Chrysler will be pleased to tell you that the Environmental Protection Agency has rated the 2014 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel at 28 mph highway, the top rating for any pickup on sale in the United States.
The Ram’s 3.0 liter EcoDiesel V6 gets 20 mpg in the city and 23 mpg on the combined cycle. The diesel six-cylinder sends 240 horsepower and 420 lb-ft of torque through Chrysler’s new TorqueFlite 8-speed automatic transmission, good for a 9,200 lb towing capacity.
General Motors has stated in the past that should half-ton diesel pickup sales take off, they are “ready to respond quickly”, most likely by putting the same 3.0 liter diesel V6 in the Silverado 1500. However the recently announced car-like 28 mpg highway fuel economy of the Ram could prompt GM to speed up that process.
GM has expressed doubt in half-ton diesel pickups in the past. They believe the added cost of a diesel upfront, which for the Ram is $2,850 more than a comparatively equipped 5.7 liter Hemi V8 model, would put off customers in the showroom.
It is also possible that GM will remain confident in the 2.8 liter Duramax diesel set to be offered in the 2015 Colorado and Canyon for the 2016 model year. General Motors North American President, Mark Reuss, said federal fuel economy standards played a large part in their decision to offer mid-size trucks.
Apart from Ram, Ford also has an ace up their sleeve in regards to fuel economy with the 2015 F-150. Thanks to the use of lightweight aluminium body panels, the 2015 F-150 is 700 lbs lighter than the outgoing model. When The Wall Street Journal asked Ford Chief Executive Officer, Alan Mulally, whether the 2015 F-150 would get 30 mpg or not, Mulally replied: “We’re absolutely going to be the leader.”
With two of its biggest rivals edging the 30 mpg mark with their pickups, GM may be feeling the pressure to offer a more fuel-efficient alternative in the Silverado 1500. Or, they could stick to their plan, pointing fuel-conscious buyers in the direction of the smaller Colorado and Canyon. Either way, we feel that the pickup truck fuel economy race is just beginning.
Comments
GM needs diesel engine in their trucks. I love to drive my Trailblazer on long trips, on one trip my wife and I drove over 6000 miles through 22 states in two weeks, and diesel would have been awesome. I don’t care for hybrids, The Ram truck and Jeep Grand Cherokee are looking very tempting. GM needs to bring back the Trailblazer as a rear wheel drive SUV like in the foreign markets and needs to be diesel.
I am also looking forward to the new Colorado. Come on GM, make it happen.
If GM has plans to use the same 3.0 diesel as Ram, then why would they sell their half ownership of VM Motori?
I’m curious as to how good the 2.8L will be in the midsizers @ roughly 4000lbs curb weight.. Hell the 3.6 V6 might even get the same EPA rating as this diesel in the Ram.
Wonder if we will ever see these in Europe
When I compare 3.0 ecodiesel to 5.3 GM, with current fuel prices and 4×4 figures, at 100,000 you will save 500 dollars with a ecodiesel. But thats not counting higher maintenance costs and almost 3k premium for this option.
@Lex
That also true, will most people think long term like that? Doubtful, math is scary for most.
Where I live diesel is consistently 20 cents cheaper than regular 87. Going to be tough to wait and see what the 2.8 Canyon can net and not just go buy the 3.6
Andrew, Where do you live? I sold my Duramax due to 40-80 cents more per gallon then 87.
See, short term is even worst to get a diesel.
So GM will be third to offer a fuel efficient half ton? No reason to be so optimistic, Titan will have the Cummins long before GM will have anything like that. Odds are Toyota will beat them to the punch also. Heck, even the already much bragged about diesel Colorado is two years away. There is a sense of urgency, just not with GM.
They could have impressed us with diesel innovation at the ’14s rollout, now they are just playing catch up. Business as usual.
Can someone please explain to me the difference between the old GM of uninspired products and the new, post bankruptcy GM?
Toyoblah and Nishit do not know how to make a real American workhorse no matter how hard they try. GM could have rolled out a diesel (3.2L?) and a smaller engine (2.8L Twincharged?), but they did not and now are playing catch up. They haven’t been doing this very often lately (e.g. CTS, Impala, Regal and Yukon), but they still aren’t quite fully transformed from “Old GM…” They have not mastered their powertrain department as of yet. Give them some time and they will thrive!
I will not explain your redundant question, because you already know the answer to that (clearly). .
Magirus, fuel efficient half ton? like what?? GM twins are pretty fuel efficient!
ecoboost are not that fuel efficient as ford propaganda tells you! most guys I know average same MPG’s with ecoboost as they do with v8’s, not to mention that it’s extremely thirsty while towing. On top of that, it’s still have reliability issues and on top of that you pay more for it! NO THANKS!!! I’D rather save money, get better MPG’s, and have more reliable GM small block!!
Maybe GM is waiting to introduce something completely new once the buzz about the f-150 and ram exodiesel die out. Remember, engineers at GM aren’t stupid, they know what they’re doing.
lex, People are buying Rams, people are buying F-series. GM truck sales are down despite having the newest model. You can’t bend facts. GM is dying. Again.
You are right about small blocks being more reliable (but much less powerful) than Ecoboost, but people want new things. You are right FoMoCo tells lies and Ecoboost isn’t eco at all in a heavy truck, but just wait and see what MPG they will get once they’ve shed 700lbs.
What incentive to you have to trade in your 1999 Silverado? It’s ground hog day at GM. Want a low slung, boring looking truck with a 5.3 V8? Ok. Doesn’t matter if it’s 2004 or 2014. People don’t work that way; and the sales numbers tell the tale.
hafeez, I have that faith in GM engineers but not in the decision makers.
GM truck sales are down right now because in America, everybody always wants the cheapest things they can find. Right now the two trucks with the highest discounts are the ram 1500 an ford f150.
Plus, correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe you’ve stated on an earlier post that you’re not American, therefore you really don’t understand the full size pick up segment here in the US as much as a lot of other gmauthority readers do.
What makes you think that I am not American?
And what makes you think that I don’t understand full size truck segment?
marigus, Regardless, GM still sell more trucks then Ram. But more can be done!
Yes GM is not as aggressive as Ram and Ford and I think they should be. GM doesn’t offer big discounts, they don’t have diesel or turbo’s in half ton’s, and don’t impress us with little things like LED’s, push start, aggressive design, etc.
Would I like to have this in GM? you betcha! But at the same time I want a powerful fuel efficient reliable V8 and high quality material truck the competition doesn’t offer!
V8’s are not underpowered like you stated, 6.2 is more powerful then an ecoboost, it’s just tuned more for MPG. Being a truck guy, I really don’t care if I get to the top of the mountain few seconds later then one with ecoboost while towing 12k trailer. If I wanted more power I would 1. chip it 2.install cold air and full high performance exhaust and if thats not enough, 3. supercharge it! or my favorite 4. get a Corvette!! Because trucks are not sports cars.
In my opinion GM should have offered a diesel in the redesigned 1500. GM….put more effort into performance and fuel economy instead of buttons large enough to operate with snow gloves on and a place to hang my file folders. I have owned four GM Duramax trucks. My current is a 2011 GMC 2500 crew cab SLT. Best Duramax I have owned. Why does GM think a diesel would not sell in a 1500 truck but they will put it into the Chevy Cruze????
It also seems like Ford is jumping on the bandwagon of having diesels on their F150. as well
Here is what I came up with when I compared 3.0 ecodiesel to GM’s 5.3
in my area 87 octane $2.89, diesel $3.59
when you drive 100,000 miles with each truck.
100000÷28 (rams mpg)=3571.42857 times 3.59 (a gallon)=$12,821.42
100000÷23 (5.3 mpg)=4347.82609 times 2.89 (a gallon)=$12,565.21
On top of that, there will be DEF costs for the ecodiesel, plus higher maintenance costs and higher premium for the diesel option.
There is a lot going on and you just have to let it play out to fully understand what is going on and why.
Here is some of what is going on.
#1 GM will have a half ton diesel sooner than you think.
#2 Why they don’t have it yet is because it is not ready just as the new transmission was not ready. Keep in mind GM is coming off chapter 11 and has been fixing and doing a lot more than Chrysler has been doing. How many new cars does GM have vs. Chrysler? There is where they have been investing and working.
#3 GM is working the two truck strategy and how well it works depends on how good the new small trucks are and how well they are priced.
#3 Diesels are getting more and more expensive. They sell well in the HD trucks as most are used for towing. The operating cost is not really going to be cheaper or much cheaper as pointed out by Lex. Now GM can market better towing and hauling with the engines and advertise the better MPG. But if you figure the higher price of the fuel and engine the savings will take a hit for over all cost.
I like the multi point attack GM is using as they have options and if one works good if not they can remove the ones that don’t work. Ford on the other hand put all their cards in one box on a truck not all that much lighter than the Steel bodies GM truck and Ram is going to sell the 1/2 ton diesel but it is the HD versions where they will make the money.
The coming emission are also going to make diesels more and more difficult to built and more expensive with the new emission they will face. We are already stuck with the crappy exhaust fluid deal that needs filled every 5K miles and there will be more things added in the future.
Europe had much lower laws on their diesels and they are much easier and affordable than what they are here in America. Now we have a president that wants to make trucks greener to save families $250 a year and to meet his demands it may cost 4-6 times more than the money save in cost added to the price for these new changes they will have to make.
The government has a secret war on trucks and the laws we will see will make the harder and harder to build and sell as the prices will just be out of sight for the large trucks.
@Lex
The cost of diesel is caused by the lower demand for actual diesel fuel, and the higher demand for heating oils, which have the same type of refining mechanism that diesel does. So while the price is higher at the moment, the increased demand will force a higher supply for diesel and because of gasoline engines becoming more efficient, more resources can be diverted to diesel production. Also diesel is generally a simpler fuel to refine, easy enough to do in an Organic Chemistry lab with the right instructions and materials. If more crude is refined for diesel use, then the costs will be much cheaper due to higher supply and lower refining costs, and also refining alternatives to crude in exchange for canola based biodiesel, will make running a diesel a cheaper way to go.
Another point I would like to make is the power losses in comparison of the 5.3 ET3 and the RAM Ecodiesel, the ET3 gets an 25 mpg highway with less then 400 lbs ft.tq compared to the Ecodiesel with 420 lbs ft.tq, I mean that’s a pretty good combo from the RAM. Also I did a bit of calculation to convert gallons to litres, and found that even for the highest price of diesel, you pay .94 cents a litre, which again is a really good deal from where I sit, when diesel sells for about 1.30/litre (about 5 bucks a litre).
@ hafeez. I’m not a citizen but pay taxes here and live here. There are 4 GM trucks in the driveway, all over 100k miles, all very reliable. One of the reasons I am not trading up is because GM doesn’t give me a reason to. They just do the same thing over and over. I already have two 5.3s, why get a 2014 if it’s just the same thing? don’t give me the DI, VVT, cylinder deactivation speech. A 5.3 is a 5.3 is a 5.3. True innovation is found elsewhere these days.
I will admit it, I was getting ready to get blown away by the new GMs when they came out a year ago and when I saw them and learned it was the same transmissions and they still made the sorry 4.3 V6 I couldn’t help but think WTF, we waited seven years for THIS?.
@Tyler. You are right, better mileage, more power. Most people get better MPG than EPA estimates with a diesel, and do worse than EPA with a gas engine. Plus you can expect to get better longevity out of a diesel.
The new trucks are different. The 4.3, 5.3 and 6.2 are all old displacements, but the ECOTEC3 versions are very different. Not to mention you get more power and efficiency. You should be blown away from the new K2XX trucks. They are amazing. They are not perfect as they need a couple of new engines and a new transmission.
The ECOTEC3’s should become ECOTEC4’s with an addition of Intake Variable Valve Lift and some extra oomph. A Voltec truck would be a nice addition to the family, perhaps in the Colorado/Canyon though. The Silverado/Sierra should have (VVT, SIDI, iVVL and AFM):
2.8L Twincharged V6 with 355HP and 380FT-LBS
3.2L TDI V6 with 290HP and 450FT-LBS
(Save the 4.3L V6 for the Lambda’s)
5.3L V8 with 365HP and 390FT-LBS
6.2L V8 with 420HP and 460FT-LBS
That was part of GM’s biggest error as while the engines are new the old sizes just do not convey the great changes they have seen. In the V8 engines this is not a big deal but the 4.3 could use a little marketing help as too many people think it is the same old 4.3 it used to be.
It is kind of like the trucks as a whole while they are great trucks the similar styling to the old just does not reflect all the changes under the skin. They miss out on the fact the new trucks are much stronger but are already around 500 pounds lighter than similar Fords.
While the styling was not broke sometimes you need change to create the proper perception.
@ magirus
“and they still made the sorry 4.3 ”
As Evan stated, the 4.3 is completely redesigned, it only has the same 4.3 displacement.
This new V6 has pretty much the same power numbers as the old LS 4.8 V-8, while still delivering better MPGs, it’s not the same old 4.3.
The 5.3 is also more powerful and more fuel efficient,
and that new 6.2 has the same MPG #s as my 2008 Silvy 5.3, BUT has an ADDITIONAL 105 hp and 122 lb-ft of torque, over my 5.3, I think that’s pretty impressive.
@all: The 4.3 is based on the new V8s with two cylinders taken off. No self respecting engineer would build a V6 with 90 degree V angle, makes the thing shake, may be excusable in 1996, but not today. It’s a cost saving measure designed to serve GM and nobody else. You would have a leg to stand on if it got better mileage than the new 5.3 which it really doesn’t. Don’t get me wrong, I do actually understand the purpose for the new V8s, but the six should’ve been the high tech option (turbo gas, or turbo diesel).
I am rarely right, but I am definitely right on this one. Just because a few die hard GM fans here try to talk pretty the harsh reality that GM blew it, doesn’t change the fact that they will continue to hurt in the sales department unless something changes in a hurry.
magirus, I haven’t seen where the 90º V-6’s shake or have any excessive vibration. One of the best V-6s that GM made is the 3800 – a 90º V-6. It’s easily accomplished with offset rod journals on the crank. The 60º V-6 is actually worse because the offset is actually greater and weakens the crankshaft. The proper banking angle for a V-6 without offset journals would really need to be 120º (720º of rotation / 6 cylinders).
In my experience, the 3800 in my daily driver has the original engine mounts that are worn due to years of a heavy foot. Still at 234,000 miles, the engine idles smooth with no visible shaking or excessive vibration.
I have no doubt that GM’s new 4.3 V-6 is a big improvement over my old 3800. 90º V-6 FTW!
Great points! Magirus does not know what he is talking about! My 3800’s are running better than ever with some new NGK spark plugs and a bottle of Rislone along with Castrol GTX Titanium! The new 4.3L is very good and plenty powerful. I think that C&D were saying that the towing was rough, because it is a very smooth engine.
The engines should be ECOTEC4’s with the addition of iVVL to save even more fuel. The Malibu went from 34 hwy to 36 hwy with the addition of iVVL! 2mpg is a very good improvement (especially in a truck)..
However, GM should replace the 4.3L in the Silverado/Sierra with a 2.8L Twincharged V6 (VVT, SIDI, AFM and iVVL) that has 355HP and 380FT-LBS. They should also bump the power of the 5.3L to 365HP and 390FT-LBS.
Whats wrong with the old 4.3 besides being underpowered? Those were some tough engines while returning good MPG’s, i’ve personally seen then with half a million original miles without overhaul and still operating in fleet trucks!
@ Brian: Owned a 1996 C/K 4×4 with a Vortec 4.3L that I would describe as coarse. Then this month C&D tested the new 4.3 and talked about vibrations through gas pedal and steering wheel.
Again no real mileage advantage over 5.3 (17/22 vs 16/22), so what’s the purpose?
Ten years ago, I was certain they would put the Trailblazer’s 4.2 I6 in the half ton. No such luck.
Hmm…. I couldn’t find the article where C&D tested the V-6. I did find this.
http://www.newcartestdrive.com/review-drive.cfm?Vehicle=2014_Chevrolet_Silverado&ReviewID=5296
Do you have a link to your information source?
Sounds pretty smooth to me. I wonder if the coarseness in your older C/K was due to another factor besides the design of the V-6. My parents have a 2006 Chevy extended cab with the V-6 and it’s smooth a silk, though quite a bit down on power. Regardless, the new 4.3 is markedly different than the old Vortec’s, with mileage comparable to the Ford and Ram 6 cylinder offerings.
However, I do agree that in many cases the V-8’s mileage isn’t much less in real world driving – especially with the Variable Displacement on the new Eco-tecs. Whether it’s a V-6 running in V-4, or a V-8 operating in V-4 mode, the parasitic losses are minor.
That’s impressive for the Ram EcoDiesel. This is why the brand is leading the pickup truck segment now in terms of innovation, offering the best and most innovative technology on there products! And I have every reason to believe the new F-150 will also present class-leading fuel efficiency and performance.
I’m sorry, but GM is simply being outclassed by the competition. For a moment they had the title for most fuel efficient trucks only to now see the title swept from under them. And the Ram is quite dated! It speaks volumes of what they’re capable of! And when the numbers are released for the next F-150, GM is going to be forced to go back to the drawing board! Their trucks are good, but they just don’t bring anything all that special to the table. Don’t be surprised to see Ram relinquish the spot for number 2 bestselling American vehicle.
Sorry but the 5.3 out powers the 5.0 ford and gets a lot better mileage doing it. 6.2 outpowers the ecboost and gets a hair less according to the EPA, but since Ecoboost owners complain about not getting anywhere near EPA numbers, they’re probably the same.
6.2 matches the less powerful Hemi w/8 speed in mileage and absolutely destroys it in power.
So who is behind on powertrain? Do the math, the ecodiesel is a joke.
Right now in Saskatchewan Canada, gas is running in Regina at $1.199 per litre. Diesel is currently at $1.429 ($.23/litre more). We have more and more people who were running diesels coming in and considering a gas engine (as long is it handles their purposes such as towing). The “rig” guys who work oil rigs are even changing over to gas because many rigs do not give out free diesel any more.
So the fact the Ram gets 20% better fuel economy is offset by the fact that diesel is 20% more at the pumps, plus the diesel engine costs more to buy (so actually more expensive to own). There is a reason why RAM figures their diesel will only comprise about 10% of their truck sales.
Then there’s the whole DEF problems that Western Canada is having right now. With this prolonged cold winter we are having, ton’s of Ford and GM (and the new RAMS) owners have been coming in with issues. The heaters in the tanks are not warming the tanks enough to completely thaw out the DEF before the other systems in the trucks (pollutions sensors) are shutting them down and the trucks end up in limp modes.
Until a diesel can pass emissions without DEF fluid or a much better DEF system is brought to market, DEF is a nightmare in very cold weather unless you leave the truck running all the time.
By the way magirus, SIL is right about the 4.3L Ecotec3 motor. It is a completely new design and the only thing the new motors have in common with the previous generation is the displacement number in their name. I half wish they had bumped the numbers to 4.4L, 5.4L and 6.3L just to shut up the idiots who don’t know anything but think they do.
Looking at curent prices in my location it would cost me $1400 more over 100K to drive a 6.2gas. That does not include DEF cost so prob an even cost in fuel. However i think the EPA will be pushing through ultra low sulfer gasoline. They claim a $0.10 cost increase but look what happened to diesel. Gas could cost as much as diesel after this then the thought of CNG comes to mind but if Obama puts coal plants out of business we will be using CNG on a much larger scale for power production.
Phil Graham, retired Republican senator, sponsored and was successful to end the law requiring domestic fuel be sold within the United States. Since then, the price of oil, diesel, and gasoline are sold on the world market. We are hostage to world prices.
Add the thirst for diesel in Europe, and developing nations, with high US Federal taxes on diesel, and there is a mountain of hills to climb for the viability of buying diesel vehicles in America. The ones who paid dearly for free market pricing were the independent American truckers. Those of us who love torque/power are penalized as well… but I’m still going to buy a GM diesel, if for no other reason than its on my bucket list… and I like powerful engines.
dpach… You guys in Canada are diesel fortunate.
dpach, you’re right, I and many other potential buyers are that superficial and can’t get beyond the fact they didn’t come up with new engine displacements.
Maybe we’re “idiots” as you say, or perhaps GM was less than wise in not realizing people like new things. It’s not that big a secret. It works just fine over at Ford and Ram, they’re not the ones losing market share.
Brian, it’s in this month’s C&D, what can I say, you think I am making it up? They pity the fool who has to sell those things, as he’d have a tough time ‘splainin the difference between the old and the new.
magirus, so you actually think that an engine is the same old just because of the displacement? Really?
Let’s see what’s new in the engines: new blocks, new head, new intakes, new injection system, new cooling ports, new ignition system, new cranks, new bearings, new camshafts, new starter, new electrical system, new oil pump design, etc, etc.
So you think Ford and Ram are bringing out all this new engine technology. How long has the 5.7 hemi been around? A decade or longer. Ford has had the 5.0L for decades (back into late 80’s mustangs). Wow, game changing. Ram has brought one new engine in the diesel (which is actually a GM designed engine through their previously owned VMMotori ownership). I guess you could say the V6 Ram is a game changer too since it allows them to boast best gas engine fuel economy in a regular cab, 2wd, short box with no options truck (a truck Ram expects to represent less than 3% of their sales). Ford has brought out the Ecoboost. GM brought out the 6.2L just a couple years before the ecoboost and the 6.2 kills the ecoboost and hemi in hp and torque and gets the same real world driving fuel economy.
As far as the new GM being the same old truck as the previous models, lets take a look at what is new for 2014: new engines, new electronic power steering, new aerodynamic front end with zero gaps between bumper/grille/headlamp/hoods, new HID headlamps, new aluminum hood, all new body panels, new rims and wider profile tires for better ground contact, more raked windshield, new pillar design that allows the doors to close inside the pillars instead of over the roof for stronger rigidity and quietness, new double cab with b-pillar, new front and rear aerospats in front of the wheels to deflect wind around the wheel wells, new material based fender liners, new paint protection with a duraguard like material under the paint along all rocker panels, almost 8 degree wider door openings, new 6.5′ box for crew cabs, new box rail caps, new under rail box lights, new rear bumper with corner steps (that actually can be used if I have the tailgate down and a load of lumber hanging over the tailgate unlike Fords useless tailgate step), new rear trailer harness with both 4 and 7 pin wiring, new tailgate with easy lower and easy lift, new tailgate rear spoiler, new rolled steel box floor instead of stamped steel, new rear disc brake design, new larger rear ends, revised rear leaf spring and front short/long arm suspensions, new movable upper tie-downs in the box, completely new interior design, new console with complete media and cord management system, 5 USB ports, 3 12 volt and a 110 volt charger, hill descent control, front park assist, front collision alert, lane departure system and rear park assist all using an available vibrating driver seat alert system, tilt and telescopic steering, MyLink touch screen infotainment system with wireless streaming with an integrated 4.2″ LCD DIC that are both controlled through one simple set of steering wheel controls or the entire thing can be controlled VERBALLY and a system where you can store radio stations, USB music files, navigation destinations and phone contacts under the radio favorites (up to 60 of them), new cab design with 2″ more crew cab rear leg room, new seat design with dual density foam and stain resistant materials, power folding mirror that can be operated directly from your remote key fob, new power rear sliding window with integrated defrost, and much more than I have forgotten.
There are only 2 parts on the new truck that are carried over from the 2013: the 6-speed which has been a really good transmission (and only being used until the 8-speed is ready) and the actual gear shift lever. Every other piece is new with new part numbers.
Besides the ugly huge front grille, weird headlamps and the fact it has an aluminum body, the 2015 F150 looks like the same old square box they’ve had for years. Even the interior is has the same boxy, square edge design with a few knob changes. But hey, it’s a game changer, right?
Yeah, right.
I agree with you for the most part as I happen to like the grille and headlights. . haha
Dpach, Very we’ll said….thank you. GM should hire you as a spokesperson. The hardest part about sales is educating your customer about your product. The last four trucks I have owned have been GMC Sierra 2500 with Duramax. My current 2011 has been by far the best. Before buying the 2011 I drove a end of model 2010. They both had the same 6.6 engine displacement but the driving experience was completely different. My towing needs have changed and I’m looking at ordering a 2014 GMG Sierra1500 for my lighter less often towing needs. After having Diesel engines for so long it’s had to give it up. I’m willing to pay the $2000 for the 6.2 with 3.73 axle because of its outstanding specs. Even if GM offered a diesel in the 1500 I might not buy it. Why…because I think the price would be between $5000-7000 and I’m getting tired of spending $4 a gallon or more for diesel fuel. Thanks again.
magirus, I don’t doubt that you read what you reported about the V6 roughness. I was only asking for the source, so I could read it myself in full context. Maybe C&D haven’t published the magazine article to their website, yet. No worries.
Thanks Greg. I am actually an in-house product and sales process trainer at a Chevrolet store, so I do have an idea of what is new on these trucks. Once our staff has gone through a new truck with a previous generation owner, that customer is almost always blown away with the changes, including the new engines.
The most common reason we here from customers who were considering a new 2014 Silverado but actually bought a Ford or Ram is due to the larger rebates and $5000 lower price tag due to the larger rebates. They love the new Silverado but in their minds couldn’t justify $5000 more ($100/mth higher payment over 60 mths). If it was the other way around, not many people could justify $5000 more for a Ford or Ram over the new Silverado either. That’s a lot of money. But cudo’s to GM for trying to break the “we have to give our product away to sell it and be #1” trend that so many manufacturers are relying on.
You are right about the hardest part of a new product is educating the public.
To the average person, except for the huge ugly grille, weird looking headlamps and an all aluminum body, the 2015 F150 still looks like the same old boxy truck with a different nose. Even the interior looks the same with the square boxy corners, edges, etc with a few location of knobs being changed.
But there will be some people who say it is a game changer with their new look and 700 lbs lighter body. Remember, 700 lbs lighter than their previous F150, not the new GM/Chev. The new GM trucks are 500 lbs lighter than previous too.
Dpach, Interesting info about the GM truck weight. Have you ever compared the weight between GM and Ford trucks. I know it may be hard,but is their any way to compair equal body configuration, engine, trim level…..? I’m planing and order for a new 1500 Sierra with the 6.2. I have driven one and the performance is far better then the 5.3. The 6.2 is hard to find on the dealer lots. Are the dealers not ordering them? Thanks for your input and keep pushing those GM sales and educating buyers.
Greg,
I found the following for the 2014 Crewcabs with 6.5′ bed.
Ford curb weight = 5607lbs 6.2 V-8 2wd
http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/specifications/capacities/
Chevy Curb weight = 5216lbs 6.2 V-8 2wd
http://www.chevrolet.com/silverado-1500-pickup-truck/specs/capabilities.config%3Dcrew_cab_short_box.html
Hope that helps.
@greg
Generally, if you compare a 2014 5.3L crew cab 4×4 Silverado Vs A 2014 5.0L super crew F150, the Silverado is about 500lbs lighter. You compare same engines with 2×4 and regular cab, the Silverado is about 400lbs lights.
I didn’t realize that until last night when I looked into it (both Chevy and Ford offer curb weight ratings on their swite that tell you which configuration weighs how ever much). I figured they would’ve been closer and that now with Ford switching up to the more expensive aluminum and shedding up to 700lbs that it would then be about 700lbs lighter than the Silverado-Sierra, but that’s not the case. At most it might be 200lbs lighter, not that significant when you consider the F150 will still weigh over 4800lbs. Where this helps them most might be in GVWR.
Thanks you Andrew, Brian_e and Dpach, Interesting information. So why would Ford be spending so much money to make the F150 with an aluminum body. Other than like Andrew said GVWR for better towing specs. Sounds like a huge investment to me. Especially for the cost of aluminum. They should do like GM and made small reductions in more parts. In some cases you are redesigning them anyways. A lot of small weight reductions can add up to a lot in the end.
February 7th, 2014, Friday, Hello, I’m impartial regarding manufacturers, has anyone else noticed that Ford’s “Scorpion” 6.7 L diesel engine’s valves are cracking and breaking apart thus destroying the cylinder head ? . . . google “6.7 engine problem” and PLEASE REPLY.
Greg,
The 6.2 is a little hard to find because it didn’t become available to order until the second quarter for ordering (late November/early December) and most dealers made sure to order a huge quantity of the 5.3L’s since it will be their volume seller. Even then there were limited quantities and most dealers ordered them in the High Country allotment they were allowed.
The 6.2 is a great choice as it only sacrifices 3-4 mpg but really bumps the hp and torque for those who either want a sport truck or require max trailering capabilities (just make sure to order the 6.2L MAX package for maximum towing which adds a few key towing features to get that max tow rating).
From what I’ve heard, Ford went with an aluminum body for weight savings. It allows them two benefits: first, it helps them reach the upcoming pollution regulations without having to try and get the ecoboost to meet the standards alone. A Ford grand master tec informed me that the only way the Ecoboost could reach pollution requirements alone would be to increase the turbo boost for an even better fuel burn but that would increase the heat where there is already enough heat from the turbo, especially when towing large loads for a period of time (campers). They saw a large number of burned up turbos from guys pulling 8000+ lb campers on long summer holidays. Secondly, the weight reduction will allow them to increase their payload and trailer weight ratings, but time will tell by how much once the numbers are published.
So basically they went with the reduced weight process for better fuel economy and less pollution. Time will tell if it actually works.
Dpach, Thanks again for the information. Good advice on the 6.2. I will make sure to get the MAX trailering pkg.
coach… You do your job well. Lots of information, that really does matter. Your identification should be… Splainer in chief.
Glad magirus pushed your button.