mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

2023 GMC Sierra Duramax Diesel To Get New LZ0 Engine

The 2023 GMC Sierra 1500 will introduce a few updates and changes over the fully refreshed 2022 model year, dropping in as the fourth model year for the latest fourth-generation pickup. Critically, GM Authority has learned that the upcoming 2023 GMC Sierra Duramax will cradle the new 3.0L I6 LZ0 turbodiesel Duramax engine under the hood.

Although the full details on the LZ0 engine set for introduction with the 2023 GMC Sierra Duramax are still forthcoming, the new oil-burner is expected to match the 3.0L I6 LM2 turbodiesel Duramax currently offered with regard to aspiration, displacement, and cylinder arrangement. As such, the LZ0 could be considered the “second iteration” of the Duramax 3.0L six-cylinder, whereas the LM2 would be the first iteration. As for comparison between the two engines, the LZ0 will improve upon the LM2 in some fashion, be it fuel returns, emissions, output, or capacities.

At present, the 3.0L I6 LM2 in the current GMC Sierra Duramax is rated at 277 horsepower at 3,750 rpm and 460 pound-feet of torque at 1,500 rpm, with the GM 10-speed automatic transmission providing cog swaps. Fuel returns range as high as 30 mpg on the highway for GMC Sierra Duramax 2WD models (23 mpg city, 26 mpg combined). Max payload rating is 1,930 pounds, with max towing at 13,300 pounds. As a reminder, the LM2 diesel is also equipped by the GMC Sierra Duramax’s corporate cousin, the Chevy Silverado 1500.

GM Authority recently compared the LM2 turbodiesel Duramax to its closest competitors, including the Ram EcoDiesel and Ford Power Stroke, so make sure to check that out for more information on how GM’s diesel offering stacks up.

As for the rest of the GMC Sierra 1500 powertrain lineup, the GMC Sierra 1500 is also offered with the turbocharged 2.7L I4 L3B gasoline engine, atmospheric 5.3L V8 L84 gasoline engine, and atmospheric 6.2L V8 L87 gasoline engine. Vehicle production takes place at the GM Fort Wayne plant in Indiana and GM Silao plant in Mexico.

Subscribe to GM Authority for more GMC Sierra news, GMC news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.

[nggallery id=1132]

Jonathan is an automotive journalist based out of Southern California. He loves anything and everything on four wheels.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. Let me guess, we’ll see a new ‘article’ for the LZ0 change in the Tahoe, and Yukon… and likely another for the Suburban. Meanwhile it’s not about the truck model, it’s the engine changing, and should get a single engine article, with the vehicle applications listed. But this is GMA and you need 5 ‘articles’ about the same thing.

    Reply
    1. You should ask for a discount on your subscription.

      Reply
  2. I’m scheduled to pick up my 2022 refresh with the 3.0 in June.

    Is this LZ0 engine worth waiting for or essentially the same thing? Better to stick with tried and true?

    Reply
    1. I also have a 3.0 coming in the near future. I would personally rather have the engine with years of history than something new.

      Reply
      1. Well the LZ0 will be improving on the years of history on the LM2. LM2 hasn’t been perfect and LZ0 should fix those bugs. It’s not likely the LZ0 will be an all new clean sheet design.

        But with that said, you and the other guy are taking delivery of your 2022 this summer, this engine is scheduled for 2024, why wait 2 years? You can spend all your time waiting for the next thing only to then hear about the next and the next after that. Take delivery of your truck, enjoy your new vehicle, and if the LZ0 is a huge step forward you can trade in for one, if it’s just a marginal improvement then keep your 2022 and be happy knowing you didn’t hold off.

        Edit: my bad. I mixed up model years. I swear the Silverado article about this updated engine yesterday said 2024. It it is Infact 2023. I’d still take delivery of your 2022, how long have you been waiting? 3-6 months?

        Reply
        1. Ditto said. If it’s like the upcoming new 6.6 duramax going from 445-500hp, that’s only a 10% bump assuming their just translating the new tech down a size. That isn’t super dramatic in the grand scheme of things.

          Reply
        2. should is not necessarily true when it comes to car makers. lets hope they fix the oil bath pump belt at the rear of the engine and do not fail us with poor EGR and cat designs like the bigger brothers to this engine.

          Reply
    2. I believe the only reason for the changes to the 3.0 is due to stricter emissions
      If you want a 3.0 diesel get the older one not the new engine
      If this change is due to emissions I think the new engine will have more issues.

      Reply
  3. Personally, I love the new look. Got a 2020 Denali wanting to upgrade. Probably a Yukon XL. With the 3.0 now they have a beautiful dark red available. Just need to make them. I have heard mileages in the 30’s mpg. Is that realistic. Thanks.

    Reply
    1. I have a 2021 Denali XL 3.0 Diesel, no joke I get on average 34mpg on highway in this boat. with a best of 38mpg. Been a year and have never had a crank issues like people complain about. I love everything about this powertrain, but will be interesting to hear how they’re going to get better fuel economy in the LZ0.

      Reply
      1. Same, Im in Canada, but it translates the same.. regularly tow a 7000# camper, and get 15 MPG (16l/100km.) tons of Grunt. 2021 Sierra with the 3.0 best 37 MPG, average (lifetime per trip-o-meter 2) 28.6 but actual calculations which I do occasionally after a fill up indicate that may be a low ball number

        Reply
  4. Quite a useless article. You should just say “we don’t know “.

    Reply
  5. Diesel used to be a decent choice for the improved MPG. Nowadays in my area of the Midwest, Diesel is a full Dollar more per gallon than 87 gasoline. So is the additional cost of the Diesel engine still worth it for more MPG ? Yes, they usually do outlast a gas burner but…….???

    Reply
    1. Midwest politics is pushing silly corn fuel

      Reply
      1. Gasoline contains twice as much “corn” as normal diesel.

        Normal diesel has a 5% bio limit, versus the 10% ethanol you put in your car, at least until biodiesel gets replaced by 2nd-gen renewable diesel.

        Reply
        1. That’s my point. They are pushing corn fuel cheaper and keeping diesel high. Politics of corn.

          Reply
    2. Assuming these trucks have a 24 gallon gas tank, $3.70/gallon gas; $4.70/gallon diesel:

      6.2L
      Full tank: $88.80
      15 city/20 highway
      360 total miles city/480 total miles highway

      3.0 Diesel
      Full Tank: $112.80
      22 city/26 highway
      528 total miles city/624 total miles highway

      So for $24/more per full tank fill up, you gain 168 city miles or 144 highway miles

      The fill up is more expensive but you go further. It comes down to personal preference.

      (note: the numbers are as accurate as I can make them. I am sure they are not perfect. This was merely an exercise to show projected range based on advertised fuel economy and generic pricing)

      Reply
      1. You need to complete the calculation:

        Gas city: 24.7 cents/mile
        Gas highway: 18.5 cents/mi

        Diesel city: 21.4 cents/mi
        Diesel highway: 18.1 cents/mi

        So fuel costs are always less. DEF costs are minor (2% fuel consumption, 4-8 cents/fuel gallon = 1/3 cent/mi).

        The issue is purchase price. In the best case for diesel, city, you save 3.3 cents a mile. Over a lifetime of 150k miles, that’s only $4950.

        Reply
        1. Except on the AT4, you actually save $1,500 by choosing the diesel. Which makes it almost a no-brainer for the AT4

          Reply
        2. Great calculation, but the 6.2 liter engine requires premium gas. That’s about an extra 50 cents in my area and closer to the price of diesel.

          Reply
        3. The option cost over the 5.3 is less than a grand, unless diesel-excluded discounts come into play. Even over the 2.7T, the diesel is only an extra $2300.
          In your calculation, highway mileage is a wash, so those who drive a lot, likely wouldn’t seeing big savings over the V8. The city mileage is just about enough to pay for the diesel up-charge though: 1200mi/mo of 50/50 driving is 600x$0.03=$18/mo. the cost of the option is just $15/mo. Of course, the higher cost of oil changes will eat that.

          Reply
      2. Had a 6.2. Actual mileage accurate..now have the 3.0.. averaging 28 same drive pattern. Been a no-brainer. I get 2x the distance for 20% fuel cost increase

        Reply
    3. @billj598 Depends on the price. My diesel seems to get about a 30% increase in fuel economy over gas. If diesel is $4.99 and 87 is $3.99, diesel is slightly better on overall fuel consumption, but about the same. The difference probably makes up for the cost of DEF consumption.

      Reply
    4. the 3.0 is not expensive an upgrade, and I am getting more than double the range from my Silverado 1500 with the 5.3..ROI was in Months

      Reply
  6. Anyone notice labor fee for the diesel is $20 more per hour than gas. That’s what’s posted at my Chevy dealer. Not really understanding the reasoning for this.

    Reply
    1. Diesel repair requires specialized training and tools which are applicable over a smaller portion of the work coming in the door.

      The dealer has to compete with the commercial market to hire diesel mechanics: a market where mechanics are more skilled and compensated better (e.g. doing in-frame rebuilds, vehicles subject to DOT inspection and recordkeeping, have greater safety implications like a bus with 50 passengers, and where downtime is lost money).

      And also, because the market will allow that higher rate: free market economics.

      Reply
  7. If i had to guess, the biggest change will be changing from a timing belt to a timing chain so there isn’t a routine engine removal every 100K miles.
    Probably a slight bump in torque as well.

    Reply
    1. The LM2 uses a timing chain at the rear of the engine. You must be referring to the oil pump drive belt also at the rear. GM seems to have been pretty conservative stating it needs to be replaced at 150K, from what I am hearing this may be going to 200K based on inspections of the test fleet showing minimal to no war on that at 150K.

      Reply
      1. Man, people have 150,000 miles in 2 years? Must be like 3 engines out there with that kind of legs.

        Reply
        1. That’s nothing for test vehicles at places like the proving grounds where they are driven 24×7 to put miles on them.

          Reply
      2. My mistake, I was referring to the oil pump belt.
        I’m hoping they can replace that with a chain or gear set up to avoid pulling engine, even if they have been able to extend intervals.

        Reply
      3. I have to believe that there was a reason they used a belt instead of a chain or gears- something with absorbing vibrations. The fact that its on the rear isn’t that big a deal- so the trans has to come down, instead of heaving to tear into god-knows-what at the front of the engine. 150k is a good opportunity for a trans service anyway. labor is probably not that different.

        Reply
    2. Everyone seems to think changing from a timing belt to a chain is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I am pretty certain that by the time 200k rolls around, you will be getting into the back of the engine to address worn chain guides, tensioners, and chains themselves for the overhead cam system. The chains that last forever are the short ones that drive a camshaft on a push-rod engine. Belts have quietly improved their durability, while chains have gone the opposite way. If you are going to back there anyway for the timing chain, I really don’t care what is driving the oil pump.

      Reply
      1. Exactly! GM pioneered belt driven cams way back in the mid 60’s on the OHC Pontiac inline 6 and those proved to be very reliable!

        Reply
        1. they actually were not, but that was just belt tech of the time, and they were completely accessibly from the front of the car without requiring engine removal.

          Reply
      2. The point is, don’t put it there. You are completely missing the point on this terrible design flaw. we can change belts and chains, it just should not be an engine out procedure. the effing trucks are huge by large these days, so use the space correctly.

        Reply
        1. No, they were very reliable to well over 100K. Anyone who says differently doesn’t have their fact in alignment.

          Reply
        2. It is not an engine removal. The Trans has to be dropped which is an easy process and by that point the Trans is ready for maintenance procedures as well. If the interval is upped to 200K that is once every 10 to 20 years of driving. Easy squeezy.

          Reply
  8. When does the 2023 start production?

    Reply
    1. Something I would like to know as well Steve

      Reply
  9. Oh no
    There goes the reliability of the 3.0
    They have found a way to save a dollar at the expense of the buyer.
    Thanks Mary

    Reply
  10. Hey Mike, what’s the rear gear ratio on your 2021 Denali XL diesel. I am definitely in the market for a truck that gets that great mpg.

    Reply
  11. When can I order the 2023 GMC Sierra 1500 AT4 3.0 LZ0???

    Reply
  12. I wonder if they changed the configuration of the oil pump?

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel