Topic: Preview: 2019 Chevrolet Silverado

[Great_Big_Abyss]

And the onslaught on the new GM trucks doesn’t stop.....AutoNews and other outlets caught wind that some of the new truck configurations have worse mpg than their previous models...

https://youtu.be/3SaWmmojSCY

..worse fuel economy...I guess.  I would imagine the volume seller would be the 5.3 with the 8-speed.  That will be the one that most people buy.  That's the engine config that improved fuel economy by 1MPG over the outgoing model year. 

No idea why the other engine configs (6.2L with 10spd, 5.3L with 6spd, and 4.3L) got worse MPG's. 

[Seafoam]

They are trucks. If you want fuel economy buy another vehicle or suck it up.

[OliverD]

They are trucks. If you want fuel economy buy another vehicle or suck it up.

That doesn't make much sense. If other companies are improving the fuel economy of their trucks, why can't GM?

[dirtyjeffer]

They are trucks. If you want fuel economy buy another vehicle or suck it up.

That doesn't make much sense. If other companies are improving the fuel economy of their trucks, why can't GM?

i agree with Seafoam...trucks are large heavy bricks, with large engines and possibly taller gears (for towing) which cause them to drink fuel...if fuel economy is important, rethink your priorities...considering 75% of the trucks i see daily are simply "cars for bros", they can't really complain about fuel costs...otherwise, they'd check their ego at the door and drive a corolla like most sensible people would.

[Great_Big_Abyss]

They are trucks. If you want fuel economy buy another vehicle or suck it up.

That doesn't make much sense. If other companies are improving the fuel economy of their trucks, why can't GM?

i agree with Seafoam...trucks are large heavy bricks, with large engines and possibly taller gears (for towing) which cause them to drink fuel...if fuel economy is important, rethink your priorities...considering 75% of the trucks i see daily are simply "cars for bros", they can't really complain about fuel costs...otherwise, they'd check their ego at the door and drive a corolla like most sensible people would.

I dunno.  I kinda get wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

The Ford F150 2.7EB is a prime example of this.  The 2.7 gets pretty good fuel economy (for a truck), and is still capable of towing 8500lbs.  And it's not slouch in the acceleration department, either, like some of the NA V6 engines are. 

I guess the question that is being posed of Chevy is, why is their mileage getting worse, given similar powertrains, and a lighter truck?

[OliverD]

I guess the question that is being posed of Chevy is, why is their mileage getting worse, given similar powertrains, and a lighter truck?

Exactly. Saying "it's a truck, it's gonna get bad fuel economy" is not good enough.

[greengs]

They are trucks. If you want fuel economy buy another vehicle or suck it up.

That doesn't make much sense. If other companies are improving the fuel economy of their trucks, why can't GM?

Domestics play games with fuel econ ratings.  There is a single fuel econ rating for each engine yet they have multiple ratios, and equipment levels. It's the reason why most 3.5TT Ecoboost F-150 owners don't get much better fuel econ in real life vs V8 trucks. 

[revalations]

Let’s let “real world” numbers talk. TFL truck just compared a new Raptor, Trail Boss Silverado (5.3) and a Ram Rebel with Etorque (5.7). They did a two way run with all three and the Silverado returned the best fuel economy. The worst? Ram by a fair bit, it was even thirstier than the 450HP Raptor!

Chevys seem to do better in real world use than the EPA numbers suggest. So who really cares what the EPA ratings are?

[Seafoam]

They are trucks. If you want fuel economy buy another vehicle or suck it up.

That doesn't make much sense. If other companies are improving the fuel economy of their trucks, why can't GM?

I was talking about trucks in general. They still suck a lot of gas. That 's why I drive half a pick-up truck.

[dirtyjeffer]

I dunno.  I kinda get wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

hey, if you want a truck, all the power to you...i want one too...but i'm not going to buy one, then complain about fuel costs...it's why if i had to go buy a new vehicle this spring, it would likely be the new RAV4 Hybrid...more room than my current car, still fits in the garage, 900 km range (fuel econ numbers around 6.1)...it's also a Toyota, so it will last a decade with minimal fuss...sure, i want a RAM Rebel or an RS3, but the RAM would cost a fortune to run (fuel) and the RS3 could cost a fortune to keep on the road (FGC)...i don't have Jeff Bezos money, so it's likely best i play it smart.

[Great_Big_Abyss]

I dunno.  I kinda get wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

hey, if you want a truck, all the power to you...i want one too...but i'm not going to buy one, then complain about fuel costs...it's why if i had to go buy a new vehicle this spring, it would likely be the new RAV4 Hybrid...more room than my current car, still fits in the garage, 900 km range (fuel econ numbers around 6.1)...it's also a Toyota, so it will last a decade with minimal fuss...sure, i want a RAM Rebel or an RS3, but the RAM would cost a fortune to run (fuel) and the RS3 could cost a fortune to keep on the road (FGC)...i don't have Jeff Bezos money, so it's likely best i play it smart.

But that's not what we're talking about.  We're not talking about the absolute amount of fuel that trucks use.  Obviously if you buy a truck, you're going to spend more in gas than  if you bought a Prius.  That's a given, and isn't what we're talking about here.

The question we're asking is why some of Chevy's EPA ratings seem to be getting worse.  The general trend with trucks has been towards improving fuel economy.  Even the Ram, typically the thirstiest of the Domestic half tons (I would love to say all half tons, but my Tundra is thirstier) has been getting better.  Over the last decade FCA has added all sorts of fuel-efficient trickery to their trucks, from active-aero, to 8-speed transmissions, to cylinder deactivation, and now, e-torque systems.  Ford has gone with smaller displacement, turbo-charged engines (sure, the 3.5EB isn't any more efficient than a V8, but their 2.7EB is, and is selling great).

Chevy has been up to similar tricks...8-10 speed transmissions, cylinder deactivation, more efficient fuel management systems, etc.  They've even lightened their new trucks by using a lot of aluminum.  So, this begs the question, if Chevy is going to all this effort to improve fuel economy, even if only by 1mpg, then why are some of their numbers getting worse?  This is the question that is being asked here.

So, the point is, YES, everybody expects to buy more fuel when driving a half ton.  We're not expecting Prius-like economy here.  But at the same time, the consensus is that each new generation of truck should have better fuel economy than its predecessor, not worse fuel economy!

[dirtyjeffer]

i'd say it has a lot to do with how the trucks are driven...buying a 2.7EB F150 and running in boost all day (because fun) is going to reward you with poor FE, regardless of what the EPA rating is...fuel economy ratings should be taken with a grain of salt...the highway number is calculated at 77 km/hr...then, people drive 120 on the 401 and say "Hey, why is my truck using so much gas, it's rated at 9.8 on the highway"...even look at your personal experience...lots of short city trips and idling gives crap fuel economy...i could probably take this Silverado on my commute and achieve the rated numbers with ease...FWIW, my colleague who has a 2018 Sierra with the 5.3L V8 averages about 14.1 in his city commutes...it's rated at 15...he has also seen high 9s on the highway and it's rated at 10.7.

[greengs]

I dunno.  I kinda get wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

hey, if you want a truck, all the power to you...i want one too...but i'm not going to buy one, then complain about fuel costs...it's why if i had to go buy a new vehicle this spring, it would likely be the new RAV4 Hybrid...more room than my current car, still fits in the garage, 900 km range (fuel econ numbers around 6.1)...it's also a Toyota, so it will last a decade with minimal fuss...sure, i want a RAM Rebel or an RS3, but the RAM would cost a fortune to run (fuel) and the RS3 could cost a fortune to keep on the road (FGC)...i don't have Jeff Bezos money, so it's likely best i play it smart.

But that's not what we're talking about.  We're not talking about the absolute amount of fuel that trucks use.  Obviously if you buy a truck, you're going to spend more in gas than  if you bought a Prius.  That's a given, and isn't what we're talking about here.

The question we're asking is why some of Chevy's EPA ratings seem to be getting worse.  The general trend with trucks has been towards improving fuel economy.  Even the Ram, typically the thirstiest of the Domestic half tons (I would love to say all half tons, but my Tundra is thirstier) has been getting better.  Over the last decade FCA has added all sorts of fuel-efficient trickery to their trucks, from active-aero, to 8-speed transmissions, to cylinder deactivation, and now, e-torque systems.  Ford has gone with smaller displacement, turbo-charged engines (sure, the 3.5EB isn't any more efficient than a V8, but their 2.7EB is, and is selling great).

Chevy has been up to similar tricks...8-10 speed transmissions, cylinder deactivation, more efficient fuel management systems, etc.  They've even lightened their new trucks by using a lot of aluminum.  So, this begs the question, if Chevy is going to all this effort to improve fuel economy, even if only by 1mpg, then why are some of their numbers getting worse?  This is the question that is being asked here.

So, the point is, YES, everybody expects to buy more fuel when driving a half ton.  We're not expecting Prius-like economy here.  But at the same time, the consensus is that each new generation of truck should have better fuel economy than its predecessor, not worse fuel economy!

Agree with this. 

I think only the old fuel management trucks at GM are getting the EPA drop.  Maybe they were overrated all along and now they are getting the correction.  The important part is the new tech ones are getting 1mpg more. 

I had a Tundra, Ridgeline and now have a Tacoma.  My goals is to buy an F-150, Ram and a GM eventually so I can say I've tried them all. People say Tundra fuel econ is a deal breaker and then go buy a Ram.  TLF truck recently tested these trucks and there was no difference in fuel consumption between the two driven the same way.  Again, because Toyota doesn't have all the ratios so they can't play fuel econ rating game like domestics can.

I do love the 3.5 EB power though.  Had one for a week and that was 

[Great_Big_Abyss]

I think only the old fuel management trucks at GM are getting the EPA drop.  Maybe they were overrated all along and now they are getting the correction.  The important part is the new tech ones are getting 1mpg more. 

Is this whole thing getting blown out of proportion?  I pointed out on the last page that the 5.3L V8 has actually improved by 1MPG.  Chevy's 5.3L is easily their volume seller.  The two engines that are receiving a worse rating than last year are the 6.2L V8, and the 4.3L V6.  Both of those engines are outliers compared to the 5.3L.

[greengs]

I think only the old fuel management trucks at GM are getting the EPA drop.  Maybe they were overrated all along and now they are getting the correction.  The important part is the new tech ones are getting 1mpg more. 

Is this whole thing getting blown out of proportion?  I pointed out on the last page that the 5.3L V8 has actually improved by 1MPG.  Chevy's 5.3L is easily their volume seller.  The two engines that are receiving a worse rating than last year are the 6.2L V8, and the 4.3L V6.  Both of those engines are outliers compared to the 5.3L.

It's confusing because the 5.3L with 8 speed and new fuel management went up.  The 5.3L with 6 speed and old fuel management system went down in mpg.  What engine is for what trim I haven't looked into those details, but I'm guessing 5.3L 8 speed will be the vast majority of sales.  The 2.7L 4 cylinder turbo looks like an interesting entry level engine for base trucks too. 

[Great_Big_Abyss]

...In the end, people aren't going to be not buying these trucks because of 1mpg up or down.

They won't be buying them because Chevy FUBARED the design so much. 

Chevy Silverado is now the Ron Perlman of the truck world.  It's a pity, because I thought the previous generation was very handsome.  Easily the best looking of all the half tons at the time.

[Jaeger]

Front end needs to be more square and blocky.  And needs more stacked horizontal lines.  Then it would be really awesome. 

[dkaz]

The last good looking Silverado was 2015 IMO. I'd take the Sierra over this.

[Great_Big_Abyss]

I feel like the 2016-2018 wasn't bad either

[EV-Light]

...and more heat from reviewers - C&D think the new Silverado is a throwback to the older days!!!

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2019-chevrolet-silverado-1500-high-country-comparison

and that 6.2 engine needs some more boost...

https://hmg-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/files/2019chevroletsilverado1500highcountry-vs-fordf150limited-vs-ram1500limited-finalscoringcompletespecsperformancedata-1545396085.pdf