kenneth bredow So true! 👍 Something possessed me to get a new Ram Cummins last August. A bare bones, Tradesman. I've been obsessed with paying it off & hope to do so by Summer. Today's trucks are phenomenal, but dang! The $$$ of the really nice ones! 😵
as a automotive technician with 18 years of experience ( i don't couth the years i spent sweeping floors or helping techs thru the years) all i heard was "THIS IS GOING TO COST YOU MONEY WHEN IT BREAKS. THIS IS EXPENSIVE, AND GOD HELP YOU IF THIS GOES OUT AND NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED. THE FUEL INJECTORS ARE ABOUT $500 E PIECE TO REPLACE. THE VARIABLE OIL PUMP IS A INDUSTRY LEADING JOKE IN THE AUTOMOTIVE BUSINESS. 400+ Lbs OF TORQUE FOR GOING TO THE MALL, AND A HIGH PRESSURE CAM DRIVEN FUEL PUMP FOR WHEN YOUR IN THE McDONALDS DRIVE THRU. THIS IS NOT THE TRUCK THAT CUSTOMERS WANT, IT'S THE TRUCK THAT WE, AS ENGINEERS ENVISIONED. AND WE'VE FULLY IMPLEMENTED WHAT WE WANT TO SEE, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT THE ACTUAL BUYING PUBLIC WANTS." I have seen time and time again how the car buying public doesn't give a rats ass whats in the vehicle, how it works, or what it's made of. They just want it to go forward and reverse, and look nice doing it. But when something goes wrong.....it's usually US (technicians and the shop) that get the blame for the immense cost of repair. I did a repair on the seat vibrator on a 2014 Suburban that went out when going in reverse. It lets you know when your too close to an object. Total cost: $1,400. Do the air ride rear shocks and the front Variable Magnetic Dampening shocks go bad? $2,600 for new rear air shocks, compressor, and front struts. The vehicles being built today are not built with longevity in mind. They are build with bells, whistles, and the newest Apps that let you control certain functions thru your phone. And when that shit breaks, so does your bank account. This truck is a Easy Pass for me.
I had a '14 Grand Cherokee that needed the front sensor replaced. The service department manager told me that it would have cost me $4000 but luckily it was still under warranty.
I'm not sure. The consumer doesn't care how it does it, as long as it does it. Seems people want it all in a truck now. Low end torque, high end horsepower, runs quiet and smooth, and delivers good MPG. Meanwhile the EPA/CAFE and a host of others want it to not only get good fuel economy but burn so clean. Here is the result. No, vehicles are not built for longevity but due to increased warranties and lemon law requirements they are being built better and lasting longer as a result. I do believe that the average consumer knows less and less about their own vehicle and how to care for it properly while becoming increasingly demanding with an entitlement mentality that the manufacturer is responsible for the vehicle as long as they have it on the road.
They are way over thinking things since 2014 everything has gone down hill. Very well said on everything they just want people to buy it and pay more when it breaks. Lol
Everytime something new is introduced everyone loses their minds and hates it, I can only imagine back in the late 80s when everything was going to fuel injection everyone was like "my 1966 350 carbureted v8 is going to WAY out last this over complicated nightmare!"
@D Kendall While making 150 HP and getting 8 MPG, then needing rings and a valve job by 100,000 miles. People forget up until the 80s most cars were ready for the junkyard by 70K on them vs these days its uncommon to replace so much as a water pump before 100k. Anybody who thinks stuff from back then lasts longer or was more reliable has their judgement clouded by nostalgia.
Ramiro Escamilla I actually like the tundra but my 2007 Chevy HD with the 6.0 I sold to buy my POS dodge was the most solid truck I’ve ever owned. I sold it at 120 miles and it ran as crisp as it did the day I bought it. My dodge 1/2 tone and my 2007 Cummins on the other hand couldn’t make it to 100,000 miles with out me dumping thousands into out of warranty work on the front ends and most recently rebuilding the top end in the 1/2 tone
jeff colt my dad had a black Chevy 2001 2500HD with the 8.1. He bought it, I think, in 2001 or 2002 with over 20k miles on it. It would pull anything you put behind it, granted there was a gas station near by. He got rid of it and his 2001 3500 duramax for a 2014 3500 duramax. I still wish and he still wishes he kept the 8.1. It needed a lot of work done, it was used as a farm truck, as God intended.
Nothing to clean up intake ports clogged by PCV /EGR deposits wich will ruin the efficiency over time... Customers don't demand on variable oil pressure... It's quite a useless gadget reducing the fuel consumption by 0.1 % or something like that and increases the unreliability with more moving parts with the variable displacement pump,solenoid etc...
You can blame ever-tightening government mandated fuel economy standards for all these little tricks to squeeze out every last bit of efficiency. Unless, you'd rather pay the hefty gas guzzler tax, AND suffer the higher fuel bill as well? But then you'd be bitching about that.... BTW, EGR is fairly rare on gasoline engines these days. The catalytic converters have taken over the task of NOx reduction. And a properly designed PCV system draws very little oil/oil vapor back into the engine these days.
@@lees.4084 you don't buy a work truck for MPG. You buy it to work. I don't want cylinders that deactivate, I don't want and oil pump that can have a software hicup, I don't want VVT, all that (and more) adds up to a motor that is not long term reliable. I will take 5mpg less if it has a solid motor that's make 20 less HP but works every day and has little to no down time. Down time cost way more than fuel. No truck no work. It cost me about $65 to start my truck and leave the office but not working for a day could cost me $3000 or more. I'll take. My 07 ram has never been to the shop other than normal maintenance. My 99 f150 had 1 issue with spark plug ejection but I put time certs in all cyc and that was that and never been in the shop since.
@@nhbountyhunter I know all too well what work trucks are bought for... It doesnt make what I said any less true. You may not like it, but the federal government mandates fuel economy standards, and the auto makers have to come up with such technology to meet the standards. Fortunately, this new 6.6L engine isn't going to use AFM, or Stop/Start.... It will have VVT, but that's a reliable system on these trucks. The variable oil pumps likely wont ve a problem either. It's a simple system, and the technology has been proven in automatic transmissions for decades already. So stop with all crying and moaning. So, you bought a Ford, with an engine with FAR more moving parts in it, more valves, rockers, twice as many cams, and twice as many timing chains, long chains that require lots of elaborate guides, with oil pressure actuated tensioners. You got damned lucky it only had to go in for spitting out spark plugs. How much downtime did that cost you? Those years F150s were notorious for their transmission failures too. And then you tell about how you like simplicity??? GTHOH BTW, most people making that kind of money typically have a backup truck they can drive if their primary one braeaks down.... Are you so I'll-prepared that you dont have another truck to fall back on? And if your 07 Ram hasn't had any issues, that's just amazing...
@@lees.4084 Guess you read internet trash more then you have real world experience. The GOV does not mandate anything. They do award CAFE "points" though. Every vehicle produced uses these points up. The amount is based on a number of parameters one of which is MPG. Saving .1 points on every truck means they might be able to produce 1 more truck for example and therefor make more money. I know many 02-06 Fords (all gas) that have been working since day one with little to no issues other than scheduled maintenance (they tow, plow, and haul). But if you know common issues you can prevent some of them. Like the spark plugs on my 99 or the stupid 2 pieces plugs on early 3V 5.4. Or harness failures on my ram (little bit of spay on electrical tape on problem connectors). But things that require software to run properly you cant (or at least real hard to) prevent failure until the manufacture gets it right. You bitch about chain tensioners, why? Most motors these days are overhead valve. I think (like your electrically controlled oil pump) are proven to last. As far as the down time with my Spit out plug... 4 hours in my own own shop the day after the issue, drove 500 miles on 7 cylinders with a rubber stopper in the valley (drilled a whole in it and put a long bolt sticking up so i could grab it) and the injector unplugged. Also, when your a transporter and your 100s or 1000s of miles away from home, having a spare truck does nothing to help you. My trucks need to be reliable on long trips of 2000-5000 miles at a time. I do ALL scheduled maintenance in the owners manual and I've never had an issue. I have 4 trucks (99 f150, 12 f350, 07 ram 2500, 10 ram 3500) 2 for short or light loads and 2 for heavy loads. All gas (because if you do the math its cheaper than diesel). I can get 300k out of a gaser then replace the motor with rebuilt for $2500-$4000 depending on year and get another 300k. My newest truck is 12 f350 with a 6.2. I knew this year had issues with throwing rods so I found out it was a main barring oiling issue. So I had my local put new bearings in it at 70k in 2014. Yes, it was 2 days of down time and $800 but better than $4k and 2 weeks down. But other than a sunroof issue NOTHING BUT ROCK STEADY like my rams. I'm not a Ford or Ram fan boy but it seems GM has implemented the "lets let the computer control it" attitude. I'm not a fan of that, not in work trucks. I loved the 99 and older GM trucks. Hell, my dad has a 14 GMC 1500. He had to replace his ECU because the external Baro is built into the the freaking computer. WHY? No other manufacture does this. They might have one in the motor but it can (in some cases) help in fine tuning the fuel mixture for a tiny bit of extra MPG but the cost to the customer is not worth it. GM benefits cause they get .5 CAFE (made up number) points though.
@@nhbountyhunter CAFE points = Mandate in my book.... But what do I know? Maybe it's just all that internet trash I've been reading, and lack of real world experience...🙄 I do agree with you about diesels not being cost-effective in many, or even most cases. Just the higher diesel fuel prices eat up most of the MPG advantages of them. Not to mention the much higher purchase, maintenance and repair costs... I know Ford has had plenty of timing set issues, plus cam phasers (VVT) issues. And yes, many engines are OHC or even DOHC these days, and most dont have major issues with it, but some do. On a V6/V8, it does add substantially to the number of moving parts involved, something GM has avoided with the LS V8s, and something Ford is rediscovering with it's new 7.3 gasser... My company just upgraded my work truck to a brand new GMC Sierra 5.3L yesterday, love it... And no, a backup truck wont do you much good a long way from home, but it can help you get back on the road faster if you are looking at prolonged repair on the truck that did break down.
If they are going to put a turbo 4 cyl in a full size truck, why not just offer a turbo 5.3? You can literally use all the same stuff and just add some small factory turbos
@@ClawDogVending A turbocharged engine has to be designed from the ground up to be a turbocharged engine. The effective compression ratio would be too high if you "simply" slapped a turbo on a factory 5.3. so if you are going to go through and design a turbo version of the 5.3, might as well design a new engine that is better suited for a turbo application...
@@6484373 so all the people running boosted 5.3s designed it from the ground up and forged it themselves. Got it. All you need is upgraded guts. Common sense isn't so common these days.
Most people don't realize how well the gas 3/4 and 1 tons pull. I've pulled up to 9000 lbs with the GM 6.0 and ford 6.2. No it's not a diesel, but they do really well
I had a 6.0 liter Chevy and it pulled a heavy load okay. Certainly no complaints. Now I have an 8.1 liter big block (Allison 5 speed) and it is the best gas towing rig I've ever had, not a diesel but right up there with 'em. I mean it pulls amazing, 10k lbs down the highway without even breaking a sweat. It could easily tow much more. Same gas mileage unloaded as the 6.0 but gets better mpg towing.
This is the most dialed in broad application gas engine. Super towing capacity and runs amazing cool. Wouldn't believe it as I am a diesel man. Wow and thanks GM.
Not even the same thing. All its doing is probably varying the displacement to optimize the oil flowrate for various temperatures. The oil pump is probably a sliding vane type that has a mechanism to control the pressure on the cam ring to vary the displacement of the pump.
All autos are being designed so us guys/girls can’t work on our own equipment that way the dealer can charge the high dollar per hour. To fix this issue we just have to learn to work on them. It’s a pain in the ass but it will pay off in the long run.
@@lees.4084 All they need is a carb and fuel pump still on the engine no computer run engins if you want more pore drop you a different cam in like in the 60s and 70s muscle cars
@@jimmydavis1151 Idk last time I checked working on fuel injected vehicle was like putting together a toddlers puzzle... All the electrical connectors can only go on one way so you have to be a special kind of dumbass to mess it up.
@@cencoast_7.340 Rebuilt a 2002 4.3 vortec from my s10 so yeah that kinda requires unplugging connectors at some point. In case it's too complicated for you to understand I was saying, the point was that working on a fuel injected engine is just as easy as working one with a carb.
@@bowsertownes Not sure that is relevant to my comment. True on the part about less side loading and more dwell time, but your sentiment should come with an asterisks that it affects multiple aspects that are tied in - including the combustion process. You don't just increased the rod length and see higher tq numbers. What you usually see is the peak torque move up in the rev range to a higher rpm (and the opposite when rod length is decreased).
@@amorag59 assuming you're building an engine with the amount of knowledge to lengthen rods your build is probably supporting it. Gm engineers did move in the right direction and the spokesperson can't go into detail cause 90 percent of customers could give a shit about everything.
Pontiac Super Duty!!! They own the copyright why are they not ? Put direct injection on it and a factory super charger. Use all forged internals, 6 bolt mains. 7,000 rpm red line. Put it in a all new x frame coup' and in heavy pickups. Offer a stepside bed gm. Get your act together. We want real automobiles. Not plastic n pop- metal trash
What I hear is this: "Only has Direct Fuel Injection" = Install oil catch can to reduce sludge build up on intake valve. "Has fan directly mounted on water pump." = Install electric cooling fan kit for more power and fuel economy. "Has intelligent oil life monitoring to get maximum life out of oil." = Change the oil and filter every 5k because it has VVT and isn't going to hurt it in the long run.
It's actually an awesome idea. Lubrication is critical in an engine, and temperature plays a huge role. Once oil is up to operating temperature, things are good (that's what they design the system around). But if the oil temp is low then the oil is thicker than it should be - this raises the pressure. Pressure does not lubricate - flow does. Pressure drives flow, right up until the cutoff point where the bypass valve opens. This is why most of the wear in engines happens when they're cold. On the flip side, when you work an engine hard, the oil gets hotter than the ideal operating temperature- this thins it out more. Now you have more flow and less pressure- and this can also destroy an engine. But if you have a system that can vary the flow of oil and a high enough pressure limit you can make sure the engine is properly lubricated much more effectively. With all that said, all I heard when he mentioned it was the next big recall/maintenance debacle to hit the news. I just don't have faith that they've engineered/tested this well enough just based on their track record. Sorry GM... but I do think this will become a standard once the bugs are ironed out. :)
Just something else to go wrong. Something will go wrong in this system and force a low pressure condition and toast an engine. More complicated = less reliable that's simple math that can not be argued.
Nathan Mohler don’t get me started on valve ticking My 2015 ram 1500 just hit 110,000 miles and had to have the whole top end rebuilt costing me $5,000 at the dealer in April. My god damn SRT8 Charger did that shit to me to but I ditched it before I had to dump money into it to. And both were 100% stock no aftermarket shit on them
@@hpperformance2819 your 6.2 does not have the durability of this engine to maintain high output for hours at a time day after day. Pushing a 3,500 lbs car to 100 mph only to hit the brakes is different than a 7,000 lbs truck towing a 9,000 lbs trailer for 8 hours a day. He said the new 6.6 is a stroked 6.2 so I expect you could increase the max horsepower with a tune and cam swap but you would reduce the torque at 2,000 rpm. I tow at 2,000 rpm not 6,000. Have you ever wondered why the Corvette with 420hp had the 6L80 transmission while the Silverado HD with 360 hp had the 6L90 transmission?
@@csh000 first off i am talking about my sierra with max tow package, has more power and will tow that load all day long. Second if you think there isn't a massive amount more stress on things pushing a car from 0-100 you should do some research. BUT my main point was, was it is bigger, and brand new, and should come ATLEAST equal to, if not more hp and to than my smaller engine. Ever wonder why ctsv's and Camaros got a 6l90?
What is the advantage of this over diesel in a heavy duty application? Seems like it's a super complicated means to an end that already has a solution....
L5P Duramax oil pressure gets close to 120psi on start up and then runs around 60psi. I do a lot of heavy gooseneck pulling up mountains and it stays around 60psi. We have 3 L5P Duramax trucks.
@@fry.master Small Bock 400 Chevy had a shorter rod than Normal 350 Chevy which was 5.7" .. but you are correct .. a longer rod improves crank to piston angles ect
GM doesn't have a small pickup anymore it ended with the S10 the Colorado started small then got almost as big as a full size. It would be nice to see a S10 size truck with a 4 banger diesel.
"Technology isn't scary" till you have to pay for one expensive fix after another! As a GM tech I cringe at how many hours it will take to just replace the HP fuel pump.
The next truck I buy will be from the 60's or 70's. No more new overpriced, expensive to fix over designed crap. All I want is a pick up. A simple pick up.
You should get a 1970-earlier inline 6 cylinder truck with 1 barrel carb, 3-speed manual. Forget all that overly complex V8, 2 barrel crap. Better yet, get an old Ford T model with a flathead 4 cylinder. 1919-earlier did away with that overly complex electric starter too...
@@limjahey4585 Nah, V8 is too complex. Too many parts in it that could break. Electric start, electronic ignition, and vacuum advance, pneumatic tires, power disc brakes are all dangerous, unreliable and failure prone technologies that should be stayed clear of. Avoid all that newfangled crap. A 1918 flathead 4 cylinder Ford is the way to go...🤣
I would rather have a 4.8 rather than a 350. Gen 1 small blocks are worn out at 100k miles. Gen 3 is good to 300k. Better sealing, better heads, 6 main block, exc.
@@brianmorrison9066 tf are you talking about? The 350 is quite literally the most reliable gas engine they've ever made. That's why they stopped making it. I've seen multiple generations with over 300k on them and still running like new.
I love the old 350s too, but why bring it back??? The LS family of engines are FAR superior to the old SBC in just about every aspect. Power, definitely. Fuel efficiency, durability/longevity, smoothness and refinement. Hotrodding potential, ect., ect...
It's a siamesed bore. Not enough space to cast a coolant passage in between the bores. It has cooling passages drilled between them. That's what they're trying to say.
GM definitely coping what Ford has already been doing using direct injection in an 8 cylinder application. Ford is launching the 7.3 liter Godzilla this fall which will definitely out-perform this 6.6.
Ford is actually using port injection on the new 7.3 gas V8. Reason being, with direct injection only (such as this new 6.6) nothing is cleaning the topside of valves so they get all gummed up. Ford learned this with the first generation Ecoboost. All of their new engines (sans the 7.3, which was probably done strictly for simplicity) feature both port and direct injection.
@@mbukukanyau how can they have a patent for di cam in block? The valve train and fuel injection are completely separate systems. And ford could make their own vvt for ohv if they wanted. Just not as much benefit as independent vvt like with dohc. With dohc you can adjust overlap, which is a big deal for midrange and high rpm power. Probably part of why stock coyotes Rev way better than a stock ls, or even a mild modded ls
I had a 350sb that the oil pressure would fluctuate according to rpm. That thing got 250k when I sold the the truck. It started doing it about 2 years after I bought it. It was a 1977 1 ton dually.
@@bryanmartinez6600 lol I know.But according to the oil pressure gauge at warm idle it was 20ish and it would peak at 42ish at highway speeds. It also went up and down between shifts ( 4 speed stick). Lol I couldn't find any problem with it. I took it to a mechanic and they thought maybe a oil pump. I said it seems fine so I left it alone and got roughly another 150-175k out of it before I sold the truck. It was a good ol' work truck.
yup..... and i own a 77 silverado with a 400 400 > 350.... any day and no..... 400s dont overheat.... if you use the original "HD" radiator... and not drop a 400 into a 350 truck.... it WILL NOT overheat but if ya still dont believe me.... please, id love to take your 400 blocks off your hands totally junk.... just give em to me
So basically is a 400 cubic inch engine. Sounds nice to see the displacement of old engines back into new ones and also has some design of the old ones (siamese heads)
A fully modernized version of a classic. GM has been doing good pushrod truck engines continuously for so long it's a pretty easy bet that this engine is going to be as rock solid as the old 6.0 vortec was.
Heads are all one piece of course did you mean Siamese cylinders as no water jacket where the cylinders touch in the middle .. water passages in the block are in the corners
James Richardson it will be interesting to see which one comes out on top. I, like yourself, am much more excited for the new 7.3. But both have merits and points against them. Hopefully engine masters will do a head to head when the 7.3 comes out
@@tylersutton7667 Seriously? Your statement isn't correct. 2017 numbers by manufacturer: ALL GM pickups - 948,909 units sold, ALL FORD pickups - 896,764 units sold, ALL RAM pickups - 500,723 units sold. As far as the Ford 7.3 goes, I hope it's a torque monster and blows everybody else away.
@@simonthebroken9691 are you insane? The ford f series is the worlds best selling vehicle and has outsold ram and chevy for 43 years you need to do some research ford sold over 2 million 7.3 powerstrokes alone ford is selling over 900k trucks a year conpared to chevy at 800k trucks a year. No one will ever outsell ford in trucks thats a well known fact
@@simonthebroken9691 Overall, in 2017, Ford sold nearly 900,000 F-Series, comfortably outpacing the combined 800,000 total of GM's Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra models.
That's what i thought. Is it trying to be a ford/4runner? Previous body style was nice. You are losing me GM. I wouldn't buy a $50K to $90K truck anyway
So basically with all GM's engineering prowess and what they know about the DI downfall they decide to let it still be a carbon valve fouling machine lol.... Why would you not knowing what you know put auxiliary injectors in the intake runners to keep the valves clean? Other manufacturers did it because of the problem. Junk, junk, junk.........
@@IndependenceIron you mean ford copied the LS and made it bigger because they couldn't make their piece of shit 6.8 v10 OHC motor run worth a danm or stay together lol
@@oddball0045 actually if you want to get technical more of the LS was copied from Ford. The LS was Chevy's rendition of the "Y" block. I'm a chevy guy but the truth is the truth.
@@turbochevelle5641 following that logic i guess every ford v8 after the flat head is just a copy of the 265/283 chevy small blocks right? Both have valves ontop of the head therefore must be a copy And i guess every car is a copy of the ford model T because they burn gasoline, have 4 wheels, and a roof lol Saying an LS is a ford design because its a Y block and has the same firing order is silly
Direct injection causes carbon deposits on intake valves . The old 6 liter had piston squirters and made 365 horse . Variable oil pumps were problem some . The old engine had an oil life monitor . Avoid buying any new model for at least 3 years . I just left a GMC dealer because I saw the problems first hand .
Its PVC and EGR that causes valve carbon build up not direct injection. Its the lack of fuel across the valve that causes the buildup. Problem none the less
I was not implying the direct injection caused the carbon build up . All the cars I worked on with carbon issues did not have egr valves . Variable value timing has virtually eliminated egr valves . The pcv systems do contribute to carbon build up . And we all know the the fuel is what cleans the valves in conventional fuel injection systems. I am a ASE certified master tech not just a person with a opinion.
@@Rejectsocialism I think most everybody reading understands how it works and what you meant, but your exact words were "Direct injection causes carbon deposits"
2200 psi isn’t that high compared to the 30,000+ that common rail diesel are using today. No problems from that sector of the market. I’m sure that they will be using a lot of diesel parts on this fuel system.
@@Master.Elekchicken it's supposed to be durable and reliable. Squeezing every last horsepower from an engine decreases longevity. Also gearing can make up for less power
@@Master.Elekchicken all you have to do is put a cam shaft with more lift and duration and it will be like the Corvette engine base engine not the Supercharged LS-9
Why isn't GM using some kind of port injector to keep the intake valves clean. Direct injection is a great idea but the intake valves still need to have a little fuel spraying on them.
Some of our customers buy $100K Escalades, then load it up with $5-7K worth of accessories, then write a check for the full ammount. Paid in full, as they drive it off the lot. And they'll do it again next year...
I’m glad they are putting some effort into gas engines. Way out of my price range but they will be used one day. I’m sure it will be a great engine if it’s half as good as the 6.0. Now they need to bring back the 8.1 and all will be well.
Had a 95 Sierra with a 350 in it. Ran it half full of coolant to and from work 30 miles each way at like 75 mph to and from work and she didn't even hiccup. Was gurgling a bit tho Lol
Blah blah blah! I've been a big Chevy fan my whole life but it's really frustrating that Chevy keeps on being weak on the horsepower and torque over the previous engine!! I don't know where he's getting the 22% increase in torque when the 6.2 is 460 foot pounds of torque and the 6.6 is 465 foot pounds of torque. 6.6 is 19 less horsepower than the 6.2. You watch they're going to put this 6.6 in the heavy duty truck with this horsepower and torque and then they're going to put it in an Escalade and at 460 horsepower and 520 foot pounds of torque in the Escalades that don't even need it. Us who pull trailers everyday need it!!! Chevy does it every year in the past. GM why don't you be a leader in this engine competition instead of always falling behind and catching up! Heck here's a great idea why don't you stick a turbo on the 6.6 gas motor!!! Oh I guess I don't get paid a bunch of money to make stupid decisions, like you vp's a GM. Sorry for that idea! I've been a GM man for 40 years and about tired of your decisions on this and really thinking about jumping ship!
This is the problem that a half ton truck or the Escalade gets more then HD. HD"s have 2 engine options, gas or Diesel. Most people that have HD"s use them for pulling or hard work. HD"s should dominate in engines horsepower and torque over half tons.
@@19Silver67 It's not just about HP and TQ it's about durability and longevity. It's not winning 1/4 mile races it's about going 200K miles without issue. The 6.2 does not have the same life to overhaul rating the 6.0 does. If I remember correctly the L96 is validated to 200K or 250K miles. The 6.2 was 125k or 150k. The L86 is also designed to run on premium and as such does gain extra power. The L96 is designed to run on regular old 87.
@@MonteCarlo3.1 I dont know anyone who races with a HD gas motor. For us who have to pull every day it is about the TQ. You have to remember that these engines have a gradual raise to hit there max HP and torque rating. Let's take the 6.0, its max HP is at 5400 rpm's, for torque its 4200 rpm's. People dont tow at those rpm's. How many miles a engine last depends on how a person takes care of it with oil changes and good maintenance. I've had a few friends that there 6.0 only lasted to 170k to 180k. GM can give us more torque and it will last. GM should be a leader in there engines HP and torque instead of ALWAYS playing catchup to the other trucks companies!!!
That's what I'm hearing. Buying one soon. Give it a few years. All the sudden these negative reviews will turn into. If you swap cam/intake/ cold air your at 600hp na
I just don't understand about the "Forged powder metal rods" did I hear this wrong? What I know about powder metal product.,.. no way it's stronger then a traditional Forged rod?? Just alot cheaper to make ?
I'm assuming they're stronger and cheaper to make than cast rods that would otherwise be used? Just a guess. Sounds like you're assuming a factory GM motor would come with a forged rotating assembly... I hope that day comes, friend. That would save us all so much money.
I wonder how GM solved the problem of carbon on intake valve that direct injection engines have? Is there a second smaller injector ? For 2020 not flexfuel capable .. Could loose a lot of Farmer and rural area sales !
From what I understand, GM has had a fair amount of success with optimizing cam and injector timing to get a little bit of gas back behind the intake valve during overlap phase. While some earlier GM engines with DI had issues, I think they have a stronger track record than most in more recent times. This set of mitigating solutions is patented, so that would explain why others are doing different things.
@@corystansbury I was reading about an engine with two injectors per cylinder.. Squirts some into intake witch puts a very lean mixture into the cylinders then more timed fuel with the larger direct injector. Maybe it was Ford that did that . Honda used to have a lean Pre-combustion chamber that may have been in the Carburetor days yet
The 6.2 is a large bore performance engine that was never intended for heavy duty applications. It's the same reason the 7.0 was never used in a truck. Over square vs under square look it up. It's not just about the numbers it's about producing as much torque at low rpms as possible while running on 87 octane fuel
@@roncook8566 Until you are doing 70 down the freeway or climbing a hill! I'd much rather have 350 HP than 240 HP. Just watch the Ecodiesel verses any gas engine in the same class. It has tremendously more torque but extremely less HP so gets smoked climbing hills and in passing on the freeway.
@@Punkinspapa The ecodiesel isnt about performance. It's about towing and being efficient at the same time. The ecodiesel can tow 7000 lbs and return better gas mileage and not feel as burdened...than any of those gas engines. Oh the gas engines had a faster 0 to 60 while towing...WOW...FUCKING WOW... People that actually tow alot or for a living do not give two shits about bragging rights. The 12 valve Cummins was down on horsepower vs comparable v8 gas engines...and it was slower. Yet while towing...it was better and more stable performing normal driving maneuvers. And returned better fuel mileage.
They could get 400 hp in the 1960’s out of a Pontiac . You are telling me they can’t get 500 hp with direct injection in 2020? Fords new 7.3 gas motor is going to blow this away and it will have 10 speed transmission with over 500 hp. Gm should combine this motor with an Allison
1960's 400 HP on the dyno. Huge 700-800 CFM carb, open headers, water pump if your lucky. 2020's 400 HP on the dyno: SAE standard conditions, full exhaust and emissions, every accessory installed and running on the motor as its being dyno'd.
You do realize that GM and Ford build the 10 speed transmissions together right? Also it will be strapped with a 10 speed. Ford puts up "big numbers" but when they actually get tested that fall very short of their claims.
If this engine was rated gross horsepower like the pre 72 engines it would be 500 quite easily. A "400" hp engine from the gross rating days would becrated 300 today
So how many miles will it run for until the oil pan or valve cover or timing cover will start puking oil Ps its nice you didnt disable comments like Mercedes Benz
direct injection .... fail ....variable oil pump ...fail ... shame its guna be a shit load of trouble ...my 94 tbi silverado still running fine and pd 4
Sorry but im not a direct injection fan by any means unless GM puts additional fuel injectors on the intake manifold to clean the back side of the valve.
The engine gets hotter than most other designs and the engineers decided electric wouldn't be a wise choice many manufacturers still use clutch fans on their workhorse engines.
Typical Dodge response! Did you not hear what he said they're doing it on regular gas 87 octane it's to save money for businesses! Do you not understand the business model for this engine compared to the Hemi! Man you guys are thick-headed
I loved my 1976 no power windows that quit no power seats, the fuel pumps on the motor easy fix not hid in the gas tank no intermittent wipers no cruise control only a truck that lasted me around 400k miles and the u I sold it to still drives it ,I regret selling it
Uncomfortable, cant roll up or down the passenger window while driving, hot in the summer, cold in the winter. Hard starts in the winter, vapor lock in the summer. Rattles, shakes and squeaks everywhere, Brakes sucked, handling SUCKED, steering sucked, driveability sucked, power sucked, fuel economy sucked, traction sucked, transmission sucked, headlights sucked, radio sucked... Broke down frequently. Brakes that would lock with the greatest of ease on wet pavement and send you crashing into other cars... Ah, the good old days. I miss them too...
@@lees.4084 mine wasn't it was a ford 250 ranger xlt camper special as nice as any truck today without junk you do t need it had I bought it brand new in 1976 for 4k and sold it 9 yrs later for 4k I like chevys but it was a great truck it had a 390 v8
@@dewaynemiguel3349 well, that 390 was rated at almost 200 hp. That's about half of what new trucks with similar size engines make, and probably about 100lb/ft less torque. The new ones have far, FAR fewer emissions, have much better fuel economy, response, smoothness, and yes, will likely last many more miles. The new trucks have more interior space, and yes, far more standard equipment and features. Now you can not care for many of these features, and that's fine. Everybody has different views on what's needed or not on cars/trucks. But new trucks are better in just about every aspect you can think of, except price of course... Don't get me wrong, I still own an 80s model Chevy truck myself, and its gets basic transportation and hauling needs met, but it certainly leaves much to be desired most of the time.
@@lees.4084 when I bought my 76 for 4k in 76 they homered the warrenty, they put garbage on trucks you know is going to go out then have to fight them to get it fixed I had a 04 suburban all pickups Tahoe suburbans from 99 to 07 had a guage cluster that went out it took a lawsuit to get gm to fix it I'm saying g theres too much junk on them that will go out .not might but will any thi g they come out with new is questionable that's not a opinion that's a fact
The new Ford 7.3 definitely wins on simplicity and more than likely on horsepower. Fords current 6.2 is rated 385hp/430tq which isn’t far off what this new 6.6 is rated. Unimpressed
and the new 7.3 ford is identical to an LS style engine 6 bolt main caps back to pushrod setup even run lifter trays identical to an LS. Log style manifolds talk about copying
@@toddjohnson7133 the cleveland or windsor never stayed together when abused. Nor do either of them make even make 4.8 ls power factory. Also gm ls based engines are the first factory engine to incorporate 6 bolt main caps unbelievable flowing cylinder heads. A windsor or cleveland would never ever stand the beating these motor will put up with factory. Not trying to push your buttons but if you look at both cutaways and really look they are identically designed. The new 7.3 is the only ford motor that incorporates the 6 bolt mains and the lifter tray design.
@@loganpenland6568 "the cleveland or windsor never stayed together when abused"...this is a news flash to me...and the rest of the world. So we should disregard the fact that the Cleveland style Ford engine forced NASCAR to allow GM to run the SB2 twenty years ago. Because the Gen 1 SBC was simply outclassed. The SB2 was the first engine that competed that was not a factory based engine design. Huh? This is stock car racing? Ford was made to soldier on with a Cleveland style engine until '07. How do you explain that when there is an engine build-off with big $$$ on the line either Kaase or Bischoffe shows up with Cleveland or a Clevor and cleans house? No LS or BBC or SBC is able to put up the numbers that the old Ford small blocks can. Hell Kaase won the last Hot Rod contest with a Y-Block Lincoln. The LS is not to intimidating. The gen III hemi is much more efficient. If there was a modern pushrod engine to copy....that would be the one. 6 bolt mains is also old news. These have been on Modular Fords since the 4 valve head....old news.
@loganpenland, you are VERY uninformed on Ford engines, Fords had cross bolted mains in the 60’s and still have them in Cobra Mustangs, hope this helps you a little!
Best truck is a paid for truck.
God dam right
kenneth bredow So true! 👍 Something possessed me to get a new Ram Cummins last August. A bare bones, Tradesman. I've been obsessed with paying it off & hope to do so by Summer. Today's trucks are phenomenal, but dang! The $$$ of the really nice ones! 😵
The best truck will last for many many years TUNDRA!
Square body
When will this be out
as a automotive technician with 18 years of experience ( i don't couth the years i spent sweeping floors or helping techs thru the years) all i heard was "THIS IS GOING TO COST YOU MONEY WHEN IT BREAKS. THIS IS EXPENSIVE, AND GOD HELP YOU IF THIS GOES OUT AND NEEDS TO BE REPAIRED. THE FUEL INJECTORS ARE ABOUT $500 E PIECE TO REPLACE. THE VARIABLE OIL PUMP IS A INDUSTRY LEADING JOKE IN THE AUTOMOTIVE BUSINESS. 400+ Lbs OF TORQUE FOR GOING TO THE MALL, AND A HIGH PRESSURE CAM DRIVEN FUEL PUMP FOR WHEN YOUR IN THE McDONALDS DRIVE THRU. THIS IS NOT THE TRUCK THAT CUSTOMERS WANT, IT'S THE TRUCK THAT WE, AS ENGINEERS ENVISIONED. AND WE'VE FULLY IMPLEMENTED WHAT WE WANT TO SEE, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT THE ACTUAL BUYING PUBLIC WANTS."
I have seen time and time again how the car buying public doesn't give a rats ass whats in the vehicle, how it works, or what it's made of. They just want it to go forward and reverse, and look nice doing it. But when something goes wrong.....it's usually US (technicians and the shop) that get the blame for the immense cost of repair. I did a repair on the seat vibrator on a 2014 Suburban that went out when going in reverse. It lets you know when your too close to an object. Total cost: $1,400. Do the air ride rear shocks and the front Variable Magnetic Dampening shocks go bad? $2,600 for new rear air shocks, compressor, and front struts. The vehicles being built today are not built with longevity in mind. They are build with bells, whistles, and the newest Apps that let you control certain functions thru your phone. And when that shit breaks, so does your bank account.
This truck is a Easy Pass for me.
I had a '14 Grand Cherokee that needed the front sensor replaced. The service department manager told me that it would have cost me $4000 but luckily it was still under warranty.
I'm not sure. The consumer doesn't care how it does it, as long as it does it. Seems people want it all in a truck now. Low end torque, high end horsepower, runs quiet and smooth, and delivers good MPG. Meanwhile the EPA/CAFE and a host of others want it to not only get good fuel economy but burn so clean. Here is the result. No, vehicles are not built for longevity but due to increased warranties and lemon law requirements they are being built better and lasting longer as a result. I do believe that the average consumer knows less and less about their own vehicle and how to care for it properly while becoming increasingly demanding with an entitlement mentality that the manufacturer is responsible for the vehicle as long as they have it on the road.
You’re no more responsible for ignorant consumers than the engineers are, anybody who doesn’t do their homework should expect expensive repairs
Do you feel that way about the duramax motors ?
They are way over thinking things since 2014 everything has gone down hill. Very well said on everything they just want people to buy it and pay more when it breaks. Lol
Everytime something new is introduced everyone loses their minds and hates it, I can only imagine back in the late 80s when everything was going to fuel injection everyone was like "my 1966 350 carbureted v8 is going to WAY out last this over complicated nightmare!"
1966 350? First year of the 350 was 68
@D Kendall While making 150 HP and getting 8 MPG, then needing rings and a valve job by 100,000 miles. People forget up until the 80s most cars were ready for the junkyard by 70K on them vs these days its uncommon to replace so much as a water pump before 100k. Anybody who thinks stuff from back then lasts longer or was more reliable has their judgement clouded by nostalgia.
@@konnerkramer3381 67
@@konnerkramer3381
They did an engine swap, ok?
Amen brother
I’m not buying another vehicle with variable anything in the engine.... my bank account has been hurt by it enough
Engines have had "variable things" on them for over a century now...
You'd best get used to it...
Richard Risner it's easily deactivated.
Richard Risner then get a tundra.
ARCH KRIEGER I can deactivate the variable valve timing in my 5.7 hemi?........ sorry homie don’t work that way.
Ramiro Escamilla I actually like the tundra but my 2007 Chevy HD with the 6.0 I sold to buy my POS dodge was the most solid truck I’ve ever owned. I sold it at 120 miles and it ran as crisp as it did the day I bought it.
My dodge 1/2 tone and my 2007 Cummins on the other hand couldn’t make it to 100,000 miles with out me dumping thousands into out of warranty work on the front ends and most recently rebuilding the top end in the 1/2 tone
Got a 2020 gmc 3500, 6.6 gas, this engine is awesome, smooth and powerful, the gas milage sucks
Houston Street monsters has an l8t motor in a v3
I think GM should bring back their 8.1 liter
They killed it off because the epa restrictions were strangling them, so they just had to let it go and focus more of their funds on the 6.0.
Zeb McCollum I've got a 2004 Chevy Suburban, mine has a 5.3 L in it, I wish I had that gas-guzzling 8.1 l in it, full of torque
jeff colt my dad had a black Chevy 2001 2500HD with the 8.1. He bought it, I think, in 2001 or 2002 with over 20k miles on it. It would pull anything you put behind it, granted there was a gas station near by. He got rid of it and his 2001 3500 duramax for a 2014 3500 duramax. I still wish and he still wishes he kept the 8.1. It needed a lot of work done, it was used as a farm truck, as God intended.
Got rid of it with 189k miles, and the 3500 duramax with 249k miles.
I still got one on my 06 Silverado 2500HD with 150000sum miles on it
Just bought last night 2021 Chevrolet Silverado HD Custom. Love it.
Nothing to clean up intake ports clogged by PCV /EGR deposits wich will ruin the efficiency over time...
Customers don't demand on variable oil pressure...
It's quite a useless gadget reducing the fuel consumption by 0.1 % or something like that and increases the unreliability with more moving parts with the variable displacement pump,solenoid etc...
You can blame ever-tightening government mandated fuel economy standards for all these little tricks to squeeze out every last bit of efficiency.
Unless, you'd rather pay the hefty gas guzzler tax, AND suffer the higher fuel bill as well?
But then you'd be bitching about that....
BTW, EGR is fairly rare on gasoline engines these days. The catalytic converters have taken over the task of NOx reduction.
And a properly designed PCV system draws very little oil/oil vapor back into the engine these days.
@@lees.4084 you don't buy a work truck for MPG. You buy it to work. I don't want cylinders that deactivate, I don't want and oil pump that can have a software hicup, I don't want VVT, all that (and more) adds up to a motor that is not long term reliable. I will take 5mpg less if it has a solid motor that's make 20 less HP but works every day and has little to no down time. Down time cost way more than fuel. No truck no work. It cost me about $65 to start my truck and leave the office but not working for a day could cost me $3000 or more. I'll take. My 07 ram has never been to the shop other than normal maintenance. My 99 f150 had 1 issue with spark plug ejection but I put time certs in all cyc and that was that and never been in the shop since.
@@nhbountyhunter
I know all too well what work trucks are bought for...
It doesnt make what I said any less true.
You may not like it, but the federal government mandates fuel economy standards, and the auto makers have to come up with such technology to meet the standards.
Fortunately, this new 6.6L engine isn't going to use AFM, or Stop/Start....
It will have VVT, but that's a reliable system on these trucks.
The variable oil pumps likely wont ve a problem either.
It's a simple system, and the technology has been proven in automatic transmissions for decades already.
So stop with all crying and moaning.
So, you bought a Ford, with an engine with FAR more moving parts in it, more valves, rockers, twice as many cams, and twice as many timing chains, long chains that require lots of elaborate guides, with oil pressure actuated tensioners.
You got damned lucky it only had to go in for spitting out spark plugs. How much downtime did that cost you?
Those years F150s were notorious for their transmission failures too.
And then you tell about how you like simplicity??? GTHOH
BTW, most people making that kind of money typically have a backup truck they can drive if their primary one braeaks down....
Are you so I'll-prepared that you dont have another truck to fall back on?
And if your 07 Ram hasn't had any issues, that's just amazing...
@@lees.4084 Guess you read internet trash more then you have real world experience. The GOV does not mandate anything. They do award CAFE "points" though. Every vehicle produced uses these points up. The amount is based on a number of parameters one of which is MPG. Saving .1 points on every truck means they might be able to produce 1 more truck for example and therefor make more money.
I know many 02-06 Fords (all gas) that have been working since day one with little to no issues other than scheduled maintenance (they tow, plow, and haul). But if you know common issues you can prevent some of them. Like the spark plugs on my 99 or the stupid 2 pieces plugs on early 3V 5.4. Or harness failures on my ram (little bit of spay on electrical tape on problem connectors). But things that require software to run properly you cant (or at least real hard to) prevent failure until the manufacture gets it right. You bitch about chain tensioners, why? Most motors these days are overhead valve. I think (like your electrically controlled oil pump) are proven to last. As far as the down time with my Spit out plug... 4 hours in my own own shop the day after the issue, drove 500 miles on 7 cylinders with a rubber stopper in the valley (drilled a whole in it and put a long bolt sticking up so i could grab it) and the injector unplugged. Also, when your a transporter and your 100s or 1000s of miles away from home, having a spare truck does nothing to help you. My trucks need to be reliable on long trips of 2000-5000 miles at a time. I do ALL scheduled maintenance in the owners manual and I've never had an issue. I have 4 trucks (99 f150, 12 f350, 07 ram 2500, 10 ram 3500) 2 for short or light loads and 2 for heavy loads. All gas (because if you do the math its cheaper than diesel). I can get 300k out of a gaser then replace the motor with rebuilt for $2500-$4000 depending on year and get another 300k. My newest truck is 12 f350 with a 6.2. I knew this year had issues with throwing rods so I found out it was a main barring oiling issue. So I had my local put new bearings in it at 70k in 2014. Yes, it was 2 days of down time and $800 but better than $4k and 2 weeks down. But other than a sunroof issue NOTHING BUT ROCK STEADY like my rams. I'm not a Ford or Ram fan boy but it seems GM has implemented the "lets let the computer control it" attitude. I'm not a fan of that, not in work trucks. I loved the 99 and older GM trucks. Hell, my dad has a 14 GMC 1500. He had to replace his ECU because the external Baro is built into the the freaking computer. WHY? No other manufacture does this. They might have one in the motor but it can (in some cases) help in fine tuning the fuel mixture for a tiny bit of extra MPG but the cost to the customer is not worth it. GM benefits cause they get .5 CAFE (made up number) points though.
@@nhbountyhunter
CAFE points = Mandate in my book.... But what do I know? Maybe it's just all that internet trash I've been reading, and lack of real world experience...🙄
I do agree with you about diesels not being cost-effective in many, or even most cases.
Just the higher diesel fuel prices eat up most of the MPG advantages of them.
Not to mention the much higher purchase, maintenance and repair costs...
I know Ford has had plenty of timing set issues, plus cam phasers (VVT) issues.
And yes, many engines are OHC or even DOHC these days, and most dont have major issues with it, but some do.
On a V6/V8, it does add substantially to the number of moving parts involved, something GM has avoided with the LS V8s, and something Ford is rediscovering with it's new 7.3 gasser...
My company just upgraded my work truck to a brand new GMC Sierra 5.3L yesterday, love it...
And no, a backup truck wont do you much good a long way from home, but it can help you get back on the road faster if you are looking at prolonged repair on the truck that did break down.
If they are going to put a turbo 4 cyl in a full size truck, why not just offer a turbo 5.3? You can literally use all the same stuff and just add some small factory turbos
It's really not that simple....
@@6484373 no it really is.
@@6484373 it really is that complicated
@@ClawDogVending A turbocharged engine has to be designed from the ground up to be a turbocharged engine. The effective compression ratio would be too high if you "simply" slapped a turbo on a factory 5.3. so if you are going to go through and design a turbo version of the 5.3, might as well design a new engine that is better suited for a turbo application...
@@6484373 so all the people running boosted 5.3s designed it from the ground up and forged it themselves. Got it. All you need is upgraded guts. Common sense isn't so common these days.
But will it fit in a Pontiac Fiero?
Yes.
People have put older LS V8s into Fieros, so this engine should fit too...
Most people don't realize how well the gas 3/4 and 1 tons pull. I've pulled up to 9000 lbs with the GM 6.0 and ford 6.2. No it's not a diesel, but they do really well
Jay Smith
I pull 10,000 across the U.S. With my 2007 6.0L, 2500 HD. No problem.
I’m a ford man but the 6.0 and 6.2 have my approval.
I had a 6.0 liter Chevy and it pulled a heavy load okay. Certainly no complaints. Now I have an 8.1 liter big block (Allison 5 speed) and it is the best gas towing rig I've ever had, not a diesel but right up there with 'em. I mean it pulls amazing, 10k lbs down the highway without even breaking a sweat. It could easily tow much more. Same gas mileage unloaded as the 6.0 but gets better mpg towing.
@@iWatchVideosAtHome the 8.1 and the Allison are probably a really reliable combo. I like the way Allison shifts and locks the converter when needed.
The transmission make a huge difference combined with these as well.
This is the most dialed in broad application gas engine. Super towing capacity and runs amazing cool. Wouldn't believe it as I am a diesel man. Wow and thanks GM.
Chevy needs to bring back the 8.1, I have one and it still pulls hard and way over 200k on it!
U cant kill those
Any part of that gm engine that starts out variable is going to give problems
The VVT in the LS and LT based vehicles works great, its the AFM/DOD on the 1500s that doesnt
Strixx Yep mine is deactivated...
Not even the same thing. All its doing is probably varying the displacement to optimize the oil flowrate for various temperatures. The oil pump is probably a sliding vane type that has a mechanism to control the pressure on the cam ring to vary the displacement of the pump.
I wonder if that crank is a drop in for the older LS engines, a factory forged stroker crank would be nice and inexpensive.
I like where oil filter is located.
Variable oil pressure, sounds like a future problem, when will they learn if it ain't broke dont change it,instead if it does break they dont change .
It's actually a very simple system.
Pumps in automatic transmissions have been doing this for decades...
All autos are being designed so us guys/girls can’t work on our own equipment that way the dealer can charge the high dollar per hour. To fix this issue we just have to learn to work on them. It’s a pain in the ass but it will pay off in the long run.
what the hell is wrong with a stable no bs no fancy always pumping correctly oil pump?
Well it’s two years later, what does everybody have to say about it now?
Plus:
6.6 liters
Iron block
Minuses:
Direct injection (dirty intake valves from PCV system)
Powder metal rods (cheaper than forged)
This thing is a turd. The new Ford 7.3 is built like a brick house, this thing is built out of popsicle sticks and soda cans.
The powdered metal rods are forged.
Erik Hockman
ua-cam.com/video/jZ-CVhRfZ9k/v-deo.html
Erik Hockman
ua-cam.com/video/O7U4HWjYcqo/v-deo.html
Bring back simple engines that we can work on
What's so complicated about this new 6.6L engine?
8 cylinders, 8 spark plugs, and injectors, 16 valves and rockers.
V8s dont get much simpler...
@@lees.4084 All they need is a carb and fuel pump still on the engine no computer run engins if you want more pore drop you a different cam in like in the 60s and 70s muscle cars
@@jimmydavis1151 Idk last time I checked working on fuel injected vehicle was like putting together a toddlers puzzle... All the electrical connectors can only go on one way so you have to be a special kind of dumbass to mess it up.
@@6484373 That's how you "work on an engine" plugging and unplugging connectors?!
@@cencoast_7.340 Rebuilt a 2002 4.3 vortec from my s10 so yeah that kinda requires unplugging connectors at some point. In case it's too complicated for you to understand I was saying, the point was that working on a fuel injected engine is just as easy as working one with a carb.
1:17 What? Rod length doesn't impact displacement
😄
Correct but a longer rod does increase tourqe due to less side loading of piston, more dwell time, straighter push on crankshaft
@@bowsertownes Not sure that is relevant to my comment. True on the part about less side loading and more dwell time, but your sentiment should come with an asterisks that it affects multiple aspects that are tied in - including the combustion process. You don't just increased the rod length and see higher tq numbers. What you usually see is the peak torque move up in the rev range to a higher rpm (and the opposite when rod length is decreased).
@@amorag59 assuming you're building an engine with the amount of knowledge to lengthen rods your build is probably supporting it. Gm engineers did move in the right direction and the spokesperson can't go into detail cause 90 percent of customers could give a shit about everything.
Ford 7.3 vs GM 6.6. That’s a lot of cubes for some gas engines. Time to bring back the 8.1l vortec and 7.4l 454.
@Chase Postell I see 19mpg out of my 02 3500 with 8.1
327
Pontiac Super Duty!!! They own the copyright why are they not ? Put direct injection on it and a factory super charger. Use all forged internals, 6 bolt mains. 7,000 rpm red line. Put it in a all new x frame coup' and in heavy pickups. Offer a stepside bed gm. Get your act together. We want real automobiles. Not plastic n pop- metal trash
What I hear is this: "Only has Direct Fuel Injection" = Install oil catch can to reduce sludge build up on intake valve. "Has fan directly mounted on water pump." = Install electric cooling fan kit for more power and fuel economy. "Has intelligent oil life monitoring to get maximum life out of oil." = Change the oil and filter every 5k because it has VVT and isn't going to hurt it in the long run.
Get ready to break out the walnut blaster. Because them intake valve's will no longer get cleaned by fuel 😂
catch cans
Yeah, but not every customer will buy and install them. I deal with this issue a lot on the car line I work on for a living.
@@darenwinckler7027 those people are not going to be Walnut blasting their intakes either
@@ze3bar nope they won't ! But I will 😊 then go buy racecar parts with the money 😏
ze3bar catch can doesn’t catch it all. Never has never will.
Variable oil pressure?WTF....
That's some hi tech. We used to think electronic ignition was weird.
It's actually an awesome idea. Lubrication is critical in an engine, and temperature plays a huge role. Once oil is up to operating temperature, things are good (that's what they design the system around). But if the oil temp is low then the oil is thicker than it should be - this raises the pressure. Pressure does not lubricate - flow does. Pressure drives flow, right up until the cutoff point where the bypass valve opens. This is why most of the wear in engines happens when they're cold.
On the flip side, when you work an engine hard, the oil gets hotter than the ideal operating temperature- this thins it out more. Now you have more flow and less pressure- and this can also destroy an engine. But if you have a system that can vary the flow of oil and a high enough pressure limit you can make sure the engine is properly lubricated much more effectively.
With all that said, all I heard when he mentioned it was the next big recall/maintenance debacle to hit the news. I just don't have faith that they've engineered/tested this well enough just based on their track record. Sorry GM... but I do think this will become a standard once the bugs are ironed out. :)
gm has had it for years nothing new here
Just something else to go wrong. Something will go wrong in this system and force a low pressure condition and toast an engine. More complicated = less reliable that's simple math that can not be argued.
Yeah I said the same thing. That shit is going to fucking break. No way
I can already hear the valves ticking
Nathan Mohler don’t get me started on valve ticking My 2015 ram 1500 just hit 110,000 miles and had to have the whole top end rebuilt costing me $5,000 at the dealer in April. My god damn SRT8 Charger did that shit to me to but I ditched it before I had to dump money into it to. And both were 100% stock no aftermarket shit on them
I can't stand the hemi tick way worse then any valve ticking in any engine
That fuel system is going be a nightmare to repair! You going need special Kent Moore Tools to service any part of this HP fuel system.
I have close to 160;000.00 miles on my di 2012 equinox V6, never had to fix the injection system
It's not any different than what is in the LT platform... Why would you think it's any harder? Take the intake off (10 bolts) and done.
My 6.2 makes 420hp and 460tq.. this should make more than 401hp and 464tq... where did you guys go wrong?
@@hpperformance2819 your 6.2 does not have the durability of this engine to maintain high output for hours at a time day after day. Pushing a 3,500 lbs car to 100 mph only to hit the brakes is different than a 7,000 lbs truck towing a 9,000 lbs trailer for 8 hours a day. He said the new 6.6 is a stroked 6.2 so I expect you could increase the max horsepower with a tune and cam swap but you would reduce the torque at 2,000 rpm. I tow at 2,000 rpm not 6,000.
Have you ever wondered why the Corvette with 420hp had the 6L80 transmission while the Silverado HD with 360 hp had the 6L90 transmission?
@@csh000 first off i am talking about my sierra with max tow package, has more power and will tow that load all day long. Second if you think there isn't a massive amount more stress on things pushing a car from 0-100 you should do some research. BUT my main point was, was it is bigger, and brand new, and should come ATLEAST equal to, if not more hp and to than my smaller engine. Ever wonder why ctsv's and Camaros got a 6l90?
What is the advantage of this over diesel in a heavy duty application? Seems like it's a super complicated means to an end that already has a solution....
Diesel has become more complicated due to Federal regulations.
L5P Duramax oil pressure gets close to 120psi on start up and then runs around 60psi. I do a lot of heavy gooseneck pulling up mountains and it stays around 60psi. We have 3 L5P Duramax trucks.
I heard those L5P motors are pretty tough
How does a longer rod make the engine displacement larger?
with a longer stroke you may need a longer rod
As compared to the 6.0? It’s elementary math.
A longer stroke does not require a longer rod nor does a longer rod increase displacement.
ntwtransam the longer rod accounts for the longer throws on the new 6.6l crankshaft.
@@fry.master Small Bock 400 Chevy had a shorter rod than Normal 350 Chevy which was 5.7" .. but you are correct .. a longer rod improves crank to piston angles ect
Be nice to see GM make a small 4 cylinder diesel for smaller lighter pickups., like you see overseas.
They already have. Lol the 2.7 4 cylinder Duramax is in the Canyon and Colorado
GM doesn't have a small pickup anymore it ended with the S10 the Colorado started small then got almost as big as a full size. It would be nice to see a S10 size truck with a 4 banger diesel.
This comment section is filled with old-souls living in the past. Technology isn't scary
"Technology isn't scary" till you have to pay for one expensive fix after another! As a GM tech I cringe at how many hours it will take to just replace the HP fuel pump.
The next truck I buy will be from the 60's or 70's. No more new overpriced, expensive to fix over designed crap. All I want is a pick up. A simple pick up.
You should get a 1970-earlier inline 6 cylinder truck with 1 barrel carb, 3-speed manual.
Forget all that overly complex V8, 2 barrel crap.
Better yet, get an old Ford T model with a flathead 4 cylinder.
1919-earlier did away with that overly complex electric starter too...
Me? Heck, I’m for horse and buggy myself. Just don’t go out when it’s dark, cold, hot, rain, or snow. Let’s all live like Amish.
@@lees.4084 Or, he could get a GM with a 350 and not have to worry about a shit Ford.
@@limjahey4585 Nah, V8 is too complex. Too many parts in it that could break.
Electric start, electronic ignition, and vacuum advance, pneumatic tires, power disc brakes are all dangerous, unreliable and failure prone technologies that should be stayed clear of.
Avoid all that newfangled crap.
A 1918 flathead 4 cylinder Ford is the way to go...🤣
I wonder how much power this would make with a LT1 camshaft and headers...
If this had port injection it would have been basically a factory stroker. I wonder how DI will perform
The big power guys will add standalone port injection on top of the di.
0:29-looks like the duramax cooling system on the front. Water pump and bypass pipe.
This engine is going to LOVE BOOST !! :)
Until then high pressure pump fails and drops 20psi and the oil pan looks like your mining for gold lmaooo
@@gapingtonbobuah9299 Your thinking of a ford this is GM bud.
@@Back_door_bandit_98 😂😂
Should have never gotten rid of the 350
I would rather have a 4.8 rather than a 350. Gen 1 small blocks are worn out at 100k miles. Gen 3 is good to 300k. Better sealing, better heads, 6 main block, exc.
You don't see chevy 350s with upgraded valve springs making 1000 hp and surviving 25 psi of boost of stock internals.
@@brianmorrison9066 tf are you talking about? The 350 is quite literally the most reliable gas engine they've ever made. That's why they stopped making it. I've seen multiple generations with over 300k on them and still running like new.
My 8.1 Silverado with a Allison Transmission has 275k and it's still bulling hard
Variable oil pump: maybe now is a good time to make full pressure?
Dry sump oil pump: "SEND IT. !!!!!!!"
My fuel pump needs a few of those mega pasquales. It will be sweet.
Are there any performance advantages to running premium fuel?
They should bring back the 350 with a FEW technological tweaks for better mpg, hp and torque.
I love the old 350s too, but why bring it back???
The LS family of engines are FAR superior to the old SBC in just about every aspect.
Power, definitely. Fuel efficiency, durability/longevity, smoothness and refinement.
Hotrodding potential, ect., ect...
Gonna give er a try. Thank God for 5 year warrantys
Inner bore cooling...... U mean a water jacket found on any water cooled engine? Cutting edge shit right there bruh ..
I thought the same. "does Chevy know Honda?" That's a v8 Honda engine, re branded
It's a siamesed bore.
Not enough space to cast a coolant passage in between the bores.
It has cooling passages drilled between them.
That's what they're trying to say.
@@marioalvidrez231
Get off the meth...
First things to go in a performance application. Variable timing and oil. I'm interested in this with a turbo.
GM definitely coping what Ford has already been doing using direct injection in an 8 cylinder application. Ford is launching the 7.3 liter Godzilla this fall which will definitely out-perform this 6.6.
GM has been using direct injection in their V8s since 2014
Ford is actually using port injection on the new 7.3 gas V8. Reason being, with direct injection only (such as this new 6.6) nothing is cleaning the topside of valves so they get all gummed up. Ford learned this with the first generation Ecoboost. All of their new engines (sans the 7.3, which was probably done strictly for simplicity) feature both port and direct injection.
it's the same thing, if you like how fords look, buy one, if you like how chevys look, buy that
GM holds the patents for vvti and di for cam in block motors..
@@mbukukanyau how can they have a patent for di cam in block? The valve train and fuel injection are completely separate systems. And ford could make their own vvt for ohv if they wanted. Just not as much benefit as independent vvt like with dohc. With dohc you can adjust overlap, which is a big deal for midrange and high rpm power. Probably part of why stock coyotes Rev way better than a stock ls, or even a mild modded ls
I love my old car for the way it drives and the ease of maintenance, but I'm also excited to see how this thing works - I hope it's a great engine!
another engine that is disposable,variable oil pressure,sounds like a nightmare.
John Simmons sounds like a variable nightmare.
direct injection is going to work great long term, am I right
I had a 350sb that the oil pressure would fluctuate according to rpm. That thing got 250k when I sold the the truck. It started doing it about 2 years after I bought it. It was a 1977 1 ton dually.
@@WheresHerb wait it isn't supposed to increase oil pressure as rpms rise, every GM we have did that even the Duramax we use to have
@@bryanmartinez6600 lol I know.But according to the oil pressure gauge at warm idle it was 20ish and it would peak at 42ish at highway speeds. It also went up and down between shifts ( 4 speed stick). Lol I couldn't find any problem with it. I took it to a mechanic and they thought maybe a oil pump. I said it seems fine so I left it alone and got roughly another 150-175k out of it before I sold the truck. It was a good ol' work truck.
Wow that should have very good fuel atomization at that pressure
More tech means more cost. Nice if you have deep pocket. Most dont😕
Form my favorite 63 Plymouth to todays Charger, I'm trying to think of all cost involved. Emissions between these two really is amazing.
That's why more people are leasing and not buying. (warrantys up,trade it for aa newnew one.)
Can't Imagine What it Costs to replace the 10 Spd Auto.
Oh boy it's the old new 400 small block
yup..... and i own a 77 silverado with a 400
400 > 350.... any day
and no..... 400s dont overheat....
if you use the original "HD" radiator... and not drop a 400 into a 350 truck.... it WILL NOT overheat
but if ya still dont believe me.... please, id love to take your 400 blocks off your hands
totally junk.... just give em to me
Having raced both there is absolutely no similarity between SBC and LS
@@petersouthernboy6327
Agreed.
This new 400 makes a lot more power than the old ones did.
Do you fix the lifter problem? What about the oil pump problem ? Still using those $hity little bolts on the Exhaust. WOW
Looks and has the same problems the hemi has. Even looks like a hemi on the outside.
So basically is a 400 cubic inch engine. Sounds nice to see the displacement of old engines back into new ones and also has some design of the old ones (siamese heads)
A fully modernized version of a classic. GM has been doing good pushrod truck engines continuously for so long it's a pretty easy bet that this engine is going to be as rock solid as the old 6.0 vortec was.
Heads are all one piece of course did you mean Siamese cylinders as no water jacket where the cylinders touch in the middle .. water passages in the block are in the corners
danthebig__Z :v
6.6 is 402 cubic inches
@@anthonywebber2211 The last Couple of years the 396 Chevy was actually a 402 cubes go figure
@@lhaus2333 It is a Vortec engine with Direct injection , they call it the Generation V small block
Have you addressed breaking exhaust bolts, or the constant oil leaking of the 6.0
At 1:40 is that Andre from TFL ? I like the 6.2 HP of 420.
I am waiting for the new Ford 7.3 pushrod Gasser
James Richardson it will be interesting to see which one comes out on top. I, like yourself, am much more excited for the new 7.3. But both have merits and points against them. Hopefully engine masters will do a head to head when the 7.3 comes out
@@CorndogBrownie fords been on top for 43 years in trucks so i don't see that changing anytime soon... Especially with that badass 7.3
@@tylersutton7667 Seriously? Your statement isn't correct. 2017 numbers by manufacturer: ALL GM pickups - 948,909 units sold, ALL FORD pickups - 896,764 units sold, ALL RAM pickups - 500,723 units sold. As far as the Ford 7.3 goes, I hope it's a torque monster and blows everybody else away.
@@simonthebroken9691 are you insane? The ford f series is the worlds best selling vehicle and has outsold ram and chevy for 43 years you need to do some research ford sold over 2 million 7.3 powerstrokes alone ford is selling over 900k trucks a year conpared to chevy at 800k trucks a year. No one will ever outsell ford in trucks thats a well known fact
@@simonthebroken9691 Overall, in 2017, Ford sold nearly 900,000 F-Series, comfortably outpacing the combined 800,000 total of GM's Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra models.
Direct injection doesn't clean intake valves without a port system in tandem
Doesn't need to any more.
But when will you change the body style? That truck is hideous! Who designed it?
That's what i thought. Is it trying to be a ford/4runner? Previous body style was nice. You are losing me GM. I wouldn't buy a $50K to $90K truck anyway
They just redesign the HD Models.
The Avalanche and Aztec designers got together and drank heavily
So basically with all GM's engineering prowess and what they know about the DI downfall they decide to let it still be a carbon valve fouling machine lol....
Why would you not knowing what you know put auxiliary injectors in the intake runners to keep the valves clean? Other manufacturers did it because of the problem. Junk, junk, junk.........
Yea well chevy's run fine with dirty valves idk about that junk you speak of apparently it's a big problem for those 😂😂
Must have stole some engineers from FORD. looks a lot like a newer ford engine.
@@IndependenceIron you mean ford copied the LS and made it bigger because they couldn't make their piece of shit 6.8 v10 OHC motor run worth a danm or stay together lol
@@oddball0045 actually if you want to get technical more of the LS was copied from Ford. The LS was Chevy's rendition of the "Y" block. I'm a chevy guy but the truth is the truth.
@@turbochevelle5641 following that logic i guess every ford v8 after the flat head is just a copy of the 265/283 chevy small blocks right? Both have valves ontop of the head therefore must be a copy
And i guess every car is a copy of the ford model T because they burn gasoline, have 4 wheels, and a roof lol
Saying an LS is a ford design because its a Y block and has the same firing order is silly
That chrome flexplate should help it get at least 15 hp gains😂
thats no joke, all that chrome does add hp, proven fact
Direct injection causes carbon deposits on intake valves . The old 6 liter had piston squirters and made 365 horse . Variable oil pumps were problem some . The old engine had an oil life monitor . Avoid buying any new model for at least 3 years . I just left a GMC dealer because I saw the problems first hand .
Its PVC and EGR that causes valve carbon build up not direct injection. Its the lack of fuel across the valve that causes the buildup. Problem none the less
I was not implying the direct injection caused the carbon build up . All the cars I worked on with carbon issues did not have egr valves . Variable value timing has virtually eliminated egr valves . The pcv systems do contribute to carbon build up . And we all know the the fuel is what cleans the valves in conventional fuel injection systems. I am a ASE certified master tech not just a person with a opinion.
Unlikely that will happen.
@@Rejectsocialism I think most everybody reading understands how it works and what you meant, but your exact words were "Direct injection causes carbon deposits"
Imagine trying to get the back cover off to service the fuel pump lol imagine the variable oil pump getting a bad ground lol oops
Imagine a 15 megapascal fuel rail line exploding and spaying a fog of fuel over a hot running engine....BOOOM. 15mpa. Wtf. Wtaf
2200 psi isn’t that high compared to the 30,000+ that common rail diesel are using today. No problems from that sector of the market. I’m sure that they will be using a lot of diesel parts on this fuel system.
@@SavxgeX420
The fuel pipes used on high pressure side arent your standard wall fuel line.
They use very thick walled stainless pipes on that.
Rod length does not increase displacement. Only bore and stroke.
You beat me to that comment!
Right on GM motor kings keep up the good work
So the injectors are right next to the exhaust runners? Seems unwise.
So it makes less power than the 6.2? How is that moving forward?
6.2L uses premium only fuel for its power numbers
@@T51B1 oh gotcha. Still gotta say though, those aren't very impressive numbers for a big motor like that.
@@Master.Elekchicken it's supposed to be durable and reliable. Squeezing every last horsepower from an engine decreases longevity. Also gearing can make up for less power
@@Master.Elekchicken all you have to do is put a cam shaft with more lift and duration and it will be like the Corvette engine base engine not the Supercharged LS-9
It's a cast iron truck engine. 6.2 is aluminum and not meant for heavy truck use.
Why isn't GM using some kind of port injector to keep the intake valves clean. Direct injection is a great idea but the intake valves still need to have a little fuel spraying on them.
Nice engine,nice truck, REAL NICE PAYMENTS!!!??
😹😹😹
Some of our customers buy $100K Escalades, then load it up with $5-7K worth of accessories, then write a check for the full ammount.
Paid in full, as they drive it off the lot.
And they'll do it again next year...
I did not know that a longer connecting rod would result in an increase in engine displacement?
I’m glad they are putting some effort into gas engines. Way out of my price range but they will be used one day. I’m sure it will be a great engine if it’s half as good as the 6.0. Now they need to bring back the 8.1 and all will be well.
Miss the old 350
Had a 95 Sierra with a 350 in it. Ran it half full of coolant to and from work 30 miles each way at like 75 mph to and from work and she didn't even hiccup. Was gurgling a bit tho Lol
Blah blah blah! I've been a big Chevy fan my whole life but it's really frustrating that Chevy keeps on being weak on the horsepower and torque over the previous engine!! I don't know where he's getting the 22% increase in torque when the 6.2 is 460 foot pounds of torque and the 6.6 is 465 foot pounds of torque. 6.6 is 19 less horsepower than the 6.2. You watch they're going to put this 6.6 in the heavy duty truck with this horsepower and torque and then they're going to put it in an Escalade and at 460 horsepower and 520 foot pounds of torque in the Escalades that don't even need it. Us who pull trailers everyday need it!!! Chevy does it every year in the past. GM why don't you be a leader in this engine competition instead of always falling behind and catching up! Heck here's a great idea why don't you stick a turbo on the 6.6 gas motor!!! Oh I guess I don't get paid a bunch of money to make stupid decisions, like you vp's a GM. Sorry for that idea! I've been a GM man for 40 years and about tired of your decisions on this and really thinking about jumping ship!
Hes using the 6.0 as a comparison, not the 6.2. The 6.0 is 360/380.
This is the problem that a half ton truck or the Escalade gets more then HD. HD"s have 2 engine options, gas or Diesel. Most people that have HD"s use them for pulling or hard work. HD"s should dominate in engines horsepower and torque over half tons.
Ford has a new 7.3 liter gas engine for 2020 trucks
@@19Silver67 It's not just about HP and TQ it's about durability and longevity. It's not winning 1/4 mile races it's about going 200K miles without issue. The 6.2 does not have the same life to overhaul rating the 6.0 does. If I remember correctly the L96 is validated to 200K or 250K miles. The 6.2 was 125k or 150k. The L86 is also designed to run on premium and as such does gain extra power. The L96 is designed to run on regular old 87.
@@MonteCarlo3.1 I dont know anyone who races with a HD gas motor. For us who have to pull every day it is about the TQ. You have to remember that these engines have a gradual raise to hit there max HP and torque rating. Let's take the 6.0, its max HP is at 5400 rpm's, for torque its 4200 rpm's. People dont tow at those rpm's. How many miles a engine last depends on how a person takes care of it with oil changes and good maintenance. I've had a few friends that there 6.0 only lasted to 170k to 180k. GM can give us more torque and it will last. GM should be a leader in there engines HP and torque instead of ALWAYS playing catchup to the other trucks companies!!!
How about a cam less engine
Did I hear forged parts in a factory GM motor?? o_0
Time for boost
That's what I'm hearing. Buying one soon. Give it a few years. All the sudden these negative reviews will turn into. If you swap cam/intake/ cold air your at 600hp na
I just don't understand about the "Forged powder metal rods" did I hear this wrong? What I know about powder metal product.,.. no way it's stronger then a traditional Forged rod?? Just alot cheaper to make ?
I'm assuming they're stronger and cheaper to make than cast rods that would otherwise be used? Just a guess. Sounds like you're assuming a factory GM motor would come with a forged rotating assembly... I hope that day comes, friend. That would save us all so much money.
thats all
I wonder how GM solved the problem of carbon on intake valve that direct injection engines have? Is there a second smaller injector ? For 2020 not flexfuel capable .. Could loose a lot of Farmer and rural area sales !
From what I understand, GM has had a fair amount of success with optimizing cam and injector timing to get a little bit of gas back behind the intake valve during overlap phase. While some earlier GM engines with DI had issues, I think they have a stronger track record than most in more recent times. This set of mitigating solutions is patented, so that would explain why others are doing different things.
@@corystansbury I was reading about an engine with two injectors per cylinder.. Squirts some into intake witch puts a very lean mixture into the cylinders then more timed fuel with the larger direct injector. Maybe it was Ford that did that .
Honda used to have a lean Pre-combustion chamber that may have been in the Carburetor days yet
@@mikeskidmore6754 Lots have gone to two injector systems. I personally find that as rather ugly engineering, myself.
Mishmoto offers a oil vapor trap canister system to vastly mitigate valve carbonization.
Had one on 6.2 liter Camaro.
@@nibotkram7743 Interesting I never heard of that... I like the LS-7 with dry sump oil pan
How well does the AC work again?
Has noone even considered what would happen if a 15 MEGApascal fuel line blows all over a hot running engine. 15mpa = well over 2000psi
SavageX420
Marshmallows anyone?
What about a fuel rail on a diesel with over 30k psi going through it?
At 5:25 you can see Mr.Truck from TFL walking in the background.
What is the big deal with the 6.6 since the 6.2 beats the horsepower and almost the same torque. Yer kiddin' right??
Maybe the 6.6 is able to put more of that power to the ground.
The 6.2 is a large bore performance engine that was never intended for heavy duty applications. It's the same reason the 7.0 was never used in a truck. Over square vs under square look it up. It's not just about the numbers it's about producing as much torque at low rpms as possible while running on 87 octane fuel
Horsepower is all but completely irrelevant in a heavy truck application
@@roncook8566 Until you are doing 70 down the freeway or climbing a hill! I'd much rather have 350 HP than 240 HP. Just watch the Ecodiesel verses any gas engine in the same class. It has tremendously more torque but extremely less HP so gets smoked climbing hills and in passing on the freeway.
@@Punkinspapa
The ecodiesel isnt about performance. It's about towing and being efficient at the same time. The ecodiesel can tow 7000 lbs and return better gas mileage and not feel as burdened...than any of those gas engines.
Oh the gas engines had a faster 0 to 60 while towing...WOW...FUCKING WOW...
People that actually tow alot or for a living do not give two shits about bragging rights.
The 12 valve Cummins was down on horsepower vs comparable v8 gas engines...and it was slower. Yet while towing...it was better and more stable performing normal driving maneuvers. And returned better fuel mileage.
Where’s the turbos?
That's Fords mistake. The eco boost motors can't handle hot and high towing in the Southwest. Go GM.
there all burnup
They could get 400 hp in the 1960’s out of a Pontiac . You are telling me they can’t get 500 hp with direct injection in 2020? Fords new 7.3 gas motor is going to blow this away and it will have 10 speed transmission with over 500 hp. Gm should combine this motor with an Allison
1960's 400 HP on the dyno. Huge 700-800 CFM carb, open headers, water pump if your lucky. 2020's 400 HP on the dyno: SAE standard conditions, full exhaust and emissions, every accessory installed and running on the motor as its being dyno'd.
You do realize that GM and Ford build the 10 speed transmissions together right? Also it will be strapped with a 10 speed. Ford puts up "big numbers" but when they actually get tested that fall very short of their claims.
If this engine was rated gross horsepower like the pre 72 engines it would be 500 quite easily. A "400" hp engine from the gross rating days would becrated 300 today
Wow forged internal it's gonna love boosted
As a mechanic, I thank yall for complicating the shit out of this.
What do you think is so complex?
What's wrong with direct injection, guys? The 5.6 DI gas in my Titan XD is sooooo well built and has not had an issue at all.
Incredible engine. Now Put it in a short 2wd Silverado!!
All they’re doing is making future engine swaps for us.
So how many miles will it run for until the oil pan or valve cover or timing cover will start puking oil
Ps its nice you didnt disable comments like Mercedes Benz
Very impressive!
I spy Roman from TFL walking around in the background lol
direct injection .... fail ....variable oil pump ...fail ... shame its guna be a shit load of trouble ...my 94 tbi silverado still running fine and pd 4
Sorry but im not a direct injection fan by any means unless GM puts additional fuel injectors on the intake manifold to clean the back side of the valve.
Why not electric fans so you don’t leach hp off the engine?
The engine gets hotter than most other designs and the engineers decided electric wouldn't be a wise choice many manufacturers still use clutch fans on their workhorse engines.
Just bought one. 5 year warranty. I'll trade it in 3 years tho. Looking forward to a nice truck.
6.4 Hemi makes 410 horses, but that’s none of my business.
On 93 octane nice try chevy’s doing it on 87 another uneducated dodge owner
Typical Dodge response! Did you not hear what he said they're doing it on regular gas 87 octane it's to save money for businesses! Do you not understand the business model for this engine compared to the Hemi! Man you guys are thick-headed
Michael Cavalieri for some of us, 89 or 93 is “regular” pump gas. Man you guys are opinionated assholes.
Can I order one in a half ton? I don’t like DFM & auto stop/start feature.
I’m cool with the forged crankshaft but the other stuff is just an endless pit of time and money🤷🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
That is the only good thing I heard the powered metal rods make me think of the 7.3 powerstroke powdered rods that certain years had
I loved my 1976 no power windows that quit no power seats, the fuel pumps on the motor easy fix not hid in the gas tank no intermittent wipers no cruise control only a truck that lasted me around 400k miles and the u I sold it to still drives it ,I regret selling it
Uncomfortable, cant roll up or down the passenger window while driving, hot in the summer, cold in the winter.
Hard starts in the winter, vapor lock in the summer.
Rattles, shakes and squeaks everywhere,
Brakes sucked, handling SUCKED, steering sucked, driveability sucked, power sucked, fuel economy sucked, traction sucked, transmission sucked, headlights sucked, radio sucked...
Broke down frequently. Brakes that would lock with the greatest of ease on wet pavement and send you crashing into other cars...
Ah, the good old days.
I miss them too...
@@lees.4084 mine wasn't it was a ford 250 ranger xlt camper special as nice as any truck today without junk you do t need it had I bought it brand new in 1976 for 4k and sold it 9 yrs later for 4k I like chevys but it was a great truck it had a 390 v8
@@dewaynemiguel3349 well, that 390 was rated at almost 200 hp.
That's about half of what new trucks with similar size engines make, and probably about 100lb/ft less torque.
The new ones have far, FAR fewer emissions, have much better fuel economy, response, smoothness, and yes, will likely last many more miles.
The new trucks have more interior space, and yes, far more standard equipment and features.
Now you can not care for many of these features, and that's fine. Everybody has different views on what's needed or not on cars/trucks.
But new trucks are better in just about every aspect you can think of, except price of course...
Don't get me wrong, I still own an 80s model Chevy truck myself, and its gets basic transportation and hauling needs met, but it certainly leaves much to be desired most of the time.
@@lees.4084 when I bought my 76 for 4k in 76 they homered the warrenty, they put garbage on trucks you know is going to go out then have to fight them to get it fixed I had a 04 suburban all pickups Tahoe suburbans from 99 to 07 had a guage cluster that went out it took a lawsuit to get gm to fix it I'm saying g theres too much junk on them that will go out .not might but will any thi g they come out with new is questionable that's not a opinion that's a fact
The new Ford 7.3 definitely wins on simplicity and more than likely on horsepower. Fords current 6.2 is rated 385hp/430tq which isn’t far off what this new 6.6 is rated. Unimpressed
and the new 7.3 ford is identical to an LS style engine 6 bolt main caps back to pushrod setup even run lifter trays identical to an LS. Log style manifolds talk about copying
@@loganpenland6568 Oh c'mon now. Or we can talk about how much copying the GM guys did of Fords Cleveland and Windsor in designing the LS.
@@toddjohnson7133 the cleveland or windsor never stayed together when abused. Nor do either of them make even make 4.8 ls power factory. Also gm ls based engines are the first factory engine to incorporate 6 bolt main caps unbelievable flowing cylinder heads. A windsor or cleveland would never ever stand the beating these motor will put up with factory. Not trying to push your buttons but if you look at both cutaways and really look they are identically designed. The new 7.3 is the only ford motor that incorporates the 6 bolt mains and the lifter tray design.
@@loganpenland6568 "the cleveland or windsor never stayed together when abused"...this is a news flash to me...and the rest of the world. So we should disregard the fact that the Cleveland style Ford engine forced NASCAR to allow GM to run the SB2 twenty years ago. Because the Gen 1 SBC was simply outclassed. The SB2 was the first engine that competed that was not a factory based engine design. Huh? This is stock car racing? Ford was made to soldier on with a Cleveland style engine until '07. How do you explain that when there is an engine build-off with big $$$ on the line either Kaase or Bischoffe shows up with Cleveland or a Clevor and cleans house? No LS or BBC or SBC is able to put up the numbers that the old Ford small blocks can. Hell Kaase won the last Hot Rod contest with a Y-Block Lincoln. The LS is not to intimidating. The gen III hemi is much more efficient. If there was a modern pushrod engine to copy....that would be the one. 6 bolt mains is also old news. These have been on Modular Fords since the 4 valve head....old news.
@loganpenland, you are VERY uninformed on Ford engines, Fords had cross bolted mains in the 60’s and still have them in Cobra Mustangs, hope this helps you a little!
Can you say cheap stroker kit?