Chevy 2500 8.3L DURAMAX Diesel Engine **Diesel Mechanic Review** | Should CUMMINS Be Worried?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 жов 2024
- I Review a Chevy 2500 Duramax with the Current L5P 6.6L Diesel Engine and discuss the possibility of a Massive 8.3L Duramax Diesel Engine that General Motor is rumored to be making for their HD truck line up. I go over the pros and cons for such a large displacement diesel engine like Towing Ability, Power numbers, Medium Duty Truck platform, Emission regulation implications, Reliability and Longevity of such a large Diesel engine as a certified Diesel mechanic myself.
L5P Map Sensor Issue - • Chevy 2500 6.6 DURAMAX...
What I Use:
Engine Oil - amzn.to/3sVnAoX
Engine Oil Filter - amzn.to/44Vk3nG
Engine Air Filter - amzn.to/3JMmMVV
Cabin Air Filter - amzn.to/3JMZAHh
Gear Oil - amzn.to/3PoIcxa
Penetrating fluid - amzn.to/3EOclkx
Rust protection - amzn.to/3Zo0Rh6
Towing Gear:
10 ton Pintle hitch (2.5" receiver) - amzn.to/3r7Axvm
7 Ton Adjustable hitch (2" receiver) - amzn.to/46i2iAf
Adjustable Pintle hitch mount (2.5" receiver) - amzn.to/3RqHGS3
15 Ton Pintle hitch - amzn.to/45SaCqv
10,000lbs Tie Down Straps - amzn.to/3ZBnxeh
My Camera Gear:
Go Pro Hero 10 - amzn.to/3ObZdJJ
Go Pro Hero 8 - amzn.to/36grzkM
Go Pro Accessories - amzn.to/3JLhlXo
Sony A6400 - amzn.to/3vkqzob
TFL truck broke the news last week that there could be a very large displacement Duramax diesel engine coming down the line in the next couple of years. Nothing is official and GM has not made a statement either way but I did think it very interesting and wanted to share my opinion.
The first thing that was said was this is for use in a medium duty application and GM wants to get back into that market. but I would disagree with that because the 6.6L Duramax should be more then capable of being put into a medium duty truck role with the power output levels.
secondly is for increased towing ability. but as you saw in the video I explained how the truck, chassis and driveline play a critical role in how much weight a truck can haul and engine power is only 1 dimension of that equation. I show how a ISL Cummins engine with far less power can tow and haul significantly more weight yet is far more underpowered then the 6.6l Duramax.
My thinking why GM would even consider this monster 8.3L Duramax over the current L5P Duramax is because they could decrease the aggressiveness of the tune and rely much more on the displacement of the engine. this could in theory result in less wear and tear over the years and result in more reliability and longevity then the current 6.6L Duramax diesel engine.
secondly is emissions, with a larger displacement engine not needing to be running as hot. the cylinder temps and pressures would be lower resulting in less nox gases being produced. this would in theory allow GM to run far less EGR gases through the engine and as I showed you guys EGR gases are not good for these diesel engine. less EGR gases will result in better reliability and longevity.
Let me know what you guys think!!
Hope you enjoyed the video!
I don’t want 2000 ft lbs of tq.. I want a reliable truck. Easy to service and built to last
Preach father 🙏 Give us lower prices while we’re praying.
Reliability seems to be a thing of the past. Largely out of the manufacturers hands with emission protocols unfortunately
All ready have 21 yo D MAX would love to have monster max
12V Cummins.
@@techs1smh13 the diaper? 🤣
Totally agreed with you, I wish they make this engine in the future, and they should still offers the 6.6L duramax as the standard diesel engine and the 8.3L as the HO diesel engine option
I like my ol 98 chevy with vortec 454 tow and moves anything i need
5.9 Cummins is my favorite, my little wrecker was a 94 4x4 Standard Shift. It wasn’t the quickest truck but at 70 mph in a snowstorm with a car on the back, it was awesome. It has a 22 inch frame extension for the tunnel box behind the cab. I wish I still had that truck it was reliable and started at every turn of the key.
They don't make them like they used too lol
Sure...but how fast did it lap the Nurburgring.? Handling counts just as much as quickness...
@@buckhorncortez why are you talking about the Ring on a truck channel. VW owns The Ring anyway. Sub 6 minutes, who else is going to do that without having its manufacturing facilities so close. Anyway it’s trucks. Lol!!!
There's a reason those motors lasted so long, they didn't have all the emissions requirements that we have today that is at the rut of the problems that modern diesels are having, and second, those motor were gutless, the 1994 Cummins had 160hp and 400ft.lbs. of torque, there are 4 cylinder motors making more than that today, those motors were so low on power that they simply didn't tear everything apart like the do today. If they dropped modern diesels to those power levels I'm certain that they would also seem to last forever.
@@pnwdweler4100 That’s why we have Gale Banks, he’s the best engineer to figure this out. Just like the Cat on the ICE’s the PDF is the same. Some day they’ll find out something that won’t kill the diesel but until then I would rather be DEF free and have reliability. Just like the 300 TD from Mercedes a Million Plus Mile Machine!!
I truly believe that if this roumer is true, the decision to go with 8.3L is purely emissions related. For some reason it is not bigger news, but recently John Deer released a new large displacement diesel call the JD18, and it uses NO aftertreatment while still using EGR. In their limited press releases, they state that that have achieved this using new "combustion technology" developed by Bosch, and if I had to guess GM may be investing in using the same technology on the next Duramax. Like mentioned in the video, a large part of what makes this work is likely lowering cylinder pressure, and necessitating a larger displacement engine to make the same power numbers.
Oh so bosch went and screwed everyone with thier cp4.2 pump, by making a cheap system. And took all that money to invest in something else. Got it.
1st tier level grifter right there. We gotta promote ethics, reliability is a product of taking pride in the work you do not squeezing a penny hoping dimes will fly out.
Same has happened to motorcycles everywhere, specially after trying to meet Euro 5 and stricter regulations.
Bigger engines just to make the same power while barely passing emissions testing and in some cases . . . even less power at the same size as is the case of the latest KAWASAKI Ninja ZX-6R.
About John Deere keeping EGR and ditching aftertreatment:
I would rather have Urea Injection than dirty, abrasive and clogging exhaust fumes being recycled thru my very finicky and expensive diesel engine.
@@casval-pj5tb
Just want to make two things clear.
1. This is my hypothetical, I don't know any real details
2. I'm not endorsing or condoning Bosch in any way. Yes the CP4 debacle is what it is, they also have thousands of other products used by manufacturers that work just fine.
@@GIGABACHI Agree with you on the EGR point, but in my opinion it is at least a step in the right direction to ditch aftertreatment. EGR was the first form of emissions control put on diesel engines, I'd assume it would be the last to come off if technology allows.
@@6484373 Previous products and designs, yes. As of recent I wouldnt trust them building a fuel pump that my life may or may not rely on.
Metrics are different amongst most especially consumers, for me, its life and death.
I have 58,000 miles on my L5P truck and I have never had a problem with that. I try to drive my truck hard every week or two. Just to get the boost pressures up high and I always try to get my truck at engine operating temperature before I shut it down.
I really wish GM would develop a heavy duty version on the 3.0L Duramax. I think that a 300hp/500lbft efficient motor would be preferable to me to the 6.6 gas, but I really don't need the 6.6 Duramax for my hauling needs. I'm looking at the max trailering 1500, but would prefer the HD chassis.
If they did that and didn’t make that $10,000 up charge and instead like 1-2 I think it would sell like hot cakes
I would buy one right away. That engine on a heavier duty frame and axles would be perfect for me.
And ditch this BS oil pump belt/chain drive, and in the back of the motor.
The 6.6 is designed to run on 87 gas
@@shadowopsairman1583 yes, and ?
They are in a marketing arms race on towing numbers (Even though Banks proved you cant achieve the max torque advertised). They need spend their efforts coming up with a better after treatment system short of deleting the truck.
Agreed!
the numbers advertised ate flywheel numbers.
Well then until that happens delete is what we will do though with companies like wace of air showing examples with their pistons that they claim reduces emissions by 80% and a handful of comments stating they stand by them because they work if this is true as their going a bit crazy with it then I honestly think more people will delete since these "pistons" reduce emission future then the expensive exhaust system I however do not care the government said get fucked I say up your this is a clear example of keeping a problem around because it's profitable why make something that works and stays out of the shop more often when you could make something that is gonna spend most of it's life time in the shop bay this sort of thing is what annoys me with these manufacturers and the problem is when they see this they simply do this bring in something new to get everyone's minds off the core issue so yeah like everyone else we would like more reliable vehicles not bigger engines bigger does not always mean better
But doesn’t GM haven’t deeper R&D dollars? They’ll figure it out if they want to.
Awwww, yes. The new standard for the 3/4 and 1 ton trucks from the big three. Awesome power and capability, along with piss poor reliability. Thanks EPA!
I will say the big three not letting the EPA's forced reliability killing emission systems stop them for greatly improving engine performance and capability is admirable.
EDIT: And before I forget, we now get to burn more fuel to help improve emissions! 😀
Thats the reality that nobody talks about. With the implementation of emissions almost every single manufacturer had to up in displacement to make the same power. Meaning more fuel burn, more CO2 into the atmosphere. But what do I know
@@TheGettyAdventures I'd say you know more than the loser lawmakers in Washington, and Canada. I think it's mainly a money making scheme that they wrap in a package that attempts to make them look like they're fighting for some phoney save the planet cause. Emissions makes everything go up in costs and volume. Vehicles know need more complex parts on them, diesels require more fuel that generally speaking keeps getting more expensive, repair work, and preventive maintenance is more necessary, as is hiring skilled labor for work that you used to could perform yourself.?.? IDK, I could be wrong, but it seems to make sense, and you cant make dollars with making cents.... Or something like that.
Like with vw
The 1.9 had lower emissions than the 2.0tdi because they made it too powerful
@@TheGettyAdventures Yup, the railroads are already there with the Tier 4, burn more fuel (along with a complicated EGR system), to make slightly better emissions than Tier 3.
I’m an automotive engineer don’t tell them I told you this, but we (employer) really don’t care. Truck blows up after the warranty. To be honest. Most cars nowadays. Have a 10 year expiration date. The people I work with every day with the smartest people I know from mechanics to former Dakar , and Baja engineers,. Trust me we can make a reliable engine Toyota was doing it back in the 2000s. There’s been multiple cases where through long-term testing we have found multiple issues but since the issues we found “most likely” happen over 200,000 miles we purposely did nothing. our customer base (likely used) who drives cars not far into the future. Don’t have the money to buy a new products so we don’t care what they think about us. And the customer basis I that afford a new truck will have a perfectly problem with the truck for 6 to 8 years. before you ask other companies do the same even Toyota now with the new turbo junk. We usually open up or competitors engines and see what we can rivers engineer or learn from )non-patented) Sooo… sorry 😢 (power train engineer in one of the big American three)
No way in hell will they put an 8.3 liter diesel in a 1 ton. I can almost guarantee that this will be a large straight six for the medium duty segment. It will burn diesel like a big block v8 and drink DEF.
Have it deleted. Get rid of that def. Nothing but problems
Def lol thats funny
I dont think it'll be a diesel at all. Just a guess but I think they'll use it as a gasser option to the 6.6 which I hear is kinda weak so they're going to need something to compare maybe beat the 7.3 Ford gasser as they also have the 6.8 gasser for 3/4 and 1 ton and up.. we'll see I guess.. this guy is correct about engine power not having much to do with hauling its all in everything else driveline,suspension etc.. in fact my 6.7 actually tows less than the gasser 7.3 because of weight ratio!
Plus Dirty D are so damn expensive these days honestly I'm going back to gas probably.. most old timers won't mess with these newer diesels with all the reliability troubles..
I get about 175-180 miles per gallon of def in my peterbilt, bigger engine
Always look forward to sundays to watch your videos! Such great truck content
Well thank you 😊
GM already supplies engines to the Navistar built medium duty truck. This engine is the next logical step. Great video.
Navistar engines are junk
@@carlosdasilva8622was going to say this same thing 😂
That Duramax is built by International.
@@jeffmockus5400the duramax isn’t built by international 😂😂 it’s built by DMAX, a subsidiary of GM
So the same Duramax what is offered in the Chevrolet Silverado HD 4500/5500/6500 is also offered in the International CV series? I knew that the Chevy version was assembled by Navistar (parent company of International trucks).
LBZ crew checking in…
👍🏻
🤝🏻
LLY but close enough
2 runners, 2 I'm slowly rebuilding when I have free time, and always ready to pick up another 1 or 2 or 10.... don't plan on ever owning anything newer.
The rebuilds are staying in storage when I finish 'em and I'll rotate one in when a roller needs replacing.
18 years and 520k on my original, if I only got 10 years each out of the rest, I'll be close to 80 years old and not worried about much of anything anymore.
I'm holding out for an LBZ. I'll gladly settle for a nice LLY
I have an old Ford/cat v-636 / 10.4L in my F-800 and it will probably last forever. Starts in -30 and runs amazingly smooth. It’s already nearly 50 years old and I love it.
My lb7 is badass and all I need and plenty of power. Intake and sensors are completely spotless and clean!
Perhaps a bigger 8.3 could deliver the same power as is but be within the EPA guidelines. With Cummins being fined and I’d be shocked if Ford isn’t next on their target list.
I think Ford and other manufacturers have the fear of god in them after seeing what cummins is going through.
I completely agree with you. It comes down to physics and it all is to do with emissions. Light truck diesel engines have probably been tuned to their max efficiencies and power for their current platforms. There is not much meat left on the bone -so to speak, and more output would mean more NOx and more EGR and more aftertreatment... maybe even dual SCR catalysts would be needed (YIKES!).
So, unfortunately, the manufacturers need to lower cylinder pressure and temperature to control NOx --BUT lowering cylinder pressures lessens horsepower and KILLs torque!
One solution to this is to use larger displacement to replace the lost torque, but it will be "de-tuned" so as to keep the EPA peeps off their back.
Their will be lots of tech in a new diesel platform. maybe we see cylinder cut-out at idle or low loads to pump O2 into the catalyst?? We are sure to see clever forced induction systems, like twin volute turbos, or compounding, or supercharging, or combination of all of the above. This will give crisp, on demand control of manifold pressure so it can be dialed up to any boost level at any time (without lag) for instant power when needed and bypass to recirculation when not needed - waiting and ready to flow when the demand is called for. This would give plenty of dense air (only when needed) to create a more complete burn and reduce particulates; consequently, running at lower cylinder pressures at idle and cruise to reduce NOx.
In the motorcycle world, plenty of manufacturers have increased engine capacities to keep the same HP and torque in their models when combating increased emission rules.
The real solution is to be happy with LESS POwER.
That would be an actual evolution
@@fastinradfordable Oh please, nobody is going to do that.
GM needs a straight 6 in their HD trucks.
Could not agree more. The 3L duramax is a shining example of how awesome an inline 6 diesel can be
Why?
ew no thanks.
I suppose an engineer could explain it better but look at all the best diesels in farm tractors or semi trucks, are inline 6's, inline 6 gas engines are great too they're not speed demons but they are torquey down low .run lower rpm's for longevity @@buckhorncortez
They do have a straight 6 duramax diesel
As for an updated diesel for GM light duty trucks.. I think a move to an inline 6 diesel makes sense. Duramax already has that platform in the 3.0 liter. Put power numbers up with the Ford H.O. 6.7. An 8.3 V8 diesel would be tight in that engine bay.
Id love to see a big inline 6 duramax. But I agree an 8.3L is a big engine
No they discontinued the 3.0 because it’s a nightmare that’s unfixable
@@fastinradfordable No they didn't. Ram and Ford discontinued theirs, but you can go buy a 3.0 Duramax Silverado, Sierra, Tahoe, Suburban, Yukon, or Yukon XL with that engine right now.
You nailed it... Emissions. But also, I love lazy, low stress engines. The macho, "Mr important HD truck" thing has gone too far. We need solid, reliable, good performing trucks with less macho BS. Like pickup trucks used to be. A strong, low stress engine would help.
I think it’s going to be a gas motor if anything. The ford 7.3 gas has impressive numbers without the emissions BS of the diesel.
Great Video as usual! You have the best, most honest, take on truck engines! From the horses mouth, I can tell you, you are 100% on your prediction of an 8 liter diesel being released by GM is correct. Like you said it’s coming out around 27.
I’m absolutely here for an 8 liter diesel
Hopefully whatever GM updates under the hood they can get us parts that arent months on back order so we can make money rather then the truck sitting on the lot.
Great video really enjoyed watching it
Bigger displacement to create more power compensate for the increasing emission requirements
You mean scam
Maybe they can call it "Fuel Pincher II"...
Lol
🥴🥴 I'm having flashbacks😂
On further thought, Duramax/Banks is selling engines for the JLTV. If there is a big enough military contract in play, they may tool up for it. Still don't see it in the pickups, but maybe the Cornbinder mediums.
Everyone is talking about displacement size.i drive 14liter Detroit engine 505 horse,1700 to 1900 lbs torque in a tractor trailer, not much power for a Big engine
But goes over million miles longevity, pulling daily, and it's fuel mileage loaded is close to a Duramax towing max.that says everything to me
Why not get rid of egr completely and let the engine breathe. Make the scr catalyst bigger and spray more def. That will solve 2 problems. Reliability of the base engine and dpf sooting up. Higher cylinder temps and pressure means less soot but more nox and the nox can be taken care of down stream outside of the base engine.
Same thoughts as me ,there are companies that are doing that
Maybe the larger platform will put lower stress on everything inside and increase reliability and get better emissions, Then they can tweak it up over the years as they become familiar with it
makes alot of sense. winning the power war is a nice byproduct.
I have an 01 K2500HD ECLB Duramx with a 6 inch lift and BFG 35x12.5 AT's and it makes all the power I need
The packaging of an engine of that size would be interesting to see. The diesels today don't seem to have a ton of space under the hood, a bigger displacement may need to be pretty creative. Could you do a video on the different axle types (full floating vs 3/4 floating, etc) and could we get your opinion and thoughts about the recall on the Ford Max Tow 9.75" rear axle for snapped bolts?
If you scaled a 6.6 up to 8.3 liters the volume would increase by a factor of 1.258 so 26 percent larger. But then you take the cube root of that and you get 1.079 so it would only be 8 percent longer, wider, and taller. Not really a huge deal and that's probably an overestimate since not everything has to get bigger.
Increasing displacement t doesn’t have to effect size.
Look at the 5.9 or 8.3 Cummins.
Same block
Or vw beetle engine for example.
Displacement can range from 1.2L up to 2.3L without changing external dimensions.
The 6.7 liter cummins is also used in log skidders fella bunchers tree log loaders, bucket loaders & many other industrial applications
Will keep my '05 DMax thank you very much... New trucks are just way too expensive.
Don't you need a cdl when you start towing 26,000 lbs plus?
It depends. If you’re commercial, yes. If it’s personal use, it’s state dependent, but most should get their Class A at a minimum.
@@CornFed_3in my state total weight of 26,000lbs and above you are supposed to have a CDL. Small Companies that hall cars do use a smaller truck for that reason and taking the bed's off to stay within the weight restriction.
@@1776Americanpyro, right, those sound like commercial use companies, not personal use.
You touched on one of the main points when burning clean. That's called heat. The more heat the better to an extent. I work on jet engines and the more heat and the faster you can turn them the more efficient they are. To detune an 8.3l engine is called a disaster when it comes to emissions in my humble opinion. Anyhow great video!! We will see...
Maybe de-tune was the wrong wording. But having lower cylinder temperature would allow less EGR gas going through the engine which would be a really nice bonus.
@@TheGettyAdventures I respectfully disagree. The higher the temps. the cleaner the burn. And less to be recirculated through the system.
@@JetTech1966not for NOx gasses. Lower cylinder temps mean less NOx. It's not about actually making it more efficient, it's about making the engine need less emissions control. Working within the confines of EPA rules
@@JetTech1966 not for nox higher temps higher nox.. nox is the most regulated exhaust gas
@@chriso2759 I get what you are saying but I think I was on a different subject than you all. Agreed lower cylinder temps means less NOx. BUT....those lower cylinder temps are going to decrease overall efficiency and could very likely turn it into a soot monster. The particulate filter it would need would have to be on full burn most of the time just burn it all off. I'm just hoping if this beast is actually made, that it doesn't turn out to be a total bomb by GM and the new owners don't get railed with expensive repair costs. I can see this thing being extremely sooty and having buildup everywhere. Hopefully I'm wrong if it indeed is going to be built.
If they made it in a in-line configuration and not a v8….. That would be a game changer!
GMs Mid sized currently trucks run a detuned Duramax engine.
Personally speaking, I would be quite happy to loose some power in exchange for reliability.
I think most people would agree 👍
i think i recall tfl saying they could run the big engine at lower speeds to get the same power figures as the current lineup, reducing pretty much everything while also not being that much more fuel hungry or co2 emitting.
That theory holds "some" water.
I could see that being the reason if that engine even exists and it's destined for the light duty trucks.
The horsepower and tourque numbers are already rediculous as im a 6.7 Powerstroke owner! Lets please start working on LONG TERM RELIABILITY that all of us diesel guys/gals were use to and the reason we payed more for diesel!!! I mean those HP/Tourque numbers aren't even realistic to go to the ground without ripping the tires off in some circumstances lol joking but yes lets get reliability back BIG 3!!!
I would completely agree. Unfortunately reliability and longevity don't seem to be on the top of the list these days lol
Sadly I have to agree also as there is no money in long term reliability!! Everything is about the all mighty dollar instead of taking care of the people that pay the insane amounts of money for there basically half thought out,half built product these days! I have a 2019 6.7 Powerstroke only 5 year old truck and have maintained it religiously in the past but there are litte electric issues popping up,lower tank filter getting stuck (and no it wasn't put in crooked its straight as a board lol) plus just small things on a $83,000 truck off the lot! Yes it's comparable to a mini tractor trailer but heck I could've just bought a tractor for that price! Plus I hear horror stories about these 2023 trucks $110,000 not even top trim being right back in the shop or traded in at 3,000 miles! I love my country but I don't recognize it anymore! Everything is about quick money instead of integrity,honesty or just plain out being human beings towards one another! Good lord I can't believe some of the things people say to each other on some of these threads over a simple topic when a decade ago it wouldn't have been near as severe geeeez I wonder what changed lol! 😅 we've got to get back to being a country people or the things you think you're worried about will really get taken away not just in your imagination!
Oh and thanks Getty for liking the comment! Your shows are great buddy! Keep up the good work!
@@rethergriffin7846you’re preaching to the choir, but most people don’t care/wont do anything about it. but in ~10 years when everything is down the toilet, people will be trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube. sad to watch with my own eyes, but unfortunately, the stupidity we’ve been breeding in our great country has led to this.. at this point all I can do is pop some popcorn and watch the show unfold.
@@evan7476 I'll be preparing somewhat for our downfall! What's the saddest part is most think it'll come from a certain direction but it will be the opposite im sure.. who knows..
I realistically wont even need 800ft-lbs of torque, i just want an efficient and reliable diesel with 350hp and 650 ft-lbs.
It’s not for the light-duty but the medium duty 4500 5500++ also for RV chassis and medium duty chassis
The 6.6l would be a great fit for a medium chassis already. In my opinion anyways 🤷
Brand recognition. Consider jamming a Duramax into a semi. that is a huge market that GM is not playing in right now, they want to get their awesome engines into that untapped market for them. Cummins is going to be on the wall for a while, you might get a foothold because of that.
My 2 cents, higher cylinder pressure means worse nox. At 8.3 liters with cylinder deactivation could put the motor into the 6 liter range for traffic and level highway miles. IF they can get deactivation to work.
They would NEVER put cylinder deactivation on an engine like this. Look how that’s going for GM’s own gas V8s, not well
Cylinder deactivation is about reducing pumping losses at light loads in gasoline engines. Since diesels have no throttle they have no pumping losses and there is no point.
Seems to me like they might be designing it for the 4500-6500 Silverado trucks possibly so they can increase the combined weight rating on those while having a lower tune and a more reliable truck that can tow heavy without burning itself up in 200,000 miles.
It will not happen for one main reason. HD trucks are alright are at the point were you need a CDL to legally tow certain gvwr trailers. A higher gvwr would limit what you could haul unless you get a CDL. This would turn away people who don't want the hassle of upgrading their drivers license. Making the truck less desirable.
GM has always said they are not chasing HP/TQ numbers. That along with the stringent certification process of modern day diesels now, tells me it is just a rumor.
Not a bad Idea at all. As far as hard parts go, it'd be a more reliable motor. Bigger engine mean the essential parts are also bigger. Enter the ages old line: "There's no replacement for displacement"
Cummins had/has an 8.3-liter inline diesel. I believe many, many years ago it was used in military vehicles.
I think the potential of the 8.3's power is that a buyer could get a more typical long bed crew cab and still tow 36K without having to opt for a non-typical single cab short bed dually.
You are correct.
When we were wrapping up the paper work on my dad's new '98 K2500 6.5 TD from a salesman my dad had bought cars from since the late '50s and I said how much I wished GM would make a giant killer turbo diesel, and the guy said hold tight, GM is coming out with an 8.3 diesel that makes 500 hp in a couple years. The guy worked at Gene Jansen Chevrolet for years, which was the dealership across the street from the Union Street plant and where all the performance Corvettes and race cars went before being picked up by racers and this guy was connected to GM corporate for decades. Sounds like he was off by about 20 years.
I would personally do a 6.4L i6, if not a hybrid system
8.3 l6 all I got to say easy to work on and reliability
all the 8.3 Duramax is is a new version of the Isuzu 8.3 liter 6HH1 6HE1TC and its in partnership with international Navistar ... it will be a big inline 6
There is an ongoing theory that engine displacement will increase in order to reduce NOx emissions. The trend ever since Tier1 engines is go smaller with more boost. This increases NOx emissions. One way you can reduce NOx emissions and maintain power is to use bigger engines with less boost. We’ll see.
A new pickup duramx would probably be a 7.0L. 8.3L would be for the bigger medium duty trucks.
I have a 2023 GMC Denali dually. If GMC produces the 8.3 liter engine my current truck will have to find a new home.
Do you have any video on a 2002 era 7.3 power stroke?
I bet the source got it wrong and its actually a big block gasser. That would make a lot more sense.
I would actually not mind something like that. A big gasser would be an awesome work truck
Putting a giant cubic engine will give GM a lot of room to grow. I think all the big 3 trucks are pulling weights that are in air brake country. Loose your torque converter and it good by .your exhaust brake is not made to stop you . When I pull heavy loads my w900 gets woke up. You had a lot of good points. Cummins made an 8.3 liter inline 6 300 horse power and 850 torque. It's the big cubes that makes the strongest torque.
I’m just waiting for a single cab 8.3 diesel with 4x4 and turn it into a sweet no prep truck
If they do. Engine brakes are definentely gonna be needed.
Love hearing a Canadian say, "doubts about." LOL
my guess is there going to start making the c7500 and 8500 and this would be the motor going into it but everything you said i see being a reason for them to come out with it.
Greetings Alex.
I like the 3.0 liters baby DURAMAX and the 6.6 liters DURAMAX
Why not an 8.3 liters SUPER DURAMAX! 😮 it depends on the job for which it is designed.
as long as it is good, nice and cheap! 😮 the only one!
Good job Alex!
Big HUG and BLESSINGS!
Maybe General motors is going to make their own medium duty truck. because it is made by international right now? And that's what they're gonna make that motor for.
They just need to come out with their own version of the F-450 and f550 with a bigger drivetrain and heavier Duty frame and put that use engine in them
They do.. 4500, 5500, 6500 with the l5P
I just did a egr delete on an LBZ. There was so much carbon. It was so bad for the engine. It was like 160,000 miles.
I can imagine this platform making a lot of torque. But I don’t think this is going to be a high horsepower “from the factory“ build. I have a feeling they’re going more for more power with less revs.
Also the brakes would need to be upgraded to increase towing
I believe they are because freightliner is gonna start making pickups
What are they making now? Coffee makers?
MD isb...i do warranty claims daily with that intake plugging.
What about an I8 Turbo diesel based off the Duramax I6 Turbo Diesel.
Were going to have to start measuring engine size in cubic feet.
I think gm gust put extra 2 cilinder to current duramax = 8,25(8,3)
Great explanation. Thx.
Thank you sir!
I’d really like to see it myself. I think this is the future for meeting emissions standards. Run the engine under what it’s really capable of making and focus on efficiency. I’m sure even running that 8.3 under what it could make would be well over 500 or 600 hp and 1200 lb ft
Just build a simple stout straight six. Standardize the line up . And keep it simple .Grow market dommance. Reap the profits.
I think a higher displacement Duramax would be a move for lower-stress big power numbers for the consumer market. The commercial market would get a more reliable detuned version. I'm really wondering how much further Ford is going to push the 6.7 before it just explodes after 10,000 miles. 1200 lbs/tq is amazing, but I'm even more afraid to look at repair costs for that new 6.7 than I am for my own.
Exactly. It seems like ford 6.7 platform can only be pushed so much further
I think the entire emissions system idea should be scrapped in favor of maximizing efficiency and torque potential. Making smaller engines that are more efficient will reduce total volume of emissions instead of less PPM. The Edison Motors concept of a true Hybrid system with a smaller max efficiency engine is the best technology path I have seen.
The weight of an 8.3 liter diesel makes me doubt the viability of such an engine in a light truck. More likely to be for medium duty trucks, and there's a lot of established proven competition in that arena.
I would say de tune the L5P so a normal 1/2 ton truck could use it and it would live longer and suit free. Is that possible???
First Alex I say TFL is full of it. They are mainstream media looking for any rumor to make a story. Alex’s videos are much more informative and interesting.
I can’t see that large of an engine being put in the light duty segment. A few tweaks, I believe the L5p can be on the same power levels as powerstroke. I personally think that all 3 are at a point where there is no further need to increase power outputs on these consumer pickups. If you are in need of pulling more than 36k lbs, step up to medium duty trucks. I personally feel that a larger displacement diesel engine would surely make the pickup quite boring. I know i love diesel trucks not only for their pulling power but the fact that they can spool up and move quite swiftly. An 8.3 with a good tune and you couldn’t keep tires on it.
Anyway, last thing…the EPA is absolute trash. Ruining diesel trucks seems to be their focal point these days.
Yeah I need this emission choked hopped up pickup to pull my bay boat once a month. Stop paying people 400k a year to do nothing and pay your techs what they’re worth. EPA shame on you for forcing this crap on our country. The planet is not of concern. The dollar is. I have made a career out of aftertreatment system troubleshooting and overly engineered 1939 and ISO data line systems. Freaking joke. In 20 years these trucks will all be rusted away and not worth rebuilding and the seasons will still change. GOTCHA! My biggest RO’s are always after treatment system failure with contingent damage, def in fuel system (dumb driver), and in depth electrical. The logic is quickly fading from trucks. Stop buying the statistics. Have you ever seen an EV garbage truck? I have. It won’t ever haul a load more than a few miles. It cost more in resources to engineer and build that truck than my old Detroit will pollute in its lifetime. However, these trucks will make it to the next red light before I do. Got me there.
I say the 6.7 L power stroke is the best out of the big three engines.
Definitely not.
Either way good content
How are the ball joints on the chevrolet truck? I had to replace one on my Dodge Ram with 5.9 at 46K miles. I know that has nothing to do with the engine, but I wondered about the GM on ball joints. I wish my 2005 Dodge Ram had a Allison transmission. Great Channel, liked and subscribed, best regards Chuck.
They tend to spit them out like every other truck. Depends on what you are doing. I personally don't like the independent suspension on their HD trucks but it seems to work alright
I'm a chevrolet guy. But I don't like the timing pin that shears. Idk why it's not a keyway
I wonder if anyone would want naturally aspirated versions of these diesels at an overall cost comparable to gas engines. They'd be much slower but simpler and would run forever
I would take anything that I could get with a manual transmission.
Get rid of that independent front suspension then I’ll start looking at Chevy
Please don’t forget the 8.3 Cummins engine
I still remember GMs fuel pincher!
I'll keep my 20 year old 3500 with an 8.1 Vortec and an Allison.
I don't think its a Diesel Engine
A lot people don't know, GM Last Giant Gasser truck engine the Vortec (496 CU) 8.1L V8 has still lived on as the (535CU) PSI 8.8L V8 power industrial applications (psi) a GM Integrator they also use others form GM Engines Design.
When the new GM Chevrolet Medium Duty Truck came out there were rumors of an 8+Liter V8 Gas Engine in some type of R&D but never came to the Medium Duty Truck market.
GM Power Solutions makes a LFI 8.0L V8 available
KEM equipment INC a GM Integrator use a lot of GM engines for industrial applications including the 3.0 I-4 /4.3 V6/5.7 V8/8.0 V8/9.1 V8/ 10.3 V8
No replacement for displacement, even when it comes to longevity. Those little 4 cylinders defy logic if they have any longevity towing included.
Still I will delete the truck. Don’t care about epa
I believe strongly there making 8.3
It will be for medium duty , l beam units, i think