09 GM 1/2 Ton Diesel

[Newbomb Turk]

Anybody else read the Diesel Power article on the 09 GM diesel for the 1/2 tons? As of now they claim 310 HP and 520 Torque and said when DOdGe and Ford try to scramble to get a 1/2 ton diesel motor, expect GM to up the numbers to 340 HP and 590 Ft lbs torque. It is a GM designed 4.5L V8 with double overhead cams & 4 valves per cyl and will be produced at the Tonawanda plant. I don't think I'll be first in line to buy one but I sure will keep an eye on this one.

[chimchim]

i think GM is the only one that has officially announced an 09 1/2 ton diesel, but there is a ton of info out there about a ford and dodge 1/2 ton diesel as well. supposedly ford's is an in-house as well based off of a land rover design. should be similar power specs to the GM and displaces 4.4L. don't know much about the dodge other than cummins has been testing a 4.2L v-6 and a 5.6L v-8 supossedly for use in the durango and ram 1500.

[bogan]

Look at the design of the diesel going in the GM. They have reversed the flow of a typical engine. This concentrates all of the heat on the top of the engine. I am curious to see how well this engine does. From an engineering stand point I can see a lot of things to go wrong.

[Harley]

This is the exact news I did not want to hear. Big horse power and torque engines in a half ton. Why buy a 1/2 ton pick up? Buy a 3/4 ton.
With the fuel prices as they are I was sure hoping on an efficient 1/2 ton pick up with great MPG and a durable diesel engine.
Maybe next year.

[bogan]

I agree with you Harley. I would like to see a much smaller but higher turbocharged diesel in a 1/2 ton. I just don't think we will get there with the current emission standards. Now keep in mind that most people do not need a 3/4 ton but want the diesel. This would open the market to a guy with a 6000 lb boat that he pulls one a month. He really only needs a 1/2 ton but wants the power of a diesel.

[TexasFlats]

I would like to see a factory installed system for propane injection on the diesels. Better mileage, more power, less dependence on oil.

With diesel still about .50/gal higher than gas, it might be a hard sell, unless the additional fuel mileage offsets the cost.

[bigfishtx]

What in the world do the automakers think you need 340 Diesel horses for in a half ton pickup? That thing will suck fuel like there is not tomorrow.

No wonder they are all going broke.

[bigdav160]

Look at the design of the diesel going in the GM. They have reversed the flow of a typical engine. This concentrates all of the heat on the top of the engine. I am curious to see how well this engine does. From an engineering stand point I can see a lot of things to go wrong.
???

Most engines have the cooling from bottom to top. The thermostat is at the top and is the hottest place on the engine.

On LT1 and LT4 gas engines GM used reverse cooling from top to bottom.

I'm not familiar with Duramax diesels so which way do you not like the flow??

BTW, Cummins has a smaller diesel ready for Dodge and Ford has had plenty of mules with smaller powerstrokes so don't count out the competition.

[RubenZamora]

1/2ton Diesels is not old news. GM put them in 1/2 tons int he 80's and there were quite a few out there. Like others have said. Its perfect for guys who pull smaller boats, ATV's, or Landscapers that have smaller 12ft trailers with tractor mowers, etc.

[Wedge]

The one from the 80's flopped. I think they used a block designed for gasoline style compression and the diesel counterparts and that block did not do so well.

[POC Transplant]

I think these guys need to talk to VW. That pasat w/ diesel gets 50mpg and is as zippy as any gas car in its class. I agree, there is no reason a half ton needs 500ft.lbs. of torque. They could concievably create a truck that gets 30mpg and pulls better than any gas engine in 1/2 tons. I drive a 2000 model cummins and love the diesel power, but I am not pushing the numbers this truck is claiming on power. I wish America's auto makers would put aside their power egos and come over to the real world of $4 fuel and make something that you didnt have to add 2k worth of mods to get a little over 20mpg.

[TheGoose]

That is a myth. The 6.2L and later 6.5L Turbo-charged GM diesel was designed and built by Detroit Diesel, which GM had owned since the 1930's. The GM 6.2L diesel was a very popular motor and was designed for fuel efficiency back when diesels were thought of differently than they are now. They were very popular motors, and are still used in several applications, most notably military HUMVEES.

The motor you are thinking of is an oldsmobile motor that has a displacement of 5.7L, or 350 cu in. Unfortunately for GM, most people assumed it was a conversion motor, which it was not, although it did share several similar dimensions to it's popular small block 350. The 5.7L diesel motor was notoriously unreliable and gave diesels in cars in the US a bad rap they are just now recovering from.

The one from the 80's flopped. I think they used a block designed for gasoline style compression and the diesel counterparts and that block did not do so well.

[catchysumfishy]

This is the exact news I did not want to hear. Big horse power and torque engines in a half ton. Why buy a 1/2 ton pick up? Buy a 3/4 ton.
With the fuel prices as they are I was sure hoping on an efficient 1/2 ton pick up with great MPG and a durable diesel engine.
Maybe next year.
Too True, to much H.P. and Torque for a half ton that has half of the brakes of a three quarter ton! I guess that is why Ford is advancing to the "land Rover" power plant @ 47 mpg.......

[TheGoose]

Here is a great article on the new motor: http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/chevy/0810dp_2010_duramax_4500_diesel/index.html

It looks great, but I won't even think about getting one unless it gets 25+ MPG on the highway and is quiet. If I want a big diesel motor I'll get a 3/4 ton.

[Newbomb Turk]

"I guess that is why Ford is advancing to the "land Rover" power plant @ 47 mpg.......[/QUOTE]From a ford web site: Ford will offer a diesel engine for its light-duty F-150 (http://research.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp;jsessionid=14UFBGN4SBMPXLAYIJEJXKY?my id=8503&makeid=14&year=2007&logtype=6&revid=&modelid=180&mode=&section=summary&mode=&aff=national) pickup, likely around 2008, according to a former Ford executive in Automotive News earlier this week. The engine will come from Land Rover's diesel-powered Range Rover in Europe. It's a 3.6-liter turbodiesel V-8 that makes 267 hp and 472 pounds-feet of torque in the Range Rover – and it helps the Rover get around 31 mpg on the highway.
I guess the 47mpg is the Ranger?

[Spots and Dots]

"I guess that is why Ford is advancing to the "land Rover" power plant @ 47 mpg.......From a ford web site: Ford will offer a diesel engine for its light-duty F-150 (http://research.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp;jsessionid=14UFBGN4SBMPXLAYIJEJXKY?my id=8503&makeid=14&year=2007&logtype=6&revid=&modelid=180&mode=&section=summary&mode=&aff=national) pickup, likely around 2008, according to a former Ford executive in Automotive News earlier this week. The engine will come from Land Rover's diesel-powered Range Rover in Europe. It's a 3.6-liter turbodiesel V-8 that makes 267 hp and 472 pounds-feet of torque in the Range Rover – and it helps the Rover get around 31 mpg on the highway.
I guess the 47mpg is the Ranger?[/QUOTE]
sure wish my Land Rover got 31MPG............it saw 18 once, going down hill, with a tail wind, on the highway.

[bogan]

bigdav,

The duramax has the air coming from the side nearest the fender (where the exhaust manifolds are on the LT1) and the exhaust goes into a manifold where the intake is one a LT1.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/06/15/gm-announces-clean-diesel-v8-for-pickups-and-the-hummer-h2/

I appologize for the confusion.