GM to make 94,000 4.5L diesels per year

[HoosierRon]

GM planning for almost 100,000 4.5L diesels a year

General Motors is expecting their new Duramax 4500 diesel V-8 to be a popular option in their trucks after its 2009 introduction. The engines will be built at GM's Tonawanda, New York engine plant and the company is preparing to build 400 engines a day. That works out to about 94,000 engines a year. The new engine will be launching in the Hummer H2 and then get added to other full-size trucks.

[blank disk]

Any word on cost premium?

[drew630]

Thats all??? I mean GM sells 400,000+ Silverado's a year. With spreading the 4.5L over the Silverado, Sierra, and H2, 94,000 won't be enough IMO. This engine will be very popular especially if gas prices continue to rise like they have in recent years. Hopefully this number can be increased very easily.

[63GrandSport001]

Well if GM has to expand capactiy due to popularity then thats just a good good thing IMHO.

[TheGeneral]

Those diesels will be in $30,000+ trucks designed for towing so price won't be a concern mileage will be though.

[Kennyboy]

I think GM is making a conservative estimate right now. When demand goes up and the new diesel engine goes into more models, GM will ramped up production to keep up with demand.

[AndrewGS]

The H2 will finally be a viable vehicle! Can't wait to see the new diesels on the lots.

[hrcslam]

Will GM put these into Tahoes Yukons and Suburbans?

[spaz]

i hope they are able to shoehorn this mill into some sedans, a duramax 4500 powered STS- replacement would be amazing. If GM offered this and the VM 2.9 V6 in vehicles needing less power theyd have the fuel mileage game covered without any performance penalty

[FordFan]

Are you kidding me? 94K for all of the GMT-900 light trucks and SUVs? That's not remotely enough. Diesel will be a big hit in light trucks and SUVs, I think GM should make 3X that amount.

[bobojay]

They are obviously being conservative with the numbers at first.
The 6.6 Duramax has always been sold out production wise every year because of production restraints at Moraine. Which is a good thing. It keeps the plant running at full capacity, keeping costs down.
The diesel market right now is just beginning to show signs of revving up in the U.S. I'm sure they will have expansion possibilities available if the demand warrants.

[jckjds]

I still contend that GM made this engine too large. GM already has the 6.6 for power mongers. The only other purpose of a diesel is to provide good fuel economy. Thus, this engine should have been 3.0-3.5 liters and get class leading (by a large margin) fuel economy. Instead, GM now has two hulking diesels, neither of which will probably wow anyone in the fuel economy department.

GM could have hit a home run by producing a 3.0-3.5 litre diesel with 200 hp and 350-400 lb ft of torque (which is MORE than plenty for the average truck buyer) that gets, say 25-30 mpg combined (i.e. true sedan mileage). Instead, we'll get another powerful diesel (reportedly 300+hp and 500+ lb ft) that will probably get 10-15 percent better mileage than the gas options, which won't be enough, IMO to make people switch from their gas engines (at least not en masse). This new 4.5 will essentially be competing with the 6.6 IMO.

An added benefit of making a 3.0-3.5 diesel would be that GM could have used the same diesel for both cars an trucks (instead of building the 2.9 AND the 4.5), which would have saved engineering and tooling costs.

Oh well.

[GMusa]

Sounds good to me!

[eaton53]

Originally Posted by FordFan

Are you kidding me? 94K for all of the GMT-900 light trucks and SUVs? That's not remotely enough. Diesel will be a big hit in light trucks and SUVs, I think GM should make 3X that amount.

Depends on the price premium.

Here's another problem with diesels... they don't save any money. Where I live diesel is 60 cents a gallon more than gas and $1.40 more than E85. This is where hybrid beats diesel - much cheaper fuel.

[Sinner]

Originally Posted by jckjds

I still contend that GM made this engine too large. GM already has the 6.6 for power mongers. The only other purpose of a diesel is to provide good fuel economy. Thus, this engine should have been 3.0-3.5 liters and get class leading (by a large margin) fuel economy. Instead, GM now has two hulking diesels, neither of which will probably wow anyone in the fuel economy department.

GM could have hit a home run by producing a 3.0-3.5 litre diesel with 200 hp and 350-400 lb ft of torque (which is MORE than plenty for the average truck buyer) that gets, say 25-30 mpg combined (i.e. true sedan mileage). Instead, we'll get another powerful diesel (reportedly 300+hp and 500+ lb ft) that will probably get 10-15 percent better mileage than the gas options, which won't be enough, IMO to make people switch from their gas engines (at least not en masse). This new 4.5 will essentially be competing with the 6.6 IMO.

An added benefit of making a 3.0-3.5 diesel would be that GM could have used the same diesel for both cars an trucks (instead of building the 2.9 AND the 4.5), which would have saved engineering and tooling costs.

Oh well.

1. The 4.5 will be in 1/2 tons, the 6.6 is 3/4, 1 and 1+ tons.

2. The horsepower war extends to diesels aswell. Do you think Ford and Dodge are coming with 3L's?

In my opinion the V6 gasser and the 4.8 should be dropped. The base engine should be the 2.9 Diesel. With the 5.3, 6.0, 6.2, 6.0 2Mode and 4.5 Diesel as options.