God and guns keep us strong. That's what this country was founded on. - Lynyrd Skynyrd
If you look at the GM800 trucks from 2000-2006 with the 5.3L 285/295 hp this engine has far more tq down low. Our ‘04 Tahoe was rated at 16 mpg but I did a 21.0 fuel economy run one time. Our ‘18 Tahoe with afm can pull 25 mpg no problem and it’s heavier than the ‘04. So I really don’t see the issue with this engine. It’s not going to be as powerful at the Ford 2.7tt but it costs GM a lot less to make. And knowing GM, it will have better fuel economy than the 2.7 tt. The only negative I can see is there might be some unrefined vibrations from the large 4 cylinder but I understand GM has worked hard on nvh. I think it will come down to the weights of the trucks, transmissions and gear ratios to see which has the better 0-60time and fuel economy.
Last edited by b4z; 04-02-2019 at 07:46 PM.
On the otherhand......
Methinks that C&D were quite deliberately up to no good here..... which kinda' makes a 3.21 'more likely' in a sense.
Last edited by AMERICA 123; 04-02-2019 at 08:39 PM.
"From tech stocks to high gas prices, Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression — and they're about to do it again."
"The world's most powerful investment bank is a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money."
"If America is circling the drain, Goldman Sachs has found a way to be that drain — " Matt Taibbi
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)