MT Tests '16 Sierra Denali. Puts Pushrods To Test. Results Astound.

[El Kabong]

There has been a vague buzz about this place as of late regarding pushrod V8 engines. More specifically, how they are supposedly old hat and unable to meet mileage and power demands going forward. So I came across this truck test from Motor Trend, and I figured I'd just leave it here, like a lump of coal for the TTV6 crowd.

Some Christmas cheer for fans of V8 awesomeness here:

http://www.motortrend.com/news/2016-gmc-sierra-denali-1500-4wd-first-test-review/

[El Kabong]

Some sample quotes to drive home the point:

"The Sierra Denali barely even noticed the 7,000-pound average-weight trailer. It blew through 60 mph in 13.3 seconds and through the quarter mile in 19.5 seconds at 71.8 mph... With the 9,100-pound trailer strapped on, the GMC still flew, powering from 0 to 60 mph in 14.9 seconds and completing the quarter mile in 20.3 seconds with a trap speed of 70.2 mph. For context, the luxurious 2015 Ford F-150 Platinum FX4 with the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 took 14.7 seconds to reach 60 mph and dusted off the quarter mile in 20.2 seconds at 69.5 mph while pulling 7,000 pounds. Lest we forget, the stout twin-turbo 3.5-liter always feels up for a drag race. Unladen, the F-150 and Sierra’s Real MPG are within spitting distance of each other, too, with the GMC’s 15.4/21.1/17.5 mpg city/highway/combined edging the Ford’s 14.8/19.9/16.8."

So, to conclude: same towing power as a TTV6.

Better mileage than a TTV6.

Pushrod valvetrain.

That, friends, is cooler than the Fonz.

Merry Christmas to all :D

Edited December 25, 2015 by El Kabong

[balthazar]

Where are these automatons who think "pushrods" somehow don't develop power??

[El Kabong]

*checks PMs*

...probably somewhere not working hard enough

:D

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

Amazing the kind of power, performance and fuel economy that the Ford truck manages uses their old V6 and only 6 speeds.

 

Can't wait to see results with the all new V6 and 10 speeds.

I also wonder how that will compare to the coming updated Ford V8 6.2L as well.

[El Kabong]

I must apologize.

I said the pushrod V8 offers similar power to the TTV6.

Turns out that was because the similar acceleration numbers I was looking at were when the pushrod was pulling a full ton more than the TTV6.

Ouch

Ouch

Ouch

:D
 

[surreal1272]

Amazing the kind of power, performance and fuel economy that the Ford truck manages uses their old V6 and only 6 speeds.

 

Can't wait to see results with the all new V6 and 10 speeds.

I also wonder how that will compare to the coming updated Ford V8 6.2L as well.

That "old" V6 is newer than the pushrod it competes against.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

Amazing the kind of power, performance and fuel economy that the Ford truck manages uses their old V6 and only 6 speeds.

 

Can't wait to see results with the all new V6 and 10 speeds.

I also wonder how that will compare to the coming updated Ford V8 6.2L as well.

That "old" V6 is newer than the pushrod it competes against.

 

 

No, no, NO, the technology is newer, but the V6 is the same basic and original EcoBoost that launched a decade ago, that was only updated several years ago by adding TiVCT instead of just iVCT.  The 6.2L is completely new (as is the 8 speed) and launched more recently.  

 

New Ford V6 is months away now. 

As is the 10 speed.

[surreal1272]

 

 

Amazing the kind of power, performance and fuel economy that the Ford truck manages uses their old V6 and only 6 speeds.

 

Can't wait to see results with the all new V6 and 10 speeds.

I also wonder how that will compare to the coming updated Ford V8 6.2L as well.

That "old" V6 is newer than the pushrod it competes against.

 

 

No, no, NO, the technology is newer, but the V6 is the same basic and original EcoBoost that launched a decade ago, that was only updated several years ago by adding TiVCT instead of just iVCT.  The 6.2L is completely new (as is the 8 speed) and launched more recently.  

 

New Ford V6 is months away now. 

As is the 10 speed.

 

No because the pushrod that the GM motor is based off of, is older. This "new" motor is merely a revision of the existing 6.2L (the LT1 really isn' t all that different from the LS3 it replaced) that has been around for decades. Not sure what you are not getting here. The pushrod GM is older than the 3.5L Ford.

 

To the rest of your post, it's the same old "wait until..." when you have no other argument. Doesn't even merit a response honestly.

Edited December 25, 2015 by surreal1272

[El Kabong]

Oh don't be so hard on yourself bong, you are working plenty hard enough with your bait thread.....on Christmas Eve.

By my calculations, you're answering me on Christmas Day.

Just. Too. Easy.

How do you manage to keep having feet to shoot yourself in?

:D

...and oh, those poor Fords.

Perhaps GM should sell them the old LS tooling. It might help their engineers focus on their jobs more, 'cause right now it just looks like they're all crapping the bed something TERRIBLE :D

Edited December 25, 2015 by El Kabong

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

The L86 is "all new" launched about 2 years ago I believe, and many years newer than the Ford engine.

 

Nice try surreal.

http://www.lsxtv.com/news/gm-officially-rates-6-2-liter-l86-truck-engine-at-420-horsepower/

[El Kabong]

The L86 is "all new" launched about 2 years ago I believe, and many years newer than the Ford engine.

Nice try surreal.

http://www.lsxtv.com/news/gm-officially-rates-6-2-liter-l86-truck-engine-at-420-horsepower/

LOL@desperate backtracking in the face of old tech learning new tricks :D

Face it: GM is schooling Ford in truck and RWD applications.

Edited December 25, 2015 by El Kabong

[surreal1272]

The L86 is "all new" launched about 2 years ago I believe, and many years newer than the Ford engine.

 

Nice try surreal.

http://www.lsxtv.com/news/gm-officially-rates-6-2-liter-l86-truck-engine-at-420-horsepower/

Maybe one day you will actually read what I posted instead of what you are reading in your head. Furthermore, it does not matter. Can GM fans use the same excuse as yourself with this "wait until..." nonsense? No so Ford's "wait and see" is just that, wait and see. Right now, the 6.2L pushrod is a beast that is also good on gas with it's "older tech" i.e. "pushrod engine". Do you get it now ?

 

The L86 is "all new" launched about 2 years ago I believe, and many years newer than the Ford engine.

Nice try surreal.

http://www.lsxtv.com/news/gm-officially-rates-6-2-liter-l86-truck-engine-at-420-horsepower/

LOL@desperate backtracking in the face of old tech learning new tricks :D

Face it: GM is schooling Ford in truck and RWD applications.

 

But just wait until next year Bong, or the year after, or the year after that?

 

Per his own link.

"All Gen V engines feature direct injection, Active Fuel Management (AFM) and continuously variable valve timing. And like traditional small-block engines that have been around since 1955, the Gen V small-blocks are single-cam, overhead-valve design and feature a 4.400-inch bore center."

Edited December 25, 2015 by surreal1272

[El Kabong]

Eh. He just writes crap he can't back up.

Sure is funny to read tho. Especially when it's time stamped Dec. 25th

Edited December 25, 2015 by El Kabong

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

Oh the desperation.....on Christmas Eve of all nights to start a bait thread.

 

 

But surreal, I will give you this, that "all new" with respect to GM engines, is sort of a relative term. 

 

This is from the link above:

 

"And like traditional small-block engines that have been around since 1955, the Gen V small-blocks are single-cam, overhead-valve design and feature a 4.400-inch bore center."

 

So I guess anything new can be an exciting time for GM fans.

 

Merry Christmas boys.  Time to put some presents under the tree, as everyone is finally asleep

[El Kabong]

I greatly enjoyed schooling you again

Work harder next year

Edited December 25, 2015 by El Kabong

[ccap41]

I think it's funny I know who posts the GM and Ford threads based on the titles.

You guys are such fanboys.

Edited December 25, 2015 by ccap41

[Drew Dowdell]

Can you guys not be dicks to each other for one whole day so I can enjoy a holiday with my family?

[Drew Dowdell]

GM is getting the 10-speed too, so it will not be a Ford exclusive for very long.

Even with an all new block, a new 3.5 Ecoboost is not going to be putting out 460 lb-ft of torque. I'm not saying Ford can't do it, but those are Cadillac ATS-V numbers and Ford is not going to put that level of premium hardware into an F-150. 

[surreal1272]

Oh the desperation.....on Christmas Eve of all nights to start a bait thread.

 

 

But surreal, I will give you this, that "all new" with respect to GM engines, is sort of a relative term. 

 

This is from the link above:

 

"And like traditional small-block engines that have been around since 1955, the Gen V small-blocks are single-cam, overhead-valve design and feature a 4.400-inch bore center."

 

So I guess anything new can be an exciting time for GM fans.

 

Merry Christmas boys.  Time to put some presents under the tree, as everyone is finally asleep

Continue to call it a bait thread yet can't seem to stop posting on it, thus giving it credibility past that of a "bait thread". Merry Christmas to all indeed.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

GM is getting the 10-speed too, so it will not be a Ford exclusive for very long.

Even with an all new block, a new 3.5 Ecoboost is not going to be putting out 460 lb-ft of torque. I'm not saying Ford can't do it, but those are Cadillac ATS-V numbers and Ford is not going to put that level of premium hardware into an F-150. 

 

 

Actually, current Navigator with old 3.5L has 460ftlbs, and the flattest, earliest torque curve you can find.

 

Soooo, yeah, they should be able to top that.  At least in premium trim models.  

 

Oh the desperation.....on Christmas Eve of all nights to start a bait thread.

 

 

But surreal, I will give you this, that "all new" with respect to GM engines, is sort of a relative term. 

 

This is from the link above:

 

"And like traditional small-block engines that have been around since 1955, the Gen V small-blocks are single-cam, overhead-valve design and feature a 4.400-inch bore center."

 

So I guess anything new can be an exciting time for GM fans.

 

Merry Christmas boys.  Time to put some presents under the tree, as everyone is finally asleep

Continue to call it a bait thread yet can't seem to stop posting on it, thus giving it credibility past that of a "bait thread". Merry Christmas to all indeed.

 

 

 

yeah, I do my best to steer it on track and on topic, rather than just attack people.

 

Thanks and Merry Christmas to you too.

And drew,

Ford took the lead on 10 speed engineering and will have it to themselves for a few years prior.  

Edited December 25, 2015 by Wings4Life

[FAPTurbo]

There has been a vague buzz about this place as of late regarding pushrod V8 engines. 

 

The 'debate' is an on-again, off-again feature of C&G that similarly plagues the entire 'autosphere' which is filled to the brim with pseudo-engineers who genuinely believe that DOHC and OHV methodologies are in competition, thus reducing each engine's application into a one-upmanship game. 

 

But what else can we expect from unscrubbed plebs who don't own Tesla's?

 

Merry Christmas. 

[Drew Dowdell]

The Navigator only gets that on premium fuel... so yea, not really acceptable for an F-150. Putting in regular means a 40 ft-lb loss in torque (based on current F-150 ratings). The ATS-V recommends premium also, but again, premium brand like Lincoln.

I do expect an improvement over the current EB 3.5, but highly unlikely they'll be hitting 460 lb-ft on regular fuel unless they up the displacement a bit over the current 3.5 liters.

But I just learned the 2.7 is an iron block instead of aluminum, so maybe they can dial the boost way up without causing problems.

For me assuming the same displacement, 430 - 450 lb-ft on regular would be expected, 460 lb-ft would be a nice surprise, over that would be astounding but would make me wonder what the driver sacrafices to use it.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

460ftlbs is available as mentioned and more will be available, even if they only offer it in a GMC-like premium trim level.  It is an entirely new engine that will only share displacement.  And more displacement is not needed. That is one of the perks of GTDI.

Fuel type should not be a concern in those premium trim models, especially at today's cheap prices.  And it's not just torque peak that will impress, but massive average torque, better known as area under the curve.

[Drew Dowdell]

"should" and "is" are two very different things... and people who fill up their trucks with regular and see a marked performance drop are just being set up for disappointment no matter how much you try to prep them

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

The performance will be there, and I doubt that premium fuel will be needed.

And when amplified by more gears and less weight, it will be impressive.

[Drew Dowdell]

The performance will be there, and I doubt that premium fuel will be needed.

And when amplified by more gears and less weight, it will be impressive.

 

Is there another round of platform weight loss for next year then?

[ccap41]

I'm just impressed any truck is running 14.1-2 let alone a loaded up Denali. That's pretty damn fast...let alone for a truck.

The 1/4 Mile with 7000lbs was even quicker than some under powered economy cars. Just plain respectable numbers from a truck. Fuel consumption is very respectable considering not too long ago no matter what you bought and how you drove you'd get 12-15mpg from a v8 truck.

[ocnblu]

 

There has been a vague buzz about this place as of late regarding pushrod V8 engines. 

 

The 'debate' is an on-again, off-again feature of C&G that similarly plagues the entire 'autosphere' which is filled to the brim with pseudo-engineers who genuinely believe that DOHC and OHV methodologies are in competition, thus reducing each engine's application into a one-upmanship game. 

 

But what else can we expect from unscrubbed plebs who don't own Tesla's?

 

Merry Christmas. 

 

*plebes

[FAPTurbo]

*plebes

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plebs

Like OHV and DOHC, both are perfectly okay!

[ocnblu]

 

There has been a vague buzz about this place as of late regarding pushrod V8 engines. 

 

The 'debate' is an on-again, off-again feature of C&G that similarly plagues the entire 'autosphere' which is filled to the brim with pseudo-engineers who genuinely believe that DOHC and OHV methodologies are in competition, thus reducing each engine's application into a one-upmanship game. 

 

But what else can we expect from unscrubbed plebs who don't own Tesla's?

 

Merry Christmas. 

 

*Teslas

[Suaviloquent]

ERMEgerd.

 

It's Christmas, and I thought that article was a gift wrapped by MT, because Shiny Truck Shiny.

 

I can't believe that it's not butter. Anyways, the results of the test were really great. Class leading as of this time. If you wanted to gift yourself or significant other a shiny shiny truck, one that slices through crowds and uses precision magnetorheological dampers... well your shopping experience is pretty easy, go to the GMC dealer.

 

I'm not going to give pity points to any automaker, especially the one the Denali was frequently compared to because it is much newer overall - or should be because that is how it is advertised. But the results are there, and as of this time, the latest from GM leads by a good margin. What's best about it is that it kind of flies in the face against the industry trend of downsizing and forced induction. 

 

Anyways, I hope you all had a nice Christmas. 

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

The performance will be there, and I doubt that premium fuel will be needed.

And when amplified by more gears and less weight, it will be impressive.

 

Is there another round of platform weight loss for next year then?

 

 

Always looking to reduce, but why, does it need it?

[Suaviloquent]

 

 

The performance will be there, and I doubt that premium fuel will be needed.

And when amplified by more gears and less weight, it will be impressive.

 

Is there another round of platform weight loss for next year then?

 

 

Always looking to reduce, but why, does it need it?

 

 

I thought even more weight loss was going to happen.

 

Well anyways - didn't you actually make a thread about an article about Ford's Alcoa partnership that led to a breakthrough in Aluminum production... I think it was called a "MicroMill".

 

Anyways, it said that Ford had an even better Aluminum alloy that it had an exclusive deal to get supplied by Alcoa.

 

But that's just from my memory - and it could be totally wrong.

[Drew Dowdell]

The performance will be there, and I doubt that premium fuel will be needed.

And when amplified by more gears and less weight, it will be impressive.

 

Is there another round of platform weight loss for next year then?

 

Always looking to reduce, but why, does it need it?

It was the implication from your post that the addition of 10-speeds and "added lightness" would contribute to further improvements in the F-150's performance. If there isn't any significant additional weight loss coming, then it can't help performance over the current model now can it?

[Suaviloquent]

We've been here before with the whole speculation of future product that supposedly will do better. Sure, maybe it will. And that's about all that can be stipulated.

 

Everyone damn well knows what stance I have on those meandering, circular, self-fulfilling arguments- I hate those arguments with a penchant desire to bury them, especially when they don't amount to anything other than banter.

 

Right, now, even without considering cost of purchase, this is a spectacular performance by a truck. It beats everyone else in a lot of metrics. With the purchase price in mind, $h! it's expensive but if I'm buying this, I'm not looking to save green at the pump, but I'd like higher mpg because why not have your cake and eat it too?

 

I'm not going to entertain the thought of future product that doesn't exist yet. Maybe 6-7 months from now when the 10 speed actually comes out. And when it actually gets driven. And it actually gets tested. And numbers are close to being posted or are posted by both the manufacturer and publications.

 

Are we cool? Do we agree that it is a pragmatic stance to take? 

[Drew Dowdell]

Well, I can say this - I *really* love the new Sierra and Silverado face.  I was lukewarm to the '15s as they were handsome, but didn't move the line forward enough for me.  To my eyes, the new GM trucks make the GM 2015s and the competitors look quite obsolete... the Ram and Tundra most of all.   It's the first time in recent memory that I can remember liking both the GMC and the Chevrolet full size truck models of the same year.  I tended to flip from one to the other. 

[Suaviloquent]

Allright, well, I'll be honest... the new Chevy front face to me, futt bugly.

 

But hey I'm indoctrinated by GMC now, so I guess it doesn't matter, because all the GMC is...is a precision (not really but marketed as and therefore maybe) version of the Silverado.

 

It'll take it as it is. But you gotta love the brash marketing that coincides with realized performance based on statistical evidence.

[Drew Dowdell]

     

 

 

 

 

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

 

 

 

The performance will be there, and I doubt that premium fuel will be needed.

And when amplified by more gears and less weight, it will be impressive.

 

Is there another round of platform weight loss for next year then?

 

Always looking to reduce, but why, does it need it?

It was the implication from your post that the addition of 10-speeds and "added lightness" would contribute to further improvements in the F-150's performance. If there isn't any significant additional weight loss coming, then it can't help performance over the current model now can it?

 

Oh. Sorry, no, not that I know of anyway.  Nothing significant or newsworthy.  

 

I guess I was waxing eloquently toward all factors in place contributing to improvements, where currently, only reduced weight is the factor.

[G. David Felt]

Fact is, who ever can deliver a 400 mile range in a battery pack with an electric motor that can deliver 400hp with over 500 lbs of torque will win. The future will eventually be electric and the stepping stone to there will be alternative fuel like BioDiesel and CNG plus your plug in hybrids like the volt.

 

Course the EV engine is already available:

 

420 HP

560 LBS of Torque

 

AMR Dual Stack 250-90 AC Liquid cooled motor.

 

 

Weight is 180 lbs

Size is 18.5 inches long

Diameter is 10.5 inches

Red Line RPM 10,000

Thermal Cooling: Internal oil pump with water heat exchange.

 

Try to beat that with your turbo 4 bangers.

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

That wonderful electric motor has a range.....and then it dies.  

Try traveling across the country with one.

[regfootball]

Can you guys not be dicks to each other for one whole day so I can enjoy a holiday with my family?

best post of'15

[El Kabong]

Can you guys not be dicks to each other for one whole day so I can enjoy a holiday with my family?

best post of'15

I'm guessing this was aimed, in part, at me.

After three pages of off-topic silliness in some other thread I decided to post an article in a thread of my own that addressed the off-topic silliness by presenting cold, hard facts. These, as we all know, are troll Kryptonite. In that regard this thread has been wildly successful, because of course it was.

As for the rest: we tailor our prose to the audience. Sometimes feelings get hurt I suppose.

Edited December 26, 2015 by El Kabong

[Guest Wings4Life(BANNED)]

^

 

Ummm, sorry mods, but bong's post above deserves a rebuttal.

 

Other than one comment about this being a 'bait thread' I have been completely and 100% topical to the original article, or several subsequent sub-topics.  

 

And the reason for the 'bait thread' comment is not due to the article itself, but the typical taunting from bong.  He even was nice enough to taunt me in PM with links to this thread, in case I missed it.  He also followed up with the following comment in PM:

 

 'Watching you getting thrashed on the Internet on Christmas Day sure is funny  '

 

So clearly, my bait remark was justified.

[ocnblu]

Enough of the meandering BS.  Truck Trend has chosen the 2016 Sierra Denali 1500 as their Pickup Truck Of The Year.  That is what we need to focus on in this thread.

[surreal1272]

Oh pass a damn tissue already and talk about the GMC instead of Ford, given that is what the thread is actually about. 

[surreal1272]

"should" and "is" are two very different things... and people who fill up their trucks with regular and see a marked performance drop are just being set up for disappointment no matter how much you try to prep them

Never mind mind the fact that his excuse is based of the assumption that gas prices will always be low, when they surely will not be this low always. What will the excuse be when gas goes up again?

[Drew Dowdell]

 

"should" and "is" are two very different things... and people who fill up their trucks with regular and see a marked performance drop are just being set up for disappointment no matter how much you try to prep them

Never mind mind the fact that his excuse is based of the assumption that gas prices will always be low, when they surely will not be this low always. What will the excuse be when gas goes up again?

 

 

While they won't always be low, they will stay relatively low for the next 3 to 5 years.  China's growth is scaling back and lots of new oil production came online in North America.  Saudi Arabia is in crisis mode, pumping as much as they can to keep the lights on because the price per barrel is so low.   So, he's most likely right that prices will stay low.... still... a bunch of people buying trucks that take premium that they are uninformed about is a potential customer relations issue.

[Drew Dowdell]

Move on..