DriveHard, here it is GM 6.6 HD gasser 2020

[ls1mike]

Glad I waited to get a new truck. This sounds good to me.
In the article it talks about using them in their medium duty trucks as well.

GM 6.6 gasser

 

[wdn]

Ten percent more displacement gives ten percent more horsepower. Not sure what is the big advancement there over the 6.0 and why it doesn't make more horsepower. Maybe it gives room to crank the HP up in future model years.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

I believe Ford is going to introduce a large gas engine soon, too

 

[dbias]

The 6.0 engine has served me well. ive had 3 different vehicles with that engine and never had any problems.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted by dbias
The 6.0 engine has served me well. ive had 3 different vehicles with that engine and never had any problems.

Yep all my LS motor have been great.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted by Miller88
I believe Ford is going to introduce a large gas engine soon, too

I read about it on the RV. I thought they said 7.0.

 

[skyactiv]

The front end is Tall. Not to my liking. Much taller than a Chevy 2500 from the past:

 

[demarpaint]

I'll be interested in what the early adopters have to say. First generation, next generation, etc. I'd wait a year or two before jumping in.

 

[maxdustington]

Originally Posted by skyactiv
The front end is Tall. Not to my liking. Much taller than a Chevy 2500 from the past:
GMT400 is perfect, using it as a comparison is unfair.

 

[92saturnsl2]

I expected a larger displacement and more hp/torque, thinking GM/Ford/Ram would introduce a large displacement gas engine to try and narrow the power gap between the gas and diesel engines. Obviously the power output would never reach that of the diesel as they wouldn't want to cannibalize too many diesel sales. But the argument could be made that profit margin could be as good or better than diesel sales, given all the cost and complexity of diesel emissions devices.

With modern technology and gasoline fuel efficiency I could see a lot of people going gas if the power compromise wasn't too great, as surely they would save a few bucks in the initial purchase price.

 

[Danno]

Originally Posted by wdn
Ten percent more displacement gives ten percent more horsepower. Not sure what is the big advancement there over the 6.0 and why it doesn't make more horsepower. Maybe it gives room to crank the HP up in future model years.

For trucks, torque is more important, the 6.6 gives an almost 20% bump to 450.

 

[jhellwig]

Originally Posted by skyactiv
The front end is Tall. Not to my liking. Much taller than a Chevy 2500 from the past:



My work truck is a 2016. It took a lot of getting used to not being able to see as good over the front end as compaired to my 95 suburban. I with the interior was as roomy as the 95 but it is cramped.

If they make the 6.6l gasser the standard motor I might wind up with one in my next work truck. The 6.0 is alright for what I do and how I drive granted it is gps monitored so I can't see what it will do in the heavy work truck. I don't need to tow 30k 0-60 in 8 seconds like everyone else thinks they need to.

It is too bad the 8.1 went away. That motor was getting close to the same mpg I get now with the 6.0.

 

[DriveHard]

If the mention of adoption of GDI, VVT, and VVL are accurate, I don't see why it wouldn't be a larger bump in hp and tq. With that said....

 

[sw99]

Glad to GM doing this also. The Ford 7.3L should be a nice engine too.

 

[FFeng7]

Originally Posted by sw99
Glad to GM doing this also. The Ford 7.3L should be a nice engine too.

See

I was doing some research on the new Ford 7.3 gas engine. Rumor has it as being a push rod set up and not the OHC as the current Ford V8's. Should be interesting in the coming years with these larger displacement engines in 3/4 and 1 ton trucks

 

[maxdustington]

Originally Posted by 92saturnsl2
I expected a larger displacement and more hp/torque, thinking GM/Ford/Ram would introduce a large displacement gas engine to try and narrow the power gap between the gas and diesel engines. Obviously the power output would never reach that of the diesel as they wouldn't want to cannibalize too many diesel sales. But the argument could be made that profit margin could be as good or better than diesel sales, given all the cost and complexity of diesel emissions devices.

With modern technology and gasoline fuel efficiency I could see a lot of people going gas if the power compromise wasn't too great, as surely they would save a few bucks in the initial purchase price.
It's only a matter of time before someone straps on a blower on one and takes a shot at 750 ft lbs. Then everyone will offer a 400 CI+- supercharged for people who want big power without the diesel price tag or turbo lag. GM is going to need a new diesel design pretty soon, maybe they will try to corner the market on big gasoline V8s in 3/4 tons while they work on a new diesel engine.

 

[02SE]

There's talk of a new 426 HEMI for the RAM as well.

 

[SeaJay]

I was just thinking to myself, these big pickup trucks just ain't quite fast enough in a drag race for me. Hopefully these new larger engines will get me down the line in an acceptable time.

 

[Snagglefoot]

I have the 6.0 in a 2008 3/4 ton Suburban. Towing a 28 ft, 6300 lb trailer was a bit much and I had to drive at 3500 rpm when at 60 mph. It had 383 ft lbs of torque and that extra jump would be very helpful. Sort of like having an 11 on your amplifier!

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted by Snagglefoot
I have the 6.0 in a 2008 3/4 ton Suburban. Towing a 28 ft, 6300 lb trailer was a bit much and I had to drive at 3500 rpm when at 60 mph. It had 383 ft lbs of torque and that extra jump would be very helpful. Sort of like having an 11 on your amplifier!

You sure it is only 6300lbs? Is that dry?

I tow a 32 footer that is 7300ish to 7500ish loaded. My complete setup is 14100. I tow 60-65 in OD on the highway 2100ish to 2500ish RPM 6.0/4L80E. Maybe you have 3.73s. I have 4.10s