Chevy Colorado Diesel Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
TELL ME IT'S NOT SO!!! 2021'S colorado's and canyon's being replaced with a friggin V6 gas hog?? wtf
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
TELL ME IT'S NOT SO!!! 2021'S colorado's and canyon's being replaced with a friggin V6 gas hog?? wtf
I just heard this week California has put in place a ban for diesels In the near future statewide. I think they said it’s 10-20 years away but still. Thanks again California for fucking it up for the rest of us.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
389 Posts
I Know the factory in Asia that made the 2.8 was sold. I have not heard where the diesel will be produced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
TELL ME IT'S NOT SO!!! 2021'S colorado's and canyon's being replaced with a friggin V6 gas hog?? wtf
They already have that V6 gas hog from what I heard it’s only getting 18 miles a gallon. Maybe that will make are more Valuable 🤷‍♂️
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
TELL ME IT'S NOT SO!!! 2021'S colorado's and canyon's being replaced with a friggin V6 gas hog?? wtf
My drift on things is Chevrolet is currently producing two different diesel engines with similar performance numbers; the current TD-4 cylinder within the Colorado, and the new TD-6 cylinder within the Silverado 1500. As their performance numbers are similar and thus competing with one another, makes for an unhealthy performance, as well as economic situation, for Chevrolet. It would seem One of the two engine variations doesn’t need to be there.
The new diesel 6 cylinder offering, currently an option only offered in the Silverado, provides not only two additional cylinders, but more horsepower, greater torque, increased mpg and considerable refinement advancement when compared to the Colorado’s 4 cylinder iteration. In my mind, Chevrolet has made a business decision to let one of engines go, and it will be 2.8 Duramax T-4 cyl. Before we all weep, scream, and decry foul, we might be on the cusp of seeing a slightly de-tuned version of the new TD-6 power plant offered as an option snuggled under the Colorado hood! Makes good performance and business sense to me... TMc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Even if so I would rather have the 1500 with the duramax if I didn’t have my 16 Colorado diesel
I'm taking a wait and see on the new 6-cyl diesel. It's way too early for my blood to get one. Although awesome on paper the DPF and everything tucked under the hood, oil pump wet-belt and all the electric valves for demand oiling and coolant worry me quite a bit. I'll want to see them work for a couple hundred thousand before jumping on that new engine.

Remember all the injector problems and such with the early V8 Duramax's. I'll keep my Colorado diesel for a while and if in 5+ years there are no bugs or defects with the 6cyl I'll consider getting a Silverado or Suburban diesel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
I would never consider an aluminum diesel truck engine, unless it's a conversion from the aero diesels they use on aircraft in Africa. They actually burn JP, and their rationale is that Av Gas is hard to get over there. Probably impractical from a $ POV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Agree. I would not be an early adopter of the 3.0 diesel. GM put a lot of aggressive new and "cutting edge" engineering into that engine, GM and "new and cutting edge" is a valid cause for concern for potential buyers. There almost certainly will be failures in the field once it has been out for awhile. The oil bathed belt driving the oil pump would seem to be an obvious potential trouble area, but that is such an obvious engineering challenge, it likely received a lot of testing/attention and will probably be fine. It is usually the unforeseen and unexpected stuff that bites ya in the ass.

My main concern is the 0/20 oil spec - lets see how that works out for the crank and small end bearings under TD loads. Same with the aluminum block. My secondary problem area bets are on the high/low pressure EGR system and DPF in the engine compartment, the "smart" thermostat, and the "variable manifold" (with it's internal flaps). Fuel system and injectors too perhaps - 36,250 PSI is a lot of pressure. Can the high pressure fuel pump handle variably quality American diesel fuel and not go into full "CP4 grenade mode" on it's owners running that kind of pressure? Time will tell.

I would give the new 3.0 5 years in the field running American diesel fuel to see what surfaces as it's weak points before even thinking about it. Do love it is a 3.0 inline 6. That is the perfect displacement and format for a non HD diesel engine. Our 2.8 has it's share of shortcomings, but at least they are known and hopefully addressable shortcomings...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
I'm taking a wait and see on the new 6-cyl diesel. It's way too early for my blood to get one. Although awesome on paper the DPF and everything tucked under the hood, oil pump wet-belt and all the electric valves for demand oiling and coolant worry me quite a bit. I'll want to see them work for a couple hundred thousand before jumping on that new engine.

Remember all the injector problems and such with the early V8 Duramax's. I'll keep my Colorado diesel for a while and if in 5+ years there are no bugs or defects with the 6cyl I'll consider getting a Silverado or Suburban diesel.

Unless your needs change, and/or you anticipate so many expenses that you think a new vehicle makes sense from a cost/mile standpoint, why change in ~5 years? NOT judging those who just like to have newer cars/trucks. I just personally like a vehicle that I've known for years (23 in the case of my built to order '95 K2500 X cab), inside and out...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
389 Posts
The 3.0 is a ticking time bomb of overly complicated systems populated with parts sourced through "value" engineering. No thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Yup, my concern with the belt driven oil pump is not that GM didn't test the heck out of it but tested it to what service life? 100K, 200K, 300K, more? My 6.5 diesel in my Surburban has over 300,000 and the chain that drives the fuel pump is just fine, so is the oil pump and pressure.The engine was used for lots of different vehicles so it was tested for a pretty long service life. Will I get the same service life out of the 2.8, probably not but I'm not expecting to. I worry that GM only tested many of the systems on the 3.0 to only have a 100K service life and that's a problem cause all that stuff is really expensive. Regarding the aluminum block I'm gonna wait and see on that one too. Everyone laughed when GM released the Duramax with an aluminum head, everyone said it couldn't contain enough combustion heat and would crack. Now everyone is using aluminum heads on their consumer diesels.

I think the only real reason I would replace my Colorado is if I want a Suburban again. Had they actually produced the 4.6 V6 diesel proposed 10 or so years ago I'd probably have a Surburban with that in it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
"Will I get the same service life out of the 2.8, probably not but I'm not expecting to."

Why not? Not disagreeing with you, and I see your point about the extent of actual user experience on the 6.5. But is this the reason that you don't expect the 2.8 to have normal truck diesel longevity?

I didn't bet the farm on ours lasting 15-20 years - i.e. if push comes to shove we can afford to replace it - but I won't replace it sooner if I don't have to......
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
389 Posts
It's not the motor I'm worried about, it's all the crap that's screwed and glued to it that I'm worried about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Older pre computer era vehicles were "analog". The way they ran ranged from perfect (a rare occurrence) to "OK" (where they tended to live out their lives) to "like sh%t" with a V8 running on 7 cylinders and fouling the air with raw unburned fuel, but still running. Older vehicles always kinda ran though, until they died in a cloud of blue smoke and gaskets leaking oil everywhere, bodies rusted out. End of life older cars often became rust buckets and were simply not worth fixing as they literally fell apart.

In contrast, modern vehicles are "digital". They either run perfect or they have a problem, which can range from minor, like a bad sensor, to serious. "Problems" are promptly announced via a check engine light and messages on the dashboard, and often involve going into "limp mode" which is a communist plot against vehicle owners to enhance the profits of dealership service departments.

Modern vehicles last longer than older ones did and they do not rust out like older ones did, but modern vehicles meet their ends in more defined on/off "digital" fashion. The car still can still look pretty good, but when it has 250K miles on it and all the computer sh%t is haywire and it is worth 3K, it may not be worth fixing. At least there is good salvage in that kind of vehicle, the salvage business is thriving these days.

The vibe I get with the diesel twins is if one manages to evade the gauntlet of potential failure pitfalls, ranging from serious mechanical things like holes in the pistons to snapped piston pins to PITA emissions stuff like DEF heaters/pumps/injectors on down to the general electronic complexity of any new vehicle, a twin can last a long time. The basic engine is quite sound - older VM 2.8s are running around down under in Australia with 400K miles on them, but those older trucks do not run crazy levels of EGR to be "clean" and do not have all the crap attached to them like ours do.

So how long will a 2.8 run? It may only go 40K or it may go 400K. It just depends. May the odds ever be in your favor 😆
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top