OLD TRUCKS VS NEW TRUCKS

[burbguy82]

I get that, but literally every person I know with cylinder deactivation have had this cylinder 6 lifter failure by 60k miles. That's 4 people in my small circle. One decided to tune it out and disable the mechanical side of the cylinder deactivation after it was repaired and has tuned his truck to 430whp since then. The problem has not reoccurred removing the system and he's now over 100k miles. I believe in GM LS reliability because of their simplicity and have had a few. Giving up reliability for efficiency seems to be a weak trade off when GM is so bad at this. They don't exactly have a choice these days though. I was a huge GM guy for many years though. My last was a 2004 GTO. The fuel economy sucked, but it was a wonderful car. It was my daily until 113k miles. I loved every mile with it.

Modern must mean something less than 5 years old. Sure sounds like a lack of staying power and literal junk on 4 wheels. Take it personally though. They've got you on new truck purchases, hook, line, and sinker. Junk just to match emissions instead of actually making efficient vehicles.

I didn't know 2017 was out of date. The disposable nature of the modern market I'm sure. EVs don't last 5 years though.

For reference my 35+ mpg GTI that makes 300+whp is a 2018. No weird cylinder deactivation or 10 speeds to get there either. I don't even have the 7 speed. I don't have a problem with inefficient trucks though, it just wasn't the right vehicle for my use anymore. Making them less reliable for better efficiency is a horrible joke though. If I needed a truck these days I'd take a bit of a pause buying one with these weird emissions systems. I'd probably land on a 3.5 turbo Ford though if it had to be new. It seems like they've managed to flush this out though somewhat. The Chevrolet is probably more efficient while being less reliable. It sure wouldn't be a Chevrolet for me for that reason. If I actually needed a truck for towing even I wouldn't select an EV. These modern trucks just suck though.

Nice car, highly under respected.

Pontiac needs to come back out.

 

[4WD]

One thing to consider is time. That 1989, is or could easily be doing the job, after 36 years of being on the road.

I agree that the newer trucks, (as you know I had one for personal use), do the job better. They have more power, better cooling systems, bigger brakes, and so on. I am impressed with the newer style intake "internal snorkel" setup.

But the truth is, that people were doing the exact same thing in their pickups 30 years ago....hauling big trailers, hauling construction equipment. Some of those gmt400 truck still do it today. I see it regularly in Charlotte. Many Gmt800s, and many newer 6.6 gmt whatever they are now.

The older trucks were victim to emission regulations and were very underpowered because of this. The legendary GM 454, was severely affected by these new restrictions on emissions, and of course, manufactured did not know how to keep the power up, and the emissions down. I think they have it dialed in now.

I agree the 2006.5 is probably the Pinnacle of the trucks, coupling near perfect drivetrains, great material selection, and proud manufacturing.

Who is to say whether these new 6.6 truck will be on the road in 30 years, and i am sorry to say, of thing continue how they are going, we will likely not be able to see.

One thing that I think is the achilles heel of these new trucks is the electrical/electronic systems. Wire sizes are to an absolute minimum, for cost and efficiency. Sure the sensor goes out here and there, or a connector breaks, but the whole harness? One of my friend has a land scaping business. not to long ago, he got stuck in some mud on a site, the rear axle was sunk. Some back and forth, someone finally helped him out. On the rear axle is a wiring harness, part of the system that tells your brake pad wear percentage. In pulling through the mud that harness got torn out. Not sure of the extent on how much had to be replaced per dealer, but it was to the tune of 2700$ to fix. All for a system that really adds no real value to a truck.

Real truck people dont need a sensor for brake pad wear.

Point is, there is a bunch of stuff we dont need on these new things.

Would you agree?

Yeah - the 454 got a smog beat down - but became another legend like the Hemi as a drag racer platform - Both had great “bones” …

 

[burbguy82]

Yeah - the 454 got a smog beat down - but became another legend like the Hemi as a drag racer platform - Both had great “bones” …

Sure, the predecessor LS6 454 in the Chevelle made 450hp and over 500lbs, with the 500 being at 3000 rpm or so, with stock exhaust manifolds. Some say that those numbers were dumbed down by GM for insurance reasons same as the L88 427 in the 67 Vette.

@ls1mike is absolutely right IMO in comparison of the GMT400 to the new GMTXXX. Drivability with a load is far better, night and day.

People could drive better and smarter with a load 30 years ago, or so it would seem. today, we have to go up a mountain at 65 with 15k in tow, and go down the otherside, in drive, like an idiot, using the brakes all the way down the mountain.

And if it aint got 400 hp it is junk. Unreasonable expectations I guess.

 

[4WD]

Sure, the predecessor LS6 454 in the Chevelle made 450hp and over 500lbs, with the 500 being at 3000 rpm or so, with stock exhaust manifolds. Some say that those numbers were dumbed down by GM for insurance reasons same as the L88 427 in the 67 Vette.

@ls1mike is absolutely right IMO in comparison of the GMT400 to the new GMTXXX. Drivability with a load is far better, night and day.

People could drive better and smarter with a load 30 years ago, or so it would seem. today, we have to go up a mountain at 65 with 15k in tow, and go down the otherside, in drive, like an idiot, using the brakes all the way down the mountain.

And if it aint got 400 hp it is junk. Unreasonable expectations I guess.

I know man, and at the time they 1st dropped them in two tone box Chev’s - more issues cooking the ATF/trans than the mill.
Those in the know went to Mobil 1 ATF and never looked back - unless it was to change lanes with a load behind them …

 

[CKN]

Sure, the predecessor LS6 454 in the Chevelle made 450hp and over 500lbs, with the 500 being at 3000 rpm or so, with stock exhaust manifolds. Some say that those numbers were dumbed down by GM for insurance reasons same as the L88 427 in the 67 Vette.

@ls1mike is absolutely right IMO in comparison of the GMT400 to the new GMTXXX. Drivability with a load is far better, night and day.

People could drive better and smarter with a load 30 years ago, or so it would seem. today, we have to go up a mountain at 65 with 15k in tow, and go down the otherside, in drive, like an idiot, using the brakes all the way down the mountain.

And if it aint got 400 hp it is junk. Unreasonable expectations I guess.

The transmissions in tow haul have a "hold back" feature that keeps the gear and holds you from running down the hill.To defeat this you actually have to use the gas pedal and accelerate to defeat the gear holding. Not calling you a liar-but these other drivers would be defeating the transmission.
In trucks of yesteryear-one would have to down shift gears manually.

If one is an experienced tower-the transmission gears (manually) need to never be touched.
You let today's sophisticated electronic transmissions do all the work. I just towed up to Leadville, Colorado-elevation 10,000 feet, I never once interfered with what the transmission was doing-there was absolutely no need to.

We just need to look at the new GMTurbo Max to see how far things have progressed-

The GM TurboMax engine has 310 horsepower at 5,600 RPM and 430 lb-ft of torque. It's a 2.7-liter four-cylinder engine that's standard on many Chevy models, including the Silverado 1500.
And yea-todays transmissions make the need for 400HP while nice-not necessary.

 

[oil pan 4]

Today I hauled a wood chipper in my Ram, if the guy in the telehandler had dinged my truck I would have giggled. I wouldnt have turned purple with rage and speed dialing the insurance company.

Later I loaded 2500(?) lbs of limestone with the tractor and dumped it straight into the bed and didnt blink an eye.

Today's brand new trucks are not trucks, they are man jewelry.

View attachment 238173

Dats chonky

 

[oil pan 4]

My neighbors 2019 ram got totalled from a hail storm. He lives about 100yd from me. My 25 year old dodge got a few new dents and a new windshield, it was already cracked from rock hits.
Not a fan of new trucks.

Oh I forget to add that storm busted all his windows then down poured. So he had dented metal, all his glass busted, the interior to include electronics all soaked.
I didn't get any busted windows, just spidered windshield.

 

[ls1mike]

The transmissions in tow haul have a "hold back" feature that keeps the gear and holds you from running down the hill.To defeat this you actually have to use the gas pedal and accelerate to defeat the gear holding. Not calling you a liar-but these other drivers would be defeating the transmission.
In trucks of yesteryear-one would have to down shift gears manually.

If one is an experienced tower-the transmission gears (manually) need to never be touched.
You let today's sophisticated electronic transmissions do all the work. I just towed up to Leadville, Colorado-elevation 10,000 feet, I never once interfered with what the transmission was doing-there was absolutely no need to.

Yep, I could come down Vantage or Snoqualmie and hit the brakes only a few times in the 17 while towing. The 2024 I think I hit them twice, had to hit to gas a few times because it was slowing down too much. The transmission braking in these new trucks is awesome. Now the 02 or the 89? Was not much to hold them back with the 3 and 4 speeds. 4.10s and 3 speeds in the 89 coming down either of those you were downshifting and breaking just to hold a safe speed which was annoying to everyone around you. I towed with the 89 for like 6 years. I just remember the huge difference the 02 was just going from only front disk to 4-wheel disk. Speed limits are 70 now here. When the 89 came out they were 55 in those spots much more manageable then. Even the truck speed limit is 60 in those spots now. I will follow that one in those areas.

 

[GMBoy]

I get that, but literally every person I know with cylinder deactivation have had this cylinder 6 lifter failure by 60k miles. That's 4 people in my small circle. One decided to tune it out and disable the mechanical side of the cylinder deactivation after it was repaired and has tuned his truck to 430whp since then. The problem has not reoccurred removing the system and he's now over 100k miles. I believe in GM LS reliability because of their simplicity and have had a few. Giving up reliability for efficiency seems to be a weak trade off when GM is so bad at this. They don't exactly have a choice these days though. I was a huge GM guy for many years though. My last was a 2004 GTO. The fuel economy sucked, but it was a wonderful car. It was my daily until 113k miles. I loved every mile with it.

Modern must mean something less than 5 years old. Sure sounds like a lack of staying power and literal junk on 4 wheels. Take it personally though. They've got you on new truck purchases, hook, line, and sinker. Junk just to match emissions instead of actually making efficient vehicles.

I didn't know 2017 was out of date. The disposable nature of the modern market I'm sure. EVs don't last 5 years though.

For reference my 35+ mpg GTI that makes 300+whp is a 2018. No weird cylinder deactivation or 10 speeds to get there either. I don't even have the 7 speed. I don't have a problem with inefficient trucks though, it just wasn't the right vehicle for my use anymore. Making them less reliable for better efficiency is a horrible joke though. If I needed a truck these days I'd take a bit of a pause buying one with these weird emissions systems. I'd probably land on a 3.5 turbo Ford though if it had to be new. It seems like they've managed to flush this out though somewhat. The Chevrolet is probably more efficient while being less reliable. It sure wouldn't be a Chevrolet for me for that reason. If I actually needed a truck for towing even I wouldn't select an EV. These modern trucks just suck though.

The issues with the AFM on GM trucks is real and I am a small shop and we do 4-5 a month. The local dealership is averaging that a week. The worst part is that this has been going on since the beginning and even have seen it happen on a 2022 and 2023.

 

[4WD]

The issues with the AFM on GM trucks is real and I am a small shop and we do 4-5 a month. The local dealership is averaging that a week. The worst part is that this has been going on since the beginning and even have seen it happen on a 2022 and 2023.

This point has been attempted before. You try to temper a comment with “I’m a small shop” - Well - Chris, by far the best GM mechanic on this site can do that too - But, what does it mean?
Repair places and consumers are two different things and sources for data as is number on the road and type of use. I know 9 GM 5.3/6.2 owners (hot & heavy use) and none have lost the valvetrain or anything like it. These range 40k to 170k.
That actually fits allot of folks range and use of ownership who purchase in this segment.
We don’t drive a Corolla, nor expect to suffer one for 300k …

 

[GMBoy]

This point has been attempted before. You try to temper a comment with “I’m a small shop” - Well - Chris, by far the best GM mechanic on this site can do that too - But, what does it mean?
Repair places and consumers are two different things and sources for data as is number on the road and type of use. I know 9 GM 5.3/6.2 owners (hot & heavy use) and none have lost the valvetrain or anything like it. These range 40k to 170k.
That actually fits allot of folks range and use of ownership who purchase in this segment.
We don’t drive a Corolla, nor expect to suffer one for 300k …

Fair points indeed and that is why I let it be known I was a small shop so my sample size would not be considered accurate across the board. My few jobs seen don't make it an issue....but when combined with other shops of all sizes, dealerships and my internal knowledge of GM - well that is why I am saying it is a real issue.

My main point is that this is an issue when every shop sees them, a majority of owners I know personally (as well as others) who had the issue themselves, when dealerships do so many that parts are often back ordered, when I myself had the issue - well it sure looks real. Now back to your point which is basically that its not a big deal when you factor failures vs total amount of vehices built and on the road....and I subscribe to that opinion and have argued that many times on other types of defects but in the case of GM trucks and the lifters the warranty data also does not lie. I was privy to that data and it showed AFM/lifters as a top 10 issues with trucks. The top 10 was everything so you had electrical, trim fits and all in that bucket and lifters was there. So...with this going on since the early 2000's and still being see today is not acceptable - even if just a small percentage like 10% of a million+ built have the issues - that is a lot of angry customers. Add to this that it is such a know widespread issue that there are companies making money off of AFM delete kits. I will agree that we don't know why some fail and some do not and some fail early other later and some more than once. I just feel that as long as ICE motors have been around there is no excuse for this type of failure and especially over the course of 10+ years. I once asked a powertrain engineer about this before I retired and he knew of the problem and they decided warranty is cheaper than redesigning their AFM system. I think that comment says it all.

 

[GMBoy]

I know man, and at the time they 1st dropped them in two tone box Chev’s - more issues cooking the ATF/trans than the mill.
Those in the know went to Mobil 1 ATF and never looked back - unless it was to change lanes with a load behind them …

You are so right on the Mobil 1 ATF. That was some good fluid and I started running that back in the late 80's in my Dexron vehicles. It's still in my 87GN and 9 Corvette.

 

[4WD]

Fair points indeed and that is why I let it be known I was a small shop so my sample size would not be considered accurate across the board. My few jobs seen don't make it an issue....but when combined with other shops of all sizes, dealerships and my internal knowledge of GM - well that is why I am saying it is a real issue.

My main point is that this is an issue when every shop sees them, a majority of owners I know personally (as well as others) who had the issue themselves, when dealerships do so many that parts are often back ordered, when I myself had the issue - well it sure looks real. Now back to your point which is basically that its not a big deal when you factor failures vs total amount of vehices built and on the road....and I subscribe to that opinion and have argued that many times on other types of defects but in the case of GM trucks and the lifters the warranty data also does not lie. I was privy to that data and it showed AFM/lifters as a top 10 issues with trucks. The top 10 was everything so you had electrical, trim fits and all in that bucket and lifters was there. So...with this going on since the early 2000's and still being see today is not acceptable - even if just a small percentage like 10% of a million+ built have the issues - that is a lot of angry customers. Add to this that it is such a know widespread issue that there are companies making money off of AFM delete kits. I will agree that we don't know why some fail and some do not and some fail early other later and some more than once. I just feel that as long as ICE motors have been around there is no excuse for this type of failure and especially over the course of 10+ years. I once asked a powertrain engineer about this before I retired and he knew of the problem and they decided warranty is cheaper than redesigning their AFM system. I think that comment says it all.

It’s not by GM’s choice alone. It’s CAFE vs market demand when so many still want a V8 - and part of life if you want to drive what we want to drive. No news to me - I’ll still look at the total package and purchase.

 

[GMBoy]

It’s not by GM’s choice alone. It’s CAFE vs market demand when so many still want a V8 - and part of life if you want to drive what we want to drive. No news to me - I’ll still look at the total package and purchase.

I left that part out - all car makers have some sort of reliability issues that are a result of trying to meet CAFE. They are forced to adopt technologies to reach CAFE/EPA metrics and it doesn't always work. Cheers fine Sir!

 

[4WD]

I left that part out - all car makers have some sort of reliability issues that are a result of trying to meet CAFE. They are forced to adopt technologies to reach CAFE/EPA metrics and it doesn't always work. Cheers fine Sir!

My friend just bought the 1500 ZR2. Went to drive the 3L DMax but liked the 6.2L better. With the new driveline that motor is just a great experience. Before it - we spent a week in a rental GW. That new hurricane has an eye before the storm lag. They will fix that.
(And I love jeep) …

 

[cb_13]

The issues with the AFM on GM trucks is real and I am a small shop and we do 4-5 a month. The local dealership is averaging that a week. The worst part is that this has been going on since the beginning and even have seen it happen on a 2022 and 2023.

I saw probably 4-5 a month as trade ins at a Ford dealership from those that’ll “never buy another GM”.

Probably still less than the “I’ll never buy another Ford again” customers that went Ram during 6.0 diesel days

 

[userfriendly]

One thing to consider is time. That 1989, is or could easily be doing the job, after 36 years of being on the road.

I agree that the newer trucks, (as you know I had one for personal use), do the job better. They have more power, better cooling systems, bigger brakes, and so on. I am impressed with the newer style intake "internal snorkel" setup.

But the truth is, that people were doing the exact same thing in their pickups 30 years ago....hauling big trailers, hauling construction equipment. Some of those gmt400 truck still do it today. I see it regularly in Charlotte. Many Gmt800s, and many newer 6.6 gmt whatever they are now.

The older trucks were victim to emission regulations and were very underpowered because of this. The legendary GM 454, was severely affected by these new restrictions on emissions, and of course, manufactured did not know how to keep the power up, and the emissions down. I think they have it dialed in now.

I agree the 2006.5 is probably the Pinnacle of the trucks, coupling near perfect drivetrains, great material selection, and proud manufacturing.

Who is to say whether these new 6.6 truck will be on the road in 30 years, and i am sorry to say, of thing continue how they are going, we will likely not be able to see.

One thing that I think is the achilles heel of these new trucks is the electrical/electronic systems. Wire sizes are to an absolute minimum, for cost and efficiency. Sure the sensor goes out here and there, or a connector breaks, but the whole harness? One of my friend has a land scaping business. not to long ago, he got stuck in some mud on a site, the rear axle was sunk. Some back and forth, someone finally helped him out. On the rear axle is a wiring harness, part of the system that tells your brake pad wear percentage. In pulling through the mud that harness got torn out. Not sure of the extent on how much had to be replaced per dealer, but it was to the tune of 2700$ to fix. All for a system that really adds no real value to a truck.

Real truck people dont need a sensor for brake pad wear.

Point is, there is a bunch of stuff we dont need on these new things.

Would you agree?

At the end of the year the only trucks left on dealership lots are the plain Jane base models.
During the lockdown years trucks were in short supply. American dealerships would come to Canada and make off with all the loaded Denali’s and High Country’s leaving the base models with cloth seats behind.
One small town dealership close to the border had over 40 3500 Denali Diesel trucks and a month later they were all gone.

 

[burbguy82]

At the end of the year the only trucks left on dealership lots are the plain Jane base models.
During the lockdown years trucks were in short supply. American dealerships would come to Canada and make off with all the loaded Denali’s and High Country’s leaving the base models with cloth seats behind.
One small town dealership close to the border had over 40 3500 Denali Diesel trucks and a month later they were all gone.

Around me, using Chevy as an example, the lowest trim you can ever find, is the Trail Boss Trim, every once and a while you will see a "custom" which is one step above base.....

Unless you buy commercial. Then you can get "plain jane" which still has many of the add ons that I spoke about like the brake pad sensing stuff and the like, but with one difference:

Business financing is higher, sometimes by 4-5 points. Get a business loan for a truck and you will see what I am talking about.

We are way passed that era of shortages, and the industry has rode that magic carpet long enough.

It seems as though I am the minority when it comes to this subject

I fixed my horn in my 1986 K30 today. Issue in the steering wheel. 5 min to fix once I got the wheel off, good luck on one of these new computers on wheels. Probably has a "horn blowing module" that cost $600 bucks at the dealer, that has to be VIN matched. One month out of warranty.

 

[userfriendly]

Around me, using Chevy as an example, the lowest trim you can ever find, is the Trail Boss Trim, every once and a while you will see a "custom" which is one step above base.....

Unless you buy commercial. Then you can get "plain jane" which still has many of the add ons that I spoke about like the brake pad sensing stuff and the like, but with one difference:

Business financing is higher, sometimes by 4-5 points. Get a business loan for a truck and you will see what I am talking about.

We are way passed that era of shortages, and the industry has rode that magic carpet long enough.

It seems as though I am the minority when it comes to this subject

I fixed my horn in my 1986 K30 today. Issue in the steering wheel. 5 min to fix once I got the wheel off, good luck on one of these new computers on wheels. Probably has a "horn blowing module" that cost $600 bucks at the dealer, that has to be VIN matched. One month out of warranty.

I just replaced the tcm, transmission control module on my 2011 gmc duramax. There was an 18 month back order and modules just started showing up at dealerships a month before mine went south.
$1000 plus another $150 to get it matched to my VIN and I was back in business.
Luckily I could reboot every few miles with the Bully Dog tuner. Too much torque will slip an Allison transmission and put it into limp mode. That’s what I thought happened.
The new tcm improved fuel economy 5%.

Back in the day I used to carry a spare HEI distributor under the seat.
Now I pack around a front hub, because nowadays you can’t just replace a wheel bearing on the side of the road.

 

[redhat]

Historically I have gravitated towards the rose-colored glasses mindset of “if it’s still around and it’s old it has to be better ‘cause it’s still around”.

There are a lot of examples where old trucks are perceived to be easier to work on, but were they really when they were new? Sure an 80s carb, coil, distributor, mechanical fuel pump SBC/BBC in a square body… but you can’t tell me that when the GMT400 came out with TBI or spider injection and EVAP, or P01/P59 equipped GMT800s with later DBW, TAC modules, IAC, EVAP, etc. — people found those “new rolling computer trucks” hard to work on. Now that 20 years have passed and everyone and their brother understands them, they’re considered simple.

Will the new ones last as long? We can’t say, the earliest example is only 10 years old. I would consider anything GM Global A or B as not having the jury out on. I would wager to say a GMT900 truck will probably keep on keeping on. Not my favorite generation but you see a lot with lots of miles and time. GMT800… probably forever as long as parts are made.

With all that said, I find this new 5.3/10-speed Tahoe amazing. Great performance, excellent economy and it tows 10x better than the 2005. And the 2005 was far from stock. New trucks just do it better. Logically if a new truck did not perform better then they would not sell.

It isn’t that you can’t work on them anymore, it’s that you need to learn them and understand how they are designed. 20 years ago I’d bet tons of folks would be lost on a Tech2 and anything Class 2 data.