2011 GMC Sierra Denali
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: MI
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 2000
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 I6
2011 GMC Sierra Denali
I was reading about this truck on another website, and GM released the hp/tq numbers for the 2011 Duramax diesel....397 hp and 795 lb. ft. of torque. HOLY SMOKES! What do you guys and gals think about these numbers? Granted, they are at the crank, but that's still A LOT of power. Where will the horsepower and torque war end between the big 3...The 2010 Cummins I6 puts down 350 hp and 650 lb. ft of torque and the 2011 Powerstroke diesel V8 will put down 390 hp and 735 lb. ft of torque. I can remember when commercial semi trucks had 250 hp and 600 lb. ft. of torque - now the OTR (over the road) engines have upwards of 500 hp and 2,000 lb. ft. of torque! I just think it is incredible how much power is being brought out from diesels these days. I wasn't sure if this was to be in the off topic section, or other vehicles, so it's here.
#3
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: MI
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 2000
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 I6
I agree. Unless I owned a busy contracting company of any sort, or had a LOT of heavy toys, a truck like that is overkill...although it would be sweet to have. The Ford and GM cousins can tow upwards (and over) 26,000 pounds with a gooseneck trailer. RIDICULOUS, but nonetheless pretty cool if you need it. The other option is for ambulance or fire apparatus set ups...that would make a heck of a mini pumper....250 lb. ft. of torque off the PTO and an engine brake...man...
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Guilderland NY
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Year: 2001
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L I6 w/ K&N and bored TB
Yeah, that much power would be nice to have and all but its not really neccesary. My grandfather owns a furniture business and his biggest truck, a GMC Top Kick 6500 only has a 350 in it and he says it got enough power to pull a big hill fully loaded. His other delivery truck can pull a heavy load and that only a Ford F250 with a 300 I6. Basically just saying, i'd rather have less power and more economy for a commercial vehicle. Those diesels now are putting out way more power than they used to though, even liter for liter.
#5
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Manahawkin New Jersey
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 96'
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 160k banks header dumping after the cat
i love what they are doing with power in these trucks right from the factory, my family business http://shipbottomboattow.com does a lot of heavy hauling. we've mainly like the cummins which has hauled everything up to 44' boats on 13,000lb trailers. we put a hundred thousand miles on those things in a year easily. All of that power is totally necessary for the guys that are starting to haul the big stuff with their pickups. all you have to do it drop some air suspension in there and a pintle hook or goose neck and your ready to haul like the big boys. The trucks are getting so much better in fact that they replaced our old gmc topkick 6500 which was only putting out like 240 hp and not nearly enough torque with a ford f550 with the powerjoke (excuse me stoke) .
#6
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: MI
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 2000
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 I6
I agree with both you above. In some instances, these trucks are too much. However, towing boats is a different story. The Cummins is becoming outpowered by the powerjoke and the Duramax. This next model year, 2011, Ford isn't using Navistar; they are using their own diesel. Check out the F450, being that it can tow just as much as the 550 and has the same technology for a little less dough. (to my knowledge)
#7
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Manahawkin New Jersey
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 96'
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 160k banks header dumping after the cat
yea we went with the 550 for the higher GVWR rating and bigger brakes...but its funny how cummins used to be the most powerful when it came out with the new 6.7 liter in 07' and ford and Gmc really stepped it up to to compete with those numbers. Dodge used to be the only ones with a factory exhaust brake and now both the 10' and 11' model ford and GMCs have one...its gonna be interesting to see what comes in the next few years as these 3 are definitely competing for the monopoly in the full size heavy duty truck market.
Trending Topics
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chilliwack, BC, Canada
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 1990
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
Ok just a side note, the cummins is the only real diesel out there, it is an inline 6 the others are a v8 that need urea, anyone who has taken high school biology knows thats ****, and no real man can actually admit his vehicle is running on urine can they??
#11
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Manahawkin New Jersey
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 96'
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 160k banks header dumping after the cat
i don't really understand what you just said, but i couldn't agree more with the first part, the inline six engine is used in everything from our jeeps to the biggest big rig trucks. its an awesome configuration especially for diesel engines. even though my company just bought a F550 v8 powerstoke its just not the same
#12
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Manahawkin New Jersey
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 96'
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 160k banks header dumping after the cat
check out youtube and 4btswaps.com its definitely been done a couple of times. but only with the 3.9liter four banger. the turbo model puts out something like 410 lbs of torque stock. i heard that the inline 6 cummins like the 5.9 or the new 6.7 is never going to fit inside a cherokee engine bay and its probably true those engines are BIG
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chilliwack, BC, Canada
Posts: 844
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 1990
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
Ok I shall try and rephrase.
The new Powerstroke and Duramax diesel engines cannot pass strict diesel regulations, so they inject urea into their engines (not sure exactly how this is done) which somehow reduces the amount of pollution they are emmitting, and for some reason the Cummins doesn't need this because it is a more efficient engine
The new Powerstroke and Duramax diesel engines cannot pass strict diesel regulations, so they inject urea into their engines (not sure exactly how this is done) which somehow reduces the amount of pollution they are emmitting, and for some reason the Cummins doesn't need this because it is a more efficient engine
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Sutton, New Hampshire
Posts: 633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 1995
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0L
The 6BT is roughly a 34" cube, so putting it into a Cherokee would require a ridiculous amount of fabrication, not to mention the engine itself weighs in the vicinity of 1000 pounds.
Also...the Denali is way, WAY more vehicle than the average person I see driving one needs.
Also...the Denali is way, WAY more vehicle than the average person I see driving one needs.
#15
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Manahawkin New Jersey
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 96'
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 160k banks header dumping after the cat
Ok I shall try and rephrase.
The new Powerstroke and Duramax diesel engines cannot pass strict diesel regulations, so they inject urea into their engines (not sure exactly how this is done) which somehow reduces the amount of pollution they are emmitting, and for some reason the Cummins doesn't need this because it is a more efficient engine
The new Powerstroke and Duramax diesel engines cannot pass strict diesel regulations, so they inject urea into their engines (not sure exactly how this is done) which somehow reduces the amount of pollution they are emmitting, and for some reason the Cummins doesn't need this because it is a more efficient engine