• 2017 Chevy Silverado HD 2500 Work Truck Towing 13,500 Lbs Up the Super Ike Gauntlet (Video)


    2017 chevy silverado hd 2500 gas v8
    2017 Chevy Silverado HD 2500 6.0L V8

    The Super Ike Gauntlet is all about maxing out trucks on the World’s Toughest Towing Test – the Ike Gauntlet. This time, it’s the 6.0-liter Vortec’s V8 chance to tackle the 8 mile stretch of highway with a 7% grade on the way up to 11,158 feet above sea level.

    This 2500 HD double-cab short bed 4×4 is powered by a 6.0-liter Vortec V8 that is rated at 360 horsepower and 380 lb-ft of torque. It’s backed up by a 6-speed automatic transmission. It has several optional packages, including the HD Custom package with 20-inch wheels, but this WT model still offers very good value at a final MSRP of $44,300.

    Check out the latest Super Ike Gauntlet right here.


    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov is an Automotive Enthusiast, Producer, Reviewer, Videographer, Writer, Software Engineer, Husband, Father, and Friend.

    Similar Articles

    66 thoughts on “2017 Chevy Silverado HD 2500 Work Truck Towing 13,500 Lbs Up the Super Ike Gauntlet (Video)

    1. I watched the video last night. It was pretty much what I expected. The engine stayed at peak HP and did pretty well. That 6.0L never had any issues that I heard of keeping the revs up. The temps seemed to be pretty good from the dash shots too. The 1500 with the 6.2L seemed to have it’s temps climb much higher.

      1. Don’t think this 6.0 is direct injected yet. So makes sense this tranny has been programmed to stay at low revs (in anticipation for when it becomes direct injected). Then it will be perfectly set up, to take advantage of the high compression at low revs.

    2. I have the 6.0 3500 2WD so this was great information for me. It gives me a good idea what to expect with a travel trailer or fifth wheel in that weight range. My 3500 is only rated for 400 more pounds. It makes me think the weak link is the transmission.

    3. Great Video,nice looking truck ,has all the options I would need.I would recommend a lighter gooseneck trailer to fully take advantage of its 13500lb capacity for this truck. Maybe a Bigtex 22gn 20+5 or a 14gn 20+5.Nice setup regardless,I’m guessing the f-250 and Ram should be a little faster,but the Chevy setup is one you can count on for at least 300k without much issues imo..

      1. I’ve got two observations. First, 13 brake applications seems a little much. I don’t think that trans holds back very well. Second, that motor was constantly revving up around 5500 rpm. Mr truck talked like that was a good thing because that’s where the engines power is. I say a 5500 rpm power band is a bad thing. How long do you think that engine will last if it routinely had to rev that high. And yes, I know, most newer non turbo motors have a high power band. So yes I will complain about this with any and all brands that perform the same.

        1. Hard to say since this is the 1st gasser HD tested on the superike.
          You do realize that ALL non-turbo (gas or diesel) motors will need around 5-6k rpm to get the most power. You know how to keep it at a lower RPM? Just press lighter on the gas pedal! The downside is you will go slower of course. The 6.0L engines have been tested for years so there is no sign that it is a problem.
          So really, none of your ‘observations’ has any worth.

          1. Nihilis
            Maybe your too young or maybe your memory is slipping. But the truth is engines from years past did “not” have to rev to 5 or 6 thousand rpm to reach peak horsepower or torque. My 96 dodge v10 was maximum torque below 3000 rpm. And I never had to push it above 4000. And don’t give us the lame reasoning that they have to build them this way for emissions and fuel economy. If everyone thought like that we would still be using a crank to start them. The new 2017 6.2 supposedly has a lower( just like the ones from years past) peak torque curve. If it does it won’t be turning 6000 rpm up the Ike!

            1. There is no way you can compare the power band of a 8.1L V10 to a 6.0L V8. Two completely different animals. For a smaller displacement engine to make power you have to cam it right, allow enough air flow, intake design is critical and you have to let it rev. The old GM 8.1L V8 would keep the RPMs low to. A lot of displacement really helps. But you could never pass a gas station either.

              In the end if you have a gas truck and you are towing so much it is always redlined, you need a different powertrain. Like a turbo diesel.

            2. Let’s go back to engine elementary school…

              Horsepower = Torque x rpm / 5250.
              Torque and Horsepower curves will ALWAYS meet at 5250 rpm. Horsepower peak is always higher than the torque peak, all depends on engine design for just how much higher.

            3. Not sure what your getting at daniel but you want an engine with a broad power band. For pulling, having an engine make good low end torque goes a long way vs low torque and high hp.

            4. “But the truth is engines from years past did “not” have to rev to 5 or 6 thousand rpm to reach peak horsepower or torque.”

              This statement is the issue. Older engines weren’t capable of revving to 6000 rpm but their horespower peak was still at the top of their rpm range. When under max load, the engine needs to downshift to peak horsepower, not to peak torque. The gearing was less than ideal on the Chevy they tested, with a 6-speed they could have geared it for roughly 1000 rpm increments, but it seems they always tune them for mpg instead of towing.

            5. I remember well when a small block made peak torque at 2000rpm and a big block did so at 16-1800. peak HP was about twice that high. It was also way less HP- you couldn’t sell a Silverado with 210hp today. Fact is- power, not torque climbs a hill like this- at posted speeds, that is. These modern engines have several things on engines from 25 years ago-
              Better tolerances from modern manufacturing makes engines better balanced, so they tolerate higher RPM. They have stronger crank shafts- better metallurgy, heat treating… Variable cam timing- that’s how they make the same low end torque as old engines, but with WAY more top end.
              The argument as to how long an engine will last if you did this all the time is nonsense- you wouldn’t. You’d buy a diesel.

            6. The NA engine struggles for air up there and second, lacks the broad, flat torque curve like a turbo engine. It’s gonna do max rpm trying to suck air in. The best engines have high and flat hp/torque curves not peaks. The 4.3 vortec and the 6.0 vortec are good beaters at sea level but for towing and altitudes you might wanna look at forced induction engines. They won’t leave you with your 4 ways on in the right lane. Or suck all the gas out of the engine at other times.

        2. 5500rpm in an engine with a 6000rpm redline is like 3000rpm in an engine with a 3500rpm redline, no? Or should we calculate piston speed instead of RPM to get a more fair comparison?

          1. Michael Pancheri
            No, it’s not the same when it comes to engine longevity. Many new “crotch rockets” have red lines of 11,000 rpm, but how many of them have 300,000 miles on them? This was also always given as a reason That diesels last longer than gas– lower rpms. So even with an engine’s life– “speed kills”.

            1. Actually sport bikes have redlines at 15,000 16,000 and 17,000. The smaller displacement bikes rev higher. But for longevity, if you take care of them they can easily hold up for hundreds of thousands of miles. In fact the engines hold up much better than the low reving twin cylinder bikes that are built here in the states.

              If you want to talk about cars, older Hondas, Toyota’s, and Mazda’s would cruise on the highway over 3,000 RPM. Some closer to 4,000. They would easily last over 300,000 Miles. I had an Accord with over 200,000 miles on it before I gave it to my sister. Never burned oil and ram like it was still new. 70mph was around 3500 RPM. And got mid 30 mpg’s

            2. Jimmy johns
              Give us a break! I have many, many friends with sports bikes and none of them have hundreds of thousands of miles on their bikes. And without rebuilding the motor, right! Dream on! All you seem to want to do on this site is argue with everyone. Lighten up!

            3. It’s not my fault you guys don’t ride that much but I know first hand a sport bike engine can last over the 100k mark. I’m friends with several people that have the iron butt award and some that don’t but just ride everywhere. Have you ever seen full camping gear strapped to a sport bike? I have.

              How about drag racing low 8’s on a bone stock bottom end Suzuki Hayabusa for 4 seasons now taking numerous wins. Including $50K prizes. All original parts in the motor except adding Gen 2 cams.

            4. FYI dan, not arguing, just giving different observations. But if you have a hard time with that just let me know. I will try and sugar coat it so it is easier for you.

            5. Just to reiterate Dan, you completely bypassed the comment on older Honda, Toyota and Mazda vehicles far surpassing several hundred thousand miles even though they cruise down the hwy at 50% max engine speed. Sometimes a little higher. Piston speed can be wear but if you use the proper materials namely the ring, is should not be an issue. The pistons and bearings should never touch other metal. The oil is the filler between them. If you have good oil, no wear to those parts.

            6. Jimmy johns
              Not arguing just giving different observations. Like”so really none of your observations have any worth”. You have a nasty, big mouth sir and I know first hand if I met you in person, you wouldn’t talk like that to me or anyone else on this site. Your nasty know it all bs is showing.

            7. Then you don’t know me at all buddy. It is what it is. I’m sorry you can’t handle it but next time put on a pair of man pants and take off your skirt.

            8. Oh no, we all know you and people like you. Your all talk,that’s it nothing more. Do us a favor go to one of your local bars tonight and talk s–t there like you do online. Then tell us tomorrow about all the people you Told off. Pansy boy!

            9. You sound like are the smack taller with a mangina. You are the only man baby that can’t handle someone questioning you. I didn’t say you were wrong with your mythical 13 mpg dodge v10 did I? Nope but you want to act as a child now. I’m sorry but your statement are not correct. Maybe you should also factor in piston travel distance. You know a sport bike has a piston travel distance of around 50 mm. If your not sure how long that is, check your panties. What is the piston travel distance of most Diesel engines? Did you factor that in anything? So do the math, piston travel distance and speed of a Diesel engine and sport bike.

            10. for the sake of the fellows at tfltruck and as well as the dozens of kind, friendly, interesting people I’ve met on this website,I won’t carry this any further. I’m kind of ashamed it went this far.

            11. So for giggles I decided to do the math on piston speed. A Cummins 6.7L with a 4.88″ stroke cruising down the hwy at 70 mph has a piston speed of 1627 ft min. My bike with a stroke of 48.8 mm at 70 which is around 6000 rpm is 1921 ft min. Like I was getting at earlier, there is more to piston speed than crankshaft RPMs.

          2. Dan, when you compare similar displacement to similar displacement, there is little to any correlation to engine speed an longevity or even maintenance costs.
            Jimmy Johns disagreed with your claim and now you want to fight him in a bar. dan ‘BUSH’ for sure.

    4. 10:20 for such a heavy load is a very respectable number. The placement of 2nd gear is perfect in this truck.

    5. The 6.0 is always a solid performer. Will run forever and holds its own. Someone said the transmission is the weakness in this truck? The transmission in this truck is the least repaired tranny in the truck business. Also the transmission is always the weak link of any truck, but thet are all solid.

    6. Jimmy johns
      Lifetime fuel mileage, hand calculated over 17 years. 12.6 mpg. 3500 4×4 dually, v10, 5 speed manual, regular cab. Gas mileage better than most v8’s I owned before.

          1. It seems odd to me but I have no reason to doubt you. Being a manual might have helped out. Plus you likely didn’t need all the transmission rebuilds he needed.

    7. I would love to see ALL of the manufacturers bring back larger displacement gas engines. The 6.0LT V8 is OK but bring back big blocks or V10’s to the 2500/3500 market. The diesels are getting so expensive and complicated that the recreational user really is in a tough spot.

        1. Yes I fully agree. In fact I believe we will get there. Diesels are getting to expensive and problematic now with all the emissions crap. I am seeing it in medium duty now with Ford using the V10 in their class 4 to 7 trucks and international is using a propane gasser in school bus applications and others. A gasoline version should be out now or very soon.

    8. I’m think this is a respectable finish for the 6.0l. As discussed above this engine is not a powerhouse, but it is very dependable, and will simple. The gear spacing seemed to be the only weakness that I saw. A little less space between 2nd and 3rd would help the time up the Ike, but since it’s not a race, it’s a descent performance. I think this will end up being the slowest of the Gas HD/SD trucks. If I remember correctly the others will be regular cab 2wd trucks.

    9. What happened to the RAM 2500 HD work truck? A video was posted some time ago about Mr Truck and Nathan having to work on trailer sway as they were getting ready to do the Super Ike using the RAM. Since then, other videos have been released, but no update on the RAM 2500 Super Ike. Did it not do well? Did something happen during the shooting of the super ike?

      1. No kidding,

        I’ve been saying the same thing? It’s been like a week and a half since they were hooking it up and still no Ike.

        Something seems fishy – definitely some stalling going on???

      2. It may be why they are using a goose neck trailer now. Remember they used a conventional hitch initially on the Ram.

        1. My guess they them coil springs make it not safe to tow that amount with out alot of squirming around. Speculation.

    10. All of this talk about powerband and peak torque and displacement…..here is a little perspective:

      3.7L 4-cyl gasser, no turbo, peak torque is 287.9lb-ft at 867rpm. Max rpm around 1500. Of course, HP is only around 32 (up to 44hp measured at the flywheel).

      This engine is found in the 1953-57 Allow Chalmers WD45 tractor. These tractors were very popular, and there is probably a running example within 50 miles of 90% Of you folks reading this. My brother still uses his on the farm. I spent many a long day cultivating corn with that tractor, listening to an AM radio that was about one cubic foot in size…

      Source: tractordata.com

      1. It irrelevant because no one would want to purhchase a 32 hp truck. Yeah it has lots of torque, but it accomplishes it at a speed that is so slow its not safe on streets.

            1. My point was that people tend to get certain trains of thought locked into their brains, and they tend to look at them as facts after a while. An example would be the common train of thought that gassers just don’t have the low-end torque of a diesel engine.

              Yet, here is a gasoline motor that provides peak torque below 1000rpm, numbers that look like they came from a diesel engine. And this is in an engine that’s 65 years old! So, yes, gasoline engines can be designed to provide a LOT of low-end torque, like a diesel. Now, HP, that’s another story!

              Btw, that particular engine has a reputation for being extremely reliable and bulletproof. Probably why you can still find many in use today, although the engine hasn’t been manufactured since around 1957.

    11. I also think that the new diesels are way too complicated and expensive for the “average” joe. Give me a decent Chevy, Ford, Ram 3/4 ton gasser that can haul my family and travel trailer and still leave me with some money to spend!

      1. I completely agree. I think The Nissan Titan XD Pro almost hit the sweet spot for us, but screwed it up with an extremely high price tag, and dismal payload compared to even an F-150. Us weekend warriors really are demanding a better performing gas engine in the 250/2500 series. Lower the displacement a tad and put some turbos on it so we have the benefit of better MPG with the lower displacement, but back in the power band with the turbos.

        1. Titan XD gas , Payload around 2200-2300lbs 400tq and 394hp , this is the xd to buy the cummins is cool but the gas is a better balanced truc , I cancelled my cummins and bought an xd gas

          1. Thats still F150 payload territory. I looked at a 2017 4×4 Supercab the other day that had 2154 lbs. on the payload sticker. I have also seen several well equipped(XLT/Lariat) HD Payload Crew cabs with 2450+ lbs of payload and one regular cab that was 2900 lbs.

    12. I driven the 6.0 gmc (14) and compared to my ford v-10. It simple didn’t have any TQ and I was not impressed with it. It was faster, but hooking a trl like they had you can tell the engine that it didn’t have any tq. The spread between gears is quite a bit. This big up/down shift can get very annoying when towing up long grades.

      6.8 Ford v-10 362 HP about 4250 457lb tq at 3250

      It might be a solid engine, but it is a dinosaur and it haven’t been updated​ in any time. Chevy pride themselves to be in class HP and TQ, but right now they are last in HP and TQ.

      1. Marc your v10 ford is a solid engine but in real world power and towing it was behind the Dodge 8.0 V 10 and definitely the Gm 8.1 496 cu inch workhorse with the Allison transmission ..imo

        1. That is true but the Ford V10 is a lot smaller too. The chevy 8.1L is a brute for pulling. It is kind of geared like diesel power. Low RPM power. Ours shifts around 4200 RPM at WOT. But it is a big engine. Don’t need to spin a lot to make power.

          1. I hate to disappoint you 2. I can out pull both 8.1 gm and 8.0 Dodge v-10. In fuel mileage I would beat at the pump. I know people that had them and compared to the Ford v-10 simply had more power then the other 2. The tq was just a little less than Ford v-10. Am I had over 350,000 miles before I parked and it was not because of failure. It was still running strong when I sold it. I’m herin guys going over 500,000 miles on the v-10 with out any engine failures​ and no over haul. I,d say over half them miles had a trl on it’s back. So am do not underestmate the Ford v-10 it is a rock.
            Yes Jimmy Johns the 8.1 was pretty good the similares​ pretty close to the Ford v-10. I new guy got like around 350,000 before the rings gave up. Now I thought he could have went farther changing the oil more freakingly.

            1. That is interesting Marc, the higher HP of the 6.8L 3V must make a difference compared to the other 2 engines. It really is hard to knock that 6.8L.

            2. The 6.8L must be doing something right if they are still putting them in medium duty trucks.

            3. Just my opinion out of the Triton engines the 2nd gen. v-10 might be best one with out a lot issues. 1st Gen. V-10 had some issues. Especially the 99s

    13. Diesel performs better in this class but in the 1/2 ton the gas motors are king and same with the midsize segment for more acceleration under pulling. If they evr turbo a gas motor in a V8 its likely they will take over the 2500 series as well. All diesels are turboed so the gas motor needs to be as well for a fair result.

      Many SUV’s have turboed V8’s in them. I would like to see what they could do with these types of loads as they will have big torque down low as well, equally matched with HP unlike a diesel engine that has low HP, low acceleration.

    14. I love how everyone on this forum bitches when the ecoboost gets a few MPG’s less than a Ram ED on the tow testing but then pull out the pitchforks because no one puts 8+ liter engines that get 8 mpgs in the 2500’s.

    Leave a Reply

    Top