• 2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 6.2L V8 Fighting for the Gold Hitch Best Towing Truck Award [Video]

    2017 chevy silverado 1500 pickup truck 6.2L v8 towing extreme review ike gauntlet
    2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 6.2L V8

    We are nearing the end of the 2017 Gold Hitch award testing. This is an annual competition to crown the top towing and off-road trucks in the land. The 2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 LTZ you see here is competing in the half-ton division against the 2017 Ford F-150 3.5L EcoBoost V6 and the 2017 Nissan Titan 1500 5.6L V8.

    Although, this is the last truck in this group, and all the scores are published below – the final 2017 Gold Hitch award selection is not yet final. TFLtruck crew will get together to make the final deliberations and decision. We will take into account the Ike Gauntlet towing testing, as well as highway MPG loops.

    The awards will be announced and given out in the evening of Apr 3rd, 2017.

    2017 Chevy Silverado Crew 6.2L V8 4×4 LTZ

    • Engine: 6.2L V8
    • Power: 420 @ 5,600 rpm
    • Torque: 460 @ 4,100 rpm
    • Transmission: 8-speed automatic
    • Rear Axle Ratio: 3.42
    • Max Towing: 11,700 lbs
    • Max Payload: 1,980 lbs
    • GVWR: 7,600 lbs
    • GCWR: 17,700 lbs
    • EPA-estimated Fuel Economy: 15/20/17 mpg (city/hwy/combined)
    • As-tested Price: $60,020

    All half-ton trucks are hitched up to the same 9,000 lbs enclosed CM Trailers 20-foot CargoMate trailer. We always use water for ballast, and set up the tongue weight between 900 and 950 lbs. We calculate the tongue weight at approximately 10% of the combined trailer weight.


    We test downhill performance by starting the 8 mile downhill at 50 MPH (which is the speed limit inside the tunnel). We use the tow/haul mode (and exhaust brake if equipped) and let the truck do its thing. If it accelerates past 60 MPH, which is the speed limit, then we apply the brake firmly to slow down to 50 MPH. We count the number of time we have to apply the brakes in this fashion. Every time we touch the brakes on the way down, the truck looses a point.

    We received several questions about the Grade Braking being enabled on the truck when we were testing it. We double-checked this. Yes, Grade Braking was “Active” during the Ike Gauntlet run.


    We time the truck on the way up (8 mile stretch of the interstate on a 7% grade going from around 9,000 feet to 11,158 feet of elevation). We also take note of the truck’s average MPG as reported by the trip computer. The benchmark time is 8 minutes. This assumes that the truck accelerated quickly, and maintained 60 MPH the entire way up the hill. Every 5 seconds over the time goal subtracts a point from the truck’s overall score. The benchmark MPG number is 6.0MPG. Every 0.2 MPG below that, and the truck looses a point.


    Each reviewer that participates in the test is given a maximum of 25 points for their subjective opinion. These scores are averaged and added to the downhill and uphill objective scores. The final score is stated out of maximum possible 100 points.

    2017 Half-ton Trucks:

    Towing a 9,000 lbs cargo trailer.

    Year Make Model Down (Num. Brakes) Up (Time) Up (MPG)  Subjective (Avg) Ike Score
    2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 Crew 4×4 V8 11 08:11.35 4.0 18.5 70.5
    2017 Ford F-150 Crew 4×4 TT V6 10 08:02.27 3.5 20 72
    2017 Nissan Titan 1500 Crew 4×4 V8 9 08:12.62 3.2 16 66

    Check out the video for all of the details!

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

    Similar Articles

    167 thoughts on “2017 Chevy Silverado 1500 6.2L V8 Fighting for the Gold Hitch Best Towing Truck Award [Video]

    1. I don’t think most viewers understand the type of torture you guys are putting these trucks through. All of them get the job done. Nice video and keep it up, thanks.

    2. Still impressed with the 6.2. Seems the transmission might be best suited for manually shifting down the hill. Would be interested to see if braking down to 45 would actuate the grade braking better… I have to agree with how the ranking sorted out in the end.

      1. To me, the Ike Gauntlet testing does not make a case for the 6.2 over the 5.3. Or over the Ford 5.0 for that matter. I know at normal elevations the 6.2 would perform better than those other engines, but in these conditions the 6.2 really doesn’t stand out. It ran 8:11 with the pedal to the floor. Both Ford EcoBoost engines have run this test with power in reserve. Yes, they have turbos, but they also have two fewer cylinders, far less displacement, and until 2017, fewer gears in the transmission to work with.

        1. 5.3 or the 5.0 wasn’t pulling this kind of weight in their tests. Don’t get me wrong I love the 5.0, but it does not have the horsepower for this load.

          1. Depends on what actually gets to the ground. GM’s Colorado at 308HP gets less power to the ground than the 278HP Tacoma as tested on putc. Also I think you mean torque and final drive ratios combined with HP and elevation losses for NA motors

        2. If it had power in reserve, it should have knocked off a 8:00 run easily, Displacement numbers go out the window as soon as you add a turbo, look at how much fuel it used that corresponds with air consumed (displacement sort of) both trucks did alright in my books, and It’s 2017 stick with the current test.

          1. The only reason Ford was 8 minutes was because they kept the speed limit in the Ford. Did you watch that video? They said repeatedly the truck had power to accelerate at any time. They probably could have held 70 easily, which would work out to a time of 6:51 going up.

            In the Chevy’s case, it ran 8:11 because that was physically as fast as it could go. Pedal to the floor. If you are going to compare times, you have to let the Ford run pedal to the floor as well and then compare the times. There would be a huge gap.

            1. Agree’d. The ford just does it so effortlessly. You dont see it much in these videos but the hills like this one and the one coming out of salt lake city on I70 turn into a game of Mario Kart. You’ve got the 18 wheelers going 30 trying to pass each other, then your got the buttholes in their range rovers doing 90, and everything in between. Its usually pretty hard to maintain speed and not have to accelerate at some point. The F150 has the advantage of being able to get that load moving again while already on a 7% grade.

        3. Pretty much agreement with your assessment IowaFord. Tho I do notice the fuel mileage on the 6.2 is pretty impressive. I said this before I think 6.2 is going to struggle with the mandates that it faces.

        4. I honestly feel the same way about the 3.5 Ecoboost. I think the 2.7 is pretty much enough for a 1/2 ton, but for artificially neuters its payload and tow ratings to force you into the 3.5. A 2.7 will pull 10,000 lbs up the ike at speed, I guarantee it. It might not have the overhead of the 2017 3.5 but it would do it.

    3. so tired your your bias videos. makes excuses for ford and chevy for how horrible they are. ram does it under 8 minutes. you guys obviously favors ford and chevy which makes this vidoes so hateful to watch.

      1. I’m a Chevy guy and I don’t see myself ever buying anything else. That being said, the interior of the Ram is the nicest of the bunch. Too bad it’s near the bottom of JD Power’s survey and at the bottom for resale value.

      2. How was it bias exactly? Mr. Ken gave the truck a 17 which is not great. Also, it is impossible to due the hill under 8:00 if you stay under 60 MPH.

      3. If they did a ram under 8 minutes they were speeding. The test as I know it should come in at 8 minutes if you maintain 60mph. Remember the F150 Kent was able to pass anyone he wanted as he had more power on tap. He had to maintain speed at 60 and not just floor the gas pedal and hope he got up to speed.

      4. There isn’t a ram half ton on the planet that could handle this weight up that hill in the time of the ford or chevy! Where are you getting this from?

          1. Yeah, even though they were speeding with the RAM, it was ABLE to go past the speed limit to get the better time. The 3.92 gears in the RAM gives it every HP in 3rd gear, unlike the Chevy.

          2. Yea canoepaddler I was looking at the list I didn’t see ram on it. Sorta what I was thinking.

          3. Looks like a 7:45 for the ram.

            If we are gunna get all upset over it we can always refer to the 7:36 that the 2013 F150 EB did with 10,800 lb trailer.

    4. Not a bad score at all. I didn’t expect the Chevy to beat a turbo in the mountains. Both are good trucks. For new truck buyers it will come down to features and appearance. For current truck owners there is nothing about wither that would make me switch. Truck owners are the most brand loyal of any customer.

    5. I’m guessing that you’re using 87 octane e10 winter blend gas for these tests? It’s good to see you use regular for all the tests but I noticed winter gas loses 2 mpg to summer gas in my Ecoboost and 87 is about 3 mpg short than if you tow with 93. Maybe someday you can do different fuel grade comparison in one of these trucks some day.

      1. That’s why I don’t even care about the mpg test for the gas or diesel trucks. Winter blend fuel always increases consumption.

      2. IIRC they use whatever the manual suggests, which is why the ecoboost loop costed more than the ecodiesel because of premium charge

      3. CPM’s can take several tanks to adjust to changing octane of the gasoline. Would be a cool test, I just don’t see how it could be done logistically.

      4. Kris s I was thinking I like to see test on​ the eco-boost between the low grade and hi grade on the ike. It would be intristing test.

    6. You know the test is tough when a 6.2L needs to be floored most of the time. The Chevy will most likely get better highway mpg than the Ford, which I think TFL will now include in the golden hitch awards.

      1. The Titan was too and even though it is a lower rated engine it seemed to do the same job in the same amount of time as the higher HP and Torque GM 6.2. And the Titan has the best grade braking of all 3 trucks. Wonder why subjective is so low for it then.

        1. Honestly, the subjective score should look at everything EXCEPT mpg, time, or braking. Perhaps the Titan sagged in the rear more, did not handle as well, shifted more often, etc.

        2. I drove the Titan SV with a luxury group and it is a bit dated and the ride quality is stiff. You feel every crack in the road and the dealer told me the Pro4X is stiffer. I was looking at it because it is a truck I can get by with for 2 years as they are offering 6500 off a two year lease; with taxes for me that is 7400 off which lowers a two year payment to 500 Canadian, any other two year lease on a base model 1/2 ton is 800 to 1000/month. The air dam is as low as a GM however and very hard, which is basically body moulding. The FX4 is at least pliable. I think I will pass. The Ram regular 1500 had a soft ride and the Rebel was way too stiff of a ride for me. Hopefully the Tacoma Pro won’t be so choppy.

          But as far as the Titan goes it has a great engine with awesome throttle response, same as the Tundra if not a tad better, but it just does not feel as nice as the Ram and there was bad wind noise after 60mph. The dealer told me the diesel lineup was failing and it only makes up 3% of truck sales, so he doesn’t understand why Nissan thought they could change that. There is also not a lot of options with Nissan, they are all grouped together as one big package for a few trim levels. Part of the subjective score may come into play on that and knowing Ford has a myriad of other options available along with GM. But Nissan does offer the 5 year bumper to bumper warranty on the Titan as standard which is a 3000 dollar option on any other truck.

          The dealer told me there suspension is better than the coil over from Ram and others but it makes the ride stiffer, however, I think this makes it feel dated, little rough around the edges and I had that wind noise with poor body clearance that Subaru car would put this truck to shame.

          At least the salesman was great, very knowledgeable about his product and the owner agrees the midsize should have V8’s, the salesman did not, so there is bantering even amongst individuals in the dealership LOL. He also stated Nissan may bring back the really small truck, he has heard word of it.

          1. Never lease a truck. Worst decision that can be made. Lease rates are always higher on trucks because they expect you to damage them from use, and when you go to turn it in, they will 95% charge you for damage again. You get better bang for buck trading every 2 years purchasing at end of year model for best rebates. You will save thousands over a truck lease. Every other vehicle is worth it, not trucks.

            1. With ownership I have to pay 13% tax on the entire truck cost. The lease allows me to stay at a lower payment which gives me power to loan more money into my secondary business as well and the banks don’t need to know what it is worth vs what I own. I am having no problem with returning my Tacoma. I am getting offers of 32, 800, likely 34,000 if I push it because the Canadian black books tags me at 32,500 to 34,780 based on what they see for average trades in my area and I only owe 28,000 on my 2015 Tacoma with 25,000km. Had I bought I would have paid all the taxes and the interest and they will give me less on a trade because they always tell you that because you are saving on taxes on the trade in we cant give you what you can sell it for because they know if you sell for 37,000, you have to pay full taxes on the new purchase.

              Believe me I have chased my tail enough. Also with a purchase if your truck gets into an accident and the insurance pays you 15,000 to fix the damage to brand new again, it will not matter and your truck will be worth about 3000 less on a trade in because it was in an accident. The Toyota lease has insurance built in on the lease that protects you from that. Unless the vehicle is worth more than your end value then they may play games with you. I don’t know.

              Looks like I may own my Tacoma in 2 years anyway if I extend the lease, I will be done paying for it. Nothing else interests me right now except the Tacoma Pro at this point and it is so rare its unavailable in Ontario in my city with likely 0 chance of getting one. Reports are that there are 1 maybe 2 in all of Ontario.

            2. Guess it is location based, here in Texas on trucks your lease interest is typically 6-9% before any mark up. They also typically consider any bed damage to be past the allowed wear limit and will charge extra. Rebates are always at most half of purchase rebates (because you only finance half the vehicle) Then again our tax rate is only 6.25% and interest to finance is usually 1.9-2.5% if no 0% specials are going on. I have never had someone lease a truck because it is, and is hear still, too horrible of an option.

            3. Jay B, Ram here is like that. Their 3 year lease tags the vehicle at only 49% of its worth, usually at higher interest rate. This Titan however is tagged at 72% so I am only paying on 28% of the vehicles worth on a base model and they are taking 7400.00 dollars from that so my payment is just for 12,000 over two years. %00 per month Canadian. Or 61% of its value in three years which actually raises the payment. Ram even with their incentives doesn’t work because their truck is tagged at 49% of its value so it doesn’t work. It all depends on the offers I guess. I think I will wait until December, even that new 5.0 V8 from Ford might be a nice option or they may have good deals in September on 2017 Tundra and F150 models. I can always just buy out my Tacoma if nothing suits me better. The Pro and ZR2 in Ontario is literally going to be unavailable and the dealers are marking them up from what I see from what is available and we see it with the Raptor. Surprising the Power Wagon had a decent incentive.

            4. @Rambro 72% residual? Good thing Nissan only moves 1200 trucks per month or they would be seriously flucked when they have to eat the other 22-25% to get them down to ACV when used.

        3. I noticed that too.
          Kick out their unusual subjective scoring, all 3 trucks were neck and neck in total points.

          I will say they are starting to improve on their subjective scoring, at least Andre has been mentioning other reasons for his subjective scores, meaning other then what they just tested snd scored.

          I agree with some others, that after looking back at last years Ram 1500 Hemi Ike testing , had that been included this year, it would have probably won.

    7. TFL crew, can you do an off the books test with the F150 and Silverado and manually downshift the transmission for grade braking. The F150 manual does state to do this when towing heavy loads. I would like to see if it makes much difference between the 2 trucks.

    8. The Ford would in all likely hood, done better with the 3:73 rear end. This one only had the 3:55 rear end.

      Would be nice if TFL posted the final gear ratios and mention there is a 3:73 available for the Ford and then post those final ratio’s just to be fair in order to make informed decisions. I’ve seen that done before on this website. Be nice if it was done here.

      1. Is anyone willing to do a rpm comparison of the gearing rpm range at say 54 mph in 2,3 and forth for the gm and ford? I am feeling lazy as hell right now. Maybe beneficial to disagreement.

      2. Hey Rambro what do you think about tfl doing a tow test starting at sea level and climbing up some big incline so we can hopefully watch the NA motors spank the eco boost engines? I will say that I think tfl needs to set a date for all the manufacturers to send their trucks on the Ike gauntlet run so they all go up on the same day, at the same temperature, same conditions, same barometric pressure….. so on and so forth.

        1. Spank? Show me a sea level test where the 6.2L spanks the 3.5tt, and I am not talking by fractions of a second. At elevation, the 3.5tt ABSOLUTELY spanks the 6.2L. Hell, if the 2.7tt may even smoke it after we have seen how it handled its lighter trailer.

        2. I don’t think they can do it or maybe they like spreading the videos out. Be good if the quoted temperatures and pressures for that day for each truck. Fuel type as well. Nothing is going to touch that 3.5 EB though. The only way is to boost the V8 and then its bye bye 👋 to the V6’s. someone will do it soon. Likely Ram

      1. Ford needs to add some dual injection to the 5.0. The grade braking was impressive in last years ike.

        1. The 5.0 is already dual direct injection, however the new engines from Ford including the V6’s will feature “dual-direct and port fuel injection” on the non-turbo line up.

          1. Jay, the 5.0L has sequential port injection right now. 2018 it will have port and direct injection.

            1. yes you are right, our source book is already on 2018 and I read it all F****ed up(thought I was on 2017). I need to go home,..

            2. LOL, your good Jay. I ended up looking it up before posting just to make sure I wasnt missing anything. Looks like Ford is getting ready for the next level emissions. Might as well get a head start before it is fully mandated.

    9. The EcoBoost is a beast. The 6.2L is all ate up with displacement and V8 sounds, but in the end, the Ford V6 always shows it the taillights.

      1. If I was doing a significant amount of towing in high elevation I would choose the Duramax that showed the other heavy duties its taillights..At lower elevations where power won’t be lost and turbo’s won’t have as big of an advantage, give me the displacement, V8 sounds and better mileage.

        1. They did not say if they ran premium in either truck, so the Titan actually ran up the hill for cheaper if they used premium in the 3.5Ford and 6.2GM

          Hopefully GM or Ford Turbo’s a V8 at some point. Chrysler is supercharging their 6.2 V8 in their Jeep that already produces 475HP in a 4800Lb truck/SUV. This V6 BS will come to an end at some point in the open boxed truck market as well.

          1. Sorry Rambro,
            V6tt technology is here to stay and will get bigger as many other manufacturers go this route.

            It’s the extra packaging requirements that will prevent the V8tt from ever making it to prime time in this day and age.

            Everything is focused on lighter weight and a V6tt vs V8tt is always going to weigh less, be much smaller to pkg, and have considerably less moving parts.

            If a manufacturer can meet the intended market demands of a vehicle regarding HP, MPG, and packaging why would they need to go after what they don’t need if they’ve already achieved it with a V6tt???

            I’m pretty sure I know what you’ll say, but your that unrealistic one guy!

            1. Buyers will determine that not the manufacturer. Maybe if there was no competition than they could sit on the V6. But where’s there is opportunity to outsell your competition than that’s what determines the market and there are big buyers in the V8 segment. Weight and packaging parameters won’t stop us.

          1. Ive seen just as many problems with 6.2l as i have ecoboosts (which is not many in either case). I love the sound of a v8 as much as the next guy but uninformed biased people need to get out of their own way. Turbo charged smaller displacement engines are here to stay and will command more and more of the truck engine market.

            1. The 6.2 has no “common issues” but the Ecoboost engines do.

              Keep the Ecocrap. The upgraded 5.0 sounds nice, but I’ll never buy a Ecoboost truck.

        1. So the EcoBoost engines perform excellent in the mountains, but drop performance at lower elevation? No. The Ecoboost engines will hold rpm and gears on inclines better than the 6.2 at any elevation.

        2. Ya remember when the vet V8 beat the GT with a V6tt, O wait the V6 destroyed it.
          Fastest truck on the market (raptor) uses the ecoboost motor. GM and it’s 6.2 bring up second place in speed, mpg, etc.

      2. Also, the ecoboost is the F150 volume engine. It’s nice to be able to get premium power and towing capability without being forced into a premium trim level. I’m betting on a power bump for 2018 but really it’s not needed as demonstrated on the Ike run.

      3. I would clarify that this is true of both the 2.7 and 3.5 EcoBoost engines. This makes 3 years running the GM 6.2 will lose to Ford in the half ton Gold Hitch contest. 2 years ago, Ford had the 2.7 EcoBoost. Last year, the 5.0. This year, the 3.5 EcoBoost. All will take the Gold Hitch over GM’s top dog powertrain.

        1. Only in the mountains. Most of the US population doesn’t live more than 2000 feet above sea level.

          1. No, they may not all live above 2000ft, but most of the major hwys that travel between these major populated cities go over passes with much higher elevations!!!

          2. So if you could choose between an engine that
            1. performs well everywhere, or
            2. an engine that performs well in low elevations
            why would anybody choose option 2?

            1. Because one is a V8 and is preferred by many vs. a turbo V6. Many just prefer V8 engines in their trucks, that is why Ford offers the 5.0.

            2. And I own a 2012 F150 with the 5.0. It is a great motor for me. And it sounds fantastic. But it simply does not compare to the Ecoboost engines when it comes to performance under heavy load.

            3. It comes down to personal preference which is valid. I will likely never be taking my maxed out truck up the Ike gauntlet. At sea level where my truck will be used I’d rather have the power delivery and gas mileage of the 6.2 V8. In the rare case I had to go up the ike…I guess that’s 9 seconds out of my life I’ll never get back.

            4. Fair enough. I just think that a lot of people who say they just prefer a V8 have never experienced how well an EcoBoost can pull a heavy load.

            5. Iowa, I agree. I know of several people that came from GM and Ram V8 engines to the 3.5L GTDI engine and they tow a lot. They all say the 3.5L is the best towing engine they have owned. The ones coming from Ram really could not believe the performance improvement when towing the same trailers.

            6. A lot of people want a V8, and would/do take the 6.2L over the ecoboost because they either rarely tow at elevations, or tow very seldom anywhere (except weekends to the lake, etc) yet alone at 7000 ft. But every day driving to work and back, weekend driving kids to hockey, (life in general) etc, the 6.2L actually beats up on the new 3.5L for mileage.

              2 weeks ago a Ford dealer and us swapped trucks for a day for training purposes. At the end of the day, him and I each took our respective trucks down the highway on a 40 miles round trip one behind the other so same conditions, road, winds, etc. The 6.2L with the 8-speed averaged 26.2 mpg (Canadian)at 110 kms/hr (68 mph) while the 3.5L averaged 22.8 mpg (Canadian), calculated manually by first filling until the pump clicked off and refilling the same way. That is around 70-80 miles more every tank. He even admitted to owning a 5.0L because if you don’t tow heavy and often, the 3.5L is harder on gas because the turbo is always working at highway speeds. His words. The 6.2L performs every bit as good as the 3.5L at anything under 3000 ft elevation where most people drive every day.

              The ecoboosts are great engines and perform well. They have the added plus of maintaining power at elevations, but buying a truck just doesn’t come down to engine performance. It comes down to comfort, features, bang for the buck (a $65,000 Canadian Lariat still has halogen bulbs and no rear fender liners whereas even a base W/T GM has HID’s and basically all LT’s and up have rear fender liners), climbing in and out (GM has a 2.5 inch lower front floor step in height and a 4.25 inch lower rear step in height) yet ground clearance is within 0.5 inches, rear steps standard and that are usable even when hauling things longer than your tailgate, auto headlamps standard on every truck, etc. Again Ford has nice things that GM’s don’t have. Just saying people have different needs from the same type of vehicle.

              Clearly the V8 GM engines (both 5.3L and 6.2L) are perfectly fine as more people bought V8 GM trucks last year than Ecoboost F150’s (article I read back in February said Ford says about 2/3’s of their F150’s are ecoboost engines where as 98% of GM’s are V8’s and only 2% are the base 4.3V6 and Ford only sold around 7000 more trucks than GM total – and Ford had more HD numbers than GM in their totals too).

            7. IowaFord,

              Best summary of the day I must say!

              Exactly my feelings.

              Why by a $50,000 – $60,000 Truck with a premium engine upcharge that only makes it stated HP at one elevation – 0ft – every 1000ft above this it’s loosing 3%.

              This is the major reason smaller Turbocharged engines and Technology are replacing the big old cubic inch V8’s of yesteryear.

              The gas mileage claim is that a V8 gets better mileage is so obvious, but most fail to realize. A V8 at altitude is not making full power because of less air being available so the computer is pulling back fuel and therefor loosing power.

              The only real mpg comparison is to take the exact same truck with a V8 vs V6tt with the same driver and get a combined mpg # like Roman did with his old 6.2V8 Raptor vs the new 3.5tt Raptor. Here you have the same tires, wheels, gears, and everything about as close as possible except the new one weighs less. Nothing we can do here, it’s a product of newer technology.

              The results speak for themselves of almost 4mpg difference between the two trucks and engine performance!

              This same advantage the turbo’s have is also a similar one the Hybrid Diesel electric power trains have in trains and heavy equipment – they have a turbocharged Diesel generator and Electric motors that don’t really loose any power at altitude up to 10,000′

              Another example: Joe Smith’s Tesla in Los Angeles CA doesn’t run any faster than Suzie Sizzles Tesla in Denver Colorado.

            8. Drifter there was a long term test that did it with the 2.7 and 5.0. Need to look again but I think the 5.0 did better

            9. Well compared to do a ratings. Search 2.7 vs 5.0 mpg. Not exact to a tee, but close to capabilities.

            10. Dpach:

              “A lot of people want a V8, and would/do take the 6.2L over the ecoboost because they either rarely tow at elevations, or tow very seldom anywhere (except weekends to the lake, etc) yet alone at 7000 ft.”

              If they rarely tow anywhere, much less at elevation, why would they need a 6.2 in the first place? If they have to have the 6.2, that forces them to buy a high trim level truck, which I feel is another flaw in the GM lineup.

              “Clearly the V8 GM engines (both 5.3L and 6.2L) are perfectly fine as more people bought V8 GM trucks last year than Ecoboost F150’s (article I read back in February said Ford says about 2/3’s of their F150’s are ecoboost engines where as 98% of GM’s are V8’s and only 2% are the base 4.3V6 and Ford only sold around 7000 more trucks than GM total – and Ford had more HD numbers than GM in their totals too).”

              This is just not apples to apples. With GM, there is no 6 cylinder option that is worth owning. If you want any kind of decent motor, you have to get a V8, either the 5.3 or 6.2. With Ford, there are 3 good engine options. 1 is a V8 and 2 are turbo V6s. So to say that GM sells more V8 engines than Ford sells V6- of course that is true, because Ford also has a pretty darn good V8 in the mix as well.

            11. I am definitely and ecoboost fan and currently own one. When I was purchasing I knew I would be moving to Utah and living at 6500′ so the Ecoboost was really the only engine on my radar. If I was still living in MA at sea level then I very well could have been in a V8 truck of any brand.

      4. Every review I’ve ever seen has the 6.2 in front at a normal elevation. Both are great powertrains, but I’d take the v8 everyday…even gets better gas mileage.

        1. I would love to see a thorough review at normal elevation with some hill driving. Most all comparisons at normal elevation I have ever seen include a 0-60 loaded time and that’s about it. That is pretty meaningless. How well does the truck hold rpm and hold gears on inclines? That is far more important than a .1 or .2 seconds accelerating to 60.

          1. Pickuptrucks.com. They do it every 2 years or so. 0-60 and 1/4 mile unloaded, with payload and with a trailer. Gas mileage loops with the 3 weights too. The 6.2 wins every year.

            Both Ford and GM have very different powertrains with similar results, ironically the big “gas guzzler” v8 is surprisingly very efficient. The real loser is Ram. It is middle of the road for power tests and dead last for economy when actually calculated. It doesn’t excel at anything.

            1. We’ve all seen the PUTC tests. The last comparison the only thing they did was 0-60 and quarter mile, both empty and with 1700 lbs in the bed. Then all the trucks towed 10k pounds but the only data they shared from towing that weight was MPG. For all the work they go to, they put out surprisingly minimal and useless information.

        2. The 6.2 is slightly and I mean slightly quicker then a ecoboost when comparing a GM 8 speed and ford 6 speed. With the 10 speed the ford is much faster, but this doesn’t matter. What matters is torque and the torque curve of the motor. The ecoboost has a wide torque band (wider then the GM 6.2) which keeps the power comfortably with running gears and rmp’s all over to keep up. Turbos are the way of he future, GM will be following suit soon considering all they do is copy everyone else.

          1. Testing has shown the 6.2 is still faster. Your opinion is not fact. It was already posted the 6.2 still edged out the Eb 10 speed.

            1. You would think the 6.2 is faster, it has 45 more HP. The 3.5L historical towed in a higher gear making the drive much nicer. It doesn’t need to scream at high RPMs to accelerate, it just goes. Both engines are great but the really nice thing with the 3.5L is you don’t have to buy a top trim truck to get it.

          2. GM copies everyone? Every design coming out of the Ford design studio is a blatant rip off! The next Expedition basically plagerized the Tahoe!!! Explorer, Fusion, every Lincoln…. Real F’n original. Pathetic.

            GM R&D crushes Fords.

            1. Come on Mike. Will you say the same when the next GM half tons are built out of aluminum and a twin turbo V6 is offered?

      1. Why Sam ? We know the eco-boost engine hoes up the Ike effortless with 9000lbs. What do you think it will do with less weight and more HP and TQ?

      1. I thought the same thing. I really wish TFL could figure out a way to manually calculate MPG on these.

        1. We know that the 6.2 does real well on fuel mileage. Maybe as good or better than the 5.3. I just know about that 4 mpg.

      2. It might be right but a manual check would be way better. All they have to do re-fuel after the entire trip up and down which would be a way better scenario, especially being done at the pumps. The other thing is that the 3.5 may have had mixed fuel types in the gas tank depending what they filled it with. The GM has to run premium.

        I get a laugh out of the point system giving points for mpg with various fuel types. It should be done based on costs as it is an oxymoron to give a truck points for better mpg when it cost more to go up the hill than the Titan with worse mpg under a cheaper fuel. Literally makes no sense, but as a viewer if you don’t catch that than, poor you for believing in the system. But then again fuel prices are always fluctuating so its hard to do it based on cost. You really have to have a head on your shoulders to not fall victim to these test criteria. Hopefully TFL explains that in the final awards video.

        1. I saw somebody comment once that TFL should report cost per mile. This removes the issue with regular/premium/diesel cost differences. I thought it was a great idea.

      3. more like 380-300hp for the duration due to lack of air. basically comes down to lbs of fuel per hp hour

      4. It could be. GM really leans their engines A/F ratios. One reason they need DI. All of our GM products have a wot slight surge because they run lean at wot. If you want to make more power on a GM engine, richen it up a little and you will gain a few.

        1. Which I’ve never heard of anyone owning. Ford has this package pretty much for marketing max payload numbers.

          1. PLenty of folks on the F150 forums have them, you just usually cannot find them in dealer inventory.

            I did look the other day though and found a dealer in MN with 2 or 3 HD Payload F150’s in stock.

      1. but its not game over because its not offered..hey what if you could get a GM truck with the Corvette supercharged 6.2 it would be game over if you could.

        1. Yes it does come with the 3:73 but some believe with the 10 speed it offers no advantage. Sure wish TFL would put this myth to the test or maybe someone call Mythbusters to do a show on it.

    10. The gm is pretty similar to last years results even with the rear gear difference. I think the 5.3 is still the way to go with gm.

      1. They were not all new. Color options don’t cut the bread. And sometimes dealers don’t send them what they request. Like a manual Tacoma. I think TFL should request all the manual trucks still available and do a mashup……Every chance I get, I poke TFL a little

          1. I don’t know? Maybe it was based on available trucks? Or maybe the 2016 did not get tested up the Gauntlet with the 8 speed? Not sure.

    11. TFL, is the payload rating you have listed correct? Based on the spec of the test vehicle, the payload according to GM is 1770 lbs, not 1980lbs.

      1. Ha, what a joke, my 2004 Sierra Denali had 4 wheel Steering and ride control with all time AWD for 42,000 and had a 1787Lb payload capacity. 13 years ago and all they did was add HP and take away mechanical advantages and raise the cost. Ridiculous.

        1. I remember those 4WS Denalis. Great trucks.
          I think the tow ratings on most 1/2 tons nowadays are unrealistic because the max payload can’t support the tongue weight of a max weight trailer if you add passengers and cargo.

          1. My favorite gem is a Suburban 2500 with 4WS. I used to see one when I live in MA once or twice a week.

    12. The silverado needs to use 3.73 gears on their max tow package like they did back in 2014. Look at the tfl video of the 2014 6.2 silverado. That truck had the 3.73’s and it came down the gauntlet with (0) break applications. And it had a heavier ( 10,800 lb) trailer. Wake up gm! Lower gears pull better and hold back better with a load.

      1. Dan Bush, too much of this comes down to government fuel mileage and pollution requirements. The only reason GM dropped the 3.73 is because their trucks need to average a set mpg and pollution ratings at the end of the year and 3.73 gears would likely cause a 2-3 mpg lower rating and a higher pollution rating.

        A lot of the braking differences comes down transmissions and their programming. Back in ’14 it had a 6-speed while now it’s an 8-speed and clearly isn’t programmed for aggressive downshifts with loads.

        1. Dpach
          I believe your right about government fuel mileage and pollution. I don’t think however that the change in transmissions is the main reason for the high number of break applications needed. Last year tfl tested the 2016 6.2 on the gauntlet. That one had even higher (3.23) gears and that truck had even more (14) break applications than the 2017 with the 3.42 had (11). I also believe as long as ford can still offer 3.73’s and ram can still offer 3.92’s, gm would be my last choice if I were looking for a 1/2 ton truck that I was going to use for towing. Just saying.

    13. What is it with GM painting the entire front end of their trucks with chrome? I know the make the Z71 with the painted front but when you want some chrome you shouldn’t have to go to this wall of Plasti Chrome. At least the other brands incorporate some painted pieces to mix it up.

    14. It seemed that Kent had to ease off a little on the gas as they approached the finish line. Not sure that made much of a difference though. I was most impressed with the Titan. It had the least number of brake applications going down hill and the fuel economy was very close to that of the F150. Also even though it has the least amount of horsepower and torque its up time wasn’t much lower than the other two trucks.

      1. Kent seemed rather different during this years test. Not sure if it was the editing or what but he gave Andre a hard time for giving high subjective scores for the Nissan and Ford. He seemed to favor GM this year. Stuck me as odd. The Titan should have scored better for subjective to me because the subjective seems to be a rehash of the time up and braking evens down. The Nissan did well in both. Better in grade braking than both trucks and I say an even match up the hill to the chevy. This year just seems weird to me. Or I am paranoid. Maybe both….

    15. A lot of people on here are discussing the final drive ratio but that’s only half the equation. You also need to look at the gearing of the transmission. Some brands may offer a lower or higher final drive axle and make up for some of it in the transmission gearing. Just depends on what brand you’re looking at.

      I’ve typically noticed that Ford is more aggressive with both transmission and final drive ratios which impacts their fuel economy. To me, that’s worth it. I’ll gladly pay a little more at the pump for performance when needed. To each their own.

      1. i know some people want super fuel efficiency out of a truck but i agree with you. I dont care about FE. I want it to perform and perform well when towing.

        1. Trucks have the biggest room for savings by increased economy, even a 1 mpg increase can save 100’s of dollars a year. That said I think looking at fuel economy while going up the tallest grade is the country is stupid. The truck will spend less then .01%n of its time on a grade like this. You have to look at overall efficiency.

            1. Me either, which is why I also don’t give two craps about the EcoDiesel Ram. Not saying I would avoid better fuel economy, but if its at the cost of performance reduction I wouldnt take it.

    16. Oh, did anyone notice the temp gauge on the chevy? It looked like it was getting hot going up too. Hard to tell but it sure did not look like it was in the normal 210°F range. It looked closer to 240° from the angle I seen.

      1. It is hard to say exactly what the gauge is reading since we are looking at it from an angle. But you are definitely right, it did go up as the truck went up the hill.

    17. I like that Kent called of the lights on the mirror. Nice to show some features like this. Crash the gate doing 98 made me laugh at the end. Kent likes the Chevs, he was pushing it the best he could. Hopefully they turbo charge the dam thing at some point and lock them V6’s, up in the chicken coops where they belong. Then “We Gone, Bye Bye”🤣😂😅

    18. Until GM improves the availability equation for their biggest, baddest power train versus the competition; it’s always worth mentioning: Cheapest Silverado I can build online with the 6.2 is a double cab, 2WD, standard box LTZ at $44,430. That price includes destination and a $1500 cash allowance at the time of this post.

      By contrast, I can currently build an F150XL std cab, 2WD, 8′ bed for $29,625 that currently includes a $2000 incentive; meaning if all I want is the most capable work truck from Chevy and don’t want or need extra seating or luxury appointments, then I’m forced to accept more doors; more seating; more fluff, and less bed; and must pay about $14,800 more to get a truck I didn’t need or want.

      Likewise, Nissan lets us have their 5.6 V8 in many more configuration choices than GM’s top dawg, starting at or about $14000 less than GM’s cheapest truck with their 6.2.

    19. should put an ad on craigslist in your area for anyone with a modded silverado. to see if a cammed/new heads will be able to breathe better on the ike

    20. I believe these engines are way de-tuned for fuel economy. The computer artificially changes the shift patterns and shift points. All one would have to do is get a custom tune on this 6.2L and it would kick ass. Manually shifting going up and down would dramatically change the results of these tests for all manufacturers. It would take a lot of variables out of these tests, and I understand why they don’t manually shift these transmissions.

      1. That sounds fair. Throw a custom tune in the Ecoboost too and see how that goes for the Chevy. I just don’t get all the Ecoboost hate from people that have never towed with one.

        1. Jim, no doubt the ecoboost is a powerful motor I’m not saying it isn’t. You could put a custom tune on the ecoboost and it would produce far more power. I’m not a fan of little motors that are boosted to produce big power. I’ve never seen a boosted motor go as many miles as a non boosted motor. Now I know Ford did a lot of work to make these motors reliable and stronger, but I wonder if the will actually last as long, and what will be the cost of ownership if you had 300,000 miles on one. I’d like to see that, and I haven’t read even one report of anyone having more then 250,000 miles on one. I’ve combed the internet trying to find someone who has high mileage without having major problems. I expect the GM small block to easily achieve 300,000 miles without breaking the bank with repairs. I had one that I put 320,000 miles on and it was still solid. Didn’t even use much oil, and power was still adequate. Original transmission too! I currently have a 5.3L with 183,000 miles and it has been an absolute rock solid performer. No major repairs at all.

    21. Now my turn.

      Good video , but subjective scoring is little bit of a head scratcher.

      What is this 2nd or 3rd time the 6.2 went up the Ike gasping for what Little air there is and the Ford eco-boost is already there wanting to go higher?
      So when is gm going to have a TT v-6 in there half ton? Hoping soon, because the turbos are beating up the 6.2 with out all that air!

    22. Good point Marc. Tfl mentions in every video that turbo engines have an advantage over non turbo engines at the extreme elevations encountered on the ike gauntlet. So it seems very silly to expect the 6.2 chevy to beat the ecoboost under these conditions. I wish someone would do this type of testing on 7% interstates in the eastern US. I say this because most trucks sold in the country will seldom or possible never be driven at 9,000 to 11,000 feet above sea level.

      1. Not true,

        In the West there’s many major Interstates going over passes from 6000′ – 9000′

    23. I think they did a test with with a new Ford SD on sand stone in wv if remember correctly.

      That being all said Dan bush I still think the 6.2 would struggle with low end TQ that the Ford makes over the gm.

      1. Yes, and if I recall it was ford diesel against ram diesel against chevy diesel. This would be a perfect place for TFL to return and test the 1/2 ton trucks; ram 5.7 vs chevy 6.2 vs ford 3.5 ecoboost. If the ecoboost wins there (at relatively low elevation) then I’ll agree that a small ecoboost engine is better at towing than a large powerful v8. However my guess, right now, is that it’s pretty much a toss up.

      2. I dont think the low end torque on the GM is all that different than the EB. they make like 90% of the 470 ft-lbs at 2000 rpms, so thats what, 420. The EB isnt making the 470 until 3000 so at 2000 I bet they are quite close.

    24. Let’s not forget that a 2016 ram 4×2 with the 5.7 beat the Times of both the 2017 6.2 silverado and the 2017 3.5 ecoboost up the ike gauntlet (7:45) while also pulling a 9,000 lbs (Although a different) trailer.

    25. I too would like to see the weights for the trucks listed with and W/O the souls aboard. As well as the rear gears. So, we all have to also remember that the advertised HP in all of these trucks is posted at the RPM the MFG wants it listed at. An engine with a 6,000 redline that idles at 700 RPM has over 50 intervals to list the HP. Also, the quad cam 4 valve 5.0 in the Ford flows air really well thru the heads at higher RPM. I tow with my 2014 5.0 and it loves RPM and will happily run up the Ike at 6,000 RMP, but I choose not to beat the snot out of it, so I don’t. In the end how much do you want to abuse your equipment to save a few seconds or a minute over an entire trip? Also….hey TFLT, you simply can get all goofy and grin over the higher MPG from the Colorado diesel if it takes an eternity to climb the hill! You cannot give other trucks (2.7 EcoBoost) bad marks because they used more fuel if they did it in a much quicker time. There must be a math wiz at TFLT that can figure out a formula for this:) Keep it up TFLT…I love what you do:)

    Comments are closed.