Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 72
Like Tree2Likes

about time......

This is a discussion on about time...... within the GM Trucks forums, part of the Vehicle Specific category; Originally Posted by 5.0THIS A new 3/4 ton with the 6.2 has an infinitely better suspension and drivetrain than your ...

  1. #41
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552

    Unhappy

    Quote Originally Posted by 5.0THIS View Post
    A new 3/4 ton with the 6.2 has an infinitely better suspension and drivetrain than your old 1 ton. It ought to though, it's a brand new truck.
    If you are speaking of the new 3/4 tons I can give you a real world comparison there without being bias.

    Just looking at the GVW's, my 2005 3/4 ton Dmax GVW is 9200 according to the door sticker.

    GVW on my 79 1 ton is also 9200 GVW on the door sticker.

    Pretty interesting, but when you look at the spring packs in the rear. My Dmax has a 5 leaf spring pack, my 79 ton has a 9 leaf spring pack. You be the judge there but I'll take the more is better theory myself.

    Driving both trucks, and I've driven the 79 for 20+ years, I feel the ride quality is probably a little better up front than the Dmax is, but both trucks ride fairly stiff in the back,,,,,as they should.

    Speaking of front suspension, I was never a fan of torsion bars (which this Dmax has) but it works. My biggest issue is that it appears the parts are cheaply made. After only 90,000 miles on the Dmax it needed almost everything replaced in the front, spent $2500 on it. It needed control arms, tie rods, idler arm, center link, and both of those damn wheel hubs since you can't pack the bearings (stupid idea, thanks GM) etc....I wasn't too impressed with that.

    My 79 however, of course is coil spring, and you can tell right off the bat it's built for durability and longevity, It has factory greasable control arm bushings at all 8 bushings (not something you see on cars anymore) and currently has 100k miles. I can honestly say the front suspension is still tight, I only replaced an idler arm about 10 years ago. The bearings can be cleaned and packed with grease too,,,,wooohooo
    Just can't kill the darn thing, they are tough old trucks.

    Both have hydroboost brakes that work flawless, but the 79 definately stops better. It will put you through the windshield. That Dmax, although stops very well, it feels like there is alot more girth to slow down and it takes quite a bit of effort to stop it quickly. But it is a big truck with alot of gadgets, I'm sure it weighs more than the 79, which scaled at 5300 lbs. without a driver. I'd bet the Dmax is closer to 6,000 or more.
    One nitpick complaint is that the Dmax gas tank isn't big enough, only 26 gallon on the short bed crew cabs. Would have prefered 35+ gallons. My 79 holds 40 gallons.

    Not really saying one is better than the other, but I can definately see a difference in build quality, and I just feel that the 79 has a couple of better features in the suspension department. However the Dmax does it's job and tows nice, but here's to hoping the front suspension doesn't wear out again.
    Last edited by Firebirdjones; 08-30-2013 at 06:24 AM.

  2. #42
    Senior Member 5.0THIS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,704

    red
    95 Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by Cutlass View Post
    Problem is...you can't get the 6.2 in a 3/4 ton. Your stuck with the 6.0 or the Dmax.
    I thought that changed for this year or last?


    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    If you are speaking of the new 3/4 tons I can give you a real world comparison there without being bias.

    Just looking at the GVW's, my 2005 3/4 ton Dmax GVW is 9200 according to the door sticker.

    GVW on my 79 1 ton is also 9200 GVW on the door sticker.

    Pretty interesting, but when you look at the spring packs in the rear. My Dmax has a 5 leaf spring pack, my 79 ton has a 9 leaf spring pack. You be the judge there but I'll take the more is better theory myself.

    Driving both trucks, and I've driven the 79 for 20+ years, I feel the ride quality is probably a little better up front than the Dmax is, but both trucks ride fairly stiff in the back,,,,,as they should.

    Speaking of front suspension, I was never a fan of torsion bars (which this Dmax has) but it works. My biggest issue is that it appears the parts are cheaply made. After only 90,000 miles on the Dmax it needed almost everything replaced in the front, spent $2500 on it. It needed control arms, tie rods, idler arm, center link, and both of those damn wheel hubs since you can't pack the bearings (stupid idea, thanks GM) etc....I wasn't too impressed with that.

    My 79 however, of course is coil spring, and you can tell right off the bat it's built for durability and longevity, It has factory greasable control arm bushings at all 8 bushings (not something you see on cars anymore) and currently has 100k miles. I can honestly say the front suspension is still tight, I only replaced an idler arm about 10 years ago. The bearings can be cleaned and packed with grease too,,,,wooohooo
    Just can't kill the darn thing, they are tough old trucks.

    Both have hydroboost brakes that work flawless, but the 79 definately stops better. It will put you through the windshield. That Dmax, although stops very well, it feels like there is alot more girth to slow down and it takes quite a bit of effort to stop it quickly. But it is a big truck with alot of gadgets, I'm sure it weighs more than the 79, which scaled at 5300 lbs. without a driver. I'd bet the Dmax is closer to 6,000 or more.
    One nitpick complaint is that the Dmax gas tank isn't big enough, only 26 gallon on the short bed crew cabs. Would have prefered 35+ gallons. My 79 holds 40 gallons.

    Not really saying one is better than the other, but I can definately see a difference in build quality, and I just feel that the 79 has a couple of better features in the suspension department. However the Dmax does it's job and tows nice, but here's to hoping the front suspension doesn't wear out again.
    You cant compare your trucks in this instance and apply it to all of them. Plenty of newer trucks out there with a ton more miles and haven't had any front end work. I'd put money on your 79 not stopping quicker, and by a lot. And your more leafs theory... materials are better nowadays. They don't need 9 leafs anymore to get the job done. And yes, you can say one is better than the other, because your 79 is really outclassed in every single way, and it isn't even close I cant believe you're still trying to put them in the same league

  3. #43
    Veteran 0rion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    22,520

    98 Formula
    06 duramax

    I don't know....the dmax brakes suck. I hate the brakes on my truck. First chance I get it's getting slotted rotors and better pads to see if that helps. Even unloaded it's a bitch to get slowed down. If something or someone steps out in front of me they're dead.....no way I get it hauled down from highway speeds in any kind of respectable distance. I would've thought it was just my truck but my buddies 05 is the same way. They just don't stop well. I guess the good point is it stops the same whether I'm loaded or unloaded but my camper has trailer brakes so that helps. I have a pretty decent controller too so when it comes to braking I really don't know the camper is back there. It's unfair comparing the build of a newer truck to an old truck....times have changed, materials have changed, and technology has changed. Vehicles in general are made cheaper and lighter than they used to be and parts are outsourced to little chinese or messican kids. That's just the way it is.

  4. #44
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by 0rion View Post
    I don't know....the dmax brakes suck. I hate the brakes on my truck. First chance I get it's getting slotted rotors and better pads to see if that helps. Even unloaded it's a bitch to get slowed down. If something or someone steps out in front of me they're dead.....no way I get it hauled down from highway speeds in any kind of respectable distance. I would've thought it was just my truck but my buddies 05 is the same way. They just don't stop well. .


    My 79 is worlds better, but like I said I bet that 05 is another 1,000 lbs. heavier too.

  5. #45
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by 5.0THIS View Post



    You cant compare your trucks in this instance and apply it to all of them. Plenty of newer trucks out there with a ton more miles and haven't had any front end work. I'd put money on your 79 not stopping quicker, and by a lot. And your more leafs theory... materials are better nowadays. They don't need 9 leafs anymore to get the job done. And yes, you can say one is better than the other, because your 79 is really outclassed in every single way, and it isn't even close I cant believe you're still trying to put them in the same league
    I'll take that bet I don't agree with the "materials are better" theory either. Like Orion said, it's all made in china, cheaper and lighter.

    Unless you've owned these old big block trucks from the 70's you may not understand where I'm coming from. Next time you're in the area give me a shout on here and let me know. Stop in, you can drive either and form a better opinion.

  6. #46
    Moderator Cutlass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    6,997

    1999 Formula WS6 M6-sold
    2001 Silverado Z71

    Quote Originally Posted by 5.0THIS View Post
    I thought that changed for this year or last?
    Nope, not yet. Kinda sucks huh? Guess they don't wanna put an aluminum block in a Heavy Duty truck.
    Hate to admit this, but I'm kinda on FBJ's side here. The GM 5.3, 6.0, 6.2 kinda suck for towing heavy stuff. They just fine for the daily commute, hauling your lawnmowers around town (i.e. landscaper businesses), or hauling a fishing boat. But once you load up a big camper or take your enclosed car hauler on a 2 to 5 hour road trip...your gear hunting between 2, 3, and 4. GM's not alone on this. All the new truck V8s are the same. Ford's 5.4, 6.2, 5.0, Dodge Hemi 5.7, Toyota 5.7....there all a bunch of "high horsepower" V8s at the expense of a torque curve that peaks around 4000 rpm.
    The most impressive, new truck, gas engine, torque curve out there is the Ford EcoBoost V6. Its no diesel, but the torque curve shots right up to its peak 350 to 400 ft*lbs before 3000 rpm.
    For towing, I'd almost rather have an old Vortec 5.7 then a 6.0....well maybe not, but almost.

  7. #47
    Senior Member 5.0THIS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,704

    red
    95 Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    I'll take that bet I don't agree with the "materials are better" theory either. Like Orion said, it's all made in china, cheaper and lighter.

    Unless you've owned these old big block trucks from the 70's you may not understand where I'm coming from. Next time you're in the area give me a shout on here and let me know. Stop in, you can drive either and form a better opinion.
    I've driven older hd trucks and my dads 04 dmax. No test drives needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cutlass View Post
    Nope, not yet. Kinda sucks huh? Guess they don't wanna put an aluminum block in a Heavy Duty truck.
    Hate to admit this, but I'm kinda on FBJ's side here. The GM 5.3, 6.0, 6.2 kinda suck for towing heavy stuff. They just fine for the daily commute, hauling your lawnmowers around town (i.e. landscaper businesses), or hauling a fishing boat. But once you load up a big camper or take your enclosed car hauler on a 2 to 5 hour road trip...your gear hunting between 2, 3, and 4. GM's not alone on this. All the new truck V8s are the same. Ford's 5.4, 6.2, 5.0, Dodge Hemi 5.7, Toyota 5.7....there all a bunch of "high horsepower" V8s at the expense of a torque curve that peaks around 4000 rpm.
    The most impressive, new truck, gas engine, torque curve out there is the Ford EcoBoost V6. Its no diesel, but the torque curve shots right up to its peak 350 to 400 ft*lbs before 3000 rpm.
    For towing, I'd almost rather have an old Vortec 5.7 then a 6.0....well maybe not, but almost.
    That's all good. We can all disagree. I don't want an older truck, because IMO everything sucks compared to newer trucks.

  8. #48
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Youngins, spoiled with all these new gadgets, they just have to learn things on their own

    Did I mention I had to walk to school,,,,up hill both ways....
    pajeff02 likes this.

  9. #49
    Super Moderator
    pajeff02's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mansfield, PA
    Posts
    21,576

    Black & Blue
    '02 WS.6 / '07 Suburban

    Brakes? Our Suburban is the first GM we have had that I actually like the brakes on.

  10. #50
    Senior Member 5.0THIS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,704

    red
    95 Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    Youngins, spoiled with all these new gadgets, they just have to learn things on their own
    One thing I've learned is that old people tend to be stuck in the past with inferior technology and shitty trucks

  11. #51
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Quote Originally Posted by 5.0THIS View Post
    One thing I've learned is that old people tend to be stuck in the past with inferior technology and shitty trucks
    I'm okay with that. I'll probably be burried in one of them

  12. #52
    Veteran 0rion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    22,520

    98 Formula
    06 duramax

    Quote Originally Posted by Firebirdjones View Post
    I'm okay with that. I'll probably be burried because of one of them
    fixed that for you....old man.

  13. #53
    Senior Member 5.0THIS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,704

    red
    95 Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by 0rion View Post
    fixed that for you....old man.

  14. #54
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Tough on the old guys.... Great way to go though, I'll have a smile on my face

  15. #55
    Moderator Cutlass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    6,997

    1999 Formula WS6 M6-sold
    2001 Silverado Z71


  16. #56
    Senior Member 5.0THIS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,704

    red
    95 Z28

    The new Colorado looks pretty good, and the available engine choices are great as well

    Nice job GM

  17. #57
    Veteran 0rion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    22,520

    98 Formula
    06 duramax

    seems a little half ass'd IMO. Why not at least put a v6 duramax in it? I mean 200HP and 368 ft/lb? Go to a 6 and make 320's and 450 so it can actually tow and get the gas mileage still. I'll be curious to see what kinda mileage people get out of it. I'm guessing not enough to offset the higher diesel costs. I would much rather see them offer the regular duramax in a 1500 truck than this. It's a start though I guess.

  18. #58
    Senior Member 5.0THIS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,704

    red
    95 Z28

    Quote Originally Posted by 0rion View Post
    seems a little half ass'd IMO. Why not at least put a v6 duramax in it? I mean 200HP and 368 ft/lb? Go to a 6 and make 320's and 450 so it can actually tow and get the gas mileage still. I'll be curious to see what kinda mileage people get out of it. I'm guessing not enough to offset the higher diesel costs. I would much rather see them offer the regular duramax in a 1500 truck than this. It's a start though I guess.


    That's plenty of motor for a smaller truck. And it's already good for 6700 pounds towing. Anybody towing more than that is going to step up to a full size anyway. And it will probably be rated at 30 mpg, so it's going to kill the 6 cylinder gasser on mileage. It wont even be close.

    GM owns part of VM motori anyway, so in theory we could see the same 6 cylinder diesel in full size GM 1500s that Dodge is putting in the Ram 1500

  19. #59
    Veteran 0rion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    22,520

    98 Formula
    06 duramax

    the max tow weights isn't my concern. That truck is too small to tow a ton of weight......my concern is what kinda gas mileage is it going to get with a load? I'll be curious to find out.

  20. #60
    Moderator Firebirdjones's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    12,552
    Exactly my point before, the truck is too small to tow anything significant. 6700 isn't much, a simple open car trailer with a car can top that, and frankly with the short wheel base I wouldn't do it.

    And a little 4 cyl diesel?? May as well go find yourself a diesel rabbit This truck is starting to be a diesel isuzu all over again.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 1967 Chevrolet Camaro - Time After Time
    By Ed Blown Vert in forum Camaro / SS
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-09-2012, 04:20 PM
  2. Long time listener, first (or second) time posting
    By Norrie in forum New Member Introductions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-04-2008, 09:10 AM
  3. Long time reader first time poster
    By bigmarky in forum New Member Introductions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-27-2008, 06:47 PM
  4. Long Time Listener 1st Time Caller
    By NSSTG8TR98 in forum New Member Introductions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-21-2007, 07:33 PM
  5. Replies: 55
    Last Post: 11-16-2006, 09:39 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •