All things being equal, ie. axles, body style etc., which is quicker in the 1/4 mile, LMM or LBZ?

i think they are the same pretty much.

does the lmm weigh more?

The GMT900 trucks weight about 200 lbs more than the GMT800 trucks they replace.

My dad just picked his up today and it feels a tad quicker than mine. He's got larger rolling stock and all. His is only an extended cab SB though. Not sure on the weight difference. His will break the tires loose from a stop and mine won't usually.

The GMT900 trucks weight about 200 lbs more than the GMT800 trucks they replace.

but the extra 5 hp and 10 ft/lb will probably compensate for that.

I'm trying to find the writeup from GM, but it stated, IF I remember correctly that the DPF/new exhaust tip weighs close to 50lbs more than previous exhaust system. Anyone know about this for sure? Chris

but the extra 5 hp and 10 ft/lb will probably compensate for that.

You need 20 additional hp to make up for a 200lb increase.

has any one heard how much the lmm dynos?i think i'll buy one in the 2 to 10 years:rotflmao: thats if the bank will loan me$$$$$$$$$$:D

Hey BM, Do you think your Dad's new LMM might break the wheels loose easier because it is a shortbed? I always thought that the longer the wheelbase of a truck, the more wieght get's transfered to the rear wheels.
I really would be curious how the mileage is on the LMM.

The extra 5hp and 10ftlbs is at the crank, that would be about 3.5hp and about 7.5ftlbs at the wheels.

just drove one yesterday. 2500,cc,sb,2wd. almost identical length as my ext cab,lb,4x4.did not notice any diff. in power. after the test drive i took mine on same route and did the same. start at w.o.t. to 60mph. mine did the same at the same distance. the salesman let me take it out for a drive alone:badidea: :thankyou2 :duh: and yes i let it warm up:D so i could really test it out. left the lot with 7 miles on her, gave it back with 32:eek: :stick_out . i liked the interior but will still have to get used to the outside :bleah:

Any news on the fuel milage of these new trucks, it seems that every time gm updates the Duramax the milage goes down.

Talked to a farmer who just bougth a load LMM, he traded his 06 Dmax for this one so he could have the latest body style. 06=18mpg...07=12mpg.
He is very disappointed in it on that aspect. But a very nicer and cleaner truck. He has all of the goodys installed

Talked to a farmer who just bougth a load LMM, he traded his 06 Dmax for this one so he could have the latest body style. 06=18mpg...07=12mpg.
He is very disappointed in it on that aspect. But a very nicer and cleaner truck. He has all of the goodys installed
The mileage will go up on the LMM once he gets some miles on it.

I drove a LMM Thursday & decided to keep my LLY. Nice truck but with my extras mine rode better & ran better. I only have a mileage tune in mine at this point. To each his own but the price tag I can keep mine have Eric build me a spare motor & still have money left over

I allmost waited for the LMM when I bought old style 07. My salesman let me drive a new lmm today. It was srw so it was hard to compare it to my dually. Brand new is allways sweet. I think the interior is very Ford / Dodge like. That rounded off European look I guess. All things considered I am really happy with my truck and I'm sure the new LMM buyer's are going to be happy with there new rides. Good luck to all.

buddy got a LLM a few weeks ago, so far the milleage has not been above 13mpg, but then it is not broke in yet

LB7 is quicker, ok I really do not know for sure but just had to :stirthepo because it's what I own....:D

Hey BM, Do you think your Dad's new LMM might break the wheels loose easier because it is a shortbed? I always thought that the longer the wheelbase of a truck, the more wieght get's transfered to the rear wheels.
I really would be curious how the mileage is on the LMM.It is the exact opposite. The shorter the wheel base the better the weight transfer.

***Off topic***
The fuel usage is pretty much equal on all these vehicles. There is almost no way it cannot be. The difference is not at the wheel, nor is it at the engine. The real difference is at the foot. Everything depends on when you start throttling back on the fuel. How often you punch it to beat that yellow light. I find that those who are reporting high mpg are often driving pretty conservatively. Those that are not, well they are jumping on it and then questioning why their mpg is so low. You can't blame the new engine because you love to punch that accelerator. **Steps off soap-box**

***On topic***
I really think the LBZ and LMM should be very similar. They are pretty much the same engine. The only difference is that the DPF and other emissions stuff is dropped on there. I'm still pretty confused though, why does it matter? Do you guys really do green light racing with these? I would rather see a conversation as to which can tow more than which is faster :D

Just my .02

***Off topic***
The fuel usage is pretty much equal on all these vehicles. There is almost no way it cannot be. The difference is not at the wheel, nor is it at the engine. The real difference is at the foot. Everything depends on when you start throttling back on the fuel. How often you punch it to beat that yellow light. I find that those who are reporting high mpg are often driving pretty conservatively. Those that are not, well they are jumping on it and then questioning why their mpg is so low. You can't blame the new engine because you love to punch that accelerator. **Steps off soap-box**

***On topic***
I really think the LBZ and LMM should be very similar. They are pretty much the same engine. The only difference is that the DPF and other emissions stuff is dropped on there. I'm still pretty confused though, why does it matter? Do you guys really do green light racing with these? I would rather see a conversation as to which can tow more than which is faster :D

Just my .02


Bravo!:thankyou2 :exactly: :Handshake Well said!!;) :D

***Off topic***
The fuel usage is pretty much equal on all these vehicles. There is almost no way it cannot be. The difference is not at the wheel, nor is it at the engine. The real difference is at the foot. Everything depends on when you start throttling back on the fuel. How often you punch it to beat that yellow light. I find that those who are reporting high mpg are often driving pretty conservatively. Those that are not, well they are jumping on it and then questioning why their mpg is so low. You can't blame the new engine because you love to punch that accelerator. **Steps off soap-box**

***On topic***
I really think the LBZ and LMM should be very similar. They are pretty much the same engine. The only difference is that the DPF and other emissions stuff is dropped on there. I'm still pretty confused though, why does it matter? Do you guys really do green light racing with these? I would rather see a conversation as to which can tow more than which is faster :D

Just my .02

****On and off topic****
I agree with your assessment for the most part. That being said, there is no way the LMM can get equal or better fuel mileage if it is basically the same engine as the LBZ. That's because extra fuel is burned when the DPF system goes into a regeneration cycle. That fuel is wasted, in terms of making the truck go. So here we go again, just like the 70's when cars burned more fuel to produce less pollution....Riiiiight. The compression was reduced to combat NOx emissions, sulfur was taken out of the gas to stop the sulfuric acid from being created in the catalytic converter, and lead was taken out to keep from poisoning the converter. All that resulted in less energy in the gas and less ability of the engine to use that energy. Then the manufacturers discovered how to use computers to control the engines and today they are pretty efficient. However, if we could go back to high compression and gas with all its previous components, I bet most vehicles would be getting 50 mpg or so with today's technology. Don't know what would happen to the air, but having lived in the LA area from '68 to '72, when smog was at its peak, I would say the health effects of smog are overblown. The environmentalists tell us that the air is much cleaner now than it was back then. Well, if that's the case, why do we need to keep spending more and more money to get the air just a little cleaner? Despite what they tell you, nobody was dropping dead from pollution back then.
<End of Rant>
I'll get off my soapbox now, but this stuff drives me nuts!!

i wish we all drove battery powered diesels like the trains. Do they have emmision tiers to meet? how about the over sea ships that burn 250 tons of fuel per day do they pay tax on that fuel or meet emission standards?

Battery powered desels?

****On and off topic****
I agree with your assessment for the most part. That being said, there is no way the LMM can get equal or better fuel mileage if it is basically the same engine as the LBZ. That's because extra fuel is burned when the DPF system goes into a regeneration cycle. That fuel is wasted, in terms of making the truck go. So here we go again, just like the 70's when cars burned more fuel to produce less pollution....Riiiiight. The compression was reduced to combat NOx emissions, sulfur was taken out of the gas to stop the sulfuric acid from being created in the catalytic converter, and lead was taken out to keep from poisoning the converter. All that resulted in less energy in the gas and less ability of the engine to use that energy. Then the manufacturers discovered how to use computers to control the engines and today they are pretty efficient. However, if we could go back to high compression and gas with all its previous components, I bet most vehicles would be getting 50 mpg or so with today's technology. Don't know what would happen to the air, but having lived in the LA area from '68 to '72, when smog was at its peak, I would say the health effects of smog are overblown. The environmentalists tell us that the air is much cleaner now than it was back then. Well, if that's the case, why do we need to keep spending more and more money to get the air just a little cleaner? Despite what they tell you, nobody was dropping dead from pollution back then.
<End of Rant>
I'll get off my soapbox now, but this stuff drives me nuts!!
yea well said and it pisses me off when i think that America is the only one doing something about.

talked to my local dealer today.... The salesguy thought the LMM was quicker, but the owner thought the LBZ was....

And so the saga continues. :D

i wish we all drove battery powered diesels like the trains. Do they have emmision tiers to meet? how about the over sea ships that burn 250 tons of fuel per day do they pay tax on that fuel or meet emission standards?

Battery powered desels?

He's referring to Diesel-Electrics...

Trains have been using them for years. Many train companies are going even greener with LPG/Electrics, where the electric powerplant powers the drivewheels (actually traction motors) and the LPG just feeds a generator that provides lots of kWs for power...

I gather that with the right set-up, one could be produced for a medium duty pickup, but I don't think it would be appropriate for a heavy-hauler, or one that carries varied loads.

Diesel-Electric pickup would probably be good for delivery trucks, that make lots of short in-town runs through stop&go traffic. (Which is where conventional hybrid technology shines. Not on the highway)

Back in 2002 (IIRC) I read something about Ford making a pneumatic start assist using compressed nitrogen gas to get the vehicle moving (esp under load). I think it was in Popular Mechanics? Looks like nothing came of it...

All diesel locos have been Diesel-Electrics for the past 40-50 years, direct diesel powered locos were used at first '30s, '40s but they were used as switchers. A few direct diesel locos are out there in the switch yards, but not many. The diesel is just a generator.

GE AC 6000- 6000 HP Diesel-Electric Locomotive, around 195,000lbs of tractive effort.

The emissions requirements are just as strick.

All diesel locos have been Diesel-Electrics for the past 40-50 years, direct diesel powered locos were used at first '30s, '40s but they were used as switchers. A few direct diesel locos are out there in the switch yards, but not many. The diesel is just a generator.

GE AC 6000- 6000 HP Diesel-Electric Locomotive, around 195,000lbs of tractive effort.

The emissions requirements are just as strick.

Yep - totally true on all accounts, and the EPA is just making things stricter. Tier 2 goes into the effect at the end of the year - this even applies to diesel gensets that provide emergency power in buildings. So lame - we spend so much money on reducing emission, yet we use more and more fuel. Doesn't that totally defeat the purpose? Leftwingers care nothing for reality, only agenda.

logically the lbz should walk the lmm with all the emissions junk on it

I agree that the LBZ should be quicker. With the added emission equipment to bog down the engine, and not to mention the added weight the the equipment adds to the truck.

Bog down the engine? LMM's are rated higher.

logically the lbz should walk the lmm with all the emissions junk on it

I own both vehicles.. Obviously the LBZ was quicker because of the aftermarket mods. BUT bone stock the LMM is quicker. Guy at the DEALERSHIP said there is a pressure sensor on the DPF that can be removed just have to override the trouble code which he told me he can do if I keep it hush. Also removing the cat.

logically the lbz should walk the lmm with all the emissions junk on itIt won't I watched a bone stock LMM 2wd run a 14.80 this weekend. It was a reg cab though. He left at like 1200 RPM. The same guy has a 07 classic LBZ reg cab 2wd, and he said it runs 15.20s. Both trucks have a huge 5th wheel hitch in the back.

It doesn't make sense that the new truck s faster. The new trucks are 200 pounds heavier, and it takes more than 5 horse power and 15 foot pounds of torque to make up the weight difference.

Wow! Duramax has come along way when all we have left to race is ourselves! LOL

It doesn't make sense that the new truck s faster. The new trucks are 200 pounds heavier, and it takes more than 5 horse power and 15 foot pounds of torque to make up the weight difference.Those are just advritised numbers @ peak. It may have more power under the curve. Feels more like 25-30Hp to me.

Why wouldn't they add more power. It's just a matter of reprogramming the computer. The same can be done with the LBZ. I wonder if the Allison is the same?

They add more power by adding more fuel and get less fuel mileage.

i got sick of not hearing my turbo so i took all that crap off tonight put striaght 4in. you can really hear it now! for some reason it is a lot louder then my LLY was

It didn't mess with the computer tearing all the emissions B.S. off? Does it have more power?

It doesn't make sense that the new truck s faster. The new trucks are 200 pounds heavier, and it takes more than 5 horse power and 15 foot pounds of torque to make up the weight difference.
I also own both and the lmm is defiantly faster then the lbz.

Man we test drove one of the LMM's on Saturday, and it seems to have a lot more than my buddies 06 LBZ. I know the new ones are more areodynamic, that could possibly help a little bit.

i got sick of not hearing my turbo so i took all that crap off tonight put striaght 4in. you can really hear it now! for some reason it is a lot louder then my LLY was

Maybe I heard a rumor, but I thought that if the emissions crap on the LMM is removed that is wont run, correct me if i'm wrong.

Maybe I heard a rumor, but I thought that if the emissions crap on the LMM is removed that is wont run, correct me if i'm wrong.
There are several members who just unplugged the DPF filters and straight piped it. They get codes but they do not affect the driveability of the truck.

Jason

Damnit...I guess I should of held out for another year

My engine light is on and my remote start is not going to work until i turn the code off but it gets better economy and feels a little Quicker I run a 14.060 at 96.8 if that teels you anything.

here's a thought. just for fun why doesn't somebody run the two if you have access to them and end the argument?

My engine light is on and my remote start is not going to work until i turn the code off but it gets better economy and feels a little Quicker I run a 14.060 at 96.8 if that teels you anything.

what HP level did you run that time with? how is the defueling with the programmer?