Has anyone heard anything about the 4.5L as of late

Has anyone heard anything about the 4.5L as of late
No proof on my part, but I would bet dollars to donuts it's deader than yesterday's fish....:)

If enough people get interested, you need to hammer GM to get stuff moving.

If enough people get interested, you need to hammer GM to get stuff moving.

Good luck with that...

If enough people get interested, you need to hammer GM to get stuff moving.


Better yet let Dodge or ford put 4or5L diesel's with 40+mpg in their 1/2 ton trucks and see what happen's:rolleyes:

Your guess is as good as mine. Nothing really official from GM on the 4.5L in a while. Last summer a GM rep said it was a completely done, tested, engine. GM could launch it within a few months of deciding to. With GM bringing a diesel next year in the Cruze, maybe GM is trying to get more into the diesel market? I wouldn't hold my breath, but wouldn't be totally surprised to see it with the next generation truck. Chris

With the current "Oil is evil" administration of enviro Nazis I would not count on it.

4.5L isnt going to happ. It died on the vine.

I'd bet it is dead for now. Introducing a small block diesel would cannibalize existing markets for GM, and would probably end up losing them money. Also, the GM engineers really need to focus on getting the problems worked out of the emissions system on these things. They need to be absolutely flawless and seamless to your average gas engine customer. Regen issues, DTC's for a myriad of reasons, and Urea are not exactly selling points. They simply have to be more refined than they are today.

They should sell a 4.5 Dmax swap kit.. That way I could buy the kit and instead of putting it in my GM truck I'd fit it in my Toyota pickup :D

Better yet let Dodge or ford put 4or5L diesel's with 40+mpg in their 1/2 ton trucks and see what happen's:rolleyes:

you're joking right? 40mpg with a V8 4.5 liter diesel in a 5000lb pickup truck that has the aerodynamics of a barn? You must be on crack.

4 cylinder 1.9l TDI Jettas dont get much better than that, unless you're driving 100% highway at 55mph.

If they were to put the 4.5 Dmax in the half tons, Id eat my shorts if it even got over 30mpg. You guys see the tiny little light aerodynamic VW diesel cars getting good fuel economy, and then you automatically think that "anything lighter than an HD pickup truck" will automatically get super duper crazy awesome fuel economy. Even if its only 1,500lbs lighter, and has the exact same aerodynamic profile. RIGHT. :rolleyes:

The new Gen V small block gassers will probably get within 4mpg of what the 4.5 dmax would have gotten. If you want to pay 7 grand (and more expensive oil changes, parts, repairs, maintenance) for 4mpg, then fine...You're in the 1% of half ton pickup truck buyers, congratulations.

Because other than the measly fuel economy benefit, there is zero appeal for the 4.5 dmax in a half ton. "oooo the torque! good for towing!!" Give me a break, who hauls more than 7,500lbs with a half ton anyways? Any of the small block gassers will tow 7,500lbs just fine...especially the 6.2.

The small block gasser will last just as long, and IF it breaks, the gassers cost peanuts to fix. You can go to any junkyard and find two complete used good condition 5.3's for the price of a set of LB7 injectors.

Dont get me wrong, I love diesels as much as the next guy on this forum...but Im also a realist and can step outside my "diesel enthusiast" shoes for a minute and look at the whole idea from an objective point of view.

Ben

VERY TRUE!

The only significant advantage that the 4.5L would have over the 6.6L is somewhat lighter weight (though it would still be a lot heavier than an all-aluminum gas V-8) and very slightly less internal friction (due to smaller moving parts, bearings, etc.).

Whatever else the design might have incorporated to improve fuel economy (compared to LMM or LBZ) would be more than offset by the ridiculously complex emissions equipment tacked onto the outside, including that DEF tank that has to be refilled every few thousand miles. And not just DEF refills, but like you say Ben, more expensive oil changes, parts, repairs, maintenance.

Just be glad there's not a fourth stage in the tighter diesel emissions standards that started in 2004, got worse in 2007, and became ridiculous in 2010.

So where is the economy gain? Most likely the diesel popularity trend will be heading the other way in the US as more direct injected gas engines hit the market.

i would be willing to assume that the 4.5L is dead but i wouldnt be surprised to see some of its design features incorporated into a future HD truck engine as emissions get stricter. but so far as in a half ton or suv i would say there is about a 1% chance of that ever happening unless the other big manufacturers do as well

Several years ago...Gm was working on the 4.5 and Ford had a 4.6 small diesel on the drawing board for half tons...I'm VERY satisfied with both my 6.6 Duramax...( 2002-- 2500 2WD and my 2007 3500 LTZ )....I was pumped about the 4.5 half ton 'cause the only thing I pull is my 245 Hardtop Trophy boat ( 6500 lbs. )...This truck would be a hot seller if it got north of 20 MPG and had the High torque Duramax is known for...I heard that Gm ran out of money for the project..

VERY TRUE!

The only significant advantage that the 4.5L would have over the 6.6L is somewhat lighter weight (though it would still be a lot heavier than an all-aluminum gas V-8) and very slightly less internal friction (due to smaller moving parts, bearings, etc.).

Whatever else the design might have incorporated to improve fuel economy (compared to LMM or LBZ) would be more than offset by the ridiculously complex emissions equipment tacked onto the outside, including that DEF tank that has to be refilled every few thousand miles. And not just DEF refills, but like you say Ben, more expensive oil changes, parts, repairs, maintenance.

Just be glad there's not a fourth stage in the tighter diesel emissions standards that started in 2004, got worse in 2007, and became ridiculous in 2010.

So where is the economy gain? Most likely the diesel popularity trend will be heading the other way in the US as more direct injected gas engines hit the market.

a what do you mean no forth stage, theres 2 more rounds of emissions on the books that i can think of off the top of my head, 2014 and i think 2017

I am pretty sure the new Audi car doesnt use DEF and get good mileage, it might be possible in the 4.5

a what do you mean no forth stage, theres 2 more rounds of emissions on the books that i can think of off the top of my head, 2014 and i think 2017
Are you sure you're not thinking of the schedule to implement current standards for on-highway vehicles to off-highway engines & vehicles?

There are more stringent corporate average fuel economy standards coming, and proposed greenhouse gas (CO2) regulations may be implemented too.
The EPA also routinely makes minor changes in what they called their rule-making process.

The point is, yes, the EPA constantly fiddles with the rules & regulations. The more significant ones end up being approved or stopped by congressional action. A lot of minor rules changes go through without any widespread public awareness.

But I have not read anything about a fourth or fifth tier of more stringent diesel exhaust emissions standards for CO, HC, N2O & particulates.

The three tiers that were implemented in 2004, 2007 & 2010 were significant changes compared to what existed before. They were devised, announced & formalized over a period of several years during the Clinton administration but the implementation date for the first tier wasn't until 2004. It takes time for manufacturers to gear up to comply with more stringent emissions standards. For years before the implementation date, articles & charts about the upcoming standards were easy to find on the EPA website and elsewhere, including trade publications.

So if significant new exhaust emissions standards on the same order as what was imposed in 2004, 2007 & 2010 were definitely on the way, there would be plenty of information available on the EPA website citing the specific emissions limits each vehicle produced after a certain date would have to meet.

Please it would be helpful if you could cite a reference for '2 more rounds of emissions on the books' (preferably from the EPA website).
If it's there, it should be in this section: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/index.htm

99% of the fed EPA workers don’t know what they are talking about or what they are enforcing. Most of the rules are put in place by green peace hipsters through lobbyist and most rules make no sense.

I found an article on another site:
“It’s a great problem to have,” Brown said, as she clicked through computer files to obtain the details of the plant’s new V8 diesel line, which is presently being installed. http://tonawanda-news.com/local/x601174161/Laboring-together

I found an article on another site:
http://tonawanda-news.com/local/x601174161/Laboring-together
"...the details of the plant’s new V8 diesel line, which is presently being installed."

You left off the next sentence:

"Its first engine is expected to roll off in March 2013."

So maybe it will come to fruition after all?

Maybe in another incarnation? With all the EPA pressures and engine downsizing I could maybe see it as a 6.6L replacement.

Maybe in another incarnation? With all the EPA pressures and engine downsizing I could maybe see it as a 6.6L replacement.
Maybe.

Or maybe it will be more like the EV1 fiasco in 1998, i.e.: GM releases something new just in time for fuel prices (in that case below $1/gal. gas) to kill the economics.

Neat, but whatever. The brake lines are rusting through on current gen pickups at as low as 30,000 miles. I'm not buying no matter what is under the hood.

I'd bet it is dead for now. Introducing a small block diesel would cannibalize existing markets for GM, and would probably end up losing them money. Also, the GM engineers really need to focus on getting the problems worked out of the emissions system on these things. They need to be absolutely flawless and seamless to your average gas engine customer. Regen issues, DTC's for a myriad of reasons, and Urea are not exactly selling points. They simply have to be more refined than they are today.


why buy a 3/4 ton when u can by a 1/2 when all u tow is a jetski or four wheeler and maybe haul the occasional 2x4 if all u wanted was a diesel $$$$ and sense (no not a typo)
however at the sema show gm did have 4.5 suburban-- idk. they do make crates for them, i was reading in cummins power mag (aka Diesel Power mag) and it had a write up on guy that built a corvette with a 4.5 crate
Long story short, idk.

DEAD.

Killed by the limited production volume that this engine would have, the high cost of diesel fuel relative to gasoline which almost offsets the fuel economy gains without even taking higher diesel maintenance costs into account, and the even higher cost of diesel emissions controls relative to gasoline engine emissions controls, which tends to make the diesel option less popular, resulting in lower production volume, driving up unit cost even more.

Case in point: look at the current cost of the SAME Duramax 6.6L engine, just in a slightly different vehicle - GM vans. The engine internals are the same, and most of the stuff bolted on to the outside of the engine is the same too, but most of the supporting systems connected to the engine are van-specific, requiring different arrangement to fit under the hood of a van.

The 2010 LMM Duramax option in a van had an MSRP of $7,795 (over the base 4.8L gas V8), or $6,800 over the cost of the optional 6.0L gas V8, which at the time I believe was about the same as the LMM option cost (not including the Allison trans.) in a HD pickup truck which came with the 6.0L gas engine standard.

Now, on the 2012 models, the cost for the Duramax option in a van is a LOT higher.
Duramax in a van is MSRP $11,945 over the base 4.8L gas V8
or $10,950 over the optional 6.0L gas V8

Meanwhile, the Duramax option in a 2012 HD pickup is MSRP $7,195 (not including the Allison)

DEAD. Put a fork in it. The near future will be heading toward direct fuel injected turbocharged spark ignition engines.

Killed by the limited production volume that this engine would have, the high cost of diesel fuel relative to gasoline which almost offsets the fuel economy gains without even taking higher diesel maintenance costs into account, and the even higher cost of diesel emissions controls relative to gasoline engine emissions controls, which tends to make the diesel option less popular, resulting in lower production volume, driving up unit cost even more.

Case in point: look at the current cost of the SAME Duramax 6.6L engine, just in a slightly different vehicle - GM vans. The engine internals are the same, and most of the stuff bolted on to the outside of the engine is the same too, but most of the supporting systems connected to the engine are van-specific, requiring different arrangement to fit under the hood of a van.

The 2010 LMM Duramax option in a van had an MSRP of $7,795 (over the base 4.8L gas V8), or $6,800 over the cost of the optional 6.0L gas V8, which at the time I believe was about the same as the LMM option cost (not including the Allison trans.) in a HD pickup truck which came with the 6.0L gas engine standard.

Now, on the 2012 models, the cost for the Duramax option in a van is a LOT higher.
See the attached chart.
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=124221&d=1322181735
Duramax in a van is MSRP $11,945 over the base 4.8L gas V8
Duramax in a van is MSRP $10,950 over the optional 6.0L gas V8,
which in this application puts out more power than the detuned Duramax, and probably enough torque too (in a lower gear, of course) to tow about as well (despite the GCWR ratings).
The Duramax option in a van weighs about 800lbs more than the 6.0L gas V8, reducing payload accordingly.

Meanwhile, the LML Duramax option in a 2012 HD pickup is MSRP $7,195 (not including the Allison), and thanks to the pairing with the Allison, the Duramax in this application puts out a lot more power and torque than the 6.0L gas V8.

The proposed 4.5L engine would offer little, if any, performance gain over the 6.0L or 6.2L gas engines offered in the 1500 trucks & SUVs.

I can't think of many applications for a 6.6L van. It would shine as an RV platform. Costs would be more easily absorbed too. The 4.5L would be an even better drop in. I bet the 6.6L will eventually go the way of the dodo bird.