Sounds like the "Ram is ditching Cummins" rumors that have been going on since, oh probably 1990.:roflmao:
I doubt GM is ditching the Allison.
I doubt GM is ditching the Allison.
No Allison for 2017
- Thread starter NC-smokinlmm
- Start date
Contrary to what may be the overwhelming majority here, I think a 7 or 8 speed transmission would benefit the overall (on paper) capabilities of the Dmax/Silverado platform...
Think about it...
More gears=more consistant hill pulls and more efficiency while doing it
More gears= greater hill decent control
More gears= less RPM drop per shift
More gears= "should" yeild better economy all the way around
More gears should force the engineering of the trans to work faster, i.e, shift faster
I am pretty impressed with the 8sp trans Jeep is using and the 7sp that was in my ex wife's BMW...
I dunno, personally I see an extra gear as a huge benifit. I would imagine quicker shifts, more MPG and greater hauling and payload capabilities... It's progress, if that didn't happen we would still be driving NA diesels, doing propane injection and rowing gears thru a granny geared 4sp slush box
Think about it...
More gears=more consistant hill pulls and more efficiency while doing it
More gears= greater hill decent control
More gears= less RPM drop per shift
More gears= "should" yeild better economy all the way around
More gears should force the engineering of the trans to work faster, i.e, shift faster
I am pretty impressed with the 8sp trans Jeep is using and the 7sp that was in my ex wife's BMW...
I dunno, personally I see an extra gear as a huge benifit. I would imagine quicker shifts, more MPG and greater hauling and payload capabilities... It's progress, if that didn't happen we would still be driving NA diesels, doing propane injection and rowing gears thru a granny geared 4sp slush box
We dont need more gears. More than 6-speeds would require a 4th planetary.
Another planetary means more complexity, more weight, more things to break, and more parasitic load on the engine. Not to mention more cost.
Do you want a truck thats heavier, more complicated, potentially less reliable, more expensive, and gets worse fuel economy? I didnt think so.
Another planetary means more complexity, more weight, more things to break, and more parasitic load on the engine. Not to mention more cost.
Do you want a truck thats heavier, more complicated, potentially less reliable, more expensive, and gets worse fuel economy? I didnt think so.
Emissions rules will be changing (EPA will be adopting CARB standards in part starting 2017) and CAFE standards need to be met starting in 2017 and will apply to 2017 light duty trucks so a transmission upgrade is the next logical step to meet those standards and more gears, evenly spaced gear ratios may be the way to meet those standards in the coming 5 years. The 6 speed Allison the way it is now sucks with the 4-5 5-6 shifts.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy
In October of 2012, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued joint final rules to further improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions for passenger cars and light trucks. Since NHTSA is required by Congress to set CAFE standards for no more than five years at a time, it issued final standards for model years 2017 to 2021 and presented non-final “augural” standards for years 2022-2025. The non-final standards were presented in the interest of aiding manufacturers in future product planning and of harmonization with EPA’s greenhouse gas emission standards. NHTSA will propose and establish CAFE standards for MYs 2022-2025 through a comprehensive future rulemaking that will be informed by the latest available data and information.
In its part of the joint light-duty program, EPA issued final GHG standards for all nine model years 2017 to 2025. However, EPA made a regulatory commitment to conduct a Midterm Evaluation (MTE) of longer-term standards for MY 2022-2025. Through the MTE, EPA will decide whether the GHG standards for model years 2022-2025, established in 2012, are still appropriate given the latest available data and information.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy
In October of 2012, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued joint final rules to further improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions for passenger cars and light trucks. Since NHTSA is required by Congress to set CAFE standards for no more than five years at a time, it issued final standards for model years 2017 to 2021 and presented non-final “augural” standards for years 2022-2025. The non-final standards were presented in the interest of aiding manufacturers in future product planning and of harmonization with EPA’s greenhouse gas emission standards. NHTSA will propose and establish CAFE standards for MYs 2022-2025 through a comprehensive future rulemaking that will be informed by the latest available data and information.
In its part of the joint light-duty program, EPA issued final GHG standards for all nine model years 2017 to 2025. However, EPA made a regulatory commitment to conduct a Midterm Evaluation (MTE) of longer-term standards for MY 2022-2025. Through the MTE, EPA will decide whether the GHG standards for model years 2022-2025, established in 2012, are still appropriate given the latest available data and information.
Last edited:
I didn't know they made that available on GMs intranet. that's good to know though.
That makes me feel better. I was hoping you had some insight Henery, thanks for posting.
Now, I can patiently await the 17's...
Last edited:
Those could change.
What Henry posted isnt necessarily the gospel.
One of the other documents he posted talked about the new Bosch ECM and fuel system, but thats not true....its going to be all Denso.
There is much more very secret info (that is more up to date) that is internal to GM powertrain only and not available to other divisions of GM...
Ben
I wish the Allison was a bit more robust in the HP handling department. Guys with the 6.7 fords are holding 600hp pretty dang easily with their stock trans. Sure, some guys might fry one hear and there, but it doesnt happen often. Not only that, their trans seems to respond to trans tuning a tick better than ours (Buddy of mine has one so I've scoped it out a few times).
In the end no matter what you do to the Ford is going to make it out perform a duramax.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
huh?
And Mike, the Ford's trans may be alot to fix, but it doesnt happen very much at all. Especially for the guys only making 500-600hp.
I just did 2 of them at 500 hp. Parts would have cost me 5K without my labor or mark up. I bought new.
from what i keep hearing guys spend on dodge and ford trans to make them hold what you built mine to hold, it sure makes me glad i have an allison.
My buddy spent like $10k on his built trans for his dodge, but said it would hold 1k HP... Still seems like an expensive tranny build to me. I think that price included freight and duties to Canada as well which is where it was built.
hes not the only one ive heard paying that much for a dodge trans to hold that much HP. I have a friend that just did a fully built 48re (everything you can do) and swapped out his 68rfe for it in his 4th gen. it cost him right around the same.
We dont need more gears. More than 6-speeds would require a 4th planetary.
Another planetary means more complexity, more weight, more things to break, and more parasitic load on the engine. Not to mention more cost.
Do you want a truck thats heavier, more complicated, potentially less reliable, more expensive, and gets worse fuel economy? I didnt think so.
Thank you.