Exactly, the general American truck buying public would not even consider a full size truck ( even a 1/2 ton) with a 4cyl. engine, no matter how good the engine. It's all about image and the words 4cyl. and full size just don't add up for the majority of truck buyers.
This is the bigger problem, meeting stricter requirements, with an old design is not that easy, and in many cases it is cheaper to go with a completely new design, then it is to hodge podge something together for an old engine that will need to be redone again in a few years to meet the next requirement.

 

Can you tell me what GMC/Chevy 1/2 ton pickup with a V8 that has an EPA rating of 22 mpg Hwy?

 

Oh, I absolutely agree with the Marketing pukes idea, however, what marketing advantage would there be in having a LEGITIMATE 32-35 MPG 1/2 ton that would pull the rated load easily as well as a small V-8?

I understand the 4BT would fail any modern emissions/NVH, yada-yada, but you would not have to step totally away from the design. Look at what VW has done with the TDI over the years. I mean, the Sprinter with a 5 cyl in a huge by large truck getting 25-27 MPG?

Sorry here guys, I know I am a newbie to the 6BT, but I also have LUSTED after one since I first saw one in 1989, driving my "powerful" Banks 6.2....... Seems like Dodge had the edit to show the world that inline power could walk the dog on the V-8's, perhaps they could do the same in power/fuel efficiency with a 4?

I wonder how many Marketing types screamed about stuffing a lowly 6 in the original CTD........

In any instance, I know it is emissions illegal, but for what could be if only a manufacturer had the courage to do it, heres a Isuzu 4 in a 2006 half ton, 32 MPG highway observed......http://www.isuzudieselswapper.com/

BTW, I get 25-26 MPG out of my 79 GMC 4X4 3/4 ton with no overdrive.......with the dreaded "puny" 4BT...... And I would hook it to any V-8 4X4 out there in a flash.

 

http://www.automedia.com/NewCarBuyer...ickup%20Trucks

http://www.carsmart.com/content/rese...ection/summary

http://autos.yahoo.com/2007_gmc_truc...gular_cab_4wd/

 

I don't understand why people are doggin' on the 4bt. It's not anymore ancient than current engines, it has been ISB for years. 4 valves per cylinder and electronically controlled. NVH can be controlled with properly engineered motor mounts and a true vibration dampener.
I would have loved to see them in Durangos/Dakotas and 1/2 ton pickups. I think it's the negative image that Americans have of the old smelly, polluting under-powered diesel engines of the past that had prevented manufacturers from marketing them in light duty applications.
It's a shame that when we are finally starting to catch up to Europe, the EPA is stepping in and making it less desireable to buy a diesel than before.

 

That first link says 16-17 / 20-22. The others don't go that high. I believe the 22 mpg is a bit of a stretch. Nobody drives with the AC turned off in the real world and very few people with pickups out there drive like my grandmother.

 

yeah i know..I'm trying to illustrate that it is comparable mileage...and if all u get is an extra 3-4 mpg out a diesel in the 1/2 ton, then it doesnt hold much sway to get one with the increases in diesel price...the engine price and the decreasing reliability of the modern diesels b/c of complexity ....thats what frustrates me cause i would love a small diesel in a 1/2 ton...the engine displacements they offer are already too big!...im fine with a 3 liter diesel in there i dont need a 5.6 v8 diesel in my 1/2 ton...heck give me a dakota with a 2.5 diesel...something like that toyota hilux truck they have overseas....whatever happened to that thread with that vid of the lil indestructable toyota pickup with the diesel???

 

I'm against diesel engines in grocery getters because it increases the demand and raises prices . Makes it rough on guys running diesels 2,000 miles a week or more trying to make a living .

 

I saw it list the mpg as 16 - 17/20 - 22. So does it get 20 mpg or 22 mpg? I guess even GM does not know for sure what the Hwy mpg is and I sure can't see the EPA mileage sticker on the truck showing it like it showed on the first web site as 16-17/20-22. I can see a customer thinking how come they don't know for sure what the mpg is.

 

I'm bet this thing will end up competing with the toyota diesel

 

What if the Toyota ends up with the same engine , Chrysler does not have the exclusive to this engine. there may be another car or truck manufacturer planning on using the same engine.

 

I would probably buy the truck sight unseen then. In fact, I would probably sell all my vehichles and purchase the truck if that happened. My current plan is to hold on to my truck for another 5 years and then get one of the lighter toyota diesels.

 

It's wrote that way to designate between the 4.7 engine and the 5.3 315hp engine or 2wd and 4X4. My last 4X4 Surburban pulled 18mpg on the highway and my dad's 2wd yukon pulled 20 and 21 mpg regularly on the highway. The new GM trucks are getting much better with their on-demand system like Dodge's MDS. I've ridden in 06 hemi trucks with MDS that were getting 19 and 20 mpg on the highway.

 

I know the moniker on the pickup is a bit off but if they imported this to the States I would buy one.

http://www.isuzu.co.jp/world/product/dmax/index.html

 

Agreed,
I would like to know how many billion miles that were put on those 4bt's in the bread vans over the last 20 years. very, very reliable.

about the V6 thing,

If they just advertised it as a "Turbo Chargerd Intercooled 3.9 Liter" they would not have to mention the cylinders. make some kind of fancy chrome cover to go over those 4 individual valve covers.