The New GMC Canyon AT4X Does NOT Match the EPA MPG Rating...
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 07. 2024
- ( www.allTFL.com ) Check out our new spot to find ALL our TFLstudios content, from news to videos and our podcasts! With its new turbocharged four-cylinder engine, you'd think the new GMC Canyon AT4X would be massively more efficient than the old truck's 3.6-liter V6 engine. The EPA rates the new Canyon AT4X AEV at 16 MPG combined, but how does it actually perform in the real world? Andre finds out on a 200-mile road trip!
( / tflcar ) Visit our Patreon page to support the TFL team!
Watch more videos from TFL Studios:
The Fast Lane Truck ( / tfltruck )
The Fast Lane Car ( / tflcar )
TFLoffroad ( / tfloffroad )
TFLbike ( / tflbike )
TFLnow ( / tflnow )
TFLclassics ( / tflclassics )
TFLtalk ( / tfltalk )
TFL Podcasts:
TFL Talkin' Cars Podcast ( redcircle.com/shows/tfltalk-c... )
TFL Talkin' Trucks Podcast ( redcircle.com/shows/tfl-talki... )
0:00 Intro
1:09 The Way There
8:10 The Way Home
12:57 MPG Result & Verdict
#gmc #truck #roadtrip - Auta a dopravní prostředky
A 4-banger kicking out 16-19 MPG? What's the point in downgrading from a 6 cylinder? Isn't the point of dropping 2 cylinders to make it more fuel efficient?
Blame the EPA😂 government forced
I have the same Truck and I get 27-31 MPG.
@@jtomtlYup, all Trump’s fault.
All for emissions.
Aint you just a special lil unicorn @ThinCrustPizzzza
You lost me at $70,000 😐😬
Yeah, because no other company has overpriced trucks..
@@TREVORJB101 they never said anything about the brand or if others have similarly priced offerings..
That's why I bought a Pro4x. I can put the parts I want on it and save a ton of money compared to other trucks.
Buy a raptor and you will be kicking your self those 3.5 like to break a lot
I sure see a lot of these comments yet all I see on the road is expensive trucks, the only lower model trucks I see are in fleets. Sure there's a few here and there, but when the majority of sales is higher end trucks, what do expect the manufacturers to go after.
I prefer like the XLT level trucks, but even that is getting too much for me. I never wanted the huge ass screen in the dash, but everyone loves that stupid thing.
I support buying these super-capable off-road packages that will finally be enjoyed by the third or fourth owners in another 15 years or so.
And by that time, the white inside will probably be grey lol
Yeah! Older off road packages are a lot cheaper, relatively speaking, than these new ones, and just as capable.
I have a 2024 "regular" ZR2 and I enjoy mine regularly...in fact, took it out yesterday and scuffed a couple skidplates.
@@kx8960 in the supermarket parking lot? Did you forget about the parking block?
@@BillLaBrie Starbucks drivethru, obviously.
He forgot to mention the biggest difference between that truck and his truck. That truck has cruise control.
lmao....got em.
Came to the comment section for this
A truck or car without cruise control, ain't for the highway or best fuel efficiency. I use cruise control in urban and suburban areas to avoid speeding tickets.
Too soon 🤣
1:24 I went to grab my microfiber towel.
Haha same
Bruh, that was shameful.
Sorry, lots of off-road dust.
As much as I like the look at that truck my Sierra At4 with Duramax gets 24mpg in town and 26 on the highway.
@@Futurase1 depending on where you live and the fuel prices there it could be quite similar cost per mile.
You get 24 mpg in town with the 6.6l Duramax? That’s impressive.
@@Cloud30000 3.0 Duramax is what I presumed.
I have the Chevy trail boss Duramax. If I'm on a slower highway going like 65 I can get over thirty. I wish they'd put that powertrain in these midsize😂
That AT4 trim level with a diesel MSRP is $68k plus.... So you'll have to drive your 24-26mpg for a long time to justify the price you paid up front.
70k is way to much money for a mini truck or any truck, 19.2 Hwy mpg is terrible for a baby truck, I have a stock Full size GMC 4x4 crew cab with 5.3 V8 that gets 22 Hwy mpg. And they wonder why nothing is selling,.......
If you had a lift and 35in tires you would get that mpg...duh
A lifted truck with 12 inches of clearance and 35 inch tires isn't going to give you spectacular fuel mileage.
The underbody turbulence is increased with the additional lift.
Put off-road tires on your truck and you'll suddenly be getting 18 mpg. I have a RAM 1500. It got 23-24 from the factory. After a lift and 33" all-terrain tires it gets 17-18. Also, the Canyon AT4X has the high output version of the engine. Get the regular AT4 with the standard output engine and it will likely get a couple mpg better.
Actually these are selling and mpg isnt whats stopping people.feom buying.
@@rightwingsafetysquad9872 No such thing, all GMC Canyons get HO engine. Been that way since launch.
Don't care what the display says, it's what the pump says
@@davidjernigan8161 no really? Wow amazing comment🤣🤣
I know the Nissan Frontier for sure reads 3mpg more optimistic than the actual mileage. I’ve checked mine numerous times and it’s always 3mpg less than the display say.
I would expect more MPG out of this truck. I have a 2023 F250 Tremor with 4.30 gears and the 7.3L Godzilla and it will average 14 MPG with a 17 MPG highway. My F250 is 2,376lbs heavier with 445 cubic inch V8 vs. 164 cubic inch 4 cyl., 430HP/480TQ vs 310HP/430TQ. Also, I have a 2020 Explorer Limited that has the 2.3L 300HP/310TQ, 4 wheel drive, 4400lbs and will average 24 MPG with a 29 MPG Highway.
It’s all how you drive. Drivers get fuel economy not cars or trucks.
I hate to say it, but that’s sad the hp/tq numbers are that close.
Ford's better
@@go4brp2 Not to me, what is sad is that I can tow a trailer with the GMC and it's trailer on it. There is no need to make the Godzilla with more power as it has plenty. GMC has a 4 cyl in order be fuel efficient and it is not. You know what isn't close? GMC payload is 1250lbs, Tremor is 3643lbs,. GMC towing/5500-6000lbs, Tremor 18,200-19,500lbs And my Tremor is plenty off road capable for what I need. So, my thought is why buy a high strung gas guzzling wimp that cant' hold a candle to a larger truck with only a few MPG difference.
Only if this truck had the 3.0L duramax, but I do love this truck. Offroad fully built with warranty.
There ain't a shoehorn big enough. Plus the fact that with this turbo 4, which weighs much less than the Duramax, it still only has a 1000 lb payload. The Duramax would eat 1/4 of that.
The amount of people here that don't understand the amount of extra weight, bigger tires, and a lift will do to the mpg of a vehicle is astounding!
😂, I was thinking the exact same thing!
It will not be, but this should be a pinned comment. 👍
@ColeSpolaric not geared correctly.
3:43 economy gearing with 35 inch tires is ridiculous. They know better just cheap
Mid size trucks get terrible mpg. If anyone is buying a mid size over a full size for fuel mileage, that is a mistake.
Truth
Yeah it’s been a mistake for quite a long time too. The true compact trucks with 4 cylinders and manuals were perhaps the exception.
@@phild9813 yeah, the older small 2wd, 4 cylinder , manual transmission trucks got decent mileage. Like the s10’s, etc.
@@phild9813 They got decent MPG *versus the full-sized competition* and using an outdated and ridiculous MPG testing methodology.
Modern-day manuals are far less efficient than automatics.
I get 24-25 combined with my mid-size truck. NA V6, AWD. 16 mpg sucks considering the smaller interior room and lower cargo capacity.
They should have kept that great little 4 cylinder diesel they had. Wonder if the fantastic 3.0 duramax would fit under the hood…
Andre your knee height while driving tells me why I will stay in the full size trucks.
Wait... Why premium fuel? The 2.7 engineer said it wont compensate for octane over 87.
He’s rated that the manufacturer for that particular high output version required premium. There’s a moment in the video where he speaks to it towards the beginning at the first fill up. 😊
Manual says 87. I'm looking at it right now.
@@LafemmebearMusic that's not true, I have the HO engine.
Yeah I have an AT4 and ran a tank of premium for ha-has. Zero difference. Completely unnecessary in this engine.
@@LafemmebearMusic He's wrong. All trims use 87.
That truck with an inline 6 would be perfect !!!
I agree. GM already puts the I6 diesel in the silverado/sierra. Give us that option in the colorado/canyon
Or a V8
Yeah, maybe the old 144ci Ford Falcon 6 would fit under that hood. Maybe. Adding the extra length for the Duramax would take away from the break over angle and the front approach angle. This isn't the 60s anymore. This is a purpose-built truck.
@@plokmko0 yeah apply the knowledge gained and tech from the 2.7T to the old 4.2 with a turbo option would be great
@@SJDJFJFSKSXNDJWJQIbuy a full size truck then
$69k for the AEV edition or you can get a non AEV AT4X for around $54k at many dealerships
I agree 70k is way to much. Trucks & cars in general are over priced. All because of the pandemic. Yet our wages haven’t gone up 10-20%. Just get taxed more & pay more for things. Ridiculous
And you can thank the Democratic party for that.
@@andysupple4838100%.
Even my 2002 Tacoma gas guzzling V6 gets 19mpg on the highway at 75mph. I am very much not sold on replacing V8s with turbo V6s or V6s with turbo I4s. I had considered looking at 2024 mid-sized trucks, but not anymore.
That is one sick rig! Great job as always Andre!
I wouldn’t called a it a rig. Not a V8
@Diatomic104 It sure does.
Bought the Colorado bison and i only have to use regular gas not premium. And I’ve driven it around 700 miles so far and I’m averaging 16.5 miles per gallon. Just what i expected.
Nobody has to use premium nor does GM recommend the use if premium. TFL is just deluded.
About 5 years ago, I rented (and then loaded down) a Ram 2500 4x4 4dr 6.5 bed and calculated 21mpg on a trip I took to Oregon from CA. I just don't think that 19.2 gal is a good number at all for that little truck. I feel that GM should have kept the diesel or developed a hybrid system for that model. But then again, I'm here in California, where we have $6/gal gas. You guys are the best at what you do. Thanks again!
I was going to comment similar… I have a 2010 ram 2500, has a 6.7 with plugged dpf. I get about 19 on the highway.
16.9 MPG in my ‘23 Raptor with 35s. I don’t drive it like I stole it but I don’t baby it either.
It looks as aerodynamic as a brick.
Actually it doesn’t. But ok.
Thats because its a truck and not a car😂
Huh. What part? It looks quite the opposite..wtf do you see
@@mabelpup8502 the front grille is a huge flat rectangle. The sides are flat slabs. The hood is flat. The roof is flat. I could draw that as a 4 year old with crayons. The classic ram 1500s are much better looking. But beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
What truck doesn’t?
I learned it even with my 2020 pickup. You still have to break it in. Meaning. You can get better mileage over time. Do some city driving and then hwy driving. As this pickup. Some off-road driving. Nice pickup. Thanks for sharing.
Here is a dirty little secret about current "premium" fuel. A common tactic to raise the octane of premium fuel since the government upped the amount allowable ethanol percentage in gasoline to 15% is adding more ethanol to premium gasoline. It does raise the octane, but ethanol contains less energy per gallon that actual gasoline, so the vehicle may very get LOWER fuel economy using premium fuel compared to regular unleaded. Where I live in the Great Plains, a couple of gasoline retail chains actually charge less per gallon for premium fuel than they do for regular unleaded gasoline, but the energy content per gallon is lower. To be clear about this, I am NOT talking about E85 fuel, which is 85% ethanol.
My state sells 91 octane no ethanol fuel for premium at most fuel stations. My turbo engine much prefers 91 or 93 octane with 10% ethanol. I'll take better performance over the 2-3mpg I lost.
Want to make a modern engine unhappy? Feed it no ethanol fuel. Cars ECU are designed to run 10-15% ethanol today.
Thank you for explaining it is a specific truck, not meeting every truck need. Before you said that, I was going to cut on it for its inability to do truck things very well. :)
Andre, I have a 24 AT4X,,non AEV. Same color too. I only have 1900 miles on mine so not totally broken in. Ive owned so many off road vehicles. This is the only one Ive ever owned that actually exceeded mpg rating in real life driving. I absolutely love this truck. Mine stickered at 59xxx and I got it for 54. Ive never used anything other than 87, which manual says it is designed to run on.
Does it have cruise control?
All the newer magazine tests say the same thing- this is a thirsty truck.
I have a 2022 GMC 4x4 single cab and my son has same truck with a lift and 33s both with the 2.7gh. I get between 18 and 19 in town and 21 highway. My son gets 17 to 18 city and 20 on the highway.
My '23 Canyon Denali also does not match the EPA MPG Ratings. It's rated at 17 city and 21 highway. My use is overwhelmingly local/city driving, and all of my 90-100% city driving fill-ups are between 13.1 and 14.6 mpg. On a road trip, it will get 22.0 mpg with the cruise set at the speed limit, so it will beat the estimate there. My 13-14 mpg is 20-24% low compared to the published 17mpg city, though. The truck has about 3100 miles on it, and the lifetime average (including about 700 highway miles) is 15.1mpg. I'm not hammering it from stoplights either. I'm still a fan of the truck, but the daily mileage is disappointing. So far, total cost per mile is $0.205, where my '15 Ram 1500 diesel was $0.166 over the ~85k miles I owned it.
I have a 24 Denali as evidenced on my YT channel, and easily hit 25mpg daily. Not sure what your talking about. Stop driving like a kid.
@@thewireman134 go do a similar fuel economy loop and post that up then.
If you are beating the highway estimate but getting way worse in the city, the problem is almost certainly how it is being driven or the conditions you are driving in. The main advantage to turbos in mileage is in the city, but they need to be driven conservatively to benefit. You can have economy or you can have boost but you can't have both at the same time. I love the 2.7 in my F-150, my lifetime average is over 4 MPG better than my old 5.4 truck.
See preveious comment where I said I'm "not hammering it". If I were giving it the beans at every opportunity, I'd not mention the low mpgs,. In my case, the truck is getting low fuel economy during local/city driving despite being driven like/by an old fart. :)
Stop and go kills MPG. So will idling. Your MPG sounds close to accurate given your driving description.
What’s the point of the midsize truck segment? They don’t have an 8ft bed option but are as externally big as the old full-size trucks, the original mid size segment, the Dakota and T-100 had 8ft bed options. They get the same mpg as modern full size half ton trucks. These trucks originate from the S-10, B2000, Hardbody, D-50, Courier, Hilux and Luv, which at least got mileage in the 20’s when full-size trucks of their era barely got double digit mileage.
Bring back the compact trucks of yesteryear. These trucks suck and cost a fortune.
I recently made a 400 mi trip, almost all was highway miles at 85mph on pretty flat roads, 2007 NNBS vortex max Silverado and got 18.6 mpg 180k on it too. I love the looks of the new Colorado ZR2 but will never spend that much on a truck.
Andrev, great looking GMC Canyon
It's hard to get these trucks in the shop for repair since there's so many of them in the shop now for repairs for water contamination.
My 4.3 V-6 awd Astro(2005) gets 19.6 on a 325 mile trip over the donner passI-80 to Sacramento from western Nevada(3.23 ratio)
Yea and has 160 hp
That should sway any buyers debating between a new AT4X Canyon and a 2005 Astro van.
How do you like the AEV edition of the Astrovan?
BTW, you are a brave man to admit you drive around in an Astrovan.
@@Cloud30000 Astro Van's are awesome. Don't be hating. I had one in high school and still want to own another one 20 years later.
I had a 2016 Silverado crew ltz z71 easily do 22 pn road trips stock. I had a tuned 6.0 diesel Excursion that would do 20 mpg routinely not towing.
That poor Dash screen....the off-road video was worse with the old dude dust and finger smears😂....Love Andre!
My '22 TRD Tacoma off-road 6-speed manual 4X4 Gets 14-17mpg 🛣️ or 🏙️ I've even done little stuff like change the diff fluids to amsoil it was much thinner was hoping that would reduce some friction and put a free flowing dry air filter it's capable of getting 20 MPG but I don't know how to make it do it constantly
Did you put bigger tires on it? I had the exact same truck and I could usually get better than 19 mpg in it. Still not great, but that’s the cost of driving a truck. You could try a bed cover to help with airflow, but mine didn’t have one either.
@@kevinbradley8613 to be honest it's got the stock tires on it & I have the tonneau cover tri-fold aluminum one. I just probably have a bad habit of driving too fast & I live in Phoenix so I got to run the AC (yesterday on i-10 120° 🥵 it definitely will 2-3mpg better with AC off it hurts 🤕 🛻performance & ⛽ mileage
lol that's same MPG i get in my 6k taco on 35s. Are you beating the shit out of it or what
@@HAHA.GoodMeme i guess so, i drive kinda aggressive sometimes ppl are crazy out here! It's hot af tho with AC on 🔥👊 phx AZ maybe that has something to do with it?
This is sus. You factored in the extra 25 miles even though you filled up after driving that distance?? Subtract that 25, and you get right around 16ish. Yall need to check yaselves.
Before you wrickety wreck ya selves.
Hey Andre,
Since they didn’t change axle ratios for the 35”’s, did they at least correct the Speedometer for the larger tires?
Did you check to see if the speedo matched google’s app?
As always stay safe and healthy.
Yes, they can’t legally sell the truck if they didn’t correct the Speedo (which is pretty easy to do on most trucks through the OBD2 port these days).
@@Cloud30000
Thanks,
I never know just what or how much they can get by with?
Very respectable MPG. I’m blessed with my gladiator Rubicon eco-diesel at currently 27 MPG on the tank. Gonna slow things down and try to see the 30 MPG I’ve been hearing about.
It’s right in the owners manual, HUGE PRINT, 87 octane recommend for this vehicle. Good job on the research.
Recommend does not mean only.
Besides, given modern tech, you will get better mpg on higher octane fuels. You just never will see cost savings due to price difference.
@@noneyabizz8337 Recommended is the *HIGHEST* octane rating you should ever use.
it's an *OPTIONAL* rating to get the *BEST PERFORMANCE*.
Cars do *NOT* infinitely adjust to higher octane if they're not specifically programmed to do so.
Cars can adjust *DOWN* by using the knock sensor and slowing the spark to prevent knock,.
When the engine is getting the appropriate fuel, there is NO KNOCKING so there is NO WAY OF KNOWING YOU PUT IN HIGHER OCTANE FUEL.
Stop spreading this utter, utter nonsense.
@@tim3172 "When the engine is getting the appropriate fuel, there is NO KNOCKING so there is NO WAY OF KNOWING YOU PUT IN HIGHER OCTANE FUEL."
You fundamentally dont understand how modern PCM's work. Like at all. Unless GM is dumb, and does something totally different than virtually any other auto manufacturer, they are continuously advancing the timing until the engine is at the boarder of knocking in order to extract to most power and efficiency they can out of the fuel. Even my 2010 Toyota V8 does it. And so does my 2014 F150 Ecoboost.
What's your thought about putting the 3.0 duramax being added to the engine line up for better mileage?
It would be $$$$$. They tried a 2.8L which was discontinued in 2022.
@@thatrudagerdude the 3.0 is like a 2900$ option over the 2.7 in the 1500 chevy. The 2.8l made like 150hp its trash.
@@MrYaxalot got it in my Duramax in my 2023 Silverado RST for 995.00 option
The 2.8L was great minus the DEF system. But emissions is why more manufacturers won't bring diesels to the US.
@@MrYaxalotHP is never the focus of a diesel. It is torque.
Man, I was freaking out when I saw the 16 MPG to start, so having it go to 19 is better, but the final result is greater appreciation for the 2.8 L diesel in the truck we have. We don't have it all lifted and skid plated out like this rig, but wow, less than 30 mpg isn't cool. Did you guys at FLT ever try a ZR3 Diesel for the MPG? Thank you for all the reviews you do!
Pretty truck, nice job Andre. Sadly out of my price range right now.
I wish GM would make an SUV based off this chassis and powertrain. It would be the only GM product I'd be interested in.
What the new blazer or trail blazer should have been
what happened to your Sinclar fuel deal?
They ran out of dead dinosaurs to convert into fuel because they actually still believe that nonsense lol
How much would it change after taking off the weight of the 35” tires and all of the AEV products? My 19 4Runner is a little heavy and I average 17.5-19 and I’m ok with it
Those tires are actually pretty light. About 52 lbs a piece. I went from stock 32" tire on 21" wheels to these tires on 17" methods on my truck and saved 6 lbs per tire/wheel.
My 2018 RAM Limited 4x4 with the 5.7L V8 gets over 20 mpg on the highway.
Needs a diesel.
Drove that thing gently on premium fuel and still not that good. I don't see the point of this unless you off road regularly. Andre, it looks like you need to adjust that headrest up. Tough to watch knowing it won't provide good protection not adjusted properly.
Must kill you seeing older cars without headrests. I hate head rests and remove them in everything that I can.
I know, safety...
@@chillislives All I know is a poorly adjusted headrest is not good.
Well, yeah, off roading is the entire point of this thing. They make other versions if you have other priorities.
@@plmn93 Which is cool but we all know few will actually do any real off-roading. I'd rather buy an old Jeep or side by side for real off roading. Country folk I could understand but city or suburban dwellers won't do anything significant off road with it.
@@302Mustang13 So what? It's more likely than a Corvette owner going to a race track.
I have the same truck as Andre, only with 20" wheels. I went on a trip a month ago and averaged 23.8 mpg. Take that for what its worth.
I'm getting a two wheel drive gmc with options. I live in Florida anyway you can review one of them?
As good looking as this GMC Canyon is, and after the "TFL Toyota Cracked Taco" incident, my brain is screaming, "NISSAN FRONTIER WITH ITS STANDARD V6!"
But, good job, Andre and TFL staff! This was interesting! 🐰
All these Nissan Frontier buyers yet they arent buying 😂
@@beexiong2995 Speak for yourself, I get mine this week. Where's yours at, hmmmm?
@@beexiong2995 I get mine this week, so speak for yourself! Where's yours?
I just bought a pro 4x. I drive the hell out of it, lot of mixed used driving highway, city, and I've taken it out on forest roads out here in Washington State. I'm averaging 20.2 mpg over the last 1,200 miles I've owned it and it has plenty of power and comfort.
Too many people making comparisons to non off-road spec vehicles, this is a very specialized off-road truck, still large and heavy, and with giant tires, it's not going to get great mpg.
I’m glad you’re doing a bigger loop than just 100 miles then you go through different terrain. I think a 300 miles loop you would get a better number.
I just drove my at4x aev edition Canyon from Arkansas to Colorado and back. Average 14.9mpg. Love the truck, very capable, and very comfortable to drive. Got worse gas mileage than my Sierra 1500 at4x aev edition.
I just got my Canyon AEV edition, but currently getting 13.7 mpg. All the hate and comments on here but the fact is that we are a NICHE buyer for a specific type of truck. This thing was built to eat rocks and go anywhere offroad so a mileage test is gonna bring out the brand trolls and bs...I love this truck and didn't buy it for fuel economy.
That’s absolutely awfully
Wait a minute, this engine does not require 91 octane. Even the engineers say 87 is what to run it on, because that’s what it’s designed for.
He's probably getting a mpg more or two than he'd get on that 87
@@noneyabizz8337negative.
@@noneyabizz8337 He is not because that's not how knock resistance works. If anything, he's getting very slightly worse fuel economy.
You only get better economy when running a lower octane *in a vehicle designed to require higher octane* because it can advance the spark.
This is simply taking in wasteful fuel and burning money.
@tim3172 car and driver has an article that's easily searchable that shows the difference is slight but there is an increase with higher octane.
@@tim3172 try an internet search.
Car and driver has an article where they test 4 vehicles.
It's tuned for 87 per the engineer you interviewed. Per the engineer its a waste of money to run premium fuel. Could get worse milage with premium fuel.
Modern vehicles adapt to different fuel grades.
@@noneyabizz8337the engineer said 2.7 will NOT. Sounds like they locked out that capability on 2.7.
@@noneyabizz8337 They adapt *DOWN* in octane. You can run a 91 octane engine on 87 FOR SHORT DURATIONS.
They do not adapt *UP* unless specifically designed to do so.
@@tim3172 which modern vehicles, even a CRV, is designed to do
@@noneyabizz8337 A CRV does not benefit from premium fuel.
Last month I went to a GMC dealership to get a cost on an AT4 AEV Edition. They said they had none and if I wanted one I could get on the waiting list. Very surprised
You’re talking about the AEV edition..I’ve never seen one anywhere..how are you surprised?
@@mabelpup8502 Andre said in the video you could walk in and pick one up. I have a 2020 Bison now but wanted to investigate the AEV Edition. I’m planning on just keeping my current Bison. It’s a great truck!
@@timgarcia2630My local dealer had 3 regular ZR2’s and a ZR2 Bison Colorado
Waiting on my Denali ordered . Do you think ride is the same ?
What good is that mileage number when you have to use premium gas to get it? It's still going to cost you significantly more.
You don't have to use premium (nor should you) TFL is out spreading misinformation.
lol, the comments show most people don't get it.
What MPG did the dash say you were getting? Curious if it was accurate?
This truck with a 5.3=perfect.
That's damn good, I got 19 average on 2 tanks (1 there 1 back comparable driving conditions) when I went to Moab in mid April in my 2024 "regular" ZR2. I was happy.
Imagine that the government can’t manage numbers..
The numbers for EPA ratings are self supplied by the manufacturer.
@@patmanz28 guess we don’t need the EPA anymore
Imagine a MAGAt that doesn't understand fuel economy figures are taken near sea level for a prescribed, repeatable test.
Imagine being an adult who doesn't understand how anything works?
@@jefferyG499 trust me I know how it works. Manufactures pay lobbyist so they can put whatever numbers they want on the window sticker..
Almost 70k I can buy a full size for that
People don’t buy this truck because they can’t afford a full-size. I don’t understand this logic. If you want an extremely capable off-road truck, a full-size pickup is a poor choice.
I have a 2023 Chevy Colorado Z71. I have driven a couple of times from my home in Eastern South Dakota to the Reno area and to Denver/Colorado Springs. I have noticed that fuel economy improves dramatically at higher altitudes. At 1,500 elevation around here I get 21-23 mpg on the highway. At higher elevations (5,000+) it was not uncommon to get 25+ mpg. I think turbocharging helps at altitude.
The dust and skin flakes really show up on the dash/screens
Why gm got rid of the diesel is beyond me
This should have been the new 3.0 engine
Overpriced small truck.
wondering if this truck comes with the Bose system or another brand??
I know that is comparing apples to oranges, but I been get 18.2 mpg on my 2018 5.7L Tundra driving from Morehead City, NC to Raleigh. I don't have the rock plates, but the Tundra is 4x4. I also have a 36 gallon tanks, so range is like 425 miles on the full tanks. At $65,000, I don't see the value. I also tow a RV with my Tundra and in "tow mode", I been getting 12 mpg on trip to the Smoky Mountains.
Still has no payload and far too much electronics that always fail
Funny that only the Ranger beats it in payload… Had mine for a bit now and not had one issue with anything on it.. Guess yours was built on a Friday…
@@Mikef1969even then the Payload of the AT4X AEV is far lower then stock. My AT4 is 1498 with the 33”s and the stock AT4 is 1525 IIRC. The 2.7 in the Ranger 4x4 is 1542.
Payload is pretty good for what it is. I swear most of the people complaining have absolutely no clue about trucks built for off roading.
Do people who bought this kind of truck really care about its MPG? Cause if you can buy the truck for sure you can afford its fuel cost.
A lot of people buy vehicles assuming they can afford gas.
Then the freak outs start when dem policies get us 7 dollar regular
Nah, in my experience, most people vastly overpurchase on a vehicle. They say, "I have an extra 600 a month," and then start looking for cars with payments ranging from 500-600. Insurance and fuel are not considerations until it is time to pay them.
That is the exact reason why you hear so many people who buy SUVs and luxury trucks complain about fuel costs
Not so much, but if you do need to road-trip it, it helps knowing a real-world (approximate) range. My personal range before I like to stop is in the 400ish range, so knowing ~350 miles before needing to stop helps to know. Our truck has a 36 gal. tank, so I have to stop way before the truck does doing highway runs. If towing, our range goes way down, but still very acceptable and in this case for this specific truck ,(IMO) it would be helpful to have a little larger gas tank.
@@noneyabizz8337 Gas isn't $7, dumdum.
Repuke policies got us cheap gas because nobody could go anywhere as they failed to contain Covid.
I’d like to see what the Colorado Z71 gets with the smaller ( more reasonable?! ) wheelbase and tires, probably much better numbers
Keeping your average speed at 70 or below would have gotten you even a better number. All the gas hogs I have ever driven take a mileage hit at 70 mph. Looks like a great truck. I wish I could afford one. 😁
Factoring the insane cost of owning a premium truck, purchase price, insurance, license , fuel is insignificant to me.
Thank you Captain obvious.
While that is fair its still only a 4cylinder making 310hp no reason for it to do so poorly
@@MrYaxalot a 310hp engine pushing a tall BoF offroader on 35's. I think it did fairly well given what it is.
Oof. Andre put 91 in a vehicle designed for 87.
Minimum octane is not maximum octane
I believe the premium output engine requires premium fuel?
@@nm-qt2hb even if not, you'll often see better mpg numbers with higher grade fuel
(Of course the offset in price is rarely worth it)
Putting higher octane into a engine that runs optimum on 87 does nothing @@noneyabizz8337
@@dirtbagliberalsnake5729do a little research, it's not 1995 any more.
Impressive looking truck!!!👍
I get 35MPG with 2024 Maverick 2.0 Ecoboost AWD. Cost me $27k. Double the mpg for half the price and I can haul almost as much as a midsize.
Having to mount the spare in the bed is a deal-breaker. Rediculous.
Like you just couldn't take it out...duh
@@atg1338 The point is that GM didn't allow enough space under the bed to put it there 🙄
@@doublebackagain4311 it's a 35in tire that won't fit under the bed. lay it down in the bed or take it out. People complain about the dumbest 💩
@@atg1338 For some reason they feel they need to come up with something to justify not buying it, even though they had no intention of buying it in the first place.
Raptor 37 allows spare to fit underbed - but we're used to this from GM
Honestly, I don’t even look at MPG as a factor in picking vehicles.
Not a problem as long as you don't complain about fuel prices. I get tired of hearing big truck and SUV owners complaining when they made the worst choice possible for fuel costs.
@@302Mustang13 wait so they can't complain when they need a truck and fuel prices are high which effect them? what i don't want to hear is people with cars that get really good mpg complaining.
@@StackaliNice try reversing what I said. I'm talking about the guys that buy trucks but don't really need it or put huge tires and a lift kit that turns it into a real guzzler. I rarely see trucks used for towing and hauling. To me a truck is a basic setup with a regular cab and 6-8 foot bed and used mainly for work. I don't complain about fuel prices because I bought the most efficient vehicle for my needs and don't need a truck.
MPG is very important.
Every time we have a large jump in fuel prices, people dump their large vehicles and buy fuel efficient vehicles.
People tend to get more car than they can afford.
I don't like working for oil companies. Next time you fill up and see the cost, work out how many hours of your life it took working to pay for that. That is how mamy hours of your life you had to give up to Saudi aramco,exxon,bp, or any of the others. You really should consider mpg when purchasing a vehicle if you don't want to give them your life.
I just bought this EXACT TRUCK. First 600 miles in and I'm getting 13.1 mpg 😢.
Gotta love my 2021 ZR2 diesel, $45k new and tops 30 mpg often.
This makes me love my Gladiator ecodiesel all the more.
Honestly, I test drove a bunch of Gladiator Rubicon Ecodiesels, and then the local Chevy dealer got three Colorado ZR2's in with this motor so I went and test drove one. The Ecodiesel was better. It just felt way stronger than this does despite them having similar torque on paper.
@@Jay-me7gw yeah the Eco Diesel torque hits at 1400-2800rpm while the GM doesn't start till 3000
Do you use 91 octane on your trail boss?
Nice looking truck. Tried to find one locally, all incoming resold for 5-6k over MSRP. As long as people are willing to pay over MSRP they will never be available for the average buyer.
I watched your interview with the engine engineer and i remember him saying using premium fuel is throwing money away. So why use premium?? I would like the Bison (cheaper than AT4X) but i'm still going back and forth between that and a regular ZR2.
This truck can be purchased for $58K & the mileage is no surprise to anyone paying attention to the industry.
Specifically, the industry’s move towards smaller displacement powerplants. As such, it’s the best truck in the midsize segment. The Ranger Raptor is a close 2nd when factoring current out the door pricing.
I knew you would beat the EPA rating because I have a 2022 raptor 37s and I can get 18 on the highway on even bigger tires.
Andre sits higher in this than a Sierra full sized truck.😆
This midsize pickup is Tall!
I like watching Motorweeks retro car reviews. They did a 1988 C1500 truck with a regular V6 and it had EPA fuel ratings of 17 city/22 highway and in Motorweek's mixed test, they got 21mpg. How did fall so far from those MPG numbers to where we are now with smaller engines and still lower MPG. I know this truck this lifted up, but even the regular Canyon/Colorado doesn't do much better than a 35+ year old truck. I think the expectations back then were that we would easily get 30mpg in every truck at this point. Under 20 MPG in a "mid-size" (comparable to a full-size truck of the past) is unacceptable. They had regular diesel Suburbans in the 80's getting 25+ mpg and those had bigger engines than the straight 6 turbo diesels of today. I figure emissions controls have an impact, but I just don't think most people need 300+ horsepower in smaller trucks.
Thanks Andre
Thank you for watching.
This is a good video as usual, thank you!
The MPG may be 16 - 19, but that is deceptive (by GM - not TFL) because the truck takes Premium gas, which is significantly more expensive than Regular which makes the Cost Per Mile more like 13 -16 mpg if it were a truck that used Regular fuel.
The same is true with people talk about the MPG of their diesel trucks or that they bought a diesel because the MPG is better....which is true except MPG and Cost Per Mile is not the same thing. It's crazy how much added cost something like $.60 per gallon makes Cost Per Mile.
The truck can take 87 no problem. It does NOT require premium.
That said, there may be some small MPG gains using premium.
2014 ram 1500 2wd with 35x12.5x20 tires, crew cab with ram box. I regeared it to 3.92 when the rear started to whine on the freeway and run a canned tuned from superchips on fuel saver mode. Driving from my home in San Bernardino to Las Vegas and back I averaged 18.71mpg calculated at the pump and driving 70 the whole way. When I had the factory 3.21 gears it was 20.12 mpg. Yes not apples to apples but for a gas guzzling v8 not to bad.
In California premium gasoline is a different breed.
$$$ the average in city is about $5. a gallon. Once you travel to the remote small town you could look at $6 a gallon.