## GM Invests $69 Million In DMAX Diesel Engine Plant for 2010 T2B5 Duramax 6.6L V-8 Turbodiesel ##### 05 February 2008  The 2008 Duramax Diesel 6.6L V-8 Turbo. General Motors Corp. (GM) will invest$69 million in its DMAX diesel engine plant in Moraine, Ohio to manufacture a new Duramax 6.6-liter V-8 turbo diesel engine that will meet 2010 emissions standards. DMAX Limited is a joint venture between GM and Isuzu Motors Limited and was established as a diesel engine company in 1998.

The 2010 model year 6.6-liter V-8 Duramax diesel will use a selective catalytic reduction NOx after-treatment system with a diesel particulate filter to help achieve the 2010 Tier 2 Bin 5 and LEV 2 emissions standards, and it will be compliant in all 50 states.

The current Duramax 6.6-liter V-8 is a four-valve high pressure common rail direct injection diesel currently equipped with a diesel particulate filter to meet 2007 emissions requirements. Available in GM’s Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra heavy-duty pickups, the engine delivers 365 hp (272 kW) and 660 lb-ft of torque (895 Nm). It is also offered with increased power and torque for the Chevy Kodiak and GMC TopKick medium-duty applications.

Versions are available with 300 hp (24 kW) and 520 lb-ft (705 Nm) of torque, as well as a new 330 hp (246 kW) option with 620 lb-ft (840 Nm) of torque. The Duramax is also available in GM’s full-size vans, Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana.

GM first introduced the Duramax diesel in the US in the 2001 model year. GM’s heavy-duty pickup truck market share has jumped nearly tenfold in the seven years that Duramax engines have been offered.

In 2007, GM began offering a Special Equipment Option on the 6.6L Duramax for B20 biodiesel capability. (Earlier post.)

The investment includes renovations to the plant, new machinery and tooling to support manufacturing of the new diesel engine.

In the DMAX joint venture with Isuzu Motors Ltd., GM owns 60% and Isuzu 40%.

Great. They should also consider 3,2, even 1.5 liter engines while theyre at it. There might be a chance their non-full-size-heavy-duty market would grow more than tenfold.

This is a great investment but why does the big automakers refuse to include devices that increase fuel economy. What about using additional fuel savings by implementing the use of hydrogen from the myriad of energy company's producing working devices. These company's, some of them working since the 1970's have produced devices that when attached to diesel engines produce increased fuel economy, lower particulate matter, and no intrusive warranty frustrations for each consumer that uses them. The companies include Hy-Drive technologies, Hypower Fuel, and Chem Technologies are all doing the same hydrogen gas pushing out some amazing results.
http://peswiki.com/energy/Directory:Hydrogen_from_Water

Maybe it's just me, maybe it's because I live in the southwest. Maybe it's because my city has been in a drought for 9 years and water is a precious resource here. But, destroying water to make hyrdrogen just sounds dumb to me. If you have EXTRA water, how bout sending it my way, I think Atlanta could use it too.

Too bad GM's engineers don't run the business instead of the Lutz's management team because GM could have sold more Duramax diesel SUV's then all the commercial truck versions combined.

I drove the 02-03 version of that engine in a 3/4 chevy pickup on time. I got 24.5 mpg, granted under nearly perfect conditions. Cruise set at 62mph with the wind at my back for most of the 180 miles. I was very impressed.

Gary, they are making a smaller version that is suppose to go into the 1/2 ton trucks and Suv's. I agree they should have put a diesel in the suburban years ago. Hummer too!

I agree with Fred: cut the engine in half and give me straight 4 cylinder diesel with 150 HP and 350 lb ft. I will dump it in my Saturn and get 60 mpg. Save fuel, save money, save the planet.

Or better yet, get those engines from the Opel plants GM owns in Europe anyway. No development costs whatsoever.

.. just to clarify the GM/Opel 150hp diesel is a 1.9, not half of this block as you indicated (3.3 litre). It has been available for 6 years now and is pretty much 'old', so yes, probably no cost....

... sorry, in traditional GCC style, here is a link to back that up... 2002MY Vectra avail in 2001.

http://www.channel4.com/4car/rt/vauxhall/vectra/479/2

GM has actually managed to sell some 600,000 of these diesel engines in spite of a \$7000 markup. The company is obviously being very careful not to apply T2B5 aftertreatment systems to smaller displacements until other car makers have established on their own nickel that US consumers are actually willing to pay the associated premium, which comes on top of the premium for the diesel engine as such.

Fred and Niels:
You're in luck! GM is planning not only this 6.6 liter behemoth, but also a 4.5 liter version for smaller trucks. In addition, GM recently purchased half of VM Motori from Penske. They are currently planning a 2.9 liter v-6 for the new CTS sedan, and other cars I'm sure.

It doesn't sound as though GM is interested in going smaller (at this time) as Lutz believes the diesel premium is too high to justify use in a small car. He has put his eggs in the direct injection gasoline and/or HCCI basket, where he believes efficiency can be found (at a lower cost, of course).

@Joseph:
The problem is not a shortage of water, it is because of a poor water policy. All too long we've had no policies in place to conserve H2O. There has always been plenty to waste and plenty to send south from the north. Now we are realizing that much of L.A.'s water is dumped by the concrete rivers into the sea when we should have been saving it by pumping it into reservoirs. We need a water plan that is based on conservation, storage and proper distribution. The federal government could help with these type problems but we currently have the wrong cast in the play. I agree water is a problem; but, the answer is as close as who you elect to the White House.

@ kevin
Gm did install a diesel engine in the hummer/humvee and in the suburban. It was the generation prior to the duramax line. If I remember correct it was a 6.2l naturally asperated engine. Good fuel economy, but could not get out of its own way.

@Bike commuter dude:
Planning, Planning, Planning is the GM keyword.

I would like to see a larger version of this engine, maybe in the 8 Liter range? for use in an upsized SUV. They could base it on the TopKick platform. I am a loyal Chevy owner, but my neighbor recently purchased a Ford Excursion, and I realized it is slightly bigger than my Suburban. This is simply unacceptable. GM needs to create a platform that can compete with the International CXT size-wise, but that can also provide the luxury and comfort of an SUV. A six wheel drive luxury pickup version would also be a good idea.

@Bikedude-

Ive been in luck for 5 years now, driving GMs only 4cyl (2.2Tid)here.

@BBill-

Get in touch with Lutz and Leno...it sounds like a winner.

DMAX

JUFIGP

The comments to this entry are closed.