Does anyone know what the major differences if any there are between the newer (2008) GMC 2500 HD D/A vs. the 3500?
I've read the only difference on the Dodge 2500/3500 is one leaf extra on the 3500.
Thanks!
The GM 2500HD and 3500 trucks are built on the same frame and use the same axles. The 3500 single has an extra leaf spring and tires/rims with a bit more load capacity. You also cannot get the 3500 with the 6.5 foot box.
2001 Silverado 2500HD LS CC/SB Duramax/Allison Indigo Blue
2004 Cedar Creek 31LBHBS 5er Our Team Rallies Attended: 3½
I would suggest that if you are going with the D/A combo I would go with the 3500. The wieght of the big diesel (700lbs more then 6.0) would be made up by the 3500 especially if you need more payload.
Elias wrote: Does anyone know what the major differences if any there are between the newer (2008) GMC 2500 HD D/A vs. the 3500?
I've read the only difference on the Dodge 2500/3500 is one leaf extra on the 3500.
Thanks!
9,200 lb GVWR is the 2500HD
9.5-11.4 GVWR is the 3500HD
Both have MTWRs from 11K to 13K
GCWR's from 16K to over 20K
All of this dependent on the options and setup of the truck.
There are many, many, many things that make the difference and you
will be told them or most of them listed as the 'only' or 'main'
difference...but...it the whole that makes the difference. Most likely
they will be right, but wrong at the same time, as there are other
things/attributes too.
Things like springs are different, even though they may 'look' exactly
the same. Frame. Brakes. Even the software in the various computers
are different between them. This or that will be bigger/smaller or
hardened or exactly the same or two of them instead of one, etc, etc, etc, etc
Here is a hot link to the GM site that has the two specifications on
one page/link. 2009 CHEVY SILVERADO 2500HD & 3500HD
Still won't dive into that rat hole of which individual component makes
the difference, as there are too many to list, nor do I think any one
person at GM really knows...
Why do you ask?
-Ben Picture of my rig
1996 GMC SLT Suburban 3/4 ton K3500/7.4L/4:1/+150Kmiles orig owner...
1980 Chevy Silverado C10/long bed/"BUILT" 5.7L/3:73/1 ton helper springs/+329Kmiles, bought it from dad...
1998 Mazda B2500 (1/2 ton) pickup, 2nd owner...
Praise Dyno Brake equiped and all have "nose bleed" braking!
Previous trucks/offroaders: 40's Jeep restored in mid 60's / 69 DuneBuggy (approx +1K lb: VW pan/200hpCorvair: eng, cam, dual carb'w velocity stacks'n 18" runners, 4spd transaxle) made myself from ground up / 1970 Toyota FJ40 / 1973 K5 Blazer (2dr Tahoe, 1 ton axles front/rear, +255K miles when sold it)...
Sold the boat (looking for another): Trophy with twin 150's...
51 cylinders in household, what's yours?...
mkirsch wrote: The rear axle is different. Looks the same on the outside but the tube is thicker on the 3500.
Not unless they've changed the axles in the new model year. GM has been using AAM model 1150 axles in both for years when optioned with a big block or diesel. They use the AAM 1050 with the vortec 6000 HD trucks. Both axles are rated far above the tire/rim capacities by AAM, even though GM does not list them as such.
on edit....BenK's link also shows the brakes to be the same size in both 2500HD and 3500 models.
* This post was
edited 02/06/09 04:34pm by bluenote *
Don't know why the 2500HD's rear axle is rated for 400# more than the 3500HD, but according to this site it is. Maybe a typo? From what I have found in the past, the 2500HD, and 3500HD SRW use the exact same axle.
Also should add that only the 2500HD with the 6.0L gasser comes with the 10.5" AAM rear axle. The 2500HD Duramax, and ALL 3500 models come with the 11.5" AAM rear axle.
The AAM 1150 axle is rated at about 10.9K pounds per AAM's website. The AAM 1050 is only a few hundred pounds less rating (don't recall the exact figure). GM has been rating those axles much lower for years in their literature, so they are just a bit higher than the load capacity of the stock rims and tires.
It's not just 'carry' weight, but other aspects of those 'ratings'
My 1996 Sub's rear axle assembly is the exact same as the 1 ton dually
of that year...am told by many trusted mechanics and buddies...but...
I've found that to be true...except...for a few 'minor' things.
The rear brake wheel cylinder has a larger dia bore. The master cylinder
is different and am told larger bores.
The front disc is thicker and what is NOT listed is that the pad
friction material is also thicker, there for the caliper 'must' be
bigger in thickness and that leads to the question...is the caliper
piston larger in dia too? Brake info from my 1996 shop manual.
Get this, the rear brakes are the same shoe width, dia, etc as the
1 ton dually. Each time I've ordered or bought something, the parts
counter person asks what the shoe width is. Why? Take a look at the
above image again and note the yellow high light. That is what I have
and take a look at the glove box label below. It says my Suburban
left the factory with 'JD7'which has narrower shoes/drums...why they
ask what my drum/shoe width each time, as they know GM doesn't follow
their own rules...
These have nothing 'directly' related to 'weight carry', but to
performance. Like stopping that load.
Also, since these new trucks have their frames in 'sections', who
knows from just looking at them if the front, middle, or rear section
is the same between'm all? Then the wall thickness and the hardening,
are they the same in all?
Just 'eyeballing' them won't show these differences, or at least to
my old eyeballs...
Offline
