Is The 1500 Really Faster 0-60 Than The 2500??

rgramjet · May 9, 2003

I was just looking through the specifications section of the Av fan club and I saw an item of interest. According to Motor Trend, the 2500 4x4 does 0-60 1/10 of a second slower than the 1500 4x4 Av. I test drove both vehicles before buying and the 2500 felt much quicker. Both test vehicles had 4.10 gears. Is Motor Trend full of it or was I mesmorized by the big block grumble?

hq · May 10, 2003

There are a lot of different numbers on the 0-60 times. ?Most of the test shows the two (1500 and 2500) to be about the same.

I have test driven both of them back to back and the seat of the pants dyno says the 0-60 on both of them is very close.

The difference I found is from 55-85. ?At that range, the 2500 is a monster. ?The torque kicks in and it just blast off. ?It takes a lot of power to get those extra 1,000 pounds rolling but once it gets moving, those horses kick in and start sucking down gas.

I would love to see some actual numbers from the track.

Anyone else with similar or different observations?

Airwolf · May 10, 2003

I bought an '02 1500 2x4 with 42000 miles on it first and drove it a couple days, but got scared of the mileage and lack of warranty so I returned it to Carmax and got a new '02 2500 4x4. They both feel the same to me as far as seat of the pants acceleration.

I checked the HP/weight ratios of each and the 2500 is only better by less than half a pound per horse power. Wish I'd checked that out before buying the 2500 as I was hoping it would be much faster than the 1500. I do pull trailers often, but never anywhere near the 12,000 pounds that mine will pull! But I am VERY happy with my Avalanche!!

djfcars · May 12, 2003

I was a little dissapointed on the 5.3L acceleration speed from 55-80MPH. Passing a car on a two lane highway can be a little more nervous than I want it to be!!!!

bryker · May 13, 2003

not to be a spoil sport, but you are driving a truck and not a sports car.

hq · May 14, 2003

bryker said:
not to be a spoil sport, but you are driving a truck and not a sports car.

The chevrolet corvette engine specs:
5.7 liters, horsepower ? 350 at 5200 rpm, torque ? 360 lb.-ft. at 4000 rpm

The avalanche 2500 engine specs:
340 horsepower @ 4200 rpm and 455 lb.-ft. of torque @ 3200 rpm.

There is the obvious weight and aerodynamic differences between the two, but you have to admit that the engine horsepower is pretty darn close and the avalanche will out torque any "sports car" under $50k.

I still contend that the 2500 has one of the lowest cost per horsepower of any vehicle on the market.

rgramjet · May 15, 2003

Bryker, not a "spoiled sport" at all. Im fully aware that its not a sports car. That doesnt decrease my desire for acceleration, just puts it in a different perspective.

I used to drive a 1999 Ford Expedition and it was absolutely gutless. I bought the 2500 series Av so I wouldnt have to spend more money on stuff like "exhaust, K&N filter and intake mod, electric fan, Hypertech 3... "

HQ, nice stats! Now if we could just get that weight equal with 455 ft lbs, I think we'll be onto something!

bryker · May 15, 2003

in all fairness, if I wasn't facinated with accelaration and speed I would not have done all the performance mods I have. it is not a sportscar but we can sure make it close to one can't we?

Skidd-au · May 15, 2003

rgramjet said:
According to Motor Trend, the 2500 4x4 does 0-60 1/10 of a second slower than the 1500 4x4 Av.

Noooooo say it isn't so!! I only brought the 2500 for the grunt, I hardly ever tow I just wanted the HP.

So if I keep all of my contests to uphill races at 60 MPH I should beat all them all?

hq · May 17, 2003

Skidd said:
So if I keep all of my contests to uphill races at 60 MPH I should beat all them all?

Here are some numbers from Truck Trend Mar/Apr 2003:

Dodge Ram 2500 345hp / 375 lb-ft 45-60 mph 3.00 sec
Chevy Silveradoo SS 345hp / 380 lb-ft 45-60 mph 2.76 sec
Ford F-150 Harley 340hp / 425 lb-ft 45-60 mph 2.37 sec

All three vehicles have about the same hp 340-345, but the big difference is torque. Gearing, weight, and aerodynamics also have some impact as well.

Torque counts once you get rolling.

BooTheRedneck · May 17, 2003

I wonder what the 1/8 mile times are for stock Avs. I don't have 0-60 times, but my 1/8 mile times are 9.81 @71.19 mph. I think that's pretty good in a 6700# Behemoth!

BIG BOB · Oct 4, 2003

just a note . I drive an 03 1500 AV, when passin on the highway , if I slowly press down on the pedal the truck will get up to passing speed slowly but surely.
When I tromp down on it & I am rolling at about 65 or 70 MPH It will drop down into the pasing gear and before I can get from the back of an 18 wheeler to the front of it and maybe a little past it I am do 100 MPH. & leaving the traffic in the dust.

fishhead · Oct 4, 2003

I'd have to agree w/ you Bigbob. I have guessed that the Av has a computer that keeps track of throttle position and rate of open and close and manages the transmission and engine accordingly. I've read about new large bore motorcycles (Aprilia, in particular) with these systems, and it seems that if you send the right signals to the computer that you really want to hustle, it will cooperate w/ you when it knows you're serious. Otherwise it tries to manage the systems "economicaly".

So what are the stock acceleration times for 0-60 anyhow? I was supprised that my 1500 Z71 could out accelerate a Dodge Stealth from zero up to about 70mph (I got chicken at 70 'cause it was urban highway posted at 50.) I don't think it was the twin turbo model however.

Wvusquatch · Oct 4, 2003

I will say using the predator to open up the 5.3 has made it much more aggressive and hopfully fast. If you are going to STI, this coming weekend stop by and we will go for a spin!

Wvusquatch