View Full Version : Trailblazer SS specs And info
http://www.autoweek.com/files/specials/2005_newyork/trailblazerss/trailblazerss_info.doc
One thing I thought that was interesting is the curb weight of TBSS. It appears to be less then the SSR. I'm guessing they are rating the 2WD model but not sure.
02EnvoySLE Guy
03-29-2005, 09:35 AM
I didn't think there WAS a straight 2WD one, I thought all of them were AWD like the Silverado SS'...
Envoy Fan
03-29-2005, 12:10 PM
Sounds like AWD is an option.
A performance-oriented all-wheel drive system is available, giving the TrailBlazer SS impressive on-road grip and enhanced “launch” feel. The always-engaged system uses a Torsen center differential to split torque between the front and rear wheels. It is a torque-bias system that detects low traction at one axle and directs more torque to the other when needed – it is capable of changing the normal 67-percent rear-axle torque bias up to 45/55 (front/rear) or 25/75 (front/rear), depending on the road conditions.
02EnvoySLE Guy
03-29-2005, 01:18 PM
Sounds like AWD is an option.
A performance-oriented all-wheel drive system is available, giving the TrailBlazer SS impressive on-road grip and enhanced “launch” feel. The always-engaged system uses a Torsen center differential to split torque between the front and rear wheels. It is a torque-bias system that detects low traction at one axle and directs more torque to the other when needed – it is capable of changing the normal 67-percent rear-axle torque bias up to 45/55 (front/rear) or 25/75 (front/rear), depending on the road conditions.
oh. For an SUV I don't really see the point of NOT having the AWD -- granted it will light up the rear tires but that's not really what SUVs are built for. :dunno:
XTREEME
03-29-2005, 03:02 PM
Does GM even have a Front Diff built for that kind of power yet in any of their vehicles?
02EnvoySLE Guy
03-29-2005, 03:09 PM
Does GM even have a Front Diff built for that kind of power yet in any of their vehicles?
I'm sure the duramax diesel trucks probably have some more strength to them for all that torque....
XTREEME
03-29-2005, 07:06 PM
I'm sure the duramax diesel trucks probably have some more strength to them for all that torque....
Might be too heavy/large for a sport truck though.
02EnvoySLE Guy
03-30-2005, 12:15 AM
Might be too heavy/large for a sport truck though.
Entirely possible -- hence why they're only on 3/4 and 1 ton trucks! Who knows though, with today's engineering potential.
I noticed the brakes are "large 12.8 in discs". I'm hoping they don't warp as easy. They really need to put the 14.4 in brakes on there from the CTS V. I don't even feel that good about 12.8 discs since the Trailblazer is about 1400 pounds heavier than the CTS V. Oh well, nothing a mod couldn't fix.
http://www.autoweek.com/files/specials/2005_newyork/trailblazerss/trailblazerss_info.doc
One thing I thought that was interesting is the curb weight of TBSS. It appears to be less then the SSR. I'm guessing they are rating the 2WD model but not sure.
Looks like the 2WD model weighs 4552 and the AWD model weighs 4728 which puts it close to the SSR (4701).
Looks like the 2WD model weighs 4552 and the AWD model weighs 4728 which puts it close to the SSR (4701).
Have these weights been confirmed?
Have these weights been confirmed?
Not sure what you mean by confirmed. If it means did I personally go weigh a TBSS? Then, no I cant confirm the weights. If it means where did I get this info, then here are a couple of links for this information which is supplied by GM. The weight on the AWD model was on the Chevrolet web site back in March but was not included on the site when they updated it couple of months back. From looking at the differences in towing capacity ratings on the TBSS and weight differences between the regular TB w/ 2WD vs. 4WD I am of the opinion that the AWD model would weigh between 175-200 more pounds over the 2WD version.
TBSS Specs & Info Link (http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/product_services/r_trucks/r_c_trailblazer/index.html)
SSR Specs & Info (http://media.gm.com/us/chevrolet/en/product_services/r_trucks/r_c_ssr/index.html)
What I was asking was if the weights were preliminary or final. Even then, I don't give much credence to the stats online unless the vehicle has been in production. One thing to note is that the LS2 block is aluminum while the 5.3L block is iron, a 90 lb penalty.
Envoy Fan
10-05-2005, 11:23 AM
What I was asking was if the weights were preliminary or final. Even then, I don't give much credence to the stats online unless the vehicle has been in production. One thing to note is that the LS2 block is aluminum while the 5.3L block is iron, a 90 lb penalty.
Thought the 5.3L was aluminum also :undecided
Not only is the 5.3L engine in the Denali Aluminum, its also a Gen IV small block....as used in the SS, SSR and Corvette, just with a smaller displacement and for 2006 DOD.
(The block is still the same with a different bore and shorter crank, but otherwise the same as the LS2).
Windy City
10-05-2005, 11:49 AM
Not only is the 5.3L engine in the Denali Aluminum, its also a Gen IV small block....as used in the SS, SSR and Corvette, just with a smaller displacement and for 2006 DOD.
(The block is still the same with a different bore and shorter crank, but otherwise the same as the LS2).
Yep. A perfect host for a LS2 shortblock swap... And from what I can tell, DOD hardware was installed on the '05 SWB models but turned off in the ECM.
Envoy Fan
10-05-2005, 12:37 PM
Yep. A perfect host for a LS2 shortblock swap... And from what I can tell, DOD hardware was installed on the '05 SWB models but turned off in the ECM.
DOD block different than non-DOD internally. Different lifters, etc. Why would GM choose to turn off DOD in the ECM, especially if better MPG could be realized? :undecided
Interesting, the LH6 is the 5.3L motor in the Trailblazer, and I see that it is DOD capable, but could not find if it was aluminum or not. If it is, that's a very good thing.
2002BlkLTZ
10-05-2005, 04:20 PM
DOD block different than non-DOD internally. Different lifters, etc. Why would GM choose to turn off DOD in the ECM, especially if better MPG could be realized? :undecided
An 05 SWB TB would have the I6. DOD is available in the 5.3. I think he's saying things external to the engine were put in the 05 SWB's and a 5.3L could *theoretically* be dropped in and make the technology work.
Windy City
10-05-2005, 05:28 PM
Why would GM choose to turn off DOD in the ECM, especially if better MPG could be realized?
Simple, exhaust tuning. I'll grab the excert from the LH6 info I posted:
The exhaust system for the Gen IV Vortec 5300 required careful tuning to maintain optimal noise and vibration control. In four-cylinder operation, the engine creates second-order exhaust pulses; in eight-cylinder operation, it creates fourth-order exhaust pulses. The system requires special pipe tuning to account for both. Mitigating features for short-wheelbase vehicles are still in development. As a result, Displacement on Demand will be disabled via calibration in the Buick Rainier, Envoy Denali and Saab 9-7.
I would assume "disabled via calibration" to mean hardware exists but is turned off. Until I can enable it via tuning I won't bother to open up the engine but as soon as I do, I'll be pulling the manifold to look.
Windy City
10-05-2005, 05:35 PM
The LH6 is all aluminum, LS6 heads, GenIV block etc... Basically just a smaller version of the LS2 with a truck manifold.
2002BlkLTZ, I own a Denali. The '05 SWB Rainier, Saab 9-7 and Envoy Denali come with the 5.3.