GM Expands XFE Badge to Full-Size Pickups and SUVs

By Chris Haak


General Motors announced yesterday that it is expanding its XFE (which stands for eXtra Fuel Efficient) badge from just the Cobalt with a five-speed manual transmission to now include the two wheel drive Silverado and Sierra pickups, the Tahoe and Yukon full-size SUVs as well.

As with the Cobalt (whose XFE badging was by Techshake back in April), the changes are not significant or expensive and can be traced to simple tweaks such as gearing and low rolling resistance tires in all XFE models, engine tuning changes in the Cobalt, and aerodynamic enhancements in the large trucks.

The changes made to the trucks include the aforementioned low rolling resistance tires, but also installation of GM’s six-speed automatic transmission, an aluminum 5.3 liter small block V8 (rated at 315 horsepower in the pickups and 320 horsepower in the SUVs), a 3.08 rear axle ratio, lowered suspension, a soft tonneau cover in the pickups, lightweight aluminum wheels, and aluminum control arms. The aerodynamic tweaks make the XFE versions of the Silverado and Sierra the most aerodynamic vehicles in their class (which means they managed to unseat the prior aero champ of the full-size picup market, the 2009 Ram, before a single truck has been sold by Dodge). The XFE tuning is only available in two wheel drive vehicles, and the only pickups that get the XFE treatment are crew cabs.

The result of the tweaks is a 7% improvement in city mileage and a 5% improvement in highway mileage (or one mile per gallon improvement in each category). The XFE versions of these vehicles are now rated at 15 city/21 highway instead of 14 city/20 highway as they had been. While GM has not announced the price of the XFE upgrades, it’s easy to calculate potential fuel savings in advance of knowing exactly how much the XFE tweaks will cost. 15,000 miles @ 16 mpg combined and $4.00 per gallon would cost $3,750 in fuel. @17 mpg combined, it would be $3,529 in fuel (a savings of $221 annually).

Many online commenters have criticized GM today for the move, saying that the move barely saves any fuel (one mile per gallon in each category), while likely adding cost to the trucks. I disagree with this viewpoint, and in fact am in favor of GM introducing XFE-badged variants for each model in its lineup. Although many of GM’s vehicles do have decent economy ratings (such as the 22 city/32 highway rating enjoyed by the tested recently by Techshake,) would having extra fuel efficiency be a bad thing for literally anyone? GM and other auto manufacturers are forced to improve the average efficiency of their vehicle lineups significantly under the new CAFE standards, so applying simple tweaks to existing vehcles would pick off some low-hanging fruit and improve the averages.

One funny thing about the XFE models is that it proves (as I suspected) that the expensive and complicated two mode hybrid system doesn’t really do much anything for highway mileage – the hybrid’s highway fuel economy almost completely comes from aerodynamics and tires – which the XFE has. The two-mode system helps city mileage only, really. But if you need or want the capability of these large vehicles and don’t do much city driving, you can probably save your money and buy an XFE instead of a hybrid. Now, seeing XFE fuel economy figures on the window sticker of a vehicle adjacent to the two-mode hybrid Tahoe will probably even further crimp [already extremely slow] sales of the hybrid model.

Just think: if every new vehicle had the same 5-7% improvement in fuel economy, we’d be in much better shape in terms of fuel prices. Just look at the drop in oil prices for the past week or two, likely caused in large part by a decrease in driving by Americans on the order of just under 4%. Now, nearly double the rate of decrease to consider what a 7% efficiency improvement could mean for macro-level oil prices once the more efficient vehicles took over from their [relatively] gas-guzzling predecessors.

If I could offer a single phrase to GM to help with its current dilemma, it would be “continuous improvement.” It’s what got Toyota and Honda to where they are today, and would really help close the perception gap, in which a portion of the buying public believes that 1) domestic vehicles aren’t as fuel efficient as import brands, and 2) domestic vehicles are starved for fixes and improvements once initial flurry of excitement from a new model dies down. Tweaking the fuel economy in these trucks is the type of relatively small, relatively low-cost tweaks can really be seen by consumers as a win.

With Ford promising to have the most efficient lineup in the next few years, the new “fuel consumption war” (replacing the “horsepower wars”) is shaping up to be an epic battle for consumers’ hearts and wallets. That means that it’s a great time to be a consumer.

COPYRIGHT – All Rights Reserved

Author: Brendan Moore

Brendan Moore is a Principal Consultant with Cedar Point Consulting , a management consulting practice based in the Washington, DC area. He also manages Techshake Consulting, a separate practice within Cedar Point Consulting. where he advises businesses connected to the auto industry. Cedar Point Consulting can be found at .

Share This Post On


  1. Not that it really matters, because these trucks are still guzzlers, but why hadn’t the XFE approach been SOP from Day One? Similarly, why hadn’t GM thought to apply the aerodynamic tweaks of their Hybrid SUVs to the regular versions?

    These guys continue to demonstrate an amazing lack of foresight. They had grown fat and lazy at the altar of cheap gasoline. Four-dollar gasoline may have been the best thing to ever happen to this country, short-term pain aside.

  2. If four-dollar gasoline is good, then eight-dollar gasoline must be twice as good.

    We’d all be traveling the same road to perfection you’re on if only we could see the light of really expensive gasoline.

  3. blitz,

    I’m guessing you didn’t get the point, which is probably not surprising. Since I need to be clearer, GM needed to apply these MPG tweaks at the very beginning and NOT after getting kicked in the crotch by high gas prices.

    So, not that you would understand, but high gas prices have compelled GM (and everyone else) to start improving efficiency. That’s why it is a good thing, not that I like paying high prices either.

  4. It’s a shame it took GM this long to figure this out. They can do well by doing good, that is, they can make a lot of money by selling vehicles that burn less gas and produce less pollution.

  5. So if my 03 Silverado standard cab 2wd 4.8L 4sp auto get 22.5 mpg now do you think they can improve it with an XFE tune?

    My 96 Caprice with 4.3L 4sp auto gets 29 mpg and I think is near optimum.

    They can do more for the full line with at least 10% improvement in mpg.

Submit a Comment

У нашей фирмы важный блог со статьями про товарные весы