2018 Chevrolet Silverado fuel economy
The EPA lists 14 versions of the 2018 Chevrolet Silverado. Combined fuel economy ranges from 17 to 20 MPG; the most efficient version is rated 18 city / 24 highway.
At a glance
- Combined
- 17 to 20 MPG depending on version
- City and highway
- 18 and 24 most efficient version
- Yearly fuel cost
- $3,350 EPA estimate, most efficient version
Source: U.S. EPA fueleconomy.gov
Every version the EPA tested
| Version | Engine | Drive | City | Highway | Combined | Yearly fuel cost |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Silverado 15 Hybrid 2WD Automatic 8-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L Hybrid | Rear-Wheel Drive | 18 | 24 | 20 MPG | $3,350 |
| Silverado C15 2WD Automatic 6-spd | 6-cyl 4.3L FFV | Rear-Wheel Drive | 18 | 24 | 20 MPG | $3,350 |
| Silverado C15 2WD Automatic 6-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L | Rear-Wheel Drive | 16 | 23 | 19 MPG | $3,550 |
| Silverado C15 2WD Automatic 6-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L FFV | Rear-Wheel Drive | 16 | 23 | 19 MPG | $3,550 |
| Silverado K15 4WD Automatic 6-spd | 6-cyl 4.3L FFV | 4-Wheel Drive | 17 | 22 | 19 MPG | $3,550 |
| Silverado 15 Hybrid 4WD Automatic 8-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L Hybrid | 4-Wheel Drive | 16 | 21 | 18 MPG | $3,700 |
| Silverado C15 2WD Automatic 8-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L | Rear-Wheel Drive | 16 | 22 | 18 MPG | $3,700 |
| Silverado K15 4WD Automatic 6-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L | 4-Wheel Drive | 16 | 22 | 18 MPG | $3,700 |
| Silverado K15 4WD Automatic 6-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L FFV | 4-Wheel Drive | 16 | 22 | 18 MPG | $3,700 |
| Silverado C15 2WD Automatic 8-spd | 8-cyl 6.2L | Rear-Wheel Drive | 15 | 21 | 17 MPG | $4,850 |
| Silverado C15 Cab Chassis 2WD Automatic 6-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L | Rear-Wheel Drive | 15 | 20 | 17 MPG | $3,950 |
| Silverado K15 4WD Automatic 8-spd | 8-cyl 6.2L | 4-Wheel Drive | 15 | 20 | 17 MPG | $4,850 |
| Silverado K15 4WD Automatic 8-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L | 4-Wheel Drive | 15 | 20 | 17 MPG | $3,950 |
| Silverado K15 Cab Chassis 4WD Automatic 6-spd | 8-cyl 5.3L | 4-Wheel Drive | 15 | 19 | 17 MPG | $3,950 |
At EPA assumptions, the most efficient version costs about $3,350 per year in fuel, versus $3,950 for the least efficient.