GM Full Size Trucks In General - 2019 Debuts

[CodeRedR51]

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/13/2014-chevrolet-silverado-and-gmc-sierra-debut-all-new-designs-t/

 

[Furinkazen]

That Chevy screams a bit of Dodge RAM to me.

 

[Tornado]

I think it's hilarious that the Ram is now the understated, handsome one and the Silverado is the over the top, stupid looking one.



And both of them look pretty crappy compared to the older Ford and Dodge, and GM not even bothering to compete with the new ideas that those two are trying while simultaneously claiming that that makes them better doesn't speak well for them. No, saying that you aren't going to retire the 4.3 for a base engine a bit more "not designed in the 1950s" isn't a feather in your cap, GM. Please try again.

 

[RocZX]

The body style looks alright, the front of the GMC looks 100 times better the Chevy front.

 

[CodeRedR51]

The body style looks alright, the front of the GMC looks 100 times better the Chevy front.

The GMC has always looked better than the Chevy...

 

[OHM_fusion]

Those circular headlights look so out of place on the Silverado, the whole front is awkward. The GMC does look better, except those fugly LED's (because everyone has them, right?).

 

[sumbrownkid]

I like that touchscreen.

It's probably the first thing to break since I like it though.

 

[xXKingJoshXx]

This is, has been, and always will be, exactly 373.745 times better than a Silverado. While Dodge and Chevy are battling it out over which truck looks meaner and more aggressive, Ford is doing the right thing and actually making a truck that works instead of making a truck for wannabe rednecks and high schoolers who lift them up and put offroad tires on when all they do is drive it to school(excluding one girl with an F150 at school)

Disclaimer: Everything in this post is unbiased completely 100% and should not be taken as fact... Errr....

 

[Tornado]

Not sure if parody.

 

[Omnis]

Chevy has one pair of lights too many.

 

[Endless-Wilso]

I was hoping Chevy would try for a more aggressive style instead of a chiselled brick with abit o chrome.

 

[Slash]

The Chevy is decent looking, just needs to drop 2 lights.

 

[Endless-Wilso]

Im usually a very accepting person when it comes to vehicle styling but overall these are theworst 2014 models of ANYTHING ive seen. And this is the only time the word vulgar has popped into my head to describe a vehicle . The Silverado looks like a Tonka truck in fact.
And im a Chevy fan so ...

 

[sumbrownkid]

I don't know why, but I still prefer the design of the Tundra over the others.

And I'm not even close to knowing anything about pick ups.

 

[Endless-Wilso]

Gotta stop using the PS3 browser it double posts sometimes sorry .

 

[GTPorsche]

The GMC looks like it's been bedazzled.

Still looks better than the Silverado.

 

[BKGlover]

My opinion consist of 'kill' and 'fire', I'm sure you can finish the though.

Last year (I think) either Motor Trend or Car and Driver gave a preliminary idea as to what the new Silverado would look like, and the only difference was that the what-I-thought-to-be-garish grill was made twice as tall, effectively removing the bumper. I now wish that was so. Does anyone else miss the late 90's/early 2000 designs? the bubble-body F-150 was a miss, but the Ram was unique, the Chevys/GMCs were predictable but nice to look at, the Fords from F-250 up hadn't changed much in a decade (not that it was needed), and the new Tundra was getting ready to turn the Full-size market on it's ear. Now what have we got? Trucks that across the board bring the word 'gaudy' to a new level, along with 'rip-off'. The Tundra isn't awful, but the grill needs a rethink, at least Dodge/RAM redesigned their trucks, Ford just keeps making the plastic bits bigger and harder to ignore, and GM hasn't had an original idea since the 2003-2004 facelift.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Gotta stop using the PS3 browser it double posts sometimes sorry .

Sometimes when I posted with the PS3 browser it would say I was trying to double post. When it does that, do not hit submit again because it will double post when you do that. Just click off to another page and your original post will still be there.

 

[Joey D]

So other then adding some HID's and LED lights they didn't really change anything, how boring. With pickups still being one of the biggest sellers in the US market, I think GM really missed the mark by not innovating the design more to make it look fresh.

And I haven't really found this anywhere. Is this a new platform or is it still considered a GMT900?

 

[Slash]

God extended cabs need to die.

 

[Joey D]

Why? Extended cabs serve a point, especially in America where people love to buy trucks yet have a family.

 

[Tornado]

I am wondering if putting full doors on the normal extended cab was a good idea or not, though. Seems like it would be more trouble than it is worth.

 

[YSSMAN]

No, saying that you aren't going to retire the 4.3 for a base engine a bit more "not designed in the 1950s" isn't a feather in your cap, GM. Please try again.

If I'm understanding everything correctly, the new 4.3L V6 is based on the current-generation V8 architecture, the only thing it sharing with the previous version being displacement. It still gets the aluminum construction, direct-injection, variable valve timing and cylinder deactivation that the others have.

Strange that they didn't offer up any power figures for the three engines. I'd figure the V6 would need to be putting down somewhere around 300 BHP. Chances are that the 5.3L is going to get boosted to 350 BHP or so. I can't imagine the 6.2L being that far off 400 BHP.




Overall, I'd consider the truck a big letdown. They had a significant opportunity to turn the truck market upside-down with new technology, and an all-new look, and in the end they evolved a design that already looked like the F-150 on the road. If it can't sell on looks, it'll have to be fantastic to drive and ride in. The outgoing model was quite good, I'm not sure how easily they're going to surpass it. With the Avalanche going away, they're going to need to work pretty hard to bring those buyers back into the fold with the crew-cab models.


I'm guessing that this new Silverado is representative of a big change in the truck lineup at Chevrolet. Between the new Colorado and the possible introduction of the Ute as the El Camino, the Silverado will need to raise the bar extensively to ward off too much in-house competition.

In that sense, if you want a "better" truck from Chevrolet, go with the Colorado. Especially if we're getting that diesel.

 

[Pupik]

These trucks aren't that ridiculous, and one shouldn't expect major overhauls in appearance; after all, the audience for the full-size truck buyer appreciates a conservative-looking vehicle that that is impressed with ability, durability, and familiarity before dazzling looks and cutting-edge technology are taken into consideration.

But I can't help but think they look like NBA players who wear fake eyeglasses.

 

[YSSMAN]

Actually, the Chevrolet made me think of this:

Probably the second most iconic design that they used with the CK model line.

 

[Omnis]

I'll bet that's what they had pinned on the bulletin board. I wonder why they can't use oversized projectors and just square them off.

 

[ND4SPD]

Bah, square wheel wells never look good!

 

[Slash]

Why? Extended cabs serve a point, especially in America where people love to buy trucks yet have a family.

Because they raise the overall price of the vehicle. Even Ford doesn't offer a base model of anything that is a regular cab anymore. That and I think they look dumb with extra doors. I buy trucks to haul 2x4's and ladders around, not my family. If I want a family vehicle I'll get a SUV/car/minivan. As a truck enthusiast I think it looks more truck like with an 8 foot bed and regular cab/base model than an extended wheelbase SUV with a tiny bed on it. Don't get me started on bed caps.

Actually, the Chevrolet made me think of this:

Probably the second most iconic design that they used with the CK model line.

The only thing I hated about that model was how low it sits. Lifting that body 3-4 inches would do wonders

Bah, square wheel wells never look good!

All the old trucks had 'em I think they suit them well.

 

[xXKingJoshXx]

Bah, square wheel wells never look good!

They look good on this.

Ok, not 100% square, but...

 

[Joey D]

Because they raise the overall price of the vehicle. Even Ford doesn't offer a base model of anything that is a regular cab anymore. That and I think they look dumb with extra doors. I buy trucks to haul 2x4's and ladders around, not my family. If I want a family vehicle I'll get a SUV/car/minivan. As a truck enthusiast I think it looks more truck like with an 8 foot bed and regular cab/base model than an extended wheelbase SUV with a tiny bed on it. Don't get me started on bed caps.

This is the US, people buy trucks just to have them, they may never even haul anything in them but yet they still have them. In Michigan people use pick-up trucks as family vehicles all the time, especially if they have a boat, which many people in Michigan do. I'm sure it's not that different in other areas of the country.

Extended and crew cab trucks serve a point. Even in the working world they serve a point. I worked road construction for a few summers and having a pickup with a back seat meant that 4 guys could be in the truck plus all the gear in the back instead of just 2 of us (no one was riding in the middle). And when there was only two of us we could actually lock up expensive surveying equipment in the backseat instead of leaving it in the bed when we stopped to get something to eat where it probably would have been stolen.

You can also buy a Ford F-150 XL (the base model) in all three cab specs so I'm not really sure what you are talking about. Same goes for the SuperDuty.