my last chevy I tapped a site marker at a state park going about 5mph, it crinkled the tail gate and left quarter to the tune of 3 grand. Now im not saying thats just chevy any other brand could have done that. And was more or less my dumb ace fault.

yeah the only problem with a diesel option is your probably talking a 5 grand up charge on it, which then turns that 1/2 ton in competition in price with the 3/4. Yeah Im sure 2008 did not help. It will be interesting to see what happens by the CAFE deadline in what comes out there, as I see most half tons are going to have to push close to 20mpg city in order to comply.

But I also see chevy pushing a 4.5 duramax in the half ton pushing 300 hp and 450-500 torque with 25mpg. Understand the capital but something like that could sweep the market, and bring back GM like the camaro did.

I'm telling you I'd bet against that happening haha, you can read between the lines here as I can't just blatantly say anything. The gen V made that option obsolete....... one could assume.

what some are missing here are the engines in this new truck are totally new and only the size is the same..new 5.3, 6.2 are nothing like currant ones, direct injection, piston/head design, nothing but the oil is the same...so until real #'s are out we just don't know...but if you look up the new engine it's pretty interesting...I also believe the LS designed engines are about the best out there period ! I am racing a 6.0 from a truck with stock intake, exhaust manifolds, heads, etc, only pistons(forged lower compression) and cam was changed, with a single turbo on E85 making way north of 1000hp. also have seen the difference that direct injection and variable valve timing makes..so should be promising....I also have driven a few eco-boost trucks, very nice, what I did not like was the lack of power until you really got on it...just normal light throttle was crappy to me...my .02...did run great under boost, also can't imagine what longevity is going to be like towing where you are going to have to keep under boost conditions for long periods of time ???

I noticed there was a bit more lag in the 3:55 truck than in the 3:73 truck which had only a barely detectable amount and when under load there was zero detectable lag in either. I would imagine a 3:15 truck has quite noticeable lag.

It does seem that these engines are completely new and even though I have been really impressed with the EB's I towed with and have driven I will admit I'm partial to a larger displacement NA engine vs all the air pushing stuff- to a point.

OF course a manufacturer gets to claim they are offering a completely new engine that claim also resets any previous reliability reputation factor you could carry over and that pushes chevy years behind the ecoboost. (in reality everyone has their issues)

Im uncertain that If I were starting an engine design from scratch that a 2 valve cam in block design would be how I would begin, but I also like simplicity. Given these new engines are quite complex regardless I dont think what Im partial to will ever be available again, but I really want to see the GM do well here.

In my mind the 6.2 has a better chance of delivering better freeway mileage than the 5.3 simply because it has a better chance of staying in 4 cylinder mode more often while on the freeway. and if it can make 80% of a journey using 3.1l of displacement rather than 60% of a journey using 2.65 it may be the cruise control mileage champ of the 2 vehicles - then again maybe not though.

in terms of a truck engine you pick your poison-either can kill you-

1. Do you spent your life in some measure of boost?
2. Or do you spend your life running at high RPM?

As to which is easier on the internals in the long run its going to be interesting to watch and I can tell you the real winners are us consumers!

Battle on!

Uncle Dave

The Ford Supercrew has the GM beat hands down in the Rear seat room category when it comes to Crew Cabs. I own both, and the published numbers say it too.

Been a GM man most of my life. Right now Ford is way ahead of them in the half ton market when it comes to features, options, looks, and capabilities. Dodge/Ram has even passed GM in my book over the last year or two.

I work on these trucks every day of my life and get the opportunity to see what I consider actual build quality. GM needs to step up.

Buck

I couldn't agree more. We considered Ford, Dodge, and GM half tons. We ended up with a F150 and couldn't be happier with the truck. I also liked the Ram, but the dealers around here were very proud of their trucks in inventory. I never even made it to look at the GM trucks. They just seem to be the same trucks from a decade ago. They just don't impress me right now.

After 30 years of GM ownership I went with Ford on my latest truck (2010 F-150 FX-4 Screw). Been a good truck so far at 36K miles but like any of them it has had its share of minor problems. One disturbing thing I discovered last week while making sure the dealer had properly fixed the notorious transmission bulkhead fitting leak is that the rockers are completely exposed to the elements due to several large square openings in the inner sheetmetal under the truck. Ford closes these openings off by using what appears to be squares of a tarpaper like material. As with anything mass produced, care was not taken applying the patches and therefore some were not centered and have exposed the openings and others have begun to peel away. Now nothing prevents dirt, water, and salt from entering into these holes and settling at the bottom of the rockers with no way to drain or be cleaned out. Hello rusted out rockers!!! Also, Ford uses no seam sealer on any of their sheetmetal joints. This is another haven for dirt/salt/moisture to accumulate and rust out the bottom of your doors and tailgate.

I agree, there's something about the Ford trucks that just far excels the others. There's a solid feel/quality to them, kinda like the old Benz that felt like a bank vault... the new Ram is nice and drives smooth but it just feels soft and mushy too. GM forget, all our GM trucks felt flimsy/shoddy, whereas even on rogh roads the F-150 just feels plain solid. Was up in CO and friend had a new loaded 1500 crew and on the roads there it just creaked and groaned and bounced like hell (never liked GM's suspensions even on the HD trucks), same roads in a 10' F-150 and not a squeek or rattle, he ended up buying a new 5.0 F-150 and couldn't believe the difference in quality and feel when driving.

That's an interesting take on the fuel economy of the 6.2 when cruising. However, as I'm guessing you know it doesn't take much hp at all to maintain speed so I'd think the 5.3 will be able to stay in AFM about as much as the 6.2 (way more than today). Given the DI the 4 cyl of the 5.3 then could very will have more than plenty of power, figure close to 200 and I think it takes around 25 hp to maintain 65 or 70 if I recall the fuel maps correctly.

I'm eager for the press release or for someone internal to give me the scoop on the real numbers.:whistle:

On the running at high rpm, I think it won't be as "bad" as today due to the DI. For example the LT1 (new vette 6.2) makes a very similar torque curve (great low end) to the current LS7 with over 10% less displacement.

Im quite aware it doesn't take much power to cruise at 60-65 MPh on level ground. 70 is going to take a bunch more with the aero on a pickup truck.

Thing is I rarely if ever am dealing with level ground where I live. It's a climb out any direction I head from my crib, and getting it to stay in AFM isnt going to be so easy in my case.

About the only level ground I get would be heading up the 5 north to the little inland lakes AFTER the big climb up. I'm curious If I could keep it in AFM with my small boat at around 62 MPH on level ground. That would save a bunch of bread.

I quite like the look of the new truck, I dont see why its getting bashed. I did notice they spared the aluminum (hood etc) probably because of cost.

UD

If you want to rad about the whole new engine there is a great story about it in last month's Hot Rod...pretty wild tech...not so sure they did not can alum do to corrosion issues...ford been having a bad time with that with paint popping up as well....

A guy at my work was commenting a couple weeks ago, while he was truck searching, that he would be more open to the Chevy if they would get rid of the "squared" fenders around the wheels. He didn't like that old Avalanche look at all because of the straight wheel opening at the top.

Frankly I thought that look would stay with the Avalanche but it has grown to the trucks now; yuk. I would venture a guess that sales numbers have influenced a cosmetic feature but I don't like the square openings either.

At least I can have GM all the time because when Chevy looks ugly I go GMC and visa versa. :lolhit:

i had AFM on my 07 or dod whatever it was called. 60 and below it would kick in between 60-70 and it was off and on and over 70, maybe downhill it would kick on. Maybe the new engine will operate better at higher speeds I dont know.

I took the comment as an opportunity to check out the latest since I had not looked hard at the details since 2008 when I last purchased.

On leg room, f150 and 250 were similar and probably do have more leg room numerically than gm BUT the rear seat still SUCKS. It may have improved with slightly more padding since 08 so it now feels like a padded 2x12. It has a poor angle that does not support an average adult's legs thus no matter how much room one has for knees, it is still uncomfortable. Sit in the back of a leather SLT / LTZ to see what I mean.
Tons of plastic pannels used that Ford tries to make look tough but comes off toy cheap IMO.

Rear bumper on the f150 felt like I could fold it in with my hands, f250 was slightly heavier. I have not touched at 2014 gm yet but again, they dont look much better.

Disappointed in the cheap hitch on both fords. f150 is only rated at 5,000 tow, 500 tongue. f250 only 8,500 tow, 800 tongue. I do like ford's sticker that differentiates weights with and without a reducer sleeve. Too bad most will still never read or understand. GM atleast has stepped it up a little on the 2500 hitch with a tow of 13,000, 1,300 tongue.

About crapped when the f150 EB FX4 sticker read 51k+!!
My 08 SLT Dmax was only 49 and out the door at 42 as I recall.
I will not be going newer anytime soon. :helmet:

That is my thought too. My old LBZ is great and I don't have to worry about a big payment.

Completely agree. Just moved to an LLY, and the dang thig is paid for. I'll let all the 6.7's pass me, all the way to the bank.

the hitches are reese and draw tites, arent those on everything? Anyways I dont know where those numbers come from as I just looked at my truck and weight is 11,500 with tongue weight at 1150. I dont know if your comparing an 08 model or using old information.


As for price I dont know what Fx4 runs 51k but I guess its possible, but do you need that one? Platinums runs that price. My XLT EB with max tow and just about everything but the back up camera rang in around 40k, after rebates and such I paid 32 for the truck. So I mean a good truck can be had a good price, and I think if you load out any truck from the big three you can find yourself in the 50k range in a hurry. My Friend bought a 12 this summer FX4 and after rebates paid 34k.


As for back seat I cant comment on leg room as I cant remember what other brands have, but as far as the seat, the angle you sit at the back seat in the extended cab on the ford is the best I have ridden in.

I am a chevy guy at heart and have had chevy trucks, but to be be honest the ford is a better truck all around then the chevy at this exact time. Are somethings better on the chevy sure, can the 14 be better sure. But if you are to go out a buy a truck objectively the ford would be in a garage before a chevy.

99% of boat towing and probably 95% of towing overall is done at the hitch, NON-weight distributing. A few travel trailer and toy haulers use a weight distributing hitch system with literally a handfull of boat trailers retro equiped.
There are many factors that go into determining a safe weight rating from design to materials to simple physics.

I have long felt manufacturers did not give proper material consideration to hitch design and capacities. It was not that long ago, most trucks came with a simple, stock bumper hitch which was way too light for the loads placed on it. Since then, most mfg reciever hitches have also been far lighter than the loads many people tow due to deceptive advertising, poor labeling or plain ignorance.

These hitch pics were taken yesterday on "tow package" equiped new 2012/13 Ford and GM half ton gas and one ton diesel trucks.
(sorry our topic has strayed from the title of 2014, but I dont think we will see the 2014's at the dealer for a while.)

All values listed are NON-weight distributing. Pics display both values.
1. GM 1500 - 5,000 trailer, 600 tongue
2. F150 - 5,000 trailer, 500 tongue
3. GM 2500/3500 - 13,000 tow, 1500 tongue
( could not find any direct literature with GM WD numbers but found an article stating 18,000 http://www.automedia.com/New_Cars/gm...-crew-cab_2012 )
4. F250/350 - 8,500 tow, 850 tongue I like the additional info Ford gives showing the reduced capacity if a 2" ball mount adapter sleeve is used.

http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t...ps7e5cd684.jpg

http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t...psaae25b1b.jpg

http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t...ps8d5d377d.jpg

http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t...ps4d6b267d.jpg

My reply to cab space can be proven with actual numbers. Comfort is subjective and always will be.

Bumpers, they're all thin. You could almost dent all of them with your knuckle. GM's are covered with plastic on the front though. That should help in a collision.

The new F150s are pricey. Not gonna argue that. I never said they were cheap. Keep in mind you also have the first half ton truck that is ALMOST comparable to a 3/4 with it's capabilities. (don't read too much into my "almost" comment) The new F150s also have a LOT more options and packages available than GM is offering too.

As for the plastic.....let me know how that glass house is working out for you.

Again, been a hardcore GM man since the word go. Never thought I would own anything different. Doing what I do for a living I have the ability to step back and look at things as they really are now.

Disclaimer....none of my comments are in reference to any 3/4 ton or heavier truck.

Buck

well said. Although i understand what you said about the 3/4 ton addage, I think some need to stop reffering to my 3/4 ton diesel can do this or that, good for you, I had one and know what it can do. Whatever brand you choose the 1/2 ton is a very capable truck and if you look at numbers todays half tons are just as strong if not stronger then 3/4 ton trucks that were manufactured just over a decade ago.

But I like you have been a GM man and would prefer one in the garage, but due to my towing needs and the fact that money just cant be spent on blind loyalty, I now buy my trucks or all vehicles objectively. And when you compare the current chevy to the current ford, there is no comparison.

Hit the nail on the head in my book.

Buck

well I have been looking at new trucks, ford & chevy..what gets me is when I speced out almost idenical trucks, crew cab, Z71vs FX4, nav, leather, heated cooled, max trailer tow, sunroof and 6.2's...hard to handle the ford is 5K more !!!!! you can build them online and see the price....unreal...things I like better on each...but the 5k ??? with 40k less warranty to boot ??

If i was buying the ford I wouldnt buy the 6.2l you get the same capability with the EB and just a little less with the 5.0. Also one note on the Ford FX4 its nothing more than appearnace package there is nothing off road about, the Z71 has a little more in different shocks and such, but really the XLT will save you some coin and but wont have body matched grill and bumpers and not have black rims. The same tires come on the FX4 as the XLT even. Personally if I were to buy a chevy I would wait till this summer or fall whent he 14s come out as the current chevy is way behind in just about every category.