New Chevy Silverado for 2014
12-24-2012 | 05:38 AM
#51
Registered
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,801
Likes: 1
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.
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.
I'm eager for the press release or for someone internal to give me the scoop on the real numbers.
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
12-24-2012 | 05:51 AM
#52
Registered
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,554
Likes: 3
From: Fredericksburg, Va
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....
Last edited by ezstriper; 12-25-2012 at 08:02 AM.
12-24-2012 | 07:36 AM
#53
Registered
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,556
Likes: 6
From: Stockbridge, Ga.
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.
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.
12-27-2012 | 03:11 PM
#54
Registered
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 4
From: Thousand Islands area
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
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
12-27-2012 | 06:45 PM
#55
Registered
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
From: Perry Lake, KS Lake of Ozarks
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
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
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.
12-28-2012 | 01:06 AM
#57
Registered
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
From: Arlington, TX
12-30-2012 | 10:28 AM
#58
Registered
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 2,347
Likes: 4
From: Thousand Islands area
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.
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.
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.
Last edited by soldier4402; 12-30-2012 at 10:39 AM.
12-31-2012 | 08:00 AM
#59
Registered
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 390
Likes: 0
From: Perry Lake, KS Lake of Ozarks
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.
I suspect like many, you are looking at the Weight Distributing number?
But if you are to go out a buy a truck objectively the ford would be in a garage before a chevy.
While the GM is out working, I dont doubt the ford is still in the garage, probably broke down
I suspect like many, you are looking at the Weight Distributing number?
But if you are to go out a buy a truck objectively the ford would be in a garage before a chevy.
While the GM is out working, I dont doubt the ford is still in the garage, probably broke down
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.
Last edited by ChargeIt; 12-31-2012 at 08:08 AM.
12-31-2012 | 03:15 PM
#60
Registered
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 46
From: Siloam Springs, Ar.
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.
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.
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
