GM scraps plans for unibody pickup, Denali XT

[bcjohnso99]

I'm holding off on a purchase until next year hoping for Avalanche on Lambda. Current Avalanche is a bit of overkill for me and uses way too much fuel.

Tacoma sized pick-up would be good too - but better have a real engine (like the 3.6DI or better tuned 3.0DI)

[gopedxr7]

the colorado was a shame when it came out. it made keeping the S10 around a better idea. heck the S10 would have sold more than the colorado had GM kept making it them. sales of the colorado from what i hear has not passed the S10.

the atlas engine is a great engine its a shame they dont use it in the silverado

Alan

[AMcA]

Good decision, I think.

Where unibody pickups have a chance, I think, is in the smaller models. There's room for innovation in the low end of the pickup market, to catch buyers who want something more efficient and manuverable than the (increasingly) enormous full-sizers.

Check out the Brazilian VW pickup. Simple unibody suitable for sporting purposes - and there's definitely a market there - but still small and efficient. Something like that cold succeed at the bottom end.

[Exploder]

A mid-sized unibody pickup on GM's mid-sized, front-drive platform had been intended for buyers who do not need the hauling and towing capabilities of full-sized models.

Hah. That's good enough reason to kill it. Who actually wants a FWD truck?

[KingElvis]

The thing is, if you already have the SUV version - Enclave - it's not THAT much to develop a pickup.

I don't know where to come down on this - you certainly can't accuse them of not thinking INSIDE the box though.

There are aspects of a unit body (unibody is madeup word by Chrysler) and front drive that would be great for a 1/2 ton pickup. You could have a very low load floor if there was no rear differential or frame.

You get phenomenal performance in mud and snow. Would have great packaging and space saving.

Everything is good about it, except the acceptance of fanboys.

[69Firebird400]

Originally Posted by bcjohnso99

I'm holding off on a purchase until next year hoping for Avalanche on Lambda. Current Avalanche is a bit of overkill for me and uses way too much fuel.

Tacoma sized pick-up would be good too - but better have a real engine (like the 3.6DI or better tuned 3.0DI)

Might as well stop holding off. The whole point of this article is that there won't be a Lambda-based Avalanche-type vehicle.

[Michael_S]

Originally Posted by hrcslam

This brings up an interesting comparison.

Let's take a V-6 powered Uni-Body midsized truck and pit it against a fullsized Body-on-Frame truck.

For the middle weight we introduce the Honda Ridgeline. $28450 base price.
Weighing in at 4545 lbs powered by a 3.5L 247hp V-6.
This little guy is rated at 15city/20hwy and 17 combined according to the EPA. Keep in mind this is for an AWD vehicle as 2WD is not available.
5 seating capability and towing up to 5000lbs. Impressive, I guess, until you meet the next contender.....

For the heavy weight we introduce the Chevy Silverado K1500 (4X4). $29465 Base price (for the 4X4).
Weighing in at 5348 lbs powered by a 5.3L 310hp V-8.
This lard ass is rated at 14city/20hwy and 16 combined according to the EPA. But this is also a 4X4, and the available 2WD is rated up to 15city/21hwy and 17 combined according to the EPA.
5 seating capability and towing up to 10,700lbs.

So, more space, power, capability, and safety for less than 1mpg sacrifice and $115 increase in purchase price. Hmmm, could've had a lot to do with the decision not to pursue the Ridgeline route.

You're comparing a Silverado Crew Cab work truck to a Ridgeline. The base Silverado Crew Cab 4WD lacks the following features you get on the base Ridgeline: locking rear differential, rear seat power outlet, CD player, MP3-compatible, rear HVAC ducts, cruise control, storage box in the bed, power windows.

The Ridgeline has better crash ratings in one test and equal ratings in all the rest - but of course, that's partly or totally offset by the Silverado's 850 pound weight advantage.

The Ridgeline also has a four wheel independent suspension, which makes it less rugged for heavy towing than the Silverado, but gives it superior handling and ride quality on the road.

And your Silverado's tow rating is only 5500 pounds.

To get a Silverado with power windows, you need to move up to the next trim level. Throw in a locking rear differential, CD player, cruise control, and a 7000 pound tow rating, and the price difference between it and a Ridgeline widens to about $2500. And your $29,200 price and the $31,700 price are with current discounts on the Silverado. At MSRP, the price gap is far wider.

On my commute every day I pass dozens of guys in business suits driving crew cab pickup trucks with empty beds. The trucks look brand new and don't have a single scratch in the bed. Plenty of people drive trucks just because they like trucks. For them, the differences between a Silverado and a Ridgeline just don't matter.

[FierySolstice]

If GM doesn't make this then what is really the point of GMC?? This would give the brand a unique vehicle. Also, I thought the Ridgeline came about in response to the Avalance?? Would this mean the Avalance would of been replaced with this new vehicle?

[Novak454]

Yup. An S-10 size truck with the 2.4 DI I-4 and a 6-speed would do wonders for CAFE, and add an option of the 3.0 DI and the light hauling end of the market is covered. Lets face it, and alot of the research has shown, if you will be much towing or hauling, you'll buy a full size. Nuff said.

[Byron]

Originally Posted by prowlerjc

I agree. I think there is a gigantic untapped market for 80s sized mini pickups. It seems the smallest you can get now are midsized.

The S-10 size truck was perfect for us that just want something to haul a small load once in awhile. They got good mileage and were easy to work on. Plus they were cheap enough for young people to get into. Look to the future and see who your next customer is going to be. I think it will be those young people and maybe some of us old codgers.

BUILD IT HERE, SELL IT HERE, PROFIT HERE.

[D C]

Originally Posted by Exploder

Hah. That's good enough reason to kill it. Who actually wants a FWD truck?

Hmmm.... wasn't the same thing said about SUVs? Seems to me that the crossover (unibody SUV) market is doing nothing but growing.

and get this... most people don't care which wheels are driven! A lot of those don't even know which wheels on their car do the driving! Likewise, do they care if it has a frame or a unibody? nope. Heck, most people probably don't even their Malibu or Camry lacks a real frame.

The bottom line is if the car/truck does what the customer needs it to do. For most people, that's seldom any more demanding than a bed of mulch or some plywood from Home Depot. For a large portion of the market, a unibody pickup makes a lot of sense.

[benroethig]

Not surprised at all. The Ute and Silverado have nearly the same exact fuel economy numbers. Unibody just ends up with a truck that's able to haul a third of what you could before. Great if you want a hotrod car truck, but not so much if you're doing serious work. They need to work on new smaller and efficient engines that make the same power as the current ones. Maybe a turbo version of the DI 3.6L V6. I also like the idea of shrinking them down slightly to what full sizers were a couple generations ago. We're driving 3/4-tons in all but name.

[artsiistra]

I think the current wave of crossover buyers are either former minivan owners or former truck-like SUV's like the ones the former Moraine plant built.

The Colorado only sold well recently because of C4C. It's an afterthought design-wise compared to what was put into the Hummer. Finally, Hummer is getting separated once more.

This will allow GM to sit back and contemplate what to do with that forgotten platform.

I hated the inside door handle to the Colorado. It felt like you could jerk the entire panel off the door over time. The S-10 inside handle is more solidly built.

I guess we have to cheer on the GM de Brazil design team once again to come up with something? I also guess GMC is back to luxury trim status...oops

[benroethig]

I think another problem with the Colorado (and mid-size trucks general) is that there isn't a lot of separation from full sizers in terms of fuel economy or price.

[usa1]

Dumb move. There IS a market for a fuel efficient uni-body truck with the flexibility of an Avalanche in a 7/8th scale (195" or less in length) package. The Colorado is an indicator that there isn't much of a market for a compact BOF truck when a full size is available. People that tow will get the full sized. A unibody small truck with a 4 cylinder would be a great addition to the GM product line and fill the needs of MOST truck owners.

Oh yeah, the Ridgeline is mediocre sales wise because it's ugly as sin and offer nothing from a fuel economy perspective.

Mark