GMT-900 Pickups: Performance and Handling

[Ghrankenstein]

Performance and Handling

Within the confines of the Ride and Drive, we only had the chance to explore the most basic low-end performance responses of the various competitive pickups against the 5.3L and VORTEC-MAX 6.0L Sierras.

Within the limited confines of two handling courses, the Sierra fares well, but its card is very obviously comparable performance with improved fuel economy. For 2007, the Silverado and Sierra feature four 5.3L V-8’s, two with cast-iron blocks, two with aluminum blocks, one each with the option of E-85 Flex-Fuel capability. All are rated identically at 315 hp, 338 lb-ft of torque.

Off the line, the 5.3L Vortecs feel stronger than the 5.4L Triton, apparently due to Ford’s typically taller first gear. The Hemi continues to be sluggish off the line, and the courses emphasized that. I’ve still driven enough 5.7L Dodges to know that the Hemi-nouveau still dumps a lot of power once it has the opportunity to take advantage of its valve area. The 5.6L Endurance V-8, at a cosmetically low 305 hp (317 hp for 2007), belts out torque everywhere, and it still feels the strongest of the volume engines. It’s also the bulkiest, the most complex, and it remains a DOHC engine tuned to run like an OHV.

Those wanting king-of-the-hill status will have to opt for the VORTEC-MAX, which can be configured to offer a 10,500 lb trailering limit. This was my first experience with the new light-duty 6.0L VVT/AFM (active fuel management), and it was a good one. The new 366 cid Vortec has been given near-Buick levels of sound deadening in the name of refinement; exhaust sounds are quieter than in the Escalade and Denali, but deep and metallic. GM wants the world to know that they can build the most refined truck in the business, but “performance” and “touring” exhaust systems are already in the accessories catalog. In terms of performance, the VORTEC-MAX makes no apologies, and is equal or better in subjective feel than any competing engine.

At the same time, it’s also more than the vast majority of pickup owners will need, and I’d personally recommend a step up to the 6.0L 2500 model in lieu of the half-ton MAX package. You’ll get a little less peak horsepower, but you’ll grab the new Hydramatic 6L90E as standard equipment. Neat.

While I’m talking about engines, I’ll throw in that the Vortec 4800 has been re-tuned to produce 295 hp and 305 lb-ft of torque. Since the more powerful 5300 is only a $600 upgrade, I doubt many buyers will opt for it. Enthusiasts who want to configure a sporty pickup, especially as a regular cab, would be wise to give it consideration. In the current Classic half-ton trucks, it revs strongly, bellows aggressively, and frequently causes drivers to do a double-take: “Are you sure this is the 4.8?” Of all the Vortec V-8’s, I think it’s the most fun. I only wish that GM offered it with a manual transmission. Four-speed automatics are standard on all half-ton GMT-900’s, for now at least.

Yes, we love engines. Oh, how we love them, but I know that a bunch of us also love handling. Like the GMT-900 SUV’s, the new half-ton trucks shine as a complete package. This package, of course, starts with the updated frame. Contrary to rumors suggesting otherwise, all GMT-900 truck frames are different from the GMT-800’s.

The three-piece modular frame still features a front section (where stresses are the greatest) with hydroformed steel rails. The front section includes additional crush capability, eliminating the need for the “crush caps” of the GMT-800, and adds “compatibility brackets,” which dip below the truck’s normal impact height to keep it from riding up on smaller vehicles. Like the SUV’s, the pickups benefit from stronger suspension and steering mounts, SLA (short/long arm) suspensions with forged aluminum lower control arms, and rack-and-pinion steering. Gone, to the chagrin of some perhaps, are the torsion beam suspension and recirculating ball steering of the GMT-800 4x4’s, which were highly rugged off-road, vague on-road.

The center sections are now fully boxed. A heavy brace has been added just behind the front wheel well, and the rails deepen by over an inch. In back the rails remain fully boxed until after the rear wheels, where they become C-section. This is where gimmicks come into effect, and where savvy competitive salespeople will play a trump-suite queen with a psychological benefit at best.

Pickups endure very little torsional stress behind the rear axle, and full-length boxed rails add dead weight, reduce payload, and contribute to pendulum-effect rear-end bounce. Furthermore, the GMT-900’s have three crossmembers, two of them tubular and welded from both sides, through the frame rails behind the rear wheels.

The new half-ton trucks are tuned for a perceived optimum balance between comfort and performance. Steering is light, but with enough feedback to guarantee sure-footedness. Chassis dynamics, though, are eye opening.

The study in chassis dynamics came about from a bit of trash talking with a co-worker with whom I compete in SCCA autocross events. “Jon, you lose speed because you’re not smooth enough.” “Ghrank, you’re way too timid.”

“Oooohhh,” the co-workers said. “Them’s fightin’ words!”

That led to challenge after extended-cab challenge in the Sierra 1500, F-150, and Hemi Ram (Club Cab) on the handling course. Our assessment, from the highly supervised low-speed handling course, was that the Titan crew cab had the sportiest steering and suspension, with higher effort and greater road feedback from the steering and the suspension. We wish we’d had the chance to rudimentarily flog the Titan as we had the other competitors. At any rate, it’s sportier, at least in its basic feel. We think that it would have had comparable handling to the Sierra due to its firmer suspension, countered by its heavier engine.

The worst handler, by far, was the F-150. Its soft suspension led to wallowing and its SOHC engine contributed weight that amounted to frustrating understeer. Steering was vague, and the torquey engine (5.4L Triton) was geared to sluggishness. The F-150’s strengths lay elsewhere. With a new F-150 in the works, Ford will be back, but for now they’re last, on paper at least.

The Hemi Ram was still burdened by a heavy iron-block engine, with weak low-end torque, and with a three-year technology deficit. The Ram 1500 was the first full-sized pickup to offer standard rack-and-pinion steering, and I lost several sales to it when it was introduced for that reason. Since then, as is always the case, the competition has evolved, and the Dodge is now front-heavy and vague.

Beyond our estimate, my co-workers and I don’t know what the Titan can do. I suspect that the automotive press will still pick the Titan as the best driving and best handling, due to its sportier setup. I also suspect that pickup drivers will disagree, preferring a smoother ride and somewhat lighter steering effort with competitive handling capabilities.

I don't have experimental instruments, at least with which to test these trucks quantitatively. I think I've done a decent job in outlining the new pickups' performance, which ranges from competitive to superior. GM's combination of ride and handling, makes few compromises for either. They are, overall, the best driving trucks you can get.

Information here on out is presented in terms of selling points and keys on manufacturer's ratings. You're welcome to continue, especially if you dig really dry reading, but it's geared toward the challenges that the people on the frontlines will face.

Ghrank

[327]

does anyone know yet what configurations you can get the VortecmaX 1500 in yet? all they still build on the websites are Crew Cab Shortboxes

[chevydlrmn]

Originally Posted by 327

does anyone know yet what configurations you can get the VortecmaX 1500 in yet? all they still build on the websites are Crew Cab Shortboxes

extended and crew

[Ghrankenstein]

The lowest trim level of the VORTEC-MAX will be the extended-cab SLE-1.

As I said before, depending on what you need, don't overlook the 2500 6.0L, with the 6L90E.

[Ghrankenstein]

LAMRONH: MY BAD

I accidentally edited my reply into your post. It was funny, but makes no point now.

Chalk it up to my simple brain, which cannot comprehend your hu-man thin-king ma-chines.

If you have any questions, I'll be RUDIMENTARILY throwing flowers into the pond.

[tog]

Originally Posted by Ghrankenstein

The lowest trim level of the VORTEC-MAX will be the extended-cab SLE-1.

As I said before, depending on what you need, don't overlook the 2500 6.0L, with the 6L90E.

will the 2500 with the 6.0 have AFM? and with the 6speed tranny, how will that affect mpg? have you seen ratings on it yet?

[davefr]

Originally Posted by chevydlrmn

extended and crew

But only with the short beds. There is no Vortec max option in an ext cab w/ long bed.

[cc1999]

I just want to know if anyone has driven a new 800/900 body 2500. I drove a 06 and there is know way I would buy one. The 06 still had the roughest ride in the industry vs other 3/4 tons and poor fuel economy vs other 1/2 GM models. I had a 02 D-max and the harsh ride was a problem then, and was still a problem in the 06. So yes when it comes to 3/4s I have been driving Fords. I still prefer a GM 1/2 ton and wish they offed the 6.0 max in the Reg cab long beds, since thats what I need. However for what ever reason GM thinks a MAX should only be used in the 5 and 6 foot short beds and not long beds of any cab configuration. It still blows my mind, since common since would say that people that buy long beds are going to be working there trucks, more often then not harder, pulling and hauling heavy loads then the people buying the short beds. Its great that they offer a motor that can pull at least as good or better then there old 350s but the limitations they have put in place to get it are just crazy IMO. I myself don't need the back seat I do need the long bed and I need all the low end torque that the 6.0 can muster.

[ChrisNJ]

How does the CC-max-6.0 w/trailer package ride compared to the old CC1500-6.0? I need to tow a 9K trailer part time. I agree with you that i would rather get the 2500-6.0 but i don't think i want it with the old frame, and would much rather have the 8.1 in a 2500 anyway, and without it, i may as well just get the 1500CC-6.0?

[texasisbetter]

the 8.1 vortec has been discontinued

[asim]

Originally Posted by texasisbetter

the 8.1 vortec has been discontinued

Yeah, that engine was crazy, and was a monster. It is actually a pretty good thing that they did DC it.

[superstreet]

so the 5.7 hemi is better than the 6.0 vortecmax??

[ponchoman49]

I'm a bit dissapointed with the 5.3 and the wide spread use of the 4 speed automatic and lack of a manual. It's interesting to note that the 4.8 is miles ahead of Dodges 4.7 and Fords 4.6 in hp and even now has more torque. But the 5.3 dissapoints, especially in the torque department to most all competitors. I wish GM had found a way to offer the 6 speed automatic in more models for this all new truck as this would have helped with the short comings of the 5.3. The truck it'self sets the bar on design. But as usual GM dissapoints somewhat in the powertrain department. I almost choked when I saw the 195 hp 4.3 is still the base engine, a motor that was conceived in 1985 with 155 hp.

[mobyss]

Originally Posted by cc1999

I still prefer a GM 1/2 ton and wish they offed the 6.0 max in the Reg cab long beds, since thats what I need. However for what ever reason GM thinks a MAX should only be used in the 5 and 6 foot short beds and not long beds of any cab configuration. It still blows my mind, since common since would say that people that buy long beds are going to be working there trucks, more often then not harder, pulling and hauling heavy loads then the people buying the short beds. Its great that they offer a motor that can pull at least as good or better then there old 350s but the limitations they have put in place to get it are just crazy IMO. I myself don't need the back seat I do need the long bed and I need all the low end torque that the 6.0 can muster.

I totally agree - the 6.0 should be available in ALL configurations, just like the "Hemi" was for the 1500 Ram from the beginning. I remember you could outfit a short-bed reg-cab 2WD Dodge with the Hemi for under $21K.

I'd like to be able to do the same with a Silverado WT - the engine bay is the same size in all configurations, right?

Another question - when will E85 be available in the 6.0?

[TOMHONE]

Can anyone here who works on the production lines tell me how many plants are producing the 900 line of trucks for GM? And what type of numbers have these plants already produced? THANKS much. A GM shareholder here and potential 900 buyer.