[Avalanche13]

just because you beat him entering the highway, def does not mean he was racing you. EB have double your Tq and atleast 115HP more. He wasn't racing you.

The V6 Malibu has a better power/weight ratio than the F150 Ecoboost.

 

[Avalanche13]

How much weight did he have in the bed?

2011 Ford F-150 Lariat EcoBoost 4x4 (3.5L Twin Turbo V6) 0-60 mph 6.1 Quarter Mile 14.6
2011 Chevrolet Malibu LTZ (3.6L) 0-60 mph 6.3

The Malibu runs mid 14's in the 1/4 mile, the Ecoboost F150 runs ~15 flat.

 

[Avalanche13]

All-new. Shares only displacement with the current one.

Considering the previous 4.3L was a 350 with two cylinders removed, is there a remote chance that GM is bringing back the 350ci displacement?

Why did they make the base motor's displacement over 4.0L? I think the 3.6L V6 would have worked well...

A 4.3L Gen 5 small block V8 based V6 will make comparable or more power than the 3.6L and make it at lower RPM. That's besides the fact that it'll have far more torque on a flatter curve. A more appropriate engine for a truck.

 

[Avalanche13]

After the information we received we concluded that the new GM half tons, though an improvement from the GMT 900s, is not enough to catch up to the competition. We are therefore going to purchase (2) F150s and (1) Tundra to replace (3) Silverados. The competition has moved ahead of GM and so for this round we will try them out.

Why not buy three Fords? Why buy a caricature of a last-gen Dodge Ram that's arguably the last place truck on the market in terms of power, efficiency, quality, etc.

 

[Avalanche13]

We tested Silverados, F150's and Tundras extensively prior to our decision. You might not like the Tundra for yourself and that is fine. However to denigrate it on Power, Efficiency and Quality just shows your severe ignorance.

Its not ignorance if its true. You can look up the stats as easily as I can. Any Tundra you can equip, I can equip a more powerful domestic from any brand with superior or equivalent fuel economy. That's a FACT. Refute me with numbers, not words.

 

[Avalanche13]

Ok equip a crew cab Silverado with at least 380 HP pushing 4.10 final drive and gets at least
18 MPG on the highway. Hint Tundra has it.

How about 403hp? That's more than 380hp right?

From the EPA http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=31867&id=31448&id=31451&id=32120:
2012 Silverado 6.2L 4x4 = 13/17/14
2012 Tundra 5.7L 4x4 = 12/18/14

The EPA predicts the same annual fuel cost. So the Tundra is less powerful with equivalent fuel economy. That's also going along with its inferior c-channel frame, etc.

For fun:
2012 Ram 5.7L 4x4 with 390hp 13/19/15
2012 F150 3.5L 4x4 with 365hp 16/22

The 6.2L Silverado crew cab gets 18 MPG highway and has 403 HP. It comes with a 3.73 rear axle ratio. You'd have to look up transmission ratios to see how that compares to the Tundra with 4.10s.

You can get the 381hp 5.7L engine in ANY Tundra config. Can you get the 6.2L in any Silverado config? Nope.

You suck at reading comprehension. I said DOMESTIC, not Silverado. I can build a Ram with more HP and better fuel efficiency than ANY Tundra.

Based on my dealers information: The 18MPG hwy rating for the 6.2L Crew Cab Silverado is with the standard 3.08 final drive. The 3.73 is rated at 16 MPG Hwy. In our testing the Tundra easily towed the load effortlessly (no down shifting on light grades) where as the Silverado down shifted at the slightest grade.

Where do you get your information? Go Chevrolet.com and try building a Silverado. The Silverado 6.2L is not available with a 3.08 diff, its either a 3.42 if you add it as an option to an LTZ or a 3.73 if you get the max towing package.

 

[Avalanche13]

No, you said: "Any Tundra you can equip, I can equip a more powerful domestic from any brand with superior or equivalent fuel economy."

You suck at geography. Last time I checked, Texas is in the US. The Tundra is built in Texas, and ONLY sold in NA. Doesn't get much more domestic than that. So, is a GM or Ram (Fiat) that's built in Mexico "domestic"?

The Tundra may be built with a crappy frame and cheesy interior (amongst other stuff), but it's 381hp will blow the doors off the 403hp 6.2L...loaded or empty. It's a great drivetrain.

I don't care where the Tundra is built, its a TOYOTA, which makes it an IMPORT. How hard is that to understand?

And no doors blowing off occurs. I'll back that up with data for you too. This data comes from a test performed on the same day in the same environment. http://www.trucktrend.com/roadtests...truck_comparison/speclfications_and_data.html

2009 Silverado 6.2L CCSB 4x4 with 3.42 gears
Unloaded the Silverado did 0-60 in 7.0 and 40-60 in 3.0
Loaded the Silverado did 0-60 in 14.2 and 40-60 in 6.3

2009 Turdra 5.7L CCSB 4x4 with 4.30 gears
Unloaded the Tundra did 0-60 in 7.2 and 40-60 in 3.0
Loaded the Tundra did 0-60 in 13.9 and 40-60 in 6.4

Looks to me like they're pretty evenly matched with the Unloaded Chevy being a tick quicker and the Loaded Toyota being a tick quicker around town while the loaded Chevy is a tick quicker on the highway. These tests were performed with a 3.42 rear for the Chevy vs the 4.30s in the Toyota; the 3.73 should give the Chevy the gearing it needs to be a tick quicker in all tests.

 

[Avalanche13]

For 2013 Ford has their 6.2L now spead through out the model line up a bit $$$$, but no longer limited to Larriat trim and up models.
Hemi's are 390+ hp and are availble in base models.
I was in hopes GM would follow suit and offer the motor in more models in the next generation trucks and SUV.
I recently sold my 11 5.3L Tahoe when I found a lower mileage 09 with the 6.2L. I really hope they bring the 6.2L back to the non Escalade/Denalli Suvs.

I still think its complete bull**** that GM didn't offer the 6.2L in the Avalanche.

 

[Avalanche13]

They did offer the 6.0 in the GMT900 Avalanches in 2007, not sure what year they stopped offering it.

The 6.0 had a pretty limited run and I don't think it was ever paired with the 6L80. Either way a 6.2L it is not.

 

[Avalanche13]

Have we seen any interior shots of the 2013 SUVs yet? I'm curious to see if the column shifter is retained.

DEF isn't a feature. It's the feasible engineering solution to meet emissions standards.

It was either sacrifice power and have no DEF, or keep the power and have DEF. For full-size trucks that need the gusto for towing they made the right choice.

 

[Avalanche13]

Maybe on some trim levels. But that's what GMC and Cadillac are for. Sorry if that makes your blood pressure high, but it's all about GM, not Chevy.

I don't know where people get off saying GMC is better than Chevy. Go compare a fully optioned Silverado LTZ and a Sierra Denali. Minus the stupid AWD system on the Denali, they're virtually identical.

So is Ford's. So is Ram's. Styling is subjective. GM sells nearly as many trucks as Ford, so your point is irrelavant.

Good point. I think Ford's grille is hideous and I've never been a huge fan of the Ram's "big-rig" styling. I also don't care for the Silverado, but love the Sierra.

Another lie. My 2003 Yukon still has the frame coating and has not rusted.

The frame coating on my Avalanche is perfectly intact, though its only 3 years old.

Hey, you guys just continue making excuses for poor quality... The fact is Chevrolet's interiors ARE cheap compared to Ford's.

The Ford was just redesigned. Ford's interiors were **** compared to Chevy when the GMT900's launched.

The fact is Chevrolet's are NOT on anyone's radar in the offroad community because they don't have a SFA nor a Raptor or RamRunner competitor.

And Ford and Dodge are just blips on the radar. Jeep owns this market. Why compromise the on-road towing and ride quality of your HD truck (which is how 99% of owners will use it) just for a few offroaders who will just buy a Wrangler anyways?

The fact is they DID use parts bin drum brakes on the GMT900.

False. My GMT900 Avalanche has four wheel disc brakes.

The fact is their bowtie emblems on the tailgates of the Silverado DO wash out from rain Very quickly.

The front grille emblem on my Avalanche did wash out; I got it replaced under warranty. The replacement bowtie was a different design so address the washout issue.

And sales of both of those trucks tell the story. That's what HD guys want.

Is it sales or is it reputation? I'm not saying I disagree, but remember Ford invented the "HD" light truck market. GM has powerful dominance in the full-size SUV market simply due to the Tahoe and Suburban's brand equity. Maybe a similar thing is happening with Ford?

Spin again. What are you, a commentator for MSNBC? I never once said that. All I Ever asked for is equality. Not for Anything to be liquidated.

I'd argue there is equality. What can you get on a Sierra Denali you can't get on a Silverado LTZ minus the stupid AWD system (which has no place on a truck)?

 

[Avalanche13]

Packed and ready to depart for truck action!

View attachment 11966


Sent from my iPhone using AutoGuide.com App

Let us know if there's anything about the SUVs there.

What type of shoes would NSAP wear? Would a man of discerning Cadillac taste perhaps wear a traditional high quality brand like Allen Edmonds, a relatively plebeian but quality brand like Rockport , a forward thinking American brand like Kenneth Cole or perhaps an Italian brand of loafer like Prada?

MR993's for me. I like mah feets to be comfy

http://www.amazon.com/New-Balance-Mens-MR993-Running/dp/B00178UTV4/ref=sr_1_1?s=shoes&ie=UTF8&qid=1353965184&sr=1-1&keywords=new+balance+993

Same here. The Sierra should have been a Chevrolet. I may have bought one.

For me the biggest difference was the full chrome bumper on the Sierra. The stupid chrome bar in the middle of the bumper on the Chevy looked silly IMO. If you are going no-chrome, then go all the way like the Avalanche, otherwise put a full-width chrome bumper. I would have used the Sierra's bumper with a body color grille were I designing the Silverado. I also would have used the Avalanche-style horizontal headlights as opposed to the stacked ones the GMT900's use.

Wax dipped frames are not of the highest quality. The wax comes right off. You can literally rub it off with your shirt doing an oil change. If you're happy with a Second Best coating on your frame, good for you. There's a reason Ford and Dodge use Paint.

I wasn't debating quality, I was just pointing out that my coating is indeed intact.

The Dodge indeed was. The Ford however was not. Ford's interior launched in 2004 was world's better than the Chevrolet interior which came 3 years later. It's no coincidence that GM is now using the same supplier for this upcoming truck.

I test drove an F-150 back in 2006 when I bought my Avalanche and its interior didn't seem nearly as nice to me. However I forget that the sub-LTZ Chevy has a different interior. A little google image searching reminded me. I haven't had any experience with that interior.

Um no, not really. We're talking about TRUCKS. Take Jeep off the table. Ford and Dodge DO OWN the offroad TRUCK market. Chevy is nowhere to be found.

I'll concede the point, but your original post said "offroading community"; you didn't specify full-size trucks. That's why I brought up Jeep. The fact remains that for most consumer who want to go offroad, a full-size pickup isn't at the top of the shopping list either way.

Again, we're talking about Trucks. The Silverado and Sierra do Not. Our 3500 Express vans at work also had disc brakes. Drums are not first best, they are second best. GM was penny pinching period.

A little searching reveals that the GMT900 Avalanche/Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon have standard 4-wheel disc. The Silverado/Sierra have standard drums with rear disc available on the VortecMax package. So I guess the real answer is "yes and no". I agree drums should be nowhere to be found.

Also, last I checked the Avalanche IS a truck. It may have SUV underpinnings designed for on-road use, but its R/4WD, BOF, V8 powered, tows 8100# and hauls 1600# in the bed, which are very competitive stats in the 1/2 ton market.

NAZRancher & SDRacing, the only 2 other Real Truck Men on this thread. Also the only 2 other guys on here that have a clue as to what they're talking about.

So what makes you a "real truck man"?

 

[Avalanche13]

Off road may not be important to you, but it is to many. The mere suggestion that it isn't, overlooks the marketing mystique associated with the toughest looking truck.

To put a reality check on this whole conversation I'll pose this question: what percentage of 3/4 and 1 ton trucks are taken offroad (and I mean seriously offroad, not a 2-rut logging trail)?

I know that if I need to tow a horse trailer or something, I'd buy a GM HD for the best-in-class powertrain and best-in-class ride quality and driving dynamics. This conversation quickly forgets that the GM trucks are better at towing and have better driving dynamics than the Ford and Ram. I would argue that that's more important to more consumers than rock crawling ability.

That said, GM should improve its IFS.

 

[Avalanche13]

SDRacing is the real deal. Chevrolet Motor Company is the equal rival to Ford Motor Company. The GM-Corporate badge matters not to many. It has only served to hurt Chevrolet in their fight against Ford. Chevrolet cannot give the beatdown it needs to give to Ford with one hand tied behind it's back.

It matters not though. The day of reckoning is 2 days away. The tale and the truth will be laid bare. I suspect the foundational post of this thread will be shown as the joke it started out as.

I've heard this line of GMC keeping Chevy down over and over and over again, yet nobody's ever substantiated it with evidence.

What pickup truck does GMC sell that's nicer than a Chevy? Run down the options list and tell me what the difference between a fully optioned Silverado LTZ and Sierra Denali is. They're virtually identical, except the GMC has that silly AWD nonsense rather than a real 2sp transfer case. The GMC Sierra has always been a grill swap of the Chevy Silverado. They're the exact same truck. How does this hurt Chevrolet? Also FWIW, GMC never got Chevrolet's most premium pickup: the Chevy Avalanche.

= Clueless. Just like many who post nothing of suspension knowlege. It's obvious who those folks are. Easily fooled by GM marketing. I take comfort in the fact that there are still real truck men out there with a brain. Those men unfortunately are not buying Chevrolet (or GM) trucks. The funny ones are those who argue that GM frames are lower due to transmissions only. These fools have clearly never turned a wrench under a truck. GM frames are slung nearly 10 inches lower for torsion bar tie ins due to the IFS period. If GM will not go back to a tucked away frame and SFA as NazRancher has stated then so be it. He obviously knows more than I about the situation as well as you.. Do not however make ridiculous excuses for why they do what they do. I wouldn't let you kids change my oil let alone dictate which truck is better.

Why don't you take the Bowtie pictures out of your signature. Chevy Thunder my ass...

I value your opinion, however posts like this make you sound rather arrogant as if you are the sole arbiter of who is a "real truck guy".

 

[Avalanche13]

I cannot explain the Avalanche. I never got it, I still don't get it..... It should have been an Optional package to the regular Silverado as far as I'm concerned. I do not however consider it premium. It was never marketed as that... It was only IMO better looking than the ugly Silverado and even the Sierra. You cannot deny that GM tries to market and pass off GMC as a premium truck line. And as a Chevrolet man, I take serious issue with this. You cannot fight Ford nor Dodge with is what to be perceived as a second rate truck. GMC needs to be a rebadged Chevy as it always was.

My opinion is that GM has been branding GMC as superior to Ford not equal. I dont see it as GM positioning Chevy as second rate, but rather saying Chevy = Ford, GMC = more upscale than either. To use a car analogy its like saying that Ford cars are is second rate to Hyundai because of Lincoln. My point about the actual trucks being the same still stands though.

Considering your knowledge of truck engineering I'm surprised you don't understand the Avalanche. It could never be an optional trim on a Silverado because of the midgate system. The Silverado's bed is distinct from the cab, its impossible to have a pass-thru Midgate with that design. Thats why the Suburban was used as the base.

Having the Suburban as its base makes it more premium than a Silverado. If you drove it back to back you'd understand. Back when I went shopping I compared the Avalanche to the Silvy, F150, and Ram 1500. The Avalanche's ride quality, NVH, handling and level of comfort blew the others away. Of course this comes at a cost of a high MSRP but most premium products do. It truly does feel premium compared to a normal half ton and is a great representative to what Chevy can do. The Avalanche pratically invented the comfortable "family car" truck with luxury appointments market. The f150 platinum owes its existence to the Avalanche's success.