GM Inside News Forum banner
241 - 260 of 1780 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,080 Posts
No, a $6,875 premium with more power and torque as well as a 5MPG City and 4MPG combined fuel economy advantage is justified. You'll save $584 per year.
In that case, a 12 year roi is hard to justify in my opinion. But I suppose if you did mainly city driving it would make more sense still.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,480 Posts
For those who want a different front suspension for better ground clearance; I took a really close look at a 2011 Super Duty 6.7 PS today. As it creaked to a stop (not sure why) next to me in the grocery store parking lot, I stayed put just to look it over real close. I wasn't all that convinced it had more off-road capability because I saw the big front I beams and transmission crossmember hanging pretty darn low. I could also plainly see oil filters and cooling lines that just seemed too low and close for comfort if I was off roading. It really made me realize how I like the cleaner look of the Silverado and appreciate the awesome frame and drivetrain. It really wouldn't take much of a refresh to the interior and cosmetics to make the current Silverado HD a homerun. As far as the frame and undercarriage goes, only thing I'd change is that darn DEF tank and a new Duramax exhaust. I like the way the current design allows you to easily change the front height.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,260 Posts
For those who want a different front suspension for better ground clearance; I took a really close look at a 2011 Super Duty 6.7 PS today. As it creaked to a stop (not sure why) next to me in the grocery store parking lot, I stayed put just to look it over real close. I wasn't all that convinced it had more off-road capability because I saw the big front I beams and transmission crossmember hanging pretty darn low. I could also plainly see oil filters and cooling lines that just seemed too low and close for comfort if I was off roading. It really made me realize how I like the cleaner look of the Silverado and appreciate the awesome frame and drivetrain. It really wouldn't take much of a refresh to the interior and cosmetics to make the current Silverado HD a homerun. As far as the frame and undercarriage goes, only thing I'd change is that darn DEF tank and a new Duramax exhaust. I like the way the current design allows you to easily change the front height.
Did you check out the plastic oil pan and drain plug on the 6.7L?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,469 Posts
For those who want a different front suspension for better ground clearance; I took a really close look at a 2011 Super Duty 6.7 PS today. As it creaked to a stop (not sure why) next to me in the grocery store parking lot, I stayed put just to look it over real close. I wasn't all that convinced it had more off-road capability because I saw the big front I beams and transmission crossmember hanging pretty darn low. I could also plainly see oil filters and cooling lines that just seemed too low and close for comfort if I was off roading. It really made me realize how I like the cleaner look of the Silverado and appreciate the awesome frame and drivetrain. It really wouldn't take much of a refresh to the interior and cosmetics to make the current Silverado HD a homerun. As far as the frame and undercarriage goes, only thing I'd change is that darn DEF tank and a new Duramax exhaust. I like the way the current design allows you to easily change the front height.
One interesting point. Diesel Power tested HD trucks a few months ago, and Ford and GM had the same lowest point on the truck measurement of 9 inches at the front differential.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,682 Posts
In that case, a 12 year roi is hard to justify in my opinion. But I suppose if you did mainly city driving it would make more sense still.
If GM would stop making the Hybrid a separate trim level and just offer the drivetrain on all full-size half-ton SUVs and Crew Cab pickups as well as build more than a few thousand of them, the cost of the system would come down to a more acceptable level, offering a ROI closer to three-five years.

I'm hoping the K2 trucks will offer the 4-Mode Hybrid system in more models and in higher quantities with lower cost up front.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
Oh, you want to compare Denali Hybrid to regular Denali now? Well, true you lose some power, but the economy gains go up to 7MPG City and 6MPG combined, that's a $1,000 per year in fuel savings. That means you'll make up the difference in price in 5 years and then it's all savings, again, to the tune of $1,000 per year.

Why do you think the Hybrid system is more troublesome? I bought a new 2005 Silverado and went through two transmissions and three torque converters in the 67,000 miles I owned it at a huge cost, luckily taken care of by the warranty. No Hybrid system there.

Also, what's to maintain on the Hybrid system? Nothing. The batteries will last at least 10 years, about enough time to break even on the extra cost of the truck, but you've used less fuel and therefore less oil over it's life. Even then the batteries just deteriorate a little over time, they don't up and die.

You say that trucks aren't meant to get good mileage, but the GM 2-Mode Hybrid system breaks that mold and allows at least 20MPG around town in a full-size truck or SUV. That's something nobody else can offer.

If you hate Hybrids just say so, but don't try to dismiss GM's class-exclusive technology as a gimmick.

I will never buy anything battery powered. Yes, those EPA rated numbers... if that's what your argument is, then its not very strong. I told you, I demo'd each Denali for a month, put about 4k miles on each one. Only got about 1 mpg more with the hybrid. The transition wasn't "smooth," the engine ran rather course, and the overall drivability was severely diminished overall.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
For those who want a different front suspension for better ground clearance; I took a really close look at a 2011 Super Duty 6.7 PS today. As it creaked to a stop (not sure why) next to me in the grocery store parking lot, I stayed put just to look it over real close. I wasn't all that convinced it had more off-road capability because I saw the big front I beams and transmission crossmember hanging pretty darn low. I could also plainly see oil filters and cooling lines that just seemed too low and close for comfort if I was off roading. It really made me realize how I like the cleaner look of the Silverado and appreciate the awesome frame and drivetrain. It really wouldn't take much of a refresh to the interior and cosmetics to make the current Silverado HD a homerun. As far as the frame and undercarriage goes, only thing I'd change is that darn DEF tank and a new Duramax exhaust. I like the way the current design allows you to easily change the front height.

Well, there isn't much dispute that solid front axle is going to perform better for off road. Enter Jeep Wrangler and Dodge Power Wagon. Yes, the Hummer H1 is fully independent, but its built differently. When you have IFS and rear axle, it won't be quite as good. I still am going to have to disagree with the ground clearance thing, there is a noticeable difference between Ford and GM. Coming from a GM guy, the Ford sits much higher. The GM's forward rake makes the front half of the truck sit lower, but I haven't personally used the trim level adjustment to see how high or low it goes. Another thing that cripples the GM market is those damn sporty wheel wells. From the factory, the Ford is much easier to build up because of larger wheel wells and more forgiving suspension travel, including the front axle. Neither truck is perfect, if you want the better on-road performer, I'd get the GM, if you want something that has a nice interior and a bit more capability off road, go with the Ford. I hope the new HD's have power mirrors like the Ford, a large crew cabin, and solid front axle option.

Interesting note about the same 9" ground clearance though. But if you put an F250 and Sierra2500 facing each other and take a look, you have a lot more room underneath the Ford. You could pretty much crawl under it, whereas you'd have to slither under the Sierra. I was checking out a GMC Sierra 3500 Denali at the dealer, looked underneath, and the driveshaft was completely rusted. WTF? I thought it would at least have an aluminum cover... but it was completely rusted.

All in all its a hard call (hey that rhymes). I'm still up in the air on which to go with. The Dodge Cummins go for about 8-10k less, I've seen ones on Ebay fully loaded Laramie/Longhorns for about 51k, whereas the same for the Ford/GM would be around 60k. The Dodge's interior is too cheap for my taste, but the Mega Cab is pretty sick. The body is greatly designed too, with good materials, door seals, and just looks imposing. I hate the manual flip up and fold mirrors though.

The Fords got all the goodies, and the luxury of the King Ranch package. I think the front end looks badass, and less the cheapish rear fender flares on the dually, it's pretty good looking. It does lack in the frame and suspension department though, especially now compared to the new GM HD's. Not too fond of the single turbo with its exhaust brake system either. The steering and brake pedal are numb, with 5.5 turns from lock to lock. I don't need all of the in-dash computer controls and diagnostics for off roading and stuff, and wish it didn't come standard with the upper trim levels (to save a few bucks).

The new GM HD's frame and suspension is an absolute perfection for on-road capability. The body isn't bad, but looks kinda wimpy compared to the other trucks, especially the smallish crew cab. It could also use larger, more round wheel wells, with larger standard tires. I think GM loses a good amount of sales to Ford because of the inability to build up the GM trucks as easily. I see A LOT more jacked up Fords than GMs. Absolutely love the Duramax/Allison, and it has the best exhaust brake in the segment. I think it feels the most solid too, opening and closing the doors and tailgate feels very snug and secure, and doing the same to the Ford yields a more unsettled feeling. I do hope they change the door lines on the new ones, I hate how the doors wrap up over the top of the cab, because it just gets bogged with water and snow, which is annoying when opening the door. Plus it adds to wind resistance and noise; GM needs to take a play out of the F-150 or Dodge Ram playbooks to see how to design their doors. I like the standard auto locker as opposed to the electric locker too, and GM is the only brand that offers it in the duallys.

Seriously, you can't go wrong with any of the Big 3. They will all perform well in most situations, and it comes down to personal preference and what you want when it turns into your daily driver. I hope all 3 trucks could culminate into one super mega awesome truck that can be custom ordered from the factory. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
858 Posts
No, a $6,875 premium with more power and torque as well as a 5MPG City and 4MPG combined fuel economy advantage is justified. You'll save $584 per year.



Cost of ownership? You SAVE money on gas.



That's why they have an "Auto Stop" readout on the tachometer. ;)
The Batteries are not cheap and from what I had read about a lot of the hybrids on the market, the batteries were good for around 60,000 miles and cost thousands to replace. So the hybrid may save some gas, but will never workout to a payback at any point that I can tell. I don't think the Hybrid would have ever taken off like the EB has for Ford marketing or not. Me, I have 0 intrust in ever owning a Hybrid truck, as far as I am concerned the option could be free and I would not have it.

I also think your kidding yourself if you think 50% of the market would ever bought the quadrasteer regardless of marketing or configuration.

If memory serves Ford was still outselling Chevy even in the GMT400 era. The biggest contributor to the explosion of pickup and suv ownership had a lot more to do with the EPA killing large powerful comfortable cars rather then something that can be pined to one particular truck model or truck brand.

3rd doors were not that big of a deal, GM rolled theres out in 97 or 98 cant remeber when Ford did theres for sure but I was thinking it was around the same time they launched there new 97 body style. GM I for some reason thought followed Ford on that one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
Plus, those battery packs aren't filled with edible cream filling. Essentially we have mini-nuclear power pants running around in our cars and trucks.

Look, there is only so far you can push an internal combustion engine. You aren't going to get far beyond 40mpg in ANY car without the assistance of other energy. In other words, why spend so much tech and resources to saving a gallon or two, when you could just put turbos in the V8's and get better mileage. Look at the new diesels... more power, MUCH more power, and improved gas mileage. It's either electric, or its gasoline/diesel powered. Combining the two is just a waste.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
694 Posts
Enter Jeep Wrangler and Dodge Power Wagon.
I've seen that new Power wagon commercial several times now. That thing is fantastic! Cool commercial too. That's how my SD gets used as well. I don't recall Ford ever having an offroad/trail type commercial like that. Nor Chevy for that matter. Here it is for those who haven't seen it. I wouldn't trade my SD for one (not really a Dodge guy) but it's cool nonetheless.

And those new Chevy frames are still pretty low. I crawled under one on Saturday. No way I could slide all the way across underneath. My Super Duty I can easily. A little kid could hide out underneath there in a good game of hide and seek. Tons of room.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,682 Posts
The Batteries are not cheap and from what I had read about a lot of the hybrids on the market, the batteries were good for around 60,000 miles and cost thousands to replace. So the hybrid may save some gas, but will never workout to a payback at any point that I can tell. I don't think the Hybrid would have ever taken off like the EB has for Ford marketing or not. Me, I have 0 intrust in ever owning a Hybrid truck, as far as I am concerned the option could be free and I would not have it.
You and DenaliHD66 must be reading from 'The Repulican's Guide To Hybrids'. Hybrid batteries last a LONG time. There are hybrid taxis running around with hundreds of thousands of miles on the original packs.

Example 1

Example 2

I also think your kidding yourself if you think 50% of the market would ever bought the quadrasteer regardless of marketing or configuration.
You're anti-turning radius as well?

If memory serves Ford was still outselling Chevy even in the GMT400 era. The biggest contributor to the explosion of pickup and suv ownership had a lot more to do with the EPA killing large powerful comfortable cars rather then something that can be pined to one particular truck model or truck brand.
Ford has how many model lines of truck? 1

GM has how many? 2

Chevy and GMC combined killed in Ford sales in those days. GM's new truck was better than the aged Ford in pretty much every way, but the Ford was cheaper and sold more to fleet customers while the GM trucks sold more to the public. Ford saw the need for advanced design in pickups and brought the world the '97 F-150. The GMT-400 was a game changer, believe it or not, I don't care.

3rd doors were not that big of a deal, GM rolled theres out in 97 or 98 cant remeber when Ford did theres for sure but I was thinking it was around the same time they launched there new 97 body style. GM I for some reason thought followed Ford on that one.
Trust me, in '96, when GM debuted the third door, it was a big deal. I've got the magazine's, brochures and memories. My cousin even bought a new '96 Chevy 3DR. Ford had to hurry and add it to the new '97 F-150 SupeCab to be competitive and Dodge went a step further with the Quad Cab in '98 so Ford added a fourth door in '99 and GM had a fourth door option in '00. GM was first and obviously it was a game changer.

Plus, those battery packs aren't filled with edible cream filling. Essentially we have mini-nuclear power pants running around in our cars and trucks.

Look, there is only so far you can push an internal combustion engine. You aren't going to get far beyond 40mpg in ANY car without the assistance of other energy. In other words, why spend so much tech and resources to saving a gallon or two, when you could just put turbos in the V8's and get better mileage. Look at the new diesels... more power, MUCH more power, and improved gas mileage. It's either electric, or its gasoline/diesel powered. Combining the two is just a waste.
I'm honestly surprised the two of you have vehicles with automatic transmissions and power windows and locks.

How in the hell are NiMH batteries like nuclear power plants? Are you scared of your cordless telephone too? Perhaps an electric razor is too deadly for you?

I can't even imagine how you must feel about the little LEAD ACID batteries in EVERY SINGLE motor vehicle on the road as well as in your computer's UPS and in the panel of your home alarm system. OMG!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,578 Posts
How in the hell are NiMH batteries like nuclear power plants? Are you scared of your cordless telephone too? Perhaps an electric razor is too deadly for you?
I can't even imagine how you must feel about the little LEAD ACID batteries in EVERY SINGLE motor vehicle on the road as well as in your computer's UPS and in the panel of your home alarm system. OMG!
Can people be trusted with lead and acids? It sounds dangerous to me!:rolleyes:;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
LOL. Bringing politics into my assumptions when I have stated over and over its an unnecessary premium cost, and its going to cost more to maintain and operate, and you can't work on it yourself. Who can work on them? Dealers. How much are they going to charge? A boat load. If you want to do a case study where 2 people buy a Yukon Denali, one buys the hybrid, and do a 10-year cost to operate comparison. They have to consistently be driven in the same manner as well as distance. I guarantee 100% the regular Denali will be cheaper over a 10-year period. I don't think this is really an arguable topic, its common sense. Consider the fact that I can work on about 50% of a normal trucks parts right now, add in this advanced hybrid system, and it probably drops to 30%. All the computerness and gadgets aren't going to come cheap.

@Smith7629 What do you mean you agree with me, but not for the new ones? The new ones have basically 400HP, 800TQ, and get BETTER gas mileage than previous generations, because of better use of turbos.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
I've seen that new Power wagon commercial several times now. That thing is fantastic! Cool commercial too. That's how my SD gets used as well. I don't recall Ford ever having an offroad/trail type commercial like that. Nor Chevy for that matter. Here it is for those who haven't seen it. I wouldn't trade my SD for one (not really a Dodge guy) but it's cool nonetheless.

And those new Chevy frames are still pretty low. I crawled under one on Saturday. No way I could slide all the way across underneath. My Super Duty I can easily. A little kid could hide out underneath there in a good game of hide and seek. Tons of room.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0f8MtXNcI4

Sierra All-Terrain concept needs to go into fruition. But yes, the Power Wagon is very capable. The new ones offer an upper and lower trim level, to satisfy customer's needs. Dodge is 3rd on my list of 3, but an upper level trim package in that thing is very appealing to me.

Yes so you know what I mean about the low-hang of the frame under the chassis part of the cab. Like I said before, the Duramax will dominate the truck category in on-road performance, but its so stuff and lacks the flexibility and articulation for off-road that it just wouldn't perform as well. The auto rear locker helps greatly versus limited slip, but if it buries the frame its not going anywhere. Couple that with its harder to build up, and if guys do build it up, they change out the front end to a solid axle one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
I think its been mentioned before that consumers are fine for new advancements and what not, but keep them as OPTIONS and don't limit what regular consumers want. I'm completely fine with people who want to pay more for hybrids, just boosts profit margins for the car companies and gives the person a sense of satisfaction (albeit superficial and pretentious), but at least they are happy with their choice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
858 Posts
There was a lot of press in recent years about hazmat training for fire and rescue workers when working Hybrid accidents.

I think there are few hundred pounds worth of batteries under the back seat of the hybrid Tahoes.
I think there is also a difference in hazzmat items out under the hood vs under your seat.
The Batteries in a Hybrid car are not exactly the same risk as the tiny little battery in your phone.

I am apparently more in line with the masses in not wanting the Hybrid or the GM Quadsteer. You can keep drinkning that GM Coolaid all you want.


Based on design to market times, I am still not sure whom would have come up with the 3rd door idea first. Ford would have had the Truck in RD likley several years prior to its launch in 96 as an 97 Model. GM had them in a very limmited production in 96 if I remember correctly it was also a late realease and it was mid design cycle addaptaion, where Ford I belive had it in there 97 design from the start. Even toward the end of the 400 design cycle the 3rd door was still not getting a 100% take rate on extended cabs, I want to say it was more in the 50% range. So I just didn't see it as a major game changer at the time. I was in the business back in those days We had them both ways on the lot with and without the 3rd door. I also seem to recall wind noise issues, rattle issue with them, I just don't remember them as being a big deal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,682 Posts
I think its been mentioned before that consumers are fine for new advancements and what not, but keep them as OPTIONS and don't limit what regular consumers want. I'm completely fine with people who want to pay more for hybrids, just boosts profit margins for the car companies and gives the person a sense of satisfaction (albeit superficial and pretentious), but at least they are happy with their choice.
Who's forcing anyone to buy the Hybrid? In fact, GM is basically hiding the Hybrids as if they were a dirty little secret.

Oh, and what is superficial and pretentious about wanting to save fuel and have lower emissions? I'm not a "Global Warming" subscriber, but I do know that conserving natural resources and cutting down air pollution is a good thing.

There was a lot of press in recent years about hazmat training for fire and rescue workers when working Hybrid accidents.

I think there are few hundred pounds worth of batteries under the back seat of the hybrid Tahoes.
I think there is also a difference in hazzmat items out under the hood vs under your seat.
The Batteries in a Hybrid car are not exactly the same risk as the tiny little battery in your phone.
The press was about the training of emergency respondents in what to look out for because of the high voltage systems that hybrids use. There have been plenty of hybrid vehicles in accidents over the years and you've heard nothing of it because the cars are designed with collisions in mind.

I am apparently more in line with the masses in not wanting the Hybrid or the GM Quadsteer. You can keep drinkning that GM Coolaid all you want.
The masses don't know about the Hybrid trucks, same with Quadrasteer. At least with Quadrasteer they had a commercial, but that's was when it was expensive and only available on a few cab/bed combinations. The public never got to sample the perfected Quadrasteer 2.

Oh, and I love how I'm drinking GM "Coolaid" now but when it comes to Cadillac I'm eating sauerkraut. Did I not just say that if it weren't for the Hybrids GM wouldn't have any advantages in half-ton pickups? Did I not just say that I'd buy a Ford if I needed to haul or tow more than the Hybrids are capable of?

Based on design to market times, I am still not sure whom would have come up with the 3rd door idea first. Ford would have had the Truck in RD likley several years prior to its launch in 96 as an 97 Model. GM had them in a very limmited production in 96 if I remember correctly it was also a late realease and it was mid design cycle addaptaion, where Ford I belive had it in there 97 design from the start. Even toward the end of the 400 design cycle the 3rd door was still not getting a 100% take rate on extended cabs, I want to say it was more in the 50% range. So I just didn't see it as a major game changer at the time. I was in the business back in those days We had them both ways on the lot with and without the 3rd door. I also seem to recall wind noise issues, rattle issue with them, I just don't remember them as being a big deal.
Who got to market first? GM

Can you get an Extended Cab-style pickup without rear doors now? No.

It was a game changer. The end.

Obviously GM had to have time to design it and come up with the idea for it, so their "design to market" time would have had to be just as long as Ford's. You can tell by the crash tests that Ford didn't do much safety engineering for their third and fourth doors on the '97-'03 generation, which leads me to believe that they added them in a reaction move to what GM and Chrysler did.


Also, GM limited the 3RD door option to half-ton Silverado-trimmed trucks with either the 305 or 350, automatic transmission and short bed or Sportside. It wasn't until the GMT-800 that it became standard on all Extended Cabs.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
694 Posts
Chevy and GMC combined
Enough said. Am I not the only person who see's a problem with this? Why is it GM needs 2 truck divisions to attempt to take on other companies that only have 1?. It just doesn't make any sense to me. If we were doing things Right we should be outselling the competition 2 to 1 based on styling preferences alone. Yet we can barely pull it off with 2 and sometimes we don't even come close. The problem is, we're not building them right.

For the life of me I cannot understand why Chevy can't purchase a Super Duty Ford and reengineer it. From the frame, to the front axle, to the King Ranch interior.. And then put their own look on it. Heck, They can borrow mine if it's that difficult.

I hope that new CEO pays attention to this type of stuff and fixes it once and for all. He seems like the type that would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,682 Posts
Enough said. Am I not the only person who see's a problem with this? Why is it GM needs 2 truck divisions to attempt to take on other companies that only have 1?. It just doesn't make any sense to me. If we were doing things Right we should be outselling the competition 2 to 1 based on styling preferences alone. Yet we can barely pull it off with 2 and sometimes we don't even come close. The problem is, we're not building them right.
Why is it a bad thing to offer people two similar but differently-styled truck lines? Choice is good for consumers and the company.

For the life of me I cannot understand why Chevy can't purchase a Super Duty Ford and reengineer it. From the frame, to the front axle, to the King Ranch interior.. And then put their own look on it. Heck, They can borrow mine if it's that difficult.

I hope that new CEO pays attention to this type of stuff and fixes it once and for all. He seems like the type that would.
Do you really think GM hasn't taken a Super Duty Ford through the paces? GM engineers spend years developing the things they develop and designing the way they design. GM just does things differently than Ford and GM still sells lots of 3/4 and 1-Ton trucks to people that choose the GM-engineered product.
 
241 - 260 of 1780 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top