GM Inside News Forum banner
1321 - 1340 of 1780 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
21,299 Posts
Anyone working a field with torsion bars and a low frame is a fool. Farmers know this. You're limited on tire size in field ruts. Not only with the Wheelwell shape, but the half shaft angles allowed for warranty reasons. Make excuses all you want. I'd Love to build a truck right Next to you in a shop right on national television. From the frame up, from the individual pieces of the engine up, from the individual parts of the transmission up, from the bare axles up and all.

I only need sales to back me up. You cannot win this argument. If GM came out tomorrow with a tucked away frame and a SFA up front everyone would be thrilled. You too Germeezy1. You once commented on how you had SFA "Envy".
I know farmers from every production system out there who are perfectly happy with their GM trucks.

Furthermore, I'm not sure what your definition of "working a field" is, but if a pickup truck goes anywhere near a crop production field, it's the outer perimeter. There's really no reason to be driving right over your arable land in anything but a tractor or combine.
 

·
Firebird Concept (the turbine one)
Joined
·
15,356 Posts
Anyone working a field with torsion bars and a low frame is a fool. Farmers know this. You're limited on tire size in field ruts. Not only with the Wheelwell shape, but the half shaft angles allowed for warranty reasons. Make excuses all you want. I'd Love to build a truck right Next to you in a shop right on national television. From the frame up, from the individual pieces of the engine up, from the individual parts of the transmission up, from the bare axles up and all.

I only need sales to back me up. You cannot win this argument. If GM came out tomorrow with a tucked away frame and a SFA up front everyone would be thrilled. You too Germeezy1. You once commented on how you had SFA "Envy".
No one is saying that the not long for this world GMT900 trucks have no flaws , and most are simply saying even with it's flaws one could choose between the Dodge, Ford, and GM based on personal preference. While I admire the axle articulation, and robust nature of a SFA I also owned a vehicle that would have no problem leaving most SFA factory vehicles far behind off road, and it had an IFS.

You don't have to meet Fan of Durant to not enjoy his rhetoric. This keeps my screen relatively spam free: "This message is hidden because FanOfDurant is on your ignore list." :D



Actually, I sat in all 3 US brands last week at an auto show. The F150 does feel like it has the best material quality (but not by much) followed by the Ram. The current GM trucks are still disappointing to me in that regard as well as rear seat comfort in the Crew Cabs.
Can I ask what trim levels the trucks that you sat in were? Aesthetically up to the 2013 Ford revisions the Dodge is more appealing to me.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,040 Posts
Can I ask what trim levels the trucks that you sat in were? Aesthetically up to the 2013 Ford revisions the Dodge is more appealing to me.
You can, but I wasn't really looking at trim range. :D I did see some window stickers though. The F150 had the color matched grille & red badge inserts, so I'd say it was an FX2 or FX4. The 2 2013 Rams were an Outdoorsman & a Laramie (I believe) with leather seating. The leather itself seems to be more of a tough, work style leather & not luxury car soft leather. One of the GM trucks had cloth, the Silverado had leather. It too wasn't very luxury car soft, but didn't feel as tough as the Ram's. I still consider myself to be someone who prefers cloth seats. Other aspects of the trucks: most rear seat room, F150; best gauge appearance, Ram; favorite exterior appearance, Ram. I've said it before, but the GMT900s just aren't aging well. This redesign is long overdue.

On a similar note, Chrysler had a test drive style program at the show. I drove their 2012 model Ram 1500. It's nice (Big Horn trim), so the '13 should be nicer. I would consider more closely a Ram if I get ready for a purchase in the near future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,104 Posts
Hey, you guys just continue making excuses for poor quality... The fact is Chevrolet's interiors ARE cheap compared to Ford's.
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.

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.
Which off-road community are you referring to? I've taken my 1996 Z71 off-roading in Colorado several times and had no problems. Most people in the off-road community use Jeeps. You're searching for excuses - lame excuses.

The fact is Chevrolet's design is indeed very offputting to Many.
So is Ford's. So is Ram's. Styling is subjective. GM sells nearly as many trucks as Ford, so your point is irrelavant.

The fact is Chevrolet uses Wax to coat their frames and it DOES come right off within a year or two allowing the frame to rust.
Another lie. My 2003 Yukon still has the frame coating and has not rusted.

The fact is they DID use parts bin drum brakes on the GMT900.
Parts bin from where? The Aveo? No. Do they work fine? Yes. Is there anything wrong with them? No. Irrelavant.

The fact is their wheels ARE made in China. Take a tire off and read it for yourself...
Apple is currently the most successful and profitable company in the world, and nearly all of their products are made in China. I'm not a big fan of things made in China, but it's not the quality jab that it used to be. I prefer China over union made on many things.

The fact is their bowtie emblems on the tailgates of the Silverado DO wash out from rain Very quickly. Even as brand new trucks with ZERO miles right on the dealer lots. Please, criticize everyone else who just said the same damn thing... Go ahead and make excuses and mock me all you want.
So GM had a temporary quality issue? Have they corrected the problem? Do no other brand have quality problems like this? In what country are those emblems made?

Make fun of these guys too regarding the thin metal....
It's "sheet" metal - it's supposed to be thin. It's not structural. Sure, GM could double the thickness of their materials - if cost and FE wasn't an issue. As soon as you find a cheap source of unobtainium, let us know and GM will get right on it.


IFS is NOT crap. IFS in the form GM uses it on HD trucks with torsion bars IS. There's a big difference. Why don't you specify what IFS set up you're talking about. I fully back IFS on 1500's. There's a damn good reason Ford and Dodge don't use torsion bars and half shafts on their HD's. And sales of both of those trucks tell the story. That's what HD guys want.
IFS on HD is not crap. What's wrong with it? Be specific.

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 guess you forgot about Oldsmobile, Saturn, and Pontiac? GM tried to make them all equal and they failed. Different brands under the same company need to be different to survive and not compete with each other. You're supposedly the history buff and you can't see that?

You guys can continue to ignore what the vast majority of truck folks think and feel. Continue on in your GM bubble. I represent the REAL truck folks. Not some car club kids who have not a clue on what truck men want.
Well good for you - REAL truck folk. What a joke. I won't be hurt if GM loses you as a customer.

I just love how you ignore my praise for the Corvette, Camaro, Cruze, Enclave, Volt, Chevrolet Express van, ATS, CTS and the LaCrosse. I love how you ignore the fact I just agreed with Envoy I Want Ford to be third place. I love how you ignore my continual praise of Chevrolet powertrains and the new SBC. Facts don't matter to you though....
Speaking of FACTS. There is no more SBC. Something else you continously ignore. It's a GM smallblock. Look at all the documentation.

Anyone working a field with torsion bars and a low frame is a fool. Farmers know this. You're limited on tire size in field ruts. Not only with the Wheelwell shape, but the half shaft angles allowed for warranty reasons. Make excuses all you want. I'd Love to build a truck right Next to you in a shop right on national television. From the frame up, from the individual pieces of the engine up, from the individual parts of the transmission up, from the bare axles up and all.
GM's frames are not significantly lower than the competitions - if you measure them from the GROUND, not the bottom of the cab. Sure, the exposed frame is unsightly, but that's a cosmetic issue, not a performance one. Ground clearance at the frame (and especially the differentials) is the important stat. And the only reason frame clearance is important is for cross-over angles, not field ruts. Rut depth is completely dependant upon tire size. So you really appear to not know what you're talking about.

I only need sales to back me up. You cannot win this argument. If GM came out tomorrow with a tucked away frame and a SFA up front everyone would be thrilled. You too Germeezy1. You once commented on how you had SFA "Envy".
You cannot point to HD IFS and frame cosmetics alone as to why GM lags Ford. Most of your complaints are typical wanna-be machoisms that most people don't care about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
I used to hate Ford. Like, absolutely LOATHE anything Ford related. I am a 4th generation GM employee, so GM was ingrained into my brain. I still think Mustangs are lame, and Ford cars are nothing special, less their nice interiors, but their trucks really have impressed me. I'm sorry but they are just better overall trucks than GM right now. GM has always had superior drivetrains; the engines are great, but the current slushy 6 speed is terrible in my opinion. Fords, especially the Super Dutys are much easier to build up, and perform better off road because of the solid Dana axles. GM is the better on-road towing performer, but with those current interiors, there is nothing to feel comfortable about. They are nice, but compared to the Super Duty, which is amazing, puts them to shame. Not to mention the Crew Cab on the F150s, with its cavernous rear bench and legroom, and flat loading floor.

So basically, I put aside my hate for Ford, right about the time when all the American car companies began to get hit hard, and I started to support the Big Three as everyone in this country should. Then I started recognizing the actual differences in quality, build, engineering, etc. of the Ford trucks and I was definitely more and more impressed the more I looked into them. I have a 2004 GMC Envoy, which I think is superior to the last generation Ford Explorer, but the outgoing Explorer had a lot of elements to it that I adored, and wished GM would have thought about those things. Ford made a terrible decision to make the new Explorer a unibody 4 banger, but that's another story.

Case in point, Ford knows trucks, and they have really gotten their act together and made a quality truck with these new engines. I still don't think their technology is quite there (where is the direct injection on the V8's??) etc., but they are currently #1 on my list of Trucks to consider.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,421 Posts
Has anyone recently been inside an F150 , and actually touched their amazingly high quality Bentley grade materials? The best interior in a truck available for sale today is in the upper trim level Dodge Rams in my opinion not the Ford trucks.
Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

Ford trucks are so grossly overrated it's not even funny. From the crap interior to the aborted transformers look in their Super Duty trucks, they suck.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,040 Posts
Case in point, Ford knows trucks, and they have really gotten their act together and made a quality truck with these new engines. I still don't think their technology is quite there (where is the direct injection on the V8's??) etc., but they are currently #1 on my list of Trucks to consider.
Ford's Coyote V8 has DI design built in, just not implemented. Ford still has a card or 2 up their sleeves (as well as room for more power from the EB V6). Let's not also forget that the Pentastar V6 doesn't have DI either, so there's some improvement room there. Plus, Ram could easily swap in some parts & upgrade the 1500 with more displacement & power. The Ram is currently on my list of favorites over the F150.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Ford's Coyote V8 has DI design built in, just not implemented. Ford still has a card or 2 up their sleeves (as well as room for more power from the EB V6). Let's not also forget that the Pentastar V6 doesn't have DI either, so there's some improvement room there. Plus, Ram could easily swap in some parts & upgrade the 1500 with more displacement & power. The Ram is currently on my list of favorites over the F150.
Gm has the most low end torque out of any N/A engine out and hasnt even started offering the turbos yet on them so i think the engine/power/economy will be for sure taken by them and im saying the new interiors will be just as good as the f-150. Once you get as good as the f-150 interior u just cant get much better so its going to com down to appearance/power/MPG. Thats just my opinion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,270 Posts
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.



Which off-road community are you referring to? I've taken my 1996 Z71 off-roading in Colorado several times and had no problems. Most people in the off-road community use Jeeps. You're searching for excuses - lame excuses.



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



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



Parts bin from where? The Aveo? No. Do they work fine? Yes. Is there anything wrong with them? No. Irrelavant.



Apple is currently the most successful and profitable company in the world, and nearly all of their products are made in China. I'm not a big fan of things made in China, but it's not the quality jab that it used to be. I prefer China over union made on many things.



So GM had a temporary quality issue? Have they corrected the problem? Do no other brand have quality problems like this? In what country are those emblems made?



It's "sheet" metal - it's supposed to be thin. It's not structural. Sure, GM could double the thickness of their materials - if cost and FE wasn't an issue. As soon as you find a cheap source of unobtainium, let us know and GM will get right on it.




IFS on HD is not crap. What's wrong with it? Be specific.



I guess you forgot about Oldsmobile, Saturn, and Pontiac? GM tried to make them all equal and they failed. Different brands under the same company need to be different to survive and not compete with each other. You're supposedly the history buff and you can't see that?



Well good for you - REAL truck folk. What a joke. I won't be hurt if GM loses you as a customer.



Speaking of FACTS. There is no more SBC. Something else you continously ignore. It's a GM smallblock. Look at all the documentation.



GM's frames are not significantly lower than the competitions - if you measure them from the GROUND, not the bottom of the cab. Sure, the exposed frame is unsightly, but that's a cosmetic issue, not a performance one. Ground clearance at the frame (and especially the differentials) is the important stat. And the only reason frame clearance is important is for cross-over angles, not field ruts. Rut depth is completely dependant upon tire size. So you really appear to not know what you're talking about.



You cannot point to HD IFS and frame cosmetics alone as to why GM lags Ford. Most of your complaints are typical wanna-be machoisms that most people don't care about.
Why cant a website like PUTC or a magazine do an off road test to put this IFS SFA debate a rest , they should get trucks that are due to be destroyed and beat the hell out of them until something breaks , and see who can keep going with a tire off the ground in the twisties , stuff like that matters to me not 0 to 60 times .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

Ford trucks are so grossly overrated it's not even funny. From the crap interior to the aborted transformers look in their Super Duty trucks, they suck.
Sorry but while the Ram truck interiors are greatly improved, and have a pretty good layout, overall quality is not as good. Their door seals, storage space, and appearance are their strong points, but the controls and center stack need improved. I hate when interior controls have missing buttons or notches replacing where buttons would go if that option were chosen. Make it nice and finished like the vast majority of the Ford interiors do.
 

·
Firebird Concept (the turbine one)
Joined
·
15,356 Posts
Just thought I would leave this here to be perused.

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,040 Posts
Gm has the most low end torque out of any N/A engine out and hasnt even started offering the turbos yet on them. Thats just my opinion
Let's see-GM: 5.3L (335 lb.-ft.), 6.2L (417 lb.-ft. on premium fuel)
-Ford: 5.0L (380 lb.-ft.), 6.2L (434 lb.-ft. on reg. gas)
-Ram: 4.7L (330 lb.-ft.), 5.7L (407 lb.-ft.)

In my opinion, Ford has the competition beat if you compare the entry level V8s against each other & then the top of the line V8s head-to-head. But, GM & Ford have a tendency to reserve the top V8s for their top trims. Want an F150 with a 6.2? Buy a Limited, Raptor or King Ranch. Want a Silverado with the 6.2? An LTZ or Denali is in your future. Want a Hemi? Ok, just pick what trim you want. Stripped entry model? Here you go. Top of the line Longhorn? Hell, we'll just give that to you automatically. As stated before, the Gen 5 GM engines will improve, but Ford will give the 5.0 DI & increase HP & torque & I'm sure if Ram wants to use the bore or crankshaft stroke size, they can resurrect the 6.1L Hemi or surprise everybody by offering a truck duty style 392 Hemi. It's a game of one-upsmanship that everybody knows how to play.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,823 Posts
I forgot about that Howie Long video. Hated his commericals, but that was a good visual for selling Chevy trucks. In fact, they should have that playing on a loop on a TV screen in every Chevy dealership.

If I was to buy a truck, the only thing that would hold me back is the interior and the fenders. IMHO Chevy screwed up the fender design big time, GMC looks way better. And the interior has not changed from 2007. They could have at least refreshed it in 2010 when the updated the powertrains. How hard would that have been.

Powertrains I could care less about. I know that there have been a lot of complaints about the 6L80 in the Silverado, but if it performs anything like the 6L50 in my Camaro, then I think that the transmission issue is a non-issue. However I wish they would give more options as far as axle ratios. I think part of the complaint about the 6L80 is due to the 3.08 axle.

Engines are just numbers on paper. As far as the torque comparison, the Gen V 5.3 will match the Ford 5.0L for torque at 380 lb/ft. The problem is if Ford throws DI onto the 5.0 The question remains will they do that, and risk cannabalizing profitable sales of the Eco-Boost? Because the 5.0 with DI would more closesly match the Ecoboost for torque along with improved FE as well.

I think that Chevy truck buyers are going to be very happy, as well as truck buyers in general. The video demonstrates that GM has the best truck frame in the industry. Improved styling, improved interiors, and improved powertrains on top of that will sway a lot of buyers, and hopefully get GM back to the point when Silverado + Sierra sell more then F-150.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,290 Posts
Sorry but while the Ram truck interiors are greatly improved, and have a pretty good layout, overall quality is not as good. Their door seals, storage space, and appearance are their strong points, but the controls and center stack need improved. I hate when interior controls have missing buttons or notches replacing where buttons would go if that option were chosen. Make it nice and finished like the vast majority of the Ford interiors do.
Are you referring to the 2013 Ram 1500?

http://www.ramtrucks.com/en/2013/ram_1500/photos_videos/

If we are talking about anything prior to 2013 then I would agree up to a point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,484 Posts
Just thought I would leave this here to be perused.

Benefit of Ford's bendy frame: Better flex and traction ability off road
Benefit of GM's frame: Duh, its not bending like its about to break

Conclusion: Sorry Ford, that frame and suspension need a lot of work.

Are you referring to the 2013 Ram 1500?

http://www.ramtrucks.com/en/2013/ram_1500/photos_videos/

If we are talking about anything prior to 2013 then I would agree up to a point.
They are definitely very nice, but just as a personal preference I don't like them as much as Ford's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Let's see-GM: 5.3L (335 lb.-ft.), 6.2L (417 lb.-ft. on premium fuel)
-Ford: 5.0L (380 lb.-ft.), 6.2L (434 lb.-ft. on reg. gas)
-Ram: 4.7L (330 lb.-ft.), 5.7L (407 lb.-ft.)

In my opinion, Ford has the competition beat if you compare the entry level V8s against each other & then the top of the line V8s head-to-head. But, GM & Ford have a tendency to reserve the top V8s for their top trims. Want an F150 with a 6.2? Buy a Limited, Raptor or King Ranch. Want a Silverado with the 6.2? An LTZ or Denali is in your future. Want a Hemi? Ok, just pick what trim you want. Stripped entry model? Here you go. Top of the line Longhorn? Hell, we'll just give that to you automatically. As stated before, the Gen 5 GM engines will improve, but Ford will give the 5.0 DI & increase HP & torque & I'm sure if Ram wants to use the bore or crankshaft stroke size, they can resurrect the 6.1L Hemi or surprise everybody by offering a truck duty style 392 Hemi. It's a game of one-upsmanship that everybody knows how to play.
You are looking at peak numbers not low end numbers then we have the genV i dont believe anyone with the engines they offer now no matter how big they go or add DI can produce the low end at 1800-2500 that the genV does then add in the fact of the truck being 4-500lbs lighter then they are now. The new truck will definitely be a very strong truck to compete against, but you will always have the ford loyalists waiting for the new f-150. I believe gm already has what ford will be doing in 2 years planed and engine options in the works to be with them. Ram on the other hand its hard telling what they will do but im not to impressed with there engines this far. My 6.2 max gets as good of FE on 87 fuel as the hemi does and mine doesnt have DOD and i can walk there ass without having premium fuel also.
 

·
Firebird Concept (the turbine one)
Joined
·
15,356 Posts
You are looking at peak numbers not low end numbers then we have the genV i dont believe anyone with the engines they offer now no matter how big they go or add DI can produce the low end at 1800-2500 that the genV does then add in the fact of the truck being 4-500lbs lighter then they are now. The new truck will definitely be a very strong truck to compete against, but you will always have the ford loyalists waiting for the new f-150. I believe gm already has what ford will be doing in 2 years planed and engine options in the works to be with them. Ram on the other hand its hard telling what they will do but im not to impressed with there engines this far. My 6.2 max gets as good of FE on 87 fuel as the hemi does and mine doesnt have DOD and i can walk there ass without having premium fuel also.
I have an L92, and Hemi vehicle and while what you say is true today the game changes soon with the Hemi/8A combination in the RAM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
I have an L92, and Hemi vehicle and while what you say is true today the game changes soon with the Hemi/8A combination in the RAM.
That may be true against a l92 with 6l80 but then here comes the genV 6.2 with about 60 ftlbs more compared to the l92 at 2000rpm and a truck that is way lighter at the same time ram comes with the 8spd so that will make the difference in the 2 more gears down low. An 8spd is basically just a crutch for no low end tq. Then wait gm throws in an 8spd later alone with alot of low end tq then we have our selves a stump puller :yup:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,040 Posts
You are looking at peak numbers not low end numbers then we have the genV i dont believe anyone with the engines they offer now no matter how big they go or add DI can produce the low end at 1800-2500 that the genV does then add in the fact of the truck being 4-500lbs lighter then they are now. The new truck will definitely be a very strong truck to compete against, but you will always have the ford loyalists waiting for the new f-150. I believe gm already has what ford will be doing in 2 years planed and engine options in the works to be with them. Ram on the other hand its hard telling what they will do but im not to impressed with there engines this far. My 6.2 max gets as good of FE on 87 fuel as the hemi does and mine doesnt have DOD and i can walk there ass without having premium fuel also.
Until official ratings for the Hemi/8A come out, the fuel economy arguement comes down more to driver than powertrain. As for the torque curve, you may feel free to post some graphs so that we may have an equal comparison.
 
1321 - 1340 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