Spied! Heavier-Duty Chevy Silverado Caught Testing

SilvyHD_cdauto_front II
Our spy photographers have caught what they believe is the next-generation GM heavy-duty trucks doing their hot-weather and high-altitude trailer testing. 

Many reports have the lighter-duty Chevy Silverado/GMC Sierra powertrains slated to eventually run an eight-speed transmission, but they are likely to debut with a new six-speed to start. The HD models, we hear, are not likely to offer the eight-speed transmission with any engine option. However, we have heard some reports that that GMC may offer a 1500 HD model (presumably based off a 2500 HD platform) to compete better with the Ram 1500 Tradesman HD, which also uses a three-quarter-ton platform. 

There's no question the 2500 and 3500 pickups will likely get any or all of the lighter-duty 2014 Silverado/Sierra interior upgrades, given that the HD interiors remained relatively unchanged when they received the significant chassis and suspension changes for the 2011 model year.

The HD trucks will likely come to market about a year after the 2014 Silverado/Sierra 1500 debuts, with the plants in Flint, Mich., and Fort Wayne, Ind., scheduled for machinery changeover starting in 2013. 

From the looks of these photos, these test units are running gas engines and hauling a fairly heavy load. We have our moles digging for any details that you might find interesting, but there is a tight lock-down on all information regarding these vehicles, so the news to date is pretty thin. 

QUICK UPDATE:

InsideLine.com got a hold of some video footage of the new GM light-duties testing in Colorado and they seem to think the new 2014 Silverado and Sierra 1500s will debut at the 2013 Detroit Auto Show in January. It makes sense but we'll see.

For now, click here to check out the video. 

SilvyHD_cdauto_side II

SilvyHD_cdauto_rear II

Comments

Looks... Basically the same...

Bigger back seat is a good thing, but the rest looks to be, with the camo at least, the same as the current HD.

Heres to hoping there is something good under the sheet metal

That's a new Chevy Silverado HD alright. Low frame with torsion bars tied in up front you can see. Why would GMC get a 1500 HD and not Chevy? Why not offer both? As for these pictures, it once again shows that GM trucks absolutely need rear fender liners in their beds and a slightly larger trie to fill up all of that dead space. They look absolutely horrible in that respect. HD's should come standard with step bars to cover up that frame as well. The front end of this Silverado looks better already than the current one, even covered up.

Do I spy a blindspot mirror on the standard mirror?

Tyler

Still has low slung frame, front IFS, ugly sheet metal. Doesn't look to be that different from the truck it replaces.

GM trucks absolutely need rear fender liners in their beds

@Jim, Hammer Meets Nail. Nobody wants to see the underside of the bed GM. Cover that crap up and give it a clean finished look. This has always bothered me about the current HD's, they look like crap because of the small tires and massive wheel openings. I also think this is a 1500 HD. Those torsion bars look smaller than the new larger ones. I assume the standard 1500 will use coils again. This would make sense to be a 1500 HD. And look at the bottom shot at the corner of the rear bumper. Is that a cut out I see? Like the Avalanche had? If so, there's our step up and sturdier bumper right under that wrap. As long as it's not that black plastic suff that fades really bad. I likewise agree these HD's need some chrome bars below the doors to make them look right. When the frame is covered, they look so much better.

Still has low slung frame, front IFS, ugly sheet metal. Doesn't look to be that different from the truck it replaces.

@Hemiv8, yep. A REAL Chevy would have a tucked up frame and beam axle out front ready to take on the rugged terrain. These low slung frame torsion bar set ups are paper tigers at best. Junk. This was Chevy's chance to get it right again and get back HD sales. They've already blown it. And ya, those massive wheel openings look stupid without a tire to fill them up. Fender liners are sorely needed. Either that or close up the opening around the tire like Ford and Dodge do. Good grief. How do they not see this stuff? It makes their truck look awful.

@Hemi V8
Still has "ugly sheet metal" you say, huh?

GM's cheap way of doing an IFS HD (IE:torsion bars) sucks. Go to a portal set up and do it right. Low slung frames would no longer be needed and the limited wheel travel and steering deflection issues would be taken off the table. This truck would look so much better without that low frame. They could actually Market the IFS to the HD crowd and not get laughed at then.

Look at the top pic. The front has fender liners. All black and proper. Then you glance back at the rear and it looks mismatched. All white metal just waiting to get rock chips and start rusting and becoming an eyesore. Why don't they put rear fender liners in like Dodge does?? It does look stupid with these big ol wheel openings and little tires. You could crawl up on that back wheel and take a nap like those 1990's Dodge's. At least Dodge was bright enough to say "If were' going to have that massive of a wheel opening, we need fender liners". GM is just freaking cheap. That whole body looks like it needs to be lowered about 2 inches. As it sits, it looks like some redneck put a stupid body lift on it and didn't swap the wheels to larger ones to compensate. The whole thing looks odd. It's obvious GM still doesn't take any pride in the fit and finish of their trucks like Ford and Dodge do. I wouldn't buy a Silverado like that.

Hemi quite trolling, you can't see the sheetmetal so STFU. The IFS on those trucks are very beefy, probably more so than the SFA on the other two (the SFA's have issues too, check em out), and you don't off road these trucks other than dirt roads and what not. If you buy this truck to do serious wheeling then there is something wrong with you. These should tow all your toys to the play box. (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/11/chevy-vs-ford-in-heavy-duty-rumble-in-the-rockies.html) they look to be sitting about the same heights. Oh, but torsion bars are the junk, well SFA is 20th century technology. A SFA has no benefit for 95% of the people who drive these trucks towing and hauling on the roads and dirt roads. It rides and drives better with IFS, look what dodge did with the 1500 and coils out back, catering to the ride.

@John, get back HD sales? Look at what they have done in the past 10 years, the HD GM trucks constantly win comparisons are are much better to tow and haul with and have gained huge sales (big assist from the duramax/allison). Stop being a pretty boy with just the looks department, a girl isn't gonna hop out of the cab of your truck because there aren't wheel liners or they can see a little more frame than another...

One more thing, from the websites

GM 3500 4x4 ground clearance min 10.0 front/8.8 rear
Ford F350 4x4 ground clearance min 8.0 (it actually has less than two wheel drive)
Dodge same thing 7.8

Go ahead and drag that front pumpkin of the SFA through the ruts and get hung up, some people...

Everybody has their preferences in suspensions and such; but if it has worked well, the manufacturers usually don't mess with them too much.
Aside from some newer sheet metal and powertrain options GM isn't likely making revolutionary changes, just evolutionary ones. Hopefully handling, efficiency, and material quality will be largely improved.

I can see enough of the sheet metal to tell that they need more of it around those ugly @$$ wheel openings. Or is that to save money too. Cheap, Cheap, Did I mention Cheap.

Ram is not cheap.

GUTS

GLORY

RAM!

Chevy luv suspension and dragging frames..no change here.

Why dont they use coils up front?

The chassis and suspension is supposed to be the same as the 2011-up HD's. Good thing, GM's chassis is the strongest, and the new IFS has plenty of ground clearance. Remember that little video of the frame twist test, and what happened to the Super Duty?

That was a scripted set up. Don't believe everything you see on the internet.

That is an ugly front end looks basically the same just bigger headlights and by the way look at the headlights just one is on like all the chebys I see on the road. Talk.about cheap lmao.
Guts
Glory
Ram!!!

if the IFS is so bad, why does the best HD military veh. have it? not only in the front but in the rear also! with the newer metals and tech. IFS in a HD truck that is to be driven on the hyw. or any roads, will handle and ride better than any SFA, and have all the durability of any SFA, and as far as wheel liners, come on people this is a prototype test truck, far from being the final deal, and if any of you were to ever go to a Chevy dealer, or at least go on line and (build) a truck you would see that for a small price, you can get a protection package that includes said wheel well protection, along with bed edge and some other types of protection, you children should realy let you mother look at you trolls before you make fools out of yourselves with your close minded hatred of thing you know nothing about! I am also a CHevy owner and Ford and Dodge owner, so I know what I am talking about, some of you some so childish!

well SFA is 20th century technology.

@Tyler, if SFA's are "20th Century Technology" then please explain why there is a SFA in the rear end? Durability perhaps? And if you want to talk about 20th century tech why don't you address your pushrod engines you nimrod. Tosion bars are worthless on anything but smooth concrete. You can't offroad with them. That's why there's SFA conversion kits that everyone uses for any truck that doesn't have one. Low slung frames are likewise worthless offroad. Torsion bars also give a Very poor ride when beefed up like GM had to do to give the front end any strength like a beam axle. They have no progressive collapse rate. It's one solid 'hit' and twist of the bar. That's why Chevy 1500's ditched them in favor of coils. Ford's and Dodge's swing arm Coil front suspension offers a superior ride, unlimited tire size restrictions for warranty for those who Do want to go off road and you don't have to have the frame slung so low.

The fact is, GM is Tied to this crappy set up because some morons at RenCen decided it was the wave of the future back in the early 90's and it was a Cheap one size fits all deal. They stuck all of their eggs in this basket and now a whole new frame would have to be engineered to make it proper again. GM didn't expect the Ram to come out with a SFA STANDARD in 1994 and they never even saw the Super Duty coming to take away all of their disenfranchised customers. Had they known then what's obvious now, they would have Never pulled out the SFA and slung their frames so low on the HD's. That's a fact.


Go ahead and drag that front pumpkin of the SFA through the ruts and get hung up, some people...

@Tyler again, get off your stupid websites and learn something in the real world of trucks. Chevy's frame ground clearance is 10 inches off the ground at the Breakover point right in the center of the damn truck. Ford's nearly 15 because the frame is tucked away 20 inches up inside the body. If you're draggin a front pumpkin then you're in trouble because you'll be dragging the Rear as well. That's why you run larger tires offroad. Can't do that on a GM. The halfshafts will only allow so much angle. You're warranty will be null and void. GM will never do much in the HD market until this stupid low frame-torsion bar set up is addressed.

if the IFS is so bad, why does the best HD military veh. have it? not only in the front but in the rear also! with the newer metals and tech.

@Sandman, Humvee's IFS is nothing like this. IFS set ups are not all identical. You will find No low slung frames on a Humvee. The Need ground clearance to go offroad! Likewise, you will find No torsion bars. Humvee's use proper Coils! It's called a PORTAL set up IFS. GM's is Not Portal. If it were, it would be the best truck on the market. You obviously don't know what you're talking about or you wouldn't have said what you did. And nobody should have to pay extra for wheel liners. They should be standard on all 4 corners if you're going to have that much open space around the wheels. Dodge has less space and they're standard.

@ sandman, you cannot compare what the military does with the civilian applications.

I know because I am one..there components and design are not even close the the cebbie ifs.

Yet another thread showing Tyler/SierraGS is clueless when it comes to real trucks. Stick to your suburbanite pavement pounder GMC Denali's pal. Real men drive Ford, Chevrolet and Dodge. Chevy's should seek to have a better suspension than this.

ford boys getting cocky again cause they know the're going back to 3rd place in trucks again gm trucks will have more power better tow pay load rates and better mpg again. ford will be stuck in 3rd place for another 11 years and probably need 5 more high tech motors to get back up to GM with good old push rods haha. ford still hasn't top the GM duramax and allison trans bye bye ford better luck in the next 11 to 12 years.

If you own a Super Duty and think the Chevy frame twist video was faked or scriped, try doing it to your own truck! See what happens. Don't blame me if you need a new tailgate and some bodywork to your cargo box, you have been warned!

@tyler

95% dont use/need the SFA? can i have some of what you are on? you have in one single post almost caught up with johnny doehead for stupidity.

On topic, the camoflauge is obviosly there to hide the body lines, but it dont look alot different than the current truck? guess time will tell, definately agree with some of the posts that say chevy really needs a winner here - i personally hope they do (I'm not a chevy guy) as it makes the competition improve too! would be kinda boring if we all drove Fords, mechanics would be out of work :)

Fordtrucks2, who is SierraGS??? I don't think I have ever seen that name posted in here.

Crandall, I can't even begin with your moronic post. Who the heck are you? Obviously one of those I am going to buy a 1 ton new sfa truck so I can rock crawl nimrods.

People who swap SFA do it for two reasons, like you said running massive tires (ie 40" mudders for bogging) or two rock crawling, most people that have half a brain use a much smaller rig. Tacoma's are one of the most iconic off roaders ever, they have ifs. The ones who wheel the crap out of them go SFA, everyone knows that. Your half brain is on repeat to what everyone already has said...

Since your so smart, please please please tell me how the sfa is better for towing and hauling weight in the bed around town and down dirt roads. I would love to see your explanation of this!

Tyler

Super Duty gets a new frame next year. Then what. It still has a superior frame layout and it still has a far superior suspension set up. You're grasping at straws Bob. Chevy is no doubt outgunned here. The best engine in the world won't change the fact that their frame and suspension set up is inferior to that of Ford or Ram which will continue to let both dominate the 2500 and up market. It will also allow Dodge and Ford dealers a shot at stealing away Chevrolet car customers if Chevy buyers go to Ford or Dodge trucks.. It's very poor business. GM should have cancelled the extra Sierra truck because it's not really needed anyway. They should have take the extra money and built a new Chassic for the Chevy HD. Kept the rest of the money for a quick MCE right after Ford and Dodge launch their new trucks. That was the only way they were ever going to get back on top again. Now you're stuck with 2 so so trucks both big and little. GM has no focus. They need to just do one line of vehicles and do them the best if they ever want people to buy their stock. And by the looks of these spyshots, they truck design itself doesn't seem all that impressive either. Others are right, there's way too much body lift going on. Those open wheel spaces are atrocious. No doubt give these things some fender liners. It's scary under there.

Scott, the GM IFS is way closer to their Independent suspension set ups than the other two using SFA.

You sound like ricers who say V8's aren't the fastest and cubic inches aren't the best. Huh, then why are the fastest drag cars in the world running massive supercharged V8's? Same thing principle. If the military uses it then there must be a reason. Yes their massize 20 ton type trucks don't because lets face it, there is a limit to durability and weight, but far a 1 ton truck, nope not buying it.

BTW crandall, it is called a diff drop to help with the angles. CORR trucks have insane angles and drops, no problems there...

Torsion bars, I am not sure why they still use them. None of yall are engineers doing the designing so you don't know and can't say why they do. I agree it isn't the best but hey, you cant make a few cranks on a coil or leaf to tightening it up over the years either.

Tyler

I don't believe the Super Duty is scheduled for a new frame or any MCE for several years. 2016 is what I hear.

@Tyler, GM's IFS isn't bad per say outside of the eyesore frame but I think you miss the point. It's a 1 trick pony. For the same money, most HD guys would rather have a truck that can do more than 1 trick. You're also not factoring the negative attributes of the torsion bar ride. They are very rough. Coils are much better and offer a smoother more comfortable ride. The swing arm set ups are lightyears ahead of old torsion bars. The Tacoma is not a valid comparison. The frame is not this low and the departure angles are far better on it's wheelbase. They also come with a nice beefy tire to lift the axle and front suspension. This here is a body lift offering nothing more than show. I personally think it looks terrible.

Scott, the GM IFS is way closer to their Independent suspension set ups than the other two using SFA.

@Tyler again, Military Humvee's are not close to Either. If the military were forced to use either the GM IFS or the Ford/Dodge swing arm SFA suspension in their Humvee's, I can guarantee you beyond a shadow of a doubt, they would use the SFA with coils. It's sturdier, far better off road, no need for a low slung frame and you don't have to worry about tire size. You're demonstrating a complete lack of knowledge.

Fordtrucks2, who is SierraGS??? I don't think I have ever seen that name posted in here.

@Tyler, uh, dude, you referenced SierraGS in the Texas stae fair thread and you know full well you did. Quit playing dumb. FT1 is right on this (oh how funny you are to say FT2). You are SierraGS and a total fraud at that. You also need to learn a thing or two about trucks before you comment. You sound like a fool. No wonder you like GMC's.

SierraGS and Bvonscott are the same guy. Bvonscott is an instigator on GMI. This guy goes by Tyler here and apparently some other names. He's trashed many good relationships between the Chevrolet guys and GM I can tell you that. These guys are right, he's some GMC clown. I can't tell you how many times I've about wanted to spit on a GMC after reading his posts.

Real men drive GM all the rest complain about real men driving GM pickups

SierraGS and Bvonscott are the same guy. Bvonscott is an instigator on GMI. This guy goes by Tyler here and apparently some other names. He's trashed many good relationships between the Chevrolet guys and GM I can tell you that.

@Jeremy, tis true. I too used to browse GMI on occasion and SierraGS always made reference to his buddy BvonScott. He was on here as Sierra claiming to be SierraGS from GMI and made the same reference to BvonScott as well. On topic of the 2500's here, wheel liners would indeed be nice. A little bigger tire as mentioned would do wonders. I'm really liking the overall shap of the truck though. The front end is looking bold! I can't wait to see it.

I have not seen anything cheaper looking then the rear stabilizer bar on the Ford super duties. And after looking at the front suspension on a Ford one ton the other day, they have some serious work to do on their suspension. I just drove a Ford one ton dually pickup from Pennsylvania to California for work. I have never rode in a pickup truck with a worse ride. Seriously! I hope GM stays with the suspension they offer because it is a proven suspension and offers a better ride then Dodge or Ford for their HD trucks.

I can't see how anyone could say the sheetmetal on this truck is ugly. That is like saying a chick wearing a thick winter parka has nice t-ts. Too much padding to know for sure.
My brother wasn't happy with getting a Chevy as his company truck due to torsion arms and he hated the thought of the low slung frame. He hasn't had any problems but he was surprised that the truck didn't seem to ride any better than the IFS trucks he had been driving. He does grind the frame more than on the other 3/4 tons he's driven, but he doesn't care since he didn't buy the truck. His biggest complaint is the interior. The "who cares it's a work truck" crowd are clueless with that remark. My brother often spends 14 hours in the cab of his truck. Driver fatigue makes the job more dangerous. Dust, dirt and mud finding their way through the door seals doesn't help either. The bodies and bumpers are a weak spot, but he doesn't pay for that either. The part he hates is having to explain to the bean counters that the broken plastic, bent bumpers, and dented body panels are normal wear and tear on a Chevy work truck.

It seems that most feel that the new Chevy's will not be hugely advanced but "status quo". I hope not since everyone else is coming out with new trucks soon and Chevy would be left behind again. There needs to be a significant leap foreward so they can hold their own against the next generation of pickups not the current generation.

The pictures are definitely of a gasoline truck, based on the rear diff and tailpipe. I hope GM made a decent investment in a HD Gas motor- an iron-block 7liter would be sweet, but a re-tuned L92/6L90E would probably do the job just fine.
"Its got a low hanging frame, wah, and IFS, wah, sob, cry, sniff..." The frame has to go somewhere under the floor boards. The fact that GM uses a large section is good for strength. Crawl under a SD or RAM and see how much the rocker panel comes down- I'll take the exposed frame over sheet metal to cover it any day. And God help you if you need to get in and out of a SD or HD Ram a lot. The lower ride height and identical 2wd suspension is just fine.
Torsion bars- I challenge any of you whining about them to explain why they are so terrible.

It does look like the cab is bigger, and dare I say... it looks like they made the box sides higher. So much for those old Howie Long commercials. LOL

IFS is a much better option than a live beam front end. The reason manufacturers use a live beam is to reduce costs.

IFS is safer improves handling etc.

Torsion bar suspension is also more than adequate for a commercial vehicle. Toyota 100Series Landcruisers used them on some vehicles and they are quite formidable off road.

Even in off road applications IFS would be better, but the cost to provide an adquate suspension makes them prohibitively expensive, that's why a live beam is generally used.

Greg
i done more work on Chevy's because of their low slung frames, than on Fords with their so called weak frames, i will take Fords so called weak frames we never had a problem with HD frames, than Chevy's low slung crap

as ugly as can be another unchanged ugly chevy the truck that never changes.they are cheap rust out fast and are junk i would never own a ugly ass chevy.no wonder ford takes them by storm ford the best truck best all around truck. and for the super dutys i love them lots of power and torque.FORD keep up the good work like you have been for years

Man I am so sick of the fanboyish trolling comments. All diesel trucks are cool, regardless of the brand! Open up your minds, fools!

More china junk. The padding is to cover all the dents caused be pepole leaning on it and closeing the hood.

The pizza cutter wheels and low slung frame is enough to make me not want one and then add the cheap plastic interior, pleather seats, broken tailgate latches, head light or tail light (or both) out, and no attempt to pay back the bailout money makes it even more disgusting!!!

Gm will try to design a truck that will appeal to the US and chinese as they invest more in the chinese market.

The fact that GM uses a large section is good for strength. Crawl under a SD or RAM and see how much the rocker panel comes down- I'll take the exposed frame over sheet metal to cover it any day. And God help you if you need to get in and out of a SD or HD Ram a lot. The lower ride height and identical 2wd suspension is just fine.
Torsion bars- I challenge any of you whining about them to explain why they are so terrible.

@Mr.Knowitall, You don't know anything. You're demonstrating your lack of true knowledge as much as a few others on this thread. Is this not PUTC?? Why is it so few here know anything about suspensions, frames, sheetmetal or dimensions? Are you all car guys?? The sheetmetal on a Ford and Dodge do NOT, I repeat DO NOT come down to cover up the frame. The sheetmetal is the SAME height off of the ground whether it's Chevy, Ford or Dodge. They are ALL virtually identical. The Chevy frame Drops Down Under the cab so the torsion bars can be down low and tie straight from the lower A arm to the frame. That is Why the frame drops down low. The sheetmetal on a Ford or Dodge covers up the frame by Default because the frame sits up High Inside of the body. Nearly a Foot higher just like the old Chevy's with a SFA did. Good lord. I've never read such clueless posts. You guys are Clearly not real truck guys. You're posers at best.

IFS is a much better option than a live beam front end. The reason manufacturers use a live beam is to reduce costs.

IFS is safer improves handling etc.

Torsion bar suspension is also more than adequate for a commercial vehicle. Toyota 100Series Landcruisers used them on some vehicles and they are quite formidable off road.

Even in off road applications IFS would be better, but the cost to provide an adquate suspension makes them prohibitively expensive, that's why a live beam is generally used.


@Bigalfromoz, another clueless post. Off road, an IFS is not better Unless it's either Portal Or has a true Baja suspension set up with long arms/shafts and extreme duty parts. And even that stuff is worthless on most trails. It's great for jumping. Serious trail trucks All and I repeat ALL use SFA's for true rugged Durability. It's why all trucks use a SFA in the rear. Same reason. True Rugged Durability! A tire going up on one side with a beam automatically transfers downforce via the beam to the other tire to dig in for traction. You cannot do that without a beam. It is also Not cheaper! A swing arm coil SFA is more expensive to build than a differential with 2 shafts and a couple of torsion bars. Tosion bars Suck for a good smooth ride. What do you fake truck guys not understand about progressive spring rates?? A torsion rod has ONE rate. Small ='s Soft for a good ride, Thick ='s Crap ride but can hold a heavy load. Coils with swing arms offer a progressive collapse of the spring. A fast collapse for bumps offers a soft ride. As the spring compresses more it gets tighter to carry heavy loads. GM's Torsion Bar IFS is pure outdated crap. That's the first thing to go on any Chevy truck that goes off road. IFS out, SFA in. And even then they're stuck with that stupid low hanging frame.

Why are you Ford red necks reading about GM products?

Go read the Ford forums. Nobody here cares what you think!

Why are you Ford red necks reading about GM products?

Go read the Ford forums. Nobody here cares what you think!


-Likewise could be said for you. GMC guys are the biggest RedNecks of them all. If I had a dollar for every 'big rough and tough' GMC truck with a rebel flag in the back and those ballsacks hanging from the trailer hitch I've be retired. Can't take the heat of the truth about GM trucks? Get out of the kitchen.

GM really needs to hit a home run with the ’14 trucks after the garbage GMT900 trucks they saddled us with in 2007. The GMT900s had the worst body stamping quality in GM truck history, horribly ugly body design (GMC not as ugly but still not great) no rocker panels to protect the door bottoms, cheap poorly executed front inner fenders that are notoriously falling down, door moldings that look 20 years old on only a 4 year old truck and the list goes on. GM should be embarrassed by the GMT900 trucks as they were a stillborn from day one and only have gotten worse with age. I hope GM can redeem themselves to diehard GM truck fans and conquest truck customers alike. Glad my ’01 HD with an 8.1L and ZF 6 speed only has 50K miles as I have no plans to buy another GM truck anytime soon. I must say at least the roof line of the truck looks promising. GM needs to pirate more designers from the other company in Auburn Hills to get the truck design thing down pat.



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2014 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com