Top 10 Best Features From 2014 Chevy Silverado, GMC Sierra

2014-Chevrolet-Silverado Interior II

2014-GMC-Sierra interior II

Now that we've had a little time to allow all the hoopla and hype to settle down, we can take a step back and look at the new 2014 Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra with a clear vision. From all the changes to the two new pickup trucks, we wanted to focus on those pieces of technology and features that impressed us.

No matter what you think of the redesign, you have to be impressed with attempt GM has made, introducing two new pickups (and we would argue hugely important pickups for the continued viability of the company) with vastly improved and upgraded details inside and out. No, this wasn't a "clean sheet of paper" exercise or a revolutionary redefinition of the pickup truck, but both the Chevy and GMC models are impressive nonetheless. 

Top 10 Best Features in the 2014 Silverado and Sierra 

10. Better Design Separation

Say what you will about either front ends, the fact remains the Chevy and GMC grilles are much further apart from where they were. We think that's good, especially if they want GMC to further the "premium grade" mantra. We're not sold on the headlight setup on the Chevy, but we're guessing there are several more grade levels we still haven't seen.  

9. Invisible Frame Strength

Knowing GM did most of the heavy-lifting work with the last-generation frame by moving to hydroforming technology, the only place to go was the added use of high-strength and ultra-high-strength steels to save weight. We like that GM spent the time and money on a place no one will typically see. We also hope that will translate into bigger towing and payload numbers and not just be used for the purpose of weight savings and MPG gains. 

8. Transmission Column Shifter

Though a console-mounted shifter might be sportier, we like GM's old-school column shifter; it has a heft and weightiness to it. Sure, GM saved some money with this setup, but it can always do something later. 

7. Fine-Tuned Suspension

Admittedly, this one we'll have to wait and see exactly how well GM has done and whether or competes well with Ford's dialed-in F-150 models or the new air suspension offered on the new Ram. Both offer soft and controlled rides. Our guess, especially after what those same chassis engineers did with the Silverado HD and Sierra HD rides on the 2010 redesign, is that it will be quite good. 

6. New Crew Cab 6.5-Foot Bed

We've been seeing the crew cab with the longer 6.5-foot bed for quite a while in spy photography, but it will be good to see it in person. The extra room and length should help a lot of buyers and the amount of crew cab reconfiguring its done is impressive. Because the front doors are shorter and the rear door is longer, it feels like there's a ton more room for rear passengers without compromising any front passenger legroom. That's a good trick. 

5. Gauges and Center Stack

The new gauge layout, which accommodates the 4.2-inch information screen between the tach and speedometer, and center stack design has a much cleaner  look, and we appreciate that the full-size pickups will get their own unique look (separated from the Tahoe, Yukon, Suburban, and Yukon XL full-size SUVs). The big nav screen, dual glove boxes, and toggle switches are all well done. 

4. Trailer Brake Controller Positioned Up High

Finally, a brake-controller location that makes sense. No doubt some will prefer the Ford and Ram locations, but to our mind this keeps the important info in a much easier line-of-vision and makes for a quick grab if needed. 

3. Extended Cab Conventional Hinge

Gone is the rear-hinged rear doors that swing open 170 degrees. Yes, they were quite handy when we were in need of a wide-mouth opening for a big-screen TV, but the move to a conventional B-pillar makes for a stronger, safer cab for passengers. Those overly complicated hinges and doors were quite expensive to replace when damaged, as well. 

2. Two New V-8-Dedicated Axles

The redesigned axles paired with the two new V-8 engines have been computer designed and reinforced to be stronger and lighter (pound for pound) than the axles they replace. We assume the extra strength means we'll be seeing GVWs and payload numbers climbing to Ford heights and beyond. 

1. Corvette Influences 

Sure, we like that a lot of the technology found in all three new engines comes straight from the Corvette engineers (direct injection, AFM, continuously variable valve timing), but what we're most happy about is that GM didn't try to stuff a performance car motor into a base-level pickup. Keeping a V-6 truck motor available for the work trucks will pay huge long-term dividends for truck customers.

Comments

Wow, this is all simply GROUNBREAKING... way to go GM >

This new design architecture is growing on me really fast, for the Sierra anyway. Still not impressed with the grill/headlight design on the Silvy. Can't wait for the stats to be released.

Some good looking trucks in my opinion.. Still think the GMC looks way better though. Definitely not a ground breaking truck or anything for the matter, but at least with this GM won't be loosing their #2 spot, but no chance to overtake Ford.

While you comment on the exteriors finally achieving some visible separation, the photos of the interiors above show they're still twins. I happily acknowledge that GMC and Chevy each have been around for a long, long time, but I've come to the conclusion that one of the biggest cost-saving factors might be to finally merge them and let the GMC nose just be another trim level the way Ford has started offering 5 supposedly different grills depending on model trim.

That said, of the two front ends, I personally have to say that I like the GMC better, Chevy's is too much a throwback to more than 30 years worth of front-end styling.

My biggest gripe about the whole package (and I'll include Ford and RAM in this) is that front-hinged extended cab. While I do understand the need for the B-post between front and rear, that doesn't dictate that you MUST have the doors open the same way. By hinging the rear door on that column you are now forced to walk around that door to do anything in that extended area where a rear-hinged door--even with the column in place, is simply far more convenient for access. Returning the back door to a rear hinge while keeping the column would provide that side-impact strength while retaining the convenience of the earlier open-side design.

The ultra high strength steel concerns me as all makers are going to this. Our trucks are becoming tuning forks and we get all sorts of vibes resonating through them.
The "better design separation" is a comical. If you cover the GMC and Chevy logos on the steering wheels in the pictures above, they are nearly identical interiors. Please tell me which is the more "premium grade" of those pictures. You'll see more differences between models from both Ram and Ford trucks, and that is within the same brand! I don't have a problem with them making basically the same truck for both brands, but please stop exaggerating how different they are.
And how in the world does a column shifter make a top ten list? Something that's been around forever is suddenly a "best feature"? All brands offer the column shifter, but most also offer additional shifters so buyers have a choice.
Nice trucks overall. Overdue enhancements for the most part. I think the engines will be the real story once the specs are released.

DWFields, that's a great point about the rear doors, for all brands. That would be close to the best of both. This would have been the perfect time for GM to do that too.

Another GM pos ! To little to late it seems like alot of chevy girls bought new Rams of late will they be back i dont think so. GM trucks are on there last legs i for one is looking forward to seeing the new 2015 F150 concept its going to be sweet

So the 10 best things are the only things they changed? and column shifter? Wow, these trucks have less going for them than I thought.

THE COLUMN SHIFTER IS WAY OUTDATED AND SUCKS!!

The column shifter is perfect for a regular cab with a bench seat... far from outdated.

@Ford850
You state that a column shifter is "old school", but yet you want "old school" construction. Harmonic and vibrations shouldn't be a hard problem to resolve. Thicker metal doesn't necessarily negate vibrations. Remember weight is the biggest problem.

I have read some post regarding the hp of these new engines. Most on this site equate hp with performance, not economy. I can see these engines having less hp and equal torque to comparable car engines, the only difference is the torque will start at lower rpm's. They only need to add a decent diesel to the line up.

I don't know why the pickups aren't incorporating a more aerodynamic profile. Even the Ram is a brick. This would be the easiest way to improve mpg's.

I do think the GMC has a nicer look.

The only thing I have huge problem with thes 2 trucks are those 2 pictures above of the center staks and the stack by the door as they are as ugly as sin. I like the gauges and information screen (which surprisingly is the only thing I want Toyota to change in the interior for the 3rd gen Tundra). I for the life of me cannot figure out why GM is having a hard time comming up with something close to these two with the last one being my favorite interior. http://wot.motortrend.com/2013-ford-f-150-gets-myford-touch-interior-exterior-updates-213387.html/2013-ford-f-150-interior/#axzz2FbfCiBCI and http://wot.motortrend.com/2012-new-york-roundup-automakers-go-big-in-the-big-apple-2-189145.html/2013-ram-1500-interior/#axzz2FbfCiBCI.

I can't see why anyone would want the trailer brake controls there. Mike Levine complained about them being on the right, then after I had mine done in my 2010 Ram on the standard left side, I wished it was on the right.

High strength steel? Ram did that already.

2 dedicated axles means the one in the 5.3 is weak.

A 4.2 inch info screen? After Ford and Ram have already done that. They couldn't design their own instament cluster, so they borrored Fords.

A new cab was long overduw, as the current crew Chevy isn't much differant from their extended cab. Did the extended cab get any bigger?

A 6'6" bed, after Ram did a 6'4" bed. If it's any like the current Chevy bed, it's 2 inches narrower at the bedside, and about a half inch narrower at the wheelwells. To each's own, it isn't bigger then a Rams though. The Ford is long, but an inch narrower at the wheelwells compared to Ram. Currently Ford dealers barely order the longbed crew. We will see if Ram and GM dealers order them. Hard to sell whats not on the lot for potential buyers to see.

The non car engine, well we don't even know if it puts out any more torque then a 3.6 Ram or 3.7 Ford. But the purpose of the v-6 is to be cheaper and get better mileage. With the 5.3 there and the stupid 4.8 finally gone, buyers that want some more torque can opt for the 5.3. I hardly think the 4.3 will get the same mileage with a 3.6. The 3.6 and an 8 speed will be alot smoother.

Maybe I missed it, but have they finally put the 4 speed auto out of their trucks? The 4 speeds were only holding Ram and Chevy back. Is the 4.3 all aluminum?

*Meant to say Mike Levine complained about them on the left!*

@Big Al: the Ram is a brick? Smoother then all the others in it's class, might even be smoother then those ugly Mazdas they have overseas! Atleast Ram worked on theirs! GM? I can't believe they still put out such a brick!

I've been checking out this website for a long time. I'm guessing @ 97. In any event this is the WORST write up since then. I can't stop laughing:
The truck guys I've talked to since the debut on the 13th have pointed out the following:
-(see #10) where is the design seperation? No more than the 07? Possibly less design seperation on the inside!
- (see #8) Why no column shifter? EVERYONE assumed it would arrive in the 07MY. Now MY14 and still no?!?
- (see #6) 6.5ft crew bed arrives 8 MY years after Ford and this is applauded? Crew is not larger and you applaud? Wow.
- (see #5) Weak point. I appreciate the seat is larger than the seat in the volt too.
- (see #4) Perhaps biggest: In past reviews nearly everone likes brake contrller on right side as you will use that hand to possibly shift tranny(Ford or Ram on console) or 4wd selector? On the Gm ues its up high, BUT ON THE WRONG SIDE!
- (see #3) Fairness in conversation act, this one will have some merit with some. I find it interesting they worked so hard to correct ingress/exit ease with Crew, but made it worse on Ext cab. I suspect this was an attempt to improve crash test data.

If you need help writing the follow up article: Top Ten worst features. that should be easier...

I think one of the biggest positives about these trucks is that GM is building traditional truck style. I want a column shifter and a bench seat with an open floorboard. Full length consoles and console shifters are fine and I have no problem with them in a truck but leave me the option of a bench seat on a high end truck. It works for my size better. As far as the CHevy headlight's, I love'em! They have the mid '80's look about them and they are far better than those ugly one-piece plastic shields on the current truck.
Now, I'm not that crazy about the shorter front door and the design of the center stack takes some getting used to and I did want something clean sheet like they did in '88.
But I can't wait to drive one of these trucks and hear some numbers on them before I pass final judgement and that is something I could never say about the current truck, I hated it from the start!
Remember though, the GMT-400's were ridiculed for there looks when they came out and they turned out to be the last great Chevy's! Let's see what this truck is like when it goes into production.

trx4; It did say in the story, and all the spec. that the 6spd is going to be across the board, with the V-6 and V-8's, and all engines are all aluminum.

How does a column shifter make the top-10 list? Whether or not this is a "re-design" or a "refresh", there is no excuse for that. Either GM didn't do a good enough job or the article missed something.

Bi Al, I said the ultra high strength steel concerns me, not that I don't want it. I realize it is needed to lose weight but I don't think any manufacturer has the kinks worked out since we see more and more complaints about bad vibes from all brands.
As for the column shifter, I like that too. My point is regarding adding something to a top ten list because of what they DON'T offer... counsel shifters. They've had column shifters for decades, and so have all the others. How can that make a top ten feature list?
Again I'll say these look like nice trucks, but I think the engines will make them that much better once we hear the specs.

@TRX4 Tom
The most aerodynamic brick is still a brick no matter how you defend them, including our utes, they can all be more aerodynamic to improve fuel economy.

The aesthetic value is subjective, that has nothing to do with aerodynamics. I do think this new new GMC will be the nicest looking pickup on offer on the outside. I don't like the look of the dash on both the Chev and GMC, it looks like GM is using the T6 Ranger as the base for their dash.

It would be interesting to see the differences in aerodynamics in the mid-sizers vs full size.

The column shifter is a wise standard feature to retain although many prefer the console shifter in the high level personal use type trucks such as the RAM Outdoorman. Nothing wrong with that. Where I think technology needs to be left alone is making the transmission electric shift such as RAM has done with their 8 speed. That is going to be a durability concern. There isn’t 1 single manufacturer out there that doesn’t have durability issues with the electric shift transfercases and now people want that for transmissions? Meh…. GM is wise not to follow that path…yet.

The outsides might be a bit more different than they have been in the past but they are still fairly close. I agree with the others that the area they needed to do some work on to make the trucks feel different was the interior. While I think the interior itself is growing on me with each additional picture/video I see they are in effect the same other than a couple of wood trim pieces on the higher end Sierra's. GM had the chance to really make the Sierra more up-market here and didn't do it.

I am positive the frame and axle changes will allow for larger payload and towing figures which is nice. I hope that the engines themselves don't disappoint. Let’s be honest the big numbers sell whether they functionally help the truck or not. It’s all about the marketing.

I do wish GM had gone with HID lights in the upper trims since both Ram and Ford offer this for the 2013's. I also would have liked to see the 8-speeds in from the start. I know GM says they aren't ready but they are going to use the 8-speeds from Aisin on the Corvette as a stop-gap measure and they should have done this on the trucks.

Ford850, you have a good point on the vibration question. I don't think that the problem is with ultra high-strength steel itself as much as how stiff the frames are on trucks these days.

The modern truck frame doesn't have as much bend and give in it as it once did due in part to the steel used, but also due in part to the design(fully-boxed, multiple crossmembers, and so forth). That extra stiffness allows just any little drivetrain vibration to be felt, whether it is from tires that are just a bit out of balance, a driveshaft that may be a little out of balance, etc.

That being said, I agree with you; vibration is a concern, and the truck manufacturers will have to work just that much harder to get rid of it.

how many people regularly use a trailer brake controller in a 1/2 ton anyway? why put it in such a high noticable spot? for the 1/10000 that use a trailer brake controler once a year.

Groundbreaking? Hardly. Solid improvements, yes; but in no way are these groundbreaking trucks.

Best feature as far as I'm concerned is the side step on the rear bumper. It first showed up on the Gen-1 Avalanche, then disappeared. It's such a smart idea—and it just amazes me that no other truck maker has offered it before. You can thank Ford with its tailgate "Man Step" to push GM into offering their version of this great idea.

SO several times the GM guy and Mike, has touted things as "weight savings" so how much lighter are these 2 trucks to comparable 2012 GMC/Chevy trucks? We need numbers not just words

wow after reading this article there really must not be much "new" to these new GM twins. I agree with pretty much everything Power Kid said. Like many others I was expecting an all-new clean sheet design. Ford has been able to get by with their constant refreshing of the same basic pickup for many years because they had such a great truck to start with in 04 and was it 99 for the HD? I still remember when they introduced the new 04 f150 saying "only this truck earned the right to be called the next F150" and boy was I impressed. I think most of us agreed that GM needs a new basic design and that's why many of us (even a lot of the hardcore chevy fans) are disappointed. Ram came through with a vastly improved design. I was hoping for a similar experience where chevy could say "only this truck earned the right to be called the next silverado." But alas the truck is just too much of the same even if it wasn't bad to begin with. IMO ford still has the best basic design on both light and heavy duty trucks and that is why they are dominating market share more and more. Chevy isn't doing their job playing leap frog they are too busy playing catch-up.

Dafish,

From the video I gather at least 20 kilos from the frame, 10 from the axles, 7 kilos from the hood and something from the bed. My guesstimate is at least 50 kilos (roughly 110 lbs) in just those items alone. I am sure some panels and the all aluminum engines will add to this total. I'd be willing to bet that overall the weight savings (at least on the larger crew cabs) are at least 250 lbs.

This is GM's truck that will have to meet the upcoming increases to CAFE so they are going to have to have some fairly major changes since it is unlikely they are going to do a full reset before 2017 to meet those standards.

The column shifter for lower trim trucks and/or trucks with front bench seat is OK. But for higher level trims, I'd prefer the console shifter or even the rotary shifter.

SCOOP! In an effort to get the best highway mileage numbers (not real world) GM will use 2.76 gears with the v-6 and little 28-29 tall tires. This will get them the numbers they want, which are unrealistic, and will result in an istant downshift up any incline. The V-8s will get 2.50 gears, because that is what GM does best, just slow the engine down. This might also end up with a downshift, but GM says it will get the numbers! The tires will only support the loaded truck at their max air pressure.

GM will also install parachutes if the stand brakes can't whoa it down!

Just Kidding! But isn't so GM like?

Evan, I take it you never tow? Some of us still do with our half tons.

@Big Al: Agreed, but i don't think they want sudden change in aero. It's gonna need to be more and more aero tho. They can make the front ends more aero and shorter far as I am concerned. As lokk as it still looks decent. Not Honda like.

I agree with rsholland , the manstep bumper should have been on the list. It's the only "innovation" I see.

@ Mark - I'm a bit concerned about driver visibility with the B pillar moved forward. I drive a current generation GMC. From my seat position, if the B pillar were 2" forward, I would have a huge blind spot to my left. This could be a big issue when merging, etc. Did you notice this?

Also, noticed in video 4 of the previous interiews with the engineer that he said the rear seat is more upright than before. Fine for kids, but I wanted a more legroom for my adult passengers - not at the cost of an uncomfortable upright rear seat. What did you think about the rear seatback angle?

I'm ready to buy a new truck and was willing to wait if I loved this, but I don't see anything worth waiting for. Ford has everything and it seems to be in a better, roomier package. It's biggest downfall is the design is getting stale with the coming 2015...

Some meaningful improvements, but they are hardly enough to catch up to the competition, and once the competion has new trucks out in two years GM will once again be out to dust.

To little to late GM,soon you become a #3,still behind,.....

To all the haters I have only one thing to say. Ford HDs outsell GM HDs because of cheap fleet agreements, but the articles you find on this website and most others say GM HDs are far superior. When looking at LDs, it's even money based on buyer PREFERENCES. F-150 wins here and there and Chevy wins here and there. Most of the time, Chevys win their awards based on lower cost of ownership and a good balance of features and "true truck" feel. GM's trucks don't have an identity crisis and I love it. And for the record, GMs half tons, between Chevy and GMC outsell F-150s REGULARLY. By that I mean 8 out of the last 12 years. Know Your History.

THE COLUMN SHIFTER IS WAY OUTDATED AND SUCKS!!

Posted by: rick irvin | Dec 20, 2012 9:10:51 AM

If you want something with a console shifter....go buy a car or a truck with a feminine flavor to it. That would be a Ford of course.

Nice over-embellishment of ho-hum advancements already employed by the competition. Dodge is already using the "move the center post forward trick" for easier rear door entry and Ford has been using heavy half-ton-specific axles since the turn of the century. And, don't get me started on "fine-tuned suspensions" and column shifters -- turn off the fluff machine. I ask myself: Is this a form of compensation and if so, why?

I think it funny on how everyone picks on the new design and engine a transmissions of these two trucks. Obviously these comments are from a bunch of RAM and Ford guys that think there brand is better no matter what. I currently own a 2010 1/2 ton extended cab with the current 6.2L 403hp 6 speed trans with the Max trailer package I tow a 31ft 9200 lbs dry weight travel almost every weekend with no issues the truck is rated to tow 10,500ilbs. The comments about 2.50 rear gears is BS I have 4:10 gears and can average 18.5 mpg on the highway with the current model. The new models with direct injection and 4 cylinder mode and lighter chassis can only improve mpg and towing capacity numbers from current. I think you will all be surprised when the new engine numbers are released. the new 5.3 will have as much HP as the Hemi and the 6.2L will be 450 + making it the highest towing capacity of any 1/2 ton on the market. I line my 2010 up against any 1/2 on the market in 1/4 mile drag any day!

@TRX4 Tom
Here is a link to an article on the T6 Ranger and its aerodynamics. It makes for some good reading on how they reduced the drag on the ute. The drag isn't as low as you would think.

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/17C502792252A9FDCA25785A001E43A0

Bac6772: That must be 18.5 miles per gallon by the lie o meter on dash display, which is closer to 18 or less. That's with premium? At 60 mph through flat Illinois? And 4.1 gears, not an option, right?

I was talking more about the 5.3 trucks, as now you can't get 3.73s with a 5.3, can you? So they put the 3.08 gear with the 3.42 gears. If you knew GMs history of how they build cars, you would see their big way of claiming gas mileage is just gearing down.

18.5 huh? I can get an in dash indicated 19.3 (prob 19 or a bit less realistically) with a quad cab 4x4 3.92 geared Ram going 65 through the hills, and I don't have the little liteweight tires GM uses. On 87 octane cheap ass Murphy Usa gas. That's in a heavier stronger built truck then a Chivy. The 6.2 doesn't make that much more power. And what more power it does make is higher in the rpm range.

So you think the 5.3 will get 395 HP and 407 ft pound torque? That's laughable! But direct injection, sure, whatever. I think you would be lucky to see 370 ft pounds out of a 5.3, but GM will probably make it a slug on bottom end, and bigger numbers at like 4500 for torque, and 5800 for hp.

The 6.2? Maybe 430 hp and 445 torque.

I would laugh my arse off if Ram put the 6.4 Hemi in a truck, just to quiet down you GM and Ford 6.2 lovers. They already have it making 470 without direct injection. And it has MDS.

Let me get this right. Cadilac started using something like MDS/active fuel management, they couldn't make it work, and Dodge figured it out, so Chevy coppied how to make it work on 5.3s?

Just waiting to get my laugh on.

I don't race my truck. I do have a 3200 pound car with a 400 plus hp engine though.

And I was kidding about the 2.50s, but you were too wound up to see it. But they will probablt make it to where you can only get 3.42s.

TRX4 Tom,
Please pull your head out of your ass. Fiat Lover.
I used to own one actually. Fiat Tipo it was. Hahaha.....that's all I got to say about that.

is hard for ford driver not able to compete whit the best,,, good job gm,dodge..

LOL TRX4 Tom is getting nervous. Takes Ram two spark plugs to get the job done. Chevy can always make new heads for four values and mill the block to fit two plugs. Any way the 5.3 will blow the Hemi out of the water. Ram the truck with big numbers hp tq but little payload and less trailering that takes guts! If the Hemi and car coils are so great, why won't it haul or tow what Ford and GM can do?

I want to know what the base model LS and Work truck dashes will look like. It looks good in these pictures, but I am sure that the huge touchscreen wont be available on the baseline trucks. How will they clean up that space when the touchscreen is gone? RAM trucks interiors look great, until you look at the baseline SL models. Those look horrible. Even the F-150 STX looks nice.

Also, I would rather have a column shifter than a stupid knob on the dash!!!

@ TRX4 Tom, yes I do tow a little. My 2012 ram has the integrated controller and I think it is in the perfect place, out of the way but still in easy reach when I need it, I don't need to look at it cuz all the information shows up on the screen in the dash so its not like it needs to be in direct line of sight.

Out of the four trailers I tow regularly only two are dual axles, one has surge brakes (no need for a controller) and one with electric brakes.


3/4 n 1 ton trucks that would be a fine location

I would like a top end trim with a leather bench seat and the column shifter.
The huge console takes up too much room. If they have a bench seat but the center of the dash swoops down to kill knee room that is not good either. The top picture is the first I saw of an interior without the console, and that is very promising. If I want a five passenger car I will buy a five passenger car.

I hope they do differentiate the look more in the future - let GMC have the Freightliner/ Peterbilt look, and get a nice sleek feminine look to the front end of the Silverado - with a lower hood if possible - I hate staring at a windshield full of hood when climbing a steep hill on a logging road, and sticking my head out the window to see what is coming up is not a great solution.

I have had Crew Cabs with 8 ft boxes, they are not so popular. I have had them with short boxes as well. Maybe the 6.5 foot will be the best - I likely will get one of those this summer and will decide as I use it.

I really need an HD, but will buy one of these because can't wait, but sure would have been nice to have a diesel option here.

The "inset doors" is a good idea, the older design they had going into the roof was stupid from the day it was introduced. I don't know about everyone else but the old design would make sure that if there was any snow on the roof of the truck it would fall down the back of your neck when you opened the door.
Water runoff was handled poorly as well. So that is a great change.

I also do a lot of towing, and have hated having to take my eyes off the road to use the trailer brake balancing lever, or whatever you want to call it, and have thought it would be great to get it mounted up higher, but it would have looked awful, but now it has been done and will work so much better, just be honest and go and use one like that and you will be able to see for yourself, (as on tractor trailers that is how they mount them, it is called a trolley brake in them), and as far as a rotary dial shifter?, from the 1st time I saw that I thought for sure the Ford fanbois were going to be all over that one! Ram should have made that a choice between a console and twistomatic, and as far as the airbags go, all through out the auto history there has been airbag suspension, and when ever you see one of the old classics that have them, it is to bad because that is the 1st thing to go, and seems to be very expensive to fix, IF the parts are available, has anyone ever seen an old 58 Caddy? or an old Merc/Benz? even some of the not so old cars have had them and yep try and fix them, no parts in manufacture anymore, all the manuf. have to do is make the parts for 10yrs!, and for about 1/2 the price you can do it yourself on any model out there, at least in the rear! yes it is nice when new, but oh nooo, when it leaks what do you do? I have the Firestone air ride bags on my Z-71, and they work fine, if someone would come out with them for the front that would be nice also, I use them when towing my Airstream, so when I go out on the road with my Harley in the back, the truck has a nice level profile, and the ride is amazing! and I have been over the Cat scales with everything and the CGW has been around 13,600lbs, and that is within the 15,000 CGVWR, and I have no problems, when driving on any roads, in a safe and reasonable manner, granted I have more power with the F150 EB, but I have no more faith in that truck to go far from home anymore, and I am also sure I would have more power with a Ram, but with a 14,000 CGWR I would have to leave the Harley at home, or the wife and some stuff, but not with the Chevy I can bring it all with me, granted I can not burn up the road, and be a danger to everyone out there, but I can do what I want, have been doing it for yrs now, and have had no problems so far, with a Chevy...Now as far as HID headlights are concerned, I have some lowbeam conversions from HIDextreem co. for $149, and I could get the high beams for $125, but dont need them, and that is fine, the low beam conv. work great, and with the Chevy the lows stay on with the highs, so I can see for a long way, and it was very cheap, and a lot less than from any factory set-up, as we know that is always worked into the price. So sorry about the soap box, just my $1.02 worth, and I would def. recomend the headlight conv. to anyone, and the Firestone Air ride is something to think about also, because before I used those, the HID lowbeams were blinding others on the road, but unlike the factory ones, these do not auto adjust, but even without the air ride the truck was fine, the sag was not to bad maybe about 2-3" and with that much weight is realy not to bad. Drive safe out there!

Hey I really wish they would bring back the composite box.
I have one on my 2002 and i love it.
I need to upgrade in the fall next year...



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