New 2014 Silverado Website Revealed!

2014 Silverado Website 3 II

GM has just revealed a new 2014 Chevy Silverado 1500 website to highlight many of the new features and technology in the new light-duty pickup. It includes rolling footage of engineering testing, testimonies from testers and detailed descriptions of each of the changes made for 2014. 

The new website is deep and wide with content, photography, 3-D-type graphics and videos, and, as you might expect, eventually leads you to the act of building and potentially ordering your own "perfect truck." Of course, we still don't have many of the specifics related to the three engine choices or how much it can tow or carry, but we're told that will come later and be added as the information is made available. However, there are several areas you can scroll to that give a general idea how much the vehicle is able to tow, represented by various trailer images. 

Some of our favorite aspects of the site include the amazing, multidimensional photography, the different information screens that provide various areas to explore and that you can get recommendations on exactly which truck combinations will fit with exactly what you like to do, carry and/or tow.  

This new type of website is specifically designed for Silverado customers and those interested in learning how this truck was developed. It seems to offer more information about this new truck than any other competitive full-size half-ton sites have ever done before. Brochures about the new website will be passed out at the 2013 North American International Auto Show in Detroit (for its debut to the public), pointing consumers there to provide feedback. As to GMC, it will offer a more traditional web experience to their customers. Take a look and let them know what you think.  

2014 Silverado Website II

 

Comments

Wonder if it has an option to raise the low slung frame any? I the pic above it is already maxed out and ready to drag it..and that is just a simple stream.

no extended cab 8ft bed ???

When you compare 2014 Silverado to current f150, the frame on the ford is far more visible then the one on Silverado. Besides, Chevy has always had great ground clearance (look it up).

I like that they focused on their long list of weaknesses, and it looks like they tried to make great improvements on them. I think that was their main focus rather than a 'new' truck or new look. That will retain customers, and it will also open their door for customers from other brands who have a problem with their current brand. Let's face it, most customers are brand loyal and only look around at the others if they have a problem with their current truck.

Yeah, never understood the whole low Chevy thing when they have more ground clearance then Ford. Ford bodies are taller giving the illusion of a taller truck, but they are no higher off the ground. You do get higher center of gravity, higher step in height, and higher load height with a Ford though.

@Fred, not on the HD's and when it comes to off roading, that's what matters. Chevy's drop down frame is horrible. You're lucky to have 8-9 inches of break over angle height and that's with a fairly good sized wheel. Also, after scrolling through that site and clicking on the exterior body link theres a quad door picture in burgandy and I can say without hesitation that is THE UGLIEST side profile of a truck I've EVER seen. WTF? I thought the GMT-900 Silverado was bad. Good God! This is Worse! Who stuck those HUGE square flares on there? It looks like Total SH*t. I think the front end looks Awesome! Like a real Chevy should but then you get to the side shots and I want to throw up. These guys need to get their act together. I don't care How capable it is, You Can't Sell Ugly. WHO at RenCen approved of THAT???? It makes me want to dump my already less that stellar GM shares.

These guys Finally fix the screwed up front end after 7 years only to make the already crappy looking sides look even worse. And I swore that couldn't even be possible. I was proven wrong. I just about want to give up on this company when it comes to trucks. And it's so sad when they build the best powertrains in the business but can't design a nice looking truck to put them in to save their life.

I saw nothing about the durability of the new sheetmetal. I thought they'd address their tinfoil body structure but apparently not. We'll be seeing a whole new round of threads like this by years end.

http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=119648


And I see they brought back their rust magnet rocker panels too. How nice. Oh, but they did bring back disc brakes! Wow... What a Major breakthrough. They're gonna have to do better than this. Please tell me how this same Chevrolet company can build a car like the C7 Corvette and then completely blow it (yet again) on their biggest money maker? No other vehicle in the world loses loyalty on a daily basis like Chevy trucks.

If someone would remove those hideous bulges from the bed side and front fender that picture up top would look like a killer classic Chevy truck. I agree, it looks like ass the way it is now. Leave fender flairs to the aftermarket. I sure as hell wouldn't buy it looking like that. Dump the flairs and you have my attention. I always liked Chevy's but they've gotten too far off track design wise. It's hard to even look at em anymore.

Wow. Sounds like they spent more time on the website than they did on the truck.

Yeah, never understood the whole low Chevy thing when they have more ground clearance then Ford. Ford bodies are taller giving the illusion of a taller truck, but they are no higher off the ground.


@zrpoo, Ford's have far more ground clearance. You can look at a Ford Super Duty underneath and while the bottom of the body is the same height as the Chevy the frame sits up high inside the body. The frame on the Chevy slings downward towards the ground so torsion bars can tie into it. It's yet another negative if their torsion bar IFS. The Ford is all nice and clear under there. So is the Dodge for that matter. I don't think anyone ever complained about the 1500 frame set up. It's the 25-3500's that are the problem. If I owned a Chevy I wouldn't even touch a 2500 for that reason alone. Around here, Chevy guys only lift 1500's so you don't have to deal with low ground clearance of the HD frame.


@Denverconst., I agree. This sides are a huge fail on this truck. They need to start drug testing the design guys at GM/Chevy.

The Chevy truck is growing on me from the exterior although the interior is still a bit of a let down from the pictures I see. Sure the LTZ and up models look decent with the wood and other niceties but the more pedestrian LT models have the low grade headlights (boo) and fairly flat and bland interior. It will probably be better materials but there is no real design to it. I still prefer Ram for the interior (and exterior but the Chevy still looks nice to me on the outside) on any trim level.

I hope the "numbers" help GM out with more potent engines and good towing and payload figures but it sounds like they are only going to be mid pack for fuel economy and power which is hard to market in the game of one-upmanship. I am still keeping the GM trucks in the running for me and since my buying window is still late 2014 or early 2015 I fully anticipate a new Ford, Ram, Titan, Tundra and GM's updated 8 or even 10 speed transmission.

Wow. Sounds like they spent more time on the website than they did on the truck.


-Just another disposable pos Chevy. They don't care about trucks anymore. They haven't cared about trucks since 1987. 1998 if you're being kind to the 1/2 ton line. Just like others said, the sides of this truck are an absolute effing disaster. And I was counting on Mark Reuss to turn their garbage truck design of the gmt900's around. Funny, he can fix and nail the Vette but not give a damn about their Silverado. The sides of this truck look worse than anything they've ever done. Just disgusting.

beebee

Sad but true. The underwelming responce to this truck has got to have GM scrambling to do a refresh in two years, like the Malibu.

The Chevy truck is growing on me from the exterior although the interior is still a bit of a let down from the pictures I see


@Howam00, that's how I feel. I like some of it but it's like 3 or 4 different trucks grafted into 1. I almost feel like I'm looking at a computer generated image with lots of cut and pasting from several designs and not the finished product. Nothing flows at all. If they thought the new Malibu was a disaster just wait till this hits the lots. I thought the current model was bad, this thing may just look even worse. I actually think the interior is good. Maybe not as good as the new Ford Atlas but it's light years ahead of the current model. I like the front end too. Very tough and classic looking. Like others have said though, they dropped the ball on the sides. It's a total mess around the front and back wheels. It's a shame too because nobody had more to lose or gain than Chevrolet on this truck. I'm really starting to feel they blew it. The next F-150 or Atlas design looks world's better. GM just needs to can whoever has been coming up with the Chevy Silverado designs since the 2007 model came out.

This thing is the Aztec of trucks. What's up with their big square cut outs and metal stampings around the tires? It looks stupid. Chevy beds haven't looked right since that 07-08 model came out but this is almost too ridiculous for words.

Chevy guys have been literally begging Govt. Motors for a real beam axle and tucked away frame (Like Ford Super Duty, Dodge Ram HD and all 1987 and prior Chevy's) for 2 damn decades now. You know what though, I don't know if a beam axle and tucked away frame would even sell this truck in HD form. It's downright ugly. I see the same damn thing everyone else does, a killer Chevy from the front and one Ugly Duckling on the sides. Head's need to roll over this disaster.

To those who don't like the sides with the "bulges" please keep in mind that the more creases you have in a flat plane the stronger the material becomes to deforming.

Those fender bulges likely help increase the rigidity of the side panels which helps the whole "tinfoil sheetmetal" that is so often complained about. That being said I am not big on the square openings either, round or at least rounder would have been better but also wouldn't have matched the squarish design language they used for virtually every other piece on this truck. I also assume that this helps the air flow around the wheels and tires to reduce drag.

Could GM have done better, of course, lets face it they all could but the truck isn't too bad and GM most likely will not gain or lose any ground in the truck wars.

If they gain no ground in sales but earn $1000 more per truck because they made it less expensive to produce is that really worse than gaining 10-15% more sales but having $500 lower margins to go with the better design/features? For GM's longevity this will likely produce the most profit for them which is smart at this stage.

I see a GovtMoCo Terrain with a Chevy face and a bed. LOL... And they think this will compete against the new Ford and Dodge trucks? They need to loosen that bowtie around their neck. Their brain is suffering from a lack of oxygen. All these years they had to come up with a good looking design again and This is the best they've got? Is this not the same company that designed the Tahoe, new Corvette, new Impala etc?? Time to send the kindergartners home and bring in the real designers. And I thought the current truck was freaking ugly... The bed sides of this are even worse. If I wanted a GovtMoCo Terrain truck I'd buy one and pull a trailer behind it.

Those fender bulges likely help increase the rigidity of the side panels which helps the whole "tinfoil sheetmetal" that is so often complained about. That being said I am not big on the square openings either, round or at least rounder would have been better but also wouldn't have matched the squarish design language they used for virtually every other piece on this truck. I also assume that this helps the air flow around the wheels and tires to reduce drag.

Could GM have done better, of course,


@Howamoo, I think that's the problem. They could have done better. Yet once again they half assed their trucks which were once their bread and butter. I'm not so sure they'll be able to say that much longer. They just don't seem to care anymore. And without truck sales what good is the rest of the company? These guys aren't Toyota who can rely on sales of the Camry to morons everywhere. Heck though, even Toyota has the Tacoma. Chevrolet is doing a very bad job putting up a fight against Ford and Dodge. I personally though this would be the truck where they got serious but alas they didn't. The looks of this truck are very poor in my opinion. And I hate to sound like a repeating part of a broken record but looking at it I've come to realize it really is the side profile that ruins the truck. They should just used a tad thicker metal or composites and go back to making the sides smooth again instead of being cheap and punching out mega square bulges in the metal. It looks like crap. Even give it some round openings around the wheels like Ford and Dodge do. Chevy used to do it as well. I'm afraid their sales will be abysmal with this truck after looking at it visually. They can't hardly give away the current model because of how it looks. I can't image what they'll do with this. This is Malibu 2.0 but so much more was at stake. When you look at the Atlas you say "ya, that's how it's done". When you look at this it's like "oh no, they screwed it up again". And I'd love for Chevrolet to get it together and be the biggest selling truck again on their own but they just can't seem to design a good looking truck anymore to save their life.

I'm going off of the 2 pictures above. You look at the top picture and think Hell Yes! Chevy is Back!! And then you look at the second picture and think Oh No. They screwed it up Again! Yep, the sides of this truck really blow. WTF is wrong with these guys and the sides of their trucks? Forst the GMT-900 and then this mess too? As a Chevy guy I can undoubtedly say this sucks. That new Ford that debuted looked way better.

I'm waiting for the obligatory gimmicky torture test. Maybe run the Baja 500 race in reverse?


Is a squared fender enough to stop a person from buying a decent truck that meets their transportation needs?
If I went on looks alone, I'd be driving a Ram 1500 right now. I'm not a fan of the headlights and grill on most F150's. The Raptor and FX4 blacked out grill being the exceptions. The way I look at it; when i drive it, I don't see it.
No big deal.
There is always the Sierra if your heart is set on a GM product.
If someone wants to stare at their trucks and admire the looks, that is okay.
I'd rather drive it than look at it.

The creases and curves as pointed out by @howam00 is to make the body more rigid. You could make the sides thicker but that would make the truck heavier and would decrease cargo capacity and increase costs. Even a thicker piece of metal without "creases" will bend easily.

Chevy was in a tough position. They did not want to risk alienating loyal customers with a totally new look. Many btiched and moaned about the GMT400's and 900's. They all had wet dreams about the "good old days". GMC has given people what they wanted: a pre-GMT look to the front end. The trucks do look dated with the standard headlights. The projector lights should of been standard across the board.
But then again, you don't notice it from the steering wheel.


I really dont get GM anymore!!!!!!!!!!! They brag brag brag about their new truck coming out and this is what we get. The teaser specs from every car mag or website saying higher off the ground, new motors, bold new look, I am so done with GM. My 2009 is lifted 6 inches and has less ground clearance than my brothers tundra or buddies f150 with just leveling kits. I do like that they copied Toyota in doing the regular opening doors on the extended cab. Just hope they dont play that same stupid game where you have to buy the highest level LTZ to get the 6.2, lets give the best truck motor to the yuppies that dont use their trucks like a truck. GM please please open your eyes, look at the competition, and realize they are blowing you out of the water! In 2015 when I buy a new truck please have the stupid fixed

That's a pretty piss poor website for ANOTHER ugly Chevy truck. I saw nothing there that convinced me to buy one. Rain and weather tests? As if every other manufacturer doesn't do the same damn thing. Why not build some real off road trucks? Where's the SFA HD? How about a truck that isn't ugly as sin? You know, like the ones you used to build? Those new truck sides are like looking at Medusa. Add me to the list who thought truck sides could Not get any worse then the current model. And boy was I wrong. It looks like a 3rd grader traced around his square box of crayons to design the wheel openings. And then to add insult to injury they puffed them out. What a horrible looking design. The Only thing they made look good again is the front end.

Looks like Grandpa's truck. How long till they slap a Buick emblem on it? I think that's about all this truck is lacking....

Really can't believe they think simply stretching the grill and fender flares is a re-design.

There's no way that's the real Lou posting. I noticed the same thing yesterday and so did someone else. There's zero difference between the Chevrolet and GMC sides. They both look like garbage. And that's what everyone is complaining about. I've yet to hear a single person complain about the front ends. The real Lou would have noticed that. The real Lou knows you don't spend upwards of 50 grand on ugly. The real Lou knows the difference betweens bends and stretching. I also recall the real Lou complimenting the F-series headlights. You sir are an imposter.

I just got done looking at the website and this truck feels like it has just caught up to the rest but doesn't bring anything new to the table. We get a freshening up of old engines, an interior that catches up to Ford and Dodge but does not surpass them. I am really disappointed in these trucks I was hoping for so much more. Ford had the Aluminum hood 4 years ago and almost that same instrument cluster 4 years ago. Dodge has had front hinged extended cabs for a decade. Ford has had standard bed rail covers for 8 years, all of this is new tech to the GM trucks? Really? Their infotainment system feels like a hash of some old GM stuff, Ford Sync, the Dodge system and some Garmin mixed in to make a mutt that from what I've read and seen doesn't do anything particularly well.

I think the team that did the GMT 400 trucks needs to be pulled out of retirement and tasked with teaching GM how to design a cutting edge truck. Ford and Dodge take a beating here for not radically changing their trucks. The 2004 F-150 was a good truck, it was refreshened in 2009 and the changes were very substantial and very substantive it didn't feel like re-warmed old truck. The Atlas looks to be building on that success, the wheel doesn't need to reinvented just continually refined with cutting edge items mixed in with the updates. The same is true for the Dodge, the profile has remained the same for long, long time but they keep massively improving upon it. The 2014 GM twins look like GM tried to do that, but they started with an outdated design and only updated it to today. The same thing happened with the 07 update. They updated to current and didn't go forward and because of that the GM trucks became quickly outdated. It will unfortunately be a long time before I look at a Chevy truck to purchase. They've got to do it better than this. If there is one good thing to say I do like the new center console. Like another poster said, how can a company that can come up with the remarkable C7 Corvette miss the truck target by a mile?

All you pavement pounding suburban dads need to stop crying about SFA's. That is old technology that is utterly useless on a heavyduty truck. Rides worse, handles worse which are most important when towing heavy loads which these trucks are designed for. They aren't designed for moab, stop crying,GM doesn't care if a few people are crying because they don;t look the same with a SFA for the image of you at a local starbucks. There is no benefit, only down falls to go with a sfa. Round wheel well, wouldn't look right on a hard edge truck.

Jesus I have never seen so many image conscious guys in my life. It is a pretty descent looking truck, you should be more worried about comfort, capability and longevity than how your truck looks next to your neighbors truck at the local grocery store. Looks aren't going to matter when you and your family have to walk home because your pretty little truck broke down.

Ford and Dodge especially both ride low in the 1/2 ton and the heaevy duty's will keep getting lower and lower because of the importance of fuel economy and the companies know HD guys do way more pulling and hauling than off roading on their trucks (probably 95% - 5%)

Just what the world doesn't need. Another ugly as hell Chevy truck. I don't know what happened but these guys once built the best looking trucks on the block. Now they're easily the worst looking out of not only the Big 3 but literally everyone who builds trucks. It is absolutely the sides that hurt this truck badly. Just like the current model. I about think this is even worse though because the big squares are So exaggerated. It looks really really bad GM. Not sure what you were thinking there.

All in all, I'm happy with the 2014 version of the truck. While I would have enjoyed a more revolutionary design, I think GM was wise to keep the basic "flavor" of the outgoing design.

Our core buyers (men, 40+) aren't clamoring for a revolution just yet, and there's a lot to be said for sticking with the same style.

However, I expect we're going to see this truck lose some weight in the next 3 years (or so) and a new transmission is likely on it's way (maybe next year?).

As Lou has pointed the shapes of vehicles is restricted by the materials employed.

Remember when plastic front ends were use on cars, the front of cars became more elaborate.

Thinner and higher tensile steel will change the shape of motor vehicles.

In the 50s/60s auto manufacturers used steel with a carbon content lower than mild steel and they bent and fabricated some really sharp angles and made some great curves and bowls.

This isn't possible today, because the higher the carbon the less malleable and ductile the material.

Aluminium will be a greater challenge than steel in forming. Higher tensile aluminium is much less forgiving than high tensile steel.

Another problem with high tensile alumium is that it is highly corrosive due to galvanic proccesses. This is caused by the use of dissimilar metals, salts, acids etc.

Take outboard engines on boats, they use sacrificial metals that will corrode first, before the casings/housings on the engines corrode.

This aluminium isn't necassarily high tensile either.

Composites will create new challenges as well. Even though composte technologies have been around for a while the manufacturing processes are very involved and polluting.

Damage on composites can be devastating. Delaminations occur that spread like cancer and can't be seen. The integrity of a component is weaken and can cause failure much more suddenly than metals.

So, what I'm trying to say is the engineers work with limitation due to the materials they are given. These materials have to be economical.

These more "exotic" materials can be engineered into whatever is required, but at a cost.

Sooner or later the bodies governing regulations hopefully can see the forest through the trees and formulate more usable regulations to work with, that will benefit the consumer.

@ lou

I sure would notice the lower grade headlights behind the steering wheel at night. :)

$100 says that within 6 months there will be companies out there replacing the smallish center console screen with its massive plastic surround for an iPad or other tablet. I bet one of those around 9-10 inches would fit perfectly in there. It would probably improve the look since there wouldn't be some much flat looking plastic all over.

Ford had the Aluminum hood 4 years ago and almost that same instrument cluster 4 years ago. Dodge has had front hinged extended cabs for a decade. Ford has had standard bed rail covers for 8 years, all of this is new tech to the GM trucks?


@SilveradoDriver, your are dead on. Ford had bed rail covers since the 97 model. Disc brakes? Done. Guages? Done. High end interiors (Platinum, King Ranch etc.) Done. The Dodge cab (total ripoff by the way) Done. Good quality seats and plastics? Done. Rustproofing? Done. Painted frames? Done. On and on. Chevy was once upon a time (in the 1900's) a leader. Greatest body designs, highest end interiors, ,the sturdiest of steel, SFA's... On and on. I know because I was there and lived it And bought it. Only Chevrolet's would sit in my driveway. Not anymore. They got so damn cheap they cut everything from build materials to quality to innovation and especially body design. Now they're just followers trying to catch up and doing a piss poor job. Not the leaders they need to be. I am so let down by this new truck design it's sad.

If this is the new GM they would have been better off dead. I'd rather the Italian's had bought Chevrolet along with Dodge. At least we'd bet getting the best looking highest quality trucks money can buy. This new truck is more cheap horribly designed (ugly as all get out) Government Motors crap. I never liked GM anyway. I only stuck with them because of Chevrolet. If this is how they're going to treat Chevy though then they can kiss my ass.


"need to stop crying about SFA's. That is old technology that is utterly useless on a heavyduty truck. Rides worse, handles worse which are most important when towing heavy loads which these trucks are designed for. They aren't designed for moab, stop crying,GM doesn't care if a few people are crying because they don;t look the same with a SFA for the image of you at a local starbucks. There is no benefit, only down falls to go with a sfa. Round wheel well, wouldn't look right on a hard edge truck. "

@Tyler, please. Swing arm with Coil SFA's ride FAR better than non progressive torsion bar suspensions. It's exactly why GM dumped the torsion bars on their 1500's in favor of coils. They ride better. It has nothing to do with image. Round wheelwells however look Much Better than square. Especially how GM does them now. In the 80's or 90's or even the early 2k's no problem. Now that they have mega huge bulges to go along with them, I wouldn't even be seen in one. Easily the worst looking design on the road. You call it 'Hard Edged' but the rest of the world calls it downright ugly. Sales tell the entire story. GM exec's keep listening to morons like you and they'll be bankrupt yet again very soon.

As Lou has pointed the shapes of vehicles is restricted by the materials employed.


@Bigal, Pfftttt. Explain why the Ford and Dodge look so good then. Complete bull.

@Saul
A torsion bar setup means the chassis has to be strengthened more so than a coil over setup.

The load on a torsion bar is moved down the chassis, so the chassis has to be engineered to handle it. Whereas a coil over setup only needs to be strengthened at the front.

Torsion bars can be set to give a progressive rate of springing also, as can leaf setups.

It is quite simple to taper a torsion bar to give a progressive rate of springing also.

Bigal, Pfftttt. Explain why the Ford and Dodge look so good then. Complete bull.


-Exactly. The Chevy could look good if GM wanted it to. Look at the F-150 or Ram or even Avalanche. Utter nonsense that Chevy can't make their truck look nice on the sides. They could if they wanted to. I never thought Mark Reuss and Dan Ackerson were rednecks but it almost looks that way glimpsing at the side shots of the new Silverado. No class at all. It looks like complete garbage. These guys are nuts if they think this truck will touch the new Atlas Ford or Dodge Ram. Hell, I'd buy a Current Ram or Ford before I ever entertained this new Chevrolet it's so damn ugly. As a Shareholder myself, I'm NOT impressed one iota. It makes me sick to my stomach after all we did for them. Outside of the Corvette, ATS and LaCrosse, I'm impressed with Very little with this company. I was banking on the new Chevrolet Silverado Apparently I bet on the wrong team.

@howam00 - good point about the headlights at night. I was confining my comment to the asthetics.

@AmericanChevrolet - I'm a fake Lou because I am not a blind loyal fanboi of everything that is Ford?
I do not recall ever complimenting the headlights on the F150.
UNLESS it is the Raptor or FX4.

There is a difference between the Sierra and Silverado sides.
Silverado - The wheel flairs are bigger and more angular. The flare extends almost all the way to the gas cap opening.
Sierra - The flares are less protuberant and the blend into the body side is "softer". There is a mid flare crease (not present on silverado).
The headlight cutout is square on the Silverado and rounded on the Sierra.

There are differences and yes I noticed them.

All of the trolls and fake posters do need to be culled from the site as it is hard to have a credible conversation.

A torsion bar setup means the chassis has to be strengthened more so than a coil over setup.

The load on a torsion bar is moved down the chassis, so the chassis has to be engineered to handle it. Whereas a coil over setup only needs to be strengthened at the front.

Torsion bars can be set to give a progressive rate of springing also, as can leaf setups.

It is quite simple to taper a torsion bar to give a progressive rate of springing also.

-Not true. Torsion rods can in theory be built that way. GM however does Not. It costs too much. Leafs are inferior to coils period when it comes to front end suspension. Torion rods used in the lower control arm like GM does it is counter productive as it requires the infamous 'Low Slung' frame. It also limits your tire size due to half shaft components. And I'd take a strong pliable C-channel frame over a stiff brittle box frame anyday. It's why Semi's use them. The sooner GM gives up this charade the sooner they will regain their credibility in truck circles and begin to sell their product again. They simply need to admit they were wrong for a host of reasons back in 1987 when this decision was made and apologize. Then they need to fix their colossal mistake and take back the market they once owned.


All of the loser Howie Long (know nothing moron) so called truck advertisements in the world can't rectify this. Only real truck men with money behind them and the support of Mark Reuss or Dan Ackerson can fix this. Outside of that, it's over. And they absolutely should fix those bed and fender sides. They are awful to look at.

There is a difference between the Sierra and Silverado sides.
Silverado - The wheel flairs are bigger and more angular. The flare extends almost all the way to the gas cap opening.
Sierra - The flares are less protuberant and the blend into the body side is "softer". There is a mid flare crease (not present on silverado).

@Lou, I noticed no real difference myself but in all honesty both of them look like garbage. I preferred the former Sierra wheel openings (the Silverado looked like sh%t) and the Avalanche to both of these atrocities. They both look like that GMC Terrain which nearly makes me go blind when I see it.

Oh boy, build your truck with no released specs. A bit premature. Or did I miss something?

The truck is ugly front end aside so who cares. These guys are so far gone it's laughable. First the pissed off China man face in 2003. Strike 1. The the abomination of a truck design in 2007. Strike 2. And now this joke of an abomination truck in 2013? Strike 3. Chevy's truck design team is hands down the most challenged in the history of truck design and I mean that literally. They flat out suck. The side of this truck is so laughable to look at it's not even funny. WHO looks at that second picture for example and says 'oh ya, that looks better than the new Ford Atlas concept or Dodge Ram.' You'd have to be high as a kite to think it was remotely close.

The sooner GM gives up this charade the sooner they will regain their credibility in truck circles and begin to sell their product again. They simply need to admit they were wrong for a host of reasons back in 1987 when this decision was made and apologize. Then they need to fix their colossal mistake and take back the market they once owned.

@JH- Chevrolet/GM is like the Lance Armstrong of trucks. Fabricate, stretch the truth and outright lie until someone puts your ass to the test and exposes the BS. They've been on their last leg for much too long. Like many, I was once a Chevy guy too. I'd have drove nothing else if you asked me 15-20 years ago. Not now however. They aren't same same company any longer. The craftsmanship is gone. The quality is gone. The innovation is gone. And the design is SO far gone it's almost sad. Their design team has been lost in outerspace since the early 2000's. The side profile of this truck is indeed disasterous.

I have to say despite the name I am not a GM hater I see what they did I just think should have done it some time ago instead of now because it is not ground breaking anymore. They added more aerodynamics, direct injection, higher compression ratio, more rigid and lighter frame and soon a better tranny. Now I happen to think those changes are nothing to sneeze at but they are not new as Mazda calls it SkyActiv http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyActiv. They even threw in a new interior now I don't care for it much. I guess because I drive a Supercharged Tundra it is not a deal breaker for me. I think when it comes time to move on from this beast I can say a 5.3L Sierra has probably made the finals as I just need to see what Toyota and Nissan will be offering.

@J Hanson
I really trying to comprehend what you wrote. From what I can gather;

1. "not true" - I never stated GM is designing vehicles with progressive springing on torsion bars, I did the opposite.

2. I never mentioned anything about a leaf sprung front end.

3. I was providing solutions to a problem concerning a percieved flaw with GM's.

4. I'm a believer in torsion bar suspensions on a commercial vehicles, as there is no real disadvantage in having them.

5. Some Toyota Landcruisers have torsion bar setups on the front end and they are far more capable off road than any pickup. The way GM has engineered their torsion bar setup was their choice.

6. GM has most definitely researched the chassis/suspension setups on their pickups and obviously came to the conclusion to engineer their pickups as they do. I can see why, the reality is what percentage of pickups will ever have problems off roading, when most pickups are never loaded and looking pretty in someones driveway in suburbia USA.

7. The construction of vehicles is quite simple, that's why cars are mainly front wheel drive. The strengthened "engine module" on a front wheel drive car is over the front axle, the rest of the car doesn't need to be as strong since the rear wheel aren't providing the motive force. This is even shown by the much lower tow weights on front wheel drives.

The same can be said for pickups, any load on a chassis has to be taken into account. The more loads are localised the cheaper it will be to produce.

You might prefer a "C" section chassis but it will come at a large weight penalty to give the same strength as a hollow section chassis. This will defeat the direction that you CAFE regulations want to head in.

Geez guys- calm the hell down. I work extensively with all the auto manufacturers and could weigh in too. However, this post is about a website for crying out lod! Thank you for your bias and "stats" that may or may not be accurate.

Our core buyers (men, 40+) aren't clamoring for a revolution just yet, and there's a lot to be said for sticking with the same style.


@GMPartsGib, I'm 48 bud and I not only hated the last (current) truck but I hate this too. This Is Not in any way, shape or form anything like the trucks of old. For one it's far too wide. And for two, just like a zillion people all over the web have been saying, it's has those G'damn GMC terrain fender bulges. If you work for GM get it through your thick skull. They look terrible! The last truck was terrible because of the flared bed and front fenders and so is this. Do you Want us Chevrolet guys to buy Ford's and Dodge's or what the hell is your deal? Fix your damn truck design. I'm about sick of this. I've bought your trucks on Chevrolet drivetrains and looks both for decades. I will Not however keep buying them just because it has a Chevrolet engine. These trucks have become so Damn Ugly I'm about fed up with you guys. What the hell happened to you idiots? It's like Ford has become the new Chevrolet. They make Good looking trucks now!

and there's a lot to be said for sticking with the same style.

- Um, ya, there is. IF you have a winning design to begin with. If your comment was based off the GMT400's of the late 1980's and 1990's you might have a point. The problem is that the 2004 and up F-150's ARE the GMT-400 Chevrolet's of the late 1980's and 1990's. They are timeless designs and Ford could probably build them for 40 years and people wouldn't get sick of them. Same with the 2009 and up Dodge's. The only thing that Chevrolet had close to the the GMT-400's of the late 80's and 90's was the Chevrolet Avalanche. Outside of that, after 2002 or 2003, as soon as they went to the slant front end trucks, it was over for Chevrolet trucks. Period, end of story. Their design mojo is gone. They got worse in 2007-8 and even worse (side design wise) in 2013. It really does look like a GM Terrain and it looks just terrible around the tires. I can't even say I like Chevrolet trucks at all anymore when it comes to exterior design and they were once my favorite line of trucks to look at.

Ok website but big whoop. The truck itself is ugly. It's not like I can't get disc brakes, 4wd on the fly etc.. in a Ford or Dodge. And with them I have a much better looking truck. I don't get Chevy's obsession with oddball exterior metal designs either. They really destroyed their looks the last 10 to 12 years or so. I don't know what happened but it's obviously not the same guys designing the Silverado truck any longer. Next time perhaps. I still love Chevrolet's but their trucks are lackluster as all get out. Downright bad looking too now. And not in a good way I will add. Oh well. Just another Bowtie letdown.

After seeing the Atlas, this truck is a massive letdown. I'm not sure I could honestly purchase this over the current F-150 even or Ram to be honest. It just isn't that impressive. Sure, the interior is better but the Dodge and Ford have been on this level for years. The Ford has been as long as I can remember. Like back into the 1990's. And I likewise don't like the body design one bit. I didn't like the last one either as many. Chevrolet needs to get a new side design and a more modern front end.

Looks like Grandpa's truck. How long till they slap a Buick emblem on it? I think that's about all this truck is lacking....


LOL@Peanut Gallery. My grandpa gave up on Chevy Trucks a good 10 years ago. No way in hell would he drive something that looked like this. It looks like a 'Pimp My Ride' Redneck Edition truck with those fenders. Buick's have far more class like Ford's and Dodge's. Chevrolet went down the tubes. They need to get billy bob off the design computer and send him back to get his GED. My god I've never seen a side profile so nasty looking. Well ok, the current Silverado sucked too but geez. This is Really Bad!



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