When are the engine specs coming out on these new trucks?!?!?!?

The bumper centre section is slightly different. It is chrome instead of black. It will be interesting to see what this truck looks like. Too bad they couldn't get interior photos.

I hope they ditch the ugly headlights, the 2014 Silverado looks much better then the 2014 Sierra, those headlights are just weird.

GMc the front grill is nice the best front grill on the market

Z71 Denali?

No steps on each end of the bumper like the 14's are supposed to have.Maybe Denali owners hire people to access the bed of the truck......

I gotta say the more i see these trucks and the prototypes i saw at the autoshow this truck hasnt changed as much as they want you to believe. The prototype appears to have the EXACT same frame and the cab's interior doesnt look as if they are really picking up much interior room from the old one IMO.

I'm curious to see if these engines are really gone be that much difference from the current ones. Only time will tell but it doesnt appear like they are making the truck look too much different.

The first post doesn't appear to be there.

Here is a link to a Triton review. It also runs a 2.5 turbo diesel.

When it was released in 2006 it replaced the Hilux as the best performing mid sizer we had.

It now sits between the Hilux and the newer Ranger/BT50, Colorado/Dmax and Amarok in overall performance.

http://www.caradvice.com.au/165057/mitsubishi-triton-review/

The first post doesn't appear to be there.

Here is a link to a Triton review. It also runs a 2.5 turbo diesel.

When it was released in 2006 it replaced the Hilux as the best performing mid sizer we had.

It now sits between the Hilux and the newer Ranger/BT50, Colorado/Dmax and Amarok in overall performance.

http://www.caradvice.com.au/165057/mitsubishi-triton-review/

Are those radar sensors in the front bumper. Looks like GM is giving the Denali collision avoidance, adaptive cruise control, or both.

I love the headlamps on the new GMC, front grill is massive, looks great.

This truck is going to rule...

-brand new interior which will be a big upgrade to the current Denali

-brand new 6.2 V8 which is no doubt going to be a beast

and of course the new front end (which looks great in person btw).

@Junner - I'm more interested in the 5.3 as that will be GM's most popular option.

Why are they covering up a 2103??? Oh wait, is that a 2014? i can't tell the difference.

Looking good , any word on the chevy high country release?

these new chevs suck,

I will say the Sierra looks 10 ten times better then the Silverado from seeing them both at the auto show.

Again doesn't look much new from the old. Yes the interiors will be upgraded but as we have already seen, the new interiors are still sup par to Ram and Ford.

These trucks look the best in black, IMO. Who needs the bumper side steps anyways, I personally thought it was an ugly feature when I saw the new GM trucks. It’s just another spot to collect mud and debris to rust.

Not a big fan of the front end with the shape of a box.

With company's coming out with V6's that get 25mpg and better than that from turbo diesel V6's, we need these manufacturers to start reducing the size of the front end. A 1/2 ton crew cab with 6.5 foot bed would only then fit in a garage and appeal to an even larger market. I'm sick of 10 years of tradeoffs between a 5.5' bed crew cab that isn't long enough, and a 6.5' bed crew cab that won't fit in a garage. The rest of all this talk about looks interior/exterior trim isn't real progress to many of us.

hey nick: what is a chev? this is a Denali story, so keep the childish comment to yourself.

Still ugly like the 2013.

@Al: how about staying on topic? Yes, we know you want to sell midsize diesels everywhere.

Did I miss it, was somebody even asking about a Triton? Or do you constantly just post reviews about midsizers in whatever thread?

Is a Triton even in the same class as this?

@Angelo: Yes, I believe they (all big trucks) can shorten the nose down, atleast for me they could. It would make for easier access to parking, and better approach angles. Possibly less overall weight. If they can do it and keep the aero getting better, I am all for it.

The Titan appears shorter with it's front end not sticking out as much.

That is also one thing I like about the new Fords, a shorter hood.

I don't get the attraction some have for the big huge grilles. Such as the Atlas. Maybe if the extra grille space is really needed to cool a bigger engine, so be it.

If they were all v-6s (be it diesel or gas) and didn't need as much nose space for the v-8s, that is 3-4" inches there. I will get flammed for saying that, but it might happen. I can't say I am crazy about a turbo'd v-6 gasser.

Have I missed any aero numbers? These trucks just don't look aero, and if this is the GM for the next 4-5 years, I can't imagine highway mileage being that great. But then they did say they weren't going all out for mileage.

I know, it's a truck, it will always get less mileage then better aero lighter weight cars, but why stop trying?

Not a big fan of the Box front end syling

They should have put those single headlights on the Silverado as well. Or at least make them optional with a higher trim package. Those and the plastic moldings around the wheelwells openings to prevent rust. The Silverado would be a far better contender to Ford and Dodge with those things. I wonder, where are the spyshots of Chevrolet's Denali version? They really need it. After seeing the new Dodge Longhorn Limited and owning our Platinum F-150 now, I'd never go back to a plain truck. And like Lou here, I don't care for western themes. Dodge was smart to add a Limited line to the Longhorn trim.

Heck, even Toyota has the 1794 western trim now and the Platinum trim for those who aren't wannabe ranchers. Chevrolet needs to get with the program. I'm not much into GMC's.

What is the engine's spec of this pick up? I like the design of if. Do you have colored black mix with maroon of this pick up truck?

By the way, We also have a constant supply of quality used pickup trucks arriving in stock from existing Pickuptrucksdirect customers looking to renew their vehicle. For more information, visit http://www.pickuptrucksdirect.co.uk/used-pickup-trucks.html.

From the picture showing the rear of the truck ( back ) it looks like a Dodge RAM !

@ Angelo,

No...shorter front ends on trucks looks ugly !!
Look at the Titan,side profile is hideous with its shorter front end,as sales reflect its ugliness !

@ TRX4 Tom ,

Just because a vehicle is boxy doesnt mean its not aerodynamic !!

The 09-current RAM 1500 is a bit boxier than the 02-08 model ,yet more aerodynamic.And its more aerodynamic than some so-called aerodynamic looking cars...Being Aerodynamic,doesnt mean it has to look like an egg or all slanted...For all we know it could be more aero than a new Corvette,as being aero doesnt go by how it looks...

Furthermore,Trucks would look ugly and ridiculous,Tundra and Titan have a odd shorter nose and it looks ugly,main reason their trucks dont sell they just look odd...

If you have issues with a full size,time to look at a Tacoma or Frontier,or maybe get a Smart car,then your parking issues will be gone ! Heck in my view the front ends could be 3-5 inches longer,to help the looks and improve safety !!

Remember if your truck got 40 mpg,there will be road tolls,mileage tax gas will be $25 a gallon and it will cost you more money to drive a 40 mpg truck then your 15 mpg truck at $15 a gallon !

Government already is planning on adding pay per mile/tolling as gas sales are down in many States ! Did you know the Government makes more money off gas sales then the oil companies ? Bet you didnt,Gov needs more money and with better mpg vehicles road tax/tolling/price per mile and higher gas is coming !! I want 600 hp trucks at 9 mpg and $1.50 a gallon gas,this is what we should fight for,not something that will screw us in the end as 40 mpg trucks will cost more money then a 9 mpg truck to drive !!

@Purple Cam
What has improved the Rams cd is the grill shutter and the variable suspension. But from what I've read these could be the current gremlins affecting Ram production. I hope Ram can develop an adequate rectification process. Best wait and see how Ram handles this new technology, it might become someones nightmare.

I do think the Denali has a very North American look. I don't prefer the look to much. But All of GMs and Ford full sizers are very NA, which suits your market.

The only odd one out is the Ram which would probably do well as a niche export vehicle for Fiat.

The Ram has more of a Asiatic look. The line have more in common with a Korean inspired vehicle of a decade ago.

I do think the nicest looking pickups are the VW Amarok and global Ranger, its a pity you don't have these.

I do like the looks of the Ford Super Duties.

@Purple Cam; ok, looks like you lost that bet, about the government and how much they tax us.

In case you don't get it, I was talking about making the front end shorter, between the front wheel, and the very front. This can make approach angles better.

I will only shop Tacoma or Frontier when the bed is as wide and long as my quad cab 2010 Ram, and when they make the Tacoma and Frontier cab as big as a quad cab, and when they have a wheelbase that is close to the 140" I currently have.

If you want 3 to 5 more inches of front end, get you some aftermarket plastic.

Do you think they should just stop trying to make them any better aero? Just be satified? Whatever.

I remember when the 2002s first came out, I was like they don't look so slick. So they went from better aero in 94 to 2001, to less, 2002 to 2008, and now better then both with the 2009.

Good luck with that wanting 600HP engines, and $1.50 a gallon gas. That's never gonna happen. What a concept, lets purposely make trucks suck gas so whe don't have to pay this toll that you are so paranoid about. You can fight for that all you want, but I think most resonable people realize that wont happen either.

About the most you might see in trucks horsepower wise, is maybe low 500s, and you will see gas guzzler taxs.

Purple shaft? As in the old outdated cams made for Dodges? I quit buying those. Hughes, Crower, and Lunati can do alot better.

Tom,

When Motortrend did their first drive of the new pentastar/8-speed one of the writers was able to easily fit between the block and the radiator standing up. That tells me there is a lot of extra space that can be pared out of the truck to make it a more reasonable size for fitting in a garage and there is room to improve aerodynamics with a skinnier front end. Cutting out 4-6 inches of frame can only help reduce weight and improve turning radius.

I hope with hte push towards smaller yet still powerful engines leads us to a slightly more compact overall truck with a still useable 6.5' bed

I've read a few articles that indicate that going to smaller engines (at least dimensionally) will save money and weight if the car companies make the rest of the engine compartment smaller. The EB3.5 is supposed to be slightly bigger than the 5.0 but both engines are much smaller than the 6.2. If Ford ditches the 6.2 in the 1/2 ton they could pare down the nose to fit. There would be less weight on the nose and hopefully that would translate in an increase in GVW assuming the rest of the truck stayed the same.
Guys like Purple cam (sounds like CanadianRamowner and a few other alias's), are going to be severely disappointed. In Europe, 5 litre engines are considered large. I was surprised that GMC kept the 6.2. They have turbo V6's in the Cadillac and the Colorado will come with a diesel so they could adapt that technology to pickups.

When it comes to looks of the vehicle, I liked the Chevy better than the Sierra but only the Chevy with projector lamps. The biggest downfall to trucks for aerodynamics is the box. A while back there was a story about tonneau covers. The 5.5 box provides less drag because airflow catchs the tailgate on a 6.5. I can see tonneaus becoming standard to bump mpg.

@Lou, Well said.

@ lou

I think this is where GM has a leg up in that the pushrod motor with cam-in-block design uses a much smaller (dimensionally smaller) engine. GM "should" be able to shrink the front end quite a bit to get some cheap mpg's.

With what you mentioned, a slightly smaller trucks should weigh a lot less and need a smaller motor, etc. etc. I suspect that Ford can get to 380-400 hp and roughly the same torque out of a DI version of the 5.0 (for truck duty) which should be plenty for a truck that is expected to lose up to 700 lbs in the next generation. I think this will be the overall trend in the next wave of trucks that will be coming out over the nex 24 months.

Losing the weight will also help things like payload since they can keep the existing axles but have more capacity (without going to larger axles that would reduce efficiency). Cutting materials will be cheaper than adding more tech like Ram did. This should help escalating costs too.

"I liked the Chevy better than the Sierra but only the Chevy with projector lamps. "

@Lou, same here. They really need those on all models. I also agree with FordTrucks1, I don't want a western theme trim either. I'm sure some Chevy guys do and that's great but not this guy. People who live in cities drive Chevrolet's too GM. We're not all from Nashville. Where's Chevrolet's Platinum version? I don't even see it on the specs of the Chevrolet website? I'd be interested in looking at a new Chevrolet again but I'm not trading off my Platinum F-150 for a rhinestone cowboy trim like the King Ranch is. Likewise, I'm not a GMC kind of man. Apparently Chevrolet dealers have no interest in my business. To bad because I built one on the Chevrolet website and I just fell in love with the crew cab in black. That with a Platinum interior would pry me out of my Ford in a second. I even like it over that Atlas design.

@howam00: I can believe it. Being that I have the 5.7 in my 2010, and there is much more room for the radiator to come back. The engine is set back quite a bit. As compaed to a Tundra v-8. The up side is the weight is moved further back, less nose weight. The downside is, spark plugs are a b!+@# to change! While they are very eay to get to on a Tundra.

Don't anybody get me wrong, I really like the look of the newer Rams, but I don't think they will always be like they are. Of course not. They will be more aero, as I believe all pickups would, most likely.

Moving the front wheels back is what it would take to make it turn quicker, be it any truck. The downside to that is now for the sake of handling, ther is more front axle weight. But moving it backward would help put more weight of the passengers on the front axle, atleast if a quad or crew cab is used. In the case of a longbed, it would put more of the weight in the font of the bed on the front axle.Breakover angles would be better, towing might not be as good.

In the head on crash testing, some trucks get the front wheels pushing in on the floorboards, and if they move it back, that is something to think about.

Then again if they did more the front axle back, that would take alot of planning on axle, steering linkage and oil pan space.

I would like it if they could shorten the area in front of the front wheels.

I would look for front air dams to be speed deploying, as the Atlas has.

@TRX4 Tom - even my F150 has a ton of room between the bumper and rad. One could loose 4 - 6 inches right there without much engineering. The shortened snout would probably make air flow managment tougher. I don't mind the looks of the "old" Tundra, it seemed to be more a case of the monster cab making the snout look odd. I like the lines of Ford F150 SuperCrew's better with the 6.5 box for that same reason. The cab seems more proportional to the rest of the truck with the longer box. Truck makers might have to be more realistic with passenger compartment size. Do we really need MegaCab or CrewMax sized cabs?
Some guys say they should go to "midgate" designs to shorten the truck and use the cab as cargo space. I have never liked that idea. I would of purchased a large SUV if that is what I wanted. I had a van for a few years and hated the fact that the inside smelled like my last cargo. If the "midgate" completely sealed the cab, maybe? but that would be expensive, would weaken the truck structurally or it would gain tons of weight to be stronger. Anyone who has ever driven a truck with a camper window open with loose stuff in the box knows what I'm talking about.

@ Purple Cam

I think it looks like a Ram from behind too.

The Ram is the most aero now and its the best looking IMO, It has a large grill that still looks intimidating but the headlights and fenders are droped down and the hood is slopped so you don't have such a large frontal area like on the Ford and expecially the new Ungainly Chevies.

omg! are they stupid?! this isn't the sierrra denali! this is the sierra all terrain. the sierra all terrain is a semi-luxury package on the Z71. it is to make the z71 more like the ford's fx4 rather than just a suspension package.

look at the rancho shocks, it is definitely a sierra all terrain. the rancho shocks were avaliable on the all terrains first, then the z71s got them later on the apperance package for chevy's with the z71. then all z71's got them period.

@BradG - It looks like a Dodge from behind because of the curved lip tailgate. I thought the same thing BUT, Chevrolet/GM has actually been doing that concept long before Dodge turned it into sheetmetal reality. The GMT-800's all had plastic platforms on the tailgate tops that bolted to the gate itself. They were curved just like that and you could set a can of soda on the flat top of one. So while Dodge did indeed make theirs of sheet metal first, Chevrolet in all reality had the idea and basic design in production long before Dodge did.

The cab is a whole different story. They hands down ripped off Dodge there. They had to however. The Chevrolet's of the last many years most likely because of penny pinching had the doors run right to the roof. You get a good sidewind going down the highway and you have wind noise inside like a tornado. My Silverado and Trailblazer are both like this and it's annoying as hell. The old Chevrolet's had no such problem.

"@Lou, same here. They really need those on all models. I also agree with FordTrucks1, I don't want a western theme trim either. I'm sure some Chevy guys do and that's great but not this guy. People who live in cities drive Chevrolet's too GM. We're not all from Nashville. Where's Chevrolet's Platinum version? "

@Ron and the rest, a big amen to that. Where's the Platinum? And not that cheap Lariat - LTZ deal. I don't listen to country music and go to rodeo's. Who the hell at GM thinks we all want a King Ranch? Don't they want to sell Silverado's or what? It reminds me of Henry Ford. You can have any color as long as it's black. What an idiot.

GM at launch: you can have any truck as long as it is a 5.3L crewcab short bed.

Only one cab, one bed, one engine will be available at launch.

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f70/2014-trucks-start-arriving-late-may-hp-torque-pricing-coming-soon-116919/

Yup, GM is acting its big 'ol bureaucratic self again...They screwed the Malibu and its launch, and now this...Why can't they ever launch more than one model or features at the same time? Are they that incompetent? I am tired of the sad marketing ploy of waiting 18 months until they have exhausted any interest in the first model to add another model (ZR1, coupe and convertible versions, etc.) The competition does not do that and they are succeeding.

Wake up and listen, GM!

@josh, I believe you are correct. This looks just as the current sierra all terrain looks today. I can't tell if the grill is really black or just covered with the camo. The grid pattern looks like it might be white through that screen camo covering.
What's really funny is all the guys over on GMI talking about this "Denali". It makes you wonder if those GMI experts with all of their "inside info" even know what GM builds.
Either way, this is GM's attempt to build a truck to compete with Ford's FX's.

You can really notice how much smaller the front doors are now when you compare the windows between 13's and these 14's.

Why would they put Rancho shocks and grey plastic fender flares on a Denali? This aint no Denali.

Federal fuel tax has not changed since 1993. At 18 to 19 cents a gallon it is hardly enough to keep up with road construction and repair. Trucks will get more aerodynamic with shorter hoods. The real challenge will be to keep bed size and interior size the same while cutting weight and outside dimensions. I am sure all the manufacturers are working on this.