More Information About 2014 Silverado, Sierra

GMC Sierra 1 II

Fresh on the heels of revealing more performance and fuel economy numbers on the heart-of-the-market 2014 5.3-liter V-8 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra, Jeff Luke, executive chief engineer for Silverado and Sierra, answered a few questions about the new details.

The call-in conference shed more light on the just-released information about the new trucks and offered some interesting additional facts. Here are some of the high points.

  • GM did follow the J2807 towing standards in regard to performance and procedures but will not fully comply until the industry (meaning competitors) decides to follow the same guidelines. As stated earlier, GM does not want to put its customers in a situation where they need to figure out how to compare GM's apples to the competition's oranges. When all manufacturers use the same standard, so will GM. Unfortunately, Ford and Ram Truck could say the same thing.

  • The two biggest issues on a truck buyer's mind are power and fuel economy, noted the marketing gurus at Chevy and GMC. Those issues keep bubbling to surface with their customers. What that means, Luke said, is that GM will keep looking at all possible ways to continuously improve the two trucks, meaning options such as eight-speed transmissions, twin-turbo V-6 options and light-duty diesels. Luke said we should "stay tuned."

  • The new trucks have been scrutinized and shaved in every way, but comparing the weight of a 2013 Silverado with the weight of a 2014 Silverado would be difficult because the 2014 truck has so many more standard safety and performance features. Our guess is that for every ounce gained, the team had to show an equal amount of weight savings. All Luke would tell us is that, according to GM calculations, a comparably equipped Ford F-150 would weigh 200 pounds more than a new Silverado.

  • Right now, almost 90 percent of all Silverados and Sierras sold are either extended or crew cabs, with the vast majority being the latter. That leaves regular cab models hovering between 10 and 12 percent. GMC, as you might expect, trends a little higher with its crew cabs, mostly because its buyers tend to purchase the more well-appointed trucks with more expensive option packages. GMC marketing representatives believe the new Sierra will go even further in that direction.

  • The maximum towing capacity for the Silverado and Sierra is 11,500 pounds, but that will be only with trucks outfitted with the max-trailering package (special note: the gross combined weight rating is said to be 17,500 pounds). The highest tow ratings without the max-tow package for regular cabs is 10,200 pounds; for crew cabs it's 9,700 pounds. And all max-tow package-equipped trucks will be running 3.73:1 ring and pinion gears; 4.10:1 gears will not be offered for 2014.

  • The two-year free maintenance program for both Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra will carry over from the 2013 models to 2014, but no information was disclosed about the program continuing beyond the end of the year.

  • For those off-road package enthusiasts, we were told the Silverado Z71 option package will be "beefed up" beyond the usual stickers and shocks packages we've seen in the past. Chevrolet seems to understand this is a strong and recognizable brand, and it will get significant improvements in the future. Likewise, GMC sees the Denali and All Terrain nameplates getting stronger, perhaps getting some significant support with even more engineering distinction.

GM VVT DI L83 5.3L II

 

Comments

Not a bad looking truck..

I like the exhaust manifolds (they should have them like that on their production trucks,love the cutaway views)

Like all,they have styling cues from the RAM,especially the grille !!

Blah, no 4.10 gears. 4.10 gears make a WORLD of difference in the Heavy duty GM trucks compared to the 3.73 with the 6.0 V8. I am surprised that GM (with a 11,500 tow cap) did not include 4.10 gears with that setup.

So, my guess is the Max Tow package comes with the 6.2 and not the 5.3, just as the current Max Tow package does.

So far I'm unimpressed. All those years wasted with little results.

John: I now it did not specifficaly say, but this is only about the 1/2 ton truck! as the HD will most likely still have 4:10's and mcarr: if you go back to the last story about the GM twins, and look closely at the towing chart, it does say the 5.3* will have a rating of 11,500lbs towing cap. and if you look at the * in fine print at the bottom of the chart, it says with the Max Tow package!

Guess is wrong on the Max Trailering package, as it's offered on the 5.3 as well. Also, John, I agree 4.10's make a difference, but kicker here is that these are still half-ton trucks. Need for them and above puts someone into an HD quickly.

Most people I know, (hunters and fisherman) do not need MAX towing in a half-ton truck, so to us it is a non issue, a loaded down Bass boat of big Lund is maybe 3,000 lbs... wish they would just come out with a REAL half ton, not some heavy-duty half ton. If we need Max towing we would buy a 3/4ton, duh.....

Why is the pictured GMC using Ford FR500 wheels?

Nothing really seems overly impressive with this truck. I was expecting/hoping for leaps and bounds ahead of the competition. But so far with the fuel mileage at around 1mpg better than an Ecoboost. And towing only 200lbs better than the max-tow F150. Its leaving me thinking all they did was catch up. I am now excited to hear what the Z71 package has in store though

A few things to note on the pictures here. I really do love the Chevrolet Smallblock. Even as a Ford guy, I still love the Chevy engines. This 5th edition of SBC is going to be a hot item for Chevrolet and GM truck guys. I like how compact and simple it all still is just like the old days. Another thing I see here is the plastic lips around the fenders. They need to put them on the Silverado's as well so those guys can protect their metal from rust. They should also make that single headlamp assembly available on the Silverado. I still don't think the double stacked Grizwald look is all that great.

Its nice that GM will continue to protect the consumer from numbers obtained using standardized testing. To that end, I wonder how the fuel economy turns out WITH the Max Tow option. And with the 1500 achieving its maximum tow rating with the mid-level engine, will the 6.2 use a smaller rear gear ratio?
Ironic, at least in MI, is that most of the time you would pay the same for a lower spec truck as a loaded one here, since no one stocks them. If you order a truck in this region, you usually miss out on some incentives.

"GMC, as you might expect, trends a little higher with its crew cabs, mostly because its buyers tend to purchase the more well-appointed trucks with more expensive option packages. GMC marketing representatives believe the new Sierra will go even further in that direction."

@Mark, that's a rather odd statement. I see exactly the opposite here. Most loaded out crew cabs are Silverado's. The idea GM tries to portray that their buyers are different for the trucks is almost to the point of laughable. It's more like that's how GM wants it to be, not how it really is. I've bought two new loaded Ford's over the last 12 months. One a King Ranch SD and the other a Platinum 150. If I was buying a truck from those guys again, I would be buying loaded Chevrolet's. Not GM's. I think they'll continue to bleed off former Chevrolet owners to Ford and Dodge over this stunt. I really do. People have trashed GM for this stuff the last several years. You'd think they'd learn.

@ sandman4X4 and RJJ
I agree, but sadly half tons today are approaching 3/4 gas jobs max tow caps. I believe the 2500hd 6.0 with 4.10 is rated at ~13,000 (depending on configuration) and the "max tow package" half ton with 3.73 is 11,500.

I know after having both trucks before a 2500HD 6.0 with 3.73 and a 2500HD 6.0 with 4.10, with the 6.0 towing heavy loads it honestly NEEDS the 4.10s. It makes me wonder about the 5.3 max tow package with 3.73, since it has similar power to the 2500HD 6.0 motor.
2500HD 6.0 - 360 HP @ 5,400 RPM and 380 TQ @ 4,200 RPM
2014 1500 5.3 Vortec V8 - 355 hp @ 5,600 RPM / 383 tq @ 4,100 RPM

The problem with these engines (specifically the 6.0 from my experience) is they have to rev to get the loads moving (look at the high RPM where it makes peak torque). This is why I do not understand why GM went with 3.73 over 4.10 for the "Max Tow Package" for the half tons.

Front diff lock would be nice on the Z71. Come on GM, all I care about is the Duramax! The Ram 3500 Cummins/Aisin combo in a mega cab Laramie is going to be pretty tough to beat, so you better have something good!

The GMC looks good not the Chevy though

It's actually hilarious that they admit to fudging towing numbers!

"We did the J2807 testing, but didn't like the results, so we are going to go with some imaginary numbers that look good instead. When our competition admits they are lying, then we will admit we are lying too..."

Damn GM,still with the 'significant improvements in the future'.The future is happening right now,it's called the Ram 1500 diesel with an 8 spd.Dumbasses............

Toycrusher....hahahaha, you are exactly right! Lol

I just read a GM press release that said the 11,500 tow max is with a 5.3. I wonder what they are shooting for with the 6.2? And keep in mind these numbers are still below a Hemi, right Turkey Tom?

John: I understand where you are coming from, but you have to understand that the HD truck weigh about 500-1500lbs MORE than the 1/2ton trucks depending on 2500 or 3500 and that is why the 6.0 needs the 4:10 gears over the 1/2 ton trucks, that and the fact the HD are rated to tow more anyway. The biggest differance between the ownership of both is mainly MPG! and what you need! yes you can tow 11,500 with a Max 1/2 ton, but will you? it is nice to have and not need, than need and not have.

I'm not sure why GM just didn't use a clean sheet of paper to change their trucks for 2014.
That way, even if they are just catching up to Ford & Ram in the powertrain dept. , they could have at least offered the customer a new look.
It still don't see a gamechanger with the 2014 twins.
They are at a point where Dodge was in the early 80's.
Tired old product.
Dodge game changers were the 1994, 2002, & 2009 RAM's.
Chrysler was on the verge of dropping trucks all together.
I'm not saying this is where GM is, but they need something to get people's attention.

DaFish, right on! If you are regularly carrying heavy payloads in the bed or on the trailer an HD just makes more sense, performance-wise and with regard to safety.

Can you think of all the times you've seen some fool on the highway with an overloaded truck running on Passenger tires?

Brakes, tires, grunt is where the HD shines and selling all that extra cost stuff to half ton buyers who use it for grocery duty is questionable to me.

I love it how everyone whines about x-manufacturer not certifying to J2807 standards... some day they are going to have to, and I have a feeling some people are in for a shocker when they pull their pants down and see what everyone else has got.

Judging by all the shiny Super Duty's I see driving around with the headlights pointed into outer space while hauling a simple 5th wheel, or flatbed, it aint gonna be pretty for the Fanbois.

Also pretty sure the 5.3 is the one quoted for max tow rating of 11,500, it did say so on the press release. And yeah the old vortec's loved to rev, so what, this one looks like it has plenty of torque at low RPM, lets hold our judgments until this thing is on the road.

@devil, I see the bias in your post. I can say that because I am not biased toward any manufacturer. It's obvious you're a Chevy man, and that is ok. Sorry to disappoint you, but I see a lot more Chevys "with the headlights pointed into outer space" than anything else. My F150 takes more weight to press the back springs down than my old Chevy did. My bro-in-law who ended up with that truck had to put airbags in the back. His new Tundra did not require that. I am impressed the current HD Chevys are rated at 18,000 lbs on the bumper, but I wonder what that would fall to with J2807. To be honest, I don't really care for a government mandated rating system, but don't talk like GMs ratings aren't inflated.

Alex, I hope you dont mind me sending you the bill for a new laptop as I just spewed my entire drink onto my keyboard laughing at your post....

You're not biased... right and Im the President of the United States of America, and everything you read and write on the internet is true. Get lost troll

Who tow's 11K with a half ton anyway, they are making them lighter now and while the engine may be able to handle the wieght the rest of the truck can't.

@Devo340, I think Dodge has 2 game changers. 1994 was the first. It was the first truck to have the swing arm and coil SFA. I switched from Chevrolet's to Ford's in the latter part of the 90's but even back then the Super Duty rode awful compared to the Dodge. We were still stuck with leafs. I still think Dodge must have had a 10 year patent that expired on that design because after 10 years was up Ford had coils within months. Outside of that though, Dodge's were plagued with transmission and rust issues. Chevrolet's have been plagued with rust issues too on the 99-07 models. Even the 02-09 Dodge trucks have terrible rust problems and they're not particularly attractive either. It's the 2009 Dodge Ram that put them back on the right track. Awesome build quality, world class interiors and finally, they look really upscale like Fords do. I can see Dodge giving Chevrolet a run for it's money. While I think the new truck is an improvement for Chevy, the looks still just aren't there. I also think Ford and Dodge have better resale value now over the Chevrolet which is a pretty important thing to factor in when making a purchase. The GM truck is ok but even it's not great. My understanding is Chevrolet customers won't be allowed to have certain items either and are stuck with country trims. That's pretty stupid on GM's part.

@Toxicsludge. Did you ever look at who owns the remaining 50% of the diesel going into the Ram 1500? Right now it is General Motors & Fiat.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/11/fiat-idUSLDE71A1PB20110211

Arguing over who is best & all the chest thumping is POINTLESS as for the most part at the top, they are all working together!

For example, search GM & Ford to develop 9 & 10 speed transmissions.

@DenverMike
Please answer these questions. You have again deflected answering questions. You have failed to support your claim.

@DenverMike - Please:
1. Show me how companies avoid or minimize the "chicken tax" on current pickups?
2. List the loopholes present in the "chicken tax" that are currently exploited?
3. List how those loopholes can be exploited?
4. List current pickup trucks that use loopholes to circumvent the "chicken tax"?
5. Show me the documented evidence (literature, links, etc..) that show that the "Chicken tax" is "100% irrelevant"?

Your links don't say DOT was formed prior to UNECE.

Your links say what we have been saying.

Sorry, posted in the wrong article. Whoops.

@ToxicSludge
Two things of interest to me is the towing. Why doesn't the government madate the J2807 towing standards for all manufacturers.

The talk of light diesels is signifcant. The 2.8 Colorado diesel would work. But it is still only talk.

@devilsadvocate That is the reason why Manufacturers will use grossly inflated towing and I suspect GCVWR figures. The PR aspect is too important. The Hitch rating limits how much you can tow anyway. I suspect you would see figures drop by several thousand pounds if even a fairly liberal standard like J2807 was implemented across the board

@Toycrusher it will be embarrassing.

@FordTrucks, the first new Dodge I bought was in 1982, then when the '95 ext cabs came out, bought a new one.
loved the room & the 5.9 Magnum, not to mention the ride & quietness. Fuel milage sucked, 14 or 9.5 towing.
Then I had a 2004 HEMI Q/C 1500, great power, loved the boxed frame, no squeaks or rattles @ 161k when I sold it.
enter the 2009 RAM HEMI crew cab 1500, great truck! 20MPG hiway & 12 towing. I was a little concerned about the coils in the rear, but it tows great. 69k on it now.
I also inherited my Dad's 2003 3500 Diesel when he passed.
It now has 174k on it. Just put on the third set of tires & second set of brake pads. I tow a 28ft enclosed race car trailer with it. I tow another race car behind the 2009 on an open trailer.
I have seen the improvements thru-out the Dodge truck line since the early 80's.
Some class leading, some just matching other manufactures.
I don't feel they have taken a step backward at any point in time.
That Axle that you talk about or the 5.2 & 5.9 Magnum engines, probably wouldn't have happened without Jeep being under the Chrysler banner.
The thing that attracts me to RAM is, even with the company going broke, raped & pilaged on occassion has done pretty well.
I personally think there isn't a nickles difference in all the manufactures out there today.
Every one of them have strengths & weaknesses.
I on the other hand have had very good fortune with Dodge/Ram trucks over the years, & at this point probably wouldn't buy anything else.
I do like to see the competetion from all the mfg's, I think it makes better trucks across the board.

Funny to read that GMC is protecting its customers by avoiding compliance with J2807. Does that mean customers might go into shock if a company actually cared more for them than PR or profits?
11,500 tow out of the new 5.3 is good. It ballparks Ford's numbers with enough room to claim 1/2 ton supremacy. Will the 6.2 have higher tow ratings?

@Lou
I was just thinking about litigation if the manufacturers adopt J2807.

How to they re-rate previous vehicles?

How will previous vehicle operators be compensated?

I think this tow standard might be harder to implement than one would think.

Now the manufacturers are stuck in the 'tow war' and are waiting to see which one will back down first. That could be why the government will not mandate J2807.

@Lou
With our US pickups we don't have that problem since they are all re-rate down in their tow capacities.

I wonder if our Australian tow figures for US pickups will give an accurate indication on what US pickups can tow by brand.

Everything theyre doing seems to be great ideas...just a few years behind Fomoco and chrysler/fiat not to mention the silverado looks like a 2012 silverado took a trip to pepboys for all the chrome in the store I do like the Sierras look though I still feel it looks to much like the last "body style" Good luck GM

@Big Al from Oz - my understanding is that there will be no attempts to re-rate older trucks and the new standards will apply only to new trucks. I suspect that is why Ford and Ram said that they will apply the ratings to their next "All new" truck. That makes it much easier for them to wash their hands of any magic sring dust used on previous generations.

@Big Al, I doubt it, the F250 7.3 diesel was rated at 3500kg in Australia, when it first came out there with the code "RM." Which is nothing for that truck. Then they gave it a new model code "RN." The RN was rated at 4500kg. I asked a Ford guy what changed it, he said that Ford supplied a truck with a 50mm tow ball the first time. The second time around, they supplied it with a 70mm tow ball. Nothing else was different. Even 4500kg is nothing for that truck, an F-150 will tow 4500kg with ease. As the towball was completely interchangeable, it should not have limited the vehicles tow rating!

@Alex
I have never stated that weight.

I do know from what Robert Ryan has described in the past the US full size trucks are rated differently to the US.

Robert Ryan is 'into' RVs etc and all ranges of transport equipment.

@Big Al- D Mike's post is gone... never read it. Can you (briefly)explain for us how tow ratings are established in Oz? I thought you guys had the same 3500kg limit as Europe w/o a CDL.
Previous vehicles would not get re-rated. Just because the method changes, doesn't mean the previous ratings had no merit. They were deemed safe for operation then, and you cannot make old vehicles comply to new rules, just because they changed.
I think the Govt. should stay the hell out of requiring J2807. If customers demand it, it will be implemented. The ones who have the real interest are the insurance companies. They are none too thrilled about ever increasing tow capacities and the trailers that go with them. SAE J2807 could serve to limit their exposure.
As it turns out, sadly, customers would rather have a higher tow rating than a standardized one.

"Who tow's 11K with a half ton anyway, they are making them lighter now and while the engine may be able to handle the wieght the rest of the truck can't."

I do. Actually 14000lbs (2011 crew ltz with 3.42) and the truck can handle it. It's working but it handles it. Someone said "it is nice to have and not need, than need and not have." but if ur empty 95% of the time like most us are it makes more sense with a 1/2 ton. Todays 1/2 tons are rated for more than 3/4 tons if the 90's.

@Mr Knowitall
I remember a while ago I found an Australian government link of some sort that described our tow limits. I think it was a NSW State governement document.

From what I remember a number of your HDs wouldn't be allowed to tow over about 10 000lbs here.

But the other day I saw a very new Chev 3500 pickup towing what appeared to be about a 35' long 5th wheel RV trailer.

I'm at work and tonight (our time) I will try to find a the link.

@BAFO - Every single import truck (you count 'em), including medium-dutys for sale in the US since '64 has avoided the irrelevant Chicken tax by either adding seats to the cargo area, showing up partially disassembled, or simply made in the US, Mexico or Canada.

The Chicken tax is only as relevant as the 2.5% tariff on import cars. Absolutely no one has ever complained about the Chicken tax except OEM marketing directors paid to make excuses in the media for weak existing or proposed products that US consumers are not remotely interested in.

@DenverMike - Initially, the Chicken Tax was avoided by importing pickups without the box attached. Subaru brought the Brat in with jump seats in the box. The USA government closed those loopholes and the small truck market started to die.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax
"Initially, Japanese manufacturers found they could export "cab-chassis" configurations (which included the entire light truck, less the cargo box or truck bed) with only a 4% tariff.[4] Subsequently, a truck bed would be attached to the chassis in the United States and the vehicle could be sold as a light truck. Examples included the Chevrolet LUV and Ford Courier. The "cab-chassis" loophole was closed in 1980."

You haven't answered my questions posted elsewhere.
@DenverMike - Please:
1. Show me how companies avoid or minimize the "chicken tax" on current pickups?
2. List the loopholes present in the "chicken tax" that are currently exploited?
3. List how those loopholes can be exploited?
4. List current pickup trucks that use loopholes to circumvent the "chicken tax"?
5. Show me the documented evidence (literature, links, etc..) that show that the "Chicken tax" is "100% irrelevant"?

I posted a "cut and paste" from Blue Oval forums where a blogger stated that Ford was ready to import Thai built global Rangers but the collapse of a USA/Thai FTA scuttled the plan.

The "seat and box" loophole for pickups no longer exists. Why would Ford import a Transit passenger van and then convert it to cargo if it was real easy to bypass the chicken tax?
Ford will import the passenger version of the Transit connect later in the year so that will be interesting to see the price difference. A base Grand Caravan passenger unit is 19,995 (US) and the cargo version is 22,465 (US). The Transit Connect starts at 22,425.

@DenverMike - Canada has been exempt since 1965 due to the "Auto Pact" and subsequently NAFTA in 1993.
http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Auto+Pact

http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/NAFTA

Mexico is covered under NAFTA.

Alex,
The original 7.3 Diesel F250 's did have a 3500kg rating that was uprated to 4500kgas he hitch was uprated They still keep US Pickups at that 4,500kg limit. Still you have to ask yourself when you see an IVECO Daily 70c towing a 38ft 5th Wheel trailer what is their actual tow rating? Other vehicles as well mainly Japanese have considerable towing ability but are rated at the 3500kg limit.

@DenverMike -

"NHTSA rules also amount to barriers to trade.
"Although a system of uniform auto safety performance and equipment regulations (ECE Regulations) had been in place in Europe since 1958, the United States did not seek to adopt or harmonize with these ECE regulations, which have since been adopted by virtually all industrialized countries outside North America. Compared to the ECE regulations, American regulations are fundamentally different in philosophy, content, emphasis, and enforcement protocol. Vehicles conforming to the internationalized (originally European) ECE regulations are allowed or required throughout the entire rest of the world, but such vehicles are illegal in the United States.

"Despite the evolution of the North American auto market to include most of the world's major automakers, and the ongoing proliferation of U.S. safety regulations, the previously-existing market oligopoly still exerts strong influence: American vehicle equipment and construction regulations are based almost entirely on Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) standards, which were written almost entirely by U.S. automakers."

"Research on the trends in use of heavy vehicles indicate that a significant difference between the U.S. and other countries is the relatively high prevalence of pickup trucks and SUVs in the U.S. A 2003 study by the U.S. Transportation Research Board found that SUVs and pickup trucks are significantly less safe than passenger cars, that imported-brand vehicles tend to be safer than American-brand vehicles, and that the size and weight of a vehicle has a significantly smaller effect on safety than the quality of the vehicle's engineering."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Highway_Traffic_Safety_Administration

blah, blah, blah. barriors to trade. Yawn......

Dafish said: "Most people I know, (hunters and fisherman) do not need MAX towing in a half-ton truck, so to us it is a non issue, a loaded down Bass boat of big Lund is maybe 3,000 lbs... wish they would just come out with a REAL half ton, not some heavy-duty half ton. If we need Max towing we would buy a 3/4ton, duh....."

I agree totally! See it everyday where I live! all this high towing crap is for ego chest pounding....for insecure people to gloat about how superior their truck is to the others. My jeep tows a boat/fishing equipment just fine. Sure, I don't try and race everyone, just like an adult shouldn't.

On the trucks: I like the simplicity of chevy engines. Not sure why everyone is so hard up on Chevy/GM. They still sell plenty of half ton trucks (close to what ford sells, maybe more). You guys are nit picking is all....

Jeep



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 | © 2011 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com