Top 5 Details Chevrolet/GMC 2015 HDs Got Wrong

2015-GMC-Sierra-Denali-3500HD-003 II

After our initial drive of both the 2015 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra 2500/3500 Heavy Duty pickup trucks, we noted there was plenty we liked. But we were surprised at the things GM didn't address or improve. Oh well, maybe next time. Here's our list of the Top 5 things GM got wrong.

1. Towing Mirrors

We would have thought this was a no-brainer since both the 2014 Ram HD and the Ford Super Duty offer big, adjustable (and in some cases electric folding and extendable) mirrors. The GM HDs still have the standard manual elephant-ear mirrors from last year. This needs to change.

2. No High Country Trim

We know GMC's Denali trim level has a pretty strong lock on the premium-grade trim-package crowd, but without a High Country offering Chevy can't compete at that level. Ford's Platinum and King Ranch, and Ram's Laramie and Longhorn editions are in another category; one that makes a lot of money for truckmakers and quite a few of their luxury-loving customers very happy.

3. No Smarter V-8 or Upgraded Duramax

We knew the powertrains (and chassis) were going to carry over, but it's still disappointing when the Ram HDs just came out with an entirely new, high-tech 6.4-liter Hemi and Ford's Super Duty is about to release its next-generation Power Stroke, which is likely to blow past Ram's new Cummins' monster 850 pounds-feet of torque rating. We're quite familiar with both of GM's stout 6.0-liter V-8 and 6.6-liter Duramax engines, but something new would have been nice.

4. DEF Tank Hangs Down, No Gauge

At a time when all sorts of small changes are being made to each new truck, almost every year, it seems like placement of diesel exhaust fluid tanks is really getting glossed over. Without the addition of the sidesteps on GM HDs, the DEF tank sits well below the door line and just looks tacky, if not dangerously exposed. We're not huge fans of step bars, but in the case of these new HDs we'll make an exception. And there is no dedicated DEF gauge.

5. No Factory Fifth-Wheel/Gooseneck Option

We know there are several companies making solid products for heavy-duty haulers that pair with big trailers for work and play, but GM didn't integrate the extra cross-member in the last frame upgrade, so we were hoping GM would add it during this upgrade. A better HD fifth-wheel/goosneck option will be necessary if buyers keep screaming for it.

 

2015-Chevrolet-Silverado-3500HD-034 II

 

Comments

I would think that with the lack of new engines, the modest body changes and dropping sales, the top brass at GM need to be looking to shake things up within the truck division. How can they possibly hold up the new products by Ford and Ram?

Top Secret GM Engineering meeting...

"Hey guys where we gonna put the DEF tank?"

Five highly educated, non off-roading guys walk over to truck and look under it...

Most energetic engineer points to area right behind the right front suspension.

"How about this empty space here? No one gets theses trucks dirty anyway, warranty claims will just blame the owner for using the truck in a manner not consistent with its design."


Low slung frame #1

DEF tank all wrong #2

Sissy suspension #3

Mirrors #4

5th wheel/gooseneck #4

@CreigMac...hahaha, nice one!

Stick a fork in it!

Funny I was talking with a bunch of real horse people a few weeks ago and most of them seem to prefer the GM pickup for towing over the Dodge or Ford. Why ride quality, mpg, and power to tow. Not one said anything about mirrors or the def tank, or lack of a solid front axle. All had the Duramax, and all were the last body style.

The lack of a higher level trim does surprise me. That is probably $2500 in profit down the tubes for as much as 30% of their HD trucks sold. I bet that ends up near $100 million is lost profits a year. I know that isn't as large of a number to GM as it sounds to we the "lay persons" but that could be used in some R&D, employee payouts, dividends, something...

My 05 D-Max has nice power-extending tow mirrors, what happened to that option?
The location of the DEF tank is so wrong.
Why no gas 6.2L?

#1... yeah those mirrors looked great on the 2005-2007 classic trucks, especially compared to the offerings on the superduty at the time (except for the 2007 facelift), but now they just look cheap and aftermarket add ons. They can do better.

#2 for me.... not so much as I would be shopping in the LT price range so yes this is true from a marketing standpoint but for me I could care less, dont have the money for a 50k+ truck

#3 Im going to have to disagree, I see the 6.6Duramax/Allison combo going down in history as the next 7.3l powerstroke or the 5.9L HO cummins. Its not the most powerfull but man it can tow, you guys of all people should know that after it STOMPED the far more powerful Super Duty and Ram at Davis Dam and Ike Pass in Rumble in the Rockies, Hurt Locker, and HD shootout. Yeah the 6.0 could see a refresh, but my current 6.0 2500 HD gets the job done and it is a design that is more than well proven in reliability and toughness. GM has a lot to lose a la Ford 6.0l and 6.4l Powerjoke fiasco by messing with these proven combos too much. Even if it falls behind the newer powertrains on speed... it is a proven reliable hauler and it gets the job done. That is more important to me than anything else.

4. DEF tank? Ugly? yes.... in the grand scheme of things I just dont see this being a huge demerit. I mean yeah if you romp in a HD pickup it would probably get smashed, but seriously, anyone truly wheeling a 9000lbs 22ft long behemoth like an HD pickup is just absurd. Im sorry Ford guys I know you like you solid axles and all, but really we are talking easly 6k lbs over the front axle on a nearly 7foot wide boat. Thats not an offroad vehicle by any standards, so I think this is misplaced priority and nitpicking at the very least. YEah it is poorly placed... if it was a huge design flaw causing problems under normal expected useage I doubt they would leave it there... thats just stupid even by GM standards.

#5... yeah this one is a puzzler and I am surprised it isnt higher up on the list... given these trucks are used for hauling and such. This is something that is surprisingly simple and cheap to integrate.

I don't like the lack of fender trim on the dually fenders. GMC put it on the front fenders but forgot the back. Looks like it fell off and is missing. So tacky. Another small item is rims. They look the same as last years. GM's cost saving is costing the consumer big. But I guess they could always buy Dodge or Ford.

When it comes to GM, everyone know theyre not the sharpest tools in the shed.

Guy at the work site I have been and inspector at dented his DEF tank by not offroading, but by using his truck as, well a work truck.

He has since become wiser and is now driving a real HD, well actually a SD.

Disagree on the mirrors devilsadvocate, the Super Dutys mirrors have been great since 99.

#1: Why? Change for change's sake means nothing; unless it makes a functional improvement over the older style, leave it alone. While I agree they're not the prettiest things in the world, they're certainly nicer than the older style like what's on the doors of my 1990.

#2: Why? All that does is jack up the price while offering little, if any real improvement in comfort or style over the existing high-end trim.

#3: As I remember, last year's reports about GM's three new engines gave them pretty high marks. You want them to change the engines again ALREADY?!

#4: I'll grant it's not pretty, but if the truck is used primarily on-road, who cares? Still, I agree that hanging so low doesn't really make practical sense in any way.

#5: Hmmm. I think Ford has put an extra frame member in just to support a fifth-wheel/gooseneck hitch and I think Ram has as well, though I may be wrong on either count. An HD is designed much more for the type of hauling/towing that would require this type of support, so if you ask me this is the ONE real mistake out of this entire list.

GM is developing a new 7.0, a spin off from the Corvette engine. Also a new Duramax is in the works and I think it will be introduced when GM comes out with their new 4500's. They do need new mirrors. I prefer the front suspension they now offer. I do not care about a fifth wheel option because they more then likely will not offer the one I would want. Ram offers the B&W which in my view is garbage. I owned one once and it is now in a salvage yard with a bent jaw. What a nightmare that hitch gave me. The def tank does need to be changed. GM has the highest tow ratings for trailers and their fifth wheel ratings are high enough to satisfy 99% of the people that tow fifth wheels.

1. Tow Mirrors - one can argue that electronic extending and folding mirrors on a work truck is just one more thing to go wrong. The power everything options need to be a choice and included with high end trims models.

2. No High Country? WTF? Wake up GMC. Chevy is your biggest seller and there are bowtie guys that will go to Ford or Ram before setting foot on a GMC dealer lot.

3. The 6.0 is reliable but a pig on gas. It needs an upgrade probably more for the sake of upgrading.

4. Location of DEF tank - in my neck of the woods HD trucks are the backbone of the logging, mining, and ranching industries. There aren't too many paved roads out to a mine, logging show, or ranch.

5. No 5th wheel provision.... WTF? if you don't offer it you can then blame the owner if the install screws up the truck?

In GM/Chevy's defence - TFL truck did a quick and dirty shootout with three 2014 gasser HD's.

These are the drag race results:
1st - 6.2 Ford
2nd - 6.0 Chevy
3rd - 6.4 Ram

The interesting thing is that one of the testers felt that the Chevy rode better than the new coil spring Ram.

that is interesting. We have 4Wheeler magazine saying that they did not find much of a difference between leaf springs and coil springs on the Ram. We now have 1/2 of TFL saying the Chevy rides better than a coil Ram.

The location of the DEF tank is losing sales. I have family that is looking to get a new HD truck and that DEF tank is their biggest concern because they don't stay on pavement all the time. Who does when they are hauling a 5th wheel?
As far as the High Country is concerned... I wouldn't be surprised if they still came out with it for the 2015 model year. The auto show season isn't over yet and it's probably good marketing to have something new to show a little later.

Low seating position
Off-set steering wheel (as others have pointed out)
Low frame
Crappy DEF tank position
No Duramax upgrade
Smaller rear seat than the Ram and Ford
Ugly front end
Still just a 6 speed (yes I know that is also true for the others in the segment).
Non-electric towing mirrors

Am I nitpicking? Probably!

I see Lou is telling half of the story. The FLT shootout, was that Chevy staged? I wouldn't doubt it, because when they set up a 1500 shootout for FLT, they made sure the 5.7 hemi was a SIX SPEED and 3.55 gears, while Fords Eco Boost got 3.73s, and the Chevy got 3.73s and a 6.2. Yeah, Chevy vs. all....or all they want you to compare to, lol! Sure that sounds fair, lets compare our strongest v-8 to a smaller engine, but we will skip out on the 3.92 gears, and optional 8 speed. Good comparo, Chevy! What a joke!

Anyway, lightning Lou didn't mention the fact that the TFL Truck test was a 4.1 geared Chevy, and 3.73 geared Ram 6.4. So with the Chevys lower trans gear ratios, what 4 something to 1st gear, not a real good test. The Ram trans gear ratios for 2500 (and now 3500) have been upped since 2011, but are still only 3.3 or so 1st gear. That plus the Chevy probably had little tires, as they usually do, helps Chevy.

Now do a real test, tow something heavy up a hill, maybe 10k, or in a hilly area, and watch the Chevy hunt gears. It will.

If you want to compare them in an equal test, the 6.0 is the same as the 2010 HD Shootout, and the 5.7 ate it up in the 2500, with the older 545 trans, which has less of a gear advantage, so what do you think the 6.4 will do with the bettet ratios, and more power?

The Phord 6.2 won that, based on transmission ratios, and more rear gear, 4.3 vs. the others @4.1, and more cubic inches & power, at a higher rpm, of course.

The Ram, as usual, tows in tow haul, and in that case, kept it in 5th gear, which hurt tow mileage. It got the best empty mileage, and the Ford sucked. The 6.4 will do the same if not better, with MDS.

I don't think 0-60 times is the best way to pick out a 2500 gasser. Better is, how well it can hold a gear pulling heavy, or get a heavy load moved from a steep hill.

@TRX Tom (Ram coils replace crown vic) - always an excuse when the Ram looses.

The 6.0 needs all of the help it can get. It got its ass handed to it in the HD shootout a few years ago by both Ford and Ram and you whine that the Ram lost in the FLT test.

No comment about the fact that 2 different tests say coils ain't what they are stacked up to be.

Didn't GMC figure that one out 40-50 years ago?

#6 chevy. ugly front end. looks like their 1996 3500 HD. That bumper is just too much...Bumper. but it still looks less goofy then the current SD

@TRX 4 Tom "Someday the people that want to own a good truck are going to stop listen to me"-TRX 4 Tom

Nice excuses its funny as hell that brand new 6.4L hemi got spanked by a ole 6.0 LOL!! Maybe Ram with throw a 7.4L HEMO motor so they can beat a little old Chevy 6.0 LOL

1 Chevy front bumper is over done /GMC grill and head lights are ugly

2 Really could use a new Allison to handle more HP TQ

3 better and new rims

4 Hint that DEF tank better

5 new gas eninges *prays for the 7.0L* lol and new from Ground up Duramax built to be little more better on MPGs with gobs more of TQ

@Peter - Ummmmm....real horse people? You didn't just say that right? It is widely known that horse people are the furthest thing from working a truck. Load up a aluminum gooseneck with two or three horses and a little bit of tack and then drive carefully down to the track. Horse people sure would not be the ones I'd be talking to if I needed to know about a work truck. Check with a real rancher instead next time maybe. Or anyone who uses a truck in a real work environment.

lol, you jokers will see when they compare them ALL with 4.10s. The 5.7 non MDS smoked the 6.0 on unloaded mileage, the 6.4 will get the same mileage as that older 5.7, provided you drive it right, you know, if you care about mileage, you wouldn't floorboard it. So, if it came down to which one you bought based on power and mileage, sorry johnny, your 6.0 sucks!

Call it un excuse, whatever, I just break it down on why it is. And if you have the OPTION, HELLO, test them with the same gear atleast. But you will see when they do a showdown, and they will ptobably give Ford the 4.3 cause it's an option (good luck with gas mileage on that 6.2 Phord, lol.

Don't tell me we need to help the 6.0, apples to apples, it sucks. It won't hold a gear at all.

So do GMs even have trans fluid temp gauges? Or oil temp gauges?

@Road Whale: those 3 new GM engines are for 1500, not 2500/3500 use.

The 6.2 would need a detune to handle HD work, then all the GM faithful will complain about a lack of power.

GM 2500/3500, sale for less, as less people will want them. Lol

#1. Already hearing rumors that new tow mirrors and wheel options are on the way as a mid year update. (don't quote me on that lol)

#2. I would be surprised if they don't offer the High Country at some point. They need to re-think that decision if they don't.

#3. Once again rumors suggest new motors are coming. (not sure on timing) The 6.0 is a bit under-powered but they are rock solid motors. I was hoping the Duramax would get a power bump for 15 but the reality is they are still very competitive in the real world plus the current Duramax/Allison is still an awesome powertrain.

#4. I agree with this one. The sooner they can relocate the DEF tank the better. I honestly haven't heard of many issues but they sure don't help with the passenger side beauty shots.

#5. It would be nice to have as an option but chances are that there are aftermarket units that are better than the factory units.

@Trx Tom (Ram coils replace Crown Vic) - "lol, you jokers will see when they compare them ALL"

Didn't you say that about the Ram 1500 5.7 8 speed air ride combo?


It’s beyond me why anybody would want a diesel in a personal use pickup anyway unless they are towing 80% of the GCWR 80% of the time. There is no value in owning a diesel truck anymore. Inception costs are at all-time high, maintenance cost are high, diesel fuel is high, while durability and reliability are at an all-time low…..plus the urea tank is in a stupid location with no gauge. Pee on diesels. It is a shame they dropped the big block.

1. They should put the urea tank inside the frame rail for a completely hidden solution.

2. The 850 ft-lb torque of the current 6.6L Duramax is more than enough for 99.9% of the regular consumer towing population. Need more power? Get a commercial driver's license (CDL) and drive a big rig.

3. Yes, the towing mirror does look ugly and cheap looking especially at the base portion where it folds in. GM probably wanted to streamline the appearance by making it slimmer and less obtrusive looking, but it backfired. Just make them big and beefy looking. If there's something people definitely want on their HD trucks, it's big obnoxious looking towing mirrors on them.

4. The 6.0L is definitely outdated, but I'm sure the new 6.2L is silently waiting in the wings to take its place. However, when it does, it'll probably be detuned a bit for greater durability in the HD's.

Correction.....the current 6.6L Duramax has 765 ft lbs of torque. However, it's still more than what most people would need in a HD based PU truck.

@Lou lost in BC: not sure where the "coils replace Crown Vic comes from? You been smoking your weed? They should drug test ambulance crews.

All I know is the Charger has given law enforcement a much better car then a crappy old crown vic, and I know a few Missouri Highway Patrolman, the only complaint I heard was the Charger air dam is low, however, it is not built to be a 4 wheel drive, like GMs new 1500, which is getting dogged out for being low slung. Atleast thats what Consumer Reports said, too low, and 4 wheeler magine, in both their test of a 5.3 powered truck vs. the Tundra, and the Ram 2500, as well as when they compared a v-6 Chevy to v-6 Ram, and the low rider Chevy lost that and generated comments about being low slung and "we dinged up the Chevy bumper" when the air suspesion ram eased on by.

The Ram air suspesion is liked by alot. I also said, but you have a poor memory, it is not for extreme offroaders. It will work for me, and as little as you say you go rock crawling, probably you too.

It sure was funny, Mark Williams did no squat test in the last light duty test, nor even an offroad course, but asked for 4x4s! That would have added points to Ram, and some for GM maybe on an offroad course, maybe if their rear axle was more condistant than the. 2008 Light Duty Shootout.

(continued) But old Mark was quick to give points for payload and tow RATINGS, even though the Ram did everything in their tests fine, with payload or heavy trailer, or without.

Lets see, lightning Lou, you talk of air suspesion warm lights comming on. Have they started braking down everwhere?, and I just don't. yet know of it? Were they being extreme on it? Do they sputter when you go to pass people in humid envirements? Oh wait, that's Fords turdbo issue.

Lets see Lou, the 5.7 Ram 2500 crew cab in the 2010 HD shootout, when equiped with 4.1 gears, same as the Chevy 6.0, smoked the 6.0 in all but 1 or 2 events, where the tall geared Ram 545 trans took off fine, but didn't have the short gears the Chevy did, so it BARELY lost in those 2 events. Now add power (and I don't mean like Fords 6.2 @a higher rpm,) a trans with a lower gear (still not as low of 1st and 2nd gears ad Ford and GM, and equip them all with 4.1s (or let the Ford have the 4.3, after all, it's an option) and what happens? Chevy gets their ass whipped again!

Please don't whine we need to handicap one, because one manufactorer hasn't kept up (Chevy)

Please compare compare as level as possible, crew cab to crew cab, same size tires, higjest gears.

Lou, I see you everywhere, jumping for joy a couple of lighter half tons beat a heavy 2500, no $#!+, sherlock! How about an even comparo, and here, and you have no sense to accuratly compare, because some inconsistant tester (FLT is VERY INCONSISTANT testing, you should pay attention)

Speaking of brakes and the 2010 HD Shotout, are these 2500 brakes the same as what they had for those 2011 models?

The 2500 GM was worst in class. The 3500 dually showed to be best in class then. Clearly ahead then.

Ram reworked theirs, so it's a new ballgame.

http://www.fourwheeler.com/vehicle-reviews/1401-2014-ram-1500-vs-chevy-silverado-v-6-truck-test/


Here you go, Lou, they liked the air suspension, even aftet they realized they were towing 1200 pounds too heavy.

They didn't have much good to say about the Chevy v6 and 6 speed combo, when comes to towing.

Lol, dinged up the Chevy lowrider's bumper!

...and then their was the air suspension Ram crew that beat the Tacoma. even with a 6 speed and 3.55 gears, I believe Fourwheeler.com?

Mark Williams just likes Ford.

@ TRX 4 Tom (Ram coils replace Crown Vic).

One of the car magazines said that the coil spring 1500 Ram is where body on frame cars would be if they kept on making them.

I thought that was funny and fits your "Someday the people that own a Ford are going to want an automobile"

because now they can...............

Ram 1500

ROTFLMFAO

but hey, the coils are getting good reviews, Edmunds tested a Ram and Ford, and they said the #1 seller made decent pavemeant feel rough. (the #1 seller being a Ford)

Most people seem to like them, except for Mark Williams, and people that look at payload only.

While I have admitted payload numbers should be higher on 4x4 models, here is some thought for you, lightning Lou.

The GVWR (you might have to look it up what that means) didn't get lowered when they went to coils, but the trucks got more options.

So the crew cab was raised to 6800, which I believe is the same weight as the 2008 quad cab 4x4 longbed, but the reviews on here generally test the loaded ones, which once you add Rambox-almost 150 pounds, heated and cooled seats, a console, a sunroof, bigger tires then the rest, 33 (only smaller to a Raptor, running boards, and they have low payload) before you know it, you have 950 pounds of payload, plus the 150 weight driver, so it's like 1100 pounds payload.

I see alot of nicely equiped crews with 1300 pounds of payload, plus the 150 pounds.

The quad cab was raised from the old 2008 number of 6700 gvwr, to 6800 for 2012 or 2013. (continued)

The GVWR does need changed, think of it this way Lou, if a 3.6 v-6 and hemi share the same 6800 pound rating and the v-6 is over 200 pounds lighter, technically you put 200 pounds more on that rear axle.

Speaking of axles, the same 9.25 axle with an 8 lug bolt pattern is rated to hold 4880 pounds on a my 87 3/4 ton 4x2.

My 2010 was 3900 per axle.

Maybe its the 5 lug setup is part of why they haven't raised it more then 6950.

6950? Where did that come from? Why it's the GVWR of the 4x4 3.0 diesel 4x4. You would think a writer doing reviews would comment on that? Nah, they don't notice.

So, it can be 6950 crew and quad 4x4. Again, some deal as the hemi vs. Pentastar, except contrary to the crap ALL1 puts out, the diesel isn't 200 pounds heavier. Try 20 pounds, and about 50 pounds of DEF (8 gallons) and weight of def tank and lines, and additional sound muffling, a total of just over 100 pounds, diesel vs hemi. Thats mostly front end weight, so why can't the hemi be 6950 GVWR?

Realistically, a 7100 GVWR would be fine.

I doubt it's in the 5 lug wheels (which are thicker then the others 6 lugs)

Surprised they haven't went with progressive rate coils.

Where are the links to the air suspension warm lights? Has a Jeep or Ram broke the air suspension yet? I would almost bet they did it extreme offroading.

They don't need to be in a half ton paylpoad pissing contest.

How come the magazines that bitch about low payload never see how the high rated trucks handle their "rated" max?

Oh, an as for the Crown Cic, I am guessing they had a 1000-1100 payload? My 1996 Chrysler LHS 4 door loaded has a 1015 payload, no 150 pound driver to add. Now since we're talking about a 4x2 car, a Ram crew 4x2 could be as much as 1500 plus payload, plus that 150 enemic (for a man) so thats about 66%. Can a Crown Vic Tow? Over 3,000 pounds? As much as 10 K?

@TRX 4 Tom (Ram coils replace Crown Vic).

- Ram either puts in slightly "softer" springs or goes with the same cargo rating for the 3.6, 5.7 and 3.0. Anyone know if the part numbers are the same?

Don't really care what a Crown Vic is rated for.

Coils do get good reviews. No one seems to complain about them in cars.

" lightning Lou" - thanks for the cool nickname.

actually, they get good reviews in trucks, and not just driving them empty. But I guess you never read one, because you are close minded.
Or possibly you scroll to the bottom, check the results, and when you. see they choose the Ram, you are like, "no sence reading this, I am biased Lou.

The Edmunds test comment above was from when they were testing the quad 1500 Ram vs. the Super Cab F-150, and yeah, they blasted the Ford. They were testing trailer towing, and the Ford was not so good. Maybe you should read it?

Did you happen to notice diesel power magazine tested a 2500 Ram and 1500? They liked the coil ride, and they have driven their share of 3/4 tons, and 1 tons, so considering thats their opinion and they can compare it to plenty of hd trucks they test, isn't that better then "we compared the 2500 Ram to the 1/2 tons...." No kidding! The half ton rode better!

Lol, thats about like you Lou, to compare a 1000 pound payload car to a 1600 plus pound crew Ram payload in some models. Oddly, just 7 years earlier, Fords Crown Vic 4.6 v-8 made about the same power as a 3.6. That's funny, I dont care whi you are.

Lou, if you weren't so close minded you might learn.

The lightning comment is similar to calling somebody "flash" cause they are slow to get it.

Yeah, there are alot of differant coils.

@ TRX 4 Tom (Ram coils replace Crown Vic).

I have noticed a few universal truths with Ram fanboys, they wrap themselves in the identity of the vehicle they own and even take up brand names as their personal identity (TRX4 Tom, HemiV8, CanadianRamowner ) and get very defensive of any critique levied towards the brand they worship even if it is legitimate.

I don't have the time or inclination to read every test on the planet. When I am ready to replace my truck I will look at all of the variables. The prime one being reliability data.

I live in the mountains Of BC and drive on logging roads all the time, I would rather have the DEF tank behind the front wheel than the lowest part of the truck in the middle of the road. It does keep the grass trimmed.
The mirror, I tow a lot and never had a problem pulling them out when needed, or folding them when needed.
I know of a few Ford owners with broken mirrors that can not afford to replace them, and quite a few that tried to adjust them in the winter and they stripped.
I do agree that a turn over ball cross member would be great, BUT if you look at the Dodge it is not as was shown when it was first posted it still takes a special frame. originally it was a cast part with the square in it.

HD is more about capacity and fuel economy, GM should have matched the RAM 3500 30.000 lbs towing capacity. That's what they did wrong. They introduced all-new trucks that are completely outclassed in capacity.

The DEF Tank is a real pain especially when you want to put AMP boards on since GM does not offer and should. The Mirrors for towing are terrible. Have allways put Power Vision on and will continue when available. The corner step in bumper is a joke and will still have to put a Bed Step on to be able to get up in the bed. The DEF fill point is terrible location and now has a hose in the road that didn't use to be there. If there is more back seat room it is not noticable. The black wheel lip moldings on the Sierra SLT look cheap and should have been color matched to vehicle.

To those who say GM didn't upgrade the powertrain...do you remember the HD Hurt Locker or Rumble in the Rockies? Duramax/Allsion dominated the competition. I feel that GM is waiting for the smoke to clear between RAM and Ford before introducing the upgraded powertrain. Refer to the article with 60 million dollar investment in the GM Duramax/Allison assembly plant.



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