2017 Chevrolet Silverado 2500/3500 Video Review

IMG_7048A II

We had the chance recently to do a bit of towing with a pair of 2017 Chevrolet Silverado 2500 and Silverado 3500 pickup trucks in and around Davenport, Iowa. Along with LTZ duallies and Z71 2500s, Chevy also had some Big Tex trailers at the ready with an assortment of John Deere skid steers and backhoes strapped on top. After a full day of using these trucks, there were a few standout features we liked and a few we hope get changed or upgraded in the next iterations of these heavy-duty trucks. We'll have more to say about this impressive platform and powertrain when our 2017 One-Ton Challenge goes live in August; for now, we'll share just a few of our thoughts in this video.

Cars.com photo by Mark Williams




Mercury? Dead. Lincoln? A veg. Edsel? Dead

Posted by: papajim | Jul 11, 2017 5:37:36 PM

Too funny gramps.Whistling past the graveyard of GM.
Pontiac -dead, Oldsmobile- dead, Saturn-dead, Himmer-dead. Oh yeah, don't forget about LaSalle, I am sure you are old enough to remember, lol!

The last Edsel was a 1960 model which was last produced in 1959. Lincoln is not dead yet as Cadillac is not dead yet and the last Mercury was 2009 almost 8 years ago. True Pontiac, Olds, Hummer, and Saturn are dead but they have been dead for 8 to 13 years and The last time I remember LaSalle being mention was in the opening song of All In The Family. The Chinese are keeping Buick alive. You forgot Saab which GM bought from the Swedes and sold only to become extinct which was a real tragedy since Saab had made great cars before GM owned them. But who knows the Chinese could revive those dead names as they are doing with Borgward. Even FCA has revived the Yugo in spirit as a Fiat 500L which the Yugo was originally a Fiat made in Yugoslavia.

@papa, Mercury oh well, Lincoln still going, too many GMs that are dead to mention, why would you even bring that up? We are talking sales king, the Ford is just that. Period. Man you guys try so hard to justify GM, but keep failing. You must be a FNN subscriber for sure.

Someone alluded to and questioned why if; "this truck is so great why is it not the number one seller?".

I would like to point out the best of the best is rarely a bulk commodity.

Average things are generally far more popular than standout performers. Look at sports. Not all can be the best performer. But you will find multitudes of wannabe mediocre performers, similar to the F Series.

The F Series is an honest truck, far from perfect, but good enough for the masses. But, GM trucks outsell the F Series, especially if you add in those Silverado/Sierra related SUVs.

So, the comment regarding why is this GM so great might contain a little bit of misunderstanding by the person who passed his judgement forward. This Silverado may be a great truck, in the largest selling truck range.

Motor vehicles are the same. The world's best pickup is in fact German (AMG 6x6 G Wagen) and its expensive, but it's the best performer.

This GM HD is most likely a better performer than a Ford HD. This is life, get used to it.

By definition an SUV is not a "pickup truck" and neither is a van or chassis cab.
Some would disagree that the GM HD is a better performer than even RAM. The gasser HD Ford is clearly a better performer than the GM gasser (6.2 vs 6.0) if you define performance as 0-60,HP, TQ, etc. There is much more to ownership than that. Any of today's HD trucks are more than capable. It's really come down to personal preference - thus we have the emotionally entrenched brand defenders. I'll say it's my opinion that the Titian XD is a FAIL. 5/8 truck with 3/4 pricing and nowhere near the capabity of s 3/4 and some domestic 1/2 tons come within a hair of the XD.

I said truck. Not pickup.

The greater spread of production in the GM truck range, which includes, Yukons, Sierra, Escalades, Tahoes,, Suburbans, etc might be a reason GM is making a better profit than Ford at the moment.

GM was able to spread the costs of production over a far greater number of trucks that are similar.

Whilst Ford has to claw back massive development, plant, retraining, etc costs for the aluminium Wunder Trux.

How many Ford fans are excited about the one ton challenge coming out next month. Considering the performance whipping that the Silverado put on the competition during the premium 3/4 ton challenge, this otta be good.

@gms, your jealousy is very evident. Its ok, you will continue to fall into the second class of trucks, as number 1 is just not in Gm's future......Although the Ford will win anyway, going by tests like this means nothing really. you need to actualy drive the trucks in question to form an opinion. Give me those trucks, and I will show which ones can tow and hold their own, I do it everyday at work, and have driven all the 2017's in the HD category

@Big Al--True GM has spread the cost of development of its trucks over several platforms and brands. The Lincoln Navigator and Expedition for 2018 will be sharing the F series aluminum body and the EcoBoost V-6. The Chevy Tahoe and Yukon outsell the Explorer but Ford is counting on the new Expedition to increase sales in this market segment. GM has the greater total truck sales including suvs and crossovers but Ford F series would still be the leader. For GM, Ford, and FCA derive most of their profit from pickups, suvs, and crossovers while car sales continue to decreasing. TTAC has a recent article on the ever increasing sales of crossovers at the expense of sedans for all manufacturers. As long as fuel prices remain stable the total truck segment will continue to grow at the expense of sedans.

meant F series will still be the leader in pickup sales. FCA has plans to produce a larger more premium suv in addition the the Durango.

Incorrect assumption.. GM doesn't have the debt service Ford has to maintain, post bankruptcy. Financially speaking GM has a structural advantage over Ford not because they are such fiduciary wizards, they are a relatively new company with much less legacy cost than Ford. They (GM) should be killin' it.
This is "pickup trucks.com" not "shared chassis and miscellaneous components.com" Should this debt load catch up to Ford's Cash Flow, Ford will need a bailout or bankrupt. Fords liquidity ratios have been up and down but were better than GM in FY16. As I've said before in this forum, it's short sighted to infer cause-effect fiscal assumptions. It's more nuanced, otherwise everyone could be a CFO

Irrespective of truck body style, they are very similar from the front doors forward. This is the most expensive part of any vehicle. The design is near on identical.

This might be Pickuptrucks.com, but it doesn't detract or change the structure of a company and it's products. Sort of like discussing McDonald's but only factoring in Big Mac's when there are Cheesburgers using the same patties, buns, sauces, onions, etc.

Most business try to modularise as much production as possible. So, making a pickup or station wagon of the same vehicle means little.

I would also re-read how, when and where GM's and Ford's money has, is and will be going.

Please share your insights and analysis?

Several of the commenters are talking about "cost of production" and defining success by how effectively an automaker can leverage its costs across different vehicle lines.


However, a glance at the financial pages shows GM stock doing well while Ford is struggling to keep share prices out of the red.

Ford's efforts at innovation deserve credit, but I'm not sure it translates into sales figures. GM suffered through the last two recessions and was able to succeed despite very tough competition.

Ford is still fighting the last war (fuel economy). Ford is also suffering from leadership problems. Until there's a real shakeup at the top, Ford will keep struggling.

Spreading costs out is still a very important in keeping costs manageable. Ford has spent a lot on developing driver-less technology and newer technologies that will take years to recoup the costs and much of it will never be recovered. GM has been selling off unprofitable operations such as Opel/Vauxhall and discontinuing production of Holden vehicles in Australia. GM's balance sheet looks better because they have been selling off and getting rid of less profitable operations. The only problem with GM and Ford would be a drastic increase in fuel prices which could leave both with a glut of trucks, suvs, and crossovers and not enough efficient vehicles which short term is not a problem but could be in the future. FCA is even in worse shape than GM and Ford when it comes to flexibility. GM and Ford for the most part have been updating their products with an exception of a few product lines. Ford's prospects should be brighter with a new CEO and change in leadership. I wish all manufacturers continued success--a lot of jobs related to auto manufacturing.

only problem with GM and Ford would be a drastic increase in fuel prices


You're fighting the last war.

Fuel economy will NOT be the big factor over the next ten years unless there's some kind of world war, or a crash in the international power of the greenback.

Today the US has vast reserves of natural gas and crude oil that were just a dream 10 years ago. Today the US is a net exporter of energy.

Electric cars have a future but at least 90 percent of the companies designing that technology will gone by 2020. Ford bet heavily on the scarce-fuel scenario and today their stockholders are paying for it.

only problem with GM and Ford would be a drastic increase in fuel prices


You're fighting the last war.

Fuel economy will NOT be the big factor over the next ten years unless there's some kind of world war, or a crash in the international power of the greenback.

Today the US has vast reserves of natural gas and crude oil that were just a dream 10 years ago. Today the US is a net exporter of energy.

Electric cars have a future but at least 90 percent of the companies designing that technology will gone by 2020. Ford bet heavily on the scarce-fuel scenario and today their stockholders are paying for it.

you need to actualy drive the trucks in question to form an opinion. Give me those trucks, and I will show which ones can tow and hold their own, I do it everyday at work, and have driven all the 2017's in the HD category

Posted by: Nitro | Jul 12, 2017 9:12:10 AM

"Ford Innovation"....hmm, doublespeak for unreliable junk engines and overpriced gimmicky 'features'. Aluminum bodies that rip apart like a popcan and beds that turn into swiss cheese if you use it for work.Engines that eat timing chains, fracture oil pumps, distort cylinder bores, 6.7's that crack valves, 5.4's that burn valve seats, turbos that constantly leak oil and coolant, turbo gas engines that chug fuel and blow spark plugs all while diluting the engine oil with unburnt fuel, and a 10 year legacy of complete junk Powerstroke diesel engines. All of them loaded up with buggy gimmicks that inevitably stop working after the 36k mile warranty ends.

Currently the most probable issue confronting Pickup truck sales in the US is the state of US vehicle financing and number of prospective customers.

I do believe we will witness a decline in pickup numbers soon as most who wanted a pickup (or new car) have bought one.

The resurgence of new vehicle sales in the US since the GFC has nearly run it's course. In other words people who wanted new vehicles and have not bought one have done so.

The easy money and leasing terms can't be extended over longer terms. Larger discounts are coming into play and the Fed is moving interest rates higher.

From a lending and leasing perspective there are more and more bad loans being issued to those who can ill afford them.

So, the only way for the near future is down.

Other areas that can affect pickup sales are things like a 20% tax on imported steel. This will increase the price of all vehicles including pickups that are manufactured in the US.

When pickup truck sales decline, the Fed lifts interest rates more and add an even slight increase in gas prices could have a significant affect on pickup sales.

The future for pickup truck sales is looking decidedly down.

@Big Al--I meant short term and in the immediate future truck sales are good. Long-term could be another story which is not that easy to predict the long-term. Disagree with papa jim in that abundant fuel and lower prices are guaranteed. How do we know what will happen in the next 5 to 10 years there could be another big war in the Middle East and oil producers could go out of business if the price goes too low which would cause the price to go up. Also there are more factors than low fuel prices that determine what consumers buy. Consumers can decide that they are tired of trucks and buy another type of vehicle. Aging baby boomers could decide that they are tired of large vehicles and that a compact crossover better meet their needs. I am not saying this will happen but consumer tastes do change. Also as you stated there is so long cheap interest rates can sustain sales but then manufacturers can offer more favorable leases. I do see manufacturers being adaptable to changes but yes increase in sales is not sustainable at long term and eventually sales will go down and then they will go up. Everything has its cycles.

"...and the Fed is moving interest rates higher"

@Big Al

The Fed's hands are tied. They've got nowhere to go.

Up is not an option, because the US debt is presently in the 20 trillion dollar range. Even a tiny 25 basis point increase in Fed funds rate increases the payback on all of that debt to even more stratospheric levels. This has been the monkey on Dr. Yellen's back the whole time she's been Fed chair.

In the meantime, trucks remain a great option because they are far more "civilized" than they were even 10 years ago and I see women driving pickups all the time, something that used to be a bit novel to see. Pickups and large SUVs like the Expedition and the Suburban are extremely versatile and offer families a one-car-does-it-all kind of option, instead of owing a second vehicle.

Higher fuel prices are extremely unlikely in the current scenario. The OPEC nations no longer have a grip, as they once did, and their own members are always selling oil "out the back door" to avoid being caught cheating on their allotments. This mirrors the conditions the US had back in the 1980s, and 1990s; cheap oil, and low inflation.

I'm talking by the end of the year.

What's holding back OECD economies?

Lack of inflation.

How do you create an inflationary environment?

By lifting interest rates.

The US has reach full employment. Wages need to rise and so do investments other than artificially low Fed rates in which money is plowed into very speculative investments, ie, Stocks.

I do believe the Feds and other economists thought that the cheaper interest rates would of been used slightly differently with the ratio of money going to stocks and bonds vs investment into the general economy.

Old people like yourself who are reliant on stocks for your income want things to remain.

People like myself want to see a future for our younger generation.

There is a large need for an far greater inflationary environment. So, investments (other than stocks, etc0 made today increase in real value into the future.

Stocks are pieces of paper. The US need hard investments like road infrastructure, dams, nuclear powerplants, investments that will be there for future generations. Not increased stock values for old people.

@Big Al

Your economic "analysis" is naive, and I'm being polite. There are so many errors I can only cover a few.

In reality, older workers and retirees want higher interest rates because their savings tend to be in cash and bonds, not stocks. Cash in the bank these days does not grow very much. This is the opposite of what you assert in your above comments.

Second, inflation is a distortion of value. Undesirable. Paper currency should be a reliable measure of value like the Swiss franc.

A dollar should not be 92 cents one day and 98 the next. Like a yardstick, it should be fixed in value.

Inflation destroys that. Unfortunately the Phillips Curve is the rule that runs the present day Fed, which has failed in all of its stated goals for decades (controlling inflation and unemployment).

In reality the Fed's obsession should be safeguarding the value of the dollar something that's been a miserable failure since the 1970s.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_curve

A superior model is called the Austrian School. See Ludwig Von Mises. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_von_Mises

The majority of one ton dually's I see pulling anything big are recreational toy haulers with 54 ft long tri-axle fivers.

Everything else gets pulled by commercial tractors since the machinery in my part of the world tends to be too big for pickups.

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 | © 2017 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us