2019 GMC Sierra 1500 Denali Is Ready to Rumble

2019-GMC-Sierra-Denali-066 copy II

The all-new 2019 GMC Sierra 1500 Denali is starting to show up at select dealerships. Coincidently, Cars.com Detroit Bureau Chief Aaron Bragman just spent a couple days behind the wheel of this new half ton in the wilds of Newfoundland and will have his full report for us Monday. In the meantime, we thought we'd highlight some of the more intriguing aspects of GM's new pickup truck.

Among some of the exclusive features the all-new Sierra 1500 Denali will offer for 2019 is the MultiPro Tailgate with its double-door drop panel that makes access to the bed and stepping into the bed easier. Sierra 1500 Denalis also will offer the industry's first carbon fiber inner bed box to save weight and provide more load strength. The ProGrade Trailering System will significantly improves a driver's ability to monitor and control towing and includes a class-first rear camera mirror that turns the rearview mirror into a monitor screen for a view of what's behind your truck, no matter what's stuffed in the cab or loaded in the bed. And finally, this new pickup will have the largest and most sophisticated head-up display in the half-ton class with more clarity than ever seen before.

Look for our full report on the new half ton, how it measures up to the competition and how it's different from the all-new 2019 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 in our First Drive on Monday. More to come.

Manufacturer images

2019-GMC-Sierra-Denali-056 II

2019-GMC-Sierra-Denali-064-1 copy II


Comments

Looks better than the chevy.

I like but I prefer my 18 looks better. This might grow on me in few years. Wish they would have updated HP/TQ though. But weight savings it should scoot

I think the pushrod engines have been pushed as far as they can go and meet pollution standards.

Nice
This will be the best looking truck.

This is just my personal take, but I’m not a huge fan of too many gadgets and gizmos. And this truck is full of them. Call me old school, but modern trucks are too car like and some, like this new GMC remind me of HotWheels toys. I like a clean practical utility. But I can see why for the sake of competition, you want to keep pushing the bar.

I think the pushrod engines have been pushed as far as they can go and meet pollution standards....Posted by: just the truth | Aug 23, 2018

Ridiculous statement.

An engine burns a fuel mixture the same regardless of valve train, as long as the diameter of the valves being compared are the same, and as long as the cam lifts the valve stem the same height and as long as the RPM is the same.

There is no reason that two 5 liter V8s won't perform similarly irrespective to the mechanism that opens and closes and times the valves in relation to the rotation of the crank and cam(s).

@ papajim I can't help what you believe. Maybe you should educate yourself on modern engines.

Looks abit like a Nissan truck with too much chrome on the nose, actually prefer the looks of current version. I have my doubts with this gizmo MultiPro Tailgate with its double-door drop panel - just more to go wrong; I can foresee it coming apart or out-of-line with heavy usage wear & tear.

NO, since you are so smart why don't YOU educate the rest of us? You must be an SAE engineer or something.

Hmm I think I still like my 2011 Chev Silverado better

@ papajim

Just the truth is full of Cr@p! He's another ford guy who knows everything. Come on you and everyone else on this site should know this! NOT!

@ papajim Bless your heart I must have hurt your feelings. And no I am not an"SAE engineer". I do like to read about modern engines and why engineers change engine designs. One of the things engineers need to control is the oxides of nitrogen. the original control was EGR which lowered peak combustion temps. Now some manufacturers with DOHC engines have learned to control oxides of nitrogen using valve timing therefore not needing to introduce exhaust gases back in to the intake. That is one simple example there are many others. The more you can control what happens in a engine the more you control what come out the exhaust. By the way oxides of nitrogen was what got VW in trouble.

@just the truth

I still like reading about engines, but when I was young I became even more interested and started tuning, building and repairing engines.

How many have you built?

@ papajim We talking lawn mower, four wheeler, auto, tractor or maybe industrial or maybe outboard. Hint I do all my own repair.

By the way oxides of nitrogen was what got VW in trouble.
Posted by: just the truth | Aug 23, 2018

Wrong.

Overly intrusive government regulations got VW in trouble.

Where I live sulfur dioxide in my engine exhaust is irrelevant.

Do you live in Mexico City or LA? if you do, exhaust gases do matter. They affect quality of life in those places. For most people who live in Central America or South America exhaust gas has no effect on quality of life.

American has many millions of drivers whose cars and trucks will never emit enough greenhouse gas or unburned hydrocarbons to affect the weather or the air quality.

Do you live in Beijing? Different story.

China is an enormous country and there are thousands of square miles in Chinese places that will never require the extent of emission controls that are needed in a place like LA or Beijing.

For 20 years or so it made sense for me to do all my own work. No more. Now I do the work that I want to do and pay people to do those chores that require special tools or technology.

When I was young I would buy a broken car for a few bucks and get it running again.

It made financial sense for me to do that. Democrats were running the country in those days and life was tough for average people.

I'm gonna go for a spin. Have a great day.

@ papajim do you have a subject you want to talk about. I don't control the rules for automobiles. I do like to read and educate myself on modern engines.

Nice truck. Me and the rest of the Ford shills wish our truck was nice like this one and the RAM 1500 also. Maybe some day.

@ tntgmc Thank you telling everybody I know everything. I really don't. I guess it must seem that way to you.

Technology, good. Appearance, hideous! That is the worst looking grille yet for the Sierra; far, far worse than two years ago when it actually seemed to be getting away from that Fake Big Rig look.

Looking forward to the technology coming to other GM trucks (too late for me, though.) A number of those features are actually worthwhile.

I think it will be a solid fourth place in the full size market.

It’s hard for me to say this. But that GMC is down right hideous

This Denali is a great looking truck, loaded with features and tech that will solidify its place at the top of the dream truck list for years.

After seeing them now in person , I must say they are much better looking in the flesh than in pictures. That being said , they are growing on me more and more but I don't "love " either these or the Silverados. The new design is definitely bolder and the two models are very different , not like previous generations that were more similar. On this site and others , many complained that GM didn't make the last gen bold enough....now they don't like the bold look .....you cant please everyone all the time and looks are purely individual and really shouldn't be counted in scoring , honestly.

Interior is improved on these new models but unlike the exterior, they are VERY derivative of the old interior , which was good (I really like my '14 High Country). There are many new features and many improvements . I do think that this interior is the weakest part of the new truck however and should have been more of a change.

I personally think Ram really did a great job on styling and especially interior. HANDS down the best looking truck on the market now. The Ford interior is FULL of hard cheap plastic....they look pretty good in upper trims but decidedly cheap in mid to lower trims. Even the upper end Fords are chocked full of cheap parts in places , not so the new Ram and even these new GM's have nicer materials all around now.

I do however think that these new GM trucks will be the best driving , best performing trucks on the market. They are probably about as light as the Fords without the total alum. approach and they offer the best V8 in the biz. The new diesel looks very impressive as well. The base v6 is hands down the best in the class and the new turbo I4 has impressive stats too. Ford offers an impressive powertrain array currently as well....

Looking forward to a head to head competition with Ford F150 King Ranch vs. Chevy High Country vs. Ram Laramie Longhorn vs. Nissan Platinum vs. Toyota 1892(4?) .

The whole that we can't get more out of a combustion engine in efficiency these days is so incredibly ignorant.
Cars (non-trucks), are seeing their mpgs soaring when they drop their heavy, complicated transmissions and connect the engine directly to a generator and then use electric drive to push the wheels. Then we will bypass the middle tranny-man who just takes profits and have our more powerful AND efficient locomotive-like heavy duty trucks.

But for now, the entrenched car part industry will win out until the new electrified parts will inevitably win out.

The earlier the better.

...we can't get more out of a combustion engine in efficiency these days is so incredibly ignorant....Posted by: BlueTruck | Aug 24, 2018

@bluetruck

Internal combustion engines are going to be with us for a while longer. It's the only powerplant that makes sense in cars and light trucks.

Unfortunately in terms of the technology needed for clean air, and fuel economy, all of the low-hanging fruit's already been picked.

I forget who said that, but he's right. The next incremental gains will cost a lot to achieve and will deliver less value. There are other (better) ways to obtain the same benefits.

Wow, so untrue. There is hard evidence that humans just have the darndest time seeing clearly.

think the pushrod engines have been pushed as far as they can go and meet pollution standards.

Posted by: just the truth | Aug 23, 2018 7:51:29 PM


I think you havent done enough reading.

Its been noted on many occassions that small displacement turbocharged engines can pollute to the point where DEF is being looked at by some manufacturers. The ohv v8s do not have this issue.

If someone gets in office that tries to improve the testing cycle the EPA uses, you could see big changes in the Ford truck engines. In some tests they can pollute as bad as diesels.

@ andrkwn The Ford 2…7 already meets 2025 standards. That is the reason for the ecoboost engines,

I think the pushrod engines have been pushed as far as they can go and meet pollution standards.

Posted by: just the truth

I think this round of LT engines will likely be the last pushrod V8's from GM. I assume an OHC engine is easier to adapt current and future technologies to.

GM already has a fantastic DOHC V6 that's been around for a decade. In twin turbo form it has made more HP than the current Raptor since 2014.

I like simplicity and I like the "old fashioned" push rod motors. They are proven and change for the sake of change makes no sense.

@ jack


GM already has a fantastic DOHC V6 that's been around for a decade. In twin turbo form it has made more HP than the current Raptor since 2014.

Posted by: Jack | Aug 24, 2018 6:55:06 AM


I would be interested to know what gm V6 engine you are talking about that made 450HP back in 2014??

I also wonder if that engine made 510TQ

"ProGrade" this, "MultiPro" that... Wishful marketing by GM?

Funny how the pros aren't buying these trucks per the 4th place-standing in the market.

I think this round of LT engines will likely be the last pushrod V8's from GM. I assume an OHC engine is easier to adapt current and future technologies to....GM already has a fantastic DOHC V6 that's been around for a decade. In twin turbo form it has made more HP than the current Raptor since 2014.
Posted by: Jack | Aug 24, 2018

@Jack

GM has already been down this road. In the late 1990s they devoted a lot of time and attention to the OHC vs Pushrods debate and their decision ended up being the right one.

A V8 engine with 32 valves is too complex to build and maintain. GM's experience with this is NOT the 24 valve DOHC six cylinder, instead it's the earlier 32 valve DOHC Northstar engine that GM put in Cadillacs for quite a long while---starting back around 1990.

They cost too much to build and maintain. This is settled science.

The manufacturers must meet pollution and CAFE standards If the pushrod V8 can't do this it is history.

I would be interested to know what gm V6 engine you are talking about that made 450HP back in 2014??

I also wonder if that engine made 510TQ

Cadillac ATS-V makes 464 hp and 445 torque since it's debut in 2014.

GM has already been down this road. In the late 1990s they devoted a lot of time and attention to the OHC vs Pushrods debate and their decision ended up being the right one. A V8 engine with 32 valves is too complex to build and maintain. GM's experience with this is NOT the 24 valve DOHC six cylinder, instead it's the earlier 32 valve DOHC Northstar engine that GM put in Cadillacs for quite a long while---starting back around 1990.

They cost too much to build and maintain. This is settled science.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 24, 2018 7:46:01 AM

I disagree. We had a 2008 Malibu with a 3.6 that my wife drove for 180,000 miles with no engine issues at all. I did ALL the maintenance in my garage including changing plugs. It was easier to maintain than my current 04 Yukon and my Yukon is easy. Also go look under the hood of a current Camaro with a 3.6. This Camaro is even easier than the Malibu was. And yes we currently have a 2016 Camaro with a 3.6 that has almost 40,000 miles and I do all maintenance on it as well.

As far as V8's go, Cadillac is about to put a new twin turbo DOHC v8 in the 2019 Cadillac CT6 V-sport. I'm thinking this is where the new GM V8's are going to start and eventually trickle down to Chevy.


@jack

"I would be interested to know what gm V6 engine you are talking about that made 450HP back in 2014??

I also wonder if that engine made 510TQ

Cadillac ATS-V makes 464 hp and 445 torque since it's debut in 2014.
Posted by: Jack | Aug 24, 2018 8:50:23 AM"


Thats a big NO.....

The ATS-V you speak of came out in 2016.


@Jack

try reading for comprehension

My whole point is about V8 engines. I did not make it up. GM went through a major evaluation of the pros/cons back in the 1990s and determined pushrod was the way to go.

Ford proved GM right. They went a different route and their V8s since then have sucked. Engine rebuilders make BIG money rebuilding Triton engines because so many junk cores are available through the recycling outfits.

Thats a big NO.....

The ATS-V you speak of came out in 2016.

Posted by: FullSize_only | Aug 24, 2018 9:23:58 AM

My bad, I was thinking about the CTS-V sport which uses TT V6 in 2014 that made 420hp and 430 Torque.

Yes, the ATS-V was introduced in 2016 with 464 hp and 445 torque.

@ PapaJoke

“ A V8 engine with 32 valves is too complex to build and maintain. GM's experience with this is NOT the 24 valve DOHC six cylinder, instead it's the earlier 32 valve DOHC Northstar engine that GM put in Cadillacs for quite a long while---starting back around 1990.

They cost too much to build and maintain. This is settled science. “
———————————-

Senile old man overlooking the FACT GM is currently building a 4.2L DOHC V8 for Cadillac ( and rumoured for the C8 ).

And also GM is working on a FPC V8 that is ( rumoured ) to be DOHC.

@Jack

try reading for comprehension

My whole point is about V8 engines. I did not make it up. GM went through a major evaluation of the pros/cons back in the 1990s and determined pushrod was the way to go.

Ford proved GM right. They went a different route and their V8s since then have sucked. Engine rebuilders make BIG money rebuilding Triton engines because so many junk cores are available through the recycling outfits.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 24, 2018 9:46:55 AM

I'm sure they did evaluate but 1990 was almost 30 years ago. If GM were so hung up on OHV, why would they develop this TT DOHC V8 for Caddy and C8 Corvette. Keep in mind the LS V8 started in the Corvette in 1997 and versions of it were used in everything that offered a V8 by 2000.

I have been a GM owner all my life but I am now cosidering a Ram. I just don’t understand how you design a new truck and give it all of these upgrades but skip some of the things that Ford and Ram have already had for several years

1) to0 notch interior (Ram)
2) panoramic Sunroof (Ram, Ford)
3) adaptive cruise control (Ram, Ford)

Makes no sense to me. The Ram even in the Laramie trim is nicer the the Denali interior. Plus the Denali is missing all these features and stickers more then a Ram Limited.

That is one UGLY frontend! Come on, GMC, show some class for a change!

For the benefit of those who were unable to locate an adult to read my last comment to them:

The decision at GM regarding DOHC engines versus pushrod designs focused on PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS. Emphasis on the word practical.

GM executives, designers and engineers did NOT swear never to build another OHC engine, rather they believed that folks who want muscle cars and heavier cars, trucks and SUVs were better served with a pushrod design.

For those who don't know, NASCAR Cup engines are all pushrod engines that develop crazy HP per cubic inch and will hold up through the end of an all out 500 mile race.

Drop CAFE and EPA regs concerning autos and you'll see some major revisions from ALL the automakers serving the North American market.

NO GUTS

DEFINITELY NO GLORY

GMC SIERRA DENALI

THE CLASS LEADING 2019 SETS THE STANDARD BY WHICH ALL OTHERS ARE JUDGED.

LEFT OUT THE FOLLOWING ON THE LAST POST;

THE CLASS LEADING 2019 RAM SETS THE STANDARD BY WHICH ALL OTHERS ARE JUDGED.

For the benefit of those who were unable to locate an adult to read my last comment to them:

The decision at GM regarding DOHC engines versus pushrod designs focused on PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS. Emphasis on the word practical.

GM executives, designers and engineers did NOT swear never to build another OHC engine, rather they believed that folks who want muscle cars and heavier cars, trucks and SUVs were better served with a pushrod design.

Posted by: papajim | Aug 24, 2018 12:17:56 PM

Yes, I understand that and it was a correct and practical decision for the time, 30 years ago. GM also decided not discontinue the RWD Cadillacs and the Camaro now both are back.

I think GM made the right call back then and I think they produce the best V8's on the market. However, it seems to me based on up coming cadillacs and the C8 Corvette GM may be moving away form pushrods engines.

Maybe they have pushed the OHV engine as far as they think it can go or maybe they have overcome the practical issues they were worried about.

Wow.

I thought this thread was about the new GMC Sierra and how ugly/not ugly the "experts" think it is... Instead it turned into a bunch of old guys who still use buggy whips, corded phones, and miss drum brakes fighting for pushrods.

Let it go... Push rods are only slightly less gone than the manual transmission and will be missed far less by far fewer. Just about everyone/everything but the truck market and GM have already moved on from them and guess what... They are leaving the truck market and GM will have to grow up too... or go bankrupt... again... wouldn't be the first time.

Meanwhile at this point GM choose to keep its engines simple and make its tailgate insane. In deciding after a decade of being lacking and making fun of the pioneering tail gate step GM has decided to finally build one itself... One that dices, slices, weaves baskets, has 58 parts, and 26 configurations. Good thing they kept the pushrods.

@Clint

Please offer to illustrate how the valvetrain mechanism impacts horsepower, torque or fuel efficiency at practical (that word again) engine speeds. Nobody driving an SUV or pickup has much reason to worry about engine speeds north of 6000 RPM. It's ok for debates, but I can't ever remember turning a pickup engine that hard. Or ever needing to.

So why bring it up? Because very high engine speeds is where the OHC designs supposedly offer their best advantage.

This is why GM took their present path back in the 1990s. Turns out it was the right choice.



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