GM To Stagger Full-size Truck Plants for New 2013 Pickups

2012_Silverado_LTZ II
In a story published by Automotive News a few days ago, GM spokesman Chris Lee let it be known that 21 weeks of plant shutdowns will be spread across the three full-size pickup truck plants in Indiana (Roanoke), Michiagan (Flint), and Texas (Arlington). 

The plant closings, usually in one week increments, will be spread over several month in 2012 to allow for the change-over teams to upgrade and rennovate the production machinery in order to produce the new GM full-size trucks, due out in 2013. GM reports they've been building up supply of the current-gen full-size trucks to accomodate the staggered plant closing so dealerships should not have to deal with strained product supply. 

The company said it had 202,720 full-size pickups in inventory at the end of November, 105 days supply on a selling-day basis. The company has said it’s targeting year-end inventory of about 200,000 full-size pickups, or about 90 days supply.

Capacity in 2012 at GM’s U.S. full-size pickup plants will be about 640,000 units, according to an Aug. 4 slideshow presentation. That’s down from “normal” capacity of about 780,000 units, the automaker said.

Scheduled down time for GM’s plant in Silao, Mexico, that also makes full-size vehicles will be finalized after January 1, Lee said.

Comments

Again, for about the 47th time, the government that bailed out GM and Chrysler was George Bush's Government not Obama's. I know that 97% of the commenters on here pray at the feet of El Rushbo, Hanity and the others but at least learn how to use a calendar. These things occurred before Obama was even elected let alone sworn in.

If anyone owns GM it is George W and Hank Paulsen

Rant off.

I am excited to see what GM has in store. I certainly hope they are big leap forward design wise and the next gen motors/drive train couldn't come fast enough. My family has largely been GM loyal and my first 2 trucks were old GM iron. I wish them nothing but success. (same goes for Ram, Toyota, Nissan, Ford and even Mahindra)

Doesn’t matter - it was still Obama demanding/pleading for it that got the automakers their funds, therefore it all belongs to Obama.

In addition, the ‘orchestrated pseudobankruptcies’ and government takeovers were on Obama’s watch.

to the BOB's (big ass bitch)

YOU are a BIG reason why people will not by a Chevy. I wouldn't want to be associated with YOUR BRAND.

Calling people punks and liars; you are the punk. Real badass while typing away at your computer, what a joke!

By the way I usually just read thru the report and troll the posts. But, since it is a free forum I can do that Richard Cranium.

This is a message from the coalition supporting Lou for Govenor of Michigan.

@Michigan Bob

IIRC - you own a 1993 Chevy Silverado with a 5.7.
You don't even own a diesel truck. Your company vehicle is a car - an Impala.
Keep bragging.

1. GMC has won shoutouts with the Duramax/Allison combo.
2. Anyone who read the HD shootout knows that GM finished 3rd in the gasser portion on the shootout.
3. GM won the Rumble in the Rockies with the Duramaxx/Allison combo.
4. You brag about the 5.3 alleged mpg advantage based on government testing which no one in their right mind believes are remotely accurate.
Since MPG keeps being mentioned, here are the results of PUTC under 30,000 dollar shootout. Please note, these are 4x2 trucks.
1. F150 5.0 V8 21.2 mpg
2. Ram 5.7 V8 19.0 mpg
3. Nissan 5.6 V8 18.8 mpg
4. Chevy 5.3 V8 18.7 mpg
5. Tundra 5.7 V8 18.0 mpg

In the real world, the 5.3 Chevy was in 4th place in fuel economy.

Lets look at performance:
1/4 mile time/speed
1. F150 15.48 sec/93.31 mph
2. Tundra 15.7 sec/91.94 mph
3. Ram 15.76 sec/89.64
4. Titan 0.2 seconds faster than last place Chevy
5. Chevy

7% grade
1. Tundra 17.55 sec/78.14 mph
2. F150 17.96 sec/77.25 mph
3. Ram 18.29 sec/77.99 mph
4. Nissan 19.24 sec/73.99 mph
5. Chevy 19.35 sec/ 70.92 mph

In the real world, the Chevy 5.3 was dead last in performance.

6. The last PUTC 1/2 ton shootout put the Ford F150 in first place. That was done with the 5.4 which in comparison to the other trucks in that shootout is grossly underpowered.

7. The Ram 1500 won the "Under 30,000" Best value shootout.
8. You ever wonder why GMC never sent a 5.3 to do battle in any of the truck shootouts ?
That is because they (GM) knows it will loose badly!

9. I don't see GM winning that many tests. Sure, it has won with the Duramax, but have you ever wondered why Ford HD outsells it 2 to 1? or why Ram Cummins HD outsells it in Canada?

10. This is the best post I've ever read as to why SFA is king.


Quote "Clearly you are not an Engineer. OR if you are, you are a GM Engineer, in which case you know who I am.
Clearly you have never taken a vehicle into a "serious Off-Road" situation.
Clearly you are a GM fan and will not look outside your own favorites.

"Anyone who actually thinks you need a straight axle instead of a independent axle for a heavy duty truck is a complete idiot and don't know what the heck they are talking about."

Okay. You start with a personal attack, generally a sign that you have no facts and that the discussion is emotional, not rational. Can you provide some facts to support your claim?
Let's talk physics:
CV joint half-shafts have the greatest torque capacity and life-span when operated at a neutral angle. As the input/output angle increases, there is a decrease in torque capacity and longevity.
IFS systems must use a CV joint and because of the design as torque is transferred through the half-shafts there is a natural tenancy for the half shaft to try and twist. On IFS systems this generally results in the front wheels twisting turning towards one another, resulting in bent tie-rods. The resulting bent tie-rods WERE common in off-road use of GMT-400s and GMT-800s. The tie-rod size was slightly increased for the GMT-900s.
We can discuss the dynamics of an IFS system in actual use vs. theory and the trade-offs against a SFA suspension, but I suspect that might be too advanced.

"Someone actually posted video's of GM trucks that had tie rod failures while pulling a heavy sled. What the He double L does the weak tie rod have to do with the independent suspension??? "

Why don't you ask the Engineering Development team about the GMT-900s? Especially the HD redesign.

First, the tie-rod failures are common, not just on sled pullers, but on H2s and in general off-road use.
Second, have you ever seen a drag-link failure on a SFA truck in a similar situation?
You won't. SFA support the individual wheel shafts out to the end, nearest the join so there is very little torque steer. IFS and FWD vehicles have 2 joints in the half-shafts and the torque input into the shaft always results in torque-steer. It is a design issue that will always be present.

Tie-Rod design is directly linked to the fundamentals of IFS because the Tie-Rod is the ONLY item that prevents unwanted steering deflection.

"And some people suggest that GM will never sell more HD'S because of their independent front suspension??? Excuse me? Yea, GM they don't want to sell more trucks now do they. Nope, because some moron suggested otherwise."

Ford and Dodge, both sell SFA 4x4 trucks (we can disregard the 2wd trucks because they are all IFS) and they have 70% of the market. Ford has 50% alone. So, let's consider that GM (Chevy and GMC) has the majority of the 1/2 ton market. Why then does GM not dominate the HD market? Does GM not have a better engine and transmission? Does GM not have competitive interiors, payload, towing and fuel economy?
Compare and contrast Ford trucks and the years of lousy gas engines, 6.0 and 6.4 Powerstrokes. Ford has many negatives, yet they STILL sell more.

"Serious off road vehicles do NOT have a straight axle. They have a independent front suspension that is built to take the beating of off road driving."

Are you talking about RACE TRUCKS? Purpose built, with massive amounts of wheel travel and HD components that are NOT O/E? If you are, your point is?

If you are implying that the best O/E trucks for off-road use are IFS, then you're under the influence and have ZERO reference to reality.
I could then take your same model of analysis and say:
How come all the serious race vehicles are RWD? and use that as a reason to explain why FWD is worthless.

"Gee, how did all the mags miss this fatal flaw that GM's HD's have on their trucks??? Why are the mags not saying this is wrong??? or that a straight front axle is the best??? Because it's not even a issue that's why. "

What Mags are you talking about? Are you talking about mags that target the casual truck user, the typical 1/2 ton buyer, those that NEVER go off-road or into tough situations? First, advertising is huge in the magazine world. Second, off-road magazines have been pointing out the GM IFS flaws for a very long time. Clearly you only read certain mags and base all your opinions on the thoughts of others.
GM spends a very large amount of money advertising and the same parent company owns two magazines that had completely different reviews of the GM HDs.

SFA, as we have it in the current market place, is the most durable front suspension design. It IS an issue and even GM knows it. GM redesigned the front suspension for the 2011 HDs because of the flaws in the prior IFS. They designed their new IFS to be great on pavement, good in snow, sand and on graded roads. The new IFS is not nearly as strong as the SFA competition. GM rolled the dice based on money and time. They beefed their IFS to be more competitive but didn't go to SFA because of the major frame changes that would be required. GM kept the IFS because of costs, PERIOD. Ford and Dodge have vids all over with their trucks off-road and GM avoids posting any of their trucks in tough situations.

I am a HUGE GM fan and I'd much rather have a GM truck, but I won't buy a truck that requires an alignment every time I take it off-road. I won't buy a truck that fails off-road and bends or breaks components. So, true to my own word (to GM Engineers) I rented a 2011 HD and took it off-road, where I take my trucks (a Dodge and a GM leaf-spring SFA truck). The new GM HD bent a tie rod. Yes this is anecdotal, but it is indicative of the GM IFS experience. People that never take them off-road have no idea of the GM IFS flaws.

So, Michigan Bob, take it from someone that actually uses their truck, the new GM HDs are great in many ways, but they are still sub-par off-road when compared to Ford and Dodge. Think I'm wrong, why don't you log off and actually TRY all three? Don't like it? Why don't you point out how great the IFS is to Ford and Dodge?"


"

Posted by: Lou | Dec 23, 2011 9:52:39 PM

My 2011 5.3L 6 speed gets 23 mpg if im easy with 8,300 miles on the clock. Retards got know a motor aint gonna perform at its peak brand new. The motor needs time to break in. The piston rings and the cylinders need to wear in some, as the cylinder walls are hone, which makes a lot of friction. That means less fuel economy, till the rings and are wore in some. You have seals and other moveing parts to got long with this. Most trucks,cars are good after 10,000 miles, for the most part all the trucks that are tested on here are luck to have 2,000 to 10,000 miles on them. for all we know the chevy could of have less miles on it then the other trucks in the 30,000 shoot out test. Use you're brains , i know i don't use mine as much as i should but its only common sense folks

I'm sorry I spoke out of terms in my last post...This is what I really meant to say.

My Junk 5.3L barely manages 15mpg highway...Its power is sub par and far below Fords superior engines in both power and econmy.

I should have listened and bought a Ford when it came time...But I was to ignorant and stupid to bother with reason...I bought my 2011 Chevy Silverado based on missguieded ideals and false faith...I can see now what a dolt I was for purchasing a Chevy instead of a Ford.

And Bob, you're a total idiot...When are you going to realize like I did that Ford is the superior machine. The F-150 is far more comfortable and far more capable than the Silverado has ever been. So please go climb back in your PoS 1993 Silverado with its weak 210hp 5.7L and chintzy 4-speed auto, or better yet you can just get back in that Stupid Impala you have, clearly that's the vehicle you belong in...You aren't even worthy of a crappy GM truck...Much less a real man's high quality Ford.

What lame d bag, why do you gotta use my name to write stupid crap? My 5.3L does get 23 mpg, it's not the most powerful motor, it aint got class A interior which is fine to me. It does the jobs i need it too. I don't drive around for fun, its a work truck. I use it to haul, pull, and tow like its made for. I don't need a fancy seats that heats and cools my butt like cry baby ford guys want. I don't need leather everything, im fine with pastic its tuff and easy to clean with it gets cover in mud or oil. Why would i wanna pay tons for leather and trash it? You're just pissed off cause i state a true fact. It's good info to poeple who really don't know much about motors, and the fact trucks and cars need time to break in to do their best. Use you're own damn name to bash chevy if you want, but don't be a scared little good and hide behind my name.

eu queria sabe se vai mudar as 2500hd 3500hd tambem

Hey Lou, you self professed know it all. You keep posting those performance numbers from the under $30,000 dollar shootout when ford was the only reg cab in the test. Of course the tests are going to favor the much lighter ford than the rest of the group. Of course the ford is going to get better milage because it's the lightest truck in the group.

And you keep harping on this SFA vs independent suspension. Obviously you don't know what the f..k your talking about. GM'S all new indpendent front is much 50% stronger than before and your insuation that it needs a realignment every time you take it off road is total B.S.

Keep harping on this totally fasle claim that SFA is the only way to go crap. and anyone who won't buy a GM truck because they don't like me is not worthy of buying a GM truck in the first place. Hey Lou, despite the fact you think you know it all, News /Flash, You don't.

And every ford girly man that posts using some else's identity is a coward and a punk.

There's no defending extensive rust on an 03 truck. Mine has 155k and 8 Michigan winters, and the only rust is in stone chips.
The HE trucks will be about a year behind with a new body on a carry-over frame. That's how they roll.
GMC? Gm makes higher margins on Sierras than Silverados, so why on earth would they not continue making them under the same strategy?
Carrying forward both a 6l and 6.2 seems redundant. I doubt we'll see the 4500 duramax in this generation, unless they offer it in the HE trucks as well. A better option might be the 3l v6 from VM, e en for duty in the 2500.

@Lou-I agree with you I think the horsepower and towing wars have gone overboard. What will they come out with next a 1,000 horsepower motor and a half ton that will pull a double wide at cruising speed? How many people really need this and what does this really prove? The commodities market is suppose to rise rapidly next year with oil (sweet crude closed at over $100 a barrell yesterday) and gold as the leading commodities. I would like to see a followup of the article a few months ago on the new Ford hybrid truck engine that does not use the battery technology. Do you remember that article? If they could eventually make this and make it affordable without compromising performance this would be a real game changer. I really don't care which manufacturer is on top, I would like to see more changes on the mpg side. If Ford lead the way on this then maybe the other manufacturers would develop more efficiency. Lets get moving.

I don't understand the IFS SFA argument I push both my Raptor and suburbans hard off road and have mangled skid plates on all the trucks to prove it. They are all IFS and all durable and capable 1/2 ton trucks with every 4x4 option (1999 Suburban LS 1500 4x4 g80 skidplate 3.73 5.7L, 05 Suburban Z71 1500 4.10 5.3L(sold), 2010 F150 SVT Raptor 5.4L 4.10). If I where to buy a 3/4 ton it would be a gasser b/c disel is too dam high both in price and in the engine upgrade, and it would have to be a ford with fx4 or a Power Wagon plain and simple as i like the selectable locker option and there are some pros and cons to each truck that I'd have to weigh before makeing a purchase. Also the GMs rubermade skid plates dont cut it and their huge bumpers het in the way off road. sorry oxi some of us like our trucks to be fully cappable out of the box the only thing I change is the tires ( and I keep them the same size the 05 and the raptor have studded wrangler duratracks). What brought me over to ford was driving pickups the air force had rented for training that where comprably equiped in the mountains of colorado, the 09 chevy 1500 crew short bed LT could not
handel the same roads that i took my 05 on but the 09 crew f150 XLT with the short bed was a champ and the chevy had the G80 and to ford had an oppen rear dif lol at that moment i became a beliver in Ford pickups and went on to the website saw a raptor promo and fell in love. I only wish Ford made its SUVs on the same frame as the trucks like GM does with the suburbans i want a truck with 8 seats that can go where ever I want. GM make the next suburban avalible with the off road cabability of my '99 and i will buy it, and you will need to do alot to get me out of the raptor, sorry. Oh and my raptor gets better gas millage than either GMs in every situation but I attribute it to the 6speed vs 4 speed.

Everytime there is a posting about Chevy or GM there is a discussion about government bailouts. This is getting to be old. As I have said before be careful what you wish for you might just get it but not exactly the way you hoped for. Let us do away with GM, Chrysler, Toyota, and Nissan and see how long it would take the Chinese to come in? Ford if you recall does not want GM and Chrysler to fail and Ford was for the government loans to GM and Chrysler. Ford, GM, and Chrysler all use related suppliers. Do you think it is feasible for those related suppliers to stay in business just supplying parts for Ford? Why do you think that Ford did not want to see their competitors fail? This is all related and sure Ford wants to be Number One but they do not want to put their US competition out of business? Another question for you bashers is do you think Ford would rather have GM and Chrylser as competitors or do you think Ford would rather compete with the Chinese who have cheaper labor and who steal technology? Grow up and get use to the real world. Everything is interconnected. If you like Fords better that is your choice but lets get off this government bailout topic and Obama, it is getting old. Discussing what you don't like about Chevy's is one thing but bashing is different.

I had 03 chevy it was a real good truck. I traded it in last november on a 2011 silverado 4x4 . I have now comeplates

Wy ford have hard time to out sold gm truck this is a older model wy gm sold more half ton pickup compare to ford ?????

I get a kick out of all the whiners who complain about us bringing up the bail outs. The bail outs, any and all bail outs, were wrong! Bush started it and Obama went big time with it.

Bailouts take money out of the pockets of the tax payers and give the tax payers NOTHING in return. NOTHING! Just deeper in debt. Only people paying taxes care about deeper in debt. Welfare recipients and the UAW do not care about deeper in debt.

What we have here is corporate welfare, and in the case of the US auto industry we have the UAW which is 6% of the workforce being kept employed and living large by the other 94% of the work force.

That just ain't right. At least we dumped Chrysler and it is now Italian. We needed to do the same with GM by giving it to China. China is big enough to handle a fiasco like GM.

That may still happen, but just not soon enough and it will cost we, the people, a lot more than the $1.3B it cost us to bribe Fiat to take Chrysler's carcass off our hands.

GM staggering its plants doesn't do diddly about the fact that there are not enough people on this planet that buy a GM product. It may take a little time but GM is going down for the count. My guess is the 2015/2016 time frame. Time for another bail out of an already defunct company.

I can understand why people living on welfare or the UAW don't care about GM getting bailed out, but if you pay taxes you should damn well care about giving GM and other corporations your tax dollars. The tax payers lose all around. It's a lose/lose/lose situation.

@Michigan Bob, Johnny Dose -
You talked about engine break in, and truck weight.
To quote the under 30K shootout "It’s worth noting that the Ford had more than 3,000 miles on it when it came to us, the Nissan about 1,800, and the remaining three around 600. At each driver-change point along our route, we rotated vehicles to mitigate any differences in weight or driving styles. By the end of the day, each driver had an equal turn in each truck."
1. F150 5.0 V8 21.2 mpg
2. Ram 5.7 V8 19.0 mpg
3. Nissan 5.6 V8 18.8 mpg
4. Chevy 5.3 V8 18.7 mpg
5. Tundra 5.7 V8 18.0 mpg

If you remove the F150 from the MPG race, the Chevy still finished behind the Ram and Nissan.
The Ram and Nissan both have larger engines were superior in the performance tests.

@Johnny Dose - 23 mpg is good. What are the specifications on your truck?
I didn't notice any change in mpg once my truck was broken in. I bought my truck in the fall. Winter driving is hard on MPG, so there may of been an improvement that I didn't notice.
I've managed to get 20.4 MPG highway with my 2010 F150 Supercrew 6.5 box 4x4, 3.55 gears, and the back full of camping gear.

My brother has had a few Chevy 3/4 ton fleet trucks. He hasn't had any problems with the IFS. His trucks are gassers not diesel. He does run his trucks hard.
His only complaints are that the interiors are not as nice as the Ford or Ram. You can go "boo hoo" and say so what?, it's a work truck, but when you are 6 - 10 hours a day driving down gravel roads as part of your job, a crappy interior leads to fatigue, which makes driving more dangerous.
His other complaint is the trucks look like hell really quickly. They look beat to death compared to Ford or Ram trucks doing the same job. It doesn't hurt him, but it kicks the crap out of resale.
The bumpers seem to be prone to damage. All of his Chevy's have missing chunks of plastic, and cracks and bent metal. Again - it may not affect the reliability, but it affects resale. I've noticed the same thing. Any Chevy work trucks I see have damaged bumpers.

Anyone who looks at the current truck market from a neutral perspective can see that Sierra and Silverado need a serious upgrade. Even Chevy guys have posted that they went to Ford due to better interiors. There are guys on this site that have changed over to Ford due to better engines. I've also read of guys chosing Ram over Chevy for the same reasons.
Currently, GM wins with only one engine, one transmission, on one surface. That would be the Duramax, with the Allison transmission, driven on smooth, hard surfaces.

Those are the hard cold facts. You can yell and scream, and use fake posting names, and hurl insults all you want. At this point in time - Chevy 1/2 tons are dead last. The Sierra 1/2 ton is a few notchs better due to better interior choices.
Chevy HD's fare better, but as I said before, only if they stay on hard ground.

Michigan Bob is clueless. Lou is correct. GM trucks are great pulling a trailer on pavement and that's where it ends. Ford and Dodge Also pull great on pavement but it doesn't end there. You can also take them off road. GM will never ever Ever win this war against Ford and Dodge until they get rid of that low hanging frame and put a SFA back underneath period. The low frame ruins the appearance and ground clearance, the IFS is weak. 50% stronger than before means nothing because they sucked before. Sure, they're better now and ride like crap because of it. Swing arm SFA with coils is the ONLY way to go on a heavy duty truck period.

For those saying guys with rust issues should move south, you do realize the north is where most trucks are sold don't you? We have this thing here called Snow and we need 4x4's to get around. There's also over 300 million people in this country. Instead of suggesting a vast majority just pack up and move, how about GM spends a few extra pennies on corrosion protection. I'm also with a few others here, I'd never buy a GMC. What a pointless brand. No company (especially one owned by us) needs 2 truck lines.

@Highdesert cat-Your right it is better to bailout the brokerage firms and the big banks. I don't think there will be any more government loans for a long time. I can understand people's frustration with the government loans but this topic never ends. The Chinese are going to own everything eventually because we will let them. You won't even have to worry about Toyota. Once the Chinese are allowed to get into our market the Japanese and the South Koreans will not be able to compete. And who knows for sure that GM is going to fail. I guess you can wish and pray for them to fail but I don't hate UAW workers enough to wish unemployment on anyone particularily workers in the US or Canada. What have we become as a country when we are so divided that we wish for companies to fail and wish for people to lose their jobs. I am not as fond of GM but I would rather have a middle class worker keep their jobs than a cocaine sniffing trader that laughs at the Government bailing them out and views the workers of America as stupid and that they will buy anything including junk bonds, bad mortgages, and etc. These same guys are trading in oil futures and are mainly to cause for the large price spikes in oil. I am not advocating class warfare or socialism but the middle class worker is a much larger contributor to society than these financial gurus. I realize you are a Toyota only fan but we are all in the same boat and if you wish for some members to fail then your beloved Toyota might be doomed as well. We are all connected and a lot of the bailout money has been repaid. Fox news talking heads could care less if any American company survive because a lot of them drive Lexuses and BMWs. They are selling themselves and disharmony sells whether it be on the right the or left.

@HighDesertCat, Jeff - I can see both sides of the arguement. Why did government stay out of "big business" and let the mess happen in the first place?
Deregulation and turning a blind eye to business prectices lead to unfettered greed. That greed lead to higher risk business practices and/or complacency. The auto industry fell due to complacency.
Big government and big business were in collusion for selling the middle class down the road for profits. (NAFTA for example).
Why should big government intervene?
The cynical side of me says it was done not to save the middle class or the general populace but to save the mandarins that caused the mess in the first place.
If Europe is any indication, the whole bailout of banks and business approach is going to fail in the mid and long term.
Borrowing money to pay debt from borrowed money.
How is that going to save anyone?
It will serve to further line the pockets of those who caused the mess in the first place.
I fear that the whole system will collapse with or without government intervention. The problem is that governments have gotten even further into debt so that they are no longer in a position to be much help to anyone when things do finally fall apart.

@CJ50 - I think that the next HD shootout should entail putting a max cargo load in the box of the trucks and run them on gravel roads and rougher simulated work sites for a few weeks. I see more HD's with a load in the box than pulling 19K trailers. Do the towing test as well, but use them everywhere. Same goes for the 1/2 ton tests.

@ Lou, I agree. I'll say up front I'm a 'Chevy Guy' but I have little interest in their heavy duty trucks. I don't want GM to be at the back of the pack but the fact is, they are. Now that they beefed up their 2500's they ride worse than the Super Duty. Those torsion bars just aren't good for comfort. You could try and design a progressive bar but then you'd weaken the rod. So what exactly is the benefit of GM's IFS? None. The frame hangs too low making the truck look ugly and giving you little ground clearance, the ride is terrible, you have to 'adjust' the bars for front load, you can only run so large of tire before the warranty is worthless, you have to worry about CV joints, steering components, alignment and the rest. It's a horrible horrible design for a heavy duty truck. GM either needs to just make a new frame and put a SFA under there or be content with last place. Unfortunately a poor designed HD casts a bad light on the 1500's. They made the biggest mistake in trucking history taking the SFA out in the late 80's. Their trucks have never been the same since.

@HighDesertCat, I see your point and both sides really. Unfortunately I don't think GM will last another 5 years. I don't want to get political or argue bailouts but I just don't see the company lasting much longer. Buick was kept for China, GMC was kept to sell upper trim Chevy's. Neither of those 2 brands had nor have a huge following. If Pontiac had to go then so should have they. The average American taxpayer does not care about Buick's in China nor do they care about upscale trims in a Chevy truck. Put the darn trim IN the Chevy truck like Ford and be done with it! It's just such a mess..

GM in my opinion would be best off winding down GMC and selling Buick to the Chinese. Get a jump start on things. Keep Cadillac in the back of their mind like Ford has done with Lincoln. Don't close it but focus on the main brand just in case the economy goes down again. Make Chevrolet their #1 truck and car line and go like mad with it. There may come a point in time where "GM" as a company has to close due to political of financial pressure. If that does come to pass face can be saved. GM can close. Chevrolet will go back to being the single brand it started out as. I don't believe Chevrolet even became part of GM until 1915. Chevy can then distance itself from anything 'GM' and live on. Possibly with Cadillac.

@Lou I don't disagree with you comments about Big Government. As for government loans "What's done is done". To constantly rehash government bailouts is not going to solve anything. The best way to change this is to vote with a ballot and your pocketbook. What about all the money that the US spends on defense for unnecessary weapons and rebuilding countries like Iraq? We could go on and on about government spending. I would much rather spend government money to save middle class jobs than to bailout greedy banks and financial institutions or to do nation building. You are absolutely right about greed and high risk business practices and also about complacency. Big Business and Big Government for the most part would like to eliminate the middle class and have us return to serfdom. The auto industry I fear is becoming complacent again between lets make the biggest most powerful truck in existence and charge as much as we can. I think there is a happy medium between having Prius like vehicles and possibly in the near future 1,000 horsepower monsters that can pull a house. Comments as to weak tie rods in GM trucks and cheapened interiors and parts are more constructive than just bringing up government bailouts and hateful comments. Lou you have in a constructive manner stated why you did not buy a GM product. This is what should be done in this forum and not used as a bashfest. If GM does not change then they will probably not survive in this market as will any company that is not competitive. Do not wish for a company to go out of business or for workers to be laidoff, wish for them to listen to constructive criticism and change.

“It’s a great problem to have,” Brown said, as she clicked through computer files to obtain the details of the plant’s new V8 diesel line, which is presently being installed.

Its first engine is expected to roll off in March 2013.

From an article in Sept

Sounds like tihe Duramax 4500 is coming

http://tonawanda-news.com/local/x601174161/Laboring-together

Thanks for the link to the article Willy. This is good news for GM and its workers. Lets wish them success.

Why there is always so many ford guys out here when thers is some kind of GM news out? Are you just starving for any kind of good news? Because there isn't any on fords side. Or you just know that ford is about to be left in a dust and you're jumping ship but you just can't blend in with GM guys?
For all of you that worry about GM's trucks so much lately. They've been doing just fine. I just looked at some numbers and GM has outsold ford 7 out of last 10 years in full size pick-up truck sales. I guess they've been doing something right with their trucks since people buy more of them then they buy fords. Simple as that. We GM guys don't worry about your f150 so you shouldn't worry about our SILVERADO and SIERRA! They are fine trucks and they have, are and will do just fine no matter what ford does with it's truck.
I drive an '09 Silverado 5.3L Z71. Love it. And my next truck will definitely be a CHEVROLET! Even if future fords run on water and have wings! Simple as that! So ford people, find yourself some ford news and post it's "greatness" there!!!

@Jeff - I do agree that the whole bailout thing is getting old. Part of the reason it keeps surfacing is because guys know it will get certain Chevy guys all worked up.
Governments should of regulated things more carefully. The Canadian banking system fared much better than the USA system due to more stringent regulations. That is dispite the fact that Canadians per capita carry more debt than their USA counterparts.
I do wish the discussions would focus on why one made their purchase choice, or why they liked a truck better than another, or what one has found as far as strong and weak points of their trucks, or what they've done to make them better.
I don't jump all over well explained comments, unfortunately, it is hard to be honest due to the trolls.

@CJ50 - I've been told that the new Chevy HD's ride rougher than the Ford and Ram trucks. That does seem counter-intuitive.

Jeff, Lou, Matt, just so you understand where I am coming from: I think that any and all bail outs, hand outs and nationalization is bad, and that includes Wall Street, Main Street, Banks & Mortgage houses, Investment firms, Fannie and Freddie, the US Postal System and publicly held corporations like GM.

Chrysler was owned by Cerberus and we, the people, bailed out Cerberus, a publicly-held investment firm, by bailing out the UAW and Chrysler. Cerberus didn't pay doodly. We, the people, did all the bleeding. We, the people, bribed Fiat with $1.3B to take Chrysler's bones off our hands.

BTW, I own a 2012 Jeep Grand Cherokee, so I'm not bashing Fiatsler. Merely stating truths.

I have three younger brothers who spent more than three decades in the new-car retail business in CA, AZ, TX and AL, selling multiple brands including GMC and Buick. They made their money on the foreign brands they sold, and the Ford trucks.

Obama and his socialist welfare policies at the expense of the tax payers of America have driven them to sell the dealerships and "take their money and run". Anything to get away from this redistribution of wealth Obama advocates with his "spreading the wealth around" philosophy.

Ditto with my wife and her family who owned a Real Estate business started by her grandfather. Her dad also decided to sell that business and "take the money and run". But at least he redistributed the proceeds to his four daughters, in cash and rentals.

GM as we know and love it won't be around much longer. GM cannot sell enough iron to offset their debts, liabilities and obligations. GM will never be able to pay back the bail out bucks and their new stock is in the tank ($19/share/IPO $34/Breakeven$53{no chance}). We, the people, lose.

GM needs to fold GMC into Chevrolet and get rid of Buick. GM should focus on its core brands, Chevrolet and Cadillac, and move as much production and assembly to Mexico as they can get away with. Labor expense is killing GM, again.

At least they make money on their Mexican-made vehicles, and the assembly is better. Check out the Avalanche. Probably because Mexicans don't worry about what the CEO of GM makes, like the UAW does.

Maybe the Mexicans are just happy to have a job and don't want to drive their employers into a financial grave and bankruptcy like the UAW did.

Staggering production plants isn't going to help GM because they're not selling the numbers they need to be self-sustaining, and they never will because there aren't enough people on this planet.

@Highdesertcat - I agree with you. GM needs to fold GMC into Chevrolet and get rid of Buick. They're just Opel rebadges anyway. Sell it all off to the Chinese since they love them there or just close it. They had a golden opportunity to leave General Motors in the 1900's as a fond memory and just had Chevrolet & Cadillac carry the torch of history into the future. The public would have been far more forgiving of that and there would have never been the Govt. Motors stuff that unfortunately will never go away. It was a big mistake to go on as GM 2.0.. Buick will never be a big seller and Chevrolet could sell so many more cars and trucks if they weren't downgraded in order to justify Buick and GMC. This is where Ford and Dodge are going to (and have been) steamroll GM straight into the ground by just killing Chevrolet with nicer world class product.

I myself would rather have a Chevrolet truck over a GMC any day. I'd rather have a Chevrolet car over a Buick. Just give Chevrolet the goods and let the rest go. If I wanted something nicer I'd buy a Cadillac anyhow. The whole thing is a mess.

Ron, my very first new truck was a 1988 Silverado ExtCab LB 350 Auto. Prior to that all I had were used trucks with 6-cyl engines and 3-on-the-tree.

But like all trucks of that era my Silverado was also not trouble free, but I kept it running with the help of Autozone. Lots of tooling and wrenching, there.

My 2006 F150 Supercab XLT 5.4 was no better. More leaks, drips and blown seals and gaskets than Silverado.

But for GM I am not optimistic. Nor do I think that they will do the right thing in folding GMC into Chevrolet.

If GM wants to continue to market Buick in America, GM should build them in China and import them here with US specs. That worked real well for Toyota, Honda, Datsun and more recently, Hyundai and Kia.

Imagine marketing a Cruz selling for $27K+! That's what GM is trying to do with the new Buick Verano. What were they thinking!? Smacks of Cadillac Cimarron to me. Deja Vu all over again...

In the end, it is up to the buying public to decide which cars and trucks to buy and which to shun. Ford is clearly the leader of the pack in trucks, TODAY. In 2007 that was Tundra with all their innovations. Sold me on Tundra.

Now is the golden opportunity for GM to come out with a truck as good or better than the F150 of today and the Tundra of 2007.

What GM can do for starters is to put an all-aluminum 32-valve DOHC V8 or an all-aluminum 24-valve DOHC Supercharged V6 in their half-tons and keep the old pushrods for the HD 2500-and up.

It's not like they don't have the technology. The Northstar was one of those and most Opel V6s are also 24-valve DOHC.

And if GM doesn't like those designs they can always reverse-engineer the Daimler V6 from Jeep/Dodge/Chrysler. Nice engine, that.

The gold standard in V8 design is still the Chevy 350 small-block inspired 5.7 from Toyota with the LS460 32-valve DOHC heads. To know one is to love one. Seriously!

My 2011 Tundra is the best, most capable and smoothest running half-ton truck I have ever owned in my 65 years of living.

As far as transmissions go, I would like to see GM incorporate the Allison transmission throughout their pickup truck line from the Half-ton and up.

Yes, that would increase cost by about $1000 per truck, but those trannies are solid and bullet proof. People that own an Allison, swear by them, and not at them as they do with the other POS GM trannies under load.

Were GM to do all that, I may even look at GM trucks again when I get ready to trade my 2011 Tundra in 2016, if GM is still around at that time because of future taxpayer-funded bail outs and hand outs. I suspect GM will still be a nationalized company by then. The chance for GM stock to reach $53 per share for the Treasury to break even, is nil.

@Highdesertcat and Ron, I agree with both of you. GMC should have been folded. The new trucks don't come out for another year so there's still time to see if they do the right thing. Chevrolet should be given the high end trim options to compete with Ford. That's really what sells GMC anyway. It would sell Chevrolet just as well as long as the truck body is a real looker and I'm sure it will be. Then make a tougher looking body for the Chevy HD's. Bring in the Colorado and complete the global Chevrolet truck line. To spend extra money on tooling , marketing and dealership operations makes absolutely no sense just to carry a second truck line when you already have a first. It also kind of irks me that it's happening given the money it's cost taxpayers. Ford doesn't need 2 lines to stomp GM, Dodge doesn't either and they are coming on strong to take over as the second place truck. The Chevrolet line and Silverado need to be the only truck line for GM and they need to be the best trucks on the planet. Anything less than that is an outrage to me.

As for Buick I agree with Highdesertcat as well. Just make them in China or even sell it all off to them. Buick is never going to make a dent in the market long term. A fresh model will sell for a short time and then it's over once again. You can't take a car brand associated with old folks and make it into something else. It will never play out how GM wants it to in the US. I'd just rather Chevrolet became an independent company like Ford and get away from the GM association. I know it won't happen but the brand would be better off if it did. 'GM'-'GM'c' and Buick just don't do anything for me anymore. I'd stand behind Chevrolet and even Cadillac though as independents.

@ SteveS, Highdesertcat and Ron, Add another one to the list because I'm with all of you. It's funny, I follow GM fairly close and the CEO hired an outside company to go through GM and look for cuts to save them money. HELLO... Close GMC and take Buick out of the North American picture. Elevate Chevrolet's status to that of modern day Ford and watch the profits roll in with a smaller scale operation. "One Chevrolet" should be their motto just like "One Ford". Cadillac can remain their high end brand like Lincoln and Chrysler. GM is still the GM of old. They just don't get it... No way would I purchase their stock in the configuration they're in. They're a very poor managed and poor sighted company still.

There will be some buzz on conservative talk radio and possibly Fox about running 2 lines of taxpayer funded trucks. No doubt in my mind. It's already making it's way up to the surface behind the scenes. While I agree the Sierra line should go, I'm not saying I agree with making a huge deal of it. I assure you though it's going to happen. You heard it here first. It's coming.. Even the 'liberal' types won't be happy about it as many dislike trucks as it is. GMC will become the new Hummer for them.

GMC just makes GM look bad all around IMO. They need to get the letters 'GM'/'GMC' out of everything they do and everything they sell. Chevrolet's the global brand anyway. There's no need for old relics like GMC. Just make Chevrolet's available with high dollar trim options like Ford does. That's all thats needed. GM is so blind sometimes. They can't see the train coming down the tracks getting ready to run them right over for good.

Hurray!

Some General Motors news...finally.

Can we go back to talking about Fords now? Fords make for better news.

The GMC's look better than the Chevys. Just the different grille is what sets it off.

Hope they have the pain in the ass intermediate steering shaft fixed.
I`m on my fourth with 80,000 miles on the clock.
2001 Slapperado and the rotting rocker panels
bad 4X4 switch, window regulater broken cable, ABS modual gone bad. ABS sensers in front hubs bad all fixed except the fourth steering shaft, Have yet to experience the infamous GM fuel pump replacement so I guess I`m lucky. 80,000 miles!

@whofan, I know what you mean. I went through the same crap with my 03.

@john, I think the whole GMC truck looks better, not just the grille. I usually dislike GMC;s front ends and prefer the Chevy but not for this current truck. They couldn't make that Chevy any uglier if they tried. I still wouldn't buy a GMC though. I'd rather have a Ford if it's not going to be a Chevy.

@Bob, GM does not win again. Ford is the #1 seller and will be for a LONG time unless GM comes up with an extremely great truck (which I doubt). I've been around both Fords and Chevys for most of my life (almost 60 years) and I've always liked Fords the best. The current Super Duty truck was first sold in 1998 as a 1999 model. The current 2011 cab is still very similar to the original '99 model, but has many changes throughout and is alot different than before. Kinda like the old VW Beetle that kept the basic body style but made numerous changes underneath for many years. GM may come out with a "looker" for the 2014 year, but you can bet that Ford will beat them again. FORD RULES!!!

To add to my statement that FORD RULES, my family has the following vehicles: 2008 Ford F-150, 2007 Ford Explorer, 1947 Ford 2N tractor, 1995 Ford F-150, 2006 Ford Explorer, 2007 Ford Edge, and 2010 Ford F-150. Yeah, I know the tractor is a different breed, but had to throw it in too.

Poor GMC. Rebates and Costo might get trucks off of the lots. Might as well stagger production. only people who stagger buy GM trucks. Anyone sober or straight will buy a Dodge. Old people will buy Ford and Tundra.

FORD,

First
On
Race
Day

DODGE,

Darned
Old
Dude
Goes
Everywhere

I initially came to this page to see what improvements are being made to the new Siverado, but It's amazing how so many Ford, Toyota and Dodge people are posting...is it out of concern, or worry? As the owner, since new, of a '89 k2500 (Rust Free) and 2008 1500 4x4 (only been back to the dealer once for a lazy power door lock, and gets between 20-23mpg (verified)on the highway) I've driven every one of them, and I picked the Siverado...so what!!? I liked it! If they were all the same in looks and engineering, it would be pointless in even having different brands. This way there is a choice! If you like the Ford, buy a Ford. if you like the Dodge, buy it! But why such an emotional concern of trying to make me hate my truck??? I can only assume it's worry by the "Brand Loyalists"...So keep on trashing GM, you're just proving my point.

As a truck driver all my life and having the benefit to drive / partly own as many as a dozen of Fords and Chevys at the same time , i like the Chevy overall a bit more .... Especially the ride !!! Ford is not a stronger truck because of a rougher ride ... It has a nice look i must say but nothing to make me go crazy either ... i just feel much more at ease in a Chevy/Gmc in my over 30 years of working with them ... They have made me a Chevy / Gmc guy ... I will now wait for this new 2013 model and hope is something i continue to like !!! I currently own a 1993 and 2007 F-150 that i own because of the deals that i got ... But my Chevy Silverado is my baby ...


@ RonL - Man your post is spot on. I'm waiting to see how the conservative media handles GMC whenever it happens. And once the truck/suv disliking left grasps the feds left 2 truck lines in tact they'll flip out too. Sierra and Savana are 2 Girls names I'd rather forget.

I'm not driving any truck that doesn't have a Blue Oval, a Bowtie or a Ram on the front. GMC devalues and ruins Chevrolet trucks and suv's at the same time. Chevy can't compete against the premium upscale quallity of Ford and Dodge because GM purposely dumbs Chevrolet down. This causes long term damage to Chevrolet. Which in turn causes permanent damage to our investment. GM will then faulter and it will have all been a big waste of taxpayer money for nothing in the end. Buick needs to go back to China and GMC needs to be buried for good in GM's 'Redundant Brand Graveyard'.

Hey,

The FACTS, No BS. I wanted to try out all of the New 3/4 ton trucks available. All of the trucks have come a long way as far as luxury is concerned. This is a no BS, hands on, review of ALL of the new 3/4 ton diesel trucks. I have owned new Fords, new GMCs, and new Dodges. I liked the new Chevy grills the best, and my best friend just bough one on 12/9/11 and it is loaded. So I was interested in the Chevy first. They warmed it up for me, melting the snow off the windows. I got in and drove it out of the parking lot onto main street and headed out of town. That is where things went south. I stepped on the petal to take it to 55 and the thing quit, I tried it two more times and the same thing happened each time. Not dismayed, thinking they could fix it, I took it back to the dealer. He said the additive (at $55 a pop) may be low and you can't get it at most gas stations. They won't even start if they are empty and it is the same thing for the Fords. The filler is in the middle of the engine compartment and hard to get to, this is a killer for me. I don't want to drip stuff all over the paint.

I used to be a GM fan, but it will take some convincing to see me ever buy another. For 30 years GM built poor quality cars and trucks, failed to resolve known problems like intake manifold gasket leaks. I had a Dodge Dakota, over 460,000 km no engine troubles, Mazda Protege 390,000, no engine problems, Oldsmobile Silhouette 182,00 km Head gaskets, you name I couldn't fix it fast enough to drive it. I would be happy with piston slap at least you can drive it. The only good thing I can say about GM , I made a good living off fixing their junk

what is new for 2013 LTZ 4 x 4 CHEVY/GMC Crewcabs



The comments to this entry are closed.