Why GMC Trucks Matter to GM


In the minds of some, there is no reason why both Chevrolet and GMC pickups should exist, especially in light of the restructuring and government loans necessary to keep GM alive.

Since there's little difference between any given model of Chevy Silverado and any given model of GMC Sierra, the question always comes up: Why didn't GM kill off the smaller GMC lineup of pickups and put all the company's efforts into a single Chevy-branded truck?

Only time will tell if keeping two separate lines of essentially the same truck was the right move, but so far it's looking pretty good. Sales are strong even though Ford and Ram have come to market with completely revamped and updated models in the half-ton segment. On the heavy-duty side (2500 and 3500), the Chevy and GMC models still look similar to the trucks offered more than 10 years ago. (Yes, we understand that the vehicles are quite different underneath.)

Possibly the strongest argument for keeping Chevy and GMC in today's market may come from GMC's own history. The story of GMC in the U.S. is practically the same story of the pickup truck and the growth of this country over the past 100 years. GMC vehicles were built for hard work, and they were bought by customers who did hard work. And, for the most part, the same is true today.

Does this mean GM will never find itself at a point where it may need to take a hard look at the two-brand strategy? We don't think so.

For now, it's worth understanding where the GMC brand came from — especially since it's celebrating its 100th anniversary this year — and how well it has connected with its customers. One of our PUTC friends, Tudor Van Hampton, put together this GMC historical piece for the New York Times, and it does a pretty good job of mapping out where GMC came from and why it has a right to be in GM's portfolio. Hope you enjoy it.



Uh oh. Oh now you've gone and done it.

I have, and will continue to buy both interchangeably, if I prefer the current syling of one, I go with it. I don't understand who could be offended by GM offering consumers a choice. perhaps their minds are so weak that the difficulty of a decision causes their brains to overheat and puke green slime out of their ears. Ive seen it before.

I don't think they need both, thier both the same and every redesign they say they are going to differentiate the two more but they never really do other then the front clip and some other minor details.

If GM made the Chevy look as good as the GMC I wouldn't mind if they dropped the brand. I have always prefered the GMC exterior over the Chevy. I didn't even look at the Silverados when I purchased my 2012 2500HD because I knew I wasnted the GMC styling.

This story will be followed by the story of Louis Chevrolet and how they designed vehicles to compete against Ford http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet which some people think GM is not letting the bowtie do anymore.

But the question is why does GMC matter more to GM than Chevy?

I think GMC will become luxury truck brand Denali for Sierra, Yukon, Yukon XL, Acadia and Terrain. if Denali will execution to GMC brand. GMC will put non luxury Savana and Crayon join to Chevrolet fleet. if non luxury trucks will full brand for Chevrolet. if I will shock and news near future.

Guaranteed Mechanical Crap
Gotta Mechanic Coming
Generally Mediocre Cars

Before GM shared engines/transmissions/axles and frame with each other GMC had a more heavy duty drivetrain then Chevy. GMC had 4-bolt mains before Chevy, heavier transmissions and axles. That is why farmers and oil rig people drove GMC's and not Chevy's......

so they were meant for work but now they are meant for grocery getters and cheap chrome?

i thought the chevrolets are for work?

i think they should of killed the gmc truck line and done something like chrysler did to the :dodge ram"

separate the cars from the trucks and only focus on the chevrolet truck line.

CHEVY trucks LIke A ROCK!

thank you and god bless AMERICA!

That is a neat old GMC Mark. Is that a 55, 56, or 57? They had some nice looking trucks back then.


@Jeff - that is a 1955 2nd Series GMC 100 (1/2 ton) pickup

I'm glad GM kept GMC Trucks - Pontiac and GMC Trucks are my two favorite GM brands and they took only one of them away from me due to the bankrupcy. Chevrolet Trucks are not horrible; however I grew up with GMCs and 9 times out of 10 prefer the GMC version over a similar Chevy version. And guess what? I'm not the only one!! I'm on my third new GMC and don't forsee that changing with the next purchase.

Is Buick bringing in the cash? How about Cadillac? Opel? Vauxhaul? Holden? So all you GMC Truck haters can continue to hate a brand that is bringing in money (profit) to GM hand over foot. If GMC goes away, GM as a corporation won't last too much longer. Don't put the cart in front of the horse and kill one of GM's money machines!

Long live the General's Trucks!!

The real reason GM keeps GMC is because it gives Buick dealers a peice of the SUV and Truck pie which those brands lack by themselves.

Yesterday during lunch I saw this pretty 2012 GMC Crew cab on a sales lot and it was open so I attempted to sit in the back. Found rear seating to be really tight and uncomfortably upright. That cab looks huge compared to my 2010 Ram Quad yet the Ram Quad felt more ample and reclined. Personally I regret I did not get the Ram Mega Cab and am now considering trading in for 2012 or 13 Ram Mega.

When gas prices hit $4.50/gal and 2013s come out all these v8 trucks will come ou in the paper for 10 and 12k off sticker.. question is, what will my 2010 with 15k miles be worth to them.

I'll never own a GMC. So if GM wants my money they'll have to put the goods to go against Ford and Dodge in the Chevy Silverado. They can keep their Government truck.

@GMTruckGuy74-Thanks for the info that 55 is neat. I don't have a problem with GMC surving, I almost bought a GMC Sonoma when I bought my S-10. I think there are way too many bloggers here that wish GM would go out of business because they like Fords or RAM better. I think that is great that they found a brand they really like but that does not mean that everything else is junk. I want to see GM thrive and pay back that government loan which is very likely the more sales they make and the more profitable they come. I cheered for Iaccoca when he brought Chrysler back in the 80s and repaid the government loan with interest. Some of these bloggers are probably resentful that Chrysler had succeeded. I am routing for the American worker and for the American made products regardless of which brand.

Also I would not be that quick to give up on Buick. The Lacross is a world class car and a good value for the money. I have a neighbor that bought one recently with the assist 4 cylinder and loves it. They had a 98 Volvo with 150k miles which they have had for fourteen years and loved it but the electrics were going on the Volvo. So GM kept Opel, Opel has some world class cars on which the Lacross and the Regal are based on.

I am glad that you have had good luck with GMC trucks and I know others that have GMC and would have nothing else. It is good when you find a product that you are satisified with. That seems harder and harder to find in today's world. Here is to both GM and yes Fiat Chrysler in success. May both sell lots of vehicles and create more jobs. By the way it is sad what happened to Pontiac and Oldsmobile but at least GM has a good chance to survive.

GMC's have been nothing but Chevrolet designed, Chevrolet powered, rebadged Chevy trucks since before WW2. They were their own truck for literally maybe 5 years way back in the early 1900's. It's a relic that should not have to be subsidized by the American taxpayer just to keep Buick going. GM ruins the Chevrolet brand and it's Silverado line 1 Sierra at a time. That TaskForce above looked better as a Chevy. At least it was the real deal. I have no respect for the pretender.

Girly Man's Chevy
G#@ Man's Chevy
GM's Metrosexual Chevrolet
Gotta Mechanic Coming
Goverment Motors Corporate truck
Ghetto Man's Chevy (for the bling bling Denali line)

The list goes on... lol

If GMC goes away, GM as a corporation won't last too much longer.

GOOD! Those slimeballs can go back to the rock they crawled out from under for all eternity. I hate GM and wouldn't be caught dead riding in a truck of all things that said Govt. Motors right on the grille. That company should have folded, not screwed the taxpayer, reorganized as a lean/mean and reputable American company simply called Chevrolet and brought Cadillac along for the high end rides. I'd at least have respect for them then. Not now though... I'm driving Ford's. Built Without Your Taxdollars.

GMC as a separate division is very valid. Not only for franchising agreements (gives Cadillac and Buick dealers trucks to sell) but also as a primiun line of trucks and SUV's. Market research time and time again has shown that GMC's sell to a different demographic than Chevy's do. Remember, many posters here on this site are not 'typical' news truck/SUV buyers (I seriously doubt that some are old enough to drive, and others most likely only buy old used vehicles, for whatever reason). You can't argue with GMC's profitability. Also, I think that many of the individuals that constantly harp on the GM bailout (which I was against, BTW- in only helped the UAW) would never have bought or would buy a GM product anyway. It's not like Ford didn't get help, and if you know anything about what actually happened, Ford very much benefitted from GM and Chrysler's troubles.

Haven't we seen this before? Either way, blah.. I'm so sick of anything 'GMC'-'GM' I just wish they'd go away.


BTW, FordTrucks1, you don't know what you are talking about. Chevy and GMC light trucks were very different animals up until around 1969. I had a '67 GMC, and it had a 305 cubic inch V-6 (that's right, a V-6), a NP435 transmission, and a Dana 60 rear axle on leaf springs. None of those components were available on Chevy's at that time. After 1969, Chevy did all the light trucks, and GMC division did all the medium and heavy trucks and buses. From that point on, the pickups were the same except for trim.

And another thing, FordTrucks1, 'Task Force' was the Chevy trademarked name for the '55-'59 models. The GMC's were known as the 'Blue Chip' trucks. You shoulkd have known that!

My Chevrolet dealer is also a Buick & Cadillac dealer. I think GMC should be dumped and Chevrolet should just have premium interior optioned trucks like Ford and Dodge have. GMC is just stupid to me. They're killing off their Chevrolet truck fanbase over this nonsense.

Remember, many posters here on this site are not 'typical' news truck/SUV buyers (I seriously doubt that some are old enough to drive, and others most likely only buy old used vehicles, for whatever reason).

@Bob, really? Oh we are all so blessed to be in your presence. People visiting the biggest truck site on the web don't drive new trucks and don't have drivers licenses? Get real.

UH OH! Big Bob, (also known as the "bob's" aka SierraGS aka BvonScott) is whining like the gmc baby he is again.

And another thing, FordTrucks1, 'Task Force' was the Chevy trademarked name for the '55-'59 models. The GMC's were known as the 'Blue Chip' trucks. You shoulkd have known that!

BigBob, you're clueless aren't you? I know exactly what the pretender truck was named. My point is it wasn't the real deal thus IMO it was and IS a Chevy Task Force. And your other post is pure BS. I've turned wrenches longer than you've probably been alive. Chevy's had Dana's, (and GMC's with a V6 in 67? really? Get a Chevy SB or Chevy BB if you want a Real engine in 67)... And after 69 they were the same damn truck as they'd been for decades prior. There was no "GMC Division". You don't know what You're talking about. GMC did "trucks and buses"? Ya, those same trucks and buses were all available as Chevy's. And yes, Chevy did the light duty rigs as well that were rebadged as GMC's. Learn your history kid. Good lord, I can't believe I have to defend Chevy of all things.

Yea I remember back in the 60's the GMC trucks had different engines and trans, available, along side the same as the Chevy,s, there was a line of realy Heavy Duty V-6 truck engines you could get in the GMC,s I believe the smaller one had 326c.i.d. and the larger one had 360c.i.d., I'm not sure because I was only 15 in 1970, but I remember a cousin of mine that had a sweet truck like the one in the picture, same color and all, it had the smaller of the two V-6's and my cousin usta haul our two trail bikes in the back and tow a trailer with another 8 bike on it, on some of the crappyist roads you can think of, and it was only 2X4, it did have a 5spd with granny low 1st, and OD 5th, I know because his father ordered the truck that way when new. As far as I know when we would split the gas we once went to N.H. (180 miles) round trip, with the bikes in the back, and we only burned 12gals of gas, not bad huh? and oh yea, it only cost us (please don't cry) $4.50!!! to fill the truck with Sunoco 260!! yep $.36.9/gal. ;( boy I miss those days huh? even though I was only making $1.45/Hr. we could fill up the bikes for $1.50!! If you are old enough to remember it is enough to make you cry.

GM'c' sucks. I'd never buy a Sierra. It' Chevy-Ford-Dodge for me.

yes their was a line of GMC v6 if you remeber me laughing at the eco turd vs 1960s gmc v6 478 here is the line up of GMC motors for the clueless people http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GMC_V6_engine

"the Chevy and GMC models still look similar to the trucks offered more than 10 years ago."

And they've been the ugliest truck on the market those entire ten plus years. Wanna sell more? Make them a whole bunch less ugly.

@ johnny doe Your another JKASS BASHER keep your PIEHOLE shut ... (wait break your fingers ) you have nothing that COMPETES or COMPARES to the ECOBOOST in any CONFIGURATION PERIOD .....

Some of you people sound like nut jobs. They are trucks, there are far more important things going on in the world. I don't get the fierce blind brand loyalty. Assuming for a moment that I did, I still wouldn't understand the hatred for everything other companies do. How can you people get so upset about something that doesn't affect or impact your life in any way?

The scariest thing is that some of you people have kids and you're passing your idiocy on to them.

@ johnny doe Your another JKASS BASHER keep your PIEHOLE shut ... (wait break your fingers ) you have nothing that COMPETES or COMPARES to the ECOBOOST in any CONFIGURATION PERIOD .....

Posted by: cory | Mar 23, 2012 5:30:27 PM
i'll slap two tubros on a 478 and spank you're belove ego turd with a 1960 engine. hurts don't it ford girlie man lmao

@Cory, the problem for you is that you don't have whatever you are bragging about, so nobody cares. Anybody can make up specs about a vehicle they dream about.

As for GMC vs Chevy, I like the GMC looks, but I prefer the 2011+ Silverado HD, with the big chrome front bumper that sticks out. The chrome bumper on the GMC is flush and is smaller, I don't think it looks as tough. So I am really not a fan of the Denali, where there is not enough chrome in the right places.

FordTrucks1, I have been in the business over 30 years, and I don't post under any other name. There most certainly was a GMC Truck and Coach Division, I knew guys that worked there in Pontiac and in Oshawa. It was separate from the Chevrolet Division (they were in Flint), and GMC had their own plants, too. Guess you never heard of the GMC V-6's, huh? Looks like you didn't know that GMC didn't offer Small Block Chevy V-8's in pickups until very late 1967 (except Canada), and Big Blocks didn't show up in pickup trucks until 1968 in either Chevy or GMC. Those V-6's are heavier than a Big Block Chevy too, about 800 lbs.. Very strong engine, similar in physical size to the Ford Super Duty 534 V-8 (ever hear of those?). Chevy never built transit buses, or the large coaches for Greyhound and Trailways like GMC Truck and Coach did (BTW, I have worked on those things). Starting in 1969, GM let some Chevy dealers sell heavy trucks, and GMC Truck and Coach Division built versions of their existing heavy trucks with 'Chevrolet' nameplates on them for those Chevy dealers. Yes, they were exactly the same product, but all were built by GMC. And, after 1969, design responsibility for the light trucks went to Chevy, and GMC Truck and Coach Division did only the medium and heavy trucks. BTW- that 1957 GMC pictured in this article would have had a Pontiac V-8 not a Chevy Small Block.

I bought my GMC mainly on its price and equipment; but I definitely prefer the styling of the GMC over the chevy. I think it just has a more rugged look.

2005 GMC 2500 HD 684,000 miles and still going.

Johnny TROLL!!!! LMFAO!

Nice GMC truck!!!

here is a prime 305 V6 GMC


@ aka Johnny Douchebag I'll slap 2 turbos on a Donkey an woop that 478 lmao are we MAD and still 5 years old ?

@ alex I don't own a ECOBOOST but I have about 4 weeks of drive time in a crewcab ... Nobody's bragging . are u mad to ?
------- > in left field or what ? Anybody can make up specs about a vehicle they dream about.

I did own a XLT 4x4 CC 3.73 5.0 so ya I can BRAG about that ...

I find it intersting that at one time GMC was the "work grade" truck and Chevy trucks were lighter duty Chevrolet Car company trucks. Times change and GMC is trying to push the opposite scenario. I personally don't care if GMC makes 2 lines of trucks. It gives me the option of 2 body styles on the same drivetrain. I currently like the Sierra looks and hate the Silverado looks. There are years where it was the opposite for me. The only problem I see with the 2 line strategy is that there are guys extremely loyal to Chevrolet. They would rather drive a Ford than sit in a GM. In that respect, GMC is making a big mistake by not offering pemium option packages to the Silverado fans. In the USA Chevy handily outsells Sierra. That is roughly a ratio of 4:1. If 13% of the market is luxury trucks, Chevy is ignoring a huge cash cow.

@Bigbob - interesting facts. I had never hear of a 534. I've heard of the 401. I never made the connection between Ford's "Super Duty" pickups and the name "Super Duty" for their big block commercial engines. Thanks for the reminder. I'm mostly familiar with Ford's FE engines.

Hello Ford and Dodge people, it's ok I would never own a Ford or Dodge or a Toyota. Nothing against them, but have had such great luck in owning over 8 GM pickups over a 30 year period why would I take a chance on something else.

Just seems crazy to be such haters... Like do these people have that much extra time and energy? Or do they just want to stir things up?

"The real reason GM keeps GMC is because it gives Buick dealers a peice of the SUV and Truck pie which those brands lack by themselves."

This is one of the main reasons!! Every one of GM's brands, other than Chevy, can sell a GMC truck or SUV. I believe sometime in my life I saw both Chevy and GMC at the same dealer, but don't quote me...
If Ford had the number of brands GM has/had, they'd do the same thing!

Cory, you were talking how you COULD go and "slap two turbos on a 478." I COULD get two Ford 6.2 V8s, make them both 7.0L V8s, join them together to make a 14L V16, add 8 turbos, intercooler, nitrous.... I win! See, who cares? It's all just talk unless you actually go and DO it.

Couldn't care less about GM. Losers. I can't believe we had to forked out money to save their @ss. They should of let them go under! I still hope they do and they probably will it's just a matter of time.

Cory::: grow up manboy!! go build you plastic models huh? I happen to own a F-150Ecco-Boost 4X4 reg cab HDYPAC 8' bed, and yes I love it, but it's not the end-all to end-all, I also have a 2011 Chevy 5.3 that you all hate so much, but to tell the truth, they are both very good engines, I would trust the Chevy more at the moment because I have owed a couple that went over 200,000miles with no problems, and If I take care of the EB the same way and get the same live out of it, well that will prove something to me. With that said both trucks get the same mileage, however, the Ecoo-Boost does have more power everywhere I need it. In my Honest Opinion, at the moment I would and do trust the Chevy the most, it is time tested and proven to me beyond a dought. Both trucks have there good points and not so good points, the Ford is a hard working truck, with power to spare, and the Chevy is very comfortable, and has smooth power, and has great value, I gor over $6,000 off sticker, and the Chevy I traded was still worth a lot more than I thought I was going to be able to get, I do believe the Ford will be the same when the time to trade-sell comes. As far as handling and hauling weight, and towing both truck provide a safe a steady platform, it's just that the Ford does have more power. I'am sure when the time comes Chevy will have had a new generation of engines that are proven to have comp. power and economy, and I will be ready to put my $$$ where my mouth is. Also let it be known I will never buy anything from a manufacturer from another country, and that includes made in America ie. Toyota, Nissan or whatever, it will have to be an American co. I don't care where the truck is made ie. Mexico, Canada ect. as long as it's an American co. they will have my buisness....

According to what I've read on here GM as a corporation sells more half tons than Ford. I don't care who sells more of what but am simply pointing out that it seems like a perfectly good business decision to have Chevy and GMC.

The comments about trim packages are proof that people are a bunch of sheep. What if the Silverado is a great looking, well designed truck that far exceeds the current dud? Does a GMC trim package matter? It's not like you won't be able to get a leathered out version of a Silverado.

That aside, there's very little news about the new truck anyway. They've been keeping it under wraps. All the drama here based on speculation is ridiculous. Why not wait and see what they come out with first?

If you're die hard Chevy ready to jump ship over speculated trim packages you're looking for an excuse anyway. And it's not bad to drive something different. I've gone away from GM trucks but will certainly check the new models out.

I'm also sure they'll create more special trim packages for us to throw our money at.

I also find it ironic that such a hardcore group of "no governemt needed" people have such an affinity to have large corporations tell us what trim packages we need to buy. Why can't I option out my own truck? I'd rather have the choice then to be force fed a trim line.

The more trucks I can chose from the happier I am. I don't know why we'd like the oportunity to have less choice.

I never cared for GMC's myself. When they were just a grille swap from the Chevy I always preferred the Chevy front grille better. I also like the name better. It just carried more inherent power from the entire Chevrolet brand to me. I will say I don't like this current Chevy though and think the GMC looked better this time now that they're using different dies for the metal. I hope Chevy fixes this because my 2006 Silverado is getting long in the tooth. I don't like the fact that I can't get a King Ranch/Longhorn in my Chevy though. Very disappointing to me. It doesn't matter much if the GMC sticks around but if it comes at sacrificing items for my Chevrolet like interior packages, options or design I'd rather it was closed. I'd most likely just switch my truck and car over to Ford if the Silverado has to take a backseat to the Sierra again.

Dont like GM. But unlike most who dont like GM I see no reason not to offer both. I mean cmon who cares. I personally like the GMCs looks thousands of times more than the Chevy since the 90s If Ram came out with a plymouth truck that looked a little different but still nice it would provide me with a different look and slightly different trim package with the mechanics Im familiar to and like. I dont get teh hate

The comments to this entry are closed.