2018 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Preview

2017-Chevrolet-Silverado-LTZ-Z71-024 II

Competes with: Ford F-150, Ram 1500, GMC Sierra 1500, Toyota Tundra, Nissan Titan

Looks like: The 2017 Chevrolet Silverado 1500

Drivetrains: 285-horsepower, 4.3-liter V-6 (305 pounds-feet of torque); 355-hp, 5.3-liter V-8 (383 pounds-feet of torque); 420-hp, 6.2-liter V-8 (460 pounds-feet of torque); six-speed automatic transmission for 4.3-liter and 5.3-liter; eight-speed automatic transmission for 5.3-liter and 6.2-liter; two- and four-wheel drive

Hits dealerships: Late 2017

Just as with some other half-ton pickup trucks, not much will change about the Chevrolet Silverado 1500 for model-year 2018. GM's 2018 half tons — which include the GMC Sierra 1500 — are scheduled for a significant chassis upgrade and powertrain boost for the 2019 model year. Regardless, the Silverado 1500 maintains the highest maximum tow rating in the class at 12,500 pounds.

The Silverado 1500 offers six different trim levels — Custom, WT, LS, LT, LTZ and High Country — with 11 different special-edition packages to cater to buyers looking for sportier, individualized pickups. Many of the special editions are tied to specific cabs, bed lengths and trim levels. For example, the Special Ops and Black Out special editions can only be ordered for the spartan WT, while the Realtree and Redline editions are tied to the better equipped LT and LTZ Z71 trims.

The Silverado 1500 comes in both two- and four-wheel drive with four wheelbases to accommodate short- and long-bed regular-cab models. Double-cab models come with a 6-foot 6-inch bed, and crew-cab models can be had with either a 5-foot 8-inch bed or 6-foot 6-inch bed.

There are no new engine choices for 2018 models, although some spy photographers are reporting they've seen camouflaged next-generation Silverado and Sierra 1500s with diesel-sounding engines in Michigan and Las Vegas.

Engine choices are the 4.3-liter V-6 that offers EPA fuel-economy estimates of 18/24/20 mpg city/highway/combine and a 5.3-liter V-8 offering 16/23/19 mpg with the six-speed transmission; that engine gets 1 mpg less for highway and combined with the eight-speed transmission. The GM half tons do have the most powerful V-8 in the segment with a bigger aluminum 6.2-liter V-8 that comes standard with an eight-speed transmission; that combo gets 15/21/17 mpg.

Standard safety equipment in the Silverado 1500 includes six air bags, electronic stability control, rollover mitigation technology, a rear camera, trailer-sway control and hill start assist. Optional safety features include an Enhanced Driver Alert Package on LT, LTZ and High Country trims that includes forward collision alert, seat-vibrating safety alerts, intelligent high-beam control, lane keep assist, lane departure warning, front and rear parking assist, and low-speed forward automatic braking.

Here are the rest of the changes to the 2018 model:

  • Custom trim (new in 2017) for crew and double (extended) cabs
  • Two new exterior colors: Cajun Red Tintcoat and Havana Metallic
  • Range-extending eAssist Package on LTZ trims nationwide
  • Tire pressure monitor alert now includes a tire overfill alert
  • MyLink 7-inch multimedia system standard on WT models

Manufacturer images

 

2017-Chevrolet-Silverado-011 II

2017-Chevrolet-Silverado-009 II

2017-Chevrolet-Silverado-High-Country-020 II

2017-Chevrolet-Silverado-High-Country-019 II

17chevrolet_silverado_ab_12jpg_33757976494_o II

 

Comments

The Silverado has become the geezer's choice. The non-geezers, young and middle age, don't want this junk anymore.

Change the channel Ken.

The non-geezers, young and middle age, don't want this junk anymore. Posted by: Ken | Sep 16, 2017

@Ken

Tell us about your crystal ball, Ken.

Over a million people have bought pickups this year, not counting those who bought RAM, Toyota, Honda and Nissan trucks.

Ford and GM roughly split the million buyers amongst themselves. Were they all listening to you? Does not sound like it. Were they all off the reservation Ken?

MyLink 7-inch multimedia system standard on WT models?

I like to use the vast selection available in the aftermarket. I put in the head-unit of my choice w/camera. Link the smart phone for navigation/hand's free calling.

I hope this isn't just a way to make OnStar mandatory.
WT's were the only way to avoid the listening system in all the other trim levels. Hope not. I don't want a bored, minimum wage, 20 something listening to my non-private conversations for amusement.
If you are afraid of running off the road and knocked unconscious on a deserted hwy, by all means, forfeit your privacy for piece of mind.

The reason I for my pessimism? Caution!
The lack of consequences today only kicks scruples to the gutter where it is shown the drain.

@stevador

...you sound a little paranoid but I can't blame you. The NSA (federal govm't) captured the meta-data on EVERY phone call in the US during the last decade or so.

If you believe the intel guys, they promise us that they only know the phone number that placed the call, and the number being called. Yeah right.

Your phone company happily gave NSA the keys to the kingdom--thank them. Companies like Google and Microsoft caved in and gave them the backdoor keys to the software.

It's a little late to be worried about GM Onstar employees listening to your calls. Secondly, they probably don't give a bleep who you're talking to anyway.

I said Silverado.

There was Zero mention of the Silverado in the 2016 GM year end sales release.

It seems to be another repeat as ales are down this year again by another 5% while Ford and Ram are up.

The geezers may love the square wheel well barges with paper thin steel and weak 5.3 which deactivates to a 4 cylinder but others want something more.

What I am telling you here is forget the geezer pickups and focus on pickups for us the regular people.

I tend to agree with Ken on this one. The Silverado appeals to an older clientele. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I don't know if it's the truck or the advertising, but generally you see older men driving Chevy and GMC full size pickups. RAM and Ford have a more diversified clientele which boads well for the future. I am sure papajim will disagree or start talking about stock price but I don't care. Last time papajim bought a new full size truck was probably never so he is not really educated on this anymore than I am. He bought a used 2013 Silverado hand me down pickup 5 years ago so he doesn't have any room to talk on what people buy new in today's market which is much different than the 1970s. Have a great weekend.

It seems to be another repeat as ales are down this year again by another 5% while Ford and Ram are up.

@Ken

GMC and Chevy are both GM brands. Don't worry about press releases.

GM will outsell RAM by 2x this year, give or take a few. GM is on track to outsell Ford's fleet of trucks & vans this year as well. Ford has not outsold GM in several consecutive years.

I'd worry more about Ford if I were you. Their stock price sucks and their executive suite is a bunch of Ford family yes-men.

@Jeff S

what about TTAC Jeff?

I thought you were gonna jump the fence and hold hands with BAFO over at TTAC. He is so bad.

Did he hurt your tender feelings again?

P.Jim; Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after me.

@stevadore absolutely understand.

@Jeff S and Ken,

Just checked the stock charts:

On a week when all three major stock indexes made new all-time highs, GM finished the week UP EIGHT DOLLARS PER SHARE.

Ford, you ask?

Ford came within TWO CENTS of its 52 Week LOW on Friday. Jeez, it must really suck to own Ford stock these days.

My 2012 still has a ticking, clicking noise near the engine compartment. After several trips to the dealer it still sounds like noisey valves. I'm wondering if the new trucks still have this problem. The service department claims it's a normal sound. Finally they admit the noise is from a purge valve for the charcoal canister. Smh.

Jeff S and Ken,
Just checked the stock charts:
On a week when all three major stock indexes made new all-time highs, GM finished the week UP EIGHT DOLLARS PER SHARE.
Ford, you ask?
Ford came within TWO CENTS of its 52 Week LOW on Friday. Jeez, it must really suck to own Ford stock these days.
Fortunately that is all Ford had to worry about, mothing in comparison to the multitude of problems GM faces.

The geezers may love the square wheel well barges with paper thin steel and weak 5.3 which deactivates to a 4 cylinder but others want something more.

Posted by: Ken | Sep 16, 2017 12:51:37 PM

Paper thin steel? It seems to be far more durable than the butter-soft aluminum Ford is using these days. Careful setting anything in the bed, wouldn't want to rip a hole in the aluminum.
https://www.f150forum.com/f118/2015-up-bed-box-strength-386478/

The 5.3 is capable of over 400 ft-lb of torque, it took Ford 4 more years to get the rod knockin' Coyote to 400 ft-lb.

Cylinder deactivation is easily disabled in several ways. Ford's buggy, unreliable start stop garbage is far worse. And their ecoboosts are constantly having problems, once the warranty is gone, its a good idea to dump those junkers.

Thank you Kenneth Kuntzsch. I do not understand all the complaining here. All trucks have their pros and cons. Test drive them all and buy what you like. It really is that simple. The people who frequent these comments seem to think that their opinion is fact. To all the Ford haters, I currently drive a 2015 F-150 with the 27EB. It's more than I need, and I'm perfectly happy with it. Do I dislike the GM twins or Ram? Absolutely not.

RAM and Ford have a more diversified clientele which boads well for the future. I am sure papajim will disagree or start talking about stock price but I don't care.
Posted by: Jeff S | Sep 16, 2017 1:04:47 PM

That's easy to understand. Young guys buy their first truck based on idiotic Ford commercials and 0-60 times. It doesn't take long before they realize that Fords are poorly engineered, cheaply built trucks with junk, unreliable engines and garbage 4WD systems. Once they get tired of the embarrassment of needing a ride home everytime their Ford breaks down, they grow into men and buy reliable, tough trucks from Ram and GM.

Most Fords I see are plain white fleet trucks. Considering fleet sales are all that's keeping Ford's head above water these days, it makes sense.

Most Ram and GM trucks I see are driven by working men that use their trucks to make a living or get stuff done. Fords are for city boys that make their truck buying decisions based on idiotic Ford commercials and 0-60 times.

5.3 which deactivates to a 4 cylinder but others want something more.

Posted by: Ken | Sep 16, 2017 12:51:37 PM

Get a 6.2 which deactivates to a 4 cylinder. You have the most powerful engine in the 1/2 work truck space and the most fuel efficient when you don't need all that awesome power.

GM builds the best trucks, you can easily tell by all the butthurt Ford girl comments seen above.

GM builds the best trucks, you can easily tell by all the butthurt Ford girl comments seen above.

Im not a chevy guy but those new blue trucks look so damn good.

FORD builds the best trucks, you can easily tell by all the butthurt GM Squids comments seen above.

Yea, I agree GM trucks appeal to an older buyer, although some of the special edition black out packages you do see younger guys in but overall its an older clintel. I think GM trucks are a bit less sporty then Ford, Ram, or Toyota. You have column shifters and an older style interior that looks very 1980's to me.

Yea, I agree GM trucks appeal to an older buyer Posted by: Andy | Sep 16, 2017

@Andy

So, Andy what brand of bicycle do you ride? Have you ever owned a truck, or ridden in one? Tell us.

Yea, I agree GM trucks appeal to an older buyer, ....

Posted by: Andy | Sep 16, 2017 6:45:27 PM

I would love to see the data to support your comment. One thing is true of an older clientele, they are wiser.

PapaJim, I have a Trek Mountain Bike LOL, Has nothing to do with what I have to say about trucks.

@Andy. Agree

Chev Engine 355-hp, 5.3-liter V-8 (383 pounds-feet of torque) eight-speed automatic transmission

Ford Engine 395 hp, 5.0-liter V-8 (400 pounds-feet of torque) ten-speed automatic transmission

1955 old style pushrod engine vs new style 4 cam/32v engine

1955 old style pushrod engine vs new style 4 cam/32v engine

@Blueman

Your comment is hardly worth mentioning, but for your benefit you should know that GM's 6.2 Generation Five engine blows the doors off your Ford Coyote motor in every way. The 6.2 bears no similarity to the 1955 SBC V8.

When the groundbreaking SBC V8 came out back in the 1950s, Ford's engine program was a joke. The Ford boys back in the '50s were still trying to hop up their flat-head V8s

How many of you all think that if Ford and/or GM could, they would prefer to run a Cummins diesel as opposed to their Ford Powerstroke or Isuzu/GM Duramax? Not poking at any of the big three, just wondering if the Cummins brand is strong enough that all of the big three would prefer to run that motor as opposed to the billions they have thrown into their current motors.

Posted by: Mumm49ers | Sep 16, 2017 12:02:59 PM


My opinion is no for GM. Because the Duramax is one badass engine. But in Fords case I'd definitely say yes.
But if they were to offer a Caterpillar engine I would take that over all of them.

So no changes from the least innovative company on the planet. No surprises. Friggen pathetic!

The Ford boys back in the '50s were still trying to hop up their flat-head V8s

Posted by: papajim | Sep 17, 2017 7:27:59 AM

The Mustang 5.2L makes 526hp while the GM 7.0L Camaro/Corvette made 505hp. It take a Chevy engine an extra 2 Litres or an extra 100 extra cubic inches to make the same HP. LOL

The Mustang 5.2L makes 526hp while the GM 7.0L Camaro/Corvette made 505hp. It take a Chevy engine an extra 2 Litres or an extra 100 extra cubic inches to make the same HP. LOL

Posted by: Blueman | Sep 17, 2017 10:51:54 AM

O.k., you make a point. Now try and make the Mustang put down the same 0-60 and 1/4 mile times as the Camaro. Something is missing from your 5.2 L and it is torque.

So no changes from the least innovative company on the planet. No surprises. Friggen pathetic!

Posted by: GMSRNOTGREAT | Sep 17, 2017 10:13:22 AM

You should try reading the articles for once and not just look at the pictures. LOL!

Here are the rest of the changes to the 2018 model:

Custom trim (new in 2017) for crew and double (extended) cabs
Two new exterior colors: Cajun Red Tintcoat and Havana Metallic
Range-extending eAssist Package on LTZ trims nationwide
Tire pressure monitor alert now includes a tire overfill alert
MyLink 7-inch multimedia system standard on WT models

O.k., you make a point. Now try and make the Mustang put down the same 0-60 and 1/4 mile times as the Camaro. Something is missing from your 5.2 L and it is torque.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Sep 17, 2017 11:12:19 AM

5.2L Mustang vs 7.0L Camaro

Around the Chuckwalla Valley Raceway circuit, the Mustang ends up completing its lap about one second faster than the Camaro. And in the western-style 1/4 mile drag race, the Mustang comes out on top with a 12.1-second time at 119.6 mph versus the Camaro’s 12.3 seconds at 116.1.

Read more: http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/11/2015-chevrolet-camaro-z28-goes-head-to-head-with-the-ford-mustang-shelby-gt350r-video/#ixzz4sxYmEaa9

JUNK LIKE ALWAYS. FORD IS TBE BEST.

NOTHING NEW HERE NOTHING TO SEE. JUST PURE JUNK. HAHAHAHA

@Jeff S and Ken,

Just checked the stock charts:

On a week when all three major stock indexes made new all-time highs, GM finished the week UP EIGHT DOLLARS PER SHARE.

Ford, you ask?

Ford came within TWO CENTS of its 52 Week LOW on Friday. Jeez, it must really suck to own Ford stock these days.


Posted by: papajim | Sep 16, 2017 1:39:34 PM

papajim: Where do you get your numbers? My GM stock only went up $1.66 last week. Oh, now I remember. The last time someone asked you for your source of information you refused to provide it. Well, here is where I got mine: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GM?p=GM

Previous Close 38.79
Open 38.74
Bid 0.00 x 0
Ask 0.00 x 0
Day's Range 38.64 - 39.03
52 Week Range 30.21 - 39.18
Volume 25,353,949
Avg. Volume 10,180,492
Market Cap 56.441B
Beta 1.64
PE Ratio (TTM) 6.76
EPS (TTM) 5.75
Earnings Date Oct 23, 2017 - Oct 27, 2017
Dividend & Yield 1.52 (3.92%)
Ex-Dividend Date 2017-09-07
1y Target Est 38.74
Trade prices are not sourced from all markets

Notice that the 52 week range is only $9 and those are not closing prices either. There has not been any week that the stock price changed anywhere near $8.

Question: Why is GM's PE ratio only 6.76 while Ford's is 12.23? That indicates that investors have much more faith in Ford's management than they do in GM's.

Don't even think about responding without a data source!

WOW!! That thing still has the game changing bumper steps!! GM girls gotta be excited! GM really took a risk there with such a controversial feature offered in a traditional truck market!! If Ford only had the nuts to try something like a high torque (at a super truck like low rpm) turbo V6 or an aluminum body or something truly innovative like fancy integrated bumper steps, than I could brag like papa/GMS/Sierra . Man they slammed the 2018 Ram for good reason!! Oh wait, that's right, the Duramax beats the PowerStroke by .1 seconds 0-60.......There you have it!! These GM girls know what they're talking about!! Sweet innovative truck you got there DUDES!!

5.2L Mustang vs 7.0L Camaro

Around the Chuckwalla Valley Raceway circuit, the Mustang ends up completing its lap about one second faster than the Camaro. And in the western-style 1/4 mile drag race, the Mustang comes out on top with a 12.1-second time at 119.6 mph versus the Camaro’s 12.3 seconds at 116.1.

Read more: http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/11/2015-chevrolet-camaro-z28-goes-head-to-head-with-the-ford-mustang-shelby-gt350r-video/#ixzz4sxYmEaa9


Posted by: Blueman | Sep 17, 2017 12:52:25 PM

Wow you seem really proud that Ford's $55k super Mustang edges out the older, heavier 5th gen Camaro Z/28. Funny thing is, the 6th Camaro SS 1LE is faster than the 5th gen Z/28 and costs significantly less than the oil burning GT350. It didn't even need carbon fiber wheels or 32 valves to do it. The GT350 is a nice car though, you should thank GM for sharing their innovative magnetic dampening shocks. Better late than never lol.

Posted by: Bard | Sep 17, 2017 4:13:38 PM

2015 Camaro big block in cubes 427cid vs a 2016 Mustang small block in cubes 315cid. Maybe the Chevy boys need a stroker 572cid to keep up................

....If Ford only had the nuts to try something like a high torque (at a super truck like low rpm) turbo V6 or an aluminum body or something truly innovative like fancy integrated bumper steps, than I could brag like papa/GMS/Sierra ....

Posted by: 2.7EcoboostRoost | Sep 17, 2017 4:02:59 PM

Too bad that wasn't enough to beat GM.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2016/01/whats-the-best-light-duty-truck-for-towing-2016-texas-truck-showdown.html

Blueman- The 7.0 LS7 is a SMALL BLOCK! If it sat next to the 5.3 V8, you'd have a hard time telling them apart. What a fool you are! hahaha!

Pretty sad when Ford's V8's have twice as many intake and exhaust valves, a variable geometry intake, and independent intake and exhaust valve timing, yet they still can't outperform GM's "ancient" "outdated" LS/LT1. Not even in fuel efficiency! Hahaha

Posted by: Bard | Sep 17, 2017 4:13:38 PM

2015 Camaro big block in cubes 427cid vs a 2016 Mustang small block in cubes 315cid. Maybe the Chevy boys need a stroker 572cid to keep up................

I said in cubes the Chevy is a big block engine. LOL

I am sick and tired of papa Jim demeaning people when he gets beaten with the facts in an argument. First of all he does not even invest in GM. If he thought it was a good investment he would. Secondly, there is nothing wrong with owning a bicycle. I have owned several. Mountain biking has an array of physical and emotional health benefits. It is a vigorous activity which can burn up to 1,000 calories per hour. Not only does this type of cycling build up your muscle strength, but it also improves your cardiovascular health and your endurance. GM has heavily pushed biking with it's Colorado. You are grouchy and cranky. Go to bed early tonight Jim. Go for a bike ride or walk tomorrow and you'll be better prepared for this conversa tion. You need it.

http://cars.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b3c669e201b8d08b96a9970c-pi

Typical results when current gen Camaro and mustangs meet:

...Cranking the 2017 Camaro SS 1LE around this Mojave Desert road course, playing gunslinger with its standard short-throw manual transmission, I steadily reel in a Mustang GT, blow holes in its doors and leave it for the undertaker.

Read more: http://www.thedrive.com/muscle-cars/5921/the-chevrolet-camaro-1le-delivers-a-knockout-punch-to-the-mustang-gt

Blueman- The 7.0 LS7 is a SMALL BLOCK! If it sat next to the 5.3 V8, you'd have a hard time telling them apart. What a fool you are! hahaha!

Pretty sad when Ford's V8's have twice as many intake and exhaust valves, a variable geometry intake, and independent intake and exhaust valve timing, yet they still can't outperform GM's "ancient" "outdated" LS/LT1. Not even in fuel efficiency! Hahaha

Posted by: Bard | September 17, 2017 at 05:44 PM

Too bad that wasn't enough to beat GM.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2016/01/whats-the-best-light-duty-truck-for-towing-2016-texas-truck-showdown.html
Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Sep 17, 2017 5:17:52 PM

You always change the subject to distort the facts. But, isn't Chevy GM anymore? The 5.3 V8 Chevrolet finished behind the 3.5 EcoBoost. It has finished behind the 2.7 EcoBoost in most every test also. Therefore, it did beat "GM" in the test you were referencing. How many GM trucks are sold with the 6.2? Honestly can you give me a simple % of GM trucks sold with that powertrain? How many truck trims is 6.2 available in? I'd like to see your biased 1/2 truth on that one also. At the end of the day you can't deny GM full size truck sales are fading fast. Cannibalized by their own mid size trucks no doubt. Also, we have to throw that test out the window because it's PUTC right? They are clearly biased as you your self have pointed out under various user names. Oh wait, you will use there test as "fact" when the pick a GM. Let's look for a more neutral test....... When the inovative F-150 came out as a 2015 model and was compared to the other trucks. Let's see if I can find such test. 2.5 seconds and here it is:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2015-chevrolet-silverado-1500-high-country-62l-4wd-crew-cab-page-4

More proof you are a clown who spreads false advertising just like previously bankrupt GM. Enjoy your shake my friend....

Let's see if I can find such test. 2.5 seconds and here it is:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2015-chevrolet-silverado-1500-high-country-62l-4wd-crew-cab-page-4

More proof you are a clown who spreads false advertising just like previously bankrupt GM. Enjoy your shake my friend....

Posted by: 2.7EcoboostRoost | Sep 17, 2017 5:58:29 PM

Well if posting a link to an article from PUTC is considered false advertising, then stay over at Car and Driver, after all, what do they know about trucks.

@2.7EcoboostRoost

You Ford guys go back and forth all the time....when your turd ecoboost win a 0-60 comparison, you guys are all over it, but when you guys lose!! (Which is most of the time!!) You claim, "who cares its a truck it doesn't matter!!" Go figure!

BTW your 2.7L might win a comparison to a 5.3L on a drag race, but Ill hook up to anything your turd can and pull it just as well and with better fuel economy!! I beat my step-dads 3.5L ecoboost when pulling. Yet, that is all fords claims is that its ecoboosts are made for fuel mileage ...LIES!!!!



The comments to this entry are closed.