Chevy's Silverado Lining

[Blue Oval Guide]

Chevy's Silverado Lining

Chevy's redesigned flagship pickup may just be the best truck on the market but can it outsell long-time category leader the Ford F-150?

 

The new Silverado matches or surpasses its main rivals—the Ford F-150 (see BusinessWeek.com, 4/19/06, "America's Favorite Pickup Truck") and the Dodge Ram—in just about every respect, from fuel economy to features and options to plain old versatility. For instance, if you're on a budget and just want a basic pickup, you can just go with the regular cab, two-wheel drive, and the basic Z83 suspension.

 

Read the entire article here.

[Watchdevil]

Chevy's Silverado Lining

Chevy's redesigned flagship pickup may just be the best truck on the market but can it outsell long-time category leader the Ford F-150?

Read the entire article here.

 

If you combine the sales of Chevy and GMC (identical) trucks with the F-150 & Mark LT then who sells more?

[NickF1011]

If you combine the sales of Chevy and GMC (identical) trucks with the F-150 & Mark LT then who sells more?

 

GM, by around 100,000 units in 2006. Nothing new there though. That has been the case for several years now.

[92merc]

... and yet, the Silverado brings nothing new to the truck scene. Just updated to match what's already out there. The only thing I'd lust for in the Chevy is the better fuel economy while keep decent HP.

[Roadrunner]

That's a pretty catch headline.

[JLaudioF150]

Meh, I do recall the "Truth About Trucks" showing the rigourous test where all the pickups were tested to see 'body flex.'

 

GMC Sierra (body flex galore)

 

It may not be so obvious in this video, but pay attention the next time you see it on tv. That bed whobbles more than Rosie O'Donnell's ass.

[natdman]

The last test done at EDMUNDS pitted the Silverado, Titan, and new Tundra against one another. The Silverado had the WORST fuel mileage 12.X the Toyota was tops with 14.x mpg. I guess that 8 to 4 cylinder thing wasnt working well or something.

[ebritt]

The last test done at EDMUNDS pitted the Silverado, Titan, and new Tundra against one another. The Silverado had the WORST fuel mileage 12.X the Toyota was tops with 14.x mpg. I guess that 8 to 4 cylinder thing wasnt working well or something.

WOOOOOOOOOO! 2 MORE MILES PER GALLON!!!

 

AND ITS THE MOST WONDERFUL TRUCK EVER BUILT 'CAUSE IT'S A TOYOTA!!!

 

:beatdeadhorse:

[RichardJensen]

That bed whobbles more than Rosie O'Donnell's ass.

I SAW that (the commercial), and thought, "Who ok'ed this?" The bed looks like it's attached with a trailer hitch it wobbles so much.

 

Also (an aside) I love the new Tundra commercials with the deep voiced announcer, the laboratory background, and the KA-THUNK sound at the end. These commercials are total rip-offs of Ford ads that have been running for y-e-a-r-s, so I'm guessing a fair number of inattentive viewers are going to see "Toyota" but remember "Ford".

Edited January 24, 2007 by RichardJensen

[natdman]

WOOOOOOOOOO! 2 MORE MILES PER GALLON!!!

 

AND ITS THE MOST WONDERFUL TRUCK EVER BUILT 'CAUSE IT'S A TOYOTA!!!

 

:beatdeadhorse:

 

 

WHOA!... Nowhere in my response did I give ANY indication what was "better" just facts in MPG comparison.

 

Seems someone is a weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee bit defensive! For what reason, I can only guess.

[ebritt]

WHOA!... Nowhere in my response did I give ANY indication what was "better" just facts in MPG comparison.

 

Seems someone is a weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee bit defensive! For what reason, I can only guess.

Um yes you did. You refered to the Chevy as "WORST" and used the word "tops" for the Toyota.

 

Isn't that what you call a Freudian slip?...........DID you hate your mother???

 

[old_fairmont_wagon]

I found the most interesting thing about the Edmunds comparo was their expose' on the Chevy engine management system oddity. Specifically, you have to wait 4 seconds to get full power from the vehicle when you step on the throttle. I agree with them that for long pulls, that 4 second delay isn't going to mean much. But for those cases when you need all your power right now, this could be a bit unnerving. It appears to me to be an adaptation of the system to make it better able to meet emissions guidelines and perhaps also return a bit better fuel mileage than it otherwise would. It'll be interesting to see if that creates somewhat of a comotion in the industry.

[Bluecon]

I found the most interesting thing about the Edmunds comparo was their expose' on the Chevy engine management system oddity. Specifically, you have to wait 4 seconds to get full power from the vehicle when you step on the throttle. I agree with them that for long pulls, that 4 second delay isn't going to mean much. But for those cases when you need all your power right now, this could be a bit unnerving. It appears to me to be an adaptation of the system to make it better able to meet emissions guidelines and perhaps also return a bit better fuel mileage than it otherwise would. It'll be interesting to see if that creates somewhat of a comotion in the industry.

I expect somebody will have a chip programmer to solve that problem.

[NickF1011]

I found the most interesting thing about the Edmunds comparo was their expose' on the Chevy engine management system oddity. Specifically, you have to wait 4 seconds to get full power from the vehicle when you step on the throttle. I agree with them that for long pulls, that 4 second delay isn't going to mean much. But for those cases when you need all your power right now, this could be a bit unnerving. It appears to me to be an adaptation of the system to make it better able to meet emissions guidelines and perhaps also return a bit better fuel mileage than it otherwise would. It'll be interesting to see if that creates somewhat of a comotion in the industry.

 

I believe the point behind the delay was to avoid the engine constantly swapping from 4 to 8 cylinders and back again at the slightest blip of the throttle on the highway. Granted, from the few antecdotes I've heard from owners with these engines, it constantly flip-flops off and on on the highway anyway. :huh:

[swenson88]

Um yes you did. You refered to the Chevy as "WORST" and used the word "tops" for the Toyota.

 

Isn't that what you call a Freudian slip?...........DID you hate your mother???

 

 

Uhhh, you did notice that in the comparison the Chevy did have the "worst" mpg and the Toyota did have "tops" mpg, right? Didn't look like bias, looked like simply how the different trucks consumed fuel. Like natdman said, seems like you're reading a little too much into something that isn't there. What I find interesting about this is that Chevy is taking advantage of the EPA system, but I bet real-world mileage shows no benefit over other manufacturers' engines.

[natdman]

Um yes you did. You refered to the Chevy as "WORST" and used the word "tops" for the Toyota.

 

Isn't that what you call a Freudian slip?...........DID you hate your mother???

 

 

Ok first, this is the EXACT reason I left these boards a couple years ago, if you gotta be a smart-ass then come up with something better at least. Since your such a FAUCKING EXPERT, Ill let you decipher what I had read and give us YOUR expert opinion.

 

ALL HAIL "THE EXPERT"!

 

Here ya go...please decipher:

 

"The Titan averaged 13.7 mpg during its stay with us, with a best tank of 15.1 mpg. Despite its extra grunt and weight, the Tundra averaged 14.4 mpg, with a best tank of 16.9 mpg. EPA estimates are 13 mpg city, 18 mpg highway for the Titan and 14 mpg city, 18 mpg highway for the Tundra.

 

Since our Silverado is a long-term test truck, we have a larger sample size from which to cull fuel economy data. The picture is not pretty. Over 5,436 miles, the Chevy has averaged 12.7 mpg with a best tank of 14.2 mpg. Of the three trucks, the Silverado's performance is the furthest from its EPA rating of 15 mpg city, 19 mpg highway."

[ebritt]

Ok first, this is the EXACT reason I left these boards a couple years ago, if you gotta be a smart-ass then come up with something better at least. Since your such a FAUCKING EXPERT, Ill let you decipher what I had read and give us YOUR expert opinion.

 

ALL HAIL "THE EXPERT"!

 

Here ya go...please decipher:

 

"The Titan averaged 13.7 mpg during its stay with us, with a best tank of 15.1 mpg. Despite its extra grunt and weight, the Tundra averaged 14.4 mpg, with a best tank of 16.9 mpg. EPA estimates are 13 mpg city, 18 mpg highway for the Titan and 14 mpg city, 18 mpg highway for the Tundra.

 

Since our Silverado is a long-term test truck, we have a larger sample size from which to cull fuel economy data. The picture is not pretty. Over 5,436 miles, the Chevy has averaged 12.7 mpg with a best tank of 14.2 mpg. Of the three trucks, the Silverado's performance is the furthest from its EPA rating of 15 mpg city, 19 mpg highway."

Okay here goes dipwad....

 

Nowhere in the article did the author say that the GM was the worst, that was YOUR choice of words. Since the GM was only 4mpg behind the Tundra , it wasn't a huge spread.

Same with you your choice calling the Tundra tops.

Not a huge difference here in these two areas yet the picture you paint is a Fantastic Toyota and a Piece of shit GM.

 

 

Mybe you should consider leaving agin, it seems to be too much for your fragile psyche.

Edited January 30, 2007 by ebritt

[jlsaylor]

I can't stand the Tundra, but even I would admit that 4mpg is just a little more than 'a little'. But to be fair, I have seen tests where the Tundra did worse than the Chevy did if I recall. And in this instance it isn't exactly apples and oranges since we don't know what the Chevy or Tundra were doing during the driving which garnered these mileage numbers. For all we know the Tundra could have been making 400 mile interstate runs on roads as flat as Kansas while the Chevy spent most of it's time pulling a 49 Mercury through city streets. My example is extreme, but it makes my point.

 

That said, Chevy and Toyota seemed so fixated on tearing each other down that they seem to be ingoring the top dog in the segment, Ford. In fact, it seems as though Chevy went out of their way to pick this fight, or at least to answer Toyota's invitation to the match, which isn't necessarily the best idea IMO. My experience is that people who are fond of Chevy trucks are more accepting of Toyota as an alternative than are those who typically buy Fords. In light of this such a scenario isn't shaping up to be pretty for Chevy since they have nothing to gain and a lot to lose from entering this mud-slinging competition.

 

Suits me just fine though. Let Toyota Cannibalize Chevy, and likely Dodge, sales while Ford largely ignores the foray and makes their lead in the segment even larger.

 

Okay here goes dipwad....

 

Nowhere in the article did the author say that the GM was the worst, that was YOUR choice of words. Since the GM was only 4mpg behind the Tundra , it wasn't a huge spread.

Same with you your choice calling the Tundra tops.

Not a huge difference here in these two areas yet the picture you paint is a Fantastic Toyota and a Piece of shit GM.

 

 

Mybe you should consider leaving agin, it seems to be too much for your fragile psyche.

[RichardJensen]

1) It's not 4mpg, it's 1.7mpg or about 13% better for the Toyota.

 

2) Why is Edmunds comparing long term numbers with short term test numbers? The only number worth comparing is the 'best tank' figure.

 

Furthermore, the odds of the Edmunds crew putting all three of these vehicles through identical usage patters is laughably small, rendering any comparison of mileage to be specious at best.

 

Once again, I lodge a protest with whatever powers may be, against writers that use pseudo-statistics and pseudo-science to justify their opinions.

[jlsaylor]

1) It's not 4mpg, it's 1.7mpg or about 13% better for the Toyota.

 

2) Why is Edmunds comparing long term numbers with short term test numbers? The only number worth comparing is the 'best tank' figure.

 

Furthermore, the odds of the Edmunds crew putting all three of these vehicles through identical usage patters is laughably small, rendering any comparison of mileage to be specious at best.

 

Once again, I lodge a protest with whatever powers may be, against writers that use pseudo-statistics and pseudo-science to justify their opinions.

 

Four mpg sounded a bit high to me too, but I didn't feel like looking it up so...And I agree wholeheartedlty that comparing the mpg of these two vehicles in this fashion is ridiculous at best and disingenuous at worst. Journalists are supposed to base their argument around the facts, instead we often find them tailoring the facts to their argument.

[ANTAUS]

To me, truck ownership costs, pertaining to gas specifically, is one of those things where....

...."If you have to ask, then you CANT afford IT!".....

 

The cute little window stickers, don't mean much. I've been known to make Civics drop to 20MPG.

 

When you buy a truck, you "shouldn't" care much about it's fuel usage. Compared to the competition, you'll be spending about the same amount of fuel...which is "An Oil Rig FULL".

 

Moving on....

[lfeg]

Huh? For trucks in commercial use fuel useage is pretty high on the priority list. It has a direct effect on the bottom line. Some of the fleet operators I know would jump at the chance to get something like 2 mpg better per truck. Another example is a city I am familiar with. They just purchased about 12 3/4 ton pickups and 1 ton dumps for the street and service departments, all 4x4 with plows. In the past they had Fords with diesels. This past year they have purchased GMCs with gas, and are getting similar mileage with a cheaper fuel. Plus the purchase cost was lower. Bottom line is that they expect to save about 30 to 40 K per year based on initial purchase cost, fuel useage, and maintenence.

 

Now, for the "recreational" user, your statement is generally true

[sprtch06]

Okay here goes dipwad....

 

Nowhere in the article did the author say that the GM was the worst, that was YOUR choice of words. Since the GM was only 4mpg behind the Tundra , it wasn't a huge spread.

Same with you your choice calling the Tundra tops.

Not a huge difference here in these two areas yet the picture you paint is a Fantastic Toyota and a Piece of shit GM.

 

 

Mybe you should consider leaving agin, it seems to be too much for your fragile psyche.

One thing that is never mentioned in these fuel mileage comparos is driving style. The mileage on my Ram 1500 sucks,but being able to pass every old geezer with nowhere to go and all day to get there makes up for it. My previous truck was 4cyl Nissan Frontier 4x4 that I think was a victim of Jap HP overstatemant. To pass someone,I had to spend a 1/2 mile planning it and then hope nothing went wrong. I work in a fleet of heavy trucks,all spec'd the same and you would not believe the differences in fuel economy. Unless these trucks were tested in lab conditions under strict supervision, I wouldn't put any stock in the numbers. I once remeber reading about how the GM suburban got better fuel economy than the Toyota Sequouia. I have always felt the Japs tend to get a free ride in the press. A lot like the whole Republican/Democrat thing.