Started By
Message

re: Chevy did it again...All-new Chevy Silverado pickup

Posted on 12/17/17 at 3:17 am to
Posted by bayou choupique
the banks of bayou choupique
Member since Oct 2014
1848 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 3:17 am to
Looks like the finally have round fender wells instead of square. Also since they are going to aluminum I wonder if they will stop the stupid commercials where they try to break the bed
Posted by skinny domino
sebr
Member since Feb 2007
14536 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 3:35 am to
quote:

Looks like they are trying to look like a Tundra.
Posted by Cajun367
S. Louisiana
Member since Oct 2017
1943 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 3:40 am to
Posted by Sid in Lakeshore
Member since Oct 2008
41956 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 3:49 am to
quote:

I currently drive a Ram but I completely agree. GM and Chrysler shouldn't exist anymore. I was completely opposed to the bailouts


Where do you bank?
Posted by BuckeyeFan87
Columbus
Member since Dec 2007
25249 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 4:50 am to
Maybe it will grow on me, but that looks awful. Something about the front and back looks pinched. And not in a good way. Much like their Colorado, it looks asian to me, like it could be a Mitsubishi.


Maybe a different model will be more appealing?
Chevy is normally my favorite of all the major trucks too.
This post was edited on 12/17/17 at 4:53 am
Posted by BHM
Member since Jun 2012
4121 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 5:19 am to
quote:

Looks like the finally have round fender wells instead of square



Was going to post the same thing. The new round looks much better. Would buy it if I needed a truck.
Posted by KLSU
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2003
11205 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 6:19 am to
Well at least they got rid of the stupid square wheel wells.
Posted by weagle99
Member since Nov 2011
35893 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 6:26 am to
F150 worshippers on this board frantically trying to come up with new and creative ways to downplay this truck.
Posted by weagle99
Member since Nov 2011
35893 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 6:30 am to
quote:

Well at least they got rid of the stupid square wheel wells.



So now you will be a customer right? Sure...

I liked them. Looked aggressive and unique.
Posted by Cooter Davenport
Austin, TX
Member since Apr 2012
9006 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 7:02 am to
Looks exactly like a Tundra, except the very front clip is different (worse).
Posted by CatsGoneWild
Pigeon forge, Tennessee
Member since Jan 2008
15200 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 7:05 am to
I like the truck. A mix of f150 and tundra. About time they did a total makeover. First time it don't look like a box. The bad thing is, they shoulda kept it hidden until as late as possible (like jeep wrangler). Now people are going to hold off and not buy current models.

And to the idiots against the gov helping GM.... Do you realize that GM is doing better than ever, paid the gov back, kept thousands of jobs in place including other companies that make parts for GM's?
Plus you have dealers/mechanics/etc? Smart move by gov
Posted by starsandstripes
Georgia
Member since Nov 2017
11897 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 7:15 am to
quote:

shoulda kept it hidden until as late as possible (like jeep wrangler).


The 18 Wranglers have quite a few differences from 2017 models. I wonder if prices are tanking on the 17s.
Posted by stout
Porte du Lafitte
Member since Sep 2006
184684 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 7:22 am to
quote:

The 18 Wranglers have quite a few differences from 2017 models. I wonder if prices are tanking on the 17s.





No. Jeeps hold their value very well and there are a lot of people that don't like the new design.
Posted by KLSU
Baton Rouge
Member since Sep 2003
11205 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 7:28 am to
quote:

So now you will be a customer right?


Not until I see if their weak arse 5.3 engine is upgraded along with the car like suspension. The 6.2 is the only useful engine they offer and it only comes in a few trims.
Posted by biglego
San Francisco
Member since Nov 2007
85580 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 7:33 am to
quote:

Not until I see if their weak arse 5.3 engine is

The OT. Where a 355hp V8 is “weak”. I agree the 6.2 should be offered in more trim levels—if it was, I’d probably be driving a Chevy right now. But the 5.3 isn’t bad.

The looks on this one aren’t bad. I like the current one better though. looks as good as the F150.
This post was edited on 12/17/17 at 7:36 am
Posted by FlyinTiger93
Member since May 2010
3724 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 7:49 am to
Congrats GM, you figured out how to release a facelifted 2014 Tundra before Toyota did.
Posted by tigerinthebueche
Member since Oct 2010
38241 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 8:00 am to
quote:

company taking money to develop more fuel efficient vehicles is because our government prioritized fuel economy and created a fund from our taxes and decided how to distribute it. It had nothing to do with the company's financials or profitability.

dels.”

But that’s not what happened here:


In a business plan submitted to Congress in December 2008, Ford touted its $14 billion plan for fuel-efficient cars as a key part of its effort to turn the company around — noting that a big piece of the funding was coming from the DOE. The company’s business plan also urged Congress to pass legislation to provide “incentives for consumers to trade in older vehicles and move to more fuel-efficient vehicles.” About six months later — on June 24, 2009 — President Obama signed the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act that became known as the cash-for-clunkers program. A Department of Transportation report (table 10) said more than 90,000 Fords were purchased under the cash-for-clunkers program — second only to Toyota — as of December 2009.
—————————————

Like you, I’m not a proponent of subsidies. But every auto maker gets them. Ford pretending to be some financially independent entity that isn’t on the govt tit is just simply untrue. They may not have received TARP funds, but they suck up subsidies as much as the others.
Posted by tigerinthebueche
Member since Oct 2010
38241 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 8:05 am to
quote:

their weak arse 5.3 engine i



I drove a 5.3 last week (cause my Ford was in the shop. Suck it Ford).

Didn’t think the engine was bad at all. My experience with the 6.0L was good. But I had to fill up every other day. The 5.3 seemed solid and I got 20.9 MPG driving to Laffy. Not sure why you wouldn’t just go get a diesel if you want more engine.
Posted by member12
Bob's Country Bunker
Member since May 2008
33146 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 8:07 am to
Wow.

I want that truck.
Posted by El Segundo Guy
1-866-DHS-2-ICE
Member since Aug 2014
11750 posts
Posted on 12/17/17 at 8:15 am to
My weak arse 5.3 has almost 184k miles and I work the hell out of it. Yeah, it's not going to accelerate as fast as some but I use it as a truck every day. It's lived in 6 states and 2 divorces and a 33rd wife and it won't die.

I have a diesel to pull my tractor/bush hog and 5th wheel but the 05 handles everything else.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram