Until they modernize this: 
I wouldn't even think of buying a GM truck, so this is probably all irrelevant to me, except that there's no way a 5 foot tall driver sees me in my Miata over that hood.
Until they modernize this:
I wouldn't even think of buying a GM truck, so this is probably all irrelevant to me, except that there's no way a 5 foot tall driver sees me in my Miata over that hood.
Javelin said:What's up with the mirror attachments?!? There's three 90 degree changes between the door and the mirror when they could have just gone straight out from the giant plastic piece that's in the window area. WTF?
I’m going to guess because of Blind Spots. The mirrors on my ‘08 come out right where that plastic piece is in front of the window, but even with the gap they put there, it’s a crappy blind spot and with these trucks getting stupidly taller, it kind of makes sense they mounted them lower.
volvoclearinghouse said:According to the wikis, a GMT400 standard cab was 213" long, 77" wide, and 73" tall. The new K2XX trucks are 224" long (assuming you can find a standard cab long bed, but supposedly they do make them), 80" wide and 74" tall.
A Colorado is 210" long, 74" wide and 70" tall. Which, if you go waay back, was about the size of the 60's Chevy trucks.
I seriously doubt that. According to Wiki, my Disco is 76 inches tall.. which is about what the figures on the sunvisor say. Parked next to or driving next to a new stock pickup, the top of the bodyline comes part way up my door glass. They sit a good foot taller than my rover. Maybe they are measuring the 2wd K2XX trucks, but the 4wd ones are much taller.
SyntheticBlinkerFluid said:Chevy released pictures of the High Country. This looks way better than the Z71, still odd, but better. I wish they would show a long bed or a dualle.
Not coincidentally, that looks like the Mammoth Car from Speed Racer. No hotlink because phone.
In reply to Duke :
I can see it.
Javelin said:What's up with the mirror attachments?!? There's three 90 degree changes between the door and the mirror when they could have just gone straight out from the giant plastic piece that's in the window area. WTF?
I'm sure they're concerned with visibility!
So, I get it...Y'all think it's hideous.
I admit I'm not in love with it, but in real life I think it will grow on me. The side view I think looks pretty good.
But consider this: The big trucks are all rated to tow around 30,000 lbs now with the right option configuration. That's outrageous. But to meet the SAE standard, a truck needs SERIOUS cooling capacity. How much heat you figure a big turbo V8 with 900+ lb/ft makes?
I don't really care what a truck looks like, and the capability of ALL of these new heavy pickups is incredible.
My 2004 LLY Duramax has a much nicer and compact front end. But guess what? They tend to overheat like a mofo towing in the heat at or near GCVW. They only make around 600 lb/ft...
In reply to doc_speeder :
Oh it's an impressive piece of equipment, I don't have any argument there.
I'm just over the in your face/hyper aggressive styling trends of continuously growing vehicles. I also hate corporate front ends.
This thing just happens to be the latest good example of all the things I don't like about where the industry is headed design wise. I'm sure they'll sell approximately 3.55 million of them however.
In reply to doc_speeder :
Not that it matters, and opinions are like, um, some orifice or another, but... I think the thing that gets me isn't just that it looks ugly to me. It's that it seems like it's pandering to a desire for The Most Giant And Aggressive-Looking Truck. Like styling doesn't matter beyond some sort of appearance-of-badassery pissing contest.
I started typing this before The0retical's post, but I see we've got some overlap.
I’m ok with whatever the industry feels they need to put out as ugly as many of us think. I have a hard time complaining about what privately owned businesses do to stay profitable (as long as they’re not being propped up by taxpayers).
(I personally think these new trucks are pretty awful-looking but I’m not even close to buying one)
That being said, give me a $4,000 1992-1997 F-350 and a few thousand dollars to restore it and I’ll be happy!
doc_speeder said:So, I get it...Y'all think it's hideous.
I admit I'm not in love with it, but in real life I think it will grow on me. The side view I think looks pretty good.
But consider this: The big trucks are all rated to tow around 30,000 lbs now with the right option configuration. That's outrageous. But to meet the SAE standard, a truck needs SERIOUS cooling capacity. How much heat you figure a big turbo V8 with 900+ lb/ft makes?
I don't really care what a truck looks like, and the capability of ALL of these new heavy pickups is incredible.
My 2004 LLY Duramax has a much nicer and compact front end. But guess what? They tend to overheat like a mofo towing in the heat at or near GCVW. They only make around 600 lb/ft...
This is true. With ever stiffer emissions laws, a need to make all vehicles more efficent at the pump, and still the ever growing need to tow.. there are a lot of heat exchangers on a new truck.
Having said that, what is with the need to tow? I rarely see non-work trucks towing anything, and I live along the atlantic where many people have boats. I do more towing with my rover than my neighbor across the street with his spotless F250
In reply to mad_machine :
For a lot of people, it's a status symbol more than a tool. Its about appearances more than a need for that much capability.
In reply to mad_machine :
It's because anytime someone asks how much truck they need to tow their 2500# boat on a 800# trailer everyone tells them they need an F-umpty-fitty with duals and 4wd or they are going to explode and murder random babies. The right answer is that their minivan probably would have done the job just fine, especially if they took it slow and easy and paid 5% more attention to what was going on around them, but according to the internet that's a sure trigger for the apocalypse.
In 1990, back when a truck was still basically a beast of burden, a decent truck, 4 wheel drive, V8, extended cab, some options, and a 6' or 8' bed, was about $15,000. Given inflation, that same truck today would sell for about $30,000. Interestingly, if you go to the Chevy website, that's the base MSRP for a standard cab long bed pickup.
But you can configure a truck up to $75k or more nowadays...which would be equivalent to a $40,000 truck in 1990. Which would be pretty much unheard of. I had a 2001 F350 for awhile, the biggest baddest 4wd diesel crew cab, and it barely stickered at 40k then, 10 years later.
Now, a 1990 compact truck was about 8,000 or so, and a $16k new compact truck is nonexistent. Nearest you can get is a base Frontier, at about 20k- and good luck finding one of those.
I feel like there's markets that are untapped here, somewhere either between the modern compact and full size, or under the modern compact. I know a lot of us poo-poo CUVs, but there's a platform for an urban pickup if ever I saw one.
I'd argue that almost no one is towing stuff in 2018 that they weren't towing in 1990. Maybe the 1% of guys, who you see running a 350/3500 dually with a gooseneck and a 3 car wedge. I live what I consider a pretty high-impact lifestyle, and I have trouble figuring out what I could possibly do that would exceed the comfortable working limits of my '93 K3500 dually.
volvoclearinghouse said:I'd argue that almost no one is towing stuff in 2018 that they weren't towing in 1990. Maybe the 1% of guys, who you see running a 350/3500 dually with a gooseneck and a 3 car wedge. I live what I consider a pretty high-impact lifestyle, and I have trouble figuring out what I could possibly do that would exceed the comfortable working limits of my '93 K3500 dually.
ehhh...I'll disagree with that. All of the hitch toys (boats, RVs, car trailers) have gotten progressively larger since the '90s too. These days most people won't buy a boat under 20' or 22' whereas 15' or 17' was plenty of boat back in the 80s. RVs have tons more gadgets and luxury but are built about the same way, so they are much heavier. Were slide outs even around in 1990? When I was a kid I never saw an enclosed trailer. A lot of the pro drag guys were still using open flat trailers in the 80s. So maybe WHAT they are towing hasn't changed, but the WEIGHT of those same toys has grown a good bit. Your '93 3500 may be fine for most anything that you need to tow, but I bet a '93 half-ton pickup wouldn't hack it.
Now, I'll give you that it's chicken and egg. Are the toys heavier because the trucks are more capable, or the other way around? That's still arguable.
In reply to ultraclyde :
Valid points- I do see a TON of those mega giganta rolling mansions being towed behind some of these trucks. I forgot about that. My dad always hd a boat growing up- a 17' aluminum outboard deal. We towed it behind whatever 1/2 ton regular cab 6 cylinder truck he owned a the time.
The real question is, are the toys and trucks bigger because people are making more money and have more disposable income...or are people just leveraged up the wazoo and spending all the inheritance they can get their hands on?
Part of the other reason for trucks getting beefier is people's expectations. They don't want to drop from the 70 mph they were doing on flat ground when they hit a huge hill, so they end up buying trucks that can tow more than they ever plan to just to gain capability like that. And it doesn't hurt in other ways, as running the truck somewhat below its max capability will probably lead to a lot of parts lasting longer than if it's being worked for all it's worth every time you tow with it.
volvoclearinghouse said:In 1990, back when a truck was still basically a beast of burden, a decent truck, 4 wheel drive, V8, extended cab, some options, and a 6' or 8' bed, was about $15,000. Given inflation, that same truck today would sell for about $30,000. Interestingly, if you go to the Chevy website, that's the base MSRP for a standard cab long bed pickup.
But you can configure a truck up to $75k or more nowadays...which would be equivalent to a $40,000 truck in 1990. Which would be pretty much unheard of. I had a 2001 F350 for awhile, the biggest baddest 4wd diesel crew cab, and it barely stickered at 40k then, 10 years later.
Now, a 1990 compact truck was about 8,000 or so, and a $16k new compact truck is nonexistent. Nearest you can get is a base Frontier, at about 20k- and good luck finding one of those.
I feel like there's markets that are untapped here, somewhere either between the modern compact and full size, or under the modern compact. I know a lot of us poo-poo CUVs, but there's a platform for an urban pickup if ever I saw one.
I'd argue that almost no one is towing stuff in 2018 that they weren't towing in 1990. Maybe the 1% of guys, who you see running a 350/3500 dually with a gooseneck and a 3 car wedge. I live what I consider a pretty high-impact lifestyle, and I have trouble figuring out what I could possibly do that would exceed the comfortable working limits of my '93 K3500 dually.
Well nowadays we have luxury versions and better equipped trucks in general .trucks back then as a whole were pretty basic even the best equipped trucks then aren’t as good as base trucks now. The cost of all vehicles are up now you could get base price cars then for around 10k or less but those are gone now too. You can get a decent half ton truck in the 30k ranges and all considering that’s not a bad deal. While back then they could pull it the trucks now can do it far more safely and also at actual speed limits or higher while then the trucks had to usually do that kind of towing at under highway speed limits.
as far as the front end that close up picture is very fair as it makes the whole front look narrower then it is making it look stranger.
rslifkin said:Part of the other reason for trucks getting beefier is people's expectations. They don't want to drop from the 70 mph they were doing on flat ground when they hit a huge hill, so they end up buying trucks that can tow more than they ever plan to just to gain capability like that. And it doesn't hurt in other ways, as running the truck somewhat below its max capability will probably lead to a lot of parts lasting longer than if it's being worked for all it's worth every time you tow with it.
Plus back then people had more then one vehicle in many cases now with the prices of all vehicles up and whatever the economy does many people want one vehicle that does everything.
SyntheticBlinkerFluid said:Javelin said:What's up with the mirror attachments?!? There's three 90 degree changes between the door and the mirror when they could have just gone straight out from the giant plastic piece that's in the window area. WTF?
I’m going to guess because of Blind Spots. The mirrors on my ‘08 come out right where that plastic piece is in front of the window, but even with the gap they put there, it’s a crappy blind spot and with these trucks getting stupidly taller, it kind of makes sense they mounted them lower.
That's because it's Mr. Tickle. Thanks Jalopnik
Also, why, if they relocated the mirror to the door, did they leave that black plastic wedge at the front of the window where a mirror would normally mount?
Ray Charles can see that it's so ugly...
In reply to NickD :
I saw that as well. What the hell GM? Also can we talk about these horrible wheels?
You'll need to log in to post.
