Live Thread: One week with a Chevrolet Silverado High Country

Colin
By Colin Wood
Apr 8, 2024 | Chevrolet, New Car Review, Live Thread

Photography Credit: J.G. Pasterjak

Wanna ride shotgun with GRM?

Welcome to this week’s test vehicle, a Chevy Silverado High Country.

Sitting in the lineup as the second-most expensive Silverado behind the off-road-focused ZR2, the High Country has a starting MSRP of $68,195 and comes standard with a 5.3-liter V8 rated for 355 horsepower and 383 lb.-ft. of torque.

Our tester came fitted with the optional 6.2-liter V8 that's capable of 420 horsepower and 460 lb.-ft. of torque–and raises the sticker price to $70,885. (Also available: A 3.0-liter Duramax inline-six diesel good for 305 horsepower and 495 lb.-ft. of torque.)

Chevrolet notes that, depending on box length and cab size, Silverados equipped with the 6.2-liter engine are able to two up to 13,300 pounds.

Questions? Comments? Feel free to post them in the comments below.

Join Free Join our community to easily find more Chevrolet, New Car Review and Live Thread news.
Comments
David S. Wallens
David S. Wallens Editorial Director
4/8/24 3:18 p.m.

It’s big, it’s red, it just went to the $2000 Challenge. 

More to come once JG stops moving. (Don’t post and drive, kids.)

Feedyurhed
Feedyurhed UltraDork
4/8/24 7:18 p.m.

Yes, it's really big and really red and really chunky. Looks sort of out of proportion or something. Not saying bad, just general observations.

Keith Tanner
Keith Tanner GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
4/8/24 7:22 p.m.

In reply to Feedyurhed :

I think it's the chrome running boards exaggerating the depth of the cabin. Also, that is one seriously bluff front end.

JG Pasterjak
JG Pasterjak Production/Art Director
4/8/24 11:31 p.m.

Honestly I wasn't super impressed with the trailer hooked up. Unladen it seemed nicer. Even with a load-leveling hitch the rear was heavily squatted with a trailer that my Tundra could tow nice and level. It also had trouble getting the roughly 7500lb trailer to let it shift beyond about fifth of its nine gears, which ment that you sepdn more time than you probably wanted to going 55-60 at nearly 3000 rpm.

And even though the rated capacity is 9200 lbs, the load felt somewhat overwhelming for the truck. So my 14 year old Tundra wins on drivability and (astoubdingly) fuel economy. The Chevy couldn;t crak 10mph while the Tundra runs 10-11 with the same load.

It is, however, a feature-rich environment inside. Almost too feature rich, as as soon as we get any GM product lately, we have to turn off the function that is constantly moving the seats whenever we open and close the doors. But it is comfy, and gets great mileage (for a truck) when unladen (just over 20mpg around town), and is well suited for hauling your crew, which probably means your kids.

QuasiMofo (John Brown)
QuasiMofo (John Brown) GRM+ Memberand MegaDork
4/9/24 6:19 a.m.

In reply to JG Pasterjak :

How heavy is that trailer?!?! 

This year we pulled the Corvair above 65 meaning 75-80 for 1390 miles averaging 14.5. yes it's a 2.7 but it 5000lbs of car trailer and junk is barely noticeable behind it.

gearheadE30
gearheadE30 Dork
4/9/24 8:39 a.m.

Enclosed or open trailer? Interesting that it struggled so much with that load, but most of the naturally aspirated stuff relies a lot on revs to make those power numbers. Peak power is at 5600, peak torque is at 4100.

I'm impressed that the curb weight is ~5300 lbs, according to the internet. That's only 200 lbs more than my 1998 K1500, which is a dramatically more basic vehicle. 

The newest GM 150 0 truck I've been in is around a 2020, and I was surprised how soft the shock tuning was. That probably doesn't help with the trailer control. Much softer than the Fords I've been in lately. 

NickD
NickD MegaDork
4/9/24 1:17 p.m.

At least it doesn't have a 6.2L. Then you'd have to worry about it spinning the main bearings before the first oil change. At least with the 5.3L, you only have to worry about the valvetrain flying apart before the first oil change.

DavyZ
DavyZ Reader
4/9/24 1:29 p.m.

Good looking truck--the sides are not as 'slab' as depicted due to the chrome running board as Keith Tanner mentioned earlier.  I'm not a huge fan of chrome on this one, however, and the truck would look better with it blacked out.  I'm trying to decide which is better for me: this Chevy or the equivalent Ford F-150.

David S. Wallens
David S. Wallens Editorial Director
4/10/24 10:14 a.m.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

The nose is comically huge. I get that the look but, dang. 

More to come as I just picked it up from JG yesterday. 

David S. Wallens
David S. Wallens Editorial Director
4/11/24 2:30 p.m.

So. Many. Buttons. I stopped counting at 75.

I think that’s the interior aesthetic: How can we get more buttons in here? If it’s a flat surface, it’s covered in buttons. 

And I totally get that we often use buttons to communicate with our vehicles but, dang, that’s a lot of them. 

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
BgzxLyuDiApW5RmUWh0EgbbGF5X5nCrCEvwQyo7cH5yP6tq5j1xQGyFeHVn8KdvH