Left Coast do-gooders? Take a hike. East Coast intellectuals? On your bike. The Chevy Silverado doesn’t give a damn about you and your fancy gas electric cars. GM’s new[ish] pickup is a rolling tribute to the working class people who form the backbone of our country– as defined by the musical stylings of John Cougar Mellencamp. More to the point, a good old Harvard boy named Rick Wagoner says his company’s turnaround depends on the Silverado. So are its flat-bedded shoulders strong enough to support the world’s America’s largest automaker?
The Silverado's clean-sheet sheetmetal starts with a front grille that forgoes the Dodge Boys’ Schwarzeneggerian schnoz and Ford’s forgettable face for something big, butch and bland. As for the rest of the rig, Chevy avoided radical change by deploying the plus-sized Colorado look. That's no bad thing. Even with badging the size of Texas road kill, the Silverado’s creased sheetmetal gives the truck a restrained toughness that harkens back to previous Bowtie classics. But if industrial-chic rules the day, Ford’s Sub-Zero on wheels wins.
Step inside and it’s obvious that Chevy’s clarion call to working stiffs is nothing more than media manipulation. The Silverado is the most car-like pickup truck ever made. Check out those tiny vents and buttons, the fussy knobs and the cowled binnacle sheltering gently glowing gauges. OK, you can’t blame The General for following the well-established trend towards civilized pickup interiors, or using generic GMT900 bits for both SUV and pickup. Well, actually, you can. While the base model has a functional (yet uninspiring) dashboard with all the right knobs and binnacles, the Buick-like dash in our tester is about as work friendly as union busters at a sweatshop. Why not make one perfectly truckish dashboard and call it a day?
When it comes to high dollar luxury, the leather hides on our $40k tester were unimpressive even by (admittedly low) truck standards. Still, Americans can rejoice in a pair of wide, comfortable buckets (up front) with a trick-folding split bench (out back). The crew-cab’s rear cabin accommodates the Corn-Fed and Yankee Doodle alike; ample seat cushions provide a terrific view over the low-rise Tahoe dashboard onto the road ahead. The BOSE stereo provided surprisingly responsive imaging with A-pillar mounted tweeters, a console-mount subwoofer and welcome goodies like XM radio and an MP3 hookup.
The Silverado’s underhood beat box sounds even better. The Corvette-based 5.3L V8 is the right mill for the job, stumping-up (literally) 338 ft.-lbs. of torque at 4400rpm. Want extra camshafts? Put ‘em in the bed; the Silverado puts out 315hp on its way to a buttery-smooth 5500rpm redline. Indeed, there’s enough grunt to tow Milwaukee and sufficient horsepower to, um, pass a Camry on the interstate. Thanks to a lightning-quick axle ratio, the four-speed automatic's quick trigger finger makes the lack of extra gears only mildly disappointing. More alarming, even with Active Fuel Management, the Silverado clocks-up an EPA optimistic 16/20mpg.
Handling is another issue. Push the Silverado hard in a corner and it’ll fight back like an over-eager stuntman at a Boar’s Nest bar fight. Steering feel is decent, with precise turn-in. But the off-road Z71 suspension tuning is hardly an on-road driving enthusiast's best friend. Winding country roads quickly unleash Titanic body roll and endless understeer. No matter. Driving enthusiasts have no business in a pickup truck, and anyone brave or stupid enough to push this rig hard in a corner will find the Silverado’s strong brakes and progressive pedal feel equal to the challenge of slowing the Hell down.
While the Silverado is library quiet at highway speeds, potholed roads still send shivers down the back half of the chassis. Such dynamically-challenged behavior was once standard fare for a pickup truck; today it’s a sign of an incomplete homework assignment. Even with plenty of time to match the F150’s well-established chassis benchmark, the Silverado is way off the mark. Chevy’s new[ish] rig simply can’t hang with the existing Ford F150’s disturbingly good steering, ride, handling and braking.
The bed is the business end of any good truck. In this the Silverado doesn't disappoint. Too bad it doesn't impress. Cumbersome tailgates went out of style after Ford boldly took the torsion bar where it’s never been before. Toyota’s Tacoma introduced an all-weather power port for stereos, electric tools and neon Budweiser signage (for the perfect tailgate party). Even if the aftermarket fills in the blanks, Chevy still failed to usher their core-competency to the head of its class.
What was needed here was a beefy-looking pickup with a work-oriented cabin, all the F150’s dynamic capabilities and strength, Chevy’s kick-ass powerplant and a proper, modern six-speed transmission. (Dodge? What Dodge?) All of which leaves Toyota– the benchmark company for benchmarking– plenty of room for advancement. Judging by the hardware in the upcoming Tundra and the not good enough vibes emanating from the Silverado and its wicked tailpipe, next year shall be one for the history books.
129 Comments on “Chevrolet Silverado LTZ Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Great review. Don’t any of you guys have cameras? Why do I have to see the same boring publicity photos for all of these vehicles?
Sajeev- Did you drive a Z71 equipped Crew Cab LTZ?
Sajeev,
Fair and balanced. It sounds like Ford is only a Hurricane away from greatness!
I think Toyota will be here to stay in a way the Titan was not. My question has always been will it be so good as to sway brand loyal Chev, GMC, Ford and Dodge customers?
By your account, Chevy did not “pooch” the new truck but have left some key pieces off the table. Do you think this is due to the rush to market or have they completely forgotten about matching the competition?
CAndrusiak: the pictures I took were junk; my digicam isn’t especially great to start. Maybe when TTAC can afford to buy me an SLR (the camera) we’ll do better. :-)
kaisen: it was a Z71 4×4 with a 3.73:1 axle. It had some scoot.
Do you think this is due to the rush to market or have they completely forgotten about matching the competition?
CSJohnston: Both have relevance, but I’m still thinking GM’s beancounters are killing their product. It isn’t about matching the competition, its about innovating and kicking the competition’s asses.
This is why the Tahoe and now defunct Trailblazer lack an IRS when the Explorer and Expedition took the plunge. Ford really seems more interested in investing R&D money in trucks and SUVs. But I still don’t like the Mod motors in pickups, GM’s LS-motors seem much better suited for the job.
Well, I will say it’s a decent looker….but sorry, still no match for the sophisticated (nee “forgettable”) look of the Ford. Not boring like the Nissan, or cartoonish like the Dodge and Toyota….just competent.
Apparently Ford and GM can’t get that 6-speed tranny in enough applications soon enough!
kaisen: it was a Z71 4×4 with a 3.73:1 axle. It had some scoot.
So the ‘nicer riding’ F150 you drove was also the FX4 Off-Road package?
I ask because I drove both trucks almost back-to-back (same day) and came away thinking the non-Z71 GMC I drove exhibited the same ride qualities as the non-FX4 F150 I drove.
I also thought the GMC was a little quieter and had better steering feel. The all-aluminum LS V8 helped lighten the nose-heavy feel of the significantly heavier iron-block mod-motor in the Ford. Did you find the same?
Apparently Ford and GM can’t get that 6-speed tranny in enough applications soon enough!
I think the 6 speeds are over-rated and mostly un-neccessary when backing a wide powerband (torque). That said, GM is saying they will ramp up 6 speed availability in the 2008 half-tons. The 6 speeds are currently only available in the 6.2L (403hp/417lb-ft) high-end GMT900 offerings or the 2500-3500 heavy duty pickups.
Kaisen: I last drove a 4×4 Lincoln Mark LT. That might not compare well in suspension tuning, but my point is that a flimsy chassis hurts ride quality, handling, etc.
Doesn’t matter if they make a “Z71 SS” package, its still on a mediocre chassis. The foundation is paramount.
Sajeev,
I agree, Ford and Lincoln sell their large SUV’s based on refinement (IRS and fold-flat 3rd row) and not horsepower or grunt. However, I would still likely take a GMC Denali over an Expedition Limited, it just looks cooler!
I am under the impression that the proposed Hurricane engine (Ford, this better be more than a proposal at this point, the F150 is bringing a knife to a gunfight right now), while based on the modular 5.4 has been bored out for more displacement.
That should address the torque issue.
I have not driven the new GM trucks yet. I will get a chance with a Denali next month, but I agree on the innovation front. GM has to pick some leadership points. The Z06 is one, trucks should rightly be another.
i hope your initial remarks are simply one writer’s attempt to attract attention and create interest in the content they lead.
if not, your cavalier attitude towards the environmental concerns that those ‘left-coasters’ and ‘intellectuals in the east’ evidently represent, is inappropriate and unappreciated.
despite the fact that gm is counting on the success of this vehicle, the use of large trucks – primarily for passenger transport – iconically symbolizes much of what troubles our domestic auto industry and the environmental degradation tormenting our planet and the people who populate it.
gm could do much better. it should. and so should those considering a silverado purchase.
I think the 6 speeds are over-rated and mostly un-neccessary when backing a wide powerband (torque). That said, GM is saying they will ramp up 6 speed availability in the 2008 half-tons. The 6 speeds are currently only available in the 6.2L (403hp/417lb-ft) high-end GMT900 offerings or the 2500-3500 heavy duty pickups.
I used to think that, but then I towed with a 6-speed Lincoln Navigator and 5-speed Tundra. The RPM jump when downshifting on the highway is much less shocking with a close ratio gearbox, not to mention helps keep the motor in its powerband without running out of steam. (I get that a lot when four speeds downshift 2 gears)
Of course there’s no excuse for a wussy, rev happy powerband in a truck, but extra gears always come in handy.
I guess I am too old to get it. While it seems America has decide that Truck must be spelled with a capital “T”, old fogeys born in the 50’s still remember when they were only tools, not fashion statements. Don’t get me wrong- I like the new style- they spoil the hell out of my sorry ass- but to speak of handling and truck makes me think of the old standby of “military” and “intelligence”. Like I said. I don’t get it. But I remember 25 cent gas and actual Beatles concerts, so maybe that is the point- I’m not supposed to. How depressing.
The F-150 is a chassis benchmark?
Oof…. how sad.
if not, your cavalier attitude towards the environmental concerns that those ‘left-coasters’ and ‘intellectuals in the east’ evidently represent, is inappropriate and unappreciated.
Its good to have environmental concerns, but I don’t want to hear complaints about trucks being bad for society/environment when they cater to a diverse range of people who like them and have every right to be proud of their purchase.
FWIW, Texans sometimes have a cavalier attitude. Goes with the territory. My apologies to coast dwellers who took offense to the intro. :)
philipwitack
if not, your cavalier attitude towards the environmental concerns that those ‘left-coasters’ and ‘intellectuals in the east’ evidently represent, is inappropriate and unappreciated.
I can’t speak for Sajeev, but I took that as a simple nod to the fact that GM has overtly stated that this is a “heartland working man’s truck” as a brazen counter to all the media hype attempting to kill the idea of the truck. I see it as simply winnowing your true market, not really meant to offend those who don’t need trucks. You’ll find plenty of SUV and truck-haters around here, but the most important idea is “is it right for its market?” This vehicle probably is.
Thanks ash, you said it better than I did!
I have owned two Full Chevs, a 71 & 72. I was in diapers when they were made. Hated the exploding 73-87 style. Still do. Loved the 88-06 style, but still have yet to own one. Will one day for beater duty.
I loved the S-10 so much I bought two of them (97 long new, 98 ext cab used several years later).
The Colorado is just boxy-gone-bad ugly, I will never own one. Looks like the new Silverdodo is the same way. Nice headlights but there is just something wrong with the fender bulges.
Is it new[ish] or a clean-sheet redesign?
You state both in adjacent paragraphs.
New[ish] is a pejorative term and doesn’t bode well for the report that follows. [Note: I do think that the review was quite fair].
And while GM may have rushed the truck to market, they shouldn’t have had to. I was helping prepare quotes for the T-900 HVAC system back in 2001. Maybe that’s another GM problem.
Is it new[ish] or a clean-sheet redesign? You state both in adjacent paragraphs.
jazbo: good point. The clean sheet redesign referred to all new sheetmetal, but yeah, that doesn’t sound right now that you mention it.
I have owned two Full Chevs, a 71 & 72. I was in diapers when they were made. Hated the exploding 73-87 style. Still do. Loved the 88-06 style, but still have yet to own one. Will one day for beater duty.
Most everyone likes the 88-06 bodystyle. From what I gather, they are the longest lasting trucks out there (I see plenty of two-tone 1988-ish models still running) and they hold their value better than Ford on the beater market.
A word about photographing cars.
As I have learned, there is a real, serious art to taking photos of cars. The lighting has to be right, the car has to be clean, the angle has to be right — it really is its own skill set.
Much more difficult than you would think.
Besides, it’s a dirt-hauler. It is not like it has a good angle.
I'd like to place a TTAC review request: Review the stripper pickups. An F150 and a GMT900 with NO options. You know, the kind you can get for less than $20k, with a V6 or V8, and just abuse the S@#)($* out of em doing work-type stuff.
“Driving enthusiasts have no business in a pickup truck” unless you are towing your track car on a tailer with such haul it all appliance.
nweaver: I don’t think the kind folks at Brasher Motors want me treating their inventory like a real truck, but I see your point. We’ll work on your request. :-)
Sajeev Mehta:
Thanks ash, you said it better than I did!
Haha…hardly. Near-simulpost. Great review.
Just a note:
Only the LTZ tested (and pictured) has the Tahoe dash, but all other trim levels, from strippo work truck to loaded LT have a different, more truck-like dash.
Whether that would change Sajeevs button criticizm, I’m not sure.
Jonny,
As a guy in the ad biz, if you want to make your car car shot look its best then there’s hours of prep, even if you’re going “au naturel” with your lighting. Photoshop can only do so much and then you’re just adding the hours onto the back end.
My guess is no one has that kind of time.
I love ya for your dogged defense of the Mustang but what do we have to do to get you to like trucks!
Come on, there’s a little redneck in all of us!
There was a little redneck in Pam Anderson, but now they’re getting divorced
Only the LTZ tested (and pictured) has the Tahoe dash, but all other trim levels, from strippo work truck to loaded LT have a different, more truck-like dash. Whether that would change Sajeevs button criticizm, I’m not sure.
kaisen, I saw the other dash on Brasher’s lot, it was more to my liking. Big rotary knobs for HVAC, Great Wall of China massiveness…all good stuff, but it looked dull compared to the F150s dash.
That’s why I mentioned it might have been smarter to make one perfect dash for this rig. Maybe some like an SUV dash in their trucks, but I’m not one of them.
“The crew-cab’s rear cabin accommodates the Corn-Fed and Yankee Doodle alike; ample seat cushions provide a terrific view over the low-rise Tahoe dashboard onto the road ahead”
Did you actually sit in the back seat?
I really like the looks of this truck, inside and out. But the rear seat has about the same legroom as the competition’s King/Extended cabs, pretty pathetic for a new design like this. The only crew that could be comfortable in this cab would have to be shorter than 5′5″.
GM’s not alone in having a giant Crew Cab truck with cramped rear seat: Dodge’s Ram suffers the same fate.
Toyota’s new Crew Cab is HUGE HUGE HUGE
Way bigger than GM or Ford or Nissan
Bigger than 1/2 ton Dodge and equal to Dodge’s Mega-Cab
The new Tundra Crew Max back seat is the belated answer to your testosterone-filled high school dreams.
I thought the GM and Ford crew back seats were comfortable enough, and I’m 6′2″.
kkop: I’m 5′10″ and I fit fine in the back. Its no Dodge Ram Megacab, but I’m willing to sacrifice the space for sleeker, less pregnant look.
I am under the impression that the proposed Hurricane engine (Ford, this better be more than a proposal at this point, the F150 is bringing a knife to a gunfight right now), while based on the modular 5.4 has been bored out for more displacement.
CSJohnston: this month’s M/T says that the 2007 Boss Mustang will have a hurricane 5.0L. So maybe there will be a larger 4.6L and 5.4L for next year.
While you can bore these blocks a bit more, they really need GM-sized bore spacing to make real displacement. I’m hoping a new block is part of the equation.
But I still can’t stop thinking that pushrods are the only way to go with a truck. Maybe the Hurricane will change my mind.
Comparing Crew Cabs to Mega Cabs: very helpful…
Comparing Crew Cabs to Mega Cabs: very helpful…
How is it NOT helpful!?
A crew cab is defined as four conventionally-opening doors. Some are bigger or smaller than others.
Dodge has two flavors: the half-ton which is bigger than a reverse-opening rear-door extended-cab but smaller than a ‘normal’ crew, and then their huge mega-cab (2500-3500 only).
Toyota’s is about that big. The biggest of the 1/2 tons.
It really depends on which length bed comes with the mega cabs. I prefer a long bed with a crew cab, just to make parking a little easier.
kaisen,
:)))
I think that’s all I can really say!
CJ
Sajeev,
While Ford is in dire dollar straits rights now, I can’t believe they’ll let the F-150 solider on at a huge horsepower and torque disadvantage.
I remember hearing tell of a 6.0L Hurricane rated at 350+ but that was back in 2004/05 and I was likely only half paying attention.
CSJohnston: remember that Ford originally canned the Hurricane program, the dumbest move a truck maker could make. They brought it back post “Way Forward”, so we shall see what’s it made of.
CS,
I drove the top of the line King Ranchified F-150 and found it miserable. The second worst car I’ve driven since “signing” on with TTAC. So, if that’s a benchmark… no thank you.
I don’t like dirt-haulers because I don’t haul dirt, they are more lifestyle statements than anything else and one of my goals in life is to never tow anything.
As for the worst car I’ve driven? It’s sitting outside right now.
Stay tuned.
The Truth about Cars, I repeat Cars and not Trucks. What is wrong with you, this review and some of the others here belong on the The Truth about Trucks website.
This is the whole issue with the industry now isn’t it? We want cars that are as big as trucks. The SUVs people buy today are about the size of a 1935 Packard 7 passenger sedan and probably drive alot the same too, although with power steering and an automatic transmission.
I read this column often and usually by the time I am half way through the comments I am disgusted and depressed. Trucks are reviewed like cars—cars are reviewed as if they were racing cars with all kinds of comments regarding their handling, acceleration in turns and the ability to shift manual and auto-manual transmissions quickly and easily without loosing any precious horsepower and torque. Comfort is often measured by the quality of the stereo and how many electronic features are present in the car/truck.
Where are the reviews that actually comment on the ergonomics of the drivers seat and what the body feels like after sitting there for six hours. It think the only car reviewed here lately that even came close to being rated comfortable was the Lincoln Town Car.
I think there needs to be more cars like the Lincoln Town Car. Comfort and decent handling for its occupants. And with three across seating that provides a sense of space instead of the feeling that one is strapped into a jet fighter.
If a car with the comfort of a Town Car and economy of the Civic were produced I bet there would be a lot of people in the market for cars again.
Thanks for letting me rant, I just had to say it.
You’re welcome. :-)
If a car with the comfort of a Town Car and economy of the Civic were produced I bet there would be a lot of people in the market for cars again.
Well, unless you’ve found a way around the laws of physics, it ain’t gonna happen.
Nothing rides like a 4200lb Town Car.
Nothing gets fuel economy like 2700lb Civic.
The Hurricane Motor has been re-christened as BOSS and will be showing up on the F150 in ‘08 and trickle down to the other cars in the following years
The 5.0L Boss motor mentioned in Motor Trend is a crate motor which is essentially a re-issue of the 1970 Boss 302 Windsor-based small block and is not a production piece.
From what I have read, the new Boss will likely be a SOHC design between 5.8 and 6.4 litres
Sajeev,
It doesn’t seem fair to criticize the dashboard for being too carlike, when buyers do have the option of getting the traditional pickup dash with larger buttons. It’s like testing a car without the optional sunroof and complaining that the view above is limited.
This vehicle is unique in giving owners a choice. Further in that vein, GM has promised a 6-speed transmission in the near future.
I am surprised the ride/handling falls short of the F-150, but trust your views, as they tend to be spot on. There will be some very interesting comparos in early 07, although my expectation is that the Ram will be the one losing the most sales. Once you get past the hemi and megacab features, there isn’t much to recommend it.
Jonny,
We are drooling with anticipation. Are you working on the obscure analogies required to review a car here, or the recaps of drunken encounters required for Jalopnik?
;–)
I don’t understand something about this site: a tendency to have people review vehicles they are predisposed to dislike. The above comments about “dirt haulers”, plus the counterpoint article about the GT500 (the original made it pretty clear that it’s a raw beast)…why? I fail to grasp the point, but I hope my question gets to a few people before Robert edits it out.
I’m not saying have fanbois review vehicles, but someone that dislikes trucks before even getting handed the keys is a pathetic choice for a reviewer: he/she wouldn’t be a potential buyer.
Zanary,
While I always have a quibble with reviews at the edges, my experience of TTAC has been that they are consistently fair. Sajeev’s main critisicms are that the tranny is only 4 speeds and that the interior and ride/handling is a step below the F-150. He’s comparing to like vehicles in the class, not Porsches.
Could it be you’re so used to all the rosy reviews that C/D, R&T, MT etc. produce so they can acquire ad dollars?
Zanary,
Sajeev is one of the more objective reviewers. I did not see anything wrong with the review. Lieberman however… do not put him a truck and expect anything more than hatred for “dirt haulers”. For some reason he absolutely hates all of them, I think it’s because he owns a MX-5.
Zanary,
Before Farago deletes you, I don’t like SUVs either. But if we were holding a “Car of the Year” thingy, my vote would go to the MB GL450.
It totally blew me away. Expecting to hate it, wound up falling in love.
So there you go.
Also, there are a whole host of other car-related sites out there that feature bland writers without opinions or convictions who happily swallow the PR line. Might I suggest [CENSORED]?
1984,
I own a WRX Sport Wagon.
Which hauls plenty.
It doesn’t seem fair to criticize the dashboard for being too carlike, when buyers do have the option of getting the traditional pickup dash with larger buttons. It’s like testing a car without the optional sunroof and complaining that the view above is limited.
SherbornSean: you can get most everything with the “other” dash, but if you want 12-way adjustable heated leather bucket seats and a big console you have to get the LTZ and its Tahoe dash. I like trucks with luxury features, but I also like the inherent truck-goodness of a truck-specific interior.
More importantly, finding a fully loaded Silverado 2LT isn’t very likely, I bet it will be special order only…the LTZ will be on the lot instead.
I am surprised the ride/handling falls short of the F-150, but trust your views, as they tend to be spot on.
Here’s why I said what I did: I noticed the rear was wiggly and had less composure than the F150.
From what I’ve gathered on the internet, the F150 has a better rear frame (through the frame crossmembers) and a better rear suspension design (outboard mounted shocks for leverage on the axle, like a car) and neither seem to be on the Chevy. Too bad I didn’t look for myself when testing the vehicle.
I can’t even imagine anything less composed than the F-150.
I remember hitting two bumps in a row at about 20mpg and I was convinced it was going to rattle apart.
Felt like I was driving a truck. Oh wait…
Lieberman,
WRX… Yeah that’s it.
I remember hitting two bumps in a row at about 20mpg and I was convinced it was going to rattle apart.
Yup, there’s no choice when you have a vehicle made out of three different parts. The cab, bed, and frame all move independent of each other. Some do it way more (Tundra) than others.
Unless you want to be stuck with one body configuration (Ridgeline) that’s what you get.