By on August 11, 2015

output_n6IY1j

2015 GMC Sierra Crew Cab SLT 4×4
6.2-liter OHV V-8, direct injection, cylinder deactivation, CVVT (420 horsepower @ 5,600 rpm; 460 lbs-ft @ 4,100 rpm)

Hydra-Matic 8L90 8-speed automatic

15 city/21 highway/17 combined (EPA Rating, MPG)

16.5 mpg, mostly city driving while yelling “AMERICA!” at full trot. (Observed, MPG)

Tested Options: 6.2L Ecotec3 V-8, navigation, polished exhaust tips, sunroof, spray-in bedliner.

As Tested (U.S.):
$52,300 w/ $1,195 destination charge (sheet)
As Tested (Canada):
$59,615 w/ $1,795 destination charge and A/C tax (sheet)

A farm, lots of mud thanks to rain from the previous day, and a dose of sunshine to dry out the ground just enough so my feet wouldn’t lose their boots in the slop. This is the perfect location — along with the perfect conditions — to test one of the latest from the pickup crop, the 2015 GMC Sierra.

Or is it?

Under the hood of the SLT-trimmed Sierra sits a V-8 less suited to farm duty and better equipped for automotive trolling.

Before we get into the meat and potatoes of the Sierra, I have a small announcement to make. TTAC now has an off-road area for testing trucks and SUVs. Sort of. It probably won’t be fully available for us for a little while, but shenanigans will be had before the end of the summer. Here’s hoping the automakers send us some metal so we can put it to the test at this newfound playland.

As for this Sierra, well, it isn’t a farm truck. Hell, it’s barely a work truck. The Sierra is available in four different trim levels — base, SLE, SLT and the top-trim Denali. Our SLT-trimmed tester arrived with its bench seat still intact, which is great for mid-summer-romance canoodling and one of the reasons girls dig guys with trucks, maybe.

Interior configuration aside, the real news for this Sierra is under the hood. The 6.2-liter Ecotec3 V-8, with its 420 horsepower and 460 pounds-feet of torque, is a nod to old-school solutions to making power and a pragmatic approach to efficiency. The pushrod V-8 might sound antiquated next to the new turbo and diesel units from Ford and Dodge, but that doesn’t make it any less valid.

2015 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT 4x4 6.2 (1 of 25)

Powertrain
Big power, these days, is easy to make. When you can go out and buy a family sedan with over 700 horsepower for under $100,000, power is almost insignificant — unless you are also trying to pair that power with fuel economy.

Previously only available on the chrome-laden Denali, the 6.2-liter V-8 now finds its way to lesser, more restrained trims like this SLT model — and it’s a punisher. Paired with fairly unassuming looks, the bigger V-8 will give a lot of performance cars a run for their money. We aren’t talking M3-beating performance here. After all, regardless of what you folks may think, I am not completely delusional. Yet, with this combination you could definitely catch a few people off-guard at stop lights.

That would be completely true if it wasn’t for the incredible amount of latency experienced from a standing start. It feels like you can count the number of seconds between your foot depresses the accelerator and the V-8 comes to life. The experience is painful. At busy intersections, you are left questioning the Sierra’s ability to get out of its own way and, more importantly, that of oncoming cross traffic. Why that latency exists, I’m not quite sure. It could be a matter of many causes. It surely isn’t because the engine is lacking power or torque, however.

The modern six-speed automatic transmissions from GM have always impressed me with their smooth-shifting antics regardless of the lazy speed in which they perform those shifts, but the eight-speed slushbox in our tester seems to have lost a little bit of its refinement while still retaining its lethargic nature. Paired with the big eight-cylinder engine, shifts can be abrupt at mid-throttle and deeper into the revs. Thankfully, when putting around town, the Hydra-Matic 8L90 exhibits the same silky demeanor as its six-geared counterpart.

In reality, the eight-speed is meant to deliver increased efficiency and not Rolls-Royce shift quality. In that regard, and in combination with the L86’s cylinder deactivation turning the V-8 into a V-4, direct injection, and CVVT, the V-8 is rated similarly to the Ram 1500’s 5.7-liter HEMI V-8 on fuel economy while delivering 25 more horsepower and 50 more pounds-feet of torque. I call that a win. For the turbo and diesel averse, it’s a no brainer if you’re looking for big numbers. And comparing the Ecotec3 with the HEMI gives GM a win for payload and towing by multiples of hundreds of pounds — when properly equipped, of course.

2015 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT 4x4 6.2 (18 of 25)

Exterior
This category is the only one that separates a GMC from a lesser Chevrolet and it’s also wholly subjective. Personally, I’d take the Sierra over the Silverado for the extra half sandwich it costs for a cleaner, three-lettered grille and headlights that don’t appear to be lifted from one of Michael Bay’s “Transformers.” Aft of the front fascia, the two trucks — save their badging and color choices — are completely identical.

Compared with the F-150, the Sierra looks much more restrained and professional, less Tonka-like and thrown together. Ignoring that the Ram Rebel grille exists, I think the FCA offering is the most handsome of the domestics — and easily much better looking than the Tundra and Titan. Again, wholly subjective.

In profile, the squared-off wheel wells are trimmed well in off-road-looking plastic. However, ignoring that GM design cue, the Sierra and Silverado are slab-sided pickups — and that’s totally, perfectly, absolutely okay. The day I see a BMW-esque flame surfacing on a pickup is the day I give up on humanity.

Around back, GM ignores fancy RamBox and Ford retract-a-step features for customizable anchoring solutions and a notch cut into the bumper for pickup bed ingress. GM seems much more pragmatic when it comes to their trucks, preferring simpler, usable solutions over flashy, marketing-friendly buzzword features like those found on Fords and Rams.

But, if there’s one thing that bugs me about GM trucks, it’s the bed. I will freely admit this is something my somewhat OCD brain thinks is an issue and probably isn’t … but! the ridges in the bed floor are all wrong. Being someone who hauls motorcycles in the pickup beds, I like the very middle ridge in the bed floor to go down, not up, so I can put the tires of the motorcycle I am hauling in the center groove and know for certain the weight of said motorcycle is evenly distributed side-to-side. Also, it helps ease my unfounded worries that the motorcycle tires will slip to one side or the other riding atop one of the ridges. Yes, I know this is a me issue.

2015 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT 4x4 6.2 (19 of 25)

Interior
If you want a quiet place to do your work, you can’t find a much better cabin than that of GM’s full-size pickups. Thanks to clever sealing solutions and active noise cancellation, the Sierra is “library silent” — that is unless you put your foot down for a quick scoot to 60 as the 6.2 still makes enough of a ruckus to be heard loud and clear.

If you order a Sierra without the optional captain’s chairs up front, the middle can be used as a console or additional seat for drive-in theater trips. Also, since the console isn’t fixed, the floor space is open from side to side. Transporting a very important package along with a very important person? You can keep both up front.

The seats themselves, while they do provide a wide range of adjustability along with the moveable steering wheel and pedals, didn’t provide the best comfort. It wasn’t until the very end of the week that I found a seating/pedal/steering wheel position combination where I was somewhat comfortable. The seat leather is just fair. The overall design of the interior is OK.

In the back row of our crew cab tester, space is ample and the seats are easy as pie to fold up. There is no latching. They simply flip up and stay there — sometimes. If you plan on traversing some rougher roads, those latchless seats will flip back down without warning.

All that said, I like the Ram interior more overall, but this bests the F-150 in my eyes.

2015 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT 4x4 6.2 (21 of 25)

Infotainment
I still do not understand how navigation is an option on a $50,000 pickup, especially when the cost of it is probably negligible for the automaker. On a base model? Sure, make people pay for the ability to find their way in an automated fashion across the country. In an almost top-trim truck, well, you’re just taking the piss.

Maybe my brain is wired a bit differently than Aaron’s father — that’s the guinea pig yardstick Aaron uses to figure out if a system is user-friendly or not — because GM’s system always confuses me. On top of that, the screen is so damn far away from the driver. If you need to do anything on the infotainment system while driving, you need to move ahead just short of unbuckling yourself to reach the screen.

2015 GMC Sierra 1500 SLT 4x4 6.2 (8 of 25)

Drive
Unfortunately, I didn’t get to test the Sierra with a load, but the unloaded drive gives a good impression of its capabilities. Effortless power. A smooth (for a pickup) ride. I just wish I was a bit more comfortable.

There’s something to be said for a big, American-style V-8. The Sierra, unlike the EcoBoost F-150, will put a 6.2-liter-sized grin on your face. This is about as close as you can get to a muscle car with a bed in the back. I’d even go far as to say this particular truck probably has more in common with the muscle cars of yesteryear than the modern muscle cars of today to their forebears. It’s unapologetic and without flash. Just a truck with a big engine that does exactly as its throaty lump advertises. The 6.2-liter L89 will completely embarrass that Craigslist Ferrari you’ve been eyeballing and be less of a basket case when it comes to repairs in the long run — not that you’d cross shop the two.

Yet, I cannot emphasize enough that this truck isn’t a workhorse. It might have the capability, but it’s too dear to be used around the cabbage patch. As a family hauler with the might to tow along a travel trailer or boat, however, it would feel right at home.

General Motors provided the vehicle and insurance for this review.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

45 Comments on “2015 GMC Sierra Crew Cab Review – America: The Truck...”


  • avatar
    APaGttH

    A 2001 Chevy Avalanche with the 5.3L Vortec V8 produced 285 HP and 325 pound feet torque got 13/17 in AWD configuration 14 model years ago.

    In 14 years an engine with 15% more displacement produces 32% more horsepower and 30% more torque, while getting 24% better city mileage, and 20% better highway mileage, with a larger tow and haul rating.

    Amazing progress in a short period of time.

    The laziness you’re experiencing off the line is likely GMs torque management programming. Programmed to prevent wheel spin at the launch so ironically the more you hammer down, the more torque management you dial in.

    A $300 programmer is the best modification you can get for any GM truck – or really any GM vehicle with RWD and the 6-speed or 8-speed getting the motivation to the drive shaft. Solves the lazy shifting and dials back the torque management.

    The torque management has been programmed in to prevent wheel spin when traction is required (initial pull on a slippery boat ramp, loose surface, etc.) but for day-to-day driving it’s a royal PITA.

    • 0 avatar
      CarnotCycle

      Totally agree on software being culprit in laggy throttle response. Wife and I rented a 2015 Escape with the blowdryer’ed Eco4 and I enjoyed operating the vehicle barring the definite sensation I was playing the equivalent of a video game – there is no mechanical connection between any driver input and vehicle output.

      That was most apparent punching through a pinkish-orange light intersection. When I stepped on it, I could sense the vehicle tell itself the driver said go, then run some numbers on current status, send updated instructions to the ECU cache, check again if I really meant to go, and then actually executed the instructions to the powertrain for ‘go.’

      Seriously, quarter second of lag between stepping on it and the vehicle responding.

  • avatar
    Syke

    As someone who’s hauled quite a few motorcycles over the past forty year, that bed issue is not just you. I’ve rejected a few trucks in the past due to not being comfortable with how the front wheel will plant itself when the front fork is under compression from the tie downs.

    And when you’re talking vintage bikes with other than hydraulic forks, it gets even more critical.

  • avatar
    dwford

    I’ve got a 2014 Sierra with the 5.3. I’ll totally agree about the lack of throttle response. It will move, but only if you really nail the gas. Otherwise you’d think it had a 4 cylinder. I’m not the biggest fan of the 6 speed auto, though. It seems like it is designed to slip into neutral whenever possible, and at slow speeds with part throttle it clunks into gear. It is an extremely quiet, smooth riding (on the highway) truck. Love it.

    Fun tip, when you drive on the highway in the rain, the shape of the hood catches the rain and makes 2 shimmering pools of water on the hood on either side of the hood indent that stay there until you come to a stop.

  • avatar
    NoGoYo

    Shame that 6.2 isn’t in the 2500, it seems like a pretty snazzy motor but if I’m buying a new truck, it’s gonna be a 3/4 ton.

    • 0 avatar

      I forget the reasoning behind GM keeping the 6.0-liter V-8 in the HD trucks, but I will ask.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        The 6.2L isn’t an HD engine. While it has more power, it isn’t meant to haul all day, every day.

        Plus, fleets like the 6.0L. It’s the same reason why the 3.5EB isn’t in the F250. The Boss 6.2L is a workhorse.

        • 0 avatar
          NoGoYo

          It seems kinda gutless though…like the 5.3 in the half tons.

          But I bet the bottom end is stout and I could get 400hp easily…

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The 6.0L is tough as nails. It, and the Ford 6.2L, are really optimized for HD applications. The GM 6.0L may seem weak next to this new engine, but it just keeps going.

            The Boss 6.2L in particular, wants to pull all the time, everywhere. Raptor sales at the end of the 2014 model run were super high because people knew that was the last chance to get that engine in a 1/2 ton. CAFE is a b!tch.

          • 0 avatar
            NoGoYo

            Heh, sounds like a throwback to the old days of truck-specific low-power/high-torque motors, like the Ford 360 and 370 and the Chevy 366.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          “Plus, fleets like the 6.0L. ”

          I know someone that owns a towing company and they love that 6.0 in their 1 ton wreckers.

          I’m past 11, going on 12 years of ownership with my ’04 HD Sierra and the 6.0 has been bullet proof(along with the rest of the truck)sans snapping exhaust manifold bolts which is a known problem with motor.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The low end grunt and durability of GM and Ford’s entry level HD engines is amazing. The diesels aren’t even needed by most fleets. I was talking to a wrecker driver with a Ford 6.2L powered truck last week and he had nothing but good things to say. I hear the same from GM 6.0L drivers.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          Agree with bball40dtw. The 6.2 isn’t a work truck engine. The 6.0 will live longer under a HD duty cycle. My brother has never had any issues with any of the 6.0 work trucks he has had. He isn’t fond of how the transmissions shift under heavy load but he says the newer HD’s are improved.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    Trucks like this make no sense to me. Too fancy to actually use as a truck. Too big and awkward to be very useful for general transportation outside of Texas. I’ve had the joy of piloting a 4dr long bed truck around Portland, ME, at times I wanted tugboats to push the bow around. Parking? Fugedaboutit.

    I like trucks for trucky things, but are you really going to dump 1000lbs of gravel in the bed of a $50K truck? Or take it off road? Might as well buy a Tahoe and rent a trailer when you need to haul gravel. Of course, then someone might think you are a soccer Mom, and that just won’t do at all…

    As for the lack of NAV – GOOD! I don’t want it. I have a smartphone with Google Apps, why do I need some crap built into the car? The screen mirroring thing will be great, if they can manage to keep it working across 10+ years of smartphone evolution. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! Yeah, that’s gonna happen.

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      I don’t understand the too fancy part. Aside from not wanting to scratch the paint (which would be true for any new vehicle), you just use it like a truck. i love having the leather – makes cleaning easier when I get in it dirty. I wish GM had a better bedliner – it doesn’t cover the top of the bed by the rear window, and when the tailgate is down, the paint is exposed at the edge of the bed and on the inside of the tailgate. Also, GM makes crappy rubber floor mats that are not only not deep enough, but they are too small to really protect the carpet.

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

        Exactly. Ive seen site managers bury their Lariat/Laramie/SLT in mud, haul 4-5 crew members in and out of the woods, stocked full of tools and whatever else may be needed. The truck, while well equipped, is still a truck and is perfectly capable to be used as one just like the vinyl and rubber floor XL is.

        My uncle, God rest his soul, ran a logging company from a pretty loaded GMC 2500 4X4. He never let the options his truck was equipped with keep him from bailing off in a mud hole that would swallow a Chevy Sonic, lol. Did it get dented, scuffed and so forth? Yes, but he wanted a nice truck to work out of and it performed perfectly.

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      “Might as well buy a Tahoe ”

      Not that easy. Trim for trim, the Tahoe stickers for something like $10,000 additional. After incentives it’s closer to $15,000 and stronger truck resale values will only increase that delta later.

      I don’t need the bed twice a year but for that kind of money I’ll live with it.

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        “Might as well buy a Tahoe ”

        I had to laugh at that comment as I need to sell my Sierra HD. I’d really rather sell the ‘Hoe, but for reasons that I won’t go into the it makes the most sense to keep it and drive it into the ground. Really looking forward to buying and maintaining another trailer. I suspect in time I’ll be back to a PU. You just can’t beat their versatility and usefulness.

        And your dead nuts on about the SUV costing more when new and not holding its resale value like a PU.

        • 0 avatar
          krhodes1

          For every one of you who actually uses a truck as a truck, there are 100 Suburban cowboys who would better off in an SUV that is feet shorter, more comfortable, and easier to deal with in the urban/suburban environs they are actually used in 99.99% of the time. And the majority of THOSE people would be better off with a minivan, if they didn’t have delusions of being the Marlboro man/woman.

          If I were buying a truck to be a truck, I would have the most basic H/D work truck trim I could that still has A/C. And use it like a rented mule. Then take the $20K+ I saved and spend it on something that is actually decent to drive and ride in. $50K and the seats still suck, sheesh.

          Fancy-pants trucks are the ultimate expression of the power of marketing, IMHO.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            krhodes1 – most of the loggers I know buy the higher trim level trucks. They argue that they work/live in their trucks so they might as well be comfortable.

            I do agree that a large number of pickup buyers don’t really need a truck but then again most of us don’t need sports cars either.

          • 0 avatar

            GIVE ME MY BRONCO.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            @Lou_BC

            Here’s the thing. I own a sports car. It has ~75hp on a good day, gets 35mpg driving it like I stole it, and if I hit somebody with it *I* lose. You could fit two of it in the space that one of these behemoths takes up. Other road users can see around it. IMHO this makes it a pretty responsible way to cart myself around, since I rarely have any need of moving anything but myself with it.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            krhodes1 – valid point. People buy what they want and rarely ever what they need.

            The love of full sized trucks is an interesting phenomenon especially for those who don’t really need one.

            My truck is not used for work but it does give me the versatility that I can’t find in other vehicles. It is big, that is true but until GM released the Colorado there wasn’t a small truck rated for 1500-1800 lb of cargo. I like the Colorado but the back seat in that crewcab is cramped for my 13 yr old son.

          • 0 avatar
            SSJeep

            Most of the pickup owners I have seen have a reason for owning them – even if it is to pull a boat or camper a few times each year…

    • 0 avatar
      CoreyDL

      Is your RR an HSE with ancient nav?

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Even the current RR nav system is atrocious. Since Ford stole the Terrain Select knob and a bunch of styling cues, Land Rover could at least try to steal Ford’s nav system. Both the current MFT and previous system are way better than what LR has.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        @CoreyDL

        Yes, an HSE. The nav screen got deleted about 5 minutes after I got the thing home from TX in favor of the storage bin from the lesser models. I still have the cd changer for it in the trunk though.

        I suppose the one cool thing about that old nav system was the ability to set off-road waypoints with it. Otherwise pretty terrible. At this point I own three standalone GPS units, an LTE Nexus tablet and a Nexus smartphone. The last thing I need is nav built into the car. Though I ended up with it on the M235i because I wanted the other stuff included in the package. Sigh.

  • avatar
    mikey

    Good review ….I’ve been “considering ” an SLT double cab , with the 6.2 litre, and the 6.5 ft box. ” considering ” might just be as far as I go. …….That 60 K Canadian price ! ….is truly frightening . Always fun to dream …..,!

  • avatar
    Iwishmywagonhadamanual

    Part of the issue is GM has a setting in the engine management software that reduces power output for approximately 4 seconds. They have done this to allow the engine to achieve higher fuel economy ratings at the expense of acceleration. I personally think that this is complete BS. In passing situations, when maximum power delivery is an issue of safety, these trucks will barely get out of their own way. I have anecdotally heard that they only output around 350 horsepower when limited.

  • avatar
    Dan

    This truck is new GM in a nutshell.

    It looks expensive, it feels expensive, it rides expensive, it has a powertrain to make you drool.

    And it’s even more expensive than that, you can’t have the good powertrain, the factory tune is a sadistic eco mode that you can’t turn off, and it’s made in Mexico for 8 bucks an hour.

    Hard to live with, hard to write off.

  • avatar
    stuki

    For some inexplicable reason, GM’s half tons only offer a >26 gallon tank in the reg cab long bed. Hence, I’d get a Ford or Ram in any other cab than regular, despite otherwise preferring GM’s design values (lower, more car like, less bro’ish, traditional truck engines…)

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      stuki – makes no sense offering a small fuel tank in a 1/2 ton pickup. Chevy’s 96 litres/25 gallons US is pathetic really. My F150’s tank is 135 litres/35.6 US gallons. I travelled 850km/530 miles through the Rockies to Calgary at 110-120 kph and still have 20 litres of fuel left when I got to a gas station a few blocks from our friend’s place. I got the same mpg on the way back. 13.26 litres/100km or 17.7 mpg US. I must add that was also running 10 ply General Grabber AT2’s. Hardly a mpg friendly tire.

      • 0 avatar
        stuki

        It seems to be a result of a production process building the tank alongside other sub assemblies dimensioned according to bed length. Ford’s and Ram’s tanks are sized by frame length, which it makes much more sense would impose a hard limit on the tank’s size. Toyota is just lazy, and only offer one, small, tank size, period.

        It could be GM is unable to fit part of the tank under the cab, the way F&R do, since they focus on making the cab sit lower for a more carlike ride. I haven’t really looked to closely into it.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I prefer the look of the Sierra over the Silverado, the opposite of the my view of the midsizers.

    The grilles are still to large for such a small engine. They just don’t look functional, more animated, gimmicky.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    The gif makes it look like you banged your head on the wheel!

  • avatar

    I’ve owned four 6.0 HD trucks and they’ve all been gems. I’ve also reprogrammed each one to dump the torque management. My current daily driver is a 2013 4×4 2500 Suburban – all the functionality of an HD pickup but I can keep my stuff and the kid’s stuff out of the rain. Off-road? Certainly! Front torsion bars and rear leafs mean reliability. Oil and tranny coolers offer the same. And the biggest perk is the 39 gallon fuel tank – range of 650 miles when crossing Texas. Shame they discontinued it for us non-fleeters; I’ve been strategizing on what it’d take to get my company registered as a fleet so I can buy a 2017.

    Can’t bring myself to buy pickups any more…

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Kudos to GM for keeping the bench seat, I was starting to think that no one offered one in anything except a regular cab pick up truck.

    ‘Merica, nuff said.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      PrincipalDan – I like the bench option. I was looking at some 2015 F150’s and the centre console is a monstrosity. I’ve noticed the same with competitors that have consoles as well. My F150 has the column shift and 60/40 bench. It is nice to have the extra seating on occasion. Unfortunately GM does not have an optional console for those who want it.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        You can get a bench seat in the F150. 40/20/40 is standard, like on the GM tricks. Neither are what “bench seats” used to be though.

      • 0 avatar
        SSJeep

        I cant stand the consoles, they serve no purpose other than a place to keep junk. Not to mention that they are big chunks of ugly plastic that take up way too much leg room.

        My last truck had a bench seat. I wouldnt have it any other way.

  • avatar
    Flipper35

    Please tell me the animated gifs are not going to be part of the site! Road and Track litters their pages with these and it is horrible enough I can’t stand to visit their site. One or two here and there is tolerable, but don’t be putting them everywhere.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    Good review. The Sierra is by far the best looking truck on the market IMO…but then again I also like the conservative look of the Titan. I get lost in a pickup truck…despite my physical size, I’m nervous Nellie driving that size bulk.

    I think Urban Cowboy started the whole Cowboy Cadillac pickup trend, at least here in Texas….funny how the Lincoln and Caddy trucks failed in the marketplace, but the $55k Fords, Chevys and Dodges they can’t make enough of.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @Jeff’s- I heard that rumour too. GM needs to have a V6 that actually has some torque.
  • Lou_BC: @imagefront – All depends on what you mean by “off road”. In my province there are 729,000...
  • Imagefont: Fact: if you drive off road 500 miles over the life of a vehicle (your ownership, well over 100,000...
  • Inside Looking Out: “132,101 deaths” That’s not true. I heard on TV that there are 120 million...
  • Steve S.: I was there. A lot of stupid ideas were hyped because the companies had “.com” in their names....

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber