By on January 17, 2018

I left Detroit at 4:51AM on Tuesday morning, pointed south for a three-hour drive that would terminate with the beginning of my workday. I could have taken the morning off, but I like to surround my auto shows with a little bit of deliberate misery, lest I inadvertently become too comfortable in the entirely artificial universe of public relations and journalist-pampering that seems to gain steam every year even as the rest of the event comes to resemble the petal-dropping Enchanted Rose in the spare wing of the Beast’s castle. Thus the  4 AM wakeup and the trudge out to the frozen parking lot, hunchbacked with suit bags and audibly creaking from every joint, Danger Girl trailing behind me with the wide-eyed stare common to prisoners of war and victims of spousal abuse, even if it’s mostly musical in nature.

We were not the only people starting our morning, and our truck, before dawn. Long-time TTAC readers may remember that General Motors and a few other automakers pay the travel expenses of quite a few autojournos in exchange for obtaining control of their narratives. Most of them arrive a few days before the actual show, all the better to maximize the free meals and curated experiences. On Saturday, while my son and I were driving up to a skatepark in Cleveland for an evening’s worth of BMX riding, I’d seen a former colleague of mine whining on Instagram about the less-than-five-star nature of his complimentary accommodations at the GM Renaissance Marriott. The only way I could think of to register my disappointment was to change my own hotel reservation to the absolute cheapest room available on Hotels.com: $47 a night for the Allen Park Motor Lodge.

The motel, and the room, turned out to be kinda-sorta okay, although the bed didn’t really make the grade for two people with a hardware store’s worth of screws and bolts in their bones. Here’s the interesting part: I’d expected that most of my fellow motel-dwellers would be engaged in some form of recreational depravity, but in actuality the bulk of them were construction and service-industry workers taking advantage of the weekly rates. They were early to bed and early to rise. Our work-truck white Silverado, parked in a line of pickups that stretched all the way across the motel’s road frontage, was notable only for being slightly newer than the rest. As we backed out of our spot, I saw a few Carhartt-clad fellows trudging out to the Colorados and F-150s and Rams, tool belts slung over their shoulders, rubbing their eyes and exhaling cloudy yawns of crystallized steam towards the moon.

Back to life, back to reality. But there was a bit of irony in it for me, because this Detroit show was the first one in a long time to acknowledge the connection between the polished artifice of the press-event turntable and the early-morning trudge to one’s truck.


I don’t have any insider information or evidence to support this assertion, but I’m going to make it anyway: Chevrolet probably didn’t want to show the 2019 Silverado at the Detroit show. I think that FCA forced their hand with the RAM reveal. If I had to guess, I would say that GM probably originally intended to show the Silverado at New York. There are a few reasons for this. To begin with, they were short on product at the show. The old trucks are still shipping, and they took up quite a bit of room on the floor. Furthermore, there was no equivalent GMC Sierra available, which means that they don’t even have the pre-production vehicles to show.

It’s marketing suicide to show a new pickup truck too far in advance. Personally speaking, I think Honda does it right. They show a “concept” about as far out as most automakers show next year’s model. Then they do the press events when the new cars are already on the haulers headed towards the dealers. They value the constant flow of metal more than they value the mostly imaginary PR boost from showing everybody the next big thing while the old big thing has six months’ of showroom exposure left. That’s smart business. What GM did is the opposite of what Honda does, which is typical for them and also typically wrong.

Surely the early Silverado reveal was an attempt to steal some marketing momentum from the facelifted 2018 F-150 and frankly spectacular 2018 RAM. “Don’t rush out and buy the new trucks from our competitors! We have this awesome new half-ton on the way!” It felt a little desperate, right down to the contrived nature of the Saturday-night reveal that was guaranteed to find a mostly sympathetic audience because GM had paid to fill the seats with its own travel-compensated bloggers and “journalists”. I’m not sure if the whole thing was made more or less pathetic by the fact that the 2019 Silverado is obviously a major revision rather than an all-new truck. Our own Bozi Tatarevic was on hand to take measurements of hard points, but it was obvious even to my liberal-arts eye that the new Silverado is going to be a lot like the old Silverado. Only uglier.

Shame, really, because the old Silverado is more than up to the task of competing with the new trucks. To begin with, it has better and more efficient engines. It’s also still more than competitive in all of the wacky metrics that get high-end truck owners excited. The one thing it lacks is some genuine bling, which the 2018 F-150 Limited and new RAM Limited have in absolute spades. The interior of the $67,000 F-150 Limited SuperCrew is astoundingly opulent, while the new RAM Limited looks like a cross between an S-Class and a Tesla Model S once you open the door. (Both of them look like ’73 Granadas next to the new Navigator Yacht Club, but that’s a story for another time.) But GM has the Sierra Denali to take the fight to those pimptrucks and the new High Country Silverado still obviously shows the Kerrigan-esque scars of deliberate crippling familiar to anybody who ever cross-shopped a Caprice Classic Brougham and a Ninety-Eight Regency.

Still, this was the first time in my memory that all the major players have shown new trucks almost at once. Which makes it the most truthful and most genuine auto show I’ve ever witnessed, because full-sized trucks are like the nine-tenths of an iceberg that you don’t see. I’ve been attending the Detroit show for more than twenty years, first as a Charity Preview participant and then as a journalist, and without fail it’s been the same thing. All sorts of hyper-hyped bluster and blather about cars that barely pay their own development costs while the show floor remains thick with the trucks that actually cover the bills. Not this time. Ford drove the point home with a nifty second-floor display that took you all the way through their crew-cab lineup, from F-150 XLT to Limited to Raptor to Super Duty. From the driver’s seats of the trucks you could look down at the Mustangs and the autonomous garbage with the same sense of self-assured superiority that the truck-line managers must feel when they report profits up the chain every year.

FCA had given as much space to the RAM trucks as they had to the rest of their products, and it was justified. This is a spectacular vehicle that pushes the limits the same way the that the 1994 predecessor did. Only this time the outrageousness is inside the cabin, not on the nose. It’s more than just a pretty face. There’s a ton of engineering underneath, including splayed octagonal front frame rails that will likely make this the best-crashing truck in history.

I will always remember 2018 as the year when the pickups got their full share of the spotlight. It was on my mind as I stopped at the Pilot station in northwestern Ohio at 6:30 Tuesday morning. The lot was filled with pickups, tired-looking men walking back to them carrying tall cups of coffee, ready to start the day. It made me think of a speech I read a while back where Neal Boortz says,

Speaking of earning, the revered 40-hour workweek is for losers. Forty hours should be considered the minimum, not the maximum. You don’t see highly successful people clocking out of the office every afternoon at five. The losers are the ones caught up in that afternoon rush hour. The winners drive home in the dark.

He may well be right. But if the winners are driving home in the dark, the workers are leaving home in the dark, part of that massive manual-labor infrastructure, the Morlocks who keep the world going and keep the power turned on so my increasingly-effete colleagues can blog about microaggression from the comfort of their gentrified loft. I’m not saying that I’m one of them – for Christ’s sake, I was wearing a set of two-tone Edward Green spectators as I stepped out of my Chevy work truck – but I’m saying that I’ve seen them. They are the nine-tenths of the iceberg. Just like the trucks they drive. And it’s the iceberg you can’t see that causes the problems. You ignore it at your peril.

[Image: Ram/FCA]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

76 Comments on “No Fixed Abode: Auto Shows In The Time Of Icebergs...”


  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    “But GM has the Sierra Denali to take the fight to those pimptrucks and the new High Country Silverado still obviously shows the Kerrigan-esque scars of deliberate crippling familiar to anybody who ever cross-shopped a Caprice Classic Brougham and a Ninety-Eight Regency.”

    That’s gold, Jerry! GOLD!

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      The real takeaway from any “auto snow,” including 2018 NAIAS in Detroit (now massively less important than Geneva, Chicago, Los Angeles…and arguably, the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas) –

      Why The Sedan Is Marked for Death In America (and elsewhere)

      https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-01-16/why-the-american-sedan-is-marked-for-death

      It’s going to get to the point where pickups, SUVs, and few CUVs obtain well over 90% market penetration in the U.S., sooner than most think, and y’all goin’ to be put up in chains!

      (*Sergio Marchione is an accidental or prescient genius in this narrative)

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Except the Ninety-Eight was a C body, shared with Cadillac and Buick, not the lowly Caprice. Nit picking? Maybe. But, its true.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        Picking nits yes – his argument was that the Chevy had noticeably downmarket interior appointments compared to a Oldsmobile and that was on purpose so GM could try to make a case for both to exist.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus

          Ahh, I understand now. I thought the point was supposed to be that they were both about the same yet one was cheaper to buy, thus crippling the more expensive car by offering a nearly-as-good car for less coin.

          • 0 avatar
            Jack Baruth

            Right — and don’t even get me started on the entirely artificial difference between a B-body and a C-body :)

          • 0 avatar
            Featherston

            I knew the platforms were similar and that both were downsized for ’77, but I didn’t realize how much they were in lockstep until looking at the “Oldsmobile road car timeline” for the 88 and the 98 in Wikipedia. As explained in the article on the C Platform: “From at least 1941, when the B-body followed suit in adopting the C-body’s pioneering lower and wider runningboardless bodystyle, it may be viewed as a stretched version of the GM B platform.”

          • 0 avatar
            JohnTaurus

            #inchesmatter

            Don’t think so? 6 inches of length turns a normal pickup into a bone-crushing monstrosity that’s impossible to drive without a well-staffed support crew.

          • 0 avatar
            Featherston

            @JohnTaurus – Oh, I don’t disagree. I think the Cs (at least based on the ’77s) typically had about 5″ of wheelbase on the Bs.

            I just expected a little variation in platform life cycles. For the 88 and 98, I think I counted seven generations in a row that began in the same model year.

            The underlining oddity is that it’s not like the Bs weren’t roomy. Once features (specifically V8 power, a/c, power locks & windows, & cruise control) had filtered down to the top B-body Impala or Caprice, it became much harder to justify buying a C-body Cadillac. Worse still for Cadillac’s image, this roughly coincided with their decision to chase volume, hurting cachet and resale. My grandparents, who had an in with a relative who owned a Buick-Cadillac dealership, actually “downgraded” in the late ’60s, even though they were in an improving financial condition. (NB: They also had a Chevrolet in with a client of my grandfather.) To them, a loaded Chevy at “friends and family” price just made more sense than a Cadillac at “friends and family” price.

  • avatar
    xflowgolf

    Seems a little shifty to knock the Silverado for “…was made more or less pathetic by the fact that the 2019 Silverado is obviously a major revision rather than an all-new truck.” when the 2018 F150 seems to be a very mild nose-job, and that’s getting a pass.

    I’m not sure their hand was forced, since they already did that surprise quick reveal showing in Texas over a month ago.

    The timing does seem to be typical GM though.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      In fairness, the current F150 was a pretty radical departure from the previous model.

      • 0 avatar
        scott25

        And the big hyped reveal of the 2018 F150 happened last year, not here. So it wasn’t really hoping or trying to compete with the others. That’s the Ranger’s job.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Ford isn’t touting the F-150 as all-new. They use words like “revised”. 2018 is its 3rd model year since the major redesign, it was due for a refresh, not a total redo. It is by no means stale or outdated.

      The Silverado 1500 has been out since ’14, and was not exactly groundbreaking when it debuted.

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    “…it was obvious even to my liberal-arts eye that the new Silverado is going to be a lot like the old Silverado. Only uglier.”

    Glad I’m not the only one who noticed that.

  • avatar

    The winners leave work at 3:30 to play golf, while the losers are doing the work for them.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      This.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Someone has to file the TPS reports.

      • 0 avatar
        28-Cars-Later

        We’re gonna need to go ahead and move you downstairs into storage B. We have some new people coming in, and we need all the space we can get. So if you could go ahead and pack up your stuff and move it down there, that would be terrific, mmmKay?

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      I guess that depends on your idea of a winner. To me, its a man who works hard (and by that I mean he actually works as in getting his hands dirty and suffering more than the occasional paper cut) and gets the job done no matter what, not the man who gets a new German luxo SUV every 6 months and “works hard” by scheming off the working stiffs who actually make the world go ’round.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        The U.S., under Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, Obama, and now Trump, increasingly with each such presidential reign (especially since 1999 when The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA), also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, was intro’d), has turned into a dynastic wealth, upper 5% (and now upper 1/10th of one percent), upper wealth-skewing (incomes, but especially inflation on financial assets), middle-class decimating (wages are pretty much flat in nominal terms and negative in real terms, since the late 1980s), 1920s Robber Baron era-besting country (concentration of vast wealth among a tiny slice of society, the top 0.1% — or 330,000 Americans — of households now hold about the same amount of wealth as the bottom 90% — 300,000,000 million Americans [see FRED Data’compiled by Fed Reserve, ironically, a major enabler, through moderation policy, of such spectacular wealth concentration and middle class deconstruction).

        The left coast technology sector (which at least added real things of value domestically and globally) and east coast financial sector (which is a parasitic drag on the rest of the country, and a heavily subsidized, TBTF sector, at that) are eating most of the pie (the defense complex gets a not too shoddy 800 billion — more in reality, due to black book accounting — annual infusion).

        This is why we see wild swings politically from Bush to Clinton to Bush II to Obama to Trump (and landslide, reversal congressional tidal wave mid-term elections) -‘ the public is angry and confused.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      IMHO, if you are working more than 40hrs a week, you need to either figure out how to work smarter, not harder, or get a better job, depending on whether the reason for it is internal or external.

      Not counting the fact that I am flying three days this week, my actually work time on-site is about 12hrs total. And I LOVE to fly.

  • avatar
    cartime

    I was highly impressed with the small things GM has changed mechanically. The box size alone is a significant addition. The interior is visually offputting at first glance but after watching a video walkthrough I find it very functional. They also appear to have a ton of blank buttons in the lower option models which is sadly disappointing. The current models have very few. Overall I’d say they’ll gain sales from current Ford buyers but lose sales to Ram if the Sierra doesn’t look more like more like the current generation than the Silverado.

  • avatar
    redapple

    ….Same only uglier.

    lots there in that paragraph. (all true).

  • avatar
    redapple

    GM pickups > 1 of 3 made HENCHO right?
    Ram has a plant in HENCHO too. Saltillo.

    Ford F 150 ALL are USA made?

    I will NOT buy a car made in Mexico. Nor China. I just wont cross that bridge. My moral code will not allow that. Just like buying a Prostitute. Wanted to. Never did.
    Will
    Not
    Cross
    That
    Bridge.

    Mexico and China have hollowed us out enough.

    • 0 avatar
      TMA1

      Ram production is moving to Michigan.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        It’s not Ram…it’s RAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

      • 0 avatar
        cicero1

        beat me, yes, just announced production is moving back to MI. they already had one MI Ram plant, i believe this makes 2.

        I wish Toyota would move 4 door tacoma production to USA, i’m limited to looking at access cabs made in TX.

        • 0 avatar
          PrincipalDan

          The RAM production shift is a chance for the BUY AMERICAN crowd to put up or shut up.

          No knocking Jack (or trying to boost DW) but I will be seriously considering the final assembly point/parts content for my next vehicle. It will not be THE deciding factor but it will be among the factors I consider.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          SHAP – Sterling Heights Assembly Plant, that used to build the Chrysler 200, was infused with 1.4 billion of retooling to build the new gen RAM.

          Warren RAM Assembly was infused with 1 billion USD of retooling to build the new gen Heavy Duty version of the RAm, that is currently being built in Mexico.

          Both Warren and Sterling Heights are in Michigan.

      • 0 avatar
        redapple

        Yep.
        I know.
        Both on mound road 7 miles apart.
        That’s kinda cool.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          Total nitpick, but yes, 7 miles apart, which is cool, but I believe Sterling Heights Assembly has a Van Dyke Avenue address (it does essentially span from 15 and Van Dyke Avenue to Mound, and receiving may be located at the Mound Road gate).

          Michigan’s economy is on fire to the point that it makes me nervous.

          All the D 2.5 automakers are nearly one-trick ponies again, ala mid early 1990s, ala mid-2000s, with massively heavy reliance on Pickups and SUVs for profitability and revenue, but MAHBE EVEN MORE SO THIS GO-ROUND.

          It’s idiotic to cede the mid-size,large sedan and compact car market to the Japanese and Koreans -‘SHORT-TERM FOCUSED IMBECILES ARE IN CHARGE AGAIN.

          • 0 avatar
            sgeffe

            ^ This!

            All it will take is one unforeseen Middle-East meltdown, and suddenly gas is at $5.75/gallon!

            Suddenly that Accord or Camry looks pretty good!

            $7k on the hood of the Camry? How ‘bout an ADM!

            Next GM BK! Could happen!

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Prediction: The New 2019 RAM (built in Sterling Heights and Warren Assembly — HD version — of mostly U.S.-sourced components — far more than General/Guangzhou Motors offerings) will be the best looking, best engineered, safest, most intelligently packaged, overall finest pickup truck to have ever been developed and built, period.

        It is already forcing General/Guangzhou Motors and even Ford into hyper-reactive a0defensive measures.

        • 0 avatar
          cicero1

          and on point:

          Moving production of the Ram pickup truck to Mexico was a mistake, Fiat Chrysler’s chief executive officer, Sergio Marchionne, said Tuesday.

          In answer to a question from CNBC, Marchionne said:

          The heavy-duty truck, at least in Chrysler’s case, was moved to Mexico in 2008. Ninety percent plus of what gets produced out of Mexico gets sold in the United States. I think this notion of making a car which has got nearly 100 percent utilization in the United States is a bit bizarre. I think it should have never been moved.

          Last week, Fiat Chrysler announced that it was moving production of the Ram to Michigan, which it says will create thousands of jobs.

          “Repatriation of the heavy-duty Ram was owed. We had to correct the mistake of 2008,” Marchionne said.

          • 0 avatar
            Adam Tonge

            It is especially a mistake for two reasons that weren’t mentioned by Sergio in that quote:

            1) The high transaction prices of HD RAMs can support US/UAW wages

            2) Building NAFTA focused vehicles in Mexico is dumb. The beauty of building vehicles in Mexico is you get relatively cheap labor, an FTA with the US/Canada, and FTAs with the rest of the world. They should be building things they can sell in the US, Europe, Asia, and South American in Mexico.

  • avatar
    deanst

    I do get the impression Chevy is afraid that FCA will inundate the market with new and old rams, passing the Silverado in sales. What a great time to sell FCA, as naive analysts would project this short term trend well into the future.

    Otherwise, I didn’t get the impression that the ram had more new stuff than Chevy – the huge weight loss and changes to the engines suggest otherwise. Admittedly, the Chevy looks like a dog versus the ram, but hopefully the gmc version will look better. (Not that that is likely……)

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      A lot of people diss Sergio without good cause (he’s a really good promoter, should get credit for setting some very talented and passionate engineers and “car guys/women” at FCA loose — they’ve literally ignited the modern horsepower wars and total torque-insanity, and have done so ingeniously and cleverly on a fraction of General-Guangzhou Motors or Ford’s engineering budget — and gets paid around 80 million annually by the Agnelli Family because of it).

      Jeep is on fire, and the new gen RAM is going to take a big bite out of the F Series and Silverado/Sierras market share (the new RAM may just garner 500,000 to 600,000 sales by 2020, barring a serious collapse in NA pickup truck demand).

      And RAM is going to be incredibly competitive at both the low-price and upper-strata end of the pickup market (you WILL see decently equipped RAMs for around 32k — not stripper models, but 4×4, Crew Cab, lots of nice features — and high trim RAMs for close to 68k by 2020).

      Good luck competing with the best looking and overall performing pickup truck that will leave the door well-equipped for 32k if you’re Guangzhou-General Motors or Ford (Ford will be better positioned to get closer to those bargain prices than Ghangzhou-General Motors, but with older, less impressive machines).

  • avatar
    stingray65

    Sure FCA may have gotten the drop on GM in pickups with the all new RAM, but does FCA have the big selling and highly profitable Bolt? Heck No.

  • avatar
    Dave M.

    I agree wholeheartedly with the looks of the Ram (awesome) and Chevy (hideous). I sure hope the Sierra is better. While I’m typically a Ford-homer and wouldn’t kick a King Ranch out of bed, the new Ram has a non-cartoonish elegance to it that will age well.

    As someone whose job requires 70-80 hours a week, I look forward to retiring soon and doing something part-time, maybe 40 hours a week.

  • avatar
    DC Bruce

    Having done an orgy of pickup shopping a few years ago (and having had no established loyalties), I still say that GM//Chevy’s biggest problem in 1/2 ton pickups is engine availability. The big 6.2 (which I own) is terrific but offered only in the highest trims and seems to be in limited production. The bread-and-butter 5.3 feels bog slow, mostly because of the throttle progression. Leaving aside the base model n/a V-6s, the Ford offers both the 5.0 V-8 and the 3.5 Ecoboost. Both of these engines are fun drives: the V-8 sounds great and the Ecoboost pulls hard like a diesel. So, the Ford buyer has 2 good engines to choose from above the base motor; and both are widely available. Ram has only the 5.7 Hemi; but it pulls really well, sounds great and likewise is widely available.

    So GM/Chevy is axing the V-6 and offering a 4 liter, I6 diesel? That could be better than the 3 liter oil burner in the Ram, which is bog slow and whose only virtue is impressive fuel economy numbers (partially negated in my end of the US by the fact that diesel fuel is a few pennies less than 91 octane gasoline). Hopefully the 6.2 liter V-8 is more widely available than it has been.

  • avatar
    gmichaelj

    ” Forty hours should be considered the minimum, not the maximum. You don’t see highly successful people clocking out of the office every afternoon at five. The losers are the ones caught up in that afternoon rush hour. The winners drive home in the dark.”

    Mr. Bortz was kissing his small business owner listeners’ asses. I’ve worked for plenty of these “winners” as a financial consultant. They count time playing golf/lunch/dinner/cheating on their wives/sporting events/bull-shitting on the phone – as “work”, whether these activities are with a client or with friends (potential clients!).

    If your take home pay is high then yes you can expect late nights, but the time you spend away from your kids isn’t going to make you a “winner”.

  • avatar
    mike978

    I know pick ups are profitable but they are only 10% of the market and the few companies that make them (6) benefit from most companies not bothering. The truck market has limits to how much it will grow, compared to say SUVs or CUVs.

    • 0 avatar
      ernest

      They sold 17 million cars and trucks last year. 2.3 million of them were full-sized trucks. With all trucks thrown into the mix, the number comes up to about 2.8 Million units.

      BUT… Ford reported the average transaction price was over $48000… which puts the F-Series solidly into E-Class Mercedes pricing. Difference being, Ford sold almost 900,000 of them. I can only imagine the profitability. Pickups pay the bills.

      BTW- did anyone else think 10 years ago that the Dodge Ram would be knocking on the Silverado’s door with sales numbers? Back then, that would have been unthinkable.

  • avatar
    Chi-One

    Nice Time Machine reference.

  • avatar
    SV

    I got the impression the 2019 Silverado was an all-new truck, especially from this article:

    https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1114845_new-2019-chevy-silverado-pickup-planned-for-all-powertrain-types

    “Still, [the Silverado’s executive chief engineer Tim] Herrick stressed, because virtually every part of the new 2019 Silverado is brand-new, it’s been designed for a longer horizon than the usual five- to seven-year model life.

    Parts of the outgoing 2018 trucks, he said, date back to the ‘GMT-400’ series introduced for 1988. The new design has eliminated those, Herrick said.”

    Meanwhile, the new Ram may be a handsome truck, but it’s lost the distinctive RAM face (one of the reasons the ’94 was such a hit I thought) and looks pretty generic everywhere else. I wonder if it will look as good in its 10th year in production as the current one does?

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I’m pretty sure GMT-400, um worked. Why so keen to get rid of DNA?

      At Guangzhou Motors, we’ve put Freshmen in charge of our marketing, design, and product management operations… and it shows.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “Parts of the current truck still date back to one of the most beloved vehicles we’ve ever made and one of the handful of actually great products our company built after 1975, but no worries we got rid of that stuff so now it’s 70% lowest-bidder Chinesium and 30% mystery meat”

    • 0 avatar
      SV

      My point was that saying the new Silverado is “obviously a major revision rather than an all-new truck” is…probably not correct.

      If the GMT400 was so good, why bother redesigning it at all? Anything new must be bad.

      • 0 avatar
        gtem

        “If the GMT400 was so good, why bother redesigning it at all? Anything new must be bad.”

        It was really good, the GMT800 that followed is a total rotbox, and the GMT900 was a cost-cut bail-out era abomination. I’d like to think the K2XX series are a step in the right direction, but looking at the % Chinesium content made in Mexico, I’m leery.

        • 0 avatar
          Dan

          The GMT900s weren’t bad at all in my book. They carried over all of the GMT800s excellent ride and ergonomics, they finally had a nice interior, they had class leading sticker mileage when it mattered most, and they addressed most of the GMT800s thumb-in-the-buyer’s-eyeball cost cutting.

          GM hadn’t raised the feature bar even by mid 00s standards, and between the recession and GM’s usual indifference to market success they went for seven years without so much as refresh. So the most recent impression is an antique that only a homer would buy.

          But consider what a Ram looked like before 2009 or a Ford looked like before 2011 (and keep the domestic blinders on so as to ignore what a Tundra looked like the whole time) and for those couple of years GM was the benchmark.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            “they addressed most of the GMT800s thumb-in-the-buyer’s-eyeball cost cutting.”

            Really? I have occasionally had a thought about buying a GMT900 Tahoe or Denali Hybrid. In my city-heavy driving, they get better mileage than a lot of smaller CUVs. But each time the packaging slows me down, and then the cheap-and-ugly-even-by-1990s-Ford-standards interior brings me to a crashing halt.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            For what a Tahoe cost the interior was indefensible. In truck form at $30,000 brand new and OTD, how much soft touch do you expect? They’re very quiet, they hold up well, the seats are comfortable, most of the switchgear feels decent. That’s nice to me.

          • 0 avatar
            gtem

            “class leading sticker mileage when it mattered most”

            Read: oil burning AFM crap

            Within the context of the era, I’d be inclined to agree though. Fords and Rams were even more rust-prone from what I’ve observed now that they’re all getting to the decade mark, Fords had a whole laundry list of Mod-motor related issues (spark plugs, cam phasers, exhaust manifolds), Rams had their electrical issues, manifolds, weak front ends, etc.

            Buying a “recession era” truck, I’d argue a 2nd gen Tundra (’07+) would far and away be the way to go for trouble-free motoring and perhaps the strongest powertrain of the era, the gen 1 Titan, as outdated as it was by 2015, was a force to be reckoned with back then too.

            We’ll see what the current crop of trucks looks like in 2028. The Fords with aluminum bodies sound promising in terms of corrosion.

        • 0 avatar
          ernest

          I bet Ford was asking themselves the same question a year after they stopped building the Gen9 F-Series (’92-’96). To this day, a clean, straight rust-free Gen9 (readily available in the PacNW) will bring substantially more money than a Gen10.

          The manufacturer that has to be chuckling is Dodge Ram. They came within spitting distance of the Silverado’s sales in ’17, something that would have been unthinkable a few short years ago.

  • avatar
    Sub-600

    Ram could gain a small bit of market share if the GMC has the toy aisle look of it’s corporate sibling.

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    I fully agree with Jack. GM was forced to reveal their new truck. They had ZERO specifications on the new diesel engine. Not even a mention of production date.

    GM is guilty of premature ejaculation due to over-stimulation from the competition.

  • avatar
    Towncar

    72 comments and nobody has yet pointed out that the Granada didn’t appear until ’75? I’m disappointed in the B&B.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • dal20402: The costs will be covered the same way as any other marketing effort.
  • dal20402: I’m planning to buy some kind of stickshift toy, probably around mid- to late 2023. New cars in this...
  • slavuta: Who created holodomor in Poland and slovakia?
  • Arthur Dailey: Well Slavuta as your favourite national leader admits to admiring Stalin, would you prefer another...
  • nrd515: The only really improved grill/front end I’ve seen lately is a guy in Michigan who took a Lexus RC-F...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber