Test drove a 2011 Sierra Duramax

[Lt CHEG]

I can see this thread geting locked out real soon.I take offense to your UAW comments.I am a union member IBEW been a electric lineman 30 plus years.Unions are good and bad just like many CEO,s and upper managers running these corps. that suck every last dime into there fat pockets.It has been said the reason why the price of cars and trucks are so high is because of labor costs.H,mm,union labor prices and health care have come down but the price of cars and trucks seem to be rising.Gee wiz maybe CEO,s pay have been increasing,go figure.Maybe you will be happy when your next new truck is made in china.Maybe you can move there to have it serviced also.coobie

I'd like to prevent this thread from turning into a debate and getting locked also. I enjoy talking about the merits of all the new heavy duty pickups currently on the market and have been excited to share my experience in test driving these bad boys. I also don't think that I singled out any particular group when I specifically noted that horribly bad management on the part of the automakers was also to blame for their problems. What I was pointing out was that the entire American auto industry was to blame for the problems that they are having from the CEO's to the union workers, they are all to blame. I was also pointing out that in my opinion it's silly to single one company out when any one of the big 3 could have just as easily been in the exact same positions. So I'm sorry if you took offense, that's exactly what I was trying to prevent when I noted that everyone in the industry shared part of the blame. And as an aside I've been a member of two different unions in the past myself too.

 

[coobie]

I'd like to prevent this thread from turning into a debate and getting locked also. I enjoy talking about the merits of all the new heavy duty pickups currently on the market and have been excited to share my experience in test driving these bad boys. I also don't think that I singled out any particular group when I specifically noted that horribly bad management on the part of the automakers was also to blame for their problems. What I was pointing out was that the entire American auto industry was to blame for the problems that they are having from the CEO's to the union workers, they are all to blame. I was also pointing out that in my opinion it's silly to single one company out when any one of the big 3 could have just as easily been in the exact same positions. So I'm sorry if you took offense, that's exactly what I was trying to prevent when I noted that everyone in the industry shared part of the blame. And as an aside I've been a member of two different unions in the past myself too.

Fair enough!I also looked at the new 2011 chevy/GMC trucks with the duramax,they are very nice trucks.My co-worker has a 2006 chevy 2500 with the duramax that has been flawless.I ended up ordering a 2011 Ford F-250 superduty crew cab (6.2 gas motor)that is supposed to arrive next week.Take care and good luck on your truck choice.coobie

 

[Dargo]

I was also pointing out that in my opinion it's silly to single one company out when any one of the big 3 could have just as easily been in the exact same positions.

There is a HUGE difference between "could have" and DID. The earth 'could have' stopped spinning today and the sun could have exploded. Neither happened. There are specific reasons why they didn't. The fact is that GM took millions of people for billions of dollars. FACT. The other auto manufacturers did not. FACT. I was one of the millions of people who got toasted by GM. Never in my life will support them again.

I own a 2004 Chevrolet Impala. The workmanship on that car is pathetic! GM should have gone under long before they did. I have actuarial data showing that GM cars and trucks have been more than twice as likely to have a breakdown as a Ford product. Fact. To cut corners, the door jams, under side of the hood and under side of the trunk on my Impala didn't get clear coated when the car was painted at the factory. How much did that save them? Maybe a couple of dollars? I could point out 20 or 30 other pathetic short cuts GM made on that car just because GM was being cheap and not concerned about quality.

When a company states that their entire future rides on being able to sell billions in stock and I've yet to speak to anyone willing to buy a share, I'm not very confident in the "General Motors" brand being here in another ten years. It's very likely it will be broken up and sold off in pieces in another floundering. It is a fact that China is looking at picking up the pieces for pennies on the dollar if/when that happens. This is the industry that most of my companies are in. I clearly have very little faith in the GM brand after attending many conferences and reading about what GM is doing each day in their corporate headquarters.

I hope they make it. I don't want more of my tax dollars wasted. I can't control that. What I can control is never buying another product from them nor ever considering buying a single share of their stock on a dare. If I were a UAW worker, I'd be very, very tempted to leave a piece off here, a part off there when building the vehicles for a company that stole my entire retirement.

 

[DennisH]

I have a 2003 D'Max with 143,000 miles and outside of a couple ejectors and rear axel leaks this truck has been rock solid and I would own nothing else.

I also would never buy this truck new again, buy a 1-2 year old truck.

 

[WALT]

Relating to the towing abilities of the stock offerings of the Big Three heavy duty pickups, last October I was in the market to replace my 99.5 Ford F-250,7.3 diesel and 10 Y/O trailer. To tow my Kubota L-39, I had to go the weight distribution (WD) route with my 10000 GVW trailer, which left me right at capacity for my truck/trailer combo. I never have favored changing the load geometry to put more weight on the front axle.

After reading the specs, and test driving what was available on the dealer lots, I ended up buying another Ford. I ordered a F-350 4x4 Super Cab, with the 6.4 diesel. Not wanting to repeat the WD route, as I also ordered a Towmaster 14,000 GVW 18' trailer, I bought a Titan 18,000 GVW class 5, 2 1/2" receiver & hitch and now tow via pintle hitch. The new hitch gives me a sufficient overkill margin of error. The stock Ford 6000 bumper/12500 WD hitch does not compare to the Titan Class 5, and pulls great behind the new truck.

This planned option cost an additional $525.00 from eTrailer.com, but gives me much peace of mind when towing my $40,000 tractor. If something goes bad, it won't be because of the hitch. As many here pull big loads with their trucks, I am puzzled why the Mfg's do not offer HD hitches as options. But always consider that while the new trucks will pull an amazing heavy load, you still need the ability to stop them safely.

A comment on government influence on our lives, I myself wish they would stop helping me. A great example is the current diesel emissions regulations. My old 7.3 diesel delivered
17 mpg empty, 14 mpg towing. The new clean 6.4 diesel gets 13 mpg empty & 9-10 mpg towing. How does burning more fuel equate to less emissions?
I cannot shake the feeling that the current politicians, who appear to have never had the pleasure of doing an honest days work, are so much more intelligent than the rest of us, and need to protect us from ourselves.

WALT

 

[VitaBene]

There is a HUGE difference between "could have" and DID. The earth 'could have' stopped spinning today and the sun could have exploded. Neither happened. There are specific reasons why they didn't. The fact is that GM took millions of people for billions of dollars. FACT. The other auto manufacturers did not. FACT. I was one of the millions of people who got toasted by GM. Never in my life will support them again.

I own a 2004 Chevrolet Impala. The workmanship on that car is pathetic! GM should have gone under long before they did. I have actuarial data showing that GM cars and trucks have been more than twice as likely to have a breakdown as a Ford product. Fact. To cut corners, the door jams, under side of the hood and under side of the trunk on my Impala didn't get clear coated when the car was painted at the factory. How much did that save them? Maybe a couple of dollars? I could point out 20 or 30 other pathetic short cuts GM made on that car just because GM was being cheap and not concerned about quality.

When a company states that their entire future rides on being able to sell billions in stock and I've yet to speak to anyone willing to buy a share, I'm not very confident in the "General Motors" brand being here in another ten years. It's very likely it will be broken up and sold off in pieces in another floundering. It is a fact that China is looking at picking up the pieces for pennies on the dollar if/when that happens. This is the industry that most of my companies are in. I clearly have very little faith in the GM brand after attending many conferences and reading about what GM is doing each day in their corporate headquarters.

I hope they make it. I don't want more of my tax dollars wasted. I can't control that. What I can control is never buying another product from them nor ever considering buying a single share of their stock on a dare. If I were a UAW worker, I'd be very, very tempted to leave a piece off here, a part off there when building the vehicles for a company that stole my entire retirement.

I have a 2004 Tahoe with 123K miles on it- it was well built and still drives the road well. I was never a fan of those Impalas though

 

[two_bit_score]

I have a 2004 Tahoe with 123K miles on it- it was well built and still drives the road well. I was never a fan of those Impalas though

OK since you started it :laughing: my 1995 Chev. 1500 just turned 200,000 and has never had anything other than routine maintainence done to it. Most expensive was athe AC compressor a few years back.

I've seriously been looking at Fords just because of the bailout issue. But I'm coming back around to considering GM again just because of the improvements in the 2011's.

Still undecided - at least as long as the '95 is running good.

 

[jcmseven]

I am one who has had the chance to own and operate both a 2008 model 250 6.4L HD Ford and my current GMC. I have always been a Ford guy, and likely always will be in my heart. Truth be known, though, none of my Ford's could hold a candle to my current GMC. I was a bit apprehensive about going to GM for some of the reasons discussed as well as my concern about GM's spotty service record among some autos. One area, though, that the big three do a solid job is in truck manufacture. Having a true lemon in the HD truck market is the kiss of death (Ford still has not recovered from the 6.0L issue fully--in 6-7 years!!) So, I took a chance and am glad I did. It is pretty clear, no matter who is paying for them, that the GM truck engineers did a solid job on making a very capable and powerful truck that does not compromise drivability. My Ford had some heavier duty sheet metal in places than my current truck, but the guts of the GMC are really solid. I would buy another without much thought. They even have serviceable grease fittings!!

John M

 

[Diamondpilot]

I am one who has had the chance to own and operate both a 2008 model 250 6.4L HD Ford and my current GMC. I have always been a Ford guy, and likely always will be in my heart. Truth be known, though, none of my Ford's could hold a candle to my current GMC. I was a bit apprehensive about going to GM for some of the reasons discussed as well as my concern about GM's spotty service record among some autos. One area, though, that the big three do a solid job is in truck manufacture. Having a true lemon in the HD truck market is the kiss of death (Ford still has not recovered from the 6.0L issue fully--in 6-7 years!!) So, I took a chance and am glad I did. It is pretty clear, no matter who is paying for them, that the GM truck engineers did a solid job on making a very capable and powerful truck that does not compromise drivability. My Ford had some heavier duty sheet metal in places than my current truck, but the guts of the GMC are really solid. I would buy another without much thought. They even have serviceable grease fittings!!

John M

I know you are happy with your current GM but if I remember right you had some fit and finish issues from day one with it? Seems like interior panels, ect. I also remember you saying the truck was 7/8 the sized of the competition which worked for your needs. They were mostly fixed by the dealer but I went though the same thing with my 05 Dmax. I never did get the passengers seat fixed right and the bed had to be repainted due to poor paint. So to say anything is the best for any of us or that nothing could hold a candle is all in the eyes of the guy writing the check, me included.

Again with the 6.0 thing. I have 2 that have never had a single issue and know of about 20 friends and customers with them. One had a tranny go out but the guy had 2 chips stacked and stacks though the bed so I am sure that helped it along. The only other one I know of that has been in the shop is a 2004 with 105,000 miles just this summer with a EGR valve issue. Lets face it, the 6.0 thing got blown way out of proportion. It helped GM sell many Dmax trucks but it if it were not for the talk of the 6.0 being such a lemon the Dmax would be another 6.5 GM diesel.

You also have to remember that Ford sells more diesel pickups each year than GM and Dodge combined. As a matter of fact in 2007 I have data that says over 80% of the F-250's and F-350's sold were diesel. They also held 51% of the total 3/4 and 1 ton market with GM having about 32% and Dodge having 17%. Of the GM sales 61% of the 2500's and 3500's were gas.

Chris

 

[CinderSchnauzer]

I was also pointing out that in my opinion it's silly to single one company out when any one of the big 3 could have just as easily been in the exact same positions.

The anti-bailout crowd also trumpets Ford's recent successes as proof that the laissez-faire theory of tough love economics forces companies to adapt for the better. What that argument misses is that Ford faced insolvency much earlier than GM. In 2006, when Ford reached it lowest point, money was still being given away for free and the company mortgaged its future for a US$23-billion stay of execution. Indeed, had the company been healthier and not needed cash quite so quickly, it probably would have faced the same bankruptcy prospects as GM and Chrysler.

 

[two_bit_score]

Indeed, had the company been healthier and not needed cash quite so quickly, it probably would have faced the same bankruptcy prospects as GM and Chrysler.

 

[mojoinco]

What he was saying is that Ford got down to business and did the things it needed to do when the economy was still strong enough to keep volume up and to arrange financing when cash was available. They also did a few other things: Bill Ford found someone else to run the company, they revamped their lines (including in Europe), etc. Mazda (as I recall, the board is controlled by Ford) also got into the same cycle (many Ford products are either significantly engineered by Mazda, or influenced by Mazda components -- like the Ranger).

Timing is everything.

 

[FlaDon]

What he was saying is that Ford got down to business and did the things it needed to do when the economy was still strong enough to keep volume up and to arrange financing when cash was available. They also did a few other things: Bill Ford found someone else to run the company, they revamped their lines (including in Europe), etc. Mazda (as I recall, the board is controlled by Ford) also got into the same cycle (many Ford products are either significantly engineered by Mazda, or influenced by Mazda components -- like the Ranger).

Timing is everything.

Ford could still get into trouble as they sold off their assets to get the money needed to stay out of bankrupcy. Ford has dumped carlines to stay afloat like GM/Chrysler. Ford is canning the Mercury line like GM did Pontiac.

GM trucks pulled ahead of Ford in capacity and Ford had to offer an upgrade to the programming to get ahead on HP but still loses to GM in towing capacity in 3500 series trucks. Ford will now be offering boxed frames in their trucks, after GM already has them out. Looks like Ford is having to play catchup. Next up will be Dodge trying to get ahead of both. Winner is the consumer in the long run.

 

[coobie]

A good read at PickupTrucks.com: Pickup Truck News, Reviews, Community and Help Finding a New or Used Pickup 2010 truck shootout. coobie

 

[Diamondpilot]

What he was saying is that Ford got down to business and did the things it needed to do when the economy was still strong enough to keep volume up and to arrange financing when cash was available. They also did a few other things: Bill Ford found someone else to run the company, they revamped their lines (including in Europe), etc. Mazda (as I recall, the board is controlled by Ford) also got into the same cycle (many Ford products are either significantly engineered by Mazda, or influenced by Mazda components -- like the Ranger).

Timing is everything.

You hit the nail on the head. All this coulda, woulda, shoulda talk makes me laugh. Ford made tough decisions and changed the management to make things right. Yes, they got lucky but like everyone knows timing is everything. Does not matter if its realestate or trucks.

Now as far as GM goes they are on the 4th CEO in 18 months. I have seen that happen before and by the 24th month I was out of a job.

GM did things right on this truck, I will applaud them for that. The question is will anyone buy it. Sure some will but many will not even look that way.

As for Fords truck the upgrade is not only to the HP but also raises the GVWR and the GCWR by 500# so that should put them back on top in the tow rating category. Its a little too late tough, everyone knows they are playing catchup instead of leading the pack like they had done for so many years. I can not for the life of me understand why if they were building a new engine they just did not blow everyone out of the water and go for 500Hp and 1000 Ft Tq????? They left too much to chance and now its biting them in the azz.

Chris

 

[Lt CHEG]

... Next up will be Dodge trying to get ahead of both. Winner is the consumer in the long run.

This is one of the most accurate posts in this thread. It has also been my experience that all the trucks that I have driven have been great and they have all come a long way from heavy duty pickups of even ten years ago in almost every way.

And Diamondpilot, please don't give GM, Ford or Dodge any ideas about building a diesel with 500 horsepower and 1000 pounds feet of torque, at least not yet. Everybody I know would rather they all concentrate on gains in fuel economy before concentrating on more power as they already make way more power than just about anyone needs. The only complaint I hear frequently from the guys I know who own the heavy duty diesel pickups is how crappy the fuel economy is on them now. Half of them have also said that they won't buy a diesel for their next truck at this point as the gas engines will do everything that the diesels will do for them but getter fuel economy doing it. When it was my turn to tow the sleds on this one trip last year, one of the guys couldn't believe that my 5.3 Liter V8 equipped Silverado 1500 got better mileage towing the 4 place trailer than his 2006 Ford F350 with the 6.0 Liter Power Stroke.

As for the whole bailout thing and timing being everything in the case of Ford, etc. etc. I feel pretty confident that nobody's opinion is going to be changed on here, so lets keep things civil (as it pretty much has been anyway) so that we can keep this thread from getting locked. I think the arguments basically come down in the same vein as which brand someone prefers, in other words, it is what it is and nobody is going to change it. By the way I'm not a fan of bailouts either. I am confident that GM and Chrysler would likely have been able to reorganize as much smaller companies after filing for bankruptcy in the event that bailout funds weren't given to either company. Politics wouldn't allow for that though as it would have meant that the UAW contracts would have been invalidated and their pension responsibilities would have been diminished; It also would have meant that a bunch of executives at the top of these companies wouldn't have been obligated to receive their golden parachute pension packages too. The politicians would never risk alienating their supporters by letting that happen. At the end of the day I know that my wife and I do pretty well for ourselves financially but even we can't afford strict, blind brand allegiance. I haven't paid for anything more than routine maintenance and tires on any of my last GM vehicles so I know that would definitely count in GM's favor for me, but at the same time if Ford or Dodge or for that matter Toyota or Nissan were better able to get the job done for me, I'd buy them. I almost bought a Toyota Tundra this time as it was.