MY93SHO Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 The only thing I find interesting is that they went with an I-6 layout... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 (edited) omg.. the front of that truck in that video shot is just... Ughhhh.. I swear the media tries to use the ugliest versions of the truck as advertisement lol. Edited June 17, 2019 by blwnsmoke 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 7 minutes ago, blwnsmoke said: omg.. the front of that truck in that video shot is just... Ughhhh.. I swear the media tries to use the ugliest versions of the truck as advertisement lol. That’s funny because I tend to think the monochromatic appearance packages are the best looking of the Chevy packages. Although it’s very difficult to polish a turd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotRunrGuy Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 11 minutes ago, blwnsmoke said: omg.. the front of that truck in that video shot is just... Ughhhh.. That's kind of how I felt about the '15-17 F150. Thank gawd they changed that grill in 2018,,,,, HRG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 The ones I've seen in person do look better than the pictures, but still not great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordtech1 Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 I can not like the new Silverado. The Sierra, I can live with. Only a couple colors can I stomach the new truck. The front is ugly and the rear taillights and gate just don’t look right to me from a 3/4 view. It’s just not a handsome truck. The previous generations were mostly handsome even with the ridiculous wheel wells. This truck is a swing and miss for me. I thought the f150 In 2015 was a swing and a huge hit. Regardless what the critics predicted. The new ram is a big hit also. They checked all the right boxes for the market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 21, 2019 Share Posted June 21, 2019 On 6/18/2019 at 12:58 AM, twintornados said: The only thing I find interesting is that they went with an I-6 layout... Amusing, GM fans think that the Colorado's 2.8 I-4 Duramax can easily be replaced by the new 3.0 Duramax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted June 22, 2019 Share Posted June 22, 2019 12 hours ago, jpd80 said: Amusing, GM fans think that the Colorado's 2.8 I-4 Duramax can easily be replaced by the new 3.0 Duramax. As long as the don't mind the front of the engine sticking out past the grille.....lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 22, 2019 Share Posted June 22, 2019 (edited) 10 hours ago, twintornados said: As long as they don't mind the front of the engine sticking out past the grille.....lol Will GM redesign Colorado/Canyon to accept the 3.0 I-6 diesel or is it orphaned to the Silverado/Sierra and full sized SUVs? The main draw back with using an I-6 configuration is that engine length prevents its use in an I-4/V6 engine bay, RWD or Transverse. I know that with the ending of D3, Ford will never need a FWD/AWD V6 diesel but it had that option with the V6 Powerstroke and there's always Ranger and Transit to consider as well.... Edited June 22, 2019 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 On 6/17/2019 at 4:47 PM, akirby said: The ones I've seen in person do look better than the pictures, but still not great. The profile work is completely fine, but I can't fathom how the Chevrolet version left the studio as it did. It's not a cheap design.. the complex flares and angles are a lot.. but there is absolutely no concept of massing and focusing on either the front or rear end treatments. The eye isn't given a target, so it scans the whole work looking for one... causing the individual elements to look disjointed and even more out of scale than they actually are. All I can believe is that GM has created another list of "must" attributes for each brand, as outlined by Maximum Bob a few years back. Design becomes less about form and shaping and more about checking boxes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted June 23, 2019 Author Share Posted June 23, 2019 12 hours ago, PREMiERdrum said: The profile work is completely fine, but I can't fathom how the Chevrolet version left the studio as it did. It's not a cheap design.. the complex flares and angles are a lot.. but there is absolutely no concept of massing and focusing on either the front or rear end treatments. The eye isn't given a target, so it scans the whole work looking for one... causing the individual elements to look disjointed and even more out of scale than they actually are. All I can believe is that GM has created another list of "must" attributes for each brand, as outlined by Maximum Bob a few years back. Design becomes less about form and shaping and more about checking boxes. Was behind a chevy yesterday. The "CHEVROLET" so high up on the tailgate was just off-putting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trailhiker Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 On 6/17/2019 at 3:45 PM, blwnsmoke said: omg.. the front of that truck in that video shot is just... Ughhhh.. I swear the media tries to use the ugliest versions of the truck as advertisement lol. It kinda looks like one of those Transformer toys that doesn't seem to fit perfectly when coverting from robot back to vehicle form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 On 6/23/2019 at 10:27 AM, MY93SHO said: Was behind a chevy yesterday. The "CHEVROLET" so high up on the tailgate was just off-putting. Yeah, the whole design of the new Silverado is oddly tall, with all the design elements pushed up toward the top of the bodywork, which skews the look upward. Not a good look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomcat68 Posted June 24, 2019 Share Posted June 24, 2019 RMC523, I think you nailed it. The Suburban and Tahoe are the same height, but they put the sharp character lines down the sides of the vehicle, accenting the length of the truck over the height. The character lines on the Silverado swirl about with no gestalt making it look somewhat blobby and putting the focus back on the height and making it not look trim and fit like the SUVs, which I do think are very good looking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
probowler Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 Now that Chevy is in last place, this truck can be the official vehicle of the Cleveland Browns. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 3 hours ago, probowler said: Now that Chevy is in last place, this truck can be the official vehicle of the Cleveland Browns. You're a year late with that joke. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 On 6/22/2019 at 4:56 PM, jpd80 said: Will GM redesign Colorado/Canyon to accept the 3.0 I-6 diesel or is it orphaned to the Silverado/Sierra and full sized SUVs? The main draw back with using an I-6 configuration is that engine length prevents its use in an I-4/V6 engine bay, RWD or Transverse. I know that with the ending of D3, Ford will never need a FWD/AWD V6 diesel but it had that option with the V6 Powerstroke and there's always Ranger and Transit to consider as well.... Meh. Ford managed to fit the old 300/4.9 with it's 4.48" bore spacing in E Series. Where there's a will, there's a way. Plus I doubt any clean sheet straight six of 3.0L displacement has anywhere near 4" bores. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 26, 2019 Share Posted June 26, 2019 (edited) I'm not disputing that the C/C can't be redesigned to accept the I-6, it's just another thing GM now has to do before it can use the I-6. Let's also not forget that the engine bay of a mid-sized truck is much smaller than the doghouse of an E Series van which is more like the engine compartment of a full sized truck Edited June 26, 2019 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.