I said it was ugly, I don’t really care which is more capable or powerful. I didn’t say your truck in particular is ugly… 99.9% of what GM makes now is ugly, not just what you own. Don’t get your GM-owning panties in a twist
the gm hd’s that I DO see coming offroad, generally don’t last very long doing so, the IFS is weak, NOT something I’d want under my offroad rig let alone my tow rig. 90% of the top rock racers/offroaders are still using solid front axles, they must be for a reason, they just last. Chryslers front ends use the junk vacuum assist axles, they’ve had problems with them for years, next time you take your new truck into the dealership for work, ask them what the BIGGEST complaint/problem is for their HD trucks, all the techs will tell you the IFS just doesn’t last, couple that with a heavier/more powerful diesel motor and thats a recipe for disaster.
TJ is a hippie from California who has his head up GM’s ass. It’s a given fact that a liberal homo like him wouldn’t mind buying from a government owned car company and not supporting another option. Ford>GM>Dodge, it has been this way for decades and it is not going to change anytime soon. His opinion is pretty much worthless. :love:
This truck from GM looks neat though. I really hate the boxed in fender flares on the GM trucks though, they look horrible. And I can’t get used to the interior, they look and feel like complete shit ( And coming from someone who owns a Crown Vic, that says a lot ). I do agree that is is not a competitor to the Raptor though. The Raptor looks to be built for So-Cal people and this truck looks to be built for ???. It has a shitty duramax and is a lifted truck, what the fuck is it good for?
I’ve done a LOT of offroading too. Again, the point of this truck is not to be a rock crawler or trail rig. It’s meant to TOW your rock crawler or trail rig to the destination which sometimes means towing through sand, dirt roads etc. It’s not meant for the Rubicon or King of the Hammers.
I have tons of friends w/ diesels from all of the big 3. Dodge guys have far and away the most front-end issues. I will say the Ford solid axles seem much better and seem to have the least trouble. GM’s IFS slots in somewhere between. That said, the entire chassis and front suspension was beefed up for '11 so we’ll see how they do.
Would I want to jump or seriously offroad ANY of the big three HDs? No. Do my friends that tow heavy and often including to offroad destinations have any IFS issues w/ their GMs? No.
QFT.
I considered thew new Ford to stay away from Government Motors, honestly. The issue is a) I think their ugly (that new grill is insane) b) the upline interiors (i.e. King Ranch) are ugly c) the 6.7 is unproven and Ford’s diesel track record is horrible.
Looks are subjective, I like the box fenders. I agree for an expensive truck the interior could be better, but I definitely don’t think it looks or feels like shit. It could be nicer, but they also have to make it durable and easy to clean for those of us that actually use their trucks like trucks.
As for what the truck in this thread is good for, read my previous posts ya lazy fuck. It’s for people who TOW their toys on rough terrain. And how the fuck is the Duramax shitty? Despite lower power #s than Ford’s 6.7 it kicks the ever loving shit out of the Ford in real world testing and it’s been around and proven for over a decade.
Go drive a VW douche fister.
To the Raptor, yes. It looks to be a 1500 gasser so it’d be in direct competition with the Raptor, not this GMC.
arent trophy trucks IFS arent military vehicles IFS for the dunes? IFS does work when used for what its intended and rides a hell alot better then that SFA. Hardcore rock wheeling yes need SFA. SFA has its place, IFS has its place
IFS rides a hell lot better on street where 95% of vehicles spend their lives, for the 5% that go offroading can upgrade as they need to for their application
Yup. SFA is really only for extreme wheeling. Even those of us who tow off road don’t need SFA. SFA’s big advantage is articulation. If you’re towing somewhere that you need the articulation of SFA you’re trailer is probably already on it’s side in a million pieces. Yes, the simplicity and durability of SFAs are generally considered better, but again look at the rebuild intervals on Dodge SFAs and you can see that it’s all about the quality of the particular system, not just the basic architecture (IFS vs. SFA). Humvees are IFS (and IRS) and so are the new M-ATVs. I see these things running all over Afghanistan, and people put their lives on the line counting on the durability of those rigs.
exactly but when you try to tel these ppl that they dont want to hear it. Majority of military vehicles weigh a hell of lot more then those wheelin buggies and the IFS takes it like a champ. To say one is better then the other for everything is incorrect, each have their place and advantages
It’s built to go fast on the sand and jump. Sand is not smooth of course, it’s usually really rutted and has “whoops” in it. Wheel travel and very little unsprung weight (so that the suspension can react very quickly) are more important than articulation. And don’t think there’s not a lot of strength built into the IFS on that thing either. It takes a serious beating doing 3rd or 4th gear pinned through the whoops.
). I do agree that is is not a competitor to the Raptor though. The Raptor looks to be built for So-Cal people and this truck looks to be built for ???. It has a shitty duramax and is a lifted truck, what the fuck is it good for? 
