Eh... really? Not very constructive. I hope that was an image of the pill you took after stating that anyone trying to have a constructive conversation about the topic is an "apologist." Maybe take the time to read the information before posting snarky comments about the information you didn't bother to read? That makes a lot of sense to me. I remote started about 8 minutes before leaving this morning and was paying close attention to the seats; again, the seats were definitely cold, but they weren't as cold as they usually are when I *don't* remote start, and within ~30 seconds of sitting down (after starting the truck and flipping on the heated seats) I started to feel warmth - which is a lot faster than I normally do when I don't remote start & turn on the heated seats. That can take 2-3 minutes before I can feel any discernable heat. (I don't have cooled seats, only heated.) This is personally my first vehicle with heated seats, and *my* first GM vehicle (we bought my wife a Traverse earlier last year, and I had my dad's Avalanche for a few months after he passed away) so I can't compare it to anything else. If past models were able to fully heat the seats in remote start mode, I'm not sure why these wouldn't too. It'd be nice to get in and sit down into warmth.
The "grips" for the cup holder are pretty tight. I've also put a can in there and felt like it was crushing it a bit, but it was just the holders. I have a coffee mug that I use every morning with the tapered bottom for cup holders - it came with a rubber "cup" to go around the tapered area (likely to help with grip in the larger cup holders), and I have to take that off because the cup holders are too tight with it on. I've also found that water bottles larger than the typical 16-20oz bottles don't fit. It's a minor gripe, but it does seem a bit unusual that the cup holders aren't a little larger. Usually a can-sized object would sit comfortably with space around it in an average cup holder; in the 2014 truck they barely fit.
I haven't done any testing, only my own observations here, but I've noticed that if I don't remote start the truck on a cold day the seats are "so cold its painful" cold. When I remote start (and yes I have the heated seats on remote start option set to on) the seats are still cold/cool but they aren't painfully cold. Maybe the cabin temps warming up a bit causes the seats to not be quite as cold, but it's pretty consistent that the seats, while not *warm* by any stretch, are at least "warmed" a bit when compared to not doing a remote start at all.
Mine seems pretty consistant. I use the cruise control a lot commuting back and forth to work, and I've noticed it seems to sort of anticipate what I may or may not need, because when I go into cruise it usually drops to V4 pretty quick. I assume it's because I'm establishing that I intend to go a consistent speed vs the potential inconsistency of using my foot. I also see it drop to v4 after a few seconds of not accelerating - again, I think it goes back to a consistency thing. If the truck anticipates you're going to need to accelerate, it's going to try and provide maximum torque. If it thinks you're going to be varying your speed or elevation a bunch, then it'll stay in V8. And since it is a learning system, maybe your past driving has "taught" it to stay in V8 more frequently due to shifts in speed or elevation or something. Not sure there, but I don't think it's a straightforward "if I do <X> then it drops to V4."
In the DFW area. I had my dad's 05 Avalanche for a few months last year after he passed away and the reception was practically non-existant. Having no signal and no AUX or bluetooth options for devices was a beating (first world problems, I know.) My wife's 14 Traverse picks all the stations up in clear HD and never waivers from it. My 14 Silverado (LTZ but no nav) seems to struggle quite a bit. Not as bad as the Avalanche, but nowhere near as good as the Traverse. It seems like it's just dependent on which direction, and how strongly, the wind is blowing as to whether or not I'll get decent reception. I've also noticed, when comparing the two 2014 vehicles, that hers will immediately start playing a station in HD when its tuned to it. Mine, on the other hand, seems to grab the analog signal first and then gropes around a bit for the HD one before switching over. On the HD only stations, they just take anywhere from 3-8 seconds to start playing when I tune to them. In the Traverse, all the stations "just work" and they just work instantly.
Wow that sucks. Although I was surprised my LTZ didn't have a console. (And it's a 4x4.) surprising that there would be such a shortage of that option though.
It may not. It'll be awhile before I can attempt something that frivolous. I'd say I could take apart my wife's Traverse and try hers, but I'd like to not piss her off if at all possible, and arbitrarily disassembling her new car isn't likely to encourage her to be happy. Maybe in a couple of months I can scour some junk yards or something (as opposed to buying the part new from GM.)
While I was waiting for them to finish up the detailing etc on my Silverado (which was on a rainy day, so that was a bit of a waste) they gave me a Sierra to drive for a few hours. The camera looked the same to me. It wasn't an SLT model, but I don't think they use a different camera for the different trims; besides, my truck is an LTZ, so if there's a better camera to be had, I'd better have it... ;)
Late getting back to my own thread... The problem isn't really lighting. It's simply quality of the optics. The resolution with the Silverado camera is so bad it can be almost worthless if there's a light (or the sun) shining directly at the camera. No such problem on the Traverse camera. The camera itself looks like it's the same size as the Traverse one, but I can't tell for sure. Maybe when I find myself with extra money I don't know what to do with (ha!) I'll buy a replacement camera for the Traverse and see if I can't swap it out with the one in the Silverado. If I'm successful I'll recessitate my thread and update it with the results.
Definitely sit in both and then decide. The seats themselves will be the same in both. I went into my purchase insisting I have a console, and ended up buying one with a bench due to the dealer stock - and am extremely glad I did. I like having the extra storage and floor space provided by the bench seat option, as well as the flexibility to squeeze up to 6 people in the truck if the need arises. I also use it when my dog rides with me in the back and I don't want her crawling all over the truck while I'm out - I can just raise the console up and it's as good as a doggie gate. I've had floor consoles in every vehicle I've ever owned, so I had this perception that the bench was the lesser option... but I'm really glad I was forced to consider it.
When we bought my wife's 14 Traverse in June, I was blown away at the quality of the backup camera. The image is so crisp and clear. The 14 Silverado... well, it's like comparing SDTV to HDTV. I know the screen itself is a good resolution, so I can only assume the camera itself is a lower resolution than the Traverse. When we bought the Traverse I test drove a Silverado, and while my truck was getting detailed right after purchase I had a Sierra as a loaner - both had the same camera, so I know it's not just mine. Why would GM use different parts for something like that? I'm curious if anyone knows whether or not the camera can be swapped with another GM camera from another vehicle - i.e. order the Traverse backup camera part and swap it out. Don't get me wrong - I LOVE having a backup camera, period. But when backing up in low light conditions or when the sun is shining in it, it'd be nice to have that higher resolution. My truck (for whatever reason) didn't come with the sensors, so I don't have any auditory feedback when I'm close to things; having a clear image would be especially helpful in the parking garage at work or backing out of the garage at night. I don't know that it's actually worth doing (depending on the cost of the camera), just curious if anyone knows if it's possible.
I wanted to have bed liner included in my financing, so I asked the dealership who they used for spray-in liner. They did Rhino Liner. I had done a bit of research on the different options and had heard mixed results with Rhino Liner, but went ahead and did it. I'm pretty happy with the results. The coating is thick and very durable feeling, but also has just a slight rubber feel that gives it a grip. Nothing that feels like it'll rip or anything - in fact I moved a really heavy piece of wood furniture last night in it and had to give it a push to get it up against the cab, and the liner was fine. It just gives it a really nice grip that prevents stuff from sliding around. Almost too much grip - there's no sliding anything in and out of the bed (the furniture mentioned above had to be pushed *really hard* to slide a few inches.) I had a heavy cardboard box back there a few days ago and couldn't slide it out at all - had to climb up and pick it up. Anyway, the quality is pretty great. My only complaint was that they sprayed the liner on over the plastic covers for the add-on tie-downs, which I didn't purchase but had given some thought to purchasing. If I want them now I'll have to cut the plastic out somehow. I gave it a passing thought as I handed the truck over to have the liner installed, but now I wish I had either taken them out myself or at least specifically mentioned them. My father-in-law just bought an F150 (boo hiss) and it came with their drop-in bedliner in the back. Seems very flimsy. Probably apples and oranges, just noting my observation. I can definitely see where dirt and debris could get trapped in it. It almost seems to float.
I've had my truck about 10 days now, and one thing I noticed from day one is the backup camera/system complains that the rear parking assist is unavailable. My wife's 2014 Traverse has the sensors in the bumper that allow the system to know if something's close by, and then does the "beep beep beep" thing with the visual exclamation point on the screen. I don't have any of that - I assume by design. So that's all well and good. On the MyLink system, I go to Home -> Settings -> Vehicle -> Collision & (something) -> Park Assist. There are three options: off, on, and on with towbar attached. It defaults to on. And therein lies the problem. I believe, as does my dealer, that the problem is the software is trying to use the park assist software, but there's no park assist hardware for it to communicate with. No matter how many times I switch it to "off", the next time I turn the truck off and on again, the default goes back to "on." The DIC also chimes in with "Park Assist Temporarily Unavailable" during this time. I can dismiss it, but the "Rear Parking Assist Symbols Unavailable" message is white text on black background, boxed out at the top of the camera screen, taking up a good 1/6th or so of the screen real estate. I had the truck at the dealership this past weekend to get the bed liner and LED lights added and they were going to look at this issue, but ran out of time to get to it. I need to reschedule, but was hoping maybe there was some other option I'm missing, like a "Don't default to factory settings every time the truck is started" option I'm just not seeing. Also curious if anyone else has had this problem.
^exactly. The seats are the same. Again, just trying to educate here cause there seems to be this idea that the bench was imported straight from 1984. The seats are all independent seats, just the middle is a console that folds up.
Most OnlineNewest Member
Who's Online 188 Members, 2 Anonymous, 3,198 Guests (See full list)
- Dave heath
- Danny Baker
- Jeffery McRae
- Sean Hartley
- Kurt Foster
- 15 Z71
- Mike GMC
- Wesley Malone
- SILVER SLED
- Brandon Adams
- bass mechanic
- Matty Patty
- Joe Gutierrez
- Blair Peake
- Sean Monteith
- Kevin Williams
- Crazy Schooner
- Kyle Templin
- Mike Barber
- Section 12
- Jason k
- Derek Keith Carbonneau
- Ryan Z71
- @[email protected]
- Eddie Roberts
- John Brai
- Dean Sterling