Donstar

I like the looks of both versions of your truck. The first picture is with a 2" level and 255's, correct? I decided to stay with stock size on my new tires (255/70r17). I far prefer the looks of the larger sizes but could not justify any differences in costs, performance or ease of access. Ironically this tire size would have been considered a larger size upgrade less than ten years ago! I still have a 1.5" front leveling kit that needs to be installed. Now that I have committed to a few more years of the 255's, I was wondering if this level kit would enhance the looks or make it worse. I would appreciate comments or pictures from those that have kept the 255/70r17 tire size.

Child seats have evolved over the years. Maximum effectiveness is achieved by proper installation. When our grand children started visiting I went for a lesson on proper car seat installation offered through our insurance company. I would confirm that it is acceptable to put a barrier between the base and your upholstery. Billy346's wife has done her homework. I only have car seats in my truck for a week or so at a time (at the most) and no evidence is left on my leather after a good cleaning! I suspect that a quality car seat installed year-round will not do permanent damage to your truck. Even if it did, I doubt evidence of a car seat will depreciate resale!

Nice find! As the advertiser says, they will fit. They will also look very good! I am not a fan of the tires though.

I'm still squeezing extra miles out of my 255's as our weather has been reasonably mild. I will make the switch shortly. Rather than relying on pictures, I looked for 2014+ GM trucks at my local malls and dealerships with various tire sizes. I would estimate that 70% of the local trucks have 265's! There is also quite a difference in appearance between various brands and types of tires. For example, a 265 width Pirelli highway tire looks mild compared to a 265 width BFG KO2 all terrain.

Tires are a major expense and you are wise to do research. I posted a similar thread in the tires and wheels section of this forum a few months ago and happily settled on 265/70r 17. I found that with identical brands of tires the "look" may be different but not necessarily better .(IMO) There is no fear of rubbing, no pressure to level, and no extra loss in mpg. I personally think 285's will fit but I am glad I did my research!

It is funny but it is the hammer on the knuckle technique that made me choose to have this done by my dealer. I know it costs but it has the potential of costing me more if I run into problems. Also, calling a modification "a dealer installed option" is a good sales line (imo)! Chances are that you won't have any problems, you will save money and be proud of your accomplishment! I did a lot of searching and I think MotoFab is the best value. I have found their customer service lacking but perhaps this is how they can offer good prices on their products!

Really sharp looking tires, but in my opinion the white letters take away from the appearance. I totally respect your choice and your truck will look great either way!

If it is a lease as someone suggested earlier, I would enjoy it stock until the lease and warranty are done. Then if you decide to buy the truck, all the modifications will belong to you. Your truck looks fabulous as it is and will receive many envious looks!

I like the monochrome look on a truck but prefer the more traditional chrome accents. The fact that you are asking suggests you are not committed to either look. I would personally save your time and money and keep the chrome. It is something you can change at a later date if you become more committed to the painted look. I grew up in a time when painted bumpers were reserved for the economy trims and an abundance of chrome was a goal. My dealer added a chrome package to my truck while it was on the lot (door handles, mirror caps, tow hooks, side steps) in an effort to attract a buyer. At one time I would have thought this was a desirable upgrade, but instead I was annoyed at the impact on the price of the truck!

Looks great! I had the Setina PB400 on my 09 Sierra cc and really liked it. It saved me from a few dents and it was handy when it was oil checking time! It is on my wish list for my current truck, but has to work its way up the priority scale!

Not as often as as some places, but yes, I rely on AC in my home and vehicles for parts of the year. We do have a son who lives in Houston, Texas and my wife and I are frequently transported in the back seat of his '14 High Country during our summer visits.

I appreciate that there are people who like vent air blowing directly at them. I don't like HVAC vents blowing at me in my home or vehicle. I have no difficulty maintaining a comfortable temperature throughout the cab with the existing layout of the vents. I regularly transport passengers of all ages and only receive compliments as to their comfort. There is no argument that many people like roof top or mid height vents in the back. However, the current system is designed to heat and cool the entire cab and in my opinion works well.

It is mentioned elsewhere in this forum but worth repeating. There are vents under the front seats directing warm/cool air to the back. It is not a blow the air in your face system but it is effective in my opinion. Heated rear seats is one of those options that would be useful for a small minority of truck owners.

When I was looking for a new truck in 2015, the trucks with the features i wanted appeared more often with a 4.3. The trucks that had the 5.3 were either too plain or two dressed up for my taste and budget. The real cost difference for trucks on the lot was not $1,000. I either had to pay for unwanted trim or sacrifice other features to get a V8 for the price I was willing to pay. If the situation was such that I found two identical trucks except for the engine, with a $1000 difference in sticker price, I would have hesitated for a minute and picked the 4.3. I am also aware that dealers are/were more anxious to negotiate on their V6's. My experiences are such that I went through decades with trucks pumping out between 100 to 200 hp. My 81 and 85 Supercabs, for example, had longer wheel bases than my current 2015 cc std. bed. They pumped out approximately half of the horsepower yet they took my family on long road trips and pulled or carried many heavy loads. To me, a 285 hp engine was a no brainer! If I was in a position to be regularly hauling loads beyond the limits of the base engine, I would upgrade to the 2500/3500 series.

Well stated! I really like all three of the current engine choices. I know that a lot of what we often attribute to engine size can be achieved through gear ratios in the differential and/or transmission hence my previous comments. I find the 4.3 to be a powerful engine. My truck is fun to drive and I never experience a lack of power. I know the 5.3 and 6.2 are more powerful but would not enhance my appreciation of my truck.

I believe gearing can be a replacement for displacement as the 4.3 with a 3.42 rear-end will out pull a 5.3 with the 3.08. The 4.3 is the smallest of the GM 1500 series engine choices but it is still a powerful engine. It is more powerful than many of the big displacement V8's of the past. If higher ratio rear-ends such as 3.73 or 4.10 were matched to the V6, the power to the rear wheels could render the 5.3 unnecessary. Imagine doing this and adding an 8 spd transmission! For now, if you are pulling an over 7,000 lb.trailer, a 5.3 with with a 3.42 differential is definitely the right choice.

The earliest recommended change in my manual appears to be 45,000 miles for the front differential and I assume the rear should be done at the same time. By reading this post it sounds like this may be too long of an interval and I should consider an earlier change!

I'm happy to see this thread reappear from time to time. The 4,3 is a very strong motor and has ample power for most of the performance requirements of a 1/2 ton truck. GM produces two more powerful engines for these trucks so we have a tendency to think of the 4.3 in terms of being the "smallest". I have close to 20K kms on mine and couldn't imagine a circumstance where I would need a bigger engine.

I have a cc 4x4 with a standard size bed and my 4.3 is not lacking either. I agree that a manual transmission would enhance the performance!

What about a body lift? I have no experience with them, but they look like reasonable solution to a little more height.

The rear window slides to the side. A window that went down would introduce a few new installation challenges!

I like having navigation "built in" but initial cost and upgrades are a high price to pay for this luxury! I justify having it as more of an emergency device. I seldom leave home not knowing how to get to my destination!

I have owned several pickups and full sized cars over the past few decades and it has been my experience that tires make the greatest impact on ride "smoothness". Stock shocks with premium highway tires will provide greater comfort (IMO) than aftermarket shocks with any of the stock tires. However, if you want to use your truck for activities beyond those expected of a car then it is fair to expect a truck-like ride.

Sliding rear windows has been a popular option for decades. Just opening your front and rear windows a little will quickly balance the temperature throughout the cab. If running wires through the headliner is problematic, then run it under the floor covering. A stock style switch placement is not necessarily the best! I've had people wave back at me while I've been operating my rear window!

Yes, try TJay 74's suggestion first. It takes a little getting accustomed to if you're used to the previous version with the hand release.