Jump to content

Assist Steps / Running Boards / Nerf Bars

Cholt2322

By Cholt2322
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

SoonerDPT Enthusiast

SoonerDPT

Posted
Posted

attachicon.gifimage.jpg

 

Another, what do you guys think?

 

Those look really good! I was thinking about the same ones with the chrome strip, but after seeing yours, I don't think I would want the chrome.

  • Like 1
  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

weagle99
weagle99

I installed Amp Research Power Steps on my GMT900 recently and will never own another truck without them.

anthony2558
anthony2558

N-Fab wheel to wheel.   Tapatalk via Moto X    

mzodarg
mzodarg

Pics of my truck with the AMP power step.    

Posted Images

sjhill60 New Member

sjhill60

Posted
Posted

I recently bought a white 2014 sierra crew cab with a black low profile tool box. I was thinking about getting the black 6 inch oval assist steps to match the tool box, but i want to see what the black steps look like on the white.

 

Does anyone have a photo of a white sierra with the black steps instead if the chrome?

morrislee Enthusiast

morrislee

Posted
Posted

Anyone has any tips on installing the AMP steps? the Plug & Play one, they should be here by the end of the week.

 

Tips on what tool to have, what to do before for any sort of preps etc.

I already have the firewall grommet punctured for other wires, there is still space for the 2 leads AMPs will use, I have also removed my OEM running boards, anything I need to keep from them? bolts and the U nuts at all?

Norcal Flyfisherman Enthusiast

Norcal Flyfisherman

Posted
Posted

I've never had running boards before, but my wife is 9 months pregnant and I'm thinking about getting a set so its easier for her (and the kid eventually) to climb in. My apologies if this was covered somewhere, but can someone break down the differences in materials? I would worry that aluminum would not hold up, the black running boards might scratch or chip... Am I off base? Any input or help would be appreciated.

mefly2 Enthusiast

mefly2

Posted
Posted

I've never had running boards before, but my wife is 9 months pregnant and I'm thinking about getting a set so its easier for her (and the kid eventually) to climb in. My apologies if this was covered somewhere, but can someone break down the differences in materials? I would worry that aluminum would not hold up, the black running boards might scratch or chip... Am I off base? Any input or help would be appreciated.

 

Your concerns are exactly why we went with stainless steel ...and, they still look like new!

  • Like 1
Jas29 Enthusiast

Jas29

Posted
Posted (edited)

Does anyone know if the amp research one are lower to the ground than the ones gm offers?

Edited by Jas29
Mike1220 Senior Enthusiast

Mike1220

Posted
Posted

Does anyone know if the amp research one are lower to the ground than the ones gm offers?

Yes they do. Much lower and in a much nicer spot for stepping

quise2024 Enthusiast

quise2024

Posted
Posted

Anyone with the AMP step live in a harsh winter area? By harsh im talking long winter and or heavy snow areas (Dakotas, Minnesota, Montana, Maine, etc

 

I want to get them eventually but wont even waste my time if they are going to freeze up or not work in cold weather. 20 degrees or colder outside, driving on a wet road from melted snow for say 30 minutes or so, then get out and they don't open. Truck sits for a few hours and its frozen in the close position

  • Like 1
Chadwilliam1 Enthusiast

Chadwilliam1

Posted
Posted

I have a CC standard bed I would like steps to go back to the rear tires. So I can reach into the bed. My last trucks tires did that and I miss it.

SouthernSilveradoGuy85 Senior Enthusiast

SouthernSilveradoGuy85

Posted
Posted

I have a CC standard bed I would like steps to go back to the rear tires. So I can reach into the bed. My last trucks tires did that and I miss it.

 

I have the N-fabs bed access steps so they have the 3rd step for the bed. The steps are very sturdy and they don't cost too much. I had a set of Weston wheel to wheel steps which also have a 3rd step, but they were just 3" round tube and didn't feel as sturdy. I've banged the steps on a curb a couple times and all it did was scratch the powdercoat, didn't dent at all which the Weston tube steps would have.

Jas29 Enthusiast

Jas29

Posted
Posted

The new Amp Reseach PowerStep XL steps have an additional 3-inch drop over the original PowerStep.

I wonder if these would be to low for a truck that is at stock ride height.

chuckl1218 Senior Enthusiast

chuckl1218

Posted
Posted

I wonder if these would be to low for a truck that is at stock ride height.

I would say these would be for lifted trucks. The standard PowerSteps are just the right height for stock ride height. My wife and mother are both "vertically challenged" and the regular PowerSteps are just right - my truck is stock ride height.

  • Like 1
Mike1220 Senior Enthusiast

Mike1220

Posted
Posted

I wonder if these would be to low for a truck that is at stock ride height.

The regular boards are perfect IMO and several family members' opinion for one of these trucks with a 6" lift. My mom and sister are both vertically challenged. I think a powerstep XL dropping 3" lower than the standard boards would be too low to really be helpful

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,914
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    AidenVorpagel
    Newest Member
    AidenVorpagel
    Joined

  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,317 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Sugar Bears 2015 GMC Terrain SLE-2 2.4 AWD

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      286,740 Mile Services   8/6/2026   New AC Compressor. Refrigerant oil and dye, evacuate and charge system.  New exhaust system from cat back.  New Iridium plugs plus replace #3 coil Repair/rewire headlamp wiring (passenger side) and replace all forward bulbs. Polish lenses of both assemblies.  Pull rear rotors, clean and adjust parking assembly. Inspect, clean and grease front calipers. Check pads and shoes.  4 wheel power bleed of brake system. Dot 4 Reset idle speed 50 rpm higher New Serpentine belt.    Will need new pads in the rear in about 5K more miles.    Tax Title and License out the door just short of a grand.    AC clutch had bitten the dust. 1 year warranty on the pick and save replacement. Thing will make a Polar Bear cry Uncle.  He spent quite some time on the wiring. It was in the harness and he does nothing half. I got off cheap. I have considerable more light down the road. Sylvania Silver Star replacements.  Gas seal between the porcelain and shell of plug #3 was blown, cooked the coil. That was the cold miss.  Love the new exhaust. I can sneak into the neighborhood again.  Nice to have a working parking brake again. Belle Tire never got it done. That was disappointing.    This was one of her bigger bills and still way cheaper than a payment even given the oil consumption. This thing cost me under a hundred a month in repairs and normal routine costs. What is my incentive to replace it? 🤔           
    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...