Jump to content

New GMC floor mats 2016 these are real nice!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 182
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

Sorry to be THAT guy, but could I see a picture of the side of the seat where the controls are? Is it painted on the 16's? Or was that just an odd camera glare???

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Are you talking about my pictures with the Escalade seat controls? look here = http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/topic/183346-seat-control-upgrade-escalade-part/page-2?hl=escalade

 

requires trim panel and 3 controls knobs for each side, it should have came on my Denali!

Posted

Love the way these floor mats/liners look. Disappointed about the gas pedal area, completely get how it could be a liability decision.

Posted

Here are mine that came in today. Very nice. Ignore the tab up in the rear picture. I was just trying to get a small lump out.

 

BF70338A-C366-4616-815D-BC99E9E9942E_zps[/C1754AF2-C850-4392-8194-A53617E4E055_zps

84727E09-C1E3-472A-88A5-8A0647067885_zps

How do you feel these match up with the color of your carpet. I have the Cocoa too and in these pictures the mat looks more blackish. Is that just my eyes or do they really look black? Thanks.

Posted

I personally would not have them due to the hole under the gas pedal. :happysad:

Posted

Got these from my 2016 GMC All/Terrain... Anyone know what there worth?

 

a2ca7736-1f59-4b71-ab8b-42398fa16431.jpg

Exactly what I have but with a bowtie.

 

I'll look them up and post back.

 

**my window sticker says $160 for the set.

 

 

Another day in paradise[emoji631]

Posted

Thanks man.. I think I'll post them in the parts classifieds for sale.. I think $140 OBO is a good deal for brand new.

Posted

Got mine and installed them last night. The cocoa matches the carpet perfectly. These are the set that should've come with the truck. Paid 180 for the set , shipping included off ebay, billionautoparts is the vendor. Very happy with these

 

Sent from my SM-T817V using Tapatalk

Posted

Here you go! Observations:

 

Not hard plastic, these are rubber/soft feel and THICK!

The rear mat is in two pieces that snap together although not great as you can see in one of the photos.

They are black but the lighting makes them not look as black as the rest of the interior. But they are.

The drivers side front mat does not go all the way under the gas peddle as the mats do flex and I guess GM wanted to be sure they would not cause a problem with the gas peddle? I may find some other material to cover the carpet but perhaps I will not need to as any liquid should fall to the mat beneath.

They do not fit as tight/contour to the floor but may conform over time as they settle in.

There are instructions to cut in various places to expose the thresholds or just allow them to overlap and protect.

The rear has an area they say cut out if you have under seat storage.

b6f7cb615f03fc4d73be175677696c89.jpg

Old mats!

07659da5c01b578760be34722d78beec.jpg

My helper lol

95ebdad638dc96f6df9a9687f5329da0.jpg

Rear drivers side

222f25ebdde9d042ffa56c5b49590a81.jpg

Rear passenger side

d9dd985b93337a3d7035baa8e89381ff.jpg

81cef2c0e1b6ca4999377d76015350ec.jpg

b28ba278edd8bc09cc7af553174a423c.jpg

2b388968251dc42cdde768b5dbca175b.jpg

cfbdf5e9a849a295ca68996952c11406.jpg

Dirty truck!

2a9cdcec2b6a69d3d44ecc3100085316.jpg

 

Those look waaaaay overkill. It's one thing to have nice rubber floor mats but damn I don't want a rubber floor. I just nano coat my fabrics every 6+ months...

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then do not buy them. Some people like that no carpet shows.

Posted

Sorry to be THAT guy, but could I see a picture of the side of the seat where the controls are? Is it painted on the 16's? Or was that just an odd camera glare???

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe the high country ones have chrome caps and all others are just black plastic. Someone else may chime in if it's different.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • 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   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 504 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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  
    • 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.
    • 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. 
    • So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...