Jump to content

Bed Cover for 2015 Sierra 1500 - Peragon or Bakflip?

Ed Spinaio

Recommended Posts

Ed Spinaio New Member

Ed Spinaio

Posted
Posted

I have a 2015 Sierra 1500 XLT with a spray-in bedliner. I've been researching bed covers and I believe I've narrowed it down to 2: the Peragon or Bakflip. Would appreciate anyone's thoughts or experiences with either of these covers.

 

From my perspective it seems that the biggest pro with the Bakflip is that it doesn't leak as much as (not at all?) the Peragon, and the ability to cover the bed partially with the Bakflip, but the Peragon is either completely open or closed. Biggest pro with the Peragon is the company (customer service) and the fact that it is Aluminum, as well it doesn't block the back window when completely open.

 

Also - is anyone aware of discount codes for either cover for members of this forum?

 

Thanks in advance!

muddkatt Senior Enthusiast

muddkatt

Posted
Posted

Bakflop is junk, unless its free, go another route.

Ed Spinaio New Member

Ed Spinaio

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Bakflip definitely isn't free! in fact... about the same as the Peragon....

 

thanks for the feedback!

Itsgnu Enthusiast

Itsgnu

Posted
Posted

I went with BakFlip. It sits flush with the bed rails and doesn't leak. It wasn't cheap to buy but looks good and works good. It's handy if you have a load that sits on the tail gate that you can sit the BakFlip cover down and it follows the contour of what's in the box with out damage.

Exhausted Enthusiast

Exhausted

Posted
Posted

I've had the bakflip F1 and Fibermax. Now I have the Undercover Flex. I like it the best so far.

Paragon is a POS. It will dent easy and the tracks suck, it's cheap and bulky.

Someotherguy Enthusiast

Someotherguy

Posted
Posted

For what it's worth I love my Peragon. Minimal water comes in, and I don't have problems opening or closing the cover at all. Not sure about denting, I don't normally set anything on top of it. But for keeping things locked up / basically water-tight it's been awesome.

muddkatt Senior Enthusiast

muddkatt

Posted
Posted

I went with BakFlip. It sits flush with the bed rails and doesn't leak. It wasn't cheap to buy but looks good and works good. It's handy if you have a load that sits on the tail gate that you can sit the BakFlip cover down and it follows the contour of what's in the box with out damage.

 

Give it a few months and see how much you like it. I will post some pictures of my 9 month old BakFLOP F1 so that you will know what to expect.

FLHRSI04 Enthusiast

FLHRSI04

Posted
Posted

 

Give it a few months and see how much you like it. I will post some pictures of my 9 month old BakFLOP F1 so that you will know what to expect.

 

I have a 2 year old Bakflip on my Sierra. It looks great, seals great and shows absolutely no wear at all. Love it.

  • 3 weeks later...
Dnt Senior Enthusiast

Dnt

Posted
Posted

Received my color matched Peragon via FEDEX on wednesday. I ordered the optional clamp on mounting hardware since i do not wish to drill holes in my new truck bed. The clamps they sent are too short and the rails cannot be adjusted to correct width. Currently working with Peragon support but they seem to have a hard time understanding. sent these pics in this morning (they will not see until monday i am sure) I think these clamp brackets may be something new? IF YOU ORDER A BED COVER FOR A GM SHORT BED BE AWARE THAT THEY MAY SEND YOU THE INCORRECT CLAMP BRACKETS. THE CLAMP BRACKETS SHOULD HAVE THE SAME LENGTH AND SLOT AS THE DRILL BRACKETS THAT COME IN WITH YOUR COVER. CHECK THAT FIRST BEFORE WASTING ANY TIME WITH THE INSTALL. see attached pics. Note; The paint match is totally awesome once I get this small issue fixed with the brackets it is really going to look great.

post-127028-0-07940900-1469893288_thumb.jpg

 

You can see that there is a LOT of difference in the length of the brackets. These short clamps brackets just will not work on our GM short beds! Need about 1/4in more slot on the back ones and less than 1/8in more slot on each of the front and middle ones. Very frustrating but I feel like they will make it right.

post-127028-0-07940900-1469893288_thumb.jpg

post-127028-0-07940900-1469893288_thumb.jpg

post-127028-0-07940900-1469893288_thumb.jpg

Ed Spinaio New Member

Ed Spinaio

Posted
  • Author
Posted

update: I purchased the Peragon cover shortly after this post. Everything from the support to the cover itself has been fantastic! Very happy with it so far. The installation was straightforward and easy. So much so in fact that my 13-year-old son did the ENTIRE installation on his own, even working with the Peragon support himself at one point. the only thing I did was drill the 4 holes.

 

So my experience has been all GOOD!

 

thanks to everyone for your help

  • 1 month later...
estcstsilverado Enthusiast

estcstsilverado

Posted
Posted

Received my color matched Peragon via FEDEX on wednesday. I ordered the optional clamp on mounting hardware since i do not wish to drill holes in my new truck bed. The clamps they sent are too short and the rails cannot be adjusted to correct width. Currently working with Peragon support but they seem to have a hard time understanding. sent these pics in this morning (they will not see until monday i am sure) I think these clamp brackets may be something new? IF YOU ORDER A BED COVER FOR A GM SHORT BED BE AWARE THAT THEY MAY SEND YOU THE INCORRECT CLAMP BRACKETS. THE CLAMP BRACKETS SHOULD HAVE THE SAME LENGTH AND SLOT AS THE DRILL BRACKETS THAT COME IN WITH YOUR COVER. CHECK THAT FIRST BEFORE WASTING ANY TIME WITH THE INSTALL. see attached pics. Note; The paint match is totally awesome once I get this small issue fixed with the brackets it is really going to look great.

attachicon.gifmiddle and front rail comparison.JPG attachicon.gifback bracket comparison.JPG

 

You can see that there is a LOT of difference in the length of the brackets. These short clamps brackets just will not work on our GM short beds! Need about 1/4in more slot on the back ones and less than 1/8in more slot on each of the front and middle ones. Very frustrating but I feel like they will make it right.

 

 

Did you ever get this resolved?

Someotherguy Enthusiast

Someotherguy

Posted
Posted

Hmm didn't know they made clamps. I didn't like the idea of drilling, but I did it anyways. I also used some touch up paint make sure it wasn't bare metal after I drilled. Also went out and purchased the sharpest drill bit I could find, even had a little tip on it to help start the hole. Didn't want it to walk when I was drilling a brand new truck!

Dnt Senior Enthusiast

Dnt

Posted
Posted

 

 

Did you ever get this resolved?

Peragon has all the info that i sent back to them not sure what they are going to do about the clamp brackets for the late model GM's. on mine I simply shimmed the clamp brackets out with some aluminum flat stock pieces that I sheared out at work approx 1/4" is all it took (I work at a large sheet metal shop) If you are willing to drill holes the brackets sent with the cover for that purpose will work well as they have a lot more slot, it is the optional clamp brackets that do not have enough slot.... Only issue that I have with the peragon cover is the perfectly matched and awesome color match paint is a bit too reflective and is annoying. If I had a do over I would order a Flat Black finish to prevent reflections from the sun through the back window.

  • 8 months later...
Dnt Senior Enthusiast

Dnt

Posted
Posted

Update on Peragon bed cover. I have sold my 2016 truck and left the Peragon cover on it. It does leak a good bit and you cannot store anything in the bed that cannot get wet. The unique opening and closing mechanism has worked well as I have opened and closed it many many times. The best feature of the cover I think is the color matched paint, it really is awesome. I am now looking for a cover for my 2017 but I am Not considering a Peragon, Nothing really wrong with the Peragon I think all bed covers will leak some however I want a 4 piece fold-a-cover G4 Elite with the personal caddy toolbox option.

My new truck has trifold steps so I am looking at utilizing the front of the bed.

bndawgs Senior Enthusiast

bndawgs

Posted
Posted

Update on Peragon bed cover. I have sold my 2016 truck and left the Peragon cover on it. It does leak a good bit and you cannot store anything in the bed that cannot get wet. The unique opening and closing mechanism has worked well as I have opened and closed it many many times. The best feature of the cover I think is the color matched paint, it really is awesome. I am now looking for a cover for my 2017 but I am Not considering a Peragon, Nothing really wrong with the Peragon I think all bed covers will leak some however I want a 4 piece fold-a-cover G4 Elite with the personal caddy toolbox option.

My new truck has trifold steps so I am looking at utilizing the front of the bed.

where was it leaking from?

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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...