Jump to content

GM Truck Owners Keep Their Pickups Longer than Ram and Ford's


Recommended Posts

Posted

post-139450-0-31283100-1483378197_thumb.jpg

John Goreham
Contributing Writer, GM-Trucks.com
1-2-2017

The publication iSeeCars.com recently did a study of 2.5 million auto sales transactions. The intent was to derive a list, in order, of vehicles which owners keep longer than ten years. The publication then ranked the vehicles by the percentage that owners did keep their vehicle longer than a decade. In the pickup truck section, the GMC Canyon and Chevy Colorado, and the Silverado and Sierra all finished higher than the RAM and Ford offerings. In fact, no Fords made the top ten models.

 

It should be noted, that the Canyon and Colorado have not been around ten years in the current form they now have. They were just introduced a couple years back after being off the market for a bit. However, the Sierra and Silverado have been long-term models.

 

We will leave the commentary now, but will offer you the following screen-shot showing the full listing of the top ten trucks that people keep longer than ten years:

 

 

post-139450-0-48989000-1483377832_thumb.png

post-139450-0-48989000-1483377832_thumb.png

post-139450-0-31283100-1483378197_thumb.jpg

post-139450-0-48989000-1483377832_thumb.png

post-139450-0-31283100-1483378197_thumb.jpg

post-139450-0-48989000-1483377832_thumb.png

post-139450-0-31283100-1483378197_thumb.jpg

Posted

I'm not sure how positive of a report this is from an economy point of view for the sales of trucks.

Honestly from a business/economy point of view, the more people AREN'T loyal to keeping their trucks for many years, the better sales.

Notice Ford is not even in the top 10, yet it's the best selling vehicle in the U.S.

It's like Apple who comes out with a new iPhone every 9-12 months, they WANT you to dump your old iPhone and get a new one.

Business would stink for them if everyone that bought an iPhone kept it for 3-4 years before upgrading.

 

The top trucks are the japanese brands, all of which don't change their trucks that often and don't have nearly as good as sales, but these japanese brands don't rely on their truck sales for their majority of profits, they'd easily succeed without the truck sales.

 

Ford, GM, and Dodge would all be in a world of hurt without their truck sales. Again, so from that point of view, GM financially would benefit if their truck owners swapped out and got newer trucks as often as Ford truck owners do.

Posted

Given what does real work, and what pulls into a dunkin' donuts easier to strain the wrist for a sip...

that is impressive by GM.

 

I doubt a honda ridgeline breaking in half is going to get a frame weld and 12 inch lift kit and 1200 foot pound upgrade after 567,473 miles. :)

 

you know what I did by accident?

I left a 12 inch ice and rain storm in the back of the truck.

each shovel full was sopping wet, not draining outside... way more than 500 pounds. The plastic version could not pick up a whole scoop without bending. I was driving around with that n the back and thought nothing of it. Truck did not even droop.

 

No power change, no loss.

 

 

Maybe defining truck should start with a five foot 9 actual laborer.

Archived

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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.    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? 🤔           
    • 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. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...