Jump to content

Sierra 1500 vs classic

Mando Ruiz

Recommended Posts

Mando Ruiz Enthusiast

Mando Ruiz

Posted
Posted

Can someone tell me the difference between the 2006 GMC sierra 1500 vs the 2006 GMC sierra classic? Which do I have? Here's a pic of mine.... Sorry trying to get some center wheel caps and it's very confusing lol

20180604_092415.jpg

Colossus Senior Enthusiast

Colossus

Posted
Posted

Hmm.. 2007 model year is when the GMT-900s came out to replace the GMT-800s.. But in 2007 there were still some of the GMT-800s made which were called the "Classic" If I remember right.  I wonder if they sold some GMT-900s in mid to late 2006 and listed them as 2006.. in which case the classic would be your style, the GMT-800 style. 

Colossus Senior Enthusiast

Colossus

Posted
Posted

Why did you put the chevy taillights on though?  The GMC taillights looked much better in my opinion with the amber turn signal that stayed with the GMCs from 1999 to 2007.  Chevy went with the all red with round accents in 2002/2003-2006/7. 

Mando Ruiz Enthusiast

Mando Ruiz

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 hours ago, Colossus said:

Why did you put the chevy taillights on though?  The GMC taillights looked much better in my opinion with the amber turn signal that stayed with the GMCs from 1999 to 2007.  Chevy went with the all red with round accents in 2002/2003-2006/7. 

I've always like the silverado taillights better. They were a direct fit. The ones I purchased had the harness so it was plug and play. 

hayners334 Enthusiast

hayners334

Posted
Posted

The early 2007s would be the "classic", GMT-800 body style. 2007.5 is the GMT-900 body style. They did the same thing in 1999, the early ones were the 88-98 body style and the 1999.5 was the 99-06 GMT-800 body style. See attached photo, 2007 "classic" on top, 2007.5 on bottom

inCollage_20180810_133502065.jpg

txab Senior Enthusiast

txab

Posted
Posted

You have a 2006 plain and simple. No distinctions. Split occurred in 2007 with the split from GMT 800  and 900 series. 2007 & 2007.5

 

You never posted in your other thread how you cured your ECM and water infiltration issue. Post back for others with same issue to see

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined

  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 3,190 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • dna9656
      No low range 4 x 4

      By dna9656 · Posted

      My 2015 1500 LTZ Silverado suddenly won't go into 4 x 4 low. It will go into 4 x 4 high.
    • asilverblazer
      Transmission Woes :-(

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      Yep, just a quick reference point.    My main point being I’d do a thousand other things before I’d pay 10k for a transmission.    Speaking in ignorance cause I don’t look at these trucks, what is it worth? 20k?
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      I think users are going to want to pick their monitored parameters, which parameters they want to see first.    It should probably start with baseline at a minimum and adjust to learned, but be able to overlay baseline for comparison.   A simple severity level would be able to determine what type of alerting is appropriate or user selectable.    Why not use the OBD port though?   I think a phone connection would be a good idea, push notifications type deal.   Number 1 issue is having data is useless if you don’t know what the data should be under normal conditions. 
    • Chuck FB
      summer road trips in the 2026 2500HD

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 
    • Aimatdeer
      Ac not keeping up

      By Aimatdeer · Posted

      Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...