Jump to content

What did you pay for your truck?

fishingtruck
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

nino
nino

MSRP: 61k my price: 48k   Here is what i did recently to get 20% off of my truck.  On the last week of August i stopped by every dealership in my local area (6).  For the first 4 dealer

entrpnr
entrpnr

Got a 2020 LT trail boss this weekend MSRP 55,105 Discounted to 44,147 Was out the door for 49k (no trade in so tax was high) This is my first modern Chevy. I had a 68 Chevelle that I restored

Daverado
Daverado

Of course.  A year-old truck is worth less, you should expect to pay less.  Resale value is definitely lower.  Even if you're buying it "new", as soon as you drive it off the lot it's a year older tha

Posted Images

paulny Enthusiast

paulny

Posted
Posted
On 9/4/2019 at 10:37 AM, econometrics said:

We're just not going to see very big rebates on the Trail Boss or AT4s for a while. As you mentioned, they are selling like hotcakes and GM knows it. 

Just purchased my '19 AT4 loaded included 6.2 and performance package...sticker $67420 paid $59200 plus ttl.  This was the exact AT4 I was looking for including color.  Had to drive 4 hours to purchase it, but it made for a very fun drive home.  Icing on the cake was it was built on 7/4/19.  

  • Like 1
Robert Rivera New Member

Robert Rivera

Posted
Posted

Sierra SLT Crew Cab Texas Edition, bedliner, tint and level kit dealer installed 41.5K OTD with an MSRP right over 57K and had 4509 miles as it was the finance managers.  I dislike negotiation without including TTL as I prefer to get an OTD price.  I had to drive 2 hours to go get the truck as I could not find anyone close in south Texas price wise.  I bought my 2016 with miles and do kind the miles since I drive a beater daily. I am late to the party as I purchased back in July.   

nino Enthusiast

nino

Posted
Posted (edited)

2019 Silverado LTZ 6.2L CrewCab Fully Loaded except Sun Roof & Running Boards.. MSRP 61k

 

51k AFTER TTL, 

 

*Free car washes for a year* included

 

 

Edited by nino
jamin87ss Senior Enthusiast

jamin87ss

Posted
Posted (edited)

How do i figure out if im getting a good lease? Have not been able to figure out the formula yet, but seems there doing better to help leases vs buying right now on a at4 i just dont know how to figure it out, looking at a 62500 truck 15k a year

Edited by jamin87ss
J23 New Member

J23

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here is my contribution

 

From Southern California

 

LT trailboss shadow Gray

msrp 55530

 

Agreed at 47.4k 

 

but added roughly 2k for the 7year GMEPP and impressive spray on bed liner

 

My all in OTD is 53.5k because of crazy Southern California taxes

 

I just wanted to contribute to this post

 

Edited by J23
cltsig Enthusiast

cltsig

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, jamin87ss said:

How do i figure out if im getting a good lease? Have not been able to figure out the formula yet, but seems there doing better to help leases vs buying right now on a at4 i just dont know how to figure it out, looking at a 62500 truck 15k a year

Look at Leasehackr.com ( no “e” in there). Generally no money down and a lease payment equal to 1% of MSRP and you’re doing damn good. So a $50,000 truck with a payment of $500, no money down (cap cost reduction) is generally good. 

Cowpie Senior Enthusiast

Cowpie

Posted
Posted

I look at the 1500's with 6.2 MSRP and average selling prices.  It really has to be a market driven thing and nothing that relates to reality.  I have seen many new 2020 6.6L gasser crew cab 2500's driving off the lot for roughly $40K.   A pickup that is far more capable in both payload and towing than any 6.2 1500.  The 6.6 has a little less HP, but substantially better torque than the 6.2.  And is cast iron block.  It is even based on the 6.2 Ecotec, using many of the same components with the only major difference being a longer stroke.  And the 6.6 is designed to meet its full potential on regular fuel since it has a little lower compression ratio. No need for premium to maximize potential. 

 

Not a dig on the 1500's, just a realistic observation that GM MSRP pricing and the average selling prices are grossly inflated over what they should be. But, as long as people are willing to shell out the bucks, nothing will change.  

  • Like 1
KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted
I look at the 1500's with 6.2 MSRP and average selling prices.  It really has to be a market driven thing and nothing that relates to reality.  I have seen many new 2020 6.6L gasser crew cab 2500's driving off the lot for roughly $40K.   A pickup that is far more capable in both payload and towing than any 6.2 1500.  The 6.6 has a little less HP, but substantially better torque than the 6.2.  And is cast iron block.  It is even based on the 6.2 Ecotec, using many of the same components with the only major difference being a longer stroke.  And the 6.6 is designed to meet its full potential on regular fuel since it has a little lower compression ratio. No need for premium to maximize potential. 
 
Not a dig on the 1500's, just a realistic observation that GM MSRP pricing and the average selling prices are grossly inflated over what they should be. But, as long as people are willing to shell out the bucks, nothing will change.  

If you’re going to use a truck as a truck it’s a no brainer. Many people use them as cars with a big trunk. That’s okay though. It allows me to get real cars at huge discounts. Soon Mr Jones will get a car.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, KARNUT said:


If you’re going to use a truck as a truck it’s a no brainer. Many people use them as cars with a big trunk. That’s okay though. It allows me to get real cars at huge discounts. Soon Mr Jones will get a car.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:cheers:    RCSB IS a two seat Roadster with a big trunk.    :cheers:

 

Just scanning the thread it seems to me that roughly 10K off the sticker is kind of a 'Normal' deal, eh? :thumbs:

 

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

:cheers:    RCSB IS a two seat Roadster with a big trunk.    :cheers:

 

Just scanning the thread it seems to me that roughly 10K off the sticker is kind of a 'Normal' deal, eh? :thumbs:

 

Of there’s always an exemption. My truck is a hot rod. Wishing to be a rear drive impala that doesn’t exist. Two door trucks can easily be reasonably priced sports cars, as you demonstrate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted

I use my truck as a truck, and the HD was not and is not a “no brainer”. Not going to derail the thread with the obvious cons to buying an HD truck when a half ton would suffice. They are, or at least should be obvious.

 

MSRP against MSRP, the 6.2 and the 6.6 are nearly identical in sticker price for the same trims with the same cab/ bed configuration (even though the HD’s bed is a few inches longer).

 

While I don’t agree, there is still some stigma or undesirability about a gas powered HD that might drive the price down a little beyond the half ton discounts. But I would imagine the larger factor in the average cost difference is that the 6.6 is the base engine, and thus can be had in a much cheaper truck. Fleet/ WT, Custom, LT trucks and so on. You aren’t going to see an HD LTZ or SLT 6.6 going out the door for 40 grand, just as you won’t see a 1500 LTZ or SLT 6.2 at that price.

 

Keep it apples to apples and the price difference is negligible, at least in what I’ve seen so far. 

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      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...