Jump to content

Any AT4s with GMC 22" wheels?

TripleBGM
 Share

Recommended Posts

Joe98 Enthusiast

Joe98

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, voltedge said:

I guess I'm on the weird side or something, but in my opinion to pay what any of the new trucks cost and then actually use them off road is not my idea of acceptable. It would be better to just get an older vehicle that costs considerably less or better yet an atv or such that is purpose built for off road riding. Anyway, here's my AT4 with 22" GM Accessories black chrome coated wheels and Nitto Ridge Grapplers in an LT285/50/22 which is a 33.5" tire set up. As you can tell, they're a good bit wider than stock. I really like the way it rides and handles albeit a tad harsher, but way better handling in turns. If you see this truck off roading call 911, cause it was obviously stolen! LOL!  Seriously, I will drive it in the snow which is rare in the South and it could see a dirt road or two as well.

at46.jpg

TRK19.jpg

 

2 hours ago, voltedge said:

I guess I'm on the weird side or something, but in my opinion to pay what any of the new trucks cost and then actually use them off road is not my idea of acceptable. It would be better to just get an older vehicle that costs considerably less or better yet an atv or such that is purpose built for off road riding. Anyway, here's my AT4 with 22" GM Accessories black chrome coated wheels and Nitto Ridge Grapplers in an LT285/50/22 which is a 33.5" tire set up. As you can tell, they're a good bit wider than stock. I really like the way it rides and handles albeit a tad harsher, but way better handling in turns. If you see this truck off roading call 911, cause it was obviously stolen! LOL!  Seriously, I will drive it in the snow which is rare in the South and it could see a dirt road or two as well.

at46.jpg

TRK19.jpg

Absolutely gorgeous rig voltedge....how would you compare it to your 17’ Denali w/6.2 ?  I honestly have to say the AT4 is the best all around looking truck in both Silverado & Sierra.  Just my opinion of course.  Did you go with the 6.2 again?  Is fuel economy comparable to your 17 Denali?  Thanks 

Truck looks awesome sir...?

  • Like 1
  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

voltedge
voltedge

I guess I'm on the weird side or something, but in my opinion to pay what any of the new trucks cost and then actually use them off road is not my idea of acceptable. It would be better to just get an

amxguy1970
amxguy1970

Not sure I understand this. Why go with the off road version of the truck and then put big street oriented rims on it? Why not leave the off road version for those that are actually going to use it as

TripleBGM
TripleBGM

Another example.

Posted Images

TripleBGM Enthusiast

TripleBGM

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 hours ago, voltedge said:

I guess I'm on the weird side or something, but in my opinion to pay what any of the new trucks cost and then actually use them off road is not my idea of acceptable. It would be better to just get an older vehicle that costs considerably less or better yet an atv or such that is purpose built for off road riding. Anyway, here's my AT4 with 22" GM Accessories black chrome coated wheels and Nitto Ridge Grapplers in an LT285/50/22 which is a 33.5" tire set up. As you can tell, they're a good bit wider than stock. I really like the way it rides and handles albeit a tad harsher, but way better handling in turns. If you see this truck off roading call 911, cause it was obviously stolen! LOL!  Seriously, I will drive it in the snow which is rare in the South and it could see a dirt road or two as well.

at46.jpg

TRK19.jpg

Looks nice and I'm sure it drives nice on the road too.  Thanks for sharing.

smit303 Enthusiast

smit303

Posted
Posted
On 6/3/2019 at 7:25 PM, MX86 said:

f63aa88235072683a6a032fe4447bfce.jpg

Saw this on Instagram 24’s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Normally I don't like black wheels on a white truck, or 24s for that matter, but that looks real good.

AT4x4 Enthusiast

AT4x4

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, voltedge said:

I guess I'm on the weird side or something, but in my opinion to pay what any of the new trucks cost and then actually use them off road is not my idea of acceptable. It would be better to just get an older vehicle that costs considerably less or better yet an atv or such that is purpose built for off road riding. Anyway, here's my AT4 with 22" GM Accessories black chrome coated wheels and Nitto Ridge Grapplers in an LT285/50/22 which is a 33.5" tire set up. As you can tell, they're a good bit wider than stock. I really like the way it rides and handles albeit a tad harsher, but way better handling in turns. If you see this truck off roading call 911, cause it was obviously stolen! LOL!  Seriously, I will drive it in the snow which is rare in the South and it could see a dirt road or two as well.

at46.jpg

TRK19.jpg

Truck looks awesome!

voltedge Enthusiast

voltedge

Posted
Posted (edited)

Thanks everyone! It is a 6.2v8 and it is a definite improvement from the 17'. I feel like it is more controlled in the suspension dept. and doesn't float like the Cadillac ride of the Denali although more truck like. I initially wasn't totally impressed with the truck in comparison to the 17', but after spending 1,500 miles behind the wheel on some long drive trips, I am ready to trade the Denali for another new style! BTW, my wife took this truck from me! LOL

Edited by voltedge
  • 3 weeks later...
MacPH Enthusiast

MacPH

Posted
Posted

I like 22" wheels on a truck as long as the tires aren't rubber bands, the new wheelwells are huge and there is way too much space with a stock 20" wheel and standard tire.  Especially when you throw a level on.  Nice looking truck.

FDHog Enthusiast

FDHog

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Stitch said:

I like 22" wheels on a truck as long as the tires aren't rubber bands, the new wheelwells are huge and there is way too much space with a stock 20" wheel and standard tire.  Especially when you throw a level on.  Nice looking truck.

All that space is for wheel travel when you're going off road.

MacPH Enthusiast

MacPH

Posted
Posted

Based on the last pic of the ridge grappler setup, unless the person is Baja racing it with a 4 wheeler in the back I don’t think there is going to be an issue with bottoming out.  

f8l vnm Senior Enthusiast

f8l vnm

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 6/8/2019 at 10:36 PM, protovack said:

22" wheels don't belong on a truck, IMO. 

This is why its your opinion :)  Having said that , I would want more sidewall as well if i'm putting on AT tires 

Edited by f8l vnm
  • 9 months later...
Trevor Munsell Enthusiast

Trevor Munsell

Posted
Posted

IMO 285 50 22s are the best looking size 22 on both silv and Sierra. Just wish they made a 4 ply street tire that wasnt so expensive.

superhighsierra Enthusiast

superhighsierra

Posted
Posted

Educate-Education-Facts-Knowledge-GIF-20

 

22's only belong on stock Denali's. 

 

20's look good on stock or a 2-4" lifted truck with 35"+ tires

 

really 17 or 18" beadlocks would probably be the best looking tire on these vehicles although nobody on here runs them. 99% of people put on 6" RC lifts and run 35's  with 2 feet of exposed wheel-well and cheap offset rims that make it look like roller skates and ride like $hit.

 

The sweet spot on these trucks is a 17-20" wheel with 35-37" tires and a 2-4" lift. Anything else... looks like you mortgaged your double wide or are in HS. 

  • Confused 1
spizike9 Enthusiast

spizike9

Posted
Posted
On 6/3/2019 at 4:27 PM, amxguy1970 said:

Not sure I understand this. Why go with the off road version of the truck and then put big street oriented rims on it? Why not leave the off road version for those that are actually going to use it as such and get a more appropriate version that better suits ones actual uses (or lack there of)?

 

Tyler


Because the “off road” version of GMCs truck really isn’t. It just has a small lift on it. Most people buy the AT4 because they like the Denali features but don’t want all the chrome. Or people like me that would be happy with a SLT but don’t want all the chrome but want more than an Elevation. 

  • Like 1

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...