Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

A much needed, simple drop-in mod.  I like the HUSKY brand b/c they cover the chassis rail in addition to the wheel well area. IMHO they have better value than OEM, these cover more area and are cheaper by about $50 for the set vs factory version. 

 

Here is a before and after, installation was a breeze (on the 2nd one) once I had figured out the wrangling that needed to be done to get the first one in.  You have to get the top of the cover up into the lip of the wheel well seated completely then pop the bottom of the cover up into place in order for these to get in. 

 

 

wwa.jpg

IMG_3657.JPG

Edited by BobbyAlton
  • Like 5
Posted (edited)

Looks very nice, where did you get them and how much?

 

Edit: never mind on my part, went out to look and apparently my came with the liners, is this a trim dependent thing? I'll leave my question up as I'm sure some will wonder the  same thing.

Edited by ChinkySuperman
  • Like 1
Posted

Look good! My RST came with liners but will keep these in mind if the GM’s don’t  last. I had my 2011 wheel wells sprayed with my bed and it lasted great also.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, ChinkySuperman said:

Looks very nice, where did you get them and how much?

 

Edit: never mind on my part, went out to look and apparently my came with the liners, is this a trim dependent thing? I'll leave my question up as I'm sure some will wonder the  same thing.

Sure, I purchased this set on eBay, $121.00 and free shipping.  But HUSKY also sells them on their website https://www.huskyliners.com/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIwsftiP635AIVCp6fCh1sUgp4EAAYASAAEgIqlPD_BwE

 

The GM OEM cloth liners are great, they just don't cover as much area(s) like the chassis rail.  My 2016 had them.  My 2019 Custom Trim Trail Boss did not come with these.  But if your truck does and you prefer the HUSKY version, they can be easily removed (the instructions from HUSKY come with info on this) and I suppose you could even sell your old set on eBay.  The GM OEM versions are $150, plus shipping, $30 or so.

 

Posted
19 hours ago, Snuff said:

Look good! My RST came with liners but will keep these in mind if the GM’s don’t  last. I had my 2011 wheel wells sprayed with my bed and it lasted great also.

I've got the stock liners in my RST also and standard in my '16Z71. They look like pressed fiber composite but are extremely durable and the best part is the truck doesn't sound like a tin can in a hailstorm when going over and kicking up gravel. They not only cushion the rock hits but provide sound deadening from the bed shell and rear fenders. Aftermarkets look like made of plastic, noisier and likely to suffer damage from a rock hit in subzero weather. And fiber ones do not buildup salt, snow, ice or road ask crud in the Winter

  • Like 2
Posted
6 minutes ago, Thomcat said:

I've got the stock liners in my RST also and standard in my '16Z71. They look like pressed fiber composite but are extremely durable and the best part is the truck doesn't sound like a tin can in a hailstorm when going over and kicking up gravel. They not only cushion the rock hits but provide sound deadening from the bed shell and rear fenders. Aftermarkets look like made of plastic, noisier and likely to suffer damage from a rock hit in subzero weather. And fiber ones do not buildup salt, snow, ice or road ask crud in the Winter

I agree 100% with the comment of the compressed fibre vs plastic. The plastic will not stand the test of time, especially in my climate. They may cover more of the chassis, but you don't want salt/sand/snow/ice to accumulate to the point where it causes issue either.

 

I disagree with the comment that the fibre ones do not buildup stuff in the winter. The salt and sand stick to them like peanut butter on shag carpet. They do tend to hold some material, and moisture, but it is easily pressure washed away/through the liner itself.

 

This is a bit of an extreme case, but the whole liner was frozen solid and about 3-4" of buildup.

image.jpeg.39c5627bc66409b81c317f8846d09c65.jpeg

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Thomcat said:

I've got the stock liners in my RST also and standard in my '16Z71. They look like pressed fiber composite but are extremely durable and the best part is the truck doesn't sound like a tin can in a hailstorm when going over and kicking up gravel. They not only cushion the rock hits but provide sound deadening from the bed shell and rear fenders. Aftermarkets look like made of plastic, noisier and likely to suffer damage from a rock hit in subzero weather. And fiber ones do not buildup salt, snow, ice or road ask crud in the Winter

Yeah, my 2016 had those OEM Fabric liners as well.  Unfortunately, they covered only a small area of the wheel well and after about the first year, the chassis rails being so exposed started to show rust and lots of debris inside them.   Here are some pics from 2016.  So with my 2019, figured I'd give these Polyethelene HUSKY liners a try.  They are guaranteed to withstand rocks, it's more of a rubbery plastic. Also, no noise as far as I can tell.  Their website is all 5-stars on these things btw...

wheel well.jpg

well2.jpg

Edited by BobbyAlton
Posted
8 hours ago, BobbyAlton said:

Yeah, my 2016 had those OEM Fabric liners as well.  Unfortunately, they covered only a small area of the wheel well and after about the first year, the chassis rails being so exposed started to show rust and lots of debris inside them.   Here are some pics from 2016.  So with my 2019, figured I'd give these Polyethelene HUSKY liners a try.  They are guaranteed to withstand rocks, it's more of a rubbery plastic. Also, no noise as far as I can tell.  Their website is all 5-stars on these things btw...

wheel well.jpg

well2.jpg

the function of the liners is not to prevent rust, or to hide it though. But I understand where your coming from. The chassis issue is another totally separate ball of $hit.

 

Good to hear that there is no noise out of the husky liners, and it's not as "plastic-y" as you'd think.

  • Like 1
Posted

for sure, it's slightly more cosmetic than it is functional.  covering the view of the chassis rail being that cosmetic end of it.   I can't help but wonder why GM doesn't put a high strength paint on the chassis versus the rub off stuff that's on there now?  When I restored my 1948 Chevrolet 3100 Truck, first thing I did was use a ceramic coating on the chassis.  Much better ?

chassis2.jpg

c2.jpg

chassis3.jpg

up.jpg

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, BobbyAlton said:

for sure, it's slightly more cosmetic than it is functional.  covering the view of the chassis rail being that cosmetic end of it.   I can't help but wonder why GM doesn't put a high strength paint on the chassis versus the rub off stuff that's on there now?  When I restored my 1948 Chevrolet 3100 Truck, first thing I did was use a ceramic coating on the chassis.  Much better ?

chassis2.jpg

c2.jpg

chassis3.jpg

up.jpg

They either don’t want it to last,  under estimate the corrosiveness of some climates, or expect the steel to withstand corrosion and still hold its integrity.

 

We shouldn’t accept any of the excuses. I plan to manage it myself unfortunately 

Edited by tanner709
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
On 9/4/2019 at 12:39 PM, BobbyAlton said:

A much needed, simple drop-in mod.  I like the HUSKY brand b/c they cover the chassis rail in addition to the wheel well area. IMHO they have better value than OEM, these cover more area and are cheaper by about $50 for the set vs factory version. 

 

Here is a before and after, installation was a breeze (on the 2nd one) once I had figured out the wrangling that needed to be done to get the first one in.  You have to get the top of the cover up into the lip of the wheel well seated completely then pop the bottom of the cover up into place in order for these to get in. 

 

 

wwa.jpg

IMG_3657.JPG

Looks great! I'm sold! 

Edited by TMD
spelling error
  • Thanks 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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 2,189 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...