Jump to content

Who's going to retrofit this on our K2xx's

camcamaro1991

Recommended Posts

IronVilkas Enthusiast

IronVilkas

Posted
Posted

There are videos on illuminated bowties im sure its the same for the gmcs

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

camcamaro1991 Enthusiast

camcamaro1991

Posted
  • Author
Posted
13 minutes ago, IronVilkas said:

There are videos on illuminated bowties im sure its the same for the gmcs

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

T1's part number is the first time they have offered a OEM solution for GMC's, unless they are allowing them for K2xx's here shortly on a later release.  However I am sure its very easy to add them. 

TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted

That would look great on a good looking “LIFTED” truck!


Sent from Above

tmo Enthusiast

tmo

Posted
Posted

I’ve done some light research on this. They are an inch too long and overlap with the grill inserts. Modifying them to fit wouldn’t be hard if they were roughly the same size, but I’m not sure how you would do it without making it look botched.

camcamaro1991 Enthusiast

camcamaro1991

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, tmo said:

I’ve done some light research on this. They are an inch too long and overlap with the grill inserts. Modifying them to fit wouldn’t be hard if they were roughly the same size, but I’m not sure how you would do it without making it look botched.

I have 2 grilles, OEM Denali, and take off AT, I have the AT as I used the paint matched surround to reduce the amount of chrome. I know there is a lot more room on my Denali grille left/right vs my AT grille. however as you stated fitment is a issue as the emblems are larger, still might try this if I can get a good deal on the newer emblem. 

 

outside of that, hopefully they release this for the K2xx's then, as only the chevy's got it for the K2xx's

 

for giggles can you post the size specs for K2xx & T1 emblems? L,W,H, etc... 

tmo Enthusiast

tmo

Posted
Posted
I have 2 grilles, OEM Denali, and take off AT, I have the AT as I used the paint matched surround to reduce the amount of chrome. I know there is a lot more room on my Denali grille left/right vs my AT grille. however as you stated fitment is a issue as the emblems are larger, still might try this if I can get a good deal on the newer emblem. 
 
outside of that, hopefully they release this for the K2xx's then, as only the chevy's got it for the K2xx's
 
for giggles can you post the size specs for K2xx & T1 emblems? L,W,H, etc... 


My grill is the SLT, which is the same as the AT just chrome I believe. You’re right, it is much more room, just not enough.

Hopefully they will release a K2 emblem or one for the Yukon that would fit.

The dimensions for the T1 are “18 1/2" long and 3 1/4" wide”. The height is the same. K2 is 17” long

134122ea9858e76142162aad5dd78dfa.jpg
camcamaro1991 Enthusiast

camcamaro1991

Posted
  • Author
Posted
23 minutes ago, tmo said:

 


My grill is the SLT, which is the same as the AT just chrome I believe. You’re right, it is much more room, just not enough.

Hopefully they will release a K2 emblem or one for the Yukon that would fit.

The dimensions for the T1 are “18 1/2" long and 3 1/4" wide”. The height is the same. K2 is 17” long

 

 

I have a Denali grille, I only used the AT painted surround (outer trim molding)  plan is to add a HD hood later. 

 

Denali grilles have more room

 

I need to know the measurements of the T1 emblem. 

 

image.thumb.png.7fdd68b51de8f068b92f13d8c80fc510.png

 

image.png.6b17a20dc6b21f61dcf3b03e8cfb8d0b.png

 

 

 

check this out...

 

ebay link for pics

  • 4 months later...

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      I hope to high heaven this is wrong. My Chevy farm trucks frame is lasting way longer than a newer Nissan Titan XD I got for a steal, and it only pulls trailers. A decade younger and it's frame is already way rustier than the waxed Chevy I drive across longs and ditches. Also, hasn't Ford been having tones of troubles with rusted frames? 
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      Batteries don’t always show signs of a few years ago my vehicle started fine in the morning and took me to work. After work the battery was completely dead and I needed a jump. No, I didn’t leave anything on and the battery was only a couple months old. It was replaced under warranty. 
    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • NDKoze
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By NDKoze · Posted

      If his battery was that bad I would think it would have been showing signs before this that were ignored. Stinks that it happened the way it did in rush hour traffic, but this seems like a pretty fringe scenario. I don't mind it that bad and never turn it off. The only slight annoyance for me is the slight delay between brake to gas, but I have gotten used to it and figure if it can save a little gas why not.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a good correction. I think “severity” was probably the wrong word for what I meant. What I really mean is closer to event priority, relevance, and actionability — not “this code is severe” or “replace this part.” I agree that a truck can have a lot of trivial or historical communication codes, and if the product starts pushing alerts for every stored or low-value event, people will ignore it very quickly. So the alert logic would need to be filtered. For example, I would not want a random old communication code to generate a push notification by itself. A useful alert would probably need to be based on things like: - new vs historical - active vs stored - repeated vs one-time - duration of the event - whether it happened near the driver-marked symptom - whether it happened together with voltage drop, reset, bus-off, misfire, oil-pressure change, etc. - whether the same pattern repeats under similar conditions So instead of saying “severity,” maybe the product should organize events by affected system and priority. For example: Misfire event: Show misfire counts / roughness first, then fuel trims, RPM/load, DFM/AFM state if available, coolant/oil temp, voltage, and related DTCs. Oil-pressure event: Show oil pressure first, but only in context — RPM, load, oil temperature, coolant temperature, DFM/AFM state if available, voltage, and baseline comparison. Communication event: Show which module/network/message dropped, whether voltage dropped, whether the recorder reset, whether it was active or historical, and whether it repeated. Voltage/reset event: Show battery voltage, crank/wake/sleep state, module reset, communication dropouts, and what came back online first. That also solves the display-order problem you mentioned. The main report should not always show the same fixed list first. It should show the system that appears abnormal first, and then the supporting values for that system. I also agree that the truck already has an oil pressure gauge and MIL. The point would not be to duplicate those. The value would be in showing what else was happening before and after the warning or symptom. For example, if the MIL comes on for a misfire, the truck already told the driver there is a problem. The useful part would be: - which cylinder or bank looked abnormal first - whether it happened after an AFM/DFM transition - whether fuel trims were already moving - whether oil pressure or voltage changed at the same time - whether the same pattern happened previously without a MIL On the OBD port point, I think you may be right for a consumer-facing version. OBD is much easier for the average owner: - easier install - easier removal - inside the cabin - easier phone connection - easier data download - easier to include a pass-through port for another scanner OBD is also the right place for DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration information, Mode 6, and normal scan-tool parameters. The reason I was looking at ECM-side recording is that some events may be gone by the time someone plugs in a scanner, and some powertrain-side network evidence may not be available the same way through the DLC. But I agree that if an OBD-based version can capture enough useful evidence for most owners, that is probably the cleaner consumer product. Maybe the split is: - OBD/DLC version for most consumers - ECM-side version only if it proves it adds evidence that the OBD version cannot get - shop/pro version if deeper powertrain-side event evidence is actually useful So I would not want to force the inline approach if the OBD workflow solves most of the real-world problem. Your last point is probably the key product requirement: the report should be specific to the system showing the abnormality. Not “here are 50 parameters.” More like: “Misfire-related event detected. Here are the misfire/fuel/DFM/context values.” or “Oil-pressure-related event detected. Here is oil pressure compared with RPM/load/temp/baseline.” or “Communication event detected. Here is what dropped, when, and whether voltage/reset happened first.” That is a much better way to think about the report.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...