Jump to content

Tonneau Cover Advice - HELP!

Bryan Kabe
 Share

Recommended Posts

sharkeysierra Enthusiast

sharkeysierra

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, superhighsierra said:

 

You logic is flawed because the Lomax weighs about 35lbs and can be taken off and tossed in the garage in less than a minute. I guess it could be stolen if you left it partially open but I'm not sure there is a big black market for specialty tonneau covers without tracks. The backflip is clearly the #2 to the Lomax but is ugly AF in comparison. Lomax is going to beat anything aesthetically because you can't see the tracks. The only thing the Backflip has over the Lomax is that it can hold more weight. The Lomax can hold 400+ pounds so unless you are consistently putting 400+ lbs on your tonneau cover, it's a no brainer. 

 

And saying the "Bakflip" is the highest selling hard cover tonneau for a reason is true but it's only because it has been around for so long in it's current form. The last version of the Lomax was garbage as the seals in between the panels would tear, but the completely revamped the design for this gen of trucks and it's not even close to which the nicer cover is. 

 

 

Sounds like you should have bought a Lomax...

Lomax is meh for me.. in honesty I didn’t see it before, and now that I have, I’m glad I didn’t get a lomax. 

personal preference and not a huge deal to take the whole cover off if I need full space

 

  • Like 1
  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

NHM25
NHM25

Okay, after spending more time being indecisive about this than any other topic in recent history, I've decided that I'm going with the BakFlip MX4. Here's why... what works for you will obviously be

jeepincbum11
jeepincbum11

I went with the GATOR and love mine  - https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B07XVQ3KL5/ Got mine for 539.  looks like the prices have gone up.

OnTheReel
OnTheReel

I have the Bak Revolver X4. Hard roll up seemed to be the option for me. I like the roll up, easier than folding my old MX4 panels. And being hard, it actually gives some modicum of security over a so

Posted Images

superhighsierra Enthusiast

superhighsierra

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, sharkeysierra said:

Lomax is meh for me.. in honesty I didn’t see it before, and now that I have, I’m glad I didn’t get a lomax. 

personal preference and not a huge deal to take the whole cover off if I need full space

 

Huh?

 

Lomax is the one you have to take completely off. You can just fold the Bakflip up against the window to use the whole bed. 

 

Irregardless, the bakflip looks like $hit and the Lomax is really the only option for a hard shell cover. But whatever floats your boat. If you like to look at an aesthetically inferior product have at it. Not seeing anything the Bakflip does that the Lomax does not if you don't mind taking the cover completely off. Again, not sure I'm following your logic other than you didn't even know about the Lomax, bought a Bakflip and now are "happy" you bought a Bakflip... sounds like you'd enjoy the company of the guys in the Crew Cab vs Double Cab thread...

 

spacer.png

 

NHM25 Enthusiast

NHM25

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, superhighsierra said:

Huh?

 

Lomax is the one you have to take completely off. You can just fold the Bakflip up against the window to use the whole bed. 

 

Irregardless, the bakflip looks like $hit and the Lomax is really the only option for a hard shell cover. But whatever floats your boat. If you like to look at an aesthetically inferior product have at it. Not seeing anything the Bakflip does that the Lomax does not if you don't mind taking the cover completely off. Again, not sure I'm following your logic other than you didn't even know about the Lomax, bought a Bakflip and now are "happy" you bought a Bakflip... sounds like you'd enjoy the company of the guys in the Crew Cab vs Double Cab thread...

 

spacer.png

 

Man, you must be fun at parties. 

sharkeysierra Enthusiast

sharkeysierra

Posted
Posted

Hahah, you can fully take off the bakflip in a matter of minutes if that. And the lomax sits higher than a bakflip, it ain’t so low.. 

 

I agree it’s preference, I made my choice.. 

NHM25 Enthusiast

NHM25

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, sharkeysierra said:

Hahah, you can fully take off the bakflip in a matter of minutes if that. And the lomax sits higher than a bakflip, it ain’t so low.. 

 

I agree it’s preference, I made my choice.. 

Totally agree with this.. Just reviewed pics of LOMAX vs BakFLIP and you're right... the LOMAX sits slightly higher than the BackFLIP (about half an inch). Both look really good, IMO. I'm with you, though... all about personal preference. 

Transient Senior Enthusiast

Transient

Posted
Posted

I went with the Rough Country trifold tonneau cover. I was looking for protection from water while also fitting with the short bar. Once my truck arrives and I can get everything installed, I'll be able to determine if my decision was sound.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Jmaze996 New Member

Jmaze996

Posted
Posted

I wanted something more and permanent and it really doesn't take up much room. It was a little pricey 

20191226_153349.jpg

20191226_153515.jpg

  • 5 months later...
Reed Cooper New Member

Reed Cooper

Posted
Posted (edited)

spacer.png

There are multiple threads on Tonneau covers for the Twins, and they probably apply to almost any pickup. Note, this is one of those times where the (gasp) Ridgeline probably falls short.

Need to understand what you are looking for in a cover, as each type has it's strengths & weaknesses. As an example, I wanted one that was easy to install, relatively cheap, and could easily be stowed away to haul a tall load. I went with a soft rollup that rolls into a small diameter, doesn't block the rear window view when rolled up, doesn't need to be removed, but can easily be removed if needed. (I haven't removed it since I installed.) I wanted it to be lockable (released is under the cover, 'secured' by locking the tailgate.). I wanted the roll to have two straps to secure when rolled up. I wanted the cover to secure on each side of the bed when rolled out, but in general, wanted to be able to open the top from just one side. Real pain to have to walk around the trailer or truck to access the other side when you wanted to open the cover and you had a trailer attached.

My summary of covers, others will probably suggest more.

1. Hard, one piece cover: Most secure, least flexible, most expensive perhaps?
2. Soft roll up - cheapest, maybe most flexible.
3. Hard roll up.
4. Soft fold, sometimes called a trifold
5. Hard fold - may be one of the few that can support any weight.
6. The one in the post above, I would almost call that a shutter fold maybe?
7. Not a tonneau, but a bed cap may fill the bill for some.
8. Soft topper, a soft version of the old bed cap.

Lot of variations on the above, but the important point is how will you use your cover. There are many factors to consider, and I would suggest you search the threads that have TONNEAU in the title to get a feel for the types, limitations, and advantages of each.

 

However, if you don't find proper information for your query from here and others thread, I have found this GMC Sierra Tonneau cover review more informative and useful. They have reviewed new top 10 product available in the market. 

2017-chevrolet-silverado-1500-.jpg

Edited by Reed Cooper
New Picture add
  • 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 384 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...