Jump to content

CarbonPro bed

Jus Cruisin
 Share

Recommended Posts

Jus Cruisin Enthusiast

Jus Cruisin

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 9/4/2023 at 11:57 PM, TxTruckMan said:

I’m not a fan of bed caps. They all look cheap and ugly. Get a cover or nothing at all.

I'm certain Rory is long gone to never be seen again. He didn't get the sympathy he wanted. 

Edited by Jus Cruisin
He wasn't the OP, I am... Duh
  • Haha 2
1454 Enthusiast

1454

Posted
Posted
On 8/30/2023 at 12:46 PM, Jus Cruisin said:

It's your canopy manufacturer problem not GM's. Bellyache at your canopy manufacturer to create a mounting solution. GM can't or shouldn't have to fix aftermarket issues. BakFlip has created unique mounting brackets for their tonneaus for the CarbonPro beds. 

Is there a need to answer it like this? GM knows their aftermarket well and should disclose major incompatibilities. This doesn't affect me, but it's just another anedote that gm doesn't care about their customers. They don't exactly make it easy to see that "xyz" won't work. *note I'm not saying -insert brand here- is better. I'm just saying this is a specific beef with gm. This is just like the "replacing one bank of lifters" when they take a crap. I like my truck, I do not like the issues I have had. 

Jus Cruisin Enthusiast

Jus Cruisin

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, 1454 said:

Is there a need to answer it like this? GM knows their aftermarket well and should disclose major incompatibilities. This doesn't affect me, but it's just another anedote that gm doesn't care about their customers. They don't exactly make it easy to see that "xyz" won't work. *note I'm not saying -insert brand here- is better. I'm just saying this is a specific beef with gm. This is just like the "replacing one bank of lifters" when they take a crap. I like my truck, I do not like the issues I have had. 

Huh? Do you really think the OEM's know the literally millions of aftermarket manufacturers out there and review compatibility? Go to SEMA and you'll find miles of aisles of aftermarket companies. How do they develop those products? They rent, buy or borrow the car, truck, component they are wanting to develop their product for and design it to fit and work. Now, what in the world does aftermarket component compatibility have to do with a warranty repair?

Edited by Jus Cruisin
  • Like 1
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
On 9/10/2023 at 6:23 AM, Jus Cruisin said:

Huh? Do you really think the OEM's know the literally millions of aftermarket manufacturers out there and review compatibility? Go to SEMA and you'll find miles of aisles of aftermarket companies. How do they develop those products? They rent, buy or borrow the car, truck, component they are wanting to develop their product for and design it to fit and work. Now, what in the world does aftermarket component compatibility have to do with a warranty repair?

 

 

Exactly.  These trucks have been out since the 2019 model year.  Plenty of time for a truck cap company to have found a mounting solution.  

1454 Enthusiast

1454

Posted
Posted
On 9/10/2023 at 5:23 AM, Jus Cruisin said:

Huh? Do you really think the OEM's know the literally millions of aftermarket manufacturers out there and review compatibility? Go to SEMA and you'll find miles of aisles of aftermarket companies. How do they develop those products? They rent, buy or borrow the car, truck, component they are wanting to develop their product for and design it to fit and work. Now, what in the world does aftermarket component compatibility have to do with a warranty repair?

Nice reading jerk. You don't have to know "Millions" to maintain standardization so anything that worked in the past still works. Good god. Enjoy your stay in the 84% 

Jus Cruisin Enthusiast

Jus Cruisin

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 hours ago, 1454 said:

Nice reading jerk. You don't have to know "Millions" to maintain standardization so anything that worked in the past still works. Good god. Enjoy your stay in the 84% 

So..... Just keep building trucks like they did in the 80's? To help the aftermarket? Really? My 2016 F150 tonneau didn't quite fit my 2021. Close but no cigar. The CarbonPro is new and unique. Rev Industries (BakFlip) created a unique mount for the hard tonneau with its own jig to locate the holes that had to be drilled. I have the Rev Industries tonneau on my CarbonPro bed. The actual hard folding tonneau is the same for all current model short beds, just a unique mounting system.

 

I worked for an aftermarket /oem company called Cars & Concepts years ago in Product Planning and we were always borrowing cars and trucks to develop t-tops, spoilers and other parts. It's up to the aftermarket supplier to verify fit and upgrade their products if needed to work with new models. 

 

Don't know what the 84% is and sure didn't know I was in it..... 

  • Like 1
Gangly Senior Enthusiast

Gangly

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 9/19/2023 at 10:25 AM, 1454 said:

Nice reading jerk. You don't have to know "Millions" to maintain standardization so anything that worked in the past still works. Good god. Enjoy your stay in the 84% 

First off, 99% of truck owners who use their truck for a job that requires the use of a truck, don't want a canopy as it severely limits the use of the bed of the truck.  This alone should tell you why GM could care less about spending millions on engineering design, tooling, and fabrication to fit a canopy, especially on a one-off package, where VERY few people will be installing a canopy to begin with. 

 

The carbon pro package is pretty nice as far as durability is concerned, but most of the time it's used as a talking point when new owners are trying to razzle and dazzle the Jones' about their new truck.  I would venture to say most people who have the package had no clue what it was, or that it was even on the window sticker.  They just bought the nicest truck they saw and it happened to have that package, and a canopy was the absolute last thing on their mind.

 

 

Edited by Gangly
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
1454 Enthusiast

1454

Posted
Posted
On 9/19/2023 at 2:18 PM, Jus Cruisin said:

So..... Just keep building trucks like they did in the 80's? To help the aftermarket? Really? My 2016 F150 tonneau didn't quite fit my 2021. Close but no cigar. The CarbonPro is new and unique. Rev Industries (BakFlip) created a unique mount for the hard tonneau with its own jig to locate the holes that had to be drilled. I have the Rev Industries tonneau on my CarbonPro bed. The actual hard folding tonneau is the same for all current model short beds, just a unique mounting system.

 

I worked for an aftermarket /oem company called Cars & Concepts years ago in Product Planning and we were always borrowing cars and trucks to develop t-tops, spoilers and other parts. It's up to the aftermarket supplier to verify fit and upgrade their products if needed to work with new models. 

 

Don't know what the 84% is and sure didn't know I was in it..... 

Reading is complicated. No, you make the two beds currently offered the same. Not the same as a truck from 1984. Geez. Was standardization really a complicated word? They do it with every other thing they make. 

 

I'm not surprised you didn't know. 

1454 Enthusiast

1454

Posted
Posted
On 9/20/2023 at 11:09 AM, Gangly said:

First off, 99% of truck owners who use their truck for a job that requires the use of a truck, don't want a canopy as it severely limits the use of the bed of the truck.  This alone should tell you why GM could care less about spending millions on engineering design, tooling, and fabrication to fit a canopy, especially on a one-off package, where VERY few people will be installing a canopy to begin with. 

 

The carbon pro package is pretty nice as far as durability is concerned, but most of the time it's used as a talking point when new owners are trying to razzle and dazzle the Jones' about their new truck.  I would venture to say most people who have the package had no clue what it was, or that it was even on the window sticker.  They just bought the nicest truck they saw and it happened to have that package, and a canopy was the absolute last thing on their mind.

 

 

 

 

Maybe 99% do use their truck as a "truck", or as you put it, "to impress the jones". I don't have the data to prove/disprove this. The point is that any engineering manager worth a crap knows to design any product for the widest compatibility for their own tooling and production. So why GM chose to make something so wildly different between options is baffling. This doesn't even count the aftermarket usage. It reduces SKU's, it relies on less training as there aren't process differences. Etc. My point is that it makes no sense to design the bed, especially a lower volume bed like the CPRO, to a wildly different spec. It's just poor management. 

TxTruckMan Senior Enthusiast

TxTruckMan

Posted
Posted

It’s okay to admit when you’re wrong. If every part was built to the same size and spec we’d all be driving the same trucks! You’re the idiot that didn’t do the research before you bought it. Don’t get mad at GM for giving the rest of us different opinions that we want!

  • 1 year later...
revrnd Senior Enthusiast

revrnd

Posted
Posted (edited)

I didn't know this existed. I know the last step side boxes were a hybrid design and there was a plastic box for the GMT800s (the different taillights were the giveaway).

 

Has the box usage been expanded? Or is it restricted to the higher end models that don't see a lot of abuse?

Edited by revrnd
redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
Posted

CarbonPro isn't a stepside.

 

2025 order guide shows carbon pro is still only available on top trim trucks.

image.thumb.png.af2875508ff7f47920c9c450c3c16b2f.png

 

image.png.7d007752630055d3c5b48bb6ea34c907.png

 

It also requires the truck to be TK10543 -- so 4wd, 1500, 4wd, short box, crew cab -- so not available on  'standard box' truck

 

 

  • Thanks 1
revrnd Senior Enthusiast

revrnd

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, redwngr said:

CarbonPro isn't a stepside.

 

2025 order guide shows carbon pro is still only available on top trim trucks.

image.thumb.png.af2875508ff7f47920c9c450c3c16b2f.png

 

image.png.7d007752630055d3c5b48bb6ea34c907.png

 

It also requires the truck to be TK10543 -- so 4wd, 1500, 4wd, short box, crew cab -- so not available on  'standard box' truck

 

 

Nor Chevs?

 

I knew that, just commenting how the 'composite' box was built over a steel skeleton.

Edited by revrnd

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

    • 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...