2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

[KARNUT]

9 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

Haha. This old man is in real good shape. If I wasn’t retired I’d still get a new truck every two years. I like the performance. My family business has a fleet of all the brands. Even performance trucks. I like the old stuff better. Too much glitter and intrusion. They don’t last like they used to. It’s a shame because the less fortunate second, third owners will pay that price. 

By the way the 98 diesel with its 355 gear gets 25 mpg at 65 mph. The 2000 7.3 one ton diesel gets 22 with the more pulling gear at 65. The way my mother drove it to town on secondary roads usually at 45 mph got better than that. 

[Atlas]

And a 1500 with a 3.0 can achieve over 30 when driven for maximum fuel economy. 

 

An equivalent one ton today with a 6.6 Duramax can do just as good as those old trucks while being heavier and with vastly increased towing capacity.

 

I'm really failing to see your point here other than you continually insist on talking about old, non-GM vehicles and family stories in EVERY dang thread.

[NDKoze]

I really get a kick out of all these old boomers saying they don't like all the technology in the new trucks and they prefer the 20-30 year old trucks or the base work truck models. 

 

I bet they yell at the neighborhood kids to get off their grass too. 

 

LOL! 

[KARNUT]

27 minutes ago, Atlas said:

And a 1500 with a 3.0 can achieve over 30 when driven for maximum fuel economy. 

 

An equivalent one ton today with a 6.6 Duramax can do just as good as those old trucks while being heavier and with vastly increased towing capacity.

 

I'm really failing to see your point here other than you continually insist on talking about old, non-GM vehicles and family stories in EVERY dang thread.

[PhilB]

1 hour ago, KARNUT said:

Maybe you wouldn't be crying if you quit talking about yourself, quit bringing up politics, and stay on topic for the thread. 

[KARNUT]

19 minutes ago, PhilB said:

Maybe you wouldn't be crying if you quit talking about yourself, quit bringing up politics, and stay on topic for the thread. 

[cautious optimist]

Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.

[Jsdirt]

7 hours ago, NDKoze said:

I really get a kick out of all these old boomers saying they don't like all the technology in the new trucks and they prefer the 20-30 year old trucks or the base work truck models. 

 

I bet they yell at the neighborhood kids to get off their grass too. 

 

LOL! 

Since I'm the one who has to fix them when they break, I'll take vehicles over 30 years old all day, EVERY day, over ANY modern crap. Have you attempted any repairs on anything built after 2006? It's a friggin nightmare, and gets worse the newer the model year. 

 

If I had the will or desire, I can make any car of any age outside of a Model T (I don't have THAT much will ...) just as powerful, comfortable, and have all the tech the new stuff does, and get pretty close in mileage, too. I prefer SIMPLICITY. The less the vehicle has, the less to fix WHEN it breaks, not IF.

 

I'm glad you snot-nosed punks don't like them. More for us, plus that keeps the prices from climbing more than they already have.

[Jsdirt]

11 hours ago, Atlas said:

 

Speaking of stupid arguments, why haven't fuel economy standards been rolled back. Or if nobody is going to enforce them, why havent auto manufacturers saved themselves a bunch of headache by reverting to naturally aspirated 6's and 8's in everything again without any of the "30% more expensive" stuff?

Because that is IDIOTIC, much like this question. They've already been forced to do it by past administrations - why would you roll that back when it's a GOOD thing?  WHO IS ARGUING FOR LOWER MILEAGE????   NOBODY IS!!

 

I'm certainly not! What I want is RELIABLE vehicles again that are worth the price paid! 

 

I don't get your logic here ...

 

In 2003 I paid $2,200 for our '86 Grand Marquis. It's STILL running and I've never been inside the engine, aside for the timing cover since it was leaking, so I threw a new timing set in since that makes sense. Transmission is ORIGINAL. Electric pump in the gas tank is ORIGINAL. Rear end is ORIGINAL. I'd have to hit my head REAL hard to want to pay $60k or more for a car that still can't come close to the comfort, seating and storage space, or reliability of this one. Nothing is even in the ball park! Hundreds of thousands of brands and models have been built and sent to the crusher while this one keeps on going!

 

https://postimg.cc/Z9XRrCSg

 

I've got a whole fleet of cars, motorcycles, and a truck close to this age for summer and winter. No one could pay me enough to buy anything built this century. I have zero use for any it.

[smit303]

5 hours ago, cautious optimist said:

Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.

The Denali Ultimate's grille is tinted, but the "regular' Denali has a bright chrome grille like the current models.

[Jus Cruisin]

5 hours ago, Jsdirt said:

Because that is IDIOTIC, much like this question. They've already been forced to do it by past administrations - why would you roll that back when it's a GOOD thing?  WHO IS ARGUING FOR LOWER MILEAGE????   NOBODY IS!!

 

I'm certainly not! What I want is RELIABLE vehicles again that are worth the price paid! 

 

I don't get your logic here ...

 

In 2003 I paid $2,200 for our '86 Grand Marquis. It's STILL running and I've never been inside the engine, aside for the timing cover since it was leaking, so I threw a new timing set in since that makes sense. Transmission is ORIGINAL. Electric pump in the gas tank is ORIGINAL. Rear end is ORIGINAL. I'd have to hit my head REAL hard to want to pay $60k or more for a car that still can't come close to the comfort, seating and storage space, or reliability of this one. Nothing is even in the ball park! Hundreds of thousands of brands and models have been built and sent to the crusher while this one keeps on going!

 

https://postimg.cc/Z9XRrCSg

 

I've got a whole fleet of cars, motorcycles, and a truck close to this age for summer and winter. No one could pay me enough to buy anything built this century. I have zero use for any it.

I was the GM of a Lincoln Mercury dealership back in the 80's. The service lot was always full with "broken" ones. Plenty of transmissions, power windows and a/c repairs. The only one I'd consider owning would be the Marauder at this point and it certainly wouldn't be a daily driver. 

My 2025 GMC Sierra 1500 Denali Ultimate is my "Lincoln Town Car" in my retirement. I want all the "stuff". Big infotainment screens, one touch power windows, Supercruise (I won't buy another vehicle without it), hands free pretty much everything. I'm going to swap my current truck for a 2027 Yukon Denali Ultimate so I can have the air suspension and surround vision recording along with all the other "stuff". 

[Atlas]

8 hours ago, Jsdirt said:

Since I'm the one who has to fix them when they break, I'll take vehicles over 30 years old all day, EVERY day, over ANY modern crap. Have you attempted any repairs on anything built after 2006? It's a friggin nightmare, and gets worse the newer the model year. 

 

If I had the will or desire, I can make any car of any age outside of a Model T (I don't have THAT much will ...) just as powerful, comfortable, and have all the tech the new stuff does, and get pretty close in mileage, too. I prefer SIMPLICITY. The less the vehicle has, the less to fix WHEN it breaks, not IF.

 

I'm glad you snot-nosed punks don't like them. More for us, plus that keeps the prices from climbing more than they already have.

 

You're right, I can't argue with someone who thinks an '86 Grandma Keith is the pinnacle of reliability and engineering. You may want to seek a mental health referral, however.

 

The difference between you and I, I think, is I don't have to depend on old vehicles. That really changes one's perception. Newer vehicles also take more knowledge and skill to work on, absolutely. Some people keep up with that, other's can't. YMMV.

[Atlas]

9 hours ago, cautious optimist said:

Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.

 

It's a current trend, away from Chrome. Chrome costs more money than a lot of other finishes and it has much, much higher environmental impact than other finish types.

 

That, and, when most chrome is actually plastic these days, a lot of people just don't prefer the look or idea that plastic should be chromed.

 

The one thing I kind of prefer is a chrome front bumper on trucks. But even that look is considered dated. It's highly functional, as we all know. Super resistant to rock chips and road rash, and resists etching from bug guts.

Edited 5 hours ago by Atlas

[Jus Cruisin]

3 hours ago, Atlas said:

 

It's a current trend, away from Chrome. Chrome costs more money than a lot of other finishes and it has much, much higher environmental impact than other finish types.

 

That, and, when most chrome is actually plastic these days, a lot of people just don't prefer the look or idea that plastic should be chromed.

 

The one thing I kind of prefer is a chrome front bumper on trucks. But even that look is considered dated. It's highly functional, as we all know. Super resistant to rock chips and road rash, and resists etching from bug guts.

It costs $5,250 for the Yukon Nightfall option (black wheels, emblems and illuminated black GMC grill badge). What a "deal". 

[Atlas]

4 minutes ago, Jus Cruisin said:

It costs $5,250 for the Yukon Nightfall option (black wheels, emblems and illuminated black GMC grill badge). What a "deal". 

 

Holy smokes. Clearly not a deal on that truck. I just mean in general, matte or painted trim is becoming more normative than chrome, but I know the Black Optics packages on various vehicles are being sold as uplevel trims. They look really good, but sheesh. It's just paint and plastic.