Sign In
Register
Help
Bookmark
Del.icio.us
Digg
Email
Facebook
Google
Mixx
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Images
C&G First Look - 07 Silverado/Sierra Ripped from the pages of Motor Trend
MultiQuote
#9
- OSV Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,296
- Joined: 19-August 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 07:57 PM
The Chevy's styling looks better on the Extended cab than it did in the crew cab spy shots. I like that they stole the door design from Nissan for the X-cab, however the seatbelt mount on the x-cab is a major step backward from the GMT800.
4-speed auto for the first model year...I'll wait for the 6speed in the next year, thanks.
I still want to see the non-Denali version of the Sierra. I like my 4wd with a low range option!
4-speed auto for the first model year...I'll wait for the 6speed in the next year, thanks.
I still want to see the non-Denali version of the Sierra. I like my 4wd with a low range option!
#10
- C&G's Boldest Member
-
- Group: Premium Subscriber
- Posts: 20,301
- Joined: 18-August 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 08:03 PM
Very strong design. These trucks are typical excellent GM trucks.
I also hoped the 4.3L V6 would be laid to rest for the 4.2L I-6. And I was hoping the 6 speed auto would be available at the start, with the 900 SUVs in production already.
Very good differentiation between the two. I want to see the GMC SLE trim, it probably has chrome bumpers and a horizontal bar blacked-out grille. I like the fact the sheetmetal is different from the beltline down between Chevy and GMC.
The interior is excellent from what I can see.
I guess the nice-looking 5 spoke Chevy wheels are the 18 inchers. 20's aren't necessary for me, I guess. I hope they still make a 6 foot bed/regular cab configuration.
Next step is to see the equipment levels through the different models.
I also hoped the 4.3L V6 would be laid to rest for the 4.2L I-6. And I was hoping the 6 speed auto would be available at the start, with the 900 SUVs in production already.
Very good differentiation between the two. I want to see the GMC SLE trim, it probably has chrome bumpers and a horizontal bar blacked-out grille. I like the fact the sheetmetal is different from the beltline down between Chevy and GMC.
The interior is excellent from what I can see.
I guess the nice-looking 5 spoke Chevy wheels are the 18 inchers. 20's aren't necessary for me, I guess. I hope they still make a 6 foot bed/regular cab configuration.
Next step is to see the equipment levels through the different models.
#11
- Red-Line
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 142
- Joined: 28-September 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 08:35 PM
The Chevy looks hideous in that shot. Much worse than the pictures of the slate colored one led to believe the truck looked like. Why release pictures of the trucks at such bad angles? The GMC looks better, more masculine and rugged. Looks a little dopey, both do, but Ill try and reserve judgement for the actual images.
#13
- Be afraid of Jake. Very, very afaid.
-
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 15,017
- Joined: 17-August 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 09:12 PM
They will look a lot better when we see actual jpegs instead of scans, but I'd say the GMC looks better at the moment.
The interior shot with leather appears to be very similar to the T900 SUVs, while the other one must be the work truck. They don't appear to share a whole lot (look at the door panels, air vents, the hump over the gauges, and center console). That's pretty impressive, IMO, considering both are Chevys and they're that different.
The equipment on them sounds impressive, as does the reconfigurable bed area and the rear doors.
The interior shot with leather appears to be very similar to the T900 SUVs, while the other one must be the work truck. They don't appear to share a whole lot (look at the door panels, air vents, the hump over the gauges, and center console). That's pretty impressive, IMO, considering both are Chevys and they're that different.
The equipment on them sounds impressive, as does the reconfigurable bed area and the rear doors.
#14
- OSV Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,067
- Joined: 18-August 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 09:26 PM
Not the best pics to judge them by. I think there is only so much you can do with the look /style of a pick up the important thing is getting all the little things right and improving as many things as you can and I'm sure they've done that.
#15
- Ultra Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 5,814
- Joined: 12-September 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 09:29 PM
the 4.3L is a sad case when the 6.0L has the same MPG est. , guess it may last as long as the 3.8? anyway......
the huge swing of the rear door is impressive, ... no manual awww
I could say the pics are dead on, but the specs? still unofficial i bet, but we'll see...
the interior is a huge improvment over what i know of our '95 C1500 while still being quite basic looking from that shot.
lets hope some of the official specs surprise us.
the huge swing of the rear door is impressive, ... no manual awww
I could say the pics are dead on, but the specs? still unofficial i bet, but we'll see...
the interior is a huge improvment over what i know of our '95 C1500 while still being quite basic looking from that shot.
lets hope some of the official specs surprise us.
#16
- Red-Line
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 165
- Joined: 18-August 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 09:33 PM
I hope that's the very base interior, because it really doesn't step up to the plate. This design is too evolutionary for me. I was hoping for a more revolutionary design. Some of the fetures, like the reconfigurable bed look cool, but they will hardly sell the truck. Power and looks sell every truck and this will have the power, but there are better looking trucks in side and out across the street at the Ford Dealer. Would I buy a ford over the chevy? No. But alot of people may and the new Tundra is not a bad looking truck at all.
#17 Guest_YellowJacket894_*
Posted 22 July 2006 - 09:37 PM
I love the GMC. That is a nice truck.
The 'Rado is alright. I like it's look -- like, not love; it reminds me of the second-generation S-10 for '94. The extended cab looks so much better than the crew cab.
And, what this? Two different interiors for uplevel trucks and base-level trucks? Whoa. Didn't see that coming. The base-level interior keeps a similar design to the GMT-800, but is lightyears ahead.
(A thought: put the work truck interior in the Tahoe for the base-level models, decontent things a bit, and one could avoid a hefty price tag and increse sales that much more.)
Lets hope the GMT-900 magic rubs off on the NG GMT-355 trucks and possible SUVs.
You can't be serious. GM losing sales to that? That thing is a rolling eyesore in all aspects and I'd bet quality will be poor to boot.
There's "playing it safe" and "going balls to the wall." If "going balls to the wall" brings crap like the Tundra, I'll "play it safe" with the GMT-900s, thank you.
The 'Rado is alright. I like it's look -- like, not love; it reminds me of the second-generation S-10 for '94. The extended cab looks so much better than the crew cab.
And, what this? Two different interiors for uplevel trucks and base-level trucks? Whoa. Didn't see that coming. The base-level interior keeps a similar design to the GMT-800, but is lightyears ahead.
(A thought: put the work truck interior in the Tahoe for the base-level models, decontent things a bit, and one could avoid a hefty price tag and increse sales that much more.)
Lets hope the GMT-900 magic rubs off on the NG GMT-355 trucks and possible SUVs.
QUOTE(network engineer @ Jul 22 2006, 10:33 PM)
...And the new Tundra is not a bad looking truck at all.
You can't be serious. GM losing sales to that? That thing is a rolling eyesore in all aspects and I'd bet quality will be poor to boot.
There's "playing it safe" and "going balls to the wall." If "going balls to the wall" brings crap like the Tundra, I'll "play it safe" with the GMT-900s, thank you.
This post has been edited by YellowJacket894: 22 July 2006 - 09:44 PM
#18
- OSV Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,714
- Joined: 21-August 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 09:37 PM
QUOTE(loki @ Jul 22 2006, 10:29 PM)
the 4.3L is a sad case when the 6.0L has the same MPG est. , guess it may last as long as the 3.8? anyway......
the huge swing of the rear door is impressive, ... no manual awww
I could say the pics are dead on, but the specs? still unofficial i bet, but we'll see...
the interior is a huge improvment over what i know of our '95 C1500 while still being quite basic looking from that shot.
lets hope some of the official specs surprise us.
the huge swing of the rear door is impressive, ... no manual awww
I could say the pics are dead on, but the specs? still unofficial i bet, but we'll see...
the interior is a huge improvment over what i know of our '95 C1500 while still being quite basic looking from that shot.
lets hope some of the official specs surprise us.
As long as they stay in LS/LT bench seat work truck trims, I don't think the 4-spd and 4.3L are a big deal.
#20
- Be afraid of Jake. Very, very afaid.
-
- Group: Admin
- Posts: 15,017
- Joined: 17-August 05
Posted 22 July 2006 - 09:40 PM
QUOTE(network engineer @ Jul 22 2006, 09:33 PM)
I hope that's the very base interior, because it really doesn't step up to the plate. This design is too evolutionary for me. I was hoping for a more revolutionary design.
There are two different interiors, the one that you can see the dash is the work truck version. The one where the doors are open is for everything else, and as you can see it looks similar to the T900 SUVs, and it's a lot different from the work truck (just look at the door panels).
