Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Chevrolet Readies A New Strategy To Stop Ford and Dodge From Eating Camaro's "Lunch"

      Will it be enough?

    From 2010 to 2014, the Chevrolet Camaro was undisputed sales champion of the U.S. sports cars. But since 2015, the Camaro has been falling behind the likes of the Ford Mustang. At the time, Chevrolet officials were okay with giving up some volume to boost profitability. Unlike Ford which started focusing on lower-end models, Chevrolet decided to target performance-oriented models with high price tags. 

    But this year, the Camaro has been outsold by both the Mustang and Dodge Challenger - the latter using a platform that is over a decade old. Chevrolet is now planning to fight back by focusing on the lower-end of the market, a place where Ford and Dodge have been making big inroads.

    "Frankly, they've been eating our lunch. The low [transaction prices] of a four-cylinder ... that's where the bulk of the sales are and that's where our pricing strategy needed improvement. We plan to go head to head — and win," said Al Oppenheiser, chief engineer of the Camaro to Automotive News.

    Chevrolet has cut prices on the Camaro 1LS, 1LT, and 2LT as part of the 2019 refresh. They have also introduced a 1LE version for the 2.0L turbo-four to better compete with the Mustang EcoBoost. The 1LE brings a chassis package from the 1LE V6, 20-inch wheels, and a six-speed manual for only $30,995 (includes shipping).

    "What's happening in the sport car segment, there's a lot more volume in the low-to-mid part of the market. We do a phenomenal job with our loaded SS's, and it's great business for us, but the reality is there's an awful lot of people who just want a great looking sports car somewhere in that $30,000 range, and that's what we're going to deliver," said Steve Majoros, Chevy's marketing director for cars and crossovers.

    Karl Brauer, executive publisher of Kelley Blue Book said Chevrolet adding the 1LE package for the turbo-four Camaro will allow it to be better compete with the Mustang. But he also questioned whether Chevrolet went far enough with the 2019 refresh to address some of styling issues that have turned off some buyers.

    "It doesn't hurt to have a lot of value for the money. I just wonder if that alone is the real stumbling block," said Brauer.

    "It just doesn't have the personality that the other two cars offer."

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)



    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    I so totally agree with this story and the thoughts of Kelley Blue Book's executive publisher. I think Camaro does need to be in the bottom entry level segment, but I still do not think they have gone far enough in fixing the image issues and value.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    12 minutes ago, dfelt said:

    I so totally agree with this story and the thoughts of Kelley Blue Book's executive publisher. I think Camaro does need to be in the bottom entry level segment, but I still do not think they have gone far enough in fixing the image issues and value.

    I am a Mustang fan but I am not a hardcore fan, I actually was considering Camaro somewhat because of its performance but was not a fan of exterior.  However, after I sat in one it sealed it for me - it was night and day compared to the Mustang, not even close.  I am not sure the pricing is the biggest issue.

    Edited by ykX

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The new Camaro looks so fckn ugly that nothing will help the refreshed one sell. They done screwed the refresh up. 

    • Upvote 4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Maybe they do a quick MCE and give it a new front end for '20.  The big problem they can't change w/ this generation, though, is the chop top and micro windows. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    10 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    Maybe they do a quick MCE and give it a new front end for '20.  The big problem they can't change w/ this generation, though, is the chop top and micro windows. 

    Also the trunk opening that can barely fit a bag of marshmallows through it. 

    The Mustang trunk opening isn't massive by any means but my god they've made the Camaro hardly livable for anybody who wants to daily it.

    Camaro Trunk.jpg

    Mustang Trunk.jpg

    • Upvote 4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I haven't sat in or looked too closely at the 6th gen interior, have they improved over the Fisher Price plastics of the 5th gen? 

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I think the interior was a major improvement over the 5th gen. At least looks-wise. It was too long ago to really remember what anything felt or sounded like. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Of the 3, I'd go with the Challenger--bigger, bigger interior, bigger trunk and a sunroof available (the Mustang hasn't had a sunroof option in decades).   

    • Like 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

    Also the trunk opening that can barely fit a bag of marshmallows through it. 

    The Mustang trunk opening isn't massive by any means but my god they've made the Camaro hardly livable for anybody who wants to daily it.

    Camaro Trunk.jpg

    Mustang Trunk.jpg

    WOW, Been awhile since I looked at them, then again, I love my SUVs. Yet thank you for posting the pics, that is a pathetic trunk.

    So ya made me go look and WTF, Mustang has just as crappy a trunk. Looks like GM and Ford joined forces in the crappy trunk area.

    See the source image

    Clearly Challenger wins here for a trunk opening but also seems to have the same failed trunk design. Why is it so hard to have a proper opening. No wonder people love the CUV / SUV for hauling stuff. 

    See the source image

    These trunks make it very hard to have as a daily driver, I give the win to Challenger for space access.

     

    2 hours ago, ykX said:

    I am a Mustang fan but I am not a hardcore fan, I actually was considering Camaro somewhat because of its performance but was not a fan of exterior.  However, after I sat in one it sealed it for me - it was night and day compared to the Mustang, not even close.  I am not sure the pricing is the biggest issue.

    Cool to hear, what all did you like about the interior of the Camaro over the Ford?

    So the interior is that much better than the Ford?

    1 hour ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    Maybe they do a quick MCE and give it a new front end for '20.  The big problem they can't change w/ this generation, though, is the chop top and micro windows. 

    I agree, like the Honda Mess, I think GM needs to roll out a MCE on the Camaro to fix the exterior style issues. Trunk issue, Window issues, etc.  will have to be fixed in an all new model.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On the subject of tiny pony car trunks, my favorite Mustang of the ones I've had was a hatchback.  A bit shallow, but w/ the backseat folded down, quite a bit of space. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    43 minutes ago, dfelt said:

     

    Cool to hear, what all did you like about the interior of the Camaro over the Ford?

    So the interior is that much better than the Ford?

     

    I maybe was not clear, I dislike the exterior of the Camaro but I really hated the interior, not even close to Mustang's interior.  Visibility is horrendous, claustrophobic feeling, just didn't feel right from the first moment.   Didn't like how interior looks as well.  

    • Thanks 1
    • Upvote 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, dfelt said:

    , Mustang has just as crappy a trunk.

    Are you drinking that Chevy Kool-Aid or something? The Mustang's isn't good but it definitely isn't as small of an opening as the Camaro's.

    Yes, the Challenger clearly has the advantage in any competition that involves more space to the user. 

    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Current Camaro has a convertible like cargo capacity.. like less than 10 cubic feet IIRC.  It is really bad.  The Mustang is pretty much what I would expect, probably 12-14 cubic feet.

     

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    33 minutes ago, frogger said:

    Current Camaro has a convertible like cargo capacity.. like less than 10 cubic feet IIRC.  It is really bad.  The Mustang is pretty much what I would expect, probably 12-14 cubic feet.

     

     

    Yup, pretty spot on. 

     

    Camaro Trunk Cap..PNG

    Mustang Trunk Cap..PNG

    • Thanks 2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Sounds like the Camaro needs a brand new model rather than just an MCE, just on looks and trunk space alone.  As for the 4cyl, that is the reality that we live in if they want higher Camaro sales. 

    Back in the F-body days, the majority of Camaro and Firebird sales were V6 models, not the faster and hairier V8 models.  The Mustang had the exact same sales mix.  Apparently, not much as changed in 50 years.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    "What's happening in the sport car segment, there's a lot more volume in the low-to-mid part of the market. We do a phenomenal job with our loaded SS's, and it's great business for us, but the reality is there's an awful lot of people who just want a great looking sports car somewhere in that $30,000 range, and that's what we're going to deliver," said Steve Majoros

    Yeah, no sh!t sherlock.  The Camaro used to be about being an affordable sports car, then they wanted it to be about putting 500-600 hp V8s in there and charging $70,000 for it, but that is what the Corvette is for.  The Camaro's focus should have always been $25-50k price range, they lost focus.  

    Nothing they do will help Camaro sales unless they totally redesign the car to give it more interior room and windows you can see out of.  The Camaro has a disproportionate number of male buyers )or potential buyers), mostly older male buyers, which means you have a lot of larger people trying to fit in this car.  Every year at the auto show I see guys in their 50s and 60s saying the Cadillac CTS is too small, not enough head room, too hard to get in and out of, etc.  Compare that to a Camaro.  If people can't fit in it or can't see out of it, doesn't matter what the price is.

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, riviera74 said:

    Back in the F-body days, the majority of Camaro and Firebird sales were V6 models, not the faster and hairier V8 models.  The Mustang had the exact same sales mix.  Apparently, not much as changed in 50 years.

    Hmmm; what's the 'F-Body days'?
    '67 :: 17K 6's  /  65K 8's
    '73 :: 14K 6's  /  32K 8's
    '83 :: 32K 4's  /  11K 6's  /  32K 8's
    '91 :: Firebird, Formula, T/A & GTA. F-bird had the 6 standard, but had 2 optional V8s. I don't have the engine breakdown handy. 24K Firebirds, 6,343 T/As.
    '99 :: 18K Firebird 6's  /  1,602 Formula 8's  /  16K T/A 8's


    Firebird V8s was always a strong seller, and by the above, was usually the majority of sales.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    9 hours ago, balthazar said:

    Hmmm; what's the 'F-Body days'?
    '67 :: 17K 6's  /  65K 8's
    '73 :: 14K 6's  /  32K 8's
    '83 :: 32K 4's  /  11K 6's  /  32K 8's
    '91 :: Firebird, Formula, T/A & GTA. F-bird had the 6 standard, but had 2 optional V8s. I don't have the engine breakdown handy. 24K Firebirds, 6,343 T/As.
    '99 :: 18K Firebird 6's  /  1,602 Formula 8's  /  16K T/A 8's


    Firebird V8s was always a strong seller, and by the above, was usually the majority of sales.

    OK. Does that apply to the Camaro?  I agree that this does NOT apply to the Firebird.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I suspect it might be even more lop-sided at Chevy- found these numbers~
    Camaro :
    '67 :: 58K 6's  /  162K 8's
    '73 :: 3K 6's  /  93K 8's
    '77 :: 31K 6's  /  187K 8's

    '83 :: 63K 4's  /  28K 6's  /  63K 8's
    '91 :: 31K 6's  /  69K 8's

    Edited by balthazar

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    In the 70s-90s V8’s were rather common though.  The V8 of then also made in the 250-305 hp range for a lot of those years.  Those are V6 numbers now, or even turbo 4 numbers now.

    V8’s today are not that common, mostly only in high dollar luxury sedans or sports cars and full size trucks which is changing quickly.  Back in the 80s every Cadillac (minus the Cimarron) had a V8, now most Cadillacs are V6 and they sell more 4’s than 8’s.  

    Times changed and the Camaro is stuck in the past trying to be a V8 car but a V8 car of today is super expensive which is not what the Camaro should be.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    V8s were common in the '70s, but 6s were quite common too. In '70, the Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, Chevelle, Nova & Camaro all came standard with a 6. Actually, the Nova came with a base 4. ElCamino, 1/2-ton, 3/4-ton & 1-ton trucks and vans were also all standard 6s. Only the Monte, Caprice & Corvette came with a standard 8.

    How is the Camaro 'stuck trying to be a V8 car' when it comes standard with a 4 and also offers a 6?
     

    Quote

    The V8 of then also made in the 250-305 hp range for a lot of those years.

    Camaro V8s ran up to 450 HP in '69. But power levels in the '70s were not overly impressive worldwide- the top-shelf MB 6.9L only made 250 HP in the '70s.

    Edited by balthazar

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    Guest 56Toledo

    Posted

    The Camaro has been one ugly car since it came back in 2010, and somehow, it's gotten uglier. It's useless for carrying anything in the trunk, and the interior is bad. I had hoped to consider the Camaro when I was car shopping this time, but I need a trunk. Not a huge one, but something reasonable, and of the Challenger, Mustang, and Camaro, the Challenger is the only one of the three that I can live with. That it's easily the best looking of them on top of that, made it an easy choice. It's my second one. I really liked my 2010 R/T, and the new R/T Scatpack is so much fun.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      There will be one less engine option for the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain come the 2020 model year. The Car Connection first reported the news on the Equinox yesterday morning, while Autoblog followed with the Terrain news later in the day. Both stories reported the same reason for cancellation, they didn't sell.
      "We did discontinue the diesel engine option in the 2020 Chevrolet Equinox due to low demand," said Chevrolet spokesman Kevin Kelly.
      The news doesn't come as a shock to us. Diesel engines have gotten a bad rap since the Volkswagen diesel emission scandal came to light, causing sales to drop. The value argument was also tough for both models. A diesel Equinox started at $30,795. But only for $100 more, you could have gotten into the 2.0L turbo-four that offered better performance. Over at the Terrain, the diesel cost around $2,000 more than the 2.0 turbo-four. Diesel fuel is more expensive than its gas counterpart as well.
      That will leave the upcoming Mazda CX-5 Skyactiv-D as the only diesel option in the compact crossover class. But as we have noted previously, the diesel option is quite expensive (begins at $42,045) and fuel economy figures are disappointing (27 City/30 Highway/28 Combined).
      Source: The Car Connection, Autoblog

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      There will be one less engine option for the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain come the 2020 model year. The Car Connection first reported the news on the Equinox yesterday morning, while Autoblog followed with the Terrain news later in the day. Both stories reported the same reason for cancellation, they didn't sell.
      "We did discontinue the diesel engine option in the 2020 Chevrolet Equinox due to low demand," said Chevrolet spokesman Kevin Kelly.
      The news doesn't come as a shock to us. Diesel engines have gotten a bad rap since the Volkswagen diesel emission scandal came to light, causing sales to drop. The value argument was also tough for both models. A diesel Equinox started at $30,795. But only for $100 more, you could have gotten into the 2.0L turbo-four that offered better performance. Over at the Terrain, the diesel cost around $2,000 more than the 2.0 turbo-four. Diesel fuel is more expensive than its gas counterpart as well.
      That will leave the upcoming Mazda CX-5 Skyactiv-D as the only diesel option in the compact crossover class. But as we have noted previously, the diesel option is quite expensive (begins at $42,045) and fuel economy figures are disappointing (27 City/30 Highway/28 Combined).
      Source: The Car Connection, Autoblog
    • By William Maley
      The news about the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra have been constant barrage about how they aren’t doing so well in the sales charts. In fact, Ram has taken second place in overall truck sales from the Silverado. General Motors is quick to point that Ram has been increasing amount of money on the hoods of the 2019 Ram 1500, along with the last-generation model being sold alongside. But could there be more to this slump? What if the new Silverado and Sierra didn’t move the needle as far as the competition?
      The new Silverado and Sierra continue to separate from one another in exterior design. The basic shape may be the same, but it is the details where the two begin to develop their own identities. On the Sierra, it goes for some polarization with its gaping maw of a grille and c-shaped headlights. Chevrolet is a bit more restrained with the Silverado featuring a split bar grille and separate headlight housings. More differences can be seen turning to the side as the Silverado has slightly more pronounced fenders than the Sierra.
      Both trucks arrived in their off-road trims: Trail Boss for the Silverado and AT4 for the Sierra. This is denoted by two-inch lift for the suspension, blacked-out trim pieces, and meaty off-road tires featuring some sharp-looking wheels. I tend not to like off-road models as they go overboard with the “LOOK AT ME” bits placed on it, which I get why a number of buyers absolutely love it. But the Trail Boss and AT4 find that nice point where they look the business without being too shouty about it.
      GMC is also trying to set itself apart in terms of the tailgate. My Sierra AT4 tester came equipped with the MultiPro tailgate which offers “six functions and positions.” They include, 
      Primary Gate (Full Tailgate) Primary Gate Load Stop: Panel that holds longer items in the bed Easy Access: Flip the inner part of the tailgate to allow for better access for items in the bed Step to allow for easy entry and exit from the bed Inner Gate with Load Stop Inner Gate as a work surface You will not find a physical tailgate handle. Instead, there are two buttons that sit between the backup camera. The top button releases the inner gate, while the bottom allows the full tailgate to open. Opening the inner gate wasn’t as smooth as the full tailgate, feeling like it was sticking at points. A lot of this I would attribute to cold temperatures during the week. Despite this issue, having the inner tailgate give way to allow for better access to the bed and a step does give a unique selling point. I do wonder how will this tailgate design hold-up in the long run.
      Moving inside, GM is still focusing on functional and practical aspects. This is evident with the large knobs and buttons controlling various functions, and a comprehensive gauge cluster. But this approach does put both trucks behind the pack in terms of interior design and materials when compared against Ford and Ram. I had to do a double-take getting inside the Silverado for the first time as the dashboard really didn’t change that much aside from the colors and slightly altered buttons. This isn’t helped by some of the material choices which look and feel out of place in trucks that carry price tags that are around the $60,000 mark.
      But the Silverado and Sierra’s interiors do claw some points back in terms of overall comfort. No one will have any issue trying to find a position that works thanks to a generous amount of power seat adjustments and a steering wheel that finally provides tilt-telescope adjustment. Space in the back of crew cabs is massive with loads of head and legroom.
      Both trucks came with an eight-inch screen (lesser trims get by with a seven-inch screen) and new software - Chevrolet Infotainment 3/GMC Infotainment. The interface looks like a simplified version of MyLink/Intellilink with simpler graphics and easier to read fonts. Moving around the system is easy thanks to the simple menu structure and quick responses for any command. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto integration comes standard. Both trucks were able to find my iPhone 7 Plus and bring up the CarPlay interface within seconds of plugging it in.
      There are four different engines on offer, including a new 2.7L turbo-four. There’s also a turbodiesel V6 that will be arriving for the 2020 model year. Both of my test trucks came with the V8s - Silverado packing a 5.3L and the Sierra using the 6.2L.
      The 5.3L V8 has not been my engine of choice for the last-generation trucks. Not because of the power on offer, but more of the tuning of the throttle pedal. It made the V8 feel very sluggish and would make the driver push further down on the pedal to get it moving a decent clip. Thankfully, GM has addressed this issue and 5.3 now feel likes it has 355 horsepower and 383 pound-feet of torque. You can lightly press on the accelerator and V8 doesn’t feel artificially overwhelmed. A new eight-speed automatic (standard on higher trims) helps keep the engine right in the sweet spot of power and provides smooth shifts.
      As for the 6.2L V8, it is a monster. With 420 horsepower and 460 pound-feet, it moves the Sierra at a surprising rate. Making a pass or merging on to a freeway is no problem as there is an abundance of power waiting to be unleashed. A new ten-speed automatic (jointly developed with Ford) helps keep the engine right in the spot of power. Unless you need or want all of the power, the 5.3 is the engine I would recommend for either truck.
      EPA fuel economy figures for the V8s are 15 City/20 Highway/17 Combined for the 5.3 and 15/19/17 for the 6.2L AT4.  My averages for the week were 16.1 for the 5.3 and 15.2 for the 6.2. 
      Ram is still the gold standard when it comes to ride quality due to its rear coil spring setup. But GM isn’t so far behind with its solid rear axle setup. Most bumps and imperfections become mere ripples. Larger potholes didn’t upset either truck, but I would put that towards the off-road suspension. The standard trucks may bounce around. Handling is quite surprising as both trucks feel agile around bends. Noise isolation, for the most part, is excellent, though the knobby tires fitted to the Trail Boss and AT4 do ruin some of the tranquility.
      My feelings are mixed on the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500. GM has either fixed or improved various problems that I have talked about in previous reviews. But it feels GM hasn’t done enough to fully set their trucks apart from the competition. I think this line from my journal says it all.
      “If General Motors wasn’t touting various aspects of these new trucks such as the aluminum body panels or multi-pro tailgate, I would have thought both models went through a dramatic mid-cycle refresh.”
      This could give the full explanation as to why the Silverado and Sierra are currently getting beaten out by Ford and Ram Trucks in the sales chart. Buyers may not see any real changes for both trucks when compared against the competition. GM has been on the offensive, saying to be patient. But that approach may not work and may cause the automaker to draw up some drastic measures.
      That’s the thing about the full-size truck market, you need to show up with the best. Anything less and you’re in danger of losing. 
      How I would configure a 2019 Chevrolet Silverado or GMC Sierra 1500.
      There are two options I would consider with the Silverado. First is the RST. I would order a 4WD crew cab with a short and opt for the 5.3L V8. From there, I would add the Convenience Package with Bucket Seats, Convenience Package II, Safety Package, and Trailering Package. That brings the final price to $52,745 excluding any discounts I could get. Second is the Trail Boss which gets the 5.3L V8 as standard. Options would mirror the RST and bring the final price to $54,285.
      If I was to order a Sierra 1500, then I would start with the SLT Crew Cab 4WD with a short bed. This comes with the 5.3L V8 as standard and I would only add two options; Dark Sky Metallic for $495 and the SLT Premium Plus Package for $6,875. This package combines a number of option packages such as the SLT Preferred Package and the two Driver Alert Packages. The final price comes to $60,460 with a $1,000 discount for ordering Premium Plus Package.
      Alternatives to the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado or GMC Sierra 1500.
      2019 Ram 1500: Ram's redesign on the 1500 has helped make it a real challenger to both Ford and GM. The interior raises the bar of what a truck can be with an impressive design and high-quality material choices. It also boasts an impressive list of safety features such as adaptive cruise control. Ride quality is still class leading. What may put some people off is the styling as it looks a bit plain. 2019 Ford F-150: Bestselling for reason, Ford has constantly improved the F-150 to keep it one step ahead of the competition. It features one of the largest selection of powertrains that help give it some impressive towing numbers. A number of trims also gives buyers different options to build their F-150 the way they want. But Ford trails Ram and GM when it comes ride quality. Disclaimer: General Motors Provided the trucks, Insurance, and One Tank of Gas
      (*Author's Note: Unfortunately, I lost the window sticker to the GMC Sierra 1500 I drove. I have built the truck as close as possible to my memory to get an approximation on price. -WM)
      Year: 2019
      Make: Chevrolet
      Model: Silverado 1500
      Trim: LT Trail Boss
      Engine: 5.3L VVT DI V8 with Dynamic Fuel Management and Stop/Start
      Driveline: Eight-Speed Automatic, Four-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 355 @ 5,600
      Torque @ RPM: 383 @ 4,100
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 15/20/17
      Curb Weight: 5,008 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Roanoke, Indiana
      Base Price: $48,300
      As Tested Price: $55,955 (Includes $1,495 Destination Charge)
      Options:
      Convenience Package with Bucket Seats - $1,805.00
      Convenience Package II - $1,420.00
      Off-Road Assist Steps - $895.00
      Safety Package I - $890.00
      Bed Protection Package - $635.00
      Trailer Brake Controller - $275.00
      Advanced Trailering Package - $240.00
      Year: 2019
      Make: GMC
      Model: Sierra 1500
      Trim: AT4
      Engine: 6.2L VVT DI V8 with Dynamic Fuel Management and Stop/Start
      Driveline: Ten-Speed Automatic, Four-Wheel Drive
      Horsepower @ RPM: 420 @ 5,600 
      Torque @ RPM: 460 @ 4,100
      Fuel Economy: City/Highway/Combined - 15/19/17
      Curb Weight: 5,015 lbs
      Location of Manufacture: Roanoke, Indiana
      Base Price: $53,200
      As Tested Price: $64,955 (Includes $1,595 Destination Charge and $500 discount for the AT4 Premium Package)*
      Options:
      Off-Road Performance Package - $4,940
      AT4 Premium Package - $3,100 with a $500 discount
      Technology Package - $1,875
      Driver Alert Package II - $745
    • By Drew Dowdell
      Quarterly:
      Ford Motor Company - Down 4.1% for the Quarter, Down 2.9% for the year
      General Motors Co. - Down 1.5% for the Quarter, Down 4.2% for the year
      Tesla - Up 133.6% for the Quarter
      FCA has announced that beginning October 2019, they will be reporting sales quarterly
      Monthly:
      Audi of America -  Down 0.3% for the month, Down 6% for the year
      BMW of North America -  Up 3.9% for the month, Down 1.1% for the year
      FCA US LLC - Up 2% for the month, Down 2% for the year - Final monthly reporting.
      Genesis Motor America - Not Yet Reported
      Honda Motor Co. -  Down 7.3% for the month, Down 1.4% for the year
      Hyundai Motor America -  Up 1.5% for the month, Up 1.69% for the year
      Infiniti USA - Down 8.0% for the month, Down 12.6% for the year
      Jaguar Land Rover North America - Not Yet Reported
      Kia Motors America - Up 0.4% for the month, Up 3.8% for the year
      Mazda North American Operations - Down 15.1.0%  for the month, Down 15.5% for the year
      Mercedes-Benz USA - Up 0.5% for the month, Down 7.1% for the year
      Mitsubishi Motors North America -  Up 10.5% for the month, Up 5.6% for the year
      Nissan Group - Down 14.9% for the month, Down 8.2% for the year
      Porsche Cars North America Inc. -  Up 6.4% for the month, Up 2.8% for the year
      Subaru of America, Inc. - Up 2.8% for the month, Up 5.2% for the year
      Toyota Motor North America - Down 3.5% for the month, Down 3.1% for the year
      Volkswagen of America -  Up 10% for the month, Up 6.8% for the year
      Volvo Cars of North America, LLC - Up 0.7% for the month, Up 5.2% for the year

      Brands (Quarterly):
      Buick -  Up 4.7% - 55,373 QTD / 107,240 YTD
      Cadillac -  Up 1.3% - 39,739 QYD / 75,734 YTD
      Chevrolet - Down 5.3% - 499,847 QTD / 952,248 YTD
      GMC - Up 9.8% - 151,700 QTD / 277,277 YTD
      Ford - Down 4.0% - 624,396 QTD / 1,189,670 YTD
      Lincoln - Down 6.7% - 25,940 QTD / 50,915 YTD
      Tesla - Up 133.6% - 95,200 QTD

      Brands (Monthly):
      Acura - Down 16.4% - 12,148 MTD / 73,767 YTD
      Alfa Romeo - Down 29% - 1,595 MTD / 9,037 YTD
      Audi - Down 0.3% - 19,409 MTD / 101,440 YTD
      BMW - Up 7.5% - 31,627 MTD / 156,440 YTD
      Chrysler - Down 4% - 12,941 MTD / 64,422 YTD
      Dodge - Down 17% - 38,561 MTD / 228,099 YTD
      Fiat - Down 35% - 933 MTD / 5,103 YTD
      Genesis - Not reported
      Honda - Down 6.3% - 135,901 MTD / 776,995 YTD
      Hyundai - Up 1.5% - 64,202 MTD / 333,328 YTD
      Infiniti - Down 8.0% - 9,839 MTD / 63,058 YTD
      Jaguar -Not Yet Reported
      Jeep - Down 12% - 76,826 MTD / 456,281 YTD
      Kia - Up 0.4% - 56,801 MTD / 304,844 YTD
      Land Rover -  Not Yet Reported
      Lexus - Down 3.0% - 23,047 MTD  / 135,735 YTD
      Mazda - Down 15.1% - 22,828 MTD / 138,555 YTD
      Mercedes-Benz - Flat 0.0% - 26,196 MTD / 147,396 YTD
      Mercedes-Benz Vans - Up 7.0% 3,005 MTD / 16,025 YTD
      MINI - Down 22% - 3,235 MTD / 17,583 YTD
      Mitsubishi - Up 10.5% - 12,317 MTD / 71,097 YTD
      Nissan - Down 15.4% - 113,665 MTD / 653,978 YTD
      Porsche - Up 6.4% - 5,205 MTD / 30,257 YTD
      Ram Trucks - Up 45% - 75,227 MTD / 333,168 YTD
      Smart - Down 41.3% - 74 MTD / 496 YTD
      Subaru - Up 6.4% - 63,972 MTD / 278,014 YTD
      Toyota - Down 3.5% - 179,305 MTD / 1,054,311 YTD
      Volkswagen - Up 10% - 31,725 MTD / 184,608 YTD
      Volvo - Up 0.7% - 9,934 MTD / 50,120 YTD

      View full article
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. GMinTheDriveway
      GMinTheDriveway
      (51 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...