Leaderboard

Lots of great real world use cases that allows you to justify a 6 1/2 or 8 ft bed. Most people rarely use it other than to haul occasional yard stuff or interior stuff from various stores and be it 4 1/2 ft, 5 or 5 1/2 ft bed, these are plenty for most people who want a family hauler plus the ability to putts around in their yard. As I said, pictures I have posted here show that Rivian is exploring King cabs to go with crew cabs and un-verified long beds by rivian, but the pictures show differences. Clearly I think Rivian is exploring to expand their truck offerings once they get the truck and SUV into mass production and shipping. I would expect in 3 to 5 years they will have many options from the single option they offer today.

While not winning the 24hr Le Mans in 1950, Cadillac did show off their bleeding edge innovation with "The Monster". This was a 5.4 Liter V8 Type 61 coupe that was specially designed prototype with multitubular space frame and aluminum body. The body built in collaboration with Grumman Aircraft with wind tunnel testing. Check out more on "The Monster" here for how it drove and the lack of safety back in 1950 compared to today. Cadillac Spyder The Monster Le Mans 1950 (autoconcept-reviews.com) Specifications between the 1950 "The Monster" and the 2018 Cadillac DPi-V.R prototype: 1950 Cadillac Series 61, Le Mans "LeMonstre" 90-degree Cadillac V-8 engine with overhead valves, custom 5-carburator induction, 331 cubic-inch displacement, making 160 hp at 3,800 rpm. 2018 Cadillac DPi-V.R Prototype Cadillac V-Performance V-8, stressed member, 580 horsepower at 7,050 rpm (approx.) IMSA mandated power level. After 50 years of running a true Cadillac at 24hrs Le Mans, Cadillac returned in 2000 with another true Cadillac to show off the NorthStar LMP System. 2000 was also the start of Cadillacs return with the Arts and Science Style. Since then Cadillac has been more of a contributor via sponsoring than focused on a full fledge true Cadillac engineered race car. 2015 2017 Now we have a return via the Cadillac V-Series! Winning technologies have been applied for decades from the race track to the performance V series of cars on the road today and Global VP Rory Harvey of Cadillac has stated that Cadillac looks forward to continuing the heritage of Cadillac by competing in a new exciting chapter at the highest level of international motorsport using the Cadillac LMDh-V.R prototype hybrid system designed to conform to IMSA and ACO Le Mans Daytona Hybrid Specifications for the new top tier class of endurance racing that replaces the current DPi class. Based on a standardized chassis and incorporating the spec hybrid powertrain system that will feature a unique combustion engine with distinctive bodywork in a hybrid system for racing. Cadillac as a contributor to the DPi-V.R is looking to expand and go beyond their years of racing with this new Cadillac Hybrid system. Current DPi-V.R achievements: Winning the Rolex 24 at Daytona four times in a row: 2020, 2019, 2018 and 2017 Winning the Michelin North American Endurance Cup four times: 2020, 2019, 2018 and 2017 Winning the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship twice: 2018 and 2017 Prior to competing in the IMSA WeatherTech SportsCar Championship, Cadillac competed in the Pirelli World Challenge Championship, earning five Manufacturing Championships (2014, 2013, 2007, 2005), and five Driver’s Championships (2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2005). To quote Cadillac press release: Cadillac’s commitment to performance is embodied in the V-Series portfolio. Its recent expansion includes the CT4-V and CT5-V sport sedans, as well as the track-capable CT4-V Blackwing and CT5-V Blackwing. Cadillac has stated that they are partnering with Chip Ganassi Racing and Action Express Racing. The Cadillac LMDh will debut on the track for the first time at the Rolex 24 Hours @ Daytona January 2023 getting dialed in for the 24 Hours Le Mans later that same year. Cadillac to Compete in IMSA and WEC in 2023 Cadillac at the 24 Hours of Le Mans: 2000, new with old! (endurancemag.fr) Cadillac Spyder The Monster Le Mans 1950 (autoconcept-reviews.com) View full article

For @smk4565 https://www.motortrend.com/features/lincoln-suv-lineup-updates-changes?slide=6 2022 Lincoln Aviator: What We Think In many ways, the bigger the SUV, the better the Lincoln. We currently rank the Aviator as the best vehicle in the three-row luxury segment. The exterior and interior design are both outstanding, with bold, distinctive lines and loads of wood, metal, and leather; it's nearly impossible to discern that the Aviator shares a platform with the underwhelming Ford Explorer. Lincoln's standard twin-turbo V-6 is powerful and plenty quick, too, and those after more power can opt for the Grand Touring plug-in hybrid (though we'd recommend the non-hybrid in this case). https://www.motortrend.com/features/lincoln-suv-lineup-updates-changes?slide=7 2022 Lincoln Navigator: What’s New Lincoln is making a big debut with the 2022 Navigator. The largest and in-chargest Lincoln is the first model to feature Lincoln ActiveGlide, a semi-autonomous system analogous to Ford BlueCruise. Lincoln is also adding second-row massage seats (a segment first), plus new Central Park and Invitation themes for the Navigator Black Label. Front and rear styling have been updated, and the center touchscreen has been enlarged to 13.2 inches. https://www.motortrend.com/features/lincoln-suv-lineup-updates-changes?slide=8 2022 Lincoln Navigator: What We Think There's a reason the Lincoln Navigator sits atop our rankings of full-size luxury SUVs. Yes, the twin-turbo V-6 and 10-speed auto provide effortless acceleration, and, of course, we appreciate that there's plenty of space even in the third row. But it's really all about this interior—an opulently finished art-deco reminder that in some spaces, America still does best. For the 2022 Navigator, we hope the updated suspension improves the ride quality, one of our few complaints about the pre-2022 SUV.

Where did he mention anywhere in his post about Rivian having a 5 ft bed? Again, you're trying to create a debate where there isn't one. I'm pretty sure he is aware of their bed length. Maybe it's you that should re-read his post. Yet that always seems to be your point of emphasis when touting the ability to "properly" haul a 4x8 ft sheet of plywood.

There's nothing to agree with here as you were trying to conflate my argument about GM interiors from the start because of one particular quote while ignoring the entire context of what I was saying to begin with.

I TOLD EVERYBODY THIS EXACT THING. Many, many times.

The Rivian is a luxury off-roader, nothing about the product or marketing says it's a work truck. It hasn't been advertised as a work truck. That's your imagination running wild if you think it is. One trim of the Ford Lightning seems to be marketed as such, though.

Gotta say I have been enjoying this read and why I think Rivian is the Truck Maker to beat. Exclusive: We Drive the 2022 Rivian R1T Off-Road Across the Trans-America Trail, Part 1 (motortrend.com) Exclusive: We Drive the 2022 Rivian R1T Off-Road Across the Trans-America Trail, Part 2 (motortrend.com) I doubt any Tesla has done a trip like this. Clearly a proper electric truck can get to just about any place you want to go. Seems Rivian can check off many of the same trails that Jeep has covered and sells auto's tagged with specific names such as Rubicon!

Re: the IROC-Z— Gen Xers with money now able to get the car they wanted in high school. I get it. Or it could be a Baby Boomer wanting a car like they had in their 20s or 30s.

WOW, Crazy money being spent on 1987 IROC Z/28 with only 2,000 miles. Don't Panic, but Someone Just Paid $56,000 for a 1987 Chevy Camaro (thedrive.com) This one is for @balthazar

"less range" but you can recharge to 100% so you're actually getting more range on a regular basis, compared to charging to 80%, as suggested by Tesla.

But...I too have a problem with creative language automotive journalism. ALWAYS looking at context. 1. While its true that European (sports) cars were "underpowered" but handled and American cars were "too heavy", "large" but fast. 2. The thing is, American automotive journalism ALWAYS knocked American cars with this creative nonsensical creative journalism and propped up in the same manner and language the Japanese and European counterparts. I wanna know why American automotive journalism did this? To KNOCK your own industry while prop up the foreign. We ALL know why European cars were underpowered while American cars were V8 rocket ships. We ALL know why European cars handled and why American cars, well, favored a more relaxed, cushy highway ride. But I will state the reasons why: 1. In Europe, after WW2, infrastructure had to be rebuilt. Gasoline and materials had to be rationed for the rebuilding of the destroyed cities. Roads. Buildings. Bridges. etc. 2. Although there was plenty of jobs in construction, Europe's economy stank more or less, give or take, from 1945-1985. Some countries LONGER than that. 3. European countries are old. The roads, even if they were destroyed and had to be built up again, with the buildings being raised up again, the blueprints were already there for thousands of years. The countries, cities, towns and villages were grown with bi-pedal humans and donkeys and horse and buggy. Plus, many European cities and towns and villages are on MOUNTAIN SIDES. Tight little twisting roads where a small miscalculation in driving perception equals death. 4. In this same time frame, the US experienced a MASSIVE economic boost. 5. Although some cities were also built on the same premise of bi-pedal humans and horse and buggy, that would be the founding and settled parts of these cities. The cities GREW in this time frame but grew with the AUTOMOBILE in mind. The cities and towns for the MOST part are built on nice, huge, LONG and STRAIGHT roadways. 6. The US now experienced a new age. A continuation of the industrial age, but with the automobile as the prime source of transportation. 7. Why American cars were big and European cars were small. Why American cars were V8 powered and European cars were and STILL are displacement challenged and why American cars were cushy while European cars HAD to handle seem like a no-brainer to me. 8. Its THOSE reasons why a certain car culture arose in the US. 9. We all like to believe there was a car culture in Europe after WW2, but there really wasnt. 10. European car manufacturing FOR Europe was geared towards small, economical shyteboxes. 11. European car manufacturing for America were those "great" handling sporty cars... 10. So why did American automotive journalism NOT knock them for being UNDERpowered since American car tastes were, well, street light to street light racing... 11. Why didnt American automotive journalism NOT knock European cars for being so freaking small, uncomfortable and useless for LONG road trips? 12. Lets NOT forget we still hold THAT as a top priority as there is a quite a large subset of American citizens TODAY bitching about electric car range anxiety for the aforementioned and famous American road trip. 13. Although American cars DID become shytty with their cars. Crap interiors. Less reliable. In that SAME time frame, European cars were NO BETTER. Actually, they were WORSE. So why the creative language? Especially the knocking of American cars but prepping up European ones? I am with Balthy on this one.

He also needs to consider that I am not just basing my argument from the opinions of journalists. He is also getting hung up on the one and only negative thing I've said about GM and that is their proven cheap looking interiors. I said what I said and I stand by it, end of story. At least GM finally had the good sense to recognize what damn near everyone else already knew. And it's not a "reflex reaction" @balthazar if they make pretty much the same basic criticism for the last thirty plus years.

Consider the context, though..that was Road & Track...Road & Track writers favored sports cars, which then were small European cars that were underpowered compared to the massive US cars of the era. Triumphs, MGs, Porsche 356s, Austin Healeys, etc were the kinds of cars their writers favored, and sports cars of that era weren't known for being fast, but were known for handling. While at the time American cars were massive and known for V8s and acceleration but not for handling.

Going thru stacks of paper, here's a prime bit of why I rail against auto journalism as a reflex reaction. And of course you know I always take into consideration the context (or here; the era context): Road & Track, 1963 Karman Ghia 4-spd manual road test ~ "Few changes have been made other than the usual and expected refinements... Most important was the change in 1960 from 36(!!!!!!!) to 40(!!!!!!!) bhp, a seemingly(!!!!!!!) insignificant amount when viewed as only a 4 horsepower gain, but it represents an 11% increase, which made the difference between barely adequate performance and that which is very satisfactory." You've already read the HP numbers, and there's no way you can agree with 'seemingly'... but let's see what this "very satisfactory" performance actually is. 0-60 : 30.0 secs 1/4-mile: 22.7 @ 55 MPH top speed : 75.8 MPH

^ SOP in the racing world.

To clarify, this was a Briggs Cunningham / Grumman build, not a Cadillac build (beyond the powertrain).

^sounds like you have many real world use cases where a full size truck with a 6.5 ft bed is worthwhile. An appropriate tool for certain tasks.

As long as the bed can accommodate 1 cubic yard of top soil or whatnot, it would be sufficient for me. That's about my line to draw if the bed is large enough or not.

Reality is complex. On the subject of DIY and hauling stuff from Home Depot, last week one evening I hauled home from Home Depot a 1 gallon potted shrubbery, 2 5 pound bags of potting mix, 1 40 lb bag of top soil, 1 40 lb bag of mulch, 4 blocks, and 16 small fall flowers to plant in a flower bed. The crazy part? Not in my Jeep, but in my sister’s Chevy Trax. Should have taken a photo.

I agree and think they will have more, but for a startup, I think they are building an outstanding truck to start. Most people do not need more than a 4 1/2 foot to 5 ft bed and for residential users this truck allows hauling people as well as stuff from Home Depot / Lowes. Yes this is not a commercial use truck or for those that want a 6 or 8 ft bed for work. Yet for most people I think this truck hits all the right boxs.

Personally, I would prefer the LFP battery over the NCA battery. Quicker charge times and the ability to use the full battery capacity, SOLD.

Another interesting read on how BMW and Mercedes wants to keep prices high even when costs drop to increase profits for executives and especially the stock holders. BMW, Daimler Pledge To Keep Prices High As Costs Drop (jalopnik.com)

@Robert Hall I know you hold the E30 Bimmer on a very high pedestal. Sure... In guess. Whatever. But you also hold an Audi 5000 to that same high pedestal? While probable dissing on the FWD GM A platform? Sure, you could do that too. But the Chevrolet Celebrity, even in the laughable Eurosport trim, the Pontiac 6000, Oldsmobile Cutlass Cierra and Buick Century were really good cars. Held there own... The Audi 5000 was really not that special. The only special thing about it was because it was made in Germany? THAT is the laughable part. It was the same type of FWD appliance car that you like to diss as the GM A platform cars. What Quattro? Yeah yeah yeah It was "winning" rallye races... I guess THAT was the marketing angle that Audi was peddling and the automotive journalism world was spewing... Oh... GM had an answer to that, but I guess it wasnt German and it wasnt winning rallye races to count as something good... But at least the GM cars were not accelerating by themselves... But I guess we will say that that story was not true though. We will just continue to bash GM cars from this era just because its a better storyline to cling on to.

From the September 2019 issue of Car and Driver. Problem is...in the 1980s, Car and Driver and everyone else ONLY crapped on American cars. NOT on the E30... Because it wasnt crapped on. The E30 in the US was ALWAYS revered. Just pick up any mag that compares a Cimarron to an E30. The Cimarron was NOT the ideal car for Cadillac. But taken one on one forgetting that the Cimarron was also a Chevrolet, which wasnt that bad of a car in realty, the Cimarron comoared to the E30 was on PAR with the E30. What? RWD versus FWD? With an E30 that had aprox the same HP? They also forgetting to mention that the E30 was SHYTTIER than the Cavalier in Europe? My dad owned a 1986 Chevrolet Celebrity. I learned to drive in that car... @balthazar showed me where the Celebrity was quicker and faster than a 1986 Audi 5000. I too, was under the impression that the Celebrity was a dog as compared to the German competition. Yeah...a Celebrity being competition, if you could call it that to an Audi 5000. And that is thanx to American automotive journalism where my perceptions were corrupted by that drivel...

@surreal1272 To clarify then: @Robert Hall said that Road&Track catered to a demographic that preferred small, road hugging European cars over large, American cars. I get that. I really do. There is a quality of ride and sportiness to being small and nimble to which American GIs got experience over in Europe during the war and craved that coming back home after the war. This is where my pic of a Hot Rod Ford comes in as this is what these GIs did to replicate what they saw in Europe. And then the muscle car era came upon us when these Hot Rods evolved into what the Detroit 3 noticed what was happening on the strip and street etc... And you cant deny that fact... The list is a very accurate way of explaining to why cars after the war were. Small European cars were always a thing. Big large American cars were always a thing too. Large European cars also existed before the war. After the war, well...read the list... But...in CONTEXT: Balthy ALSO described this "sporty phenomenon" in another point of view that some of us FAIL to recognize or even ACKNOWLEDGE... So there is that... But...Im not the one to diss different car cultures. THIS is about automotive journalism. And I realize that! Ill agree with you with your statement here! I have issues with the hypocritical automotive journalism along with the hypocritical opinions of certain anti-American car sentiment car folk that I know personally in my real life.

Automotive Journalism 101.

Which does not change my statement about GM interiors over that same period. I know European cars were s*** in that regard but this whole discussion started with the new interior of the upcoming Chevy Silverado. Not BMW. Not Mercedes. Not Audi. Not anything else. Just Chevy (and by extension, GM). Everything else mentioned afterwards was deflection and cherry picking like I was talking to SMK and I'm not taking that bait. Folks need to just settle down and pay attention what was actually said from the start instead of assuming intent halfway through said discussion. But it was still a fact to point out how far power has come over the last five decades. It's really that simple. If you're going to assume that everything is just negative thinking, then that's all you're going to get.

I stated right up front I was considering the context / the era this was in. I stated it, and I always do. That rides right on the back of folks commenting "A V-6 Camry is quicker to 60 than a lot of muscle cars from the '60s". That's blatantly out-of-context. And in that same vein of context, this is not comparing a -say- Triumph to a -say- Olds Vista Cruiser. The issue was the '1963 Road & Track Sports & GT" issue; there aren't any "massive" US cars in it. My issue is that nearly unilaterally, cars that aren't even CLOSE to 'not known for being fast' are in fact dismally & unbelievably slow- you're not going to enjoy the handling of anything that takes 30 seconds to reach 60- you can't even power thru a sweeping turn when you can't even gain 5 MPH doing so. Robert- I'm sure you've read a comment or two that the first gen Corvette 'wasn't really a sports car performance-wise', yet despite a full decade disadvantage, it's three times quicker than the Karman Ghia. A Chevette diesel ran 0-60 in 22 seconds! I guess what bothers me most is the unilateral acceptance. These cars were (mostly) sold in the U.S., but it's really hard to find any objective criticism in this issue of them, when they're not fitting for ANY on-road sporting activity. There's a reason almost all of the brands in the book are long dead.

LOL (sarcastically) So...Road&Track were smitten by underpowered European econoboxes while the rest of America prefered these from the early 1950s to the mid 1950s and eventually to these Like I said....the OVERWHELMINGLY demographic of what cars were enthused by Americans was these: It was a VERY tiny subset of Americans that preferred British roadsters. Yes...Hot Rods and the Chevrolet Corvette arose from that subset. But QUICKLY became what I posted above... Why? But read it ANYWAY 1. In Europe, after WW2, infrastructure had to be rebuilt. Gasoline and materials had to be rationed for the rebuilding of the destroyed cities. Roads. Buildings. Bridges. etc. 2. Although there was plenty of jobs in construction, Europe's economy stank more or less, give or take, from 1945-1985. Some countries LONGER than that. 3. European countries are old. The roads, even if they were destroyed and had to be built up again, with the buildings being raised up again, the blueprints were already there for thousands of years. The countries, cities, towns and villages were grown with bi-pedal humans and donkeys and horse and buggy. Plus, many European cities and towns and villages are on MOUNTAIN SIDES. Tight little twisting roads where a small miscalculation in driving perception equals death. 4. In this same time frame, the US experienced a MASSIVE economic boost. 5. Although some cities were also built on the same premise of bi-pedal humans and horse and buggy, that would be the founding and settled parts of these cities. The cities GREW in this time frame but grew with the AUTOMOBILE in mind. The cities and towns for the MOST part are built on nice, huge, LONG and STRAIGHT roadways. 6. The US now experienced a new age. A continuation of the industrial age, but with the automobile as the prime source of transportation. 7. Why American cars were big and European cars were small. Why American cars were V8 powered and European cars were and STILL are displacement challenged and why American cars were cushy while European cars HAD to handle seem like a no-brainer to me. 8. Its THOSE reasons why a certain car culture arose in the US. 9. We all like to believe there was a car culture in Europe after WW2, but there really wasnt. 10. European car manufacturing FOR Europe was geared towards small, economical shyteboxes. 11. European car manufacturing for America were those "great" handling sporty cars... 10. So why did American automotive journalism NOT knock them for being UNDERpowered since American car tastes were, well, street light to street light racing... 11. Why didnt American automotive journalism NOT knock European cars for being so freaking small, uncomfortable and useless for LONG road trips? 12. Lets NOT forget we still hold THAT as a top priority as there is a quite a large subset of American citizens TODAY bitching about electric car range anxiety for the aforementioned and famous American road trip. 13. Although American cars DID become shytty with their cars. Crap interiors. Less reliable. In that SAME time frame, European cars were NO BETTER. Actually, they were WORSE.

It's a good idea that GM is going with a more upscale interior for the higher priced trucks, I know if I were shopping a $50-75k pickup I wouldn't want the same Rubbermaid interior as a $25k work truck..something costing 2-3 times as much needs an appropriate interior for it's price point.

Bolt still looks like a potato. Leaf is about as bad. Kona isn’t bad, the Mini familiar.

Not saying anything about nothing.... But just wanted to point out that "as recently as 1970" also means half a century ago. Seeing as GM was formed in 1908, in 1970 that would make GM 62 years old at that time. 1970 to today is 52 years. Not quite at the middle of GM's history, but almost. Just sayin' that I kinda understand that 1970 doesnt seem like a long time ago because we grew up during that time, but it IS a long time ago.

@David There is always room for one more. Make it four. The more the merrier. Greece. Italy. And now we are off to Germany. Oktoberfest is just around the corner!!! Literally!!! We could stay long enough after Oktoberfest to actually ski here!

Very cool take on a modern updated version of the A-team van with a current SAVANA van and the front from a Sierra 1500. This rocks and I think people would like it. I could so see an EV version of this.

And that probably won't move the sales needle, if anything I think Navigator sales will drop with the Grand Wagoneer out there now. The Maybach GLS already has massage rear seats and level 2 semi-autonomous driving, so Lincoln has nothing new there, just what is expected in that segment.

Rivian doesn't offer a 5' bed. I thought you knew that. And people practice consumerism in FAR more outlets than just Home Depot/Lowes. You don't need an 8-ft bed for commercial work, but you do need 6.5'. That's pretty much neither here nor there; Rivian isn't suited or intended for commercial work, just stating that fact.

So we agree- any plethora of journalistic opinion amounts to basically nothing.

It can be both and for different reasons. It is the truth that GM has lagged in the interior department for decades. It’s opinion to say a dash feels greasy. This is not a one or the other situation here.