Much more attractive than the Silverado IMHO.

 

The Silverado looks better. That said, money isn;t being allocated into the right departments with these trucks and new suvs. Trucks don't need a major design overhaul or a lot of money invested into the design. It seems that people forget what trucks are for. They are utility vehicles. Just one look at the truck and I can see where money isn't being used properly.

 

 

At the heart and soul of truck is a utility vehicle, more so than an suv and sedan. You cannot argue that and never can. Yes, these trucks are being bought as a halo garage queen, but for the most part, people would rather see it exceed in utility capabilities instead of lavish exterior styling. Trucks are not luxury cars and never will be. It just doesn't look as good pulling up to the red carpet in a truck as it would a coupe.

 

I would (respectfully) suggest a trip down to your local Dodge/Ram dealer and a test-drive in a Ram 1500. Then tell us if you notice any significant difference between its ride comfort, noise-level and general refinement in its road-manners, from some of the best-riding sedans. Several years ago, a commitment was made by Ram engineers to make this arguably the most comfortable pickup on the road, and, IMO, they succeeded....partly, among other factors, by replacing the rear leaf springs with coils. Ford and GM have also made some progress in improving the ride comfort of their large trucks (as with the Ford F-150's conversion to aluminum structure)....but not to anywhere near the Ram's extent.

 

I hear you, but there is a reason. The 6.0 is an old, tried and true tow pig engineered for more abuse (heavy duty) than the 6.2. In any case that V8 is irrelevant anyway because who on earth wouldn't go for the diesel when going the HD route. I'd rather have the diesel than even the 6.2. It's nearly 1000lb/ft of torque, lol. These trucks are approaching insanity in just about every way.

I rather like the interior, I love the column shifter and am glad they stuck to that. The materials look nice, too. There's supposedly open pore wood.

I'd drive one of these in a heartbeat.

 

See, you couldn't help yourself but to speak about the engineering of these trucks. Ride comfort, refinement, noise comfort are all aspects of what the engineering team has to tackle. What im saying is that the design team has bee given too much money to play with. That money should allocated into the engineering department. So to reiterate, utility is the main priority of trucks, which some of you guys are disagreeing on.

I see a lot of truck owners modify their trucks with a long led bar on the trunk. This is a concern for the manufacturer because they aren't making things that truckers actually need, which is visibility, not better styling.

 

tend to agrre with everything you said - Silverado has a cleaner look, the Dinali front end is a mess, overdone and overthought ......for no reason....except to bolt on more ugly chrome (over plastic), LOL.

 

True, trucks are designed to work.....I don't think that anyone here is disagreeing with that. But this is the 21st century, and the days are long-gone when many customers bought a truck just for work and little or nothing else. Today, in addition to the farm, ranch, construction site, or other utile purpose, trucks often serve as daily-drivers, family/Kiddie-haul vehicles, suburban shopping, and, yes, sometimes, as with the Ford King Ranch and Ram Longhorn, as luxury transportation.

 

what is it with the trend of square bracket drls now?
same on ford f250

[ ------ ]

 

But what does that matter? At the heart and soul of an SUV is a utility vehicle too and that didn't/doesnt stop people from lining up to pay luxury car money for leather lined versions of them. Hell, we had a 95 Explorer Limited that cost $40k in 1995, what many nice luxury cars cost and it was very nice but it was a terrible riding truck. But...we bought it because it was cool.

Just because a truck has "lavish exterior styling" in certain trims doesn't mean that it lacks in its utility capabilities. Look at the stats, this truck is superior in utility areas to the previous truck too.

Tons of high end high optioned trucks out there used by ranchers and such as work vehicles.

And whether you'd want to pull up to "the red carpet" in a truck vs a coupe depends on where you are. Ask people in Texas.

If buyers didn't want to buy these high end high optioned trucks they wouldn't make them.

 

 

yes but getting out of the truck may well be less embarrassing for someone (pronouns are so yesterday now ) in a short dress

 

If this truck is too luxurious, you can come drive my 18 year old Silverado. Bench seat, rubber cab floor, manual windows, no A/C, 5 speed manual transmission... Holds landscaping materials, bricks, Christmas trees, etc. with ease.

 

Definitely have to disagree with you on that one. Though there are certainly people who buy pickups to really put them to use as trucks, I'd venture to guess that's now far from the majority. I have two friends who currently own pickups, one is a technical recruiter with a loaded F-150 Platinum, the other an elementary school teacher who recently traded his Colorado for a Silverado. Neither regularly carries anything in the bed more substantial than a few dozen pounds of sporting equipment, and neither truck will ever see a trailer (one doesn't even have a hitch, the other only does because it was standard equipment). Appearance, comfort, and features matter; capability, not so much.

In my youth, I had two pickups. Though far from the luxury equipment available today, both were pretty loaded. The first was a Ranger with a stepside bed and a lowered sport suspension, so basically useless for carrying or towing anything. But lowered with chrome wheels and a graphics package, it looked awesome, and was fun to drive. The second was a Dodge Dakota. I wanted the 5.9 R/T, with it's honking 360ci V8, lowered suspension, giant (at the time) 17" alloys, body colored everything and pathetic 1500lb towing capacity. But it was auto-only, so I made do with the 5.2L V8 to get the 5-speed manual I wanted. It in turn got lowered, debadged, all accessories painted body color, rear bumper replaced with a roll pan, throttle body ported and polished, and a Ram air hood installed. Also a set of performance tires and a pair of traction bars, to help out with the wheel hop endemic to high-powered pickup trucks. Never hauled anything but *** except for one apartment move the entire time I had it.

Neither truck had a trailer hitch. It was all about looking good, having fun, and going (relatively) fast for a reasonable cost--utility never even entered the equation. Hell, a friend of mine at the time had a GMC Syclone, a turbocharged AWD version of the Sonoma that had a 500lb towing capacity--not even enough to pull an empty trailer in most cases-- and a fancy body kit. It was discontinued (along with its Jimmy-based SUV cousin the Typhoon) because Chevrolet corporate got pissed that another GM brand was selling a pickup truck that was faster than the C4 Corvette.

I think these values are a whole lot more mainstream than you'd ever admit, hence the plethora of options and massive increase in maximum price among light-duty pickups. Yes, the capability is there for those that want/need it. But there are a ton of people who don't care, and just want a luxury pickup.