01-14-2014, 07:38 PM | #15 |
General Motors Aficionado
Drives: 2023 GMC Canyon, 2020 Colorado Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 37,371
|
It'll undercut GM's trucks by a hundred or so pounds depending on cab/bed/engine configuration, but yeah, basically Ford is just catching up in the weight department.
__________________
2023 GMC Canyon Elevation 2020 Chevrolet Colorado W/T Extended Cab (State-issued) |
01-14-2014, 07:43 PM | #16 |
Stevew
Drives: 2012 Camaro 2SS and 2012 Corvette Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 34
|
A 1/2 ton truck will not do what I need a truck to do. I am looking forward to seeing the specs on the one ton and maybe even the 3/4 ton. It will be a while. I like the current Ford Super Duties. Hoping my 05 Dodge 3500 4X4 keeps going. The wife is tired of it. I do not want to blow $60K on a new truck.
|
01-14-2014, 08:17 PM | #17 |
Account Suspended
Drives: some to distraction Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Location: Location:
Posts: 627
|
GM may revisit the stillborn 4.5L BabyMax diesel V8. That could be an image-changer AND a game-changer. And don't forget the GM HDs will be renewed for '15.
|
01-14-2014, 09:21 PM | #18 |
Buick 455 Fan
Drives: 1970 Buick, 2012 1SS LS3 Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston MA
Posts: 5,957
|
My understanding is that despite Ford's webpage claims, the entire body is not aluminum alloy.
__________________
|
01-14-2014, 09:24 PM | #19 |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,214
|
Aluminum is much more expensive than steel. Ford is now at a major cost disadvantage to GM and Dodge.
But yes it is 700 pounds lighter than THE CURRENT FORD PICKUP.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
01-14-2014, 10:44 PM | #20 |
Drives: 2002 ws6 Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: manitoba
Posts: 1,202
|
the ecoboost is horrible. the only decent engine they have left is the 5.0
__________________
Bolt on 2002 ls1 Trans am--- 11.5 @ 121 (1.72) 2000 da
|
01-15-2014, 01:18 AM | #21 | |
Iron fist, lead foot
Drives: 2003 Mustang Cobra Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 1,237
|
Quote:
2WD '14 Silverado ...... 2WD '14 F-150 Crew Cab, 5’ 8” box ...... Supercrew, 5' 6" box 4942 lbs. (4.3L) ...... 5128 lbs. (3.7L) 5042 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 5254 lbs. (5.0L) 5156 lbs. (6.2L) ...... 5296 lbs. (3.5L EB) Crew Cab, 6’ 6” box ...... Supercrew, 6' 6" box 5000 lbs. (4.3L) ...... n/a 5104 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 5345 lbs. (5.0L) 5216 lbs. (6.2L) ...... 5380 lbs. (3.5L EB) 4WD '14 Silverado ...... 4WD '14 F-150 Crew Cab, 5’ 8” box ...... Supercrew, 5' 6" box 5139 lbs. (4.3L) ...... n/a 5218 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 5586 lbs. (5.0L) 5370 lbs. (6.2L) ...... 5615 lbs. (3.5L EB) Crew Cab, 6’ 6” box ...... Supercrew, 6' 6" box 5197 lbs. (4.3L) ...... n/a 5292 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 5714 lbs. (5.0L) 5429 lbs. (6.2L) ...... 5731 lbs. (3.5L EB) ________________________________________ 2WD '14 Silverado ...... 2WD '14 F-150 Double Cab, 6’ 6” box ...... Supercab, 6' 6" box 4860 lbs. (4.3L) ...... 5043 lbs. (3.7L) 4963 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 5169 lbs. (5.0L) 5074 lbs. (6.2L) ...... 5203 lbs. (3.5L EB) Double cab, 8' box ...... Super cab, 8' box n/a ............ 5312 lbs. (5.0L) n/a ............ 5317 lbs. (3.5L EB) 4WD '14 Silverado ...... 4WD '14 F-150 Double Cab, 6’ 6” box ......Supercab, 6' 6" box 5104 lbs. (4.3L) ...... 5333 lbs. (3.7L) 5201 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 5461 lbs. (5.0L) 5352 lbs. (6.2L) ...... 5476 lbs. (3.5L EB) Double cab, 8' box ...... Super cab, 8' box n/a ............ 5604 lbs. (5.0L) n/a ............ 5620 lbs. (3.5L EB) ________________________________________ 2WD '14 Silverado ...... 2WD '14 F-150 Regular Cab, 6’ 6” box...... Regular cab, 6' 6" box 4387 lbs. (4.3L) ...... 4685 lbs. (3.7L) 4503 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 4791 lbs. (5.0L) n/a ............ 4953 lbs. (3.5L EB) Regular Cab, 8’ box ...... Regular cab, 8' box 4567 lbs. (4.3L) ...... 4764 lbs. (3.7L) 4673 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 4901 lbs. (5.0L) n/a ............ 5073 lbs. (3.5L EB) 4WD '14 Silverado ...... 4WD '14 F-150 Regular Cab, 6’ 6” box ......Regular cab, 6' 6" box 4587 lbs. (4.3L) ...... 4925 lbs. (3.7L) 4707 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 5033 lbs. (5.0L) n/a ............ 5220 lbs. (3.5L EB) Regular Cab, 8’ box ...... Regular cab, 8' box 4816 lbs. (4.3L) ...... 4993 lbs. (3.7L) 4922 lbs. (5.3L) ...... 5130 lbs. (5.0L) n/a ............ 5375 lbs. (3.5L EB) These lists were compiled from both ford.com and gm.com, so direct from their respective sources, and I don't think there's a model where the Ford outweighs the GM by "600+" lbs. Now, there may be 6.2L Ford trims that may, but seeing as its being phased out of the 1/2 ton I don't see how it's relevant. Though I'll post those as well if anyone interested. That Boss motor is HEAVY. Either way if the "700 lbs" lost is structural, therefore model wide, the 150 will be in a pretty good spot weight wise vs GM and Ram.
__________________
'03 SVT Cobra-SC4.6L V8 || modded with mods'n'stuff
Last edited by crysalis_01; 01-15-2014 at 10:50 AM. |
|
01-15-2014, 01:33 AM | #22 |
Drives: 2014 1LE Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 478
|
I like this truck. I'm down with it. Ecoboosts are awesome if you don't get the dreaded CEL for moisture in the intercooler or whatever they're diagnosing it as. Otherwise they're good to go.
|
01-15-2014, 10:28 AM | #23 | |
Drives: Callaway Rogue Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: W8n 4 Snow, Minnesota
Posts: 4,738
|
They didn't sell many 6.2's.... And for a $3500 MSRP bump for it I can understand why. LOL
Quote:
And as a side note on engines, it's not like GM's new 5.3 is a gamechanger Exactly. (And my f150 is a 5.0..... LOL) |
|
01-15-2014, 10:51 AM | #24 | |
Drives: 2010 SS, 2000 Pontiac Formula Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 509
|
Quote:
This is how I feel about GMs new truck lineup. I feel like GM is 4 years behind, and there new stuff is on par with Ford and Rams old stuff that's been around a few years. I personally don't like the new full size offerings from GM, but they are fine trucks nonetheless. GMs a day late a dollar short IMO |
|
01-15-2014, 11:27 AM | #25 | |
Drives: Slow Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Metro Chicago,Illinois
Posts: 560
|
Quote:
|
|
01-15-2014, 12:40 PM | #26 | |
Drives: 2010 SS, 2000 Pontiac Formula Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 509
|
Quote:
It was based on comparing the lightest offering from GM to the heaviest from Ford lol |
|
01-15-2014, 02:52 PM | #27 |
Hail to the King baby!
Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 12,214
|
Lost me. Based on the data Ford is no further she'd of GM than GM was ahead of Ford.
__________________
"Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley
|
01-16-2014, 12:28 AM | #28 | |
Drives: 2002 ws6 Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: manitoba
Posts: 1,202
|
Quote:
the ecoboost is far from a game changer. if anything, it's a step backwards.
__________________
Bolt on 2002 ls1 Trans am--- 11.5 @ 121 (1.72) 2000 da
|
|
|
|