Chevrolet Vs. GMC.

GM currently has two nearly-identical, light-duty trucks lines: One made by the Chevrolet division and the other made by the GMC division. It was only a few years ago that the two trucks were identical, with the exception of a few superficial trim items. But lately -- particularly since the introduction of the 2003 Silverado -- the trend has been to widen the gap between GMC and Chevrolet trucks. As of 2003, the front bumpers, hoods, front fenders and tail lights are no longer interchangeable between Sierra and Silverado trucks.

It seems ridiculous to have both divisions producing other nearly-identical models, such as the Suburban, Tahoe/Yukon, Colorado/Sonoma etc. GM already knows the advantage of dropping a redundant product line, because Oldsmobile is now gone. There are rumors that Buick or Pontiac may be next.

This trend toward widening the gap between GMC and Chevrolet trucks seems to have come at a particularly bad time for GM. In an era of decreased sales, plant closures and massive layoffs, GM has ignored an obvious money-saving strategy. Why not have Chevrolet manufacture all trucks, SUVs and vans up to the 3500 series and leave all of the big truck manufacturing to GMC?

Then, instead of having GMC competing against Chevrolet, GM could concentrate exclusively on competing against its true large-vehicle rivals: Ford, Dodge, Toyota and Nissan.

On the other hand, maybe GM is on to something by keeping GMC and Chevrolet separate. This course of action might force Ford and Dodge to follow suite.

I have always thought that Ford needed two nearly-identical truck lines competing with each other. The new model could be called the FMC. A huge FMC logo -- in bright, reflective tomato red -- would look great stretched across the grille and tailgate.

If Ford goes ahead with the FMC truck idea, Chrysler is sure to create a Mopar truck division to compete against Dodge.

Reply to
One-Shot Scot
Loading thread data ...

This is because you don't understand the history. GMC trucks were/are sold at non Chevrolet dealerships. The GMC was in the beginning a step above the Chevy in features. Chevy got a painted grill, GMC got chrome. Chevy has single head lights, GMC got quads. Chevy light duty had coil springs all around, GMC got leafs in the back. GMC had nicer interiors, fancier radios, in dash AC vs. under dash in the Chevy models And GMC cost more than Chevy Somewhere in the mid 70's the two started merging, but the idea is/was still the same, Buick, Olds(before GM screwed up and ran it into the ground) Pontiac, and even Caddy dealers didn't want a new Chevy on the lot, and they wanted something a bit nicer then the Chevy.. Ford did sell another brand of truck, there were Mercury pick-ups in the

50's. And before Plymouth went under there were Plymouth trucks. Somewhere along the line GM has forgotten its basics. The idea was to get young first time buyers by offering solid basic transportation, the Chevrolet line and the Pontiac line. As a person moved up the economic ladder they moved to ether the Buick or the Oldsmobile, and when they hit the big time, or retired, they would move to the Cadillac. Each step up offered features and luxuries the one below didn't have available. Ford followed the same idea, Ford, Mercury/Edsel, and Lincoln and Mopar was Plymouth, Dodge/Desoto, Chrysler, and Imperial The cars started competing with themselves in the mid 60's when the Parent companies started seeing them as independent manufactures instead of pieces of an over all pie.

Whitelightning

Reply to
Whitelightning

Reply to
ronlin79

Reply to
One-Shot Scot

Do you see any major difference between the Porsche Cheyenne S, and the Volkswagon Touareg? There are some engine differences. 4.5 vs 4.2 V8, same auto tranny, same air suspension etc etc etc, but do you think the Porsche buyer will stoop to the VW?

the solution is gearing to the buyer. I want a plane jane work capable 1/2 ton truck, 4x2. Yeah I want a nice paint job. But I don't want "sport suspension" or radical cornering etc etc. if I wanted that I would by Monte Carlo, or the new Impala V-8, or a GTO. I want to be able to pull an 18 foot wooden runabout, or a load of plywood and 2x4s, or some fill dirt. I don't want rear brakes that are constantly causing me issues, read disk brakes that are always freezing on their slide mounts. For some reason the rear disk brakes just seem to get clobbered with garbage on trucks. Disk/ Drum on a truck gets the job done, some nice meaty min spec. 1.230" thick front rotors

12" in diameter, and 12 inch diameter drums in the rear with 2 1/2"-3" wide shoes. and she will stop every time. I really don't want air bags, I've stuffed a couple front bumpers, and pushed through heavy brush, the idea of a bag going off in my face is unsettling. Give me a good seat belt, and an adjustable shoulder harness, and a strong cab. I want a bed I can put a 4'x8' sheet of ply wood between the wheel wells like we used to be able to do. Hell I could put a sheet flat in the bed of my '69 step side. I want nice looking rubber mats, not carpet, and ditch the padding under it. I want the floor flat, not recessed so I can sweep dirt out easy. If its a 4x4 I want the center of the floor to be removable, like they used to be. I would like steel and bronze bushings on the control arms with grease fittings. Keep em greased they last forever and the darn things stay in alignment. In a 3/4 ton and 1 ton I want full floating axles, 13 inch rotors, and I want 14 inch drums 3 1/2" wide shoes. That's what the Chevy should be, the GMC's were often referred to as "Gentlemen's Trucks" I never figured that out because they had a stronger rear suspension in my opinion. My '69 was like a drunk sailor on shore leave when loaded. Whitelightning
Reply to
Whitelightning

Years ago GMC's had different transmissions and engines. GMC's had Pontiac engines and Hydromatic automatics. In the late 60's GMC and Chevy's looked alike but Chevy's had coil springs in the rear, GMC's had leafs. GMC's had stouter clutches and two more headlamps. I had a 68 GMC 1/2 ton with a large over the cab camper. Was on the truck for years. I lent it to a guy with a

69 Chevy 1/2 ton for almost 3 months. He had wife problems and had to move out quick. When we took it off the back of the Chevy, it was down about 3 inches.

Al

Reply to
Big Al

I noticed a difference in the 1996 GMC 2500 vs 1996 Chevy 2500. My Dad owned the Chevy and I had the GMC. Both were ext. cab long bed with the same interior package. Just different colors What got us wondering what the difference was when Dad came to visit. He parked next to mine. And the GMC sat taller. So we did some measuring.The difference we found was in the suspension and drivetrain. Both were clasified as HD. GMC came with the 7.4L & 4L80 tranny. Chevy had the 5.7L & 4L60 tranny. Front springs were .062 bigger in diameter on the GMC (Expected this with the heavier motor). Rear springs had 1 more leaf in them. Als the frame had an extra cross support back near the rear axle. Just for fun we loaded his camper on my GMC. And it didn't squat as far down either. Now I had about 100,000 more miles on the GMC than on the Chevy. And neither vehicle has been modified since purchased. Both were purchased with the Towing & Camper package. Chevy was bought in Buffalo N.Y. area. The GMC was bought in Madison, Ohio. Turned out both were made in Canada (According to the stickers.). Oddly enough Dad wanted to leave the camper on mine and take it. (He liked the power the 7.4L put out. But I told him NO! That truck has been my baby and workhorse all wrapped up into one. So I'm not ready to part with it yet. Plus I like the Tan GMC coler better than the Red Chevy anywho! :)

Well that's just my two cents on a comparison with two closely related vehicles! Both in year size and family!

Reply to
Daveman

Pontiac, actualy Oakland, as the first Pontiac didnt come in to being untill 1926, and Ponitac as a company didnt exist untill; Oakland was bought and renamed in 1932, engines were used in Rapid and Reliance trucks cerra

1910. These companies became GMC truck. As to Pontiac engines in GMC light trucks, well yes and no. In 1926 Pontiac did build a pick up truck but Durant figured three truck lines was one two many and the Pontiac truck said good night. and was rebranded GMC. Then it gets messy. 29-36 used chevy. 37-38 used pontiac, 37-50 used olds. 55-58 used a pontiac V-8, 288 cid. 53-55 used Buick 322 V-8. 49-64 olds 370 and 371 were choices. Mixed in through the years were GMC engines ie the 236 and 248 from 39-55. The 256 40-41, the 305 V-6 from 1960 till 78, along with most of the chevy engines as options starting in the 50's. working on early GMC trucks can be a challange finding parts, and nothing interchanges between the various engines. Weird thing is the big Ponitac Straight 8 was never used.

Great reading here

formatting link

Reply to
Whitelightning

your father could have ordered the big block as well. And keep in mind that the HD2500 series, as do most trucks, come in different GVWs, which would explain the difference in leaf count.

Whitelightning

Reply to
Whitelightning

All this is true. But we did both have the same GVW rating also. Our stickers for except for the vin numbers almost matched! I was going to go with the Deisel. But the 7.4L was in stock. Since this last winter though my GMC is still with me at 215,000 miles. Only real issue has been the cam. My dads chevy moved on to different pastures. He opted for a 4wd shortbed half ton. (Doesn't have the camper anymore.) So I can't confirm any other comparisons!! :)

Reply to
Daveman

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.