Motor Trend's Truck Of The Year

[Bubba Bob]

Motor Trend Names Redesigned Chevrolet Silverado 2007 Truck Of The Year

Chevrolet Wins with "Everybody's All-American"

LOS ANGELES, CA (December 19, 2006) -- Motor Trend (www.motortrend.com), the world's automotive authority and part of PRIMEDIA's (NYSE: PRM) Consumer Automotive Group, has announced that the redesigned Chevrolet Silverado is its 2007 Truck of the Year. The complete report on Motor Trend's 2007 Truck of the Year will be published in the February issue, available on newsstands January 2, 2007.

"The Silverado impressed us most of all because it is a great reworking of an iconic American vehicle," said Angus MacKenzie, editor in chief of Motor Trend. "The Chevy pick up truck has been a part of the American automotive landscape for decades. This Silverado takes it into the twenty-first century."

MacKenzie said the 2007 Silverado is leaps ahead of the vehicle it is replacing, citing a number of measurable improvements in refinement and fuel-economy, such as a 5.3 liter V-8 engine that can shift into V-4 mode for greater mileage per gallon, and an optional interior that offers near-luxury car levels of comfort and equipment. The Motor Trend team also noted a tremendous improvement in perceived quality throughout the new Silverado. The use of upscale materials and thoughtful design details mean the new Silverado now beats some SUVs in terms of fit and finish.

General Motors engineers haven't forgotten the Silverado often works for a living. The new model offers a choice of cab and bed sizes, plus suspensions and drive trains, to suit a variety of applications. Developed in conjunction with GM's new GMT900 SUVs, the new Silverado remains truck-tough under its classy sheet metal.

MacKenzie added, "The Silverado offers traditional values people want in a pick-up - it's rugged, durable and versatile, but it's also stylish and comfortable. GM has done a good job in understanding that these trucks are not just for work but also for recreation, and it's done a great job in maintaining the Silverado's reputation for value - prices have only increased about $300 on most models."

Wow, four GM vehicles (all based on the same platform) and one Ford SUV which is quite a bit smaller than a full size truck.

Good ol' Motor Trend. The competition was a tuffy for GM. After all they only went in with a small 80% chance of victory! HA! No F150 or Dodge 1500? Not even a yuppie truck like the ridgeline to Tundra? Hard hitting automotive journalism strike again.

What a joke...

[TheTerrorist_75]

You failed to post the vehicle requirements to win.

http://www.motortrend.com/features/auto_ne...rolet_silverado

The 2007 Field of Contenders

The Chevrolet Silverado was one of only five trucks eligible for the Truck of the Year title, and of those five contenders, four (including the Silverado) were GMT900-based vehicles from General Motors.

To be eligible for Truck of the Year, a vehicle must be totally new or redesigned, and released in the 12 months prior to January 1, 2007 (trucks with modifications such as new engines or that are variants of existing models are not eligible). This year's field of contenders for Truck of the Year included the Chevrolet Avalanche, the Chevrolet Silverado, the Cadillac Escalade EXT, the Ford Explorer Sport Trac and the GMC Sierra.

Seeing as Ford,Dodge, Nissan and Toyota haven't done any major changes for this year to their trucks they weren't eligible.

BTW. I got to test a new 2007 GMC Sierra with the 5.3. It made my 2005 F-150 XL with the 4.6 Triton seem like a total wimp. Even the GM 4.3 V6 blows away my Triton. The GMs ride a hell of lot better and feel as though they can handle any weight I put in or tow behind it. I am seriously considering trading in the Ford now or wait until 2008 to see if there's any bugs with the new versions.

[bearskin]

personally I rely on Consumer Reports for my information.

they don't take bribes...or paid advertisement.

[Bubba Bob]

The requirements are absurd. It makes no sence to declare a truck "truck of the year" if you don't compare it to any other trucks.

TT, id wait for the numerous amount of recalls to come out and shoot for the 08'

Also, I havent driven one, but on paper Ford beats out its GMC counter parts. FOr example, 294 lb-ft of torqe for Ford's 4.6 compared to 260 on GM's 4.3L. GM's vortec 6.0L only has 10 more ft-lbs of torque over the 5.4L triton. 0.6 more liters for 10 more pounds of torque?

GM may have lower drive train loss I suppose...

Edited January 4, 2007 by Bubba Bob

[TheTerrorist_75]

My 4.6 V-8 Triton has less @$$ than my 4.3 V-6 in my '88 GMC. The Triton engine feels like a loosely wound rubber band and gets real bad mileage. The F-150 has 3.55 rear gears with a four speed automatic and the GMC has 3.42 rear gears with a three speed Turbo 400 automatic. The Ford averages around 14-15 mpg while the GMC has been averaging 19-20 mpg. I never go by the paper specifications listed by manufacturers when it comes to HP/torque and mileage ratings. They have been known to lie. I go by real world testing by me.

I have had many of my Ford trucks recalled for a wide range of problems in the past where as my GMs were mostly recalled for those d#$% ABS problems.

[Bubba Bob]

That's the truth. Im still trying to find that 34 mpg my Focus is supposed to get. If doing 95% highway with the cruise control set at 65mph doesn't do it, nothing will. The EPA is changing testing procedures this year so hopefully they will be more accurate.

On a side note, I took a 5.4L triton pulling a 3 ton travel trailer to Florida last summer. The torque in that truck is great. And a plus, the cruise control didn't catch on fire

[JDoors]

He's already mentioned it but most car or truck "of the year" competitions are solely for vehicles that are basically or completely new for that year. It's more like a "Best New Vechicle Of The Year" award. There are dozens of other tests and awards that include vehicles that haven't changed much ("10 Best" is a familiar one).

The GM trucks have been well-reviewed, but unfortunately the market is, at least temporarily, turning away from the largest trucks on the market, many are turning to smaller or more car-like trucks, while at the same time Japanese companies are introducing their largest, heaviest and thirstiest trucks ever -- making for one tough market for new trucks.

GM, Ford and Dodge have been doing the same thing for decades: GM updates their line grabbing all the headlines, then Ford takes their turn, and finally, Dodge follows. I'm not sure how Toyota and Nissan are going to fit into that time-tested equation.

------

Edited January 4, 2007 by JDoors

[sethook]

Motor Trend Names Redesigned Chevrolet Silverado 2007 Truck Of The Year

Chevrolet Wins with "Everybody's All-American"

LOS ANGELES, CA (December 19, 2006) -- Motor Trend (www.motortrend.com), the world's automotive authority and part of PRIMEDIA's (NYSE: PRM) Consumer Automotive Group, has announced that the redesigned Chevrolet Silverado is its 2007 Truck of the Year. The complete report on Motor Trend's 2007 Truck of the Year will be published in the February issue, available on newsstands January 2, 2007.

"The Silverado impressed us most of all because it is a great reworking of an iconic American vehicle," said Angus MacKenzie, editor in chief of Motor Trend. "The Chevy pick up truck has been a part of the American automotive landscape for decades. This Silverado takes it into the twenty-first century."

MacKenzie said the 2007 Silverado is leaps ahead of the vehicle it is replacing, citing a number of measurable improvements in refinement and fuel-economy, such as a 5.3 liter V-8 engine that can shift into V-4 mode for greater mileage per gallon, and an optional interior that offers near-luxury car levels of comfort and equipment. The Motor Trend team also noted a tremendous improvement in perceived quality throughout the new Silverado. The use of upscale materials and thoughtful design details mean the new Silverado now beats some SUVs in terms of fit and finish.

General Motors engineers haven't forgotten the Silverado often works for a living. The new model offers a choice of cab and bed sizes, plus suspensions and drive trains, to suit a variety of applications. Developed in conjunction with GM's new GMT900 SUVs, the new Silverado remains truck-tough under its classy sheet metal.

MacKenzie added, "The Silverado offers traditional values people want in a pick-up - it's rugged, durable and versatile, but it's also stylish and comfortable. GM has done a good job in understanding that these trucks are not just for work but also for recreation, and it's done a great job in maintaining the Silverado's reputation for value - prices have only increased about $300 on most models."

Wow, four GM vehicles (all based on the same platform) and one Ford SUV which is quite a bit smaller than a full size truck.

Good ol' Motor Trend. The competition was a tuffy for GM. After all they only went in with a small 80% chance of victory! HA! No F150 or Dodge 1500? Not even a yuppie truck like the ridgeline to Tundra? Hard hitting automotive journalism strike again.

What a joke...

How do you think Ford won the award? Or, have they ever won it?

Edited January 5, 2007 by sethook

[Honda_Boy]

well one thig that bugged me. That near luxury interior crap. Hello it's a ****ing truck. It's a work vehicle. Those things they call trucks now are more like jacked cars with beds. My dad's 1998 Tacoma 2WD with a 4 banger is more of a truck. Hell my hatchback is more of truck. A real frickin truck is my and my brother's old 66 Chevy 3/4 ton or our 78 Chevy 1/2 ton. Real trucks that were used for real work. My dad's Tacoma has seen more work than any of these luxury vehicles are ever gonna see. Also, a Lincoln truck. you have got to be bull****ing me. It's getting to the point where trucks are costing just as much as luxury cars.

Don't get me started on SUV's either. UUV's is what my dad and I call them. Urban Utility Vehicle. Ain't none of them ever gonna touch dirt. Give a good ole Ford Bronco or and old school 1500 Blazer. Crap gimme an old 4Runner.

I ignore trucks and SUV's mostly now cause they ain't what they used to be. Hardly any are used for their original purpose anymore.

[TheTerrorist_75]

I have driven and owned many trucks since 1966. I must say I do like the nicer interiors. After humping blocks, timbers and other heavy materials it feels good to sit in a seat that is comfortable and supports my body. I also like to be able to crank up my tunes on a system that sounds great and not hear the old rattle of the cheap plastic grills and other dash parts along with the tinny sounds from the old AM/FM junk systems in the older trucks.

I will say that my '88 GMC will handle larger loads and has more power than my '05 F-150, but the newer Ford seats and sound system rock compared to the crap in my GMC.

I also prefer the "hidden" back door setup in the Ford's extended cab. I don't like the height of the Ford. I need a step ladder just to get up in the box. The oversized tire/wheel setup is bull and probably part of the reason the truck has no take off power even with 3.55 rear gears.

The more I look at other trucks to buy later this year or next the more I want to build my own.

[garmanma]

I have driven and owned many trucks since 1966. I must say I do like the nicer interiors. After humping blocks, timbers and other heavy materials it feels good to sit in a seat that is comfortable and supports my body. I also like to be able to crank up my tunes on a system that sounds great and not hear the old rattle of the cheap plastic grills and other dash parts along with the tinny sounds from the old AM/FM junk systems in the older trucks.

I will say that my '88 GMC will handle larger loads and has more power than my '05 F-150, but the newer Ford seats and sound system rock compared to the crap in my GMC.

I also prefer the "hidden" back door setup in the Ford's extended cab. I don't like the height of the Ford. I need a step ladder just to get up in the box. The oversized tire/wheel setup is bull and probably part of the reason the truck has no take off power even with 3.55 rear gears.

The more I look at other trucks to buy later this year or next the more I want to build my own.

My van is a 1 ton Ford with oversized wheels. I darn near need a step ladder to get in it with myy bad knees, but I wouldn't trade it for anything.

Mark

[JDoors]

... That near luxury interior crap. Hello it's a ****ing truck. ... Don't get me started on SUV's either. ...

Wow! Nice "old man" rant there bub: "They don't build 'em like they used to, no sirree sonny!"

Trucks are no longer the exclusive domain of lumberjacks and construction foremen, therefore a nicer interior SHOULD go along with the changing demograpics of truck owners. Along with a nicer ride, better styling, etc. And just as an old Civic cost under three grand and a new one can run a LOT more than that, new trucks cost more too -- then again, they DO more than they ever did (like not rattle like a can of rocks or turn your kidneys into mush).

I own an SUV (and a pickup before that) and while I haven't taken my nicer, more luxurious SUV into anything approaching the type of terrain I've been through in the pickup (I don't travel or explore as much as I used to), the SUV has saved my ass many times over due to its inherant abilities. The SUV is likely as capable off-road as the pickup, probably more so as I equipped the pickup for highway commuting while the SUV has tires better suited for the muck and better skidplates among other things.

Just as there are people who buy the performance version of Hondas and never approach the handling limits driving to work and back or dropping the kids off at the soccer field, there are truck owners who never blaze trails through the backwoods. That doesn't make either vehicle any less capable, or imply that those vehicles should be toned down to serve the lowest common denominator.

Now, how's THAT for an old man's rant?

[Honda_Boy]

yeah but what I'm saying is trucks used to be cheaper work Vehicles and now people buy the real nice ones and they are never used for work. The former owner of the place I worked at had a newer GMC Sierra V6 that was also a real truck. Regular cab, crank windows, fabric seats, only thing is he installed a CD player. It was comfortable enough and it did work. We constantly loaded that thing up with crap and hauled stuff in it. My managers older Sierra despite being a higher end vehicle, it was used constantly for work and off-road. People don't buy trucks and SUV's for their intended purpose anymore. They buy one just have a bigger version of a Cadillac or something. My next truck is gonna be a Toyota Tundra or Tacoma more than likely and it's gonna have 4WD and regular cab (possibly extended but no 4 door) cheapo interior, probably crank windows but maybe power. Either that or I'm gonna get me an old Chevy or GMC 1500 4WD in the same setup.

I'll tell you though, I don't like Honda's "truck". It's a Unitbody SUV not a truck. Even then most people that buy one ain't gonna use for much work. The dern things start at over $20,000.

Oh and Civics have had the same basic pricing since the 92 model. DX $14,000, LX $16,000 EX (and 92-95 Si) $18,000 and since 99, Si (different type of Vehicle entirely from 92-95 Si) $20,000-$22,000.

[garmanma]

My last pick up was a fairly nice, comfortable truck. If you're using it every day it might as well be laid out to your liking. Didn't even bother me that the 2nd week I owned it I put a ton of asphalt in it

Mark

[JDoors]

Trucks are used for everything; basic transportation (commute to work), luxury (night out on the town), hauling (trips to Home Depot or Sam's Club), everything. So they're equipped to handle everything now, whereas in the "good old days" you bought one only if you needed it for hauling. You can still buy a stripper if that's what you want (probably have to order it that way though). I don't know anyone with a pickup that hasn't used it to haul a load of manure, firewood, furniture, whatever (and the bane of all pickup owners: To move their friends, families and co-workers).

ALL vehicles are different, not just trucks. The Honda Fit is the cheapest car Honda sells and its standard equipment would put some old Cadillacs to shame (including stuff that didn't exist in the 'good old days').

Aside: When I ordered my pickup (I am very choosy) I did not tick off "power steering." I didn't think a "truck" should have power steering, you should have to wrestle with it (power brakes were standard, I would've left that unchecked too if it were possible). The dealer suggested that would hurt the resale value too much, so on that one item I compromised. Otherwise it was mostly basic transportation (and lasted thirteen years before someone ran into me and totaled it -- come to think of it, that whole "resale value" point was irrelevant all along -- I keep my vehicles 'til they fall apart around me).

Edited January 6, 2007 by JDoors

[cherokeechief]

well here is my thought on the matter.

the reason the trucks are so popular today is that the cars today are getting smaller and smaller.

and if you get in a wreck in one, kiss it goodbye. not fixable. trucks are alot safer, and will stand up to alot more than a car.

i should know, cause i am on the roads alot, and i see alot of wrecks,, and the cars today do not survive.

it is a throw away society today.

i have a 94 gmc, only rep-laced the timing chain, and it has over 200,000 mioles and it is still going.

in fact, it out runs alot of the newer vehicles. it is still stock, with the 5.7, the old 350.

it is good to see a gm product get the truck of the year.

oh, by the way, i had an 86 s-10 with a small v6 and had over 177,000 miles on it before getting the gmc, and i towed a funny car with the s10.

[Bubba Bob]

THat was the best generation of S10, CHeif. I had the next gen up from that (1993) and it went through 3 trannies before blowing the engine. ha

[Honda_Boy]

people keep saying trucks and SUV's are safer but still it all depends on where the vehicle is hit, how fast it was going and what made contact with it. You're doing 50 or above and whack a tree head on, I don't care what you are driving, kiss that car goodbye. I have seen a Civic T-bone a Trailblazer. It was a 96-98 like mine, only a Sedan. Trailblazer was demolished. Totaled, unrepairable. Civic, messed up bumper and fenders, crinkled hood and maybe some light frame damage, totally fixable and drivable.

[Bubba Bob]

Well duh

Even a Geo or Kia could do damage in a situation like that.

[TheTerrorist_75]

I stood in my back yard Friday and watched as the fire department used the jaws of life extracting the people from one of those Japanese cars that ran a stop sign and hit a Chevy Blazer in the passenger side fender. The owner of the Blazer had no problem continuing on to work after the cops allowed him to leave the scene. Both people in the Japanese car were transported to the hospital on back boards.

[JDoors]

Everyone has anecdotal evidence that one car or another or trucks vs. cars are safer than another, after all, in a similar manner concerning anecdotes many people "know someone" or "heard of someone" who would have died if they were wearing seat belts (or drowned, or burned, or .. ), but statistically trucks are safer in multiple vehicle collisions. Yes, if a truck hits another truck or a stationary object then that's one thing, but because there are so many cars on the road vs. trucks the more likely collision, and the one that generates the statistics that trucks are safer, is a truck and a passenger car colliding. If you're in the car you are statistically dead...er.

That's not meant to be a suggestion that you only drive a truck (they're more likely to roll over, like, 5 times more likely), it's just a statistic. You're probably more able to AVOID an accident in a passenger car since they're more maneuverable and stop better.

One reason vehicles crumple up more than they used to is they're SUPPOSED to crumple up. That absorbs the impact so YOU don't have to. Sacrifice the car to save the humans inside. Good idea but yeah, the cars sure look a mess. People didn't used to walk away from 40 mph impacts. Now they usually do, while looking back and complaining about how their car didn't "take" the impact well. Uh, yes, it did, that's why you're alive to pitch a fit about how messed up your car is.