Ford Tremor Fighter...2022 Silverado ZR2

[Deleted member 9101]

Other than the hood, i don't hate it. Lockers front and rear, appears to be narrower than the raptor and TRX, much more simple drive train. It's what dodge should have done with the rebel.

The 6.2 is in no way a simple motor, neither is the transmission. It's every bit as complicated as any other modern drivetrain.

 

[jadmt]

After watching that video I would head straight to my Ram or Ford dealer to check out what they have. promo vids are supposed to get you pumped up that put me to sleep.

 

[phsycle]

Cmon now. If I based my purchases based on the marketing department, I’d not own half the (great) stuff I have now. I couldn’t care less about commercials.

 

[john61ct]

I don’t want to spend $60k on a truck. I’d rather get a PW for that kind of money.

What is a PW?

 

[jadmt]

What is a PW?

power wagon

 

[jadmt]

Cmon now. If I based my purchases based on the marketing department, I’d not own half the (great) stuff I have now. I couldn’t care less about commercials.

I generally do not buy things based on commercials, but I often do not buy things based on commercials. When a company tries too hard to appeal to every segment of the population by inserting someone from every segment it is over the top lol.

 

[Todd780]

So what you are saying is you would get the wrong truck just because the right truck doesn't look good? That is what I hear from the suburban dad crowd that doesn't actually leave the pavement/have a use for a truck, they just want what looks the "coolest". Never understood that, especially for a truck, I give two licks what it looks like, is it the best tool for the job at the best price and most reliable. All these people that shop based on what fancy interior it has and how it looks is the demographic that is sadly driving truck design and sales lately and which in turns drives up the cost for those that actually need and use trucks (it is the reason we have massaging seats and base models cost 30k or more, the development cost of those features have to get passed down). I have heard people say they won't buy a vehicle because it doesn't have X feature like LED lights or pushbutton start, like really? That is the key feature that is driving the decision, not the engine output, capabilities, layout, ride/handling, etc? SMH

Tyler

Who said I thought the Chevy was the right truck despite the grill? Personally I think the EcoBoost / 10 speed combo is better for MY uses.

Better low end torque as @EcoBoosted pointed out. Much better then my 5.0 too.....

I've owned a Tahoe, Yukon, 2 Sierras and 2 Suburbans. And those are just the GM trucks / SUV's I've owned. Nevermind all the GM cars..... So not opposed to any make.

Regardless, yeah....I think the front is ugly in MY opinion. Also didn't say THAT was the reason I wouldn't want one.

 

[jadmt]

Who said I thought the Chevy was the right truck despite the grill? Personally I think the EcoBoost / 10 speed combo is better for MY uses.

Better low end torque as @EcoBoosted pointed out. Much better then my 5.0 too.....

I've owned a Tahoe, Yukon, 2 Sierras and 2 Suburbans. And those are just the GM trucks / SUV's I've owned. Nevermind all the cars..... So not opposed to any make.

Regardless, yeah....I think the front is ugly in MY opinion. Also didn't say THAT was the reason I wouldn't want one.

I personally have to like the looks of something, if I am going to spend my money on it, I better be able to go out in my garage or driveway and admire it. So for me that would be reason enough and that front end looks like it got hit with the ugly stick so I would not buy one. I am not brand loyal either and have owed Ford, GM (both gmc and chevy) and dodge and Ram trucks all were somewhat based on how they looked.

 

[Todd780]

I personally have to like the looks of something, if I am going to spend my money on it, I better be able to go out in my garage or driveway and admire it. So for me that would be reason enough and that front end looks like it got hit with the ugly stick so I would not buy one. I am not brand loyal either and have owed Ford, GM (both gmc and chevy) and dodge and Ram trucks all were somewhat based on how they looked.

For sure. If all other things... features, performance, pricing etc are all 'close enough' looks would play a role. Why wouldn't it? For the most part all the trucks are pretty comparable.

(As in every manufacturer is probably better than another in some area - I don't think there 1 truck that is best at everything)

Ford handles trailers better IMO. (and now offers on board scales and smart hitch) But, GM has better cameras for towing. (The see through the trailer camera mode is pretty slick!)

GM and Ram offer 4Auto on lower level trims where Ford requires Tremor or Lariat, etc.. Little things like that.

 

[phsycle]

I generally do not buy things based on commercials, but I often do not buy things based on commercials. When a company tries too hard to appeal to every segment of the population by inserting someone from every segment it is over the top lol.

Guessing you meant you do buy things based on commercials.
Anyway, function first. If it works, and fits my needs, I buy it. I won’t fault the R&D Dept for the marketing people’s failure (or success). ie I’ve bought hot pockets and meow mix. ?

 

[Todd780]

Guessing you meant you do buy things based on commercials.
Anyway, function first. If it works, and fits my needs, I buy it. I won’t fault the R&D Dept for the marketing people’s failure (or success). ie I’ve bought hot pockets and meow mix. ?

Yep. Function is good. That's why I want a canopy on the box of my truck and a box of kleenex on my dash. It would work for me. But, I've been forbidden from having either....

Also, I have that damn meow mix song stuck in my head now..... So thanks for that.

 

[john61ct]

Personally, other than powertrain strength for my use case, I would rather have million-mile reliability and a century of spares availability

than any post WW2 features

roll up windows, no aircon, no radio, no problem.

Too bad the free market does not supply such preferences.

 

[Todd780]

Personally, other than powertrain strength for my use case, I would rather have million-mile reliability and a century of spares availability

than any post WW2 features

roll up windows, no aircon, no radio, no problem.

Too bad the free market does not supply such preferences.

Lol, I think the only window failure I had was a 1977 Impala whose driver door window constantly came out of the track while being rolled up. It was a manual window.

Oh! I did have an '86 Grand Marquis who's power window conked out. After the car caught fire. For the third time.....

Okay. I did also have a '88 Jag XJ6 Sovereign with a power window issue. But... it was a Jag. So it also had many other electrical issues.

Don't recall any radio issues. Had a bunch of cars with A/C and a bunch w/out. I think 1 I had to do a recharge? Wasn't expensive either.

That being said I think Jeep still offers what you're after with the Wrangler. But I be stunned if it lasted a million miles.... My 2000 TJ was junk after 124,000 miles.

I don't think there is enough demand to support a business case for development of a new vehicle like that in the free market.

 

[phsycle]

Yeah, I don’t think roll up windows and radio would be a big concern. Even if auto windows and Navi systems crap out, you can still just keep moving along.

Bigger issue is the engine/drivetrain. Modern day emissions complicates bush mechanics.
fortunately for extreme luddites like the guy above, there are plenty of used “dead reliable” trucks around……usually in the junk yard ?

I’m all for simplicity, but old cars, even when new, had plenty of problems. And exponentially increased as they aged.

 

[skyfree]

I hope they got this version of the DSSV shocks down better than the Colorado DSSV version which is the biggest failure point of that truck.