PacerX's monthly rant....
04-23-2003, 04:43 PM
#16
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 2,612
If they didnt want people to compare the Silverado SS to the Lightning then they should not have called it the Silverado SS, period.
If I wanted everything the Silverado SS offered I would have bought a Sierra C3 last year. I could have had my mom sew "C3" on the head rests and it would have been a comparable truck. Or a denalli today, since its the same damn thing and it has the cool quadrasteer.
This truck was a perfect canidate for a name such as Silverado RS.
If I wanted everything the Silverado SS offered I would have bought a Sierra C3 last year. I could have had my mom sew "C3" on the head rests and it would have been a comparable truck. Or a denalli today, since its the same damn thing and it has the cool quadrasteer.
This truck was a perfect canidate for a name such as Silverado RS.
Last edited by Chuck!; 04-23-2003 at 04:48 PM.
04-23-2003, 05:36 PM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166
Originally posted by guionM
Talking to 2 separate GM reps over this since December, the seemingly standard issue response something like "Lightning is a limited edition truck, while the Silverado SS will be made in volumes".
Talking to 2 separate GM reps over this since December, the seemingly standard issue response something like "Lightning is a limited edition truck, while the Silverado SS will be made in volumes".
Originally posted by Chuck!
If they didnt want people to compare the Silverado SS to the Lightning then they should not have called it the Silverado SS, period.
If they didnt want people to compare the Silverado SS to the Lightning then they should not have called it the Silverado SS, period.
Silverado SS is really the only "performance" variant from GM that really irks me right now. Despite the abuse it takes here, I'd MUCH rather buy the uniquely styled, limited edition (and probably just about as fast) SSR for the same price!
04-23-2003, 05:42 PM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 6,166
Originally posted by guionM
BTW, straight from SVT's top guy, they have ALOT more they are holding back in their arsenal. I think if he has something standing by to outrun a Viper powered 500hp V10 dodge Ram SRT-10, it's safe to say that same powerplant will make shortwork of an 8.1 500hp "crate" motor Chevy "may" install someday.
That 500hp 2005 Lightning concept seems to be just the tip.
BTW, straight from SVT's top guy, they have ALOT more they are holding back in their arsenal. I think if he has something standing by to outrun a Viper powered 500hp V10 dodge Ram SRT-10, it's safe to say that same powerplant will make shortwork of an 8.1 500hp "crate" motor Chevy "may" install someday.
That 500hp 2005 Lightning concept seems to be just the tip.
04-23-2003, 06:55 PM
#19
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Originally posted by guionM
Guess all these articles are wrong then:
*"Tweaks to the spring rates, working in conjunction with Bilstein dampers, raise the SVT Lightning's payload rating by 600 lbs. to a total of 1400 lbs".
http://www.autointell-news.com/News-...e-19-02-p9.htm
http://ca.autos.yahoo.com/020618/11/n4q1.html
*"Maximum Payload: 1400 lbs".
http://edmunds.nytimes.com/new/2003/...denav..9.Ford*
*"...When it comes to towing, if that's what you think you will be doing with your SS, the 7500 pound capable Silverado outdoes the Lightning by 2500 pounds with its Z82 heavy duty trailering package, though it only beats the Lightning by 90 pounds in payload at 1490 pounds..."
http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/2003...irstlook2.html
*"Payload rating increases from 800 pounds to 1,400 pounds".
http://www.lubbockautos.com/2003newcar/lightning.shtml
*Or from SVT's own website:[I]"1350 lbs. (612 kg)".
http://www.svt.ford.com/flash/
I can't believe you of all people say it isn't fair to compare the 2 on a price basis, Mr. GTO-at-$32,000-is-overpriced/ everyone-should-buy-a-$45,000-BMW-instead.
What you have accidently done is make a case against the SS. Lightnings offer a truly unique and special truck, with actual performance pieces (and it still is fully loaded, so we aren't comparing a loaded SS to a stripped Lightning by far!). SS is nothing other than a bumper, and a few labels. A comparable regular cab Silverado 2500 LT is about $28-30,000 (and it is faster than the SS due to lighter weight), and an extended cab version runs no more than $35,000. Again, if anyone wants to pay $5,000 for decals and a valence panel, go ahead.
Dealer mark-up is irrevelent. I using MSRP whenever I compare vehicles. There's always someone who claims their uncle so-and-so, or their best friend cut them a deal, or that they haggled the dealer down to below sticker. Dealer markups (or downs) have nothing to do with the company's price. You aren't the only one who refered to markups on price when comparing vehicles.
The end result is it's all a matter of taste. If you bought a Mercury Maurader because you liked the looks, wanted comfort, and didn't mind having a "sports" sedan that could be whipped by a Nissan family sedan, then you will be perfectly happy with a extended cab, AWD "SS" pickup truck that not only will be humiliated by Ford's far cheaper Lightning, but will be beated by regular cab, even cheaper Chevy 2500 LS Pickups as well.
We both agree on not liking the SS pickup. I think Chevrolet once again is using a label and a plastic piece or two to jack up the price of something you can get for far cheaper with no performance penality.
Remember in the 1970s when everyone else competed with the Pontiac Trans Am by sticking tape & labels to "performance cars", and charging quite a bit more than the same cars without? This is the exact same thing.
[/B]
Guess all these articles are wrong then:
*"Tweaks to the spring rates, working in conjunction with Bilstein dampers, raise the SVT Lightning's payload rating by 600 lbs. to a total of 1400 lbs".
http://www.autointell-news.com/News-...e-19-02-p9.htm
http://ca.autos.yahoo.com/020618/11/n4q1.html
*"Maximum Payload: 1400 lbs".
http://edmunds.nytimes.com/new/2003/...denav..9.Ford*
*"...When it comes to towing, if that's what you think you will be doing with your SS, the 7500 pound capable Silverado outdoes the Lightning by 2500 pounds with its Z82 heavy duty trailering package, though it only beats the Lightning by 90 pounds in payload at 1490 pounds..."
http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/2003...irstlook2.html
*"Payload rating increases from 800 pounds to 1,400 pounds".
http://www.lubbockautos.com/2003newcar/lightning.shtml
*Or from SVT's own website:[I]"1350 lbs. (612 kg)".
http://www.svt.ford.com/flash/
I can't believe you of all people say it isn't fair to compare the 2 on a price basis, Mr. GTO-at-$32,000-is-overpriced/ everyone-should-buy-a-$45,000-BMW-instead.
What you have accidently done is make a case against the SS. Lightnings offer a truly unique and special truck, with actual performance pieces (and it still is fully loaded, so we aren't comparing a loaded SS to a stripped Lightning by far!). SS is nothing other than a bumper, and a few labels. A comparable regular cab Silverado 2500 LT is about $28-30,000 (and it is faster than the SS due to lighter weight), and an extended cab version runs no more than $35,000. Again, if anyone wants to pay $5,000 for decals and a valence panel, go ahead.
Dealer mark-up is irrevelent. I using MSRP whenever I compare vehicles. There's always someone who claims their uncle so-and-so, or their best friend cut them a deal, or that they haggled the dealer down to below sticker. Dealer markups (or downs) have nothing to do with the company's price. You aren't the only one who refered to markups on price when comparing vehicles.
The end result is it's all a matter of taste. If you bought a Mercury Maurader because you liked the looks, wanted comfort, and didn't mind having a "sports" sedan that could be whipped by a Nissan family sedan, then you will be perfectly happy with a extended cab, AWD "SS" pickup truck that not only will be humiliated by Ford's far cheaper Lightning, but will be beated by regular cab, even cheaper Chevy 2500 LS Pickups as well.
We both agree on not liking the SS pickup. I think Chevrolet once again is using a label and a plastic piece or two to jack up the price of something you can get for far cheaper with no performance penality.
Remember in the 1970s when everyone else competed with the Pontiac Trans Am by sticking tape & labels to "performance cars", and charging quite a bit more than the same cars without? This is the exact same thing.
[/B]
2. Dealer mark-up is never irrelevent, at least for the person shelling out the cash. The $40,000 Silverado SS should be obtainable with a discount of at least $8,000 ($3000 rebate + $5,000 mark-up). The $32-33,000 SVT Lighting typically wasn't discounted. By that real world measure, the high-content Silverado isn't that expensive to buy.
The SVT Lightning is also a lame-duck model. Unless you're shopping for a Ram SRT-10, the Chevy is the only show in town.
3. It isn't cheaper to "built your own" regular cab Silverado SS. You mentioned a regular cab Silverado 2500 LT. That configuration is only available on a 2500HD 4x4 long box - not too sporty! After you're done buying 20" inch rims and suitable performance upgrades you won't be saving money. And I seriously doubt you'll have a superior vehicle
4. Thanks for bringing up the Marauder, a vehicle the Silverado SS could seriously beat. The extended cab SS is a vehicle that offers reasonable performance, with a package you can actually live with. As much as I'm a pickup hater, I can see why someone would buy one.
On the other hand, the Lightning was limited by 2wd and no rear accomodations. Besides, a low riding, short box truck - no matter how dressed up - screams "base." The truck market has moved on to extended and crew cabs. Nissan doesn't even see the need to introduce a regular cab Titan. Chevy's just giving the people what they want with the SS. When you consider that 0-60 times nearly match the Mercedes ML55 AMG, so even the acceleration isn't too shabby for a truck.
If we have reason to complain, its because trucks have become expensive. More than that, they are no longer pick-and-choose-the-options vehicles. Packages have replaced the infinite choices of yesteryear's option sheet. Despite all of that, I'll give this SS the benefit of the doubt. Sure, I'd wish for a 6.0 liter Tahoe, but what we're getting isn't that bad.
The SVT Lightning never tempted me, but there is a very slim chance the Silverado SS might. That's something, especially coming from a pick-up hater.
04-23-2003, 07:37 PM
#20
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mich.
Posts: 562
I really dont see why and how anyone would compare the L to the SS.The real comparo here is the Harley 150.Which is still cheaper and faster.This is also a real ball buster.If you take out the engine it blows the SS away in sheer looks alone inside and out.But the S/C'ed engine beats the SS by 1/2 a second which isnt a comparison at all.They sell quite well too.
The comment of the L being only a 1/4 mile wonder isnt all it does.You must not have read how well it does in autoX.
There is a SS sitting on a lot here that hasnt moved in over 2 weeks.Literally.
The comment of the L being only a 1/4 mile wonder isnt all it does.You must not have read how well it does in autoX.
There is a SS sitting on a lot here that hasnt moved in over 2 weeks.Literally.
04-23-2003, 08:38 PM
#21
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Originally posted by guess who
I really dont see why and how anyone would compare the L to the SS.The real comparo here is the Harley 150.Which is still cheaper and faster.This is also a real ball buster.If you take out the engine it blows the SS away in sheer looks alone inside and out.But the S/C'ed engine beats the SS by 1/2 a second which isnt a comparison at all.They sell quite well too.
The comment of the L being only a 1/4 mile wonder isnt all it does.You must not have read how well it does in autoX.
There is a SS sitting on a lot here that hasnt moved in over 2 weeks.Literally.
I really dont see why and how anyone would compare the L to the SS.The real comparo here is the Harley 150.Which is still cheaper and faster.This is also a real ball buster.If you take out the engine it blows the SS away in sheer looks alone inside and out.But the S/C'ed engine beats the SS by 1/2 a second which isnt a comparison at all.They sell quite well too.
The comment of the L being only a 1/4 mile wonder isnt all it does.You must not have read how well it does in autoX.
There is a SS sitting on a lot here that hasnt moved in over 2 weeks.Literally.
Of course, the Harley Davidson F-150 is 2WD only, making it just about as helpless in snow as the Cobra. Taking into account the less than $3,000 price difference, the AWD Silverado SS still doesn't loose out. However, I do have to wonder why we aren't seeing an Avalanche SS instead.
04-23-2003, 08:56 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 2,612
04-23-2003, 09:23 PM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,873
Originally posted by redzed
1. I don't care what "articles" say, the Lightning is not a 3/4 ton truck by the one objective measure that matters - the EPA.
You mean the same organization that considers the neon based PT-Cruiser to be a TRUCK? If I were buying it, PAYLOAD would be what mattered to me.
1. I don't care what "articles" say, the Lightning is not a 3/4 ton truck by the one objective measure that matters - the EPA.
You mean the same organization that considers the neon based PT-Cruiser to be a TRUCK? If I were buying it, PAYLOAD would be what mattered to me.
04-23-2003, 09:54 PM
#24
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Golden State
Posts: 13,711
Originally posted by Chuck!
Lightning in action, not at the strip
That's good enough for me to consider it a 3/4th ton
Lightning in action, not at the strip
That's good enough for me to consider it a 3/4th ton
EPA doesn't consider what's a 3/4 ton truck, the manufacturer does. The concern the EPA has regarding trucks is how it plays into mileage standards. If a vehicle (truck or otherwise) is produced under a certain quanity (the 5-7500 unit annually is well below that level) it's immune from mileage standards. BTW: EPA rates the Silverado SS at 12 & 16 mpg respectively, so they do rate all passenger trucks fuel economy.
As to the rest of your response, i'll just say this again and leave it at that:
Originally posted by guionM
...A comparable regular cab Silverado 2500 LT is about $28-30,000 (and it is faster than the SS due to lighter weight), and an extended cab version runs no more than $35,000. Again if anyone wants to pay $5,000 for decals and a valence panel, go ahead.
Dealer mark-up is irrevelent. I using MSRP whenever I compare vehicles. There's always someone who claims their uncle so-and-so, or their best friend cut them a deal, or that they haggled the dealer down to below sticker. Dealer markups (or downs) have nothing to do with the company's price.
The end result is it's all a matter of taste. If you bought a Mercury Maurader because you liked the looks, wanted comfort, and didn't mind having a "sports" sedan that could be whipped by a Nissan family sedan, then you will be perfectly happy with a extended cab, AWD "SS" pickup truck that not only will be humiliated by Ford's far cheaper Lightning, but will be beated by regular cab, even cheaper Chevy 2500 LS Pickups as well.
...A comparable regular cab Silverado 2500 LT is about $28-30,000 (and it is faster than the SS due to lighter weight), and an extended cab version runs no more than $35,000. Again if anyone wants to pay $5,000 for decals and a valence panel, go ahead.
Dealer mark-up is irrevelent. I using MSRP whenever I compare vehicles. There's always someone who claims their uncle so-and-so, or their best friend cut them a deal, or that they haggled the dealer down to below sticker. Dealer markups (or downs) have nothing to do with the company's price.
The end result is it's all a matter of taste. If you bought a Mercury Maurader because you liked the looks, wanted comfort, and didn't mind having a "sports" sedan that could be whipped by a Nissan family sedan, then you will be perfectly happy with a extended cab, AWD "SS" pickup truck that not only will be humiliated by Ford's far cheaper Lightning, but will be beated by regular cab, even cheaper Chevy 2500 LS Pickups as well.
Last edited by guionM; 04-24-2003 at 09:02 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post