Silverado Bed Length

- 03.41

Amazon.com: Rightline Gear 110750 Full-Size Short Truck Bed Tent ...
photo src: www.amazon.com


Ram 1500 - TruckBedSizes.com
photo src: www.truckbedsizes.com


Maps, Directions, and Place Reviews



Bed Lengths

Silverado/ Sierra has 3 bed lengths. Short Bed= 69.3"/5.775', Standard Bed= 78.7"/6.5583', and Long Bed= 97.6"/ 8.1333' 1500 models Reg Cab 2wd has Standard Bed and Long Bed models Ext Cab 2wd has Short, Standard, and Long Bed Models Crew Cab 2wd (1500hd) has short and standard bed models

Reg Cab 4wd has Standard and Long Bed models Ext Cab 4wd has all three Crew Cab 4wd has short and standard bed models

Wheel Bases 1500 models 119" Reg cab Standard Box 133" Reg cab Long Box 133.9 Ext Cab Short Box 143.5 Ext cab standard box and crew cab Short Box 157.5 Ext Cab Long box

I know this will help out with specs. All this infromation was researched and measured myself for a company that uses specs for collision repair. I know most editors will want a link for this info. I mainly used www.chevy.com and used the "build your own truck link" 70.184.211.68 (talk) 17:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)



You think that is bad check out the Toyota Corolla wiki site. All the engine specs and everything else. I know now what color of the of toliet paper used to put it together70.184.211.68 (talk) 17:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


Silverado Bed Length Video



Weight

It would be of interest if all tables also had the empty weight, max gross weight and max towing weight. --Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanbrowne (talk o contribs) 17:05, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


Tundra - TruckBedSizes.com
photo src: www.truckbedsizes.com


Bed lengths

Can anybody add the lengths of the beds of the various Silverado models?


body-book-page-151.jpg
photo src: brochures.slosh.com


Merge or split

There has been a suggestion to split the GMC Sierra content from this Chevrolet Silverado page. I suggest leaving them merged in this article for the following reasons:

  • There are virtually no differences in specification or equipment between the two models. Compare GMC.com with Chevrolet.com and see for yourself. Or ask Edmunds.
  • There are no differences in introduction schedules or other facts which would cause confusion.
  • The Chevrolet handily outsells the GMC, so this is clearly the "master" vehicle for the other to be redirected into.
  • This same argument has been made repeatedly for other car models. See the Chevrolet Lumina APV et al for a family that (barely) had enough differences to be split.

Since the suggestion has been made, let's discuss it here before proceeding. --SFoskett 04:41, 6 February 2006 (UTC)


Ram 2500 - TruckBedSizes.com
photo src: www.truckbedsizes.com


Reason for split

The GMC Sierra has existed for quite a few years as its own vehicle, called the GMC Sierra. Formerly, the Silverado was just a trim package on the GMC Sierra. However, in 1999, Chevrolet decided to start manufacturing its own vehicle, called the Chevrolet Silverado. Now, I know these cars pretty well, I've ridden in both and have looked at the cars, both online and in person. I know that, for all intents and purposes, they are the same truck. However, this similarity has only come about recently (1999-present) and is still only a similarity. The fact of the matter is, the GMC Sierra has been in production for years before the Chevrolet Silverado has been in production, and they are still separate vehicles. Having them listed the way it is listed now is misleading to someone looking up the car and might lead them to believe that the Sierra is just another name for the Silverado.
Also, how can the history of the Sierra be listed in the Silverado article if they are in the same article? Furthermore, what if any future discrepancies between the cars come about. It would not be beyond GM to do that.
There needs to be separate articles for the GMC Sierra and the Chevrolet Silverado. Any questions, feel free to message me.
-Mtz1031


Just a note that at least for the past several years both of the vehicles are made in the same factory, on the same assembly line from identical frames and bodies. Almost all of the parts are identical. Peyna 04:04, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

The major argument I could see that would justify a split is the difference of models offered by Chevrolet and GMC (namely the the SS and Denali models). The standard model Silverado and Sierra are similar, except for the sheet metal changes brought on in 1999 which made the visual change between the two pickups more than just an emblem. However, a GMC Sierra Denali is not offered on the Silverado platform, nor is a Chevrolet Silverado SS offered on a Sierra platform. This is a major difference in both brands, and it is not identified prominently enough on this page. If a split is not in the works, then some further explanation (and possibly some more images) are needed to differentiate these two brands. I think a possible GMC Sierra section should at the very least be added to note the difference between these two brands. --HumanZoom 08:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)


body-book-page-149.jpg
photo src: brochures.slosh.com


Future Auto Tag

The GMT 900 trucks have not been released yet, and as far as I know is still subject to have model changes until it is officially released (hence the future auto tag that specifies that this part of the article "is likely to contain information of a speculative nature"). Please discuss before removing the tag again. -HumanZoom 06:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC)


Silverado Extended Cab vs Silverado Crew Cab - Davis Chevrolet ...
photo src: news.davischevrolet.com


Reason for a split

With the upcoming releease of the GMT900 line of trucks, the exteriors and interiors of both trucks will look completly different. Also, some features may be diferent beteen the two vehicles. When more information is released, I suggest this be split into two seperate articles.

P.S. I don't think the Denali line is mentioned in this if this is a Silverado/Sierra article.


body-book-page-167.jpg
photo src: brochures.slosh.com


Removal of Marketing

While it now has its own section, does it really need to be included at all in this article? I thought the purpose of this page was to talk about the truck itself and not how GM markets it. My other reason for removal is the potential of controversy arrising from this subject. This is the second time I've had to clean up this section and I assume it won't be the last.

I would suggest to merge it into another, more relivant article, but I can't find one. I vote to remove it completely unless there are some major objections. -HumanZoom 05:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


2012 Chevrolet Silverado Reviews and Rating | Motor Trend
photo src: www.motortrend.com


YouTube Links

I have removed both YouTube links as references from this page. Luckly, one of the links already had another reference that supported the same information. However, the other link did not and I have therefore added a {{fact}} tag. While, it is not official Wikipedia policy to disallow the use of YouTube videos as references, it is suggested that these videos do not break copyright law. Both links were videos of obviously copyrighted material, so I had them removed. -HumanZoom 20:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


body-book-page-165.jpg
photo src: brochures.slosh.com


Infobox clutter

OK, the assortment of different lengths and heights in the infoboxes is a bit ridiculous. Either someone pick out select values or annotate them with the models they correspond to, or I'll just condense them into a range. --Vossanova o< 21:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Reviews and Rating | Motor Trend
photo src: www.motortrend.com


What happened to....

the picture of the white 2007 Silverado Shortbed Z71 that was here? If you dont want to post it with the article, could you please add it to Wikimedia Commons? --Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.221.10.186 (talk) 05:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


2016 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Reviews and Rating | Motor Trend
photo src: www.motortrend.com


Truckin' magazine 2007 Truck of the Year

The Silverado did not win this award. Actually the Toyota Tundra did

http://www.truckinweb.com/features/0613tr_top_10_trucks_2006/index.html

The very first line on the page, "2007 Truck & SUV Of The Year" The very last sentance on the page "The Tundra wins our Truck of the Year Award."

Because of this I'm removing that information from wikipedia.


SilveradoSierra.com • How to build a under seat storage box : How ...
photo src: www.silveradosierra.com


Chart at bottom doesn't show correct production date

I think the Silverado was introduced in '88. I hesitate to make the change because I do not know if the c/k line continued at the same time. Steveandaugie (talk) 20:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


2012 Ram 1500 Reviews and Rating | Motor Trend
photo src: www.motortrend.com


USA

You need to not add USA to every city name. I'm pretty sure that is counter to policy as those cities are already wikilinked and internationally known (again, there is no other Flint, Michigan.) This isn't my opinion, this is pretty much established for every single article on Wikipedia: You don't need to add USA if the city is well known. PHARMBOY (TALK) 21:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

    • Yes. The wp:manual of style clearly states that you should never use USA anyway, ie: U.S.A. and USA are not used unless quoted or as part of a proper name (Team USA). Also, the Wikilinks themselves do not have USA. It is an American owned company, it is normal to assume locations are in the United States unless otherwise indicated, as is the case with the Mexico link. Also, try looking at virtually every other article on Wikipedia. This is the standard, you are the one trying to come up with a new policy. PHARMBOY (TALK) 21:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
    • You are trying to change how everyone on wikipedia does cities, all by yourself. As a side note to answer you question that has no bearing here, if you said that a car was built in Paris, then I would know it is in France (note that the article isn't Paris, France, which is a redirect. If it was built in Paris, Texas, then you would see that Texas is in the title. This is normal convention here. This is why the articles are named as they are. PHARMBOY (TALK) 21:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


Please state the policy that indicates you should put USA on every city. I have shown you the policy that says you never use that abbreviation anyway. PHARMBOY (TALK) 21:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

And it is NOT normal to assume locations are in the United States, nowadays cars are assembled in various places ---- Typ932T | C  21:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

keep it civil, please. This discussion needs to be taken to Template_talk:Infobox_Automobile since it involves all vehicle articles.--Flash176 (talk) 21:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed on the civility request. I would also ask for a link to the policy that states that country names shouldn't be included.  Frank  |  talk  21:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

  • I have already given the exact policy that says you never use USA above, wp:mos. This may be why I am getting testy. And this isn't about Automobiles, it is about general policy at Wikipedia. And you you really think we should go into every article and add United States to every city/state? Why would autos be different than any other product? We don't add the name of the country to every city in any article, we only do where it is needed to prevent confusion. There is no confusion about Flint, Michigan. If there was, then the Flint article would be named Flint, Michigan, United States PHARMBOY (TALK) 21:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Note Wikipedia:NC:CITY also indicates that you only use country name when there isn't a secondary geographic area, ie: for countries without subdivided states. This means you never add United States unless there is a specific reason it is needed to prevent confusion. PHARMBOY (TALK) 21:59, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
So we should go and clean most of city articles ? give me a break... ---- Typ932T | C  22:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
read the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(settlements), its only for article names ---- Typ932T | C  22:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

close


body-book-page-166.jpg
photo src: brochures.slosh.com


GMT900HD

i see information on the GMT800 HD is here but nothing much of anything for the GMT900HDs, which just recently got a chassis redesign and some minor exterior changes close --Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.17.201.146 (talk) 21:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)




Outdated and inconsistent information

This page seems to be at least 2-3 years out of date, but the text often does not indicate which year it applies to.

Terms such as "light-duty", "heavy-duty", "half ton", "3/4 ton" , etc are used variously with no way to determine which models fall into which category in most instances. peter (talk) 00:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Source of the article : Wikipedia



EmoticonEmoticon

 

Start typing and press Enter to search