Would you trade your glamour truck for a brand new Chevy?

[57taskforce]

Originally Posted by 67ChevyRedneck

RIGHT??? I thought the 2014/15's were the best looking truck since the 2002s, not a fan of the 2016 refresh, but it's OK looking with the right trim, but the 2019... what... the...

At least the GMC is tolerable. If something happened to my 2015 today, I would get enough insurance $ (paid the truck off a couple years ago) I'd probably look at a brand new GMC over a 2014/15 someone else probably beat the snot out of.

The Sierra is MUCH better looking, and I actually kinda like it. Why they failed so hard on the Silverado... I have YET to see one driving around and they've been out for a couple months now.

funny I’m the opposite that gmc isn’t my favorite, the Silverado is tolerable. To me the gmc seems like it could of been a RAM concept or something. There’s some of the new ones running around here and they will definitely take some getting used to for sure. I guess I kinda feel the same way about them as I did the 07-13 trucks... just not my cup of tea inside and out. The 14-18 trucks are pretty decent looking, my company truck is an ‘18 Sierra.

[Stocker]

Originally Posted by ubtripn

the new technology is amazing in what the new one's can do but there is far too much more that can break.

Yes, more complexity = more potential problems. Looking back a few decades, I recall thinking the same about frivolities like power steering, power windows, air conditioning.... and slightly later, catalytic converters (in fact, any pollution control devices / systems) and probably a few other things.

Hopefully, today's 'new stuff' will eventually prove to be reliable enough to be accepted by the skeptics. I am including myself.

[Andy4639]

Originally Posted by Stocker

Yes, more complexity = more potential problems. Looking back a few decades, I recall thinking the same about frivolities like power steering, power windows, air conditioning.... and slightly later, catalytic converters (in fact, any pollution control devices / systems) and probably a few other things.

Hopefully, today's 'new stuff' will eventually prove to be reliable enough to be accepted by the skeptics. I am including myself.

I have over 120,000 miles on both my newer vehicles. Not one thing done to the Tahoe are the Traverse other than oil changes.

My daughters 2000 S 10 has 250,000 on it.
The S 10 has had a few things done but it has served us well. Nothing major. All of them are stock.

[davepl]

Originally Posted by Stocker

Yes, more complexity = more potential problems. Looking back a few decades, I recall thinking the same about frivolities like power steering, power windows, air conditioning.... and slightly later, catalytic converters (in fact, any pollution control devices / systems) and probably a few other things.

Hopefully, today's 'new stuff' will eventually prove to be reliable enough to be accepted by the skeptics. I am including myself.

Thing is the new stuff in trucks is SO much more reliable than the old trucks that even with 10X as many things to go wrong, they're still more reliable.

What's about the worst you could get for a truck, a 77 half ton (no offense to those who love those, I mean mechanically from GM)? It's a very simple truck with very few parts and features, but it's just not a very reliable vehicle.

Think of a Rolex and how complicated it is, yet properly designed, they run for decades until parts wear out completely (yes, you're supposed to service them).

I've got old trucks, my favorite being my '70 2500. And I've got a new Tahoe, a new Escalade, and a new 1500. They're very different. I love the '70 more than all of them of course but if I had to get somewhere an get there reliably, I'm taking the Escalade.

[ubtripn]

Wow-that seems so wrong to me. Cylinders working twice as hard, turbos to break but if you can have good mileage AND power what more could ya want.

[weq92f]

Yeah here's the specs:

2.7 L I-4 mated to 8-speed auto
310HP @5600 rpm
348LB/FT @1500-4000
MPG: 20/23

GM notes that the vast majority of these trucks will be sold with a v8.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/chevr...erado-engines/

Originally Posted by ubtripn

Wow-that seems so wrong to me. Cylinders working twice as hard, turbos to break but if you can have good mileage AND power what more could ya want.

[Mudder]

I had a chance to do an even up a few years back. You know what I told hm? Your crazy for offering and I'm crazy for not taking the offer.

[oldgold70c10]

I am in the no camp. My 78 fulfills all my newer vehicle requirements, even though I am constantly lamenting that it is not a simalarly equipped 67-72.
Even though it is still an old, 'easy to work on' carbed 70's truck, it has too many of the features that drew me to the 67-72's. The interior and dash is built much like my Malibu, and everything is less accessible than the 67-72. And the noticeably less rugged interior irritates me too. A brand new truck would drive me right up the wall. I like my old trucks and will continue to drive them as long as gas is there to burn

[chevy71super]

Its a difficult question to answer. My initial thought is why trade an appreciating asset for a depreciating asset? Thinking it through if someone wanted to trade a $60,000 truck I could immediately sell for $50,000 for a truck worth $35,000 I would probably do it and look for another one to rebuild.

This thread got me thinking of the escalating cost of new trucks. My personal experience on the trucks I have purchased:

1979 Silverado Short Box 4 x 4 - loaded $10,500 MSRP

1985 GMC Sierra Classic Short Box 4 x 4 - loaded $15,300 MSRP

2003 Silverado SS Short Box AWD - loaded $38,500 MSRP

Each one is more advanced than the previous (well maybe not the GMC, it had a 305 . . .) but I am willing to bet the cost increase is outpacing the increase in the average wage.

[ls1nova71]

I think its funny how many people on this thread say they are "anti-new tech", while typing that into their computer........

That said, I'd probably trade my rusty old '71 for a new one straight across, but only because it would be financially stupid not to. but, since that will never happen, I will keep driving it, and as to what others have said about old vehicles not being reliable enough to drive across country, I wouldn't hesitate to hop in mine and drive it anywhere, of course it does have a newer engine and trans, so that helps.

[ubtripn]

That is ionic =) However I am not anti-tech, just anti-extra tech for the wrong reasons in vehicles. When people look at my engine they are almost always amazed at the simplicity. Some of the new tech is worth it like HEI, injection, etc but smog stuff and tons of extra parts are just extra points of potential failure to me. One truck I owned had 7 circuit boards and just on the boards there are a thousand ways to fail. I guess I just don't like opening a hood that is shaped to conform with a gigantic bundles of hoses, wires and parts. I bought my 68 because i consider it the peak of truck design. The new ones will stop shorter, pull more, etc but I will never sell my 68.

[elorenzof]

We have em both and are happy with them both!

[71meangreenc10]

Technology is great until it leaves you waiting for a tow because your Key Fob will not communicate with the vehicle. (Yep, my friends 16 just did that, and I will leave the MSRP out of the discussion) I had a 99 Yukon that left me stranded when the security system went. Everything can fail, it is only a matter of time. If you maintain your vehicles you "should" (key word)...be ok. I have driven my old GMC across the country and if needed, will do it again. But for S&G's I would be a Maybe for the original question...

Smitty

[Ironangel]

Originally Posted by ubtripn

A funny thing happened yesterday, I saw a brand new 4 wheel drive Chevy that was almost taller than me with a stock suspension. It was orange like my 68 two wheel drive and I was just looking at it. A salesman came up and started trying to sell it to me. I told him that I built the Chevy I was driving expressly to NOT have computers, thin metal and simulated chrome etc.. I wanted a simple, dependable, easy to work on, all metal truck. (I should have taken a photo side by side because wow have trucks changed as you all know) but I realized at that moment that I would not even trade straight across much less pay 50-60K for a truck. It seems unreasonable but I wouldn't. I built my Chevy to drive and I drive it. And they are hard to find this day in age. Now maybe if I was rich then I would have both but....would you trade yours for a brand new version?

Exactly my reasoning and thoughts! Although one of my 72's is for sale, I would only trade it for a full dressed Indian Chieftain...

[Troy Sr]

Sorry to say this but I just sold my '72 C20 Camper Special to buy a Mustang for my wife. She's wanted one since high school!! I sure miss it, every time I want to do something that needs a truck I go ahhh Sh%T!!!!

[67ChevyRedneck]

I'd also like to add, there is no way I would keep the brand new one. I LOVE the styling of my 2015.



WTH happened to the 2019s???

[ubtripn]

Ok, to refine the question a bit. Would you trade your restored truck straight across for a new one that you have to drive? (Can't sell.)

[morepwr]

Originally Posted by ubtripn

Ok, to refine the question a bit. Would you trade your restored truck straight across for a new one that you have to drive? (Can't sell.)

Nope.

[chevy71super]

The answer is no.

[ubtripn]

Thank you all for your opinions, once in a while somebody makes an offer and I have to go through the whole thing and shore myself up to say no again. I know it's just a truck but I'm nostalgic, I will drive her to the end.

[Mike C]

If you take the money out of the equation, I see no reason to swap my old vehicle(s) for a new one. I have an '02 GMC Duramax that I sold my old '70 C2500 Sierra Grande to buy. And I miss that truck. But it was the right thing to do at the time. (Dog, wife, new baby: I'm a dog-in-the-truck guy and we didn't all fit.). The Duramax still pulls yeoman duty for whatever I need. It was expensive at $29,927 used (18 months old, 18,000 miles with a sticker of $42,500) but it's been a good truck, mostly reliable. (1 set of injectors: cost more than $3000 with me doing all the labor...) But it's 16 years old now (17 model years) and coincidentally, at 16 years of age is when I got my Jimmy from my Dad.

Personally, I think the new trucks are absolutely atrocious looking. So yes, I'd swap my old one to sell the more expensive one, then I'd buy more old ones. But without the money aspect, no. I have zero interest in a giant plastic truck you have to put 6" of lift on to run 33" tires.

[IronX]

No, and if you look closely at the new ones they are trying to bring back the body style of the old ones. Keep it simple stupid and you won’t be sorry, nice pics man
Posted via Mobile Device

[CastIron]

I commented earlier on the first page that I wouldn't trade because of the simplicity of the older trucks. I want to expand on that a little. I don't mind newer vehicles. They are safer, have good power stock, get better mileage and are generally more refined that our old trucks. But they are much more complicated when they do break, and it's very possible they could break. Our old trucks are very easy to make reliable and more refined, and still easy to fix if something happens. I did some minor upgrades/improvements on mine, such as adding power steering, front sway bar, 3 point seat belts, HEI, and a higher output alternator. I'm still in the slow process of improving it, but at some point I plan on taking it on longer road trips. I'll carry just a few basic tools and won't stress about it breaking down. And if it does break, I won't have to pay somebody to fix it. I will just do it myself.
On a side note, I never actually pay people to fix my cars. I fix cars for a living and know how to work on new cars. Even with that, I prefer the old trucks to the new ones.

[clear-lake-gmc]

i have a 2011 gmc sierra slt extended cab 4x4 and LOVE it, not overly complicated like newer models no big screen in the dash etc buuuut if i had my 71 gmc with that same engine trans and fuel economy thats the only truck id have

[ubtripn]

Designers must to be bold, sometimes they hit it and others...well we get a confused vision. Remember back in 94 or 95? when Dodge introduced the nose that resembled big rigs, everybody jumped on that train. I would love a 68 update like they have done with the Camero's. That would fit the bill. That line that runs all the way down the side then slopes down as the bed continues straight. One of the best designs I have seen plus the front clip simplicity and shape of the cab. Simplicity and beauty.