Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    General Motors Having A Tough Time Keeping Up With Their Popular Truck Orders

    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    October 1, 2013

    2013 has been the year of the pickup truck with sales reaching levels that haven't been seen since the recession. If you're a truck manufacturer, the last thing you want to have happen is a hiccup when you're launching a new pickup. Unfortunately that is happening with General Motors.

    According to Bloomberg, General Motors is facing a shortage of the 5.3L V8 for the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra due to a unnamed supplier not being able to keep up with demand. This is causing GM to restrict the number of V8 pickups that Chevrolet and GMC dealers can order.

    Now General Motors is saying this is a temporary thing, but doesn't give a range of when they should be back to normal. This is a critical time since just over the horizon is the new Ford F-150.

    Source: Bloomberg

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at [email protected] or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    While this sucks, it is also a good thing for GM as it shows people realize they are building quality products and are demanding a quality American made, American Company products.

    Yes I know NAFTA means these get build in Canada, US and Mexico. But still North American Made and US headquarter company.

    Very happy they are having strong demand. Keep it up GM.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    From other places I've been reading this article at, some feel this is a way for GM to force dealers to order the 4.3L V6 EcoTec engine. It appears many dealers are focusing only on the 5.3L V8 EcoTec engine for their trucks, leaving the V6 for the base, regular cab, 2WD work-truck models. As one dealer posted, they had an allocation for 10 Silverado Crew Cabs but could only order 8 of them with the V8. Seems GM wants the dealers to start ordering more crew & double cab models with the new V6.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I know everyone is all hot to trot for a powerful V6, but I am not sold that the V6 will truly last and not be an ugly eye sore on companies over the long haul. It will be interesting to see how these V6 hold up and the residual value they have after 2 and 4 yrs.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Quite honestly, the V6 should suffice many of the buyers out there that are replacing their CUV or sedan with the pickup aas their daily driver. The V8 is really needed for the person that will be hauling loads and towing trailers (need the extra torque and HP from a V8). Look at how many Ecoboost V6 F150s are being sold the past two years as proof that people will buy a double or crew cab 4WD pickup with a V6 engine! Personally I would not give up the opportunity to own a V8 powered pickup, but I am interested in test driving a new Sierra with the 4.3L V6 EcoTec engine out of curiousity.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It was so understressed it was, like, indestructible. For a reg cab shortbed, 300+ horsepower would do just fine. My '07 Sierra with 5.3 was rated at 315 hp... barely a tick above the new 4.3.

    Although this new 4.3 is fantastic... I do agree with dfelt in that resale value will likely, as a percentage, be lower for the 6 cylinder than the V8.

    And GMTG74... although I'd hate to think that after they spent the development dollars on the new 6, you might be not far from the truth. I'd be interested in seeing what CUSTOMERS are factory ordering, as opposed to dealers, for GM, and for Dodge and Ford, all with updated, high-hp base sixes.

    Edited by ocnblu
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The old 4.3, while no powerhouse, did just fine on reliability thanks.

    GMT800 had the LS5.3 making 285 hp with a little over 300 lb-ft of torque. This 4.3 will match those ratings with a better fuel economy.

    If I was in a market for a truck with no need for towing capabilities with occasional heavy lifting needs, I would go with the single cab V6 with Z71 package.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Isn't this "oh we're having trouble with V8 powered truck dealer orders" a (perhaps CAFE-induced) way to shove V6 models into dealer lots? I mean, irrespective of the V6's qualities dealers will have a tendency to boast the 2 extra cylinders to prospective costumers and they'll order from GM accordingly.

    This reminds me of how different the car shopping experience is in the US, it seems, when compared to Europe: over here we usually spec our cars and then go to a dealer, or go to a dealer and spec the cars withthe salesperson. Most of us when buying new will order the car to the desired spec and wait for it. In the US it seems like much more of going to the dealer who has a fairly large inventory sitting there and one just picks; very supermarket-like...

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Yes, mostly in US, a customer waiting to buy what he wants is outnumbered by a customer who kicks the tires and purchases the vehicle the same day.

    There are many things that contribute to it. But it certainly changes the dynamics for equipments such as manual transmissions, or engine choices, or handling packages, or special order featues for the lot ready vehicles. In someway it is a gamble for both the companies and dealers to suffice such environment.

    There are times when dealers ask you to make a deposit to ensure a car is brought on the lot for a "test drive".

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I'm pulling back hard on spending. My vehicles are weeks (300c) or months (Avalanche) from being paid off. The LLC that owns C&G got some new contracts recently and I'm going to be writing off every last thing I can. Both of us may be putting a lot of expensable miles on soon and we might find a cheap EV lease to take advantage of the situation and keep the miles off the ICE vehicles.
    • All of that waste is reprocessable back into fuel again, but due to outdated regulations and fear mongering dating back to the 1970s, it is only waste because we say it is waste.  Breeder reactors can extract additional energy out of those nuclear byproducts and turn it back into useable fuel in another type of reactor.  The only reason we don't do that is because it could be used to make bomb quality isotopes.  But if WE are the ones doing it, why are we afraid we might accidentally make the bomb isotopes? The remaining radioactive material left over from those next two steps in the process, if we got out of our own way and did them, would condense the entire container seen above down to a relatively benign thimble size. 
    • Scary times ahead folks, watch your spending, debt load and be cautious as we are in for a crazy 4 years. 'Flashing a warning': Economist says Trump's plans leading to 'a terrible outcome'
    • Considering the number of folks that have had their life cut short in Hanford here due to what was supposed to be storage for life of radioactive Liquid, I would say this will fail and contaminate the earth, animals or humans in a new and destructive way. Honestly, I remember this from the news and the science behind it that it is the best way to store Nuclear waste, as a glass solid and then put it into an underground bunker like the old salt mines in the SW. SRS - Programs - Waste Solidification QUOTE: The largest radioactive waste glassification plant in the world, DWPF converts the high-level liquid nuclear waste currently stored at the Savannah River Site (SRS) into a solid glass form suitable for long-term storage and disposal. Scientists have long considered this glassification process, called “vitrification,” as the preferred option for immobilizing high-level radioactive liquids into a more stable, manageable form until a federal repository is ready.
    • ummmm yeah... Deep geological disposal... Away from where humans live deeeeeep down bee-low. Away from the top soil deep in the earth's core.  Sealed in containers that wont leak, sealed in chambers that will contain the leakages, if there is a such a leakage to begin with, that themselves wont leak deeeeeeeeep down bee-low with nuclear waste that has been neutralized.   All nice things when spoken but what IS the reality and the TRUTH about this storage? Colour me just a tad skeptical.  And why? We cant seem to stop a freakin' faucet from leaking with attempts and trials and errors that span a millennia. We cant seem to stop ANY liquids from escaping their containment, again, a practice that we have tried to do spanning a millennia or two or three.   Even four and five...  So know, we wanna poison the earth from deeeep inside as we are NOT content of killing our planet from above.   My my!!!   We are quite the destructive little shytes we are!!!   
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search