Wanna ride shotgun with GRM?
Welcome to this week’s test vehicle, a Chevy Silverado High Country.
Sitting in the lineup as the second-most expensive Silverado behind the off-road-focused ZR2, the High Country has a starting MSRP of $68,195 and comes standard with a 5.3-liter V8 rated for 355 horsepower and 383 lb.-ft. of torque.
Our tester came fitted with the …
It’s big, it’s red, it just went to the $2000 Challenge.
More to come once JG stops moving. (Don’t post and drive, kids.)
Yes, it's really big and really red and really chunky. Looks sort of out of proportion or something. Not saying bad, just general observations.
In reply to Feedyurhed :
I think it's the chrome running boards exaggerating the depth of the cabin. Also, that is one seriously bluff front end.
Honestly I wasn't super impressed with the trailer hooked up. Unladen it seemed nicer. Even with a load-leveling hitch the rear was heavily squatted with a trailer that my Tundra could tow nice and level. It also had trouble getting the roughly 7500lb trailer to let it shift beyond about fifth of its nine gears, which ment that you sepdn more time than you probably wanted to going 55-60 at nearly 3000 rpm.
And even though the rated capacity is 9200 lbs, the load felt somewhat overwhelming for the truck. So my 14 year old Tundra wins on drivability and (astoubdingly) fuel economy. The Chevy couldn;t crak 10mph while the Tundra runs 10-11 with the same load.
It is, however, a feature-rich environment inside. Almost too feature rich, as as soon as we get any GM product lately, we have to turn off the function that is constantly moving the seats whenever we open and close the doors. But it is comfy, and gets great mileage (for a truck) when unladen (just over 20mpg around town), and is well suited for hauling your crew, which probably means your kids.
In reply to JG Pasterjak :
How heavy is that trailer?!?!
This year we pulled the Corvair above 65 meaning 75-80 for 1390 miles averaging 14.5. yes it's a 2.7 but it 5000lbs of car trailer and junk is barely noticeable behind it.
Enclosed or open trailer? Interesting that it struggled so much with that load, but most of the naturally aspirated stuff relies a lot on revs to make those power numbers. Peak power is at 5600, peak torque is at 4100.
I'm impressed that the curb weight is ~5300 lbs, according to the internet. That's only 200 lbs more than my 1998 K1500, which is a dramatically more basic vehicle.
The newest GM 150 0 truck I've been in is around a 2020, and I was surprised how soft the shock tuning was. That probably doesn't help with the trailer control. Much softer than the Fords I've been in lately.
At least it doesn't have a 6.2L. Then you'd have to worry about it spinning the main bearings before the first oil change. At least with the 5.3L, you only have to worry about the valvetrain flying apart before the first oil change.
Good looking truck--the sides are not as 'slab' as depicted due to the chrome running board as Keith Tanner mentioned earlier. I'm not a huge fan of chrome on this one, however, and the truck would look better with it blacked out. I'm trying to decide which is better for me: this Chevy or the equivalent Ford F-150.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
The nose is comically huge. I get that the look but, dang.
More to come as I just picked it up from JG yesterday.
So. Many. Buttons. I stopped counting at 75.
I think that’s the interior aesthetic: How can we get more buttons in here? If it’s a flat surface, it’s covered in buttons. 
And I totally get that we often use buttons to communicate with our vehicles but, dang, that’s a lot of them.
A few more buttons for you:
Buttons aside, The Silverado’s interior just seems unnecessarily busy–lots of levels and layers and textures. I’m fine with keeping trucks simple.
The growth of today’s full-size trucks reminds me how much I’d rather have something like a Maverick, Colorado, Ranger, Ridgeline, etc. I don’t tow but I do sometimes have the need to carry stuff. The smaller footprint just works better for me: big enough yet easier to live with.
I was hoping that JG would love towing with it. The fact that it didn’t really beat his old Tundra bums me a little.
The Silverado does look good, and I know that’s important for some. The body crease is very Hyundai-like in that it’s sharp and distinctive.
Just so many buttons.
THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN! THEY WANT ALL THE BUTTONS!
Someone hit the "Buttons" button.
When the alternative is touchscreen interaction to do anything, I'll take all the buttons.
I like buttons but this, this, was a bit much.
Today we got a VW Atlas. It has like no buttons. Of course, it took me a min to lower the a/c.
Makes you realize the perfection of an NA Miata, right?
I'll admit, I found a button a few days ago in my F-150 to do the same thing I'd been using the touchscreen for (turn the area illumination on). It's like a keyboard shortcut for your car!
The 2nd button from the right is another window down button - double the width of the other buttons and it rolls down all 4 windows at the same time.
Why do I need this button? It's like: we need to fill this space.....
Oddly, the button to the right was a blank.
pkingham (Forum Supporter) said:When the alternative is touchscreen interaction to do anything, I'll take all the buttons.
It turns out the best option is a mix of both, and there's a big grey area in the middle.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Yup. And ye market shall decide.
As the Silverado is No. 2 on the list of vehicles sold annually, I guess people like the buttons.
Or maybe fewer buttons would push it to the top of the list? 
I suspect the Silverado market tends to be a little more conservative than some others. I wonder what the demographics of buyers are?
I own two cars with screens, built nearly 20 years apart. One (the E39) has a fair number of buttons (20+) but you still need to interact with the screen (via two turn and push knobs). The other (Tesla) has a smaller number of buttons and requires more screen interaction. I've also spent a considerable amount of time in a car (ND Miata) that splits the difference, using a screen that only works with touch when the car isn't moving and with a few big knobs. Honestly, they all fall in the acceptable range - the controls you access on a regular basis are all almost all physical and can be used blind. Hunting down the right button out of a couple of dozen isn't really any different than interacting with an icon onscreen, especially once you've spent a bit of time in the car.
The weakest of the three is probably the middle ground. Because it has a smaller number of physical buttons than the E39, you rely more on the screen. But you can only do that by spinning and clicking if you're moving, which means a clunkier interface with more multi-step processes.
Then there's the hidden button to open the top glove box - it took me two weeks to figure it out since there is no detailed owners manual in the G box.
In reply to Datsun240ZGuy :
I found that but only because of prior experience.
You'll need to log in to post.
