Why I think GM is better

Discussion in 'Brand Wars' started by DMAXRIG, Feb 13, 2006.

  1. chillls

    chillls Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Posts:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    sacramento
    and if thats what it takes to get out of the 1/2 ton section then play ball
     
  2. chillls

    chillls Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Posts:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    sacramento
    i do have to say you did pick a good color
     
  3. 1999GMC

    1999GMC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Posts:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Carmichael, CA
    Right on. I don't know how many posts you have to do to get the 1 TON.
     
  4. brods

    brods Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    Posts:
    56
    Media:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Michigan
    1999GMC Cool picts. That jump in the bottom picture looks like the makings for some hard landings! Makes the berm that bent my axle look like a speed bump.

    Baddog...comparing old to new again:doah: . The new Ram QCs have almost 5 more inches of leg room compared to your 98 model. New to new Ram QC beats Chevy CC in all areas of rear seat room except leg room, where the Chevy has a wopping 2.4" more. 2.4" is not a good reason to buy one truck over the other one.

    http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/dodge/rampickup2500/100604865/VehicleComparison;jsessionid=GHxTJTrxpjwFY1vtjGNstWCg5T247HwXgt3TdjkQwsbb241zDBSv!1688806684?basestyleid=100604865&styleid=100556620&styleid=100536475&styleid=100556963&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=specs

    I agree the IFS should be better on washboard and be less susceptible to DW as well. I don’t think the GM ride was deficient, it just wasn’t much better, if any, than the Dodge. It just shows how far suspension design has come when a straight axle rides and handles as well as the Dodge does. So maybe a slight advantage to GM. (Not enough to make up for GM's butt ugly styling, but take heart, Dodge seems hell bent on morphing the RAM into some kind of a transformer toy looking abortion, similar to what they've done to Dakota and Durango, so by comparison the GM's might start looking good again:eek: ).
     
  5. 1999GMC

    1999GMC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Posts:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Carmichael, CA
    Thanks brods. I was young and stupid and I'm guessing very lucky. The jump on the bottom was the last time I jumped it and that was in 1997. I drove the truck with no alignment issues until I sold it 8 months ago. I honestly can't believe that truck was still in one piece we used to go wheeling alot.
     
  6. bigHD

    bigHD Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Posts:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Cumberland, West Virginia
    Oh okay, so you have two Fords now chills?
     
  7. DMAXRIG

    DMAXRIG Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Posts:
    215
    Likes Received:
    0
    i think you guys are smoking something if you cant feel the difference in ride. Down the road there isnt much, but off road for a whole day in a gmc 2500 4x4 and then a dodge 2500 4x4 and you'll feel the difference, believe me. The mega cab is huge, but ugly as sin, and you CANNOT get in a long bed. How stupid. The dodges quad cab is smaller than GMC's by just a little bit, but it makes a world of difference when you actually have to ride back there for more than 20 minutes. The dodges back seat is just so uncomfortable.:stir:
     
  8. bigHD

    bigHD Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Posts:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Cumberland, West Virginia
    I agree. I like the Ford back seat too, its comfortable even with the front seats all the way back. I think my extended cab Chevy has about the same room as a Quad Cab Dodge. At least it feels that way. Also, the Dodges back seat sits too straight up in the back for me to get comfortable.
     
  9. RJF's Red Cummins

    RJF's Red Cummins TRC Staff Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Posts:
    2,853
    Media:
    68
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    I live in Modesto California
    I've been driving my dad's surburban through the foothills up to the hospital to see him after he broke his leg on saturday. The last 3 days I have driven it 65miles a day through windy mountain roads. The first day I drove my Ram up there, so I was able to compare.

    Whats my feeling on IFS vs a solid axle now? I'm still not impressed with IFS. I felt my D60 equipped Ram was able to take some of the foothill curves just as fast if not faster due to the truck feeling more stable than the IFS burb.
     
  10. DMAXRIG

    DMAXRIG Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2006
    Posts:
    215
    Likes Received:
    0
    On the road, I cant see much difference. They turn and feel the same im sure. I just think the IFS is softer off road compared to solid front axle, its easier on the kidneys. Sorry to hear bout your dads leg RJF, hope he's doing ok.
     
  11. BadDog

    BadDog TRC Staff Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Posts:
    845
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix
    Bobby, we’ve been here before, you are still not comparing apples and apples. What you describe has NOTHING to do with IFS specifically.

    Burb has softer suspension (being primarily a passenger transport vehicle with moderate hauling capability) and a lot more "up high" weight too. So, more body roll is to be expected along with the accompanying feel of instability. A Lincoln Town Car and a Corvette both have IFS, but I seem to recall they handle quite differently.

    Or, if your analysis is correct, maybe GM should put an old 40's style solid axle under a Corvette? Or maybe there is a reason that solid suspension (even in the back) is fading away year by year?

    Again, as I see it, the characteristics that set IFS apart from SFA (on the topic at hand) fall primarily in 2 categories.

    1) Lower unsprung weight. This IS a HUGE improvement and is not open for debate. It is a known physical effect that not only backed up by industry and many years of racing, but also by the laws of Physics which do not change to suit pre-dispositions. If you like, go to any racing (including desert racing), rally, or even a more sedate auto aficionado site and debate it there. Or talk to a mechanical engineer or anyone familiar with the related Physics. Alloy wheels did not initially become popular because the “look cool”. And tire manufacturers do not go to great lengths to reduce weight just for fun. Every pound you remove from unsprung weight has a measurable (and often quite noticeable) effect on handling, particularly on rough roads of any kind.

    2) Tire orientation. SFA can do a better job of maintaining an even, consistent contact patch AND it can change parameters based on input. Things like changing caster, camber, and even toe (though sometimes to detriment like the notorious Ford TIB/TTB suspension) based on suspension input does make a measurable difference and can be seen on Slalom, road, or skid pan courses. My GTP has over-all suspension geometry just like a standard Grand Prix, but with the Competition Group it gets different suspension alignment parameters.

    As discussed many times before “ride” has little to do with anything since it is generally very subjective and it is also more a characteristic of spring rate, sprung weight (inertia), and shock valving than suspension implementation and geometry (though there is some cross over).

    I’m not saying that SFA does not have its strong points, to do that would be foolish. But constantly trying to shore up SFA as being every bit as good or better than IFS in every category makes even less sense… Give points to SFA where SFA is superior, give points to IFS where IFS is superior, and look else where for the remaining stuff…
     
  12. RJF's Red Cummins

    RJF's Red Cummins TRC Staff Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Posts:
    2,853
    Media:
    68
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    I live in Modesto California
    Blah blah blah, I am not nearly interested enough to pay close attention to desert racers, corvettes, blah blah. Yes they run IFS, like I care. I am interested in trucks and SUV's. If I was interested in desert racing I wouldn't be on this forum. Nor do I care how IFS does offroad, if I want to go offroading I will ride my snowmobile, atv, or in a long third my K5. I only care about on road handling with the topic on hand.

    The IFS thumpers always say it handles better than SFA on the road and through the turns. I said I had driven my dad's burb through windy roads with lots of higher speed curves the last few days. I said I did not notice any better handling from the IFS burb. I didn't say anything about the ride quality, that can't even be compared, one is a 3/4T diesel and the other is a 1/2 car with a suburban body.
     
  13. 1999GMC

    1999GMC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Posts:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Carmichael, CA
    I was going to ask you if it was a half ton? My friend bought a 1996 1/2 ton and the first time I road in it I thought it was way to soft and plowed on those little a$$ tires. My lifted 85 suburban handled way better I thought. My other buddy bought a 99 crew cab Chevy dually and I couldn't believe how well it handled. But it also has load E tires and had a little stiffer suspension. That is what changed my mind about buying my truck. I totally agree with RJF on a 1/2 ton not cornering well. I personally don't think GM ever should have made a 1/2 ton suburban anyway. I think it is way to heavy of a truck.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2006
  14. BadDog

    BadDog TRC Staff Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Posts:
    845
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix
    But the point is relevant to the "topic on hand". Lower unsprung weight DOES improve handling anywhere you want to consider, including on the road in a truck. And dynamic suspension adjustment DOES improve handling. My reference to other areas was only supporting evidence. The ONLY place you ever here anyone even attempting to claim that it does not matter is when you are talking to a Dodge or Ford fan (aka "SFA thumpers") about 4WD front suspension options in tow rigs. Apparently in that application the well established "best practices" as well as the laws of physics change...

    Here is another point for you (though not a new one). If the 2 points I mentioned above don’t matter for a tow rig, then why don’t the manufacturers go with a 1950 era solid beam front axle on 2WD instead of the much more complex IFS? Not only is it simpler to make with far fewer parts, but they could save on total number of parts by using the 4x4 suspensions across the board. Less variation on the assembly line with less parts to engineer, produce, and stock. Man, what are those morons thinking putting IFS in 2WD trucks when they could save all that money… And since MD and heavy trucks run solid beam front suspension, then it simply MUST be better in a LD truck just like a Cummins… :rolleyes:

    :stir: :poke:
     
  15. RJF's Red Cummins

    RJF's Red Cummins TRC Staff Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Posts:
    2,853
    Media:
    68
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    I live in Modesto California
    Russ, you go into so much detail, DON'T.

    I'm not interested.

    Yes, the laws of physics do not change on or offroad when it comes to unsprung weight, camber, toe, etc.
    But that is not what this is all about, it's that I did not notice any better handling or cornering from the IFS burb, it's that simple Russ....

    Throw all the technical stuff out and go drive something.... because that is what matters in the end, and I will say it for the last time. The burb didn't handle any better than my SFA Ram, thats it. Less unsprung weight, better camber, different suspension movement....it all didn't matter...why didn't it? Because I couldn't tell one bit of better cornering performance, it's that simple.
     
  16. RJF's Red Cummins

    RJF's Red Cummins TRC Staff Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Posts:
    2,853
    Media:
    68
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    I live in Modesto California
    Yeah it's a half ton, that may have made a difference. Sure did float nice down the road though.:D
     
  17. brods

    brods Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    Posts:
    56
    Media:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Michigan
    Hey, no fair! You can't use the other sides argument preemptively! Can’t argue with your statements on IFS except that in this application it would appear GM’s IFS is not up to the task (or their frames are not) since you can’t hang a snow plow on a Dmax. So for people who want to plow snow with a diesel pickup, giving up the "advantages" of IFS for a SFA is well worth it.

    Its all about individual priorities. If you drive on washboard roads all day long, IFS may be more important for you. If you regularly have full grown adults ride for hours in the back seat, then rear seat comfort is more important. If you prefer a proven heavy duty engine with a long track record of success, rather than taking a chance on a relatively young engine with a short track record of teething problems, then which engine the truck has is of more importance. If you plow snow, then a real diesel truck with a front end strong enough to hang a snow plow on has more importance.:stir:

    It all depends. Overall Gm isn’t better or worse, it just has different strengths and weaknesses.
     
  18. 1999GMC

    1999GMC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Posts:
    111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Carmichael, CA
    You can't put a snowplow on the front of a Dmax? The campground I go to alot has a Chevy truck like mine with a snowplow on front. What's up with the Dmax's?
     
  19. BadDog

    BadDog TRC Staff Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    Posts:
    845
    Media:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix
    Brods:

    I couldn't agree more, it's all about what works for you. I just get tired of all the silliness that comes out of supporting a favorite. I only jump in for IFS because it's the underdog that never gets any love, and it does not hurt that the stong points of IFS are a significant part of my choice of current vehicle, though I've owned and been very fond of Dodges and Fords (to a lesser extent) in the past, and have 2 SFA 1 ton (axles anyway) 4x4s currently. The 2 SFAs are both GM but have Ford and Dodge parts on them too! So I'm very much not prejudiced one way or the other in spite of the fact I'm usually arguing the same side.

    Hehe, absolutely right on the snow plow. My guess is that it's mostly a mater of spring rate. I've seen some guys using Timbrens(sp?) to carry a plow though... I'll give that point to the SFA crowd though. The solid axles are much better for taking that kind of pounding (500 some odd pounds hanging off the front).


    Bobby:

    I was trying to get at a point without being too blunt. Let me try again...

    IMO (and strongly held) your stated observation is worth absolutely nothing. You are comparing 2 completely different beasts and your observation is worth exactly the same as someone declaratively stating that they drove a Corvette and a Town Car on the same road and noted that the Corvette felt more stabile and handled better. The 2 vehicles are totally different on all levels and would feel different even if you drove an older 2WD Sub or a SFA 4x4 Sub. And with all those differences there is NO way to tell what the IFS is or is not contributing. IFS is not some magic feature that makes a bumbling ‘Burb into a Vette, but if you drove a SFA burb back to back with the IFS, it would at least be MUCH closer. If you drove my truck and yours back to back on the same twisty and rough road, you may still feel the same way and make the same statement, and at least you would be comparing from the same class of vehicle. Then again, look how many people swear by the “Tornado” thingys and K&N filters… :D

    Oh, and one last point Bobby, notice the forum this is in? If you don't want to debate and/or argue on this point, maybe you should avoid starting the discussion? Because you know very well that if I'm not distracted, I can't pass up a good debate... :poke:
     
  20. RJF's Red Cummins

    RJF's Red Cummins TRC Staff Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Posts:
    2,853
    Media:
    68
    Albums:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    I live in Modesto California
    So what you're saying is that my SFA Ram is like a vette and the burb with cheesy IFS is like grandma's town car?:D :D :D
     

Share This Page