Chevy Colorado & GMC Canyon banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,178 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
There are some really cool insights as to why GM didn't put larger tires on the ZR2 and Bison as well as all the information we've been seeking on those boron skid plates! Well worth the watch.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
727 Posts
AEV said the Bison will fit 33" tires with minor modification, and GM didn't want to do it because of re certification for emission and crash testing. I also like that AEV will be selling upgrades for the Bison besides the obvious Snorkel, he mentions two winch options (but looks like you'd have to get those through AEV), replacement fog lights, rear bumper lighting (with brackets from AEV) and those bar skids for the center dif?/transmission? (sorry don't remember).


I am really hoping they offer the front bar that was on the SEMA vehicle. But I'm doubting it because of how much he talked about cooling (especially for the Gas Engine) that's needed, where he specifically talked about lighting there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
Too bad the Bison didnt come out sooner. I'd have seriously considered it. However, most of the Bison stuff should be able to be ordered either though GM or AEV. So we should be able to bolt on what we want.

I like the bumpers and skid plates. However, in order to get the front bumper you'll have to basically order the entire front end. The discussion about cooling was interesting as well. However, I've not noticed any change in cooling sense I put on the 589 winch mount.

I hope GM sells a lot of Bisons and ZR2s. But I also hope Ford sells lots of Rangers.

I also love Expedition Overland's videos. Good material.
I really hope my current situation gets sorted out soon. I really want to be in a position to take some trips.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,881 Posts
Good video and I like how he highlights what all GM requires and faces when it comes to changes to vehicles. Small changes can add up to major $$$ today with all the regulations.

These appear very well sorted parts for this truck and a step over the usual after market items in some cases.

I hope this stimulates the aftermarket for even more parts for these trucks as Ford already is promoting the aftermarket parts they plan for the Ranger and we know what is out for the Taco already.

I was not impressed much with this truck at first but I have a good appreciation as to how much work went into this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,567 Posts
I really enjoyed watching this last night. It provided a lot of insight into how expensive it is for an OEM to make modifications to their vehicles, and how much testing needs to occur before they can sell something.


I really enjoy watching the videos from the Expedition Overland trips. The production value is very good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,461 Posts
The great thing about this video (IMHO) is it answers the question that so often gets asked: "Why doesn't GM do _____?". People don't realize how complicated it can be to add or subtract something on a vehicle when it comes to crash testing. They briefly mention that they crashed about a dozen trucks at $1 million dollars each. That's not hype or exaggeration. Each crash vehicle is hand assembled and literally every nut, bolt and screw has it's torque measured, recorded and signed off by the mechanic (aka Metal Model Maker) doing the assembly. They cannot just pull a vehicle off the assembly line, modify it and do a crash test. Forgetting to record one screw can be grounds for nullifying crash tests results, requiring another vehicle build - and I have seen that happen. So while we sit around and moan about why GM did this or didn't do that, there's a reason and it's almost always related back to cost, including the cost of re-certifying the entire vehicle. There's also the cost of making the tools for the part(s), which as they indicated for the flares was a million. Think about that for a minute. Since the Bison is a limited market, how many of these trucks will they have to sell to recoup that cost? Remember, GM makes about 150K of all the twin models a year combined. And that brings up my last point - this option is going to be very pricey. When people look at the price tag this option adds, or the costs of these pieces on the aftermarket, there's going to be a lot gnashing of teeth and comments like "That's bullshit". No, that's capitalism - there is no free lunch! During my time with GM, return on investment for new parts was 18 months. For the unfamiliar, that means the tooling costs had to be paid back in 18 months of production - and that didn't include design or testing, which may have been longer (24 to 36 months?) but still had to be paid for by the end user.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
274 Posts
The great thing about this video (IMHO) is it answers the question that so often gets asked: "Why doesn't GM do _____?". People don't realize how complicated it can be to add or subtract something on a vehicle when it comes to crash testing. They briefly mention that they crashed about a dozen trucks at $1 million dollars each. That's not hype or exaggeration. Each crash vehicle is hand assembled and literally every nut, bolt and screw has it's torque measured, recorded and signed off by the mechanic (aka Metal Model Maker) doing the assembly. They cannot just pull a vehicle off the assembly line, modify it and do a crash test. Forgetting to record one screw can be grounds for nullifying crash tests results, requiring another vehicle build - and I have seen that happen. So while we sit around and moan about why GM did this or didn't do that, there's a reason and it's almost always related back to cost, including the cost of re-certifying the entire vehicle. There's also the cost of making the tools for the part(s), which as they indicated for the flares was a million. Think about that for a minute. Since the Bison is a limited market, how many of these trucks will they have to sell to recoup that cost? Remember, GM makes about 150K of all the twin models a year combined. And that brings up my last point - this option is going to be very pricey. When people look at the price tag this option adds, or the costs of these pieces on the aftermarket, there's going to be a lot gnashing of teeth and comments like "That's bullshit". No, that's capitalism - there is no free lunch! During my time with GM, return on investment for new parts was 18 months. For the unfamiliar, that means the tooling costs had to be paid back in 18 months of production - and that didn't include design or testing, which may have been longer (24 to 36 months?) but still had to be paid for by the end user.
Yep.

Lots of 'forumbreh disappointment' surrounding the Bison - but what nobody understands is just what it took to bring a vehicle like that to market from a major OEM.

It's one set of 33" or 34" tires and a winch away from factory perfection. Easy enough to do yourself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,567 Posts
Yep.

Lots of 'forumbreh disappointment' surrounding the Bison - but what nobody understands is just what it took to bring a vehicle like that to market from a major OEM.

It's one set of 33" or 34" tires and a winch away from factory perfection. Easy enough to do yourself.

I have no problem with GM not stuffing the max tire size on a truck that they have to put a fuel economy rating on.



What's silly, is the responses the GM engineers / marketing people usually give at the press events. It's always some rambling about meeting design criteria and such, and trying to convince the press that what they put on the truck is best for everyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,840 Posts
I found it interesting that the skid plates have slots for the mounting bolts so the skid will slide/give on impact, better them giving then you...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,881 Posts
I remember when I saw the First 2004 GTO. Scott Settlmire of GM told us all that GM had to do to make it pass the American goverment regulations as well GM standards for the N American market. The cost he said was done as cheaply as possible due to lack of funds yet they were in the millions.

I agree this was a goo explanation of just some of the things OEM MFGs face.

Also it points out many of the things aftermarket suppliers skip. Makes you pause to think.

I liked the comments on the grill slot. GM was very protective of it. This is interesting. Makes you wonder how the lights installed there could effect cooling in some cases. Towing, desert driving etc.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
4,178 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
More about the skid plate material from AEV

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
274 Posts
GM must have a reason.



Emissions? Blocked Vision? Warranty reasons?


Same reason they didn’t do the bigger tires. They would’ve had to recertify the fuel economy and emissions.

Also I bet it produces a little wind noise at highway speeds. Better to leave it as an accessory.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,881 Posts
Same reason they didn’t do the bigger tires. They would’ve had to recertify the fuel economy and emissions.

Also I bet it produces a little wind noise at highway speeds. Better to leave it as an accessory.
That was my first consideration.

Another possibility is the drive by noise regulations.

The snorkel may not be baffled and could make more noise than permitted.

This regulation killed many muscle scoops like the functional shaker in the Trans Am in the 70’s.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
267 Posts
Anyone notice the exhaust exit was tucked back and out of the way like it should be. I guess this was done by the owner of the truck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,461 Posts
Same reason they didn’t do the bigger tires. They would’ve had to recertify the fuel economy and emissions.

Also I bet it produces a little wind noise at highway speeds. Better to leave it as an accessory.
Along with reduced fuel economy due to wind drag. Fuel economy is a HUGE concern at GM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
515 Posts
There's a lot of interesting information in the walkaround video. The front skid's mounting system seems to be more for the crash testing compliance. I wager that due to the alleged "elasticity" of the boron steel, the mounts probably aren't that big of a deal when it comes to off-road impacts anyways.

What really intrigued me was the tubular design of the transmission skid. If his reasoning is to be believed, then the existing aftermarket skids out there from SS would be a possible heat and debris build-up hazard?? That seems a little strange to me (and the gaps between the bars seem a bit big for my liking), but if it didn't make a difference, they wouldn't have invested in the design, right?

Interesting cut exhaust, considering this is a 2.8 LWN truck that usually has the thicker diameter pipe that comes all the way out to the fender, to make space for the tubular corners. And I guess it was due the lighting and camera angle but from the promo vids I didn't actually realize that the rear corner bumper tubes actually loop around to connect to the frame. It all looked like a bit of a gimmick, until now. Damn that's going to be strong.

Loving that rear diff skid. If there's anything I would buy in a heartbeat, it'd be the diff skid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,461 Posts
What really intrigued me was the tubular design of the transmission skid. If his reasoning is to be believed, then the existing aftermarket skids out there from SS would be a possible heat and debris build-up hazard?? That seems a little strange to me (and the gaps between the bars seem a bit big for my liking), but if it didn't make a difference, they wouldn't have invested in the design, right?
Given the process for stamping out a skid plate is a lot faster and cheaper to do than their tubular design for the transmission, I agree with their reasoning. As someone who has spent a lot of quarters at the car wash washing mud out of shields, I applaud their thinking and wonder if other shields wouldn't benefit from this design.
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top