Find Reviews by Make:
Where did GMC get the idea to take a short-bed pickup, widen the track, fit some Fox shocks and generally beef it up to create a factory off-road “halo” truck? Oh right, from Ford. If you’re not convinced that Detroit still has at least one foot firmly stuck in the past, this halo niche-chasing behemoth should help clear up some of that doubt.
48 Comments on “What’s Wrong With This Picture: Raptor Hunting Edition...”
Read all comments
Looks more like a Ram Power Wagon rip off than a Raptor rip off.
I agree!
Between this, and his NYT OpEd piece, it seems Edward Niedermeyer needs to get (re)schooled on the American auto industry…
Exactly. The Raptor is a short-bed extended cab, not a crew cab like the Power Wagon.
Ironically, GM did have a potential Raptor alternative for years, but never offered it. It was the SWB Avalanche 1500 with the bigger 6.0 engine. You could get the big engine in the 1st gen Avalanche 2500, but the 2500 3/4 ton was discontinued for the 2nd gen model.
The 1/2 ton 6.0 Avalanche was never offered in the US due to the bigger engine being in the Cadillac Escalade EXT. GM was too afraid of the lower-priced, big-engine Avalanche siphoning off EXT sales. In typical GM fashion, if you wanted a 1/2 ton Avanlanche with the 6.0 engine, you had to pony up lots of extra cash for an EXT.
Sorry guys… I try to cover a lot of topics, and I’ll admit that trucks are something of a blind spot.
@ E.N. – and right there was why I like TTAC. Classy.
Ed,
For the illumination of said blind spot:
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/07/2011-toyota-tacoma-gets-two-new-limited-edition-option-packages.html
This is de rigeur in the truck market now. Absolutely everyone gets on this lucrative gravy train.
As Zackman was saying, there is almost no customization anymore for passenger cars*, so this has migrated to pickups (I hate that word), as the BOF is far more customizable, for starters. That, and a lot of people have customized trucks, for work or play.
*May or may not have something to do with most passenger cars being utterly lame and narcolepsy-inducing.
It’s tacky, it’s a niche, no doubt, it’s not to everyone’s tastes, but it’s certainly indicative of the vitality and variety in the pickup market.
What about it is “the past”? I see it more as a segment staying relevant for people whose pulse quickens a bit when it involves their choice of wheels.
Is the “future” a greyscale market of amorphous blobs we call crossovers?
There is no pleasing some people. A halo niche it may be but it is a very profitable niche – and there is nothing “in the past” about making a buck.
Exactly. I completely fail to see why this truck rates such negativity and bias.
Does TTAC whine when GM re-launched the Camaro, as a Mustang-fighter?
Or anybody else when they follow into a segment?
The incessant and unwarranted anti-GM bias is grating and unprofessional.
I gotta agree – if GM can make a buck by taking a slice of the Raptor pie – why shouldn’t they? Sure it’s not exactly a mould breaking design, but if theres money in them thar pickups… wouldn’t GM be more foolish not to?
The Raptor does it way, way better.
That paper-thin GMT900 sheetmetal should handle off-roading really, really well.
Exaggerates a styling issue that I find is particularly bad on the GM pickups – the gap between wheel and body. Raptor still has it, but since the wheel well is wheel-shaped, doesn’t look at bizarre.
Other angles, not so bad. People who would buy this here in TX normally have to do aftermarket jobs to get this level of menace, no sense not offering it from the dealer with a warranty and a profit margin for GM.
I wouldn’t mind it so much if I didn’t know it wasn’t going to be purchased by some ‘entrpreneur’ who will use it to go grocery shopping and commuting to his office and pretty well nowhere else.
Something for the Hummer crowd I guess. Before commenting further, I’ll have to wait until they build it.
But if you say HUMMER is first, then wouldn’t TTAC have had to note how the Raptor doesn’t match up to the H2T?
For me a vanity truck would be something a little more road worthy, like an 07 Roush Nitemare.
I see what looks like a storage compartment in the bed rails. Someone else produced this as an option previously….
Was it the Chevrolet Avalanche?
Ram Box
http://www.dodge.com/en/2010/ram_1500/storage/exterior/
Again… It’s another copy from Chrysler, but Chrysler gets no credit as the original
I suggested the Avalanche because since 2002 it has had storage built into the box.
Although the implementation on this concept looks similar to Dodge’s.
It’s not something I would buy, but it sure looks impressive, although there is a Ford resemblance in the grille shape. Build it and see if anyone buys it. After all, it pretty much uses off-the-shelf parts, so no great investment loss if it fails. Hummer had its fans, you know, even if I wasn’t one of them.
Here’s what I do find troubling, though: You can option/personalize trucks from here to forever, but you can’t do it with cars. Why? Many car buyers have a desire to set theirs apart from the run-of-the-mill, too.
Think of the 2000-2005 Impalas, of which I own one. Many Imp owners of this model like to make theirs unique. Although I don’t approve of “SS” clones, this model does invite personalization. Mine? I did trim it a bit by switching the “Impala” script to the right side of the trunk lid where historically it was meant to be and adding “Chevrolet” to the left side. I also had custom-made mirror-chrome Impala script made for the sides instead of the factory body-color ones that you can’t see. Just minor touches to satisfy a sense of Impala history in my own mind. If I could manufacture triple tail lights, I’d do that too. Also, saw off the “B” pillars and…well, you know the rest!
Actually by getting your hands on some of the farthest out to the corners round tail-lights and mounting them in a new farthest in position, the wiring wouldn’t be too hard. And the mods you’ve made are the way I think God intended an Impala to be. Now if I could just get the body style you’re speaking of with the 3.9V6 or 5.3V8 from this generation, I’d be sold.
Doggone it, Educator Dan, now you’ve done it, you’ve got my wheels turning! I may just take up this challenge! It’s going to take the rest of the winter to figure out the best way to pull this off!
Hey if it works, you’ll be the next W-body forum hero. Now if there was just a cheap fix for the ugly butt of the current Impala.
that… is a big truck.
“Halo” is a money-losing product, by definition (e.g. Toyota Land Cruiser). Do we have any proof that Raptor was losing money? All they did was what you wrote: a bunch of easy mods, and these things sell for 3 times the base truck. This is no halo, more like exploiting the market right. So I am not convinced that this is such a dumb idea for GM.
3rd Episode of Top Gear US actually tested the Raptor and was pretty vocal about it’s uselessness on road and how it was just a halo vehicle that did serve much of a purpose other than trying to toughen up Ford’s image. My fiance said: “Well if it sucks on the highway, what’s the f&%$ing point?” I reminded her that Hummer was dead and buried and those guys will eventually need new vehicles. (rolls eyes)
I watched that episode, my interpretation of his on-road comments was that while the truck was certainly biased towards offroad ability, it wasn’t too bad on-road considering what it was. Plus, the AmeriStig managed to put a pretty decent time down in it, and considering he didn’t flip it with as hard as he was pushing it into the corners, that’s an accomplishment.
Why GMC…WHY?
You don’t need a goofy, over-rated truck that looks as if it was attacked by the import aisle at Advanced Auto Parts like Ford does.
Hopefully this will stay a concept, like the misguided Raptor…with it’s tacky fender flares and ugly grille should have stayed.
“Where did GMC get the idea to take a short-bed pickup, widen the track, fit some Fox shocks and generally beef it up to create a factory off-road “halo” truck? Oh right, from Ford.”
Ever hear of the Chevy S-10 ZR2 first introduced in 1994?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPO_ZR2
Features
-Ladder-type Frame with modified mounting points
-100mm wider track (3.9 inches wider than regular S-10)
-Increased ground clearance (Approx 3″ over Regular S-Series 4×4)
-Enhanced front (7.25″ ring gear) and rear (8.5″ ring gear) axles w/ 3.73:1 rear-axle ratio
-Larger wheel and axle bearings
-31 x 10.50″ BFG A/T Tires (Pickup), 31 x 10.50″ BFG Longtrails (Blazer)
-46mm gas pressurized Bilstein Monotube shocks
-Rear track bar (pickup), front anti-sway bar (blazer)
-Skid plates
Yeah, well, whatever, to each their own. The problem is the certain clientele who buy them, then install louder mufflers, bigger lift kits; high intensity “Roo hunting” lights and only uses them to haul boy toys. And in their mind four doors make it an excellent family vehicle to boot. It may be a very capable 4×4 but sadly many, not all, buy it for the look or the image it projects, everything else is immaterial.
“Detroit still has at least one foot firmly stuck in the past”
I can’t agree with this (at least in regards to this truck). All I see is Detroit finally producing halo worthy range topping options for North America’s favorite type of vehicle. The CTS needs the “V”, the 3-series needs the “M”, etc… why should trucks be any different? Especially when they are bought mostly for recreational use nowadays.
I’m already getting an F-150 Lariat Crew 4X4 w/optonal 6.2 and the Raptor is just a $2700 premium that I might just get for sh!ts and giggles plus public scorn/outrage. If I get the $5000+ King Ranch option instead… no one will care/notice.
A truck like that will make your penis larger.
Ha ha, yes that’s what it is!
Not my choice, but I believe that competition improves products. Will be interesting to see how the Raptor and Power Wagon respond.
It looks like the usual clueless designer took a Ram Power wagon and grafted on a Ford grille and partially deleted the front bumper. I can already feel my penis growing larger as I climb up into this thing!
It looks like a Tonka truck.
Yep, go ahead and criticize a concept vehicle like it is coming into production tomorrow.
FWIW, I have seen far more Raptors on the road that I ever thought I would. But, I do live in Texas.
Was this designed in the GM-chinese-clone-copying-department using the Ford as a donor example? From the front, seems they could have save a little tooling cost by not re-engineering the Ford oval to look like it says GMC.
The Raptor is awesome. If its not your cup of tea – drink something else. The only problem I’ve got with the Raptor personally is a lack of a diesel engine option (same with the Power Wagon too). This GMC thing addresses that shortfall. Its just a concept and I doubt anything will be made from it, but if it pushes ford to drop a diesel in the Raptor that would be epic.
Just what the snowy highways of Ohio need to have in the hands of soccer moms distracted by cell phones and children. I think I’m going to look into a life insurance policy.
This thing is absolutely hilarious. As poser-riffic as the Raptor is (and let us count the ways…), this is even worse.
First, no one offroads even a fullsize pickup if they’re serious about it. They’re too long, maneuver too poorly, and have horrible approach/departure/breakover angles. They’re too heavy, and don’t float on sand or mud. They have high centers of gravity. The Raptor’s fancy shocks are great for mall crawling…and the block under the rear leaf springs is great for axle-wrap. In the offroad world it’s Jeep, Mid-size/compact pickup/SUV, or custom truggy or bust.
What then, are we to make of an even more bloated beast supposedly “tuned” for offroad duty? Are you fucking kidding me GM? Did you just offroad “tune” a fucking 3/4 ton pickup by *deleting* the live front axle? Perhaps you didn’t notice the place of the solid axle swap on factory-IFS vehicles as the ultimate offroad tuning mod? This is why you went bankrupt.
Previous comments were right: It’s a good thing halo vehicles are money-losers by definition. This thing will be bought by men on the west coast with large incomes and tiny penises. Congratulations to GM for creating the first vehicle in the “AutoBrobile” niche.
not sure where anyone gets the idea that halo products are money-losers. M cars make tons of money, so do SRTs and SVT product. unless you’re greenwashing, no car company is going to approve a program which loses money. no one.
the Raptor may feel a bit soft and tippy on the road, but it’s actually not bad at all when you get used to it. the crew cab is large, but for those who want the extra space, it’s pretty useful. Raptor is not a rock-crawler/mud-bogger/single-track creeper, nor was it intended as such.
I’ll believe this thing if they actually build it. I’m not sure how you get something with that much big. heavy engine up front to not land like a lawn dart over any sort of jumps, but maybe they’ll figure it out. a lot of serious engineering went into the Raptor, we’ll see whether GM wants to do the same, or just jack up a truck and put shocks on it.
“a lot of serious engineering went into the Raptor, we’ll see whether GM wants to do the same, or just jack up a truck and put shocks on it.”
Not really. They took an F-150 and slapped a “long” travel kit on the front (calling 11.x inches long travel is pretty generous – well designed aftermarket mid-travel setups get 9-11 inches of travel, long travel usually ends up in the teens). The rear gets slightly softer landings from better shocks and flexier leaf packs, but gains no bonus in travel and pays a big penalty in towing and payload.
My biggest beef with these so called “off-road” tuned vehicles is that they aren’t off-road tuned at all. They’re dirt road tuned. True, the raptor wasn’t designed to take on rocks, mud, and mixed trails…which is why it really doesn’t impress people that have been in the trenches in seriously hairy terrain.
when you’re in a position to judge the engineering that goes into an OE program, let me know. I am and there is significant work in the Raptor. ask the guys at Fox how much more work they were asked to do on the Raptor than on any other program they’ve worked on for anyone – it’s orders of magnitude more testing and prove-out. blow it off all you want, but the level of sign-off and execution required of an OE is beyond the capability of nearly every aftermarket company. having seen lot of “engineered” aftermarket products for all sorts of applications, it’s comical how many of them are the farthest thing from.
just like hardcore roadracers are not going to be impressed with street-legal, warrantied factory optioned street cars, people who are the 99.9 percentile users of offroad capability are not going to be impressed with a Raptor. however, I’d not seen a single review by any sort of offroad press folk not say that it’s an immensely impressive piece of work and impressive value for that it provides. I also think you’re getting hung up (hah) on the rock-crawling/trails/etc side of offroading as a metric which needs to be met. just like open track <> auto-x <> rally, different vehicles are for different applications.
then again, just like most M3, Corvette, STi, Evo, Porsche, etc drivers are not going to use their vehicles in the environment where they have been designed to excel, I’m sure lots of Raptor owners won’t either. doesn’t mean the capability of the vehicle isn’t real and there. I still don’t think GM will spend the money to build something which has the same capability as the Raptor, but I guess we’ll have to wait & see. I’m not holding my breath.
Faygo,
You’re correct on a lot of counts vis-a-vis the Raptor and its engineered bits. Jandrews and his ilk may not “get it,” but then again, the get what they deserve.