No Reserve 2002 Gmc Sierra 1500 W/t 4x4 Ext Cab, 1 Owner Off Corp.lease on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2019 GMC Sierra CarbonPro Edition pricing starts above $65,000

GMC is hard at work building carbon fiber beds for its CarbonPro trucks, so it's fitting that the company has finally released pricing for the 2019 GMC Sierra CarbonPro Edition. It's not cheap by any measure. The most "affordable" for 2019 is the AT4 version starting at $66,635. It's also available in Denali trim, and that version starts at $70,020. Both represent an increase of $8,000 to $9,000 more over the base AT4 and Denali models. That may seem like a lot to go from a steel bed to a carbon fiber one, but you're getting more than the bed for that money. GMC also includes unique badging, a Bluetooth bed speaker, rear-camera mirror, surround vision cameras, automatic emergency braking, lane-keep assist, automatic headlights, power side steps, a sunroof, trailer tire pressure monitoring and a color heads-up display to both models. The AT4 specifically gets a Bose sound system, navigation, parking sensors and a cat-back exhaust, too. The Denali adds unique 22-inch wheels. Both only come with the 6.2-liter V8 and 10-speed automatic. To equip a regular GMC Sierra AT4 similarly to the CarbonPro Edition, the price comes out to $64,110. The Denali comparably equipped to the CarbonPro is $67,940. So the bed itself is about $2,000 to $3,000. The 2019 GMC Sierra CarbonPro Edition trucks should be reaching dealers very soon. They will soon be supplanted by the 2020 version, which will add the new 3.0-liter diesel inline-six as an engine option. The AT4 CarbonPro will get some extra black accents for 2020, too.

2020 GMC Sierra 1500 Interior Driveway Test | Still lagging behind

GM has caught nothing but grief for the interiors of its full-size pickups since they were redesigned. Some of it is about perspective. Ram blew everybody away with the new 1500’s interior, but it's not like the Ford F-150 is embarrassed by it. Chevy and GMC are. Even a top-shelf Sierra Denali doesnÂ’t live up to the luxurious environment its price tag would promise.  The trim of Sierra we're testing is an AT4, though. ThatÂ’s the light off-roading version of the Sierra thatÂ’s mechanically the same as the Silverado Trail Boss we recently reviewed. Looking at the interior from a pure functionality standpoint, the Sierra is perfectly fine at performing its truck duties. The seats are wide, flat and comfortable. It has huge armrests on both sides so you can stretch out as much as your truck stretches the boundaries of the road (seriously, this thing is huge). All the buttons in the center stack are well-labeled, easily found and big enough to stab away at without hitting the wrong one. It even has a volume and tuning knob. Yeehaw!  But look at the design. And the styling, or lack thereof. ItÂ’s plain and lacking in imagination. The whole center stack is just one big slab of black plastic, and the only splashes of color or style to distinguish it visually are bits of silver surrounding knobs and bits of gray surrounding air vents. That's certainly not enough to make it attractive. There are token pieces of "wood" inserted on Denali models, but they're almost hidden away along the center console and doors.  The screen looks as if itÂ’s scrunched into the top of the stack due to the vents curving in on both sides, making it look smaller than its perfectly acceptable 8-inch size. That just makes it more obvious that GM doesn't offer something to challenge the gigantic 12-inch optional screen on the Ram 1500. Not good, because size does matter when it comes to trucks, even if it's measured in a touchscreen's inches rather than engine displacement. LetÂ’s not discount how good all of the tech is in the Sierra 1500, though. GMÂ’s infotainment software that runs on the screen is glitch-free and runs like lightning through screens and menus. The performance is impressive, and of course both Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are on board.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.