This Is The New GMC Sierra EV, Which Will Start Around $50,000 After Launching As A $108,000 Pickup With Over 750 HP, 400 Miles Of Range, And A Midgate

Screen Shot 2022 10 20 At 6.40.12 Pm

GMC just debuted the new 2024 GMC Sierra EV, an 800-volt , 754 horsepower electric pickup built on the same Ultium platform as the Silverado EV. Here’s what we know.

Okay, let’s get to the basics, which GMC outlines in its press release:

The 2024 Sierra EV Denali Edition 1’s Ultium battery pack enables its GM-estimated driving range of 400 miles1 on a full charge. It is also a structural element of the vehicle, which contributes to its overall strength, durability and performance. Furthermore, the placement of the battery pack lowers the truck’s center of gravity, while enhancing ride comfort and driving confidence on and off the road.

Front and rear electric drive units channel a GM-estimated 754 horsepower and 785 lb-ft of torque to the wheels via an e4WD system in Max Power mode, giving the truck exceptional traction and capability in almost every driving scenario.

The output and range figures are basically the same as those of the Silverado platform mate, so you can expect the setup to be similar: Dual motors powered by a giant 200 kWh battery pack between them. Here’s what the Silverado EV’s battery and drivetrain situation looks like:

Screen Shot 2022 10 20 At 6.44.48 Pm

Right out of the gate, there will be only the Sierra EV Denali Edition 1, which will come in early 2024.

Screen Shot 2022 10 20 At 6.52.25 Pmd

Later, for the 2025 model year, AT4 and Elevation trims join the party. Here’s how those look:

Screen Shot 2022 10 20 At 6.50.34 PmScreen Shot 2022 10 20 At 6.49.48 Pm

Screen Shot 2022 10 20 At 6.53.17 Pm

I think they all look great. Nice and aggressive. There’s up to 9,500 pounds worth of towing capacity, up to 1,300 pounds of payload capacity, there’s a big frunk up front, and most importantly: There’s the Midgate, just like you know and love from the old Chevrolet Avalanche:

Screen Shot 2022 10 20 At 6.54.27 Pm

Here’s the frunk:

Screen Shot 2022 10 21 At 9.03.19 Am

As for the interior, there’s a huge 16.8-inch screen, an 11-inch gauge cluster, and a head-up display “offering 14 diagonal inches of view.” It looks good; it’s nothing wacky and over-the-top like you might expect out of a new EV, but it’s still nice:

Screen Shot 2022 10 21 At 8.58.09 Am

The price for the Sierra EV Denali Edition 1 is $107,000 plus $1,695 “destination freight charge.” GMC says “Further details for the full range of Sierra EV models will be announced closer to the start of production, with MSRPs starting around $50,000 (plus DFC).”

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit

49 Responses

    1. New idea to evaluate electric trucks! Take an electric truck with a trailer at the max rated weight and see how far you can drive at full throttle up the Ike Gauntlet before overheating or running out of juice.

      1. Doesn’t TFLTruck do essentially that with every truck they test? None of them overheat or run out of juice because the tow ratings now include towing up Davis Dam so if they couldn’t handle it they wouldn’t be rated to tow that much.

        1. It’s an EV. They aren’t designed for drivers. The EV is a first step to self driving. And self driving is the final step in government controlling where you go how you go or if you go. But the Borg Collective is in charge so no turning back.
          Anyone notice Biden acts like a Tesla in FSD mode. Okay at first but need to stay ready to take control before he drives outside the lines or rams an emergency vehicle?

  1. A truck cannot look “nice” and “aggressive” at the same time, IMHO. These two adjectives contradict each other. An original Beetle looks nice. A first-generation Twingo looks nice, or a first-generation Picanto.

    1. I mean, he was obviously using the phrase “nice and” in the colloquial, adjectival sense meaning “satisfactorily.” Mind you, I agree with you that aggressive vehicles rarely look nice. I also disagree with DT thay the Sierra EV looks aggressive. I think it looks assertive and rugged, but that’s different. The AT4 is a little unhinged, though.

      1. It was, admittedly, an extremely unenlightening/uncreative few words to describe my thoughts on the vehicle’s looks.

        But it roughly does communicate what I think: I dig it. Looks tough, as truck should (in most people’s minds. I actually like happy trucks, too).

  2. The issue I have with this truck is the same issue I have with the Hummer EV. It’s using an absolutely MASSIVE 200+kwh battery pack that is awful for the environment. So bad, in fact, that it’s actually worse for the environment than a normal ICE vehicle. The emissions from creating the Hummer EV”s battery pack are about what a Toyota Highlander would emit over the course of 13 years, which is just astonishing. Assuming the Sierra uses the same 212kwh battery pack the Hummer does, this will be equally bad for the environment. It’ll also probably weigh about as much as the Hummer, making it not only horribly inefficient but also bad for any person who gets in an accident with one of these in a regular car.

    1. Sorry sir you are wrong. My question is we ate investing way too much in EV development and virtually nothing into sex robots. I thought we could trust Elon to develop them but then he got a girlfriend had sex and oops no more sex robot. You’d think for him development of a sex robot would be cheaper than divorce and losing half his money? And easier to develop than FSD because slower ramming speed and no government regulations yet.

  3. so basically they want to advertise a low price, but really cannot make one, so make them unobtanium to the average truck buyer, and then make excuses later when the bet on future commodities of scale pricing does not work out?

  4. Maybe it’s just because I’m generally not interested in trucks, but I look at this and think “okay fine, but maybe do a Terrain instead.” It’s expensive and huge and entirely silly.

    Though taking EV tech and immediately going to a dick measuring contest is an extremely American choice.

  5. It’s a much better-looking truck than the Silverado, and the stats are impressive. It looks like potentially an excellent EV all around, and I imagine I’d be happy to have one. Not at the price of the Denali of course, but that 409-mile range sure sounds nice, and I do love me a midgate.

    1. Exactly. The only thing is, the price of vehicles has gone to where regular jobbers are going to have to do weird contortions to afford them. I’d like someone around here to do an article on the last 100 years, with graphs showing the average (non-union) construction worker’s wage, and the average price of the trucks they used that year. It looks to me like this transition to PHEV or full EV may be pricing itself to inevitable failure. And that’s gotta change. Because we need to make that change as fast as we can legitimately do so.

      1. Judging by the fact that no fewer than four of the guys at my branch recently bought themselves Tacomas, I think construction workers are finding ways to afford trucks. Not $100,000 trucks mind you, but the existence of a $100,000 truck doesn’t mean you can’t still get a solid lightly-used truck for low-to-mid 30s.

  6. Batteries as a structural element caught my eye…
    So, not hot-swappable?
    How will this affect the ability to replace the battery?
    I’m guessing that flexing your suspension at the local 4×4 meet is not recommended

      1. Not needed? Depends on what you mean by “need”. Standard swappable battery modules would go a long way towards solving many EV adoption problems. Once logistics are in place that you can be as sure to get a fully charged battery at an EV swap station as you can be to get petrol at a filling station, EVs can be driven like ICE cars can, and people who live in appartments without at-home charging facilities can finally consider driving one.
        But if you see EVs as a plaything only for rich house-dwellers, then no, not needed.

        1. The problem with a “standard” battery is that it will be heavily compromised for all applications. We haven’t even come up with a standard battery design for use in a flashlight yet, just several radically different ones. And that’s an application with no package constraints or water cooling to worry about.

          Then you have the logistics nightmare of having to store hundreds of batteries with several different sizes, voltages and connectors (you don’t want to plug 800V in to anything other than a system designed for 800V) and each of those battery packs will cost tens of thousands of dollars. And you’ll need one of these massive battery facilities every 50 miles (or whatever the distance is that you’re willing to go to in order to swap the battery in your commuter car you can’t charge at home) in every direction across the country.

          And once the battery facilities are full of thousands of batteries there is no way anyone is going to change to a new, better cell chemistry. It’s a massive investment in a dead end.

      1. This is my point hidden in a shitty hot-take. We can’t lose sight of the fact that batteries contain nasty elements which cost a lot of environmental damage to produce, and anything that makes it harder to recycle them is imo not a good thing.

    1. I could be wrong, but I believe they are a structural element insofar as they provide additional rigidity being inserted into the frame. I think they can still be removed and replaced, they are integrated into the design of the frame, but are separate pieces.

Leave a Reply