The all-new 2021 Chevrolet Tahoe and 2021 Chevrolet Suburban both come equipped with a new independent rear suspension (IRS), which promises big changes for the full-size SUVs. However, it’s looking like the Chevrolet Silverado may follow suit with a new IRS of its own, as we’ve covered previously. In fact, it’s all but officially confirmed that the upcoming battery-electric Chevrolet Silverado will come with IRS. So then, GM Authority readers – how do you feel about that?
For reference, the current Chevrolet Silverado 1500 comes with a solid rear axle and semi-elliptic, variable-rate, two-stage multileaf springs. What’s more, the current Silvy is built on the GM T1 vehicle platform, the same bones as the new Chevy Tahoe and Suburban.
Independent rear suspension in the 2021 Chevrolet Suburban.
Broadly speaking, an IRS offers a number of benefits compared the solid rear axle found in the current Chevy Silverado. For example, IRS setups typically offer much better handling and ride quality compared to a solid rear axle, two characteristics that have driven the adoption of IRS across countless segments and platforms over the years.
That said, a solid rear axle is also typically lighter than a comparable IRS setup, while also offering lower maintenance and manufacturing costs, plus higher towing capacity and payload as well – all crucial factors in the Silverado nameplate.
What’s more, solid rear axle setups are typically considered more durable than an IRS. However, in a recent interview with Road Show, General Motors chief engineer Tim Asoklis described the new IRS on the 2021 Chevy Suburban and Tahoe as being “incredibly” durable, and should be more than up to towing, hauling, and off-roading – all the usual Chevrolet Silverado activities.
Regardless, we want to know – how do you feel about a Chevrolet Silverado with independent rear suspension? Are you behind the idea, or is it not for you? Are you still on the fence? Make sure to let us know in the following poll, and don’t forget to subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevrolet Silverado news, Chevrolet news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
If they can put it together with the same performance then give ‘er.
Makes perfect sense for a premium electric pickup. The frame can be slightly lower and the battery pack can be placed under the bed.
Otherwise – not so much. There are already a lot of unnecessary material and technology costs added to pickups now to help companies meet CAFE regulations.
Think it depends what truck is used for. As a commuter vehicle or one that is mostly pavement and not worried about ground clearance IRS is great. Heavy towing and heavy loads would think straight axle would be better.
No vote here as it is yes for IRS being offered but it must be optional. Let the people choose what they want or need.
Not likely,as it would require two different frames. Probably independent for the 1500. And solid axle for 2500,3500.
Would be great on a regular cab short box. Thing would handle nice with less bouncing on tight bumpy curve.
Not as standard. But making it an [expensive] option on LTZ and High Country makes sense
Let the market decide.
Folks will complain if GM doesn’t offer it and complain when they do.
True, overall you’ll never be able to make everyone happy.
Hell no. I have bought 3 new Chevrolet trucks in the last 6 years. Independent rear suspension is great for ride…but horrible for high load capacity. For those wannabe truck people who real do not use a truck, independent rear suspension would be fine; but for the RVers, construction guys, and anyone else who needs to put a lot of weight in the bed….independent suspension is a deal breaker. Looks like GM will be giving my business to Ford or Dodge. I want strong, maintenance free leaf springs on my trucks. You can keep your independent rear suspension with expensive air bags and compressor systems that eventually need replaced.
Do not make it standard or fully electric it should be offered only as an option battery manufacturing is by far worse for the environment do the research
Yes, do the IRS, not so much for the ride, but for electrification. Hub motors are the easiest way to electrify a vehicle, but they are heavy and add a lot of unsprung weight. Dumping the solid axle and going to an IRS will greatly alleviate this issue and allow the bed floor to be significantly lower.
Do it so that its an option… Maybe IRS on the higher trim levels??? Even if it IRS is standard on trims like the High Country, make it so you can switch to solid rear axle…
Chevy guy, As much as I like your idea, GM seems to have a little problem with that whole “offering customers options” thing.
*cough* 5 CT6 paint colors, no more 1.6 L diesel *cough* having to spend an extra 6k to go up a trim level in the burban just to get heated seats *cough* no more sedans *cough* one engine in the XT4, and 6, 1 tranny option in the HD trucks, very limited interior color options in a few vehicles *cough* no optional larger fuel tank on new trucks *cough*
I’m not a big Fan of Ford save for the Mustang and the F150 (I personally like the current F150 better than the new Ram or Silverado 1500), but they do a hell of a job giving customers options.
Since when does Ram give options? They only have one transmission option and the only viable engine choice in the 1500 is an ancient, and relatively weak, 5.7 Hemi.
Make it optional. Or standard on the 1/2 ton minus the work truck. Keep the 3/4 and full ton as leaf spring.
Okay, now show me a graphic of the drive train superimposed onto the picture above. Then I’ll vote.
Makes sense for a BEV or premium 1500 series truck. Not for a base model 1500 or HD though.
Stop calling it irs that is just lazy. There is only 1 irs and they suck. The independent rear suspension will make it handle much better. Ill pass on air suspension they will leak they all do.
GM definitely should give the trucks IRS, HOWEVER, It should be optional, and I feel it would best be executed in a Avalanche style vehicle.
Take a CC Silverado (or Sierra) give it IRS, a Rambox type storage system, a separate interior from the actual truck (more SUV esque) and a tonneau cover (the mid gate would be fantastic if brought back).
Hummers had it. Should have done it years ago.
THE SILVERADO IS A ” PICK UP TRUCK ” ITS NOT A CAR!!!! FOR THE CERTAIN ONES THAT ARE SO WORRIED ABOUT HOW THE SILVERADO RIDES BUY A ROLLS ROYCE!!
I am from Saudia Arabia . Yes by all means . But make it optional.
It will make ride more comfortable.
Forget the IRS….bring back the Extended Cab…..ASAP
There is room for both. It is great to have choice.
COMMON SENSE,, TRUCK!!!!!
My opinion on IRS and IFS has not changed since 1988.
With a solid axel, just the overall longevity is undeniable !
Tire ware do to misalignment !
And so many more parts for troubles, Axle boots for the first !
But I do like the drivability of them.
I do however STRONGLY APPOSE any kind of air only suspension !!!!!! They ALL Leak, the compressors ALL go bad, and in 10 years the GM trucks will look like all those air ride sedans driving around with a saggy rear !!
I think with this move, just like with the interior, GM is just going to have to break down and spend even more of that money stuff and make two 1500 truck options, interior and drivetrain.
GM needs this, yet if GM still wants to be known at all for making a work truck, this fancy stuff needs to go away as it just adds unneeded cost.
Is GM considering IRS for HD pickups?
Oshkosh has the Tak-4 in heavy trucks.
Camaro went IRS
Mustang went IRS
it was bound to happen.
I figured that RAM would have been first with it in a half ton.
The problem is, one company jumps off the roof of a tall building an the rest of the manufacturers do! There lies the problem why cars look the same an why Ford’s an GM trucks look alike WHY?!! A what is the deal with the led lights around the headlights other than raising the price of the vehicle there worthless! Talk about manufacturers copy the other check out the front of a Ford an the front of the Chevy or GMC truck ! Back in the day you would see a car or truck going down the road you could tell what it make it was without looking for the badge! The cars are just as bad as looking the same, COPY CATS!!
I can’t see them offering it as an option. That would increase manufacturing costs substantially. It will be one or the other.
Wont buy one ever. Have IFS 4×4 suburban now and its junk. Here come the 4k after market kits to change it to straight axle in back so that it can 4wheel. Independent suspension is terrible for supporting a uneven or top heavy load. Why do think big trucks dont have them. Loaded accidents will skyrocket.
Just another way to price these trucks out of the market of the average North American customers.
IRS would allow for an awesome performance truck no doubt.
This suspension option was talked about in Motor Trend Magazine during the timeline when the 2007 Silverado came to market, based on a very heated market between Pick Ups and SUV’s today, it would be wise for GM to bring forth that as standard equipment in the Custom through High Country Models and Optional in Work Truck trim along with the revised interior that GM has also proposed for the upcoming 2021 Model Yeat. They need to move forward with this, the upcoming Tahoe/Suburban is already on board with that as being Standard Equipment.
A Tahoe an Suburban is not a PICKUP it is a passenger vehicle made for people an for the replacement of the good old station wagons they can’t haul what pickups can haul! Try to put a round bail of hay in the back over the back seats! IRS has no business on a pickup!!
As long as it doesn’t do the following
1) Drive up the the already high prices
2) Being solely done for the electric movement
3) Take away from the nice weight loss we saw on the new T1’s
4) Cheapen or de-content more things out of these already de-contented trucks
I agree with some of you that the lower trim trucks should stick with what they have and the IRS could be on the high end variants and optional on say the LT and RST etc
“That said, a solid rear axle is also typically lighter than a comparable IRS setup, while also offering lower maintenance and manufacturing costs, plus higher towing capacity and payload as well”
Where’s the info for this claim? Your article about the Tahoe/Burb getting the IRS states that it gets a slightly lower towing capacity due to losing the solid rear axle but now the IRS gives a higher towing capacity? If it truly gave higher towing I believe it would be a no brainer. The reason it is up for debate is because you lose a little towing capability.
I think maybe give the 1500’s IRS or make a solid axle an option. And leave the 2500’s with the solid axle.
I drive a 59 year old Chevy truck rated for 1,930lbs carrying capacity which came stock with four wheel independent suspension and it works fine. I’ve never put more than 1,600lbs in it but even that is a substantial load for a current half ton in the box. Although it is a light duty build and is powered only by a six cylinder, it is fine for driving and for hauling loads. It is too light and underpowered for towing but I can’t see why that would be adversely affected by independent suspension.
It’s a freaking truck!!!! Use it like a truck not like a European luxury sedan… USE IT LIKE A TRUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!
THATS WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT. ( COMMON SENSE ) THANK YOU!!!!
Do not do it. This is just one more way to sissify, loose capability and/or reliability for doing what trucks are meant for…. WORK. As an exclusive gm truck owner for both business and personal use for the last 30 years, I am disgusted by the moves to make trucks a car with a bed. As someone that uses a truck to put food on the table daily, whether plowing snow, hauling tools to job, or pulling a loaded equipment trailer, all of my trucks work. Our gm plow trucks have been lasting 20 plus years plowing snow commercially. Unheard of from Ford or ram let alone in a half ton. Unavailable regular cab short bed and sissified everything is just driving me unhappily toward an compromising alternative. In getting rid of car lines in favor of trucks, gm is essentially just making the trucks into cars. Hope everyone likes their new Prius pick up.
It’s bad enough with front wheel drive cars or rear wheel drive cars going to alignment not only getting the normal front end alignment but getting the rear alignment! I just can’t imagine wearing the rear tires wearing out because the rear wheels are out of alignment!!!
Can you imagine a truck getting a 4 wheel alignment? A 4 WHEEL ALIGNMENT ON A PICKUP!!!? REALLY? People with pickups have them so they can haul things . A PICKUP with IRS you would be in the alignment shop all the time $$$$ because you use likes pickup !
NO! IRS DOES NOT BELONG ON A FULL-SIZE TRUCK!
I understand the hesitancy of our Chevy Truck loving friends. However I will point them toward the H1 HUMMER. That unit was all independent suspension. As an engineer, I must caution General Motors, IF YOU ARE GOING TO DEVELOP A FULLY IRS/IFS (independent rear suspension/ independent front suspension) TRUCK, TIE UP THE BEAN COUNTERS AND LET YOUR ENGINEERS WORK, ELSE YOU END UP WITH A 737-MAX. All of the really tough trucks that are home made are IFS/IRS.
As long as no one tries to skimp in the development, I know there will be many happy campers. It will have to be sold as an option because there are too many that will not want them … there are those who still distrust electronic fuel injection …
Makes it much easies to slam or lift, go for it GM!
With the long association with the H1, I would think that there has been much learned in the medium duty truck IFS and IRS. I am personally confident the independent suspensions will draw many followers as the benefits are realized.
IRS equals more parts, more maintenance and more issues. Leave the solid rear axle alone. You already killed the durability with IRS in the Tahoe and Suburban.
Yes bring on the IRS, but I agree it should be an option or only on the 1500’s I would also love to see Awd as an option! I want a v6TT, IRS, AWD, single cab short box straight from the dealer!!!