Just yesterday, General Motors unveiled the new 2024 Chevy Silverado HD ZR2Â and Silverado HD ZR2 Bison, dropping in a new flagship, heavy duty off-roader for the Chevy Silverado pickup lineup. While the 2024 Chevy Silverado HD ZR2 is equipped with a long list of off-road goodies to enhance its prowess in the dirt, it is does not come equipped with a front e-locker. Now, GM Authority is exploring the reasoning behind this move.
Highlight equipment features for the 2024 Chevy Silverado HD ZR2 include a 1.5-inch suspension lift, MultiMatic DSSV dampers, specific front upper and lower control arms, specific steering knuckles, a larger steel transfer case skid plate, a front aluminum skid plate, 18-inch aluminum wheels wrapped in 35-inch Goodyear wrangler territory MT tires, and, of course, a rear e-locker. Looking over that list, the absence of a front e-locker may seem like something of an omission. So, what happened?
As explained by GM Authority Executive Editor Alex Luft in an exclusive new video, the reasoning starts with the 2024 Chevy Silverado HD ZR2’s new Off-Road mode. When engaged, off-road mode alters settings for a number of different components, including the brakes, traction control, stability control, throttle response, and transmission. The mode also removes the rear-axle locking speed limitation.
According to Chevrolet engineers, the extra traction that would be provided by a new front e-locker simply would not offset the mass and changes required for its installation. Rather, the traction benefits provided by the altered stability control settings in Off-Road mode provide 95 percent of the traction benefits a front e-locker would offer.
Check out the video below for more information. Discussion of the 2024 Chevy Silverado HD ZR2’s lack of a front e-locker can be found around the four-minute mark:
For the sake of comparison, the Ford Super Duty Tremor off-road package includes a rear e-locker and a front limited-slip differential, but not a front e-locker. The Ram 2500 Power Wagon is equipped with both front and rear e-lockers, which, in theory, may provide it with an advantage in some off-road driving situations, while the Ram 2500 Rebel has a rear e-locker only.
As a reminder, the 2024 Chevy Silverado HD ZR2 is equipped a standard with the naturally aspirated 6.6L V8 L8T gasoline engine, while the updated 6.6L V8 L5P turbodiesel Duramax engine is offered as an optional upgrade. Under the skin, the Chevy Silverado HD rides on the more-capable variant of the GM T1 platform. Production of the 2024 Chevy Silverado HD ZR2 will begin at the GM Flint Assembly plant in Michigan this summer.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevy Silverado news, Chevy news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
Chevy is cheapening out on what is likely a $90,000 truck.
They aren’t needed, only a handful of people in the other trucks even get them in a situation where they are of any use (that is an extreme situation). A front brake based system is far superior, especially in an IFS. A big truck like this won’t get in situations it is needed. The Silverado is the same. Only the Colorado could maybe make a legit case for use but even then, not that many people would get in that situation. It may take a half a second longer but a brake based traction system can send all of the power to the single wheel with traction. Jeep and Toyota have shown that to work incredibly well and you don’t have the same level of risk involved trying to lock a dif that turn and droops/compresses with different caster and camber.
It would have had to have been way overly engineered on an HD truck to last only for a small handful of people at best that can make use of one. Let those people install their own, this keeps costs down across the board for GM and the customer. They should have done the same with the Silverado. Most of the time it is just a conversation point at the local starbucks.
Yeah that argument works for lowly LT grade Silverados. But on the ZR2/Bison, the lack of a front e-locker is a huge miss. This isn’t a typical Silverado pickup. The ZR2/Bison is a toy, and it’s a top of the line one at that. It’s the pickup version of the Corvette Z06 or Tesla Plaid. It should be the best money can buy.
Enthusiasts, overlanders, and some buyers will point out the absence of a front E-locker even if it’s practicality in this particularly truck is limited. For what this truck costs and it’s stated mission as a ZR2/Bison rig….it should absolutely come with an E-locker.
Loaded HD pickups like this today are the equivalent of the 1980s Mercedes SEL500. They should be overbuilt as hell (to a standard), and have all the mechanical bragging rights that someone paying nearly 6 figures would expect. Few people used those goofy headlight wipers from the 1980’s Mercedes. But their existence said a lot about the car and the motivation of the people who designed it. And you can bet the owners were impressed by it and showed it to their buddies, because it wasn’t available BMW’s and Cadillacs at the time.
The F250 doesn’t have a front e-locker, but it has a limited slip. Chevy should have done an E-locker here.
Get ready for it. Next year the 1500 will lose the front locker, and probably the Colorado and Canyon will lose it as well. GM’s way of showing that they don’t give a crap about their customers. Offer something great, then take it away, but still raise the prices.
By the way, if you let MOST of those people who have a toy like this, they WILL get into situations where they need the front locker time and again.
GM has DEFINITELY cheaped out once again!
I saw this coming from the start.
You have zero idea on the amount of people that own trucks like this and what they do with them. Jeeps for example, barely a 1/4 of them take them off road (it was like 40% at the beginning of the 2000’s per Jeep). So no, not most, not some, but barely any would get them selves in to a situiatuon where a front locker is needed. A front brake based system will get those select few more than likely out of the situation to begin with, just as GM states in the article.
Member 12, did you just use the front locker necessity as an image purchase for a luxury vehicle? That is sad…
News flash, that nice $72k starting price many boast as very reasonable, is $76k with a front locker. These trucks aren’t image purchases or luxury drivers, they are work vehicles, and people like you are why they are getting so expensive as all that testing to put in massaging seats and fancy gizmos, gets passed down the line that the base models also have to pick up which prices out the blue collar guys that use them FOR ACTUAL WORK.
It isn’t a huge miss, it is a spot on assessment of unnecessary waste for what the truck will actually be used and do. Honestly, they could ditch it in the half ton ZR2 as well, bring that cost down a little that no one actually uses any ways…
Agree 100 %. I prefer the G80 over an E locker anyway. Why? Because the only real place you would need a locker is in towing. Brake limited slip these days is more accurate, responsive and doesn’t compromise your steering. The only time would would need a locker is when you got a trailer in tow and you would burn up your pads. In this situation, the G80 is more reliable, and consistent. It’s something you’ll never really need and exists solely to point out to your friends you have the best 1980’s off roading had to offer
Any of you guys heard of snow? Snow plowing your own driveway? Pulling your fish house up a frozen landing off of a lake? Front locker completes the package.
Snow is the worst for a locker in nearly every situation, it allows for a much worse slide when the tires inevitably break traction. Why do you think AWD does better in most situations? It allows some back and forth. Only thing it is beneficial for is when are already stuck or traversing very slowly about the worst of situations and you better not be in a tight spot if it slips.
There is no comparison between fake and real when it comes to lockers. Until you’ve tried a model with and without you’ll never understand just how seriously different the performance is. Try climbing slick WV mountains with a load of firewood, gravel, water tank, cabin building materials, or anything else with significant weight. One slip makes you slide uncontrollably until you hit something. Lockers give you power to both sides before the slip, 100% of the time. Alternatives try to give power AFTER the slip, when it’s too late making damage likely. Trust experienced people on this; it is more true than you can guess. Stop calling this feature that of a toy. It should be for people that have a real life, not a “life-style”…
You do realize when a front locker slips it is over, where a front brake system allows back and forth to each tire, one of which isn’t spinning and has traction. Instead of sliding, it stops the spinning wheel (that now will regain traction) send power to the traction wheel to see if it does, and back again, which guess what? DOESN’T MAKE YOU SLIDE!!! Repeat after me, and write this over and over on a chalk board, A FRONT LOCKER IS NOT FOR SNOW. All those guys you see running in the mountains in deep snow, usually keep the front locker unlocked until stuck… When it loses traction, which it will, the whole vehicle slides. If it was beneficial it would be on option packages for AWD and other snow packages (which by the way all wheel drive is superior in most instances in snow). There is a reason they are only offered on the most extreme off roaders that are geared towards MOAB and the Rubicon. They aren’t for slick fire roads and snowy one and a half laners. Some of you that are thinking that show exactly why you haven’t had proper experience with them and shouldn’t have access to them. I don’t even know where to begin. Just a question, those of you that are talking about a locker in snow conditions, do any of you own a ZR2 Colorado and boast about using the locker on ice covered streets in Texas by chance? Either way, just now. If you talk about needing it in those situations, are you in the 99.98% that don’t need it, simple as that. Common sense was spot on.
I don’t think you’re statements are 100% correct. My daughter has a Lexus RX 350 AWD with a button for locking all the wheels and everything I’ve read about it says that it’s to be used in Snow, Ice, Sand, Mud, etc. to give you the “most available traction” and to “get you unstuck.” This is coming directly from Lexus and there are several YouTube videos about it. To say that a “front locker is not for snow” sounds naive, at best. I’m not sure where you’re getting your info, but you sound like an internet know it all troll. Just saying…..
The RX is AWD. That center diff locks the power front to back, not side to side, two COMPLETELY different things. No trolling at all, just know what I am talking about. Your daughters AWD system keeps power front to back in the locked mode as it needs to, it needs to constantly send power to front and rear as opposed to having it cut out front to back with the delay in engagement. What is doesn’t do, and the WHOLE point of this discussion, is lock the power side to side. AWD lets the system when one tire slips, stop, and send power to the other side and see if it has traction. That is what your daughters system does. It doesn’t just keep it locked side to side and if it over comes traction slide off the side of the road. That is why AWD and your daughters system is superior, and acts similar to AWD system in a truck when in 4WD.
Does that make sense? Info comes from years or living and driving off road up north in snow and ice, years of closely following the intricacies of cars/trucks and power delivery and constant reviews and interest. Maybe be a little more informed on what you are talking about, a AWD system in your daughters Lexus is not what we big boys are talking about…
I agree with Todd – It’s all about the snow. Driving up a snowy road and getting stuck with one front tire spinning and the other just sitting there is like having a 2WD which is just worthless in snow country. Hope some of you guys would choose to think outside your tiny box.
I had a 2002 big block suburban. I put an eaton e-locker in it. The front locker was necessary several times.
If you haven’t owned or driven power wagon or the Rubicons,
Please be quiet.
I know I am not likely to convince anybody that is arguing on the internet, but I have plenty of experience with three wheel drives with back and forth traction such as a-track and other virtual brandings versus four wheel drives with a proper front locker. There is a significant difference that should be respected and over time you get to know when each is necessary and best for the application and situation. Regardless of your reasons for it, they’re always should be an option at the price points these trucks have. In my situation in rural West Virginia, it is worth it for us to pay what it costs to have a front locker and I wish I did not have to worry about warranty issues when I retrofit a truck. Without a front locker your maximum traction only comes from 75% of the tires at any given time. With a front locker it’s 100% and that makes a very noticeable difference in the mountains here when it comes to getting your cargo to your destination over unimproved roads, especially when people depend on you making it in a time sensitive manner. I believe the true reason manufacturers don’t offer this has more to do with not trusting their buyers to know when it is appropriate to use the front locker since it can be dangerous in some situations especially on public roads when others are driving on the same road.