The late Sir Terence Conran, foremost of the wave of industrial designers who introduced design literacy to a grey post-war Great Britian, believed everyone’s lives could be improved with a better-designed salad bowl. I’m not sure about that, seeing as salads are to be endured rather than enjoyed, but the point is that good design should be democratic and accessible — available to everyone in the products they use everyday. The humble Bic ballpoint. IKEA’s Billy bookcase. A Bialetti Moka stove top coffee pot. The Swatch. Nike Air Max 90 sneakers. These are everyday goods whose great design is overlooked because of their sheer ubiquity. To this list of design underdogs I will add one, an everyday vehicle that never gets the attention its outstanding design deserves: the GMT400 trucks and SUVs. (Yes, I’m aware the SUVs had different platform codes but they’re essentially identical, and I’m including them for the purposes of this discussion.)
Just how good were they? Think about this: Not only were they in production for nearly twelve years, look at what came before and after. The GMT400 was a huge step forward functionally, technically and aesthetically over the previous GM ‘square body’ that preceded it. The design language was so successful the first time around it couldn’t easily be improved upon, and the replacement GMT 800s that appeared in 2000 were a retrograde step, visually speaking.
It’s an automotive irony that the minivan, that most visible manifestation of virility, is a sex-free device. More efficient in terms of packaging and fuel economy, by the mid-eighties it was well on its way to replacing traditional sedans and wagons on driveways across America. But if you wanted accessible eight-cylinder power, plenty of space for passengers and cargo, and body-on-frame simplicity in a style that didn’t look like you had given up on life, your options were becoming limited. Recognizing customers were starting to buy pickup trucks for personal use, GM went all out to make the GMT400s as refined as possible.
But before I, an automobile designer, get into the legendary styling, let’s talk about what this truck was.
A Massive Step Forward
The GMT400 marked the first time trucks moved away from being strictly utilitarian commercial vehicles. The truck market was evolving – by the early 1980s they were no longer being purchased solely as work vehicles. Non-traditional customers wanted a more car-like driving experience with better ride quality, improved fuel economy and increased interior comfort. Previously trucks had been hardworking, mechanically robust but somewhat unrefined vehicles with few concessions to anything other than standing up to an honest day’s hard work – heavy duty live axles and leaf springs were great for hauling and towing, but not good for providing a car-like driving experience.
Introduced in 1988, the Chevrolet C/K 1500s (and their GMC Sierra twins) were a revelation. According to the CarHP website, they were the first trucks designed using CAD (Computer Aided Design). I couldn’t corroborate this but the slickness and consistency of the GMT400s’ appearance, coupled with the fact they were fractionally lower and narrower than their predecessors while providing larger door openings and increased interior volume, certainly points to the surfacing and body engineering being carried out with the aid of digital tools. [Ed Note: This sounds plausible; the first Jeep designed using CAD is known to be the Jeep Grand Cherokee, developed in the late 1980s, so the timeline makes sense. -DT].
Underneath, the front suspension did away with the live axle and all its attendant compromises, and replaced it with an independent control arm set-up – sprung with coils for the 2WD models and torsion bars for the 4WD trucks, which introduced the Insta-Trac shift-on-the-fly transfer case, further increasing usability. There was power steering as standard, and ABS on the rear axle to prevent empty-bed lock ups. The front frame rails were hydroformed to reduce weight and increase strength and rigidity.
Why Use One Button When You Can Use Two
The interior banished the cold vinyl and harsh trim of the previous trucks. In came plush velour liberally applied across the seats and door panels. Because GM was incapable of getting everything quite right, the original GMT400 dashboards had confusing half moon dials in an odd layout that, according to Hemmings, were hard to read. GM was also in the habit of using two buttons where one would do, leading to confusing secondary control arrangements, although both these issues were addressed in an update for 1995.
Upon introduction, aside from the regular cab, there was an extended cab available and a sporty step-side bed made from fiberglass. The larger cab and narrower bed were not GM firsts – Ford had previously offered a step-side on the F-150 but dropped it in 1987, and Mopar had an extended cab Ram until 1982. But GM offering them on its new truck range was an acknowledgment of the changing nature of the types of customers buying trucks, and both Ford and Mopar were forced to follow the GMT400’s lead when their revised trucks emerged in 1992 and 1994, respectively. In terms of expanding the appeal of trucks to non-truck buyers, GM was leading the way.
In 1990, Chevrolet debuted the SS454 with a honking 7.4 liter V8. A short bed, regular cab muscle truck good for sub-eight second runs to sixty, it was the progenitor of all today’s high performance full-sized pickups. Then two years later came a further body style on the GMT400 theme whose magnificence was matched match only by its capability – a car so perfect it in its appearance it simply makes me weep – the 1992 Suburban. Now the GMT400 range truly offered something for everyone.
Simple, Not Simplistic
None of this would have mattered one bit if the truck didn’t look good. Fortunately, it looked every inch the modern, capable all-American vehicle it was. Remember, this truck debuted in 1988, so serious design work would have probably commenced in 1983 or 1984. It’s staggering how advanced for the time it is – flush door handles, flush glazing (with an increased glass area), flush trim. Every detail sits perfectly on the surface without interrupting the overall cohesiveness of the appearance.
The profile is simple, almost like something a child would come up with if you asked them to draw a truck. Little more than three boxes placed end on end. But it’s not simplistic and rigid. The filet that runs along the top of the bed and continues into the cant rail and down onto the hood is subtle; not too soft, and not too tight. The feature line management is exceptionally clean; one single line that runs off the top of the taillight, down the bed, creates the bottom edge for the side window and gently arcs down the top of the fender.
There’s a neat inset feature running between the wheels and around the rear that provides a border for the trim pieces worn by the higher trim levels, so they look properly integrated and not just tacked on. The inset also works perfectly as the break separating the paint colors of two-tone trucks. The gentle curvature of the body side gives a feeling of solidity and strength – important because you don’t want a working vehicle to look weak. Anchoring the whole thing are wheel arch flares that are small but extremely sharply defined, meaning you get a nice straight consistent highlight along the length of the truck without any interruptions.
There’s a crease running down the center line of the car I like to think is a call back to past GM Vice President of Design Bill Mitchell’s ‘sheer look’. Whether it is or not I don’t know, but he certainly would have approved of the GMT400’s front Down the Road Graphic – cleverly hiding its verticality with split lighting units and strong horizontal shapes to emphasize width over height. The grill strikes a balance between quiet authority and boldness without looking overbearing – something lost on the furious visages of today’s trucks.
GM created what they called a more formal look for the GMC version by isolating the grill with vertical body color elements. I don’t think the GMC treatment is quite as successful as the Chevrolet grill, but the real horror show was reserved for the hastily introduced first generation Cadillac Escalade, rushed into production in 1998 to compete with the newly released Lincoln Navigator. The more rounded, pillowy forms and enlarged grille and bumper simply don’t work are out of place with the rest of the bodywork.
Remember in the Aztek discussion how I talked about how the bumper supporting the tailgate in the lowered position was badly done? At the back of the GMT400 as the inset feature line wraps around to the rear it becomes the gap to allow the tailgate to drop, supported by a simple bumper with an upwards facing surface. It’s how these little details are so considered and integrated that make the overall design so good. It’s all of a piece – nothing jars or stands out to upset the harmony of the whole thing.
So Good I Used Suburbans As Mood Images
I could wax lyrical for hours about how good I think the Suburbans are. It’s a big car at nearly 5.6 meters long but it hides it so well. This is due to two things – the wraparound glazing runs up to the roof, so there isn’t an overabundance of painted metal work adding visual weight. And something shared with the trucks: the stance; the rocker panels are in line with the center of the axles, exactly where it should be – so the body side is not too deep and heavy. Both the trucks and the SUVs have an overriding feeling of precision – constituent parts being slotted tightly together to make a seamless body.
What’s remarkable about this design, in some ways, is how unheralded it is. For all the designers you could easily name as an enthusiast (Mitchell, Shinoda, Bangle, Horbury), there so little written appreciation for this vehicle that I couldn’t find out much about the designers. I was told designer Clark Lincoln was involved, but it turns out he worked on the GMT800. Matt went so far as to ask GM President Mark Reuss about it, and he confirmed Donald Wood as the chief designer, but that’s about all we could collectively discover.
The tenth-generation F-150 is sometimes considered as being at the vanguard of truck gentrification. I think it’s a soft blob with none of the GMT400’s confidence or assertiveness. The ’88 Silverado and Sierra bought a more approachable truck a full eight years before the F-150 came to market specifically targeting car drivers. When the GMT400 SUV versions arrived in 1992 it’s no wonder they became a valid choice for hauling families and all their gear – there was basically nothing that could match their combination of ruggedness, comfort and space at the time. Squint a bit and you can see their restrained yet commanding influence in some of Land Rover’s better efforts. Not for nothing was I using Suburbans and Tahoes as mood images when posting my own sketches up for review in the studio.
Andy Warhol once said “what’s great about this country is that America started the tradition where the richest consumers buy essentially the same things as the poorest.” The GMT400 is a classic design that is the epitome of everyday America: at home on the work site, the camp site and in the motorcade. A democratic design good enough for proles and Presidents. You can’t help but feel Sir Terence would have a wry smile at that.
This article would not have been possible without the assistance of the GM Heritage Archive, whose researchers patiently dug into their archives for these exclusive images. Many thanks for your help.
- I Took On A Bad GM Design In A Hail Mary Attempt To Fix My Friend’s Suburban, But It Was Too Little Too Late
- This 1,000-Horsepower Chevrolet Suburban Restomod Looks Like A Million Dollars, Costs $1.1 Million
- The Escort Cosworth Is A Legendary Rally Machine That’s Hiding A Big Secret
- The Pontiac Aztek Was Not A Design Tragedy, It Was A Corporate Tragedy.
Fantastic as always, Mr Clarke. Bravo, sir!
Right, people living paycheck to paycheck are thinking about buying $64,000 Suburbans like millionaires
Man, I miss my Suburbans.
While I have no argument that the GMT400 was a design peak (from which we continue to descend — have you seen the grilles on today’s heavy duty models? Massive facepalm), I must quibble on a minor detail.
As I read the bit about GMT800s first appearing in 2000, I glanced out my window to confirm that I have not spent the last many years imagining the GMT800 LQ4-powered 1999 Silverado 2500, which my wife’s grandfather purchased new *in 1998*, and which continues today to suit my occasional towing and hauling needs perfectly. No, sir — it’s real.
If you would be so kind, your figure should be decreased by two.
mmmmmmmmmm, real bumpers…….. I had a 98 step side, extended cab back in the early 2000s when my daughter was born. That car seat didn’t look terribly gigantic until i tried to fit it in through the third door of that truck and on to that tiny rear bench. The writing was on the wall, so I wisely(sarcasm) traded it in for a reliable(sarcasm), trouble free(sarcasm) and cheap to maintain(sarcasm) 2002 Isuzu Axiom.
Conspiracy: Giant bulky car seats were invented to force parents to give up perfectly usable vehicles and buy new ones.
In the same vein, those collapsible strollers may have driven the SUV craze.
I owned a 1995 Chevy C1500 Silverado extended cab. Still one of my favorite vehicles I’ve ever owned. The big bench seat was so comfortable and it just ate highway miles with that small block V8. Still the best look truck ever made.
More than 20 years ago I owned a ’97 Suburban 3500LT with the diesel. Wonderful car. A little too big for German’s small roads (and towns), but I loved it.
I saw one of these just a couple days ago: Manual, two-tone, patina. It looked fantastic. More to the point though, my son, who is 11 and has lived in Seattle his whole life looked at it and said, “That’s a nice looking truck, should we have one?” It’s incredibly compelling design.
Like a rock…
I’ve always thought these were slightly understyled honestly, especially the tailgate being a featureless slightly curved expanse(but I’m a sucker for embossed tailgates). The 1980-1996 Ford pickup has just one more style line across it and I think that alone is an improvement.
I also prefer the 2000 Cateye Chevy/GMC pickups over this.
Counter point – they didn’t stand the test of time. They were too narrow – as evidenced by all newer trucks being wider (except the copy generation of Fords that were a flop, too.) They only lasted 12 years because that’s how often trucks were designed back then (the previous generation was 73-87 that’s 15 years.) The Insta-Trac kinda sucked, because it relied on a thermal element in the front axle that was known to have trouble engaging the front axle – especially snowy and icy weather, you know, when you want your 4wd to work flawlessly. The Rear ABS (in that generation) sucked. I transitioned from a paved road to a dirt driveway while on the brakes and the pedal just dropped to the floor with no braking at all.
Thanks, Adrian. I can analyze the mechanical side reasonably well, but with aesthetics it’s just a gut reaction that I can’t articulate. These DGD articles teach me details of design which helps me broaden my outlook.
I remember them when they were new. They were kind of crap. The front end was weak with mulitple ball joint failures and recalls, CV joints would fail often as well as idler arms. The headlights were crap, you couldn’t see at night and as mentioned the dash layout and controls made no sense. The 73-87 was better truck in almost every way except maybe lack of fuel injection in all but the last years.
I also remember the design being somewhat polarizing when new … mostly because Americans hate any form of change, and the Squarebody pickups were such icons. But these have aged incredibly well, and a barn-door Blazer from this period is in my top ten.
Disagree, or maybe the ‘when they were new’ failures were the ’88.
I purchased a K1500 pickup brand new in ’92 – most reliable vehicle I’ve ever owned.
Am not alone, almost anyone who owns or has owned one seems to think so.
Still have it today, 210K miles and going strong; regularly drive it over mountain passes on 4-5 hour trips.
> This sounds plausible; the first Jeep designed using CAD is known to be the Jeep Grand Cherokee, developed in the late 1980s, so the timeline makes sense
Peugeot was using CAD in the late 1960s.
Great article that puts names to attributes I love about this truck design but couldn’t verbalize. It’s a truly timeless design. It doesn’t look out of place today. Bring it back, cowards!
Yes, because Peugeot signed a technology sharing agreement with Renault, who had invented UNISURF. I wrote a whole piece about it a while back:
https://www.theautopian.com/why-car-designers-have-used-computers-for-longer-than-you-think-and-how-boeing-helped-it-all/
This would have been one of the first times it was used on trucks though.
Got it. Any thoughts why it took so long?
The systems probably wouldn’t have been ubiquitous across projects within the company. They were incredibly expensive so there wouldn’t have been enough resource to go around. Also it’s likely GM would have implemented it on low risk projects first to work out the kinks.
Great write up! I am an ardent lover of the GMT400 body style, it is in my opinion one of the best-designed vehicles to come out of GM in the last several decades. And, they’re shockingly good to drive, even this far after they were built. I have 2 in my current fleet, a ‘96 K1500 ECSB (my daily, 225k miles) and a ‘99 K2500 RCLB (tow pig, 125k miles). Love em. Though they are undeniably beautiful, they are also solidly engineered. A neighbor of mine has a ‘94 C1500 that’s currently approaching 600k miles, and There are a number of GMT400 pickups that have crossed over the million-mile mark. I think that says something.
If I lived in America I would look long and hard for a black Suburban on steel wheels. I would have absolutely no use for it. But I would want it very, very badly.
Best-looking suburban IMO is the K2500 on steelies. The 16” wheels are in better proportion to the body I think.
I don’t know, a properly designed truck should be able to intimidate someone in front of you who’s poking along at only 10mph over the speed limit into either speeding even more or pulling onto the shoulder to let you pass, I don’t know if these pull it off. Unless you do an aftermarket lift and add a couple of light bars.
That is funny sarcasm; or is it satire?
“But if you wanted accessible eight-cylinder power, plenty of space for passengers and cargo, and body-on-frame simplicity in a style that didn’t look like you had given up on life, your options were becoming limited.”
So what WERE the options for those who had given up on life and weren’t trying to to hide it?
Ford Econoline?
We have a winner. Preferably with a “…don’t come a’knocking” sticker and/or parked by the river.
Those folks haven’t given up on life, they just were run over by it.
Good point. ’90s Ford Windstar/Mercury Villager maybe?
Nah. Minivans are awesome. You can do a lot with a minivan. They drive way better than a BOF truck too.
Pontiac maybe. After all its well known as THE official car of the IDGAF crowd which is basically the same as giving up on life.
Gotcha. ’00s Grand Am sedan it is!
BINGO!!
Female friend of mine once helped a guy with a busted arm get a couch into the back of his, I often wonder what happened to her.
It put the lotion on its skin or it got the hose again..
Puts on ‘Goodbye Horses’ by Q Lazarus.
Hose, free candy, same difference.
Yeah, you bought a 10th-gen F-150.
Chevy Lumina van? Somehow the Pontiac equivalent managed to be cool.
A Chevy Lumina van lands somewhere on the spectrum between a rolling suicide booth and maniacally hoonable. Finding out exactly where might require maths I don’t understand.
Same era, similar design; but the Chevy Astro van always smacked of IDGAF to me
Preferably in A-team livery.
GMT400’s really were amazing when they came out. Hell, they still looked really good and modern when they were gone after 1999!
Most reliable years are pre 1996, because those TBI motors really didn’t have much to go wrong with them… however the Vortec motors after 96 added like 50hp and drive better… but with more issues (i.e. coolant dumping in the intake valley, injector issues, etc..)
Overall I think the best iterations of them were the final ones, with the revised grille, MUCH better looking interior (with controls that, ya know, made sense).
GM did miss the boat on the HD 2500/3500 models though, the 6.2/6.5 diesel was just, not competitive from any standpoint. Less reliable, less powerful, maybe just as efficient vs. 7.3 powerstrokes/5.9 Cummins. They weren’t horrible motors, just really needed to be better and have some more advancements (i.e. direct injection).
I agree with all of that. I had a 6.2 in a squarebody and it was *ok*, but by the time the 7.3 and 5.9 were on the market, those Detroits were outgunned in every way. My favorite grille is the W/T grille with sealed beams, but I agree the later ones in general look nicer up front.
Good point, the sealed beams do look pretty good. I guess that just shows how flexible the GMT 400 design was. The front end went from sealed beams, to composite headlamps, to the 1st gen Cadillac Escalade… all on one platform.
This kind of design is fundamentally my jam. Basically, it’s the truck version of someone who dresses smart, looks good but not necessarily trying to draw attention to themselves. Obviously there are buyers who very much want a vehicle that says “LOOK AT ME!” but I’m not that person.
I’ve always thought of it as the combination of clean, nearly new jeans and a button-down Oxford shirt: Good enough for business, but ready to turn wrenches. Not formal, but competent enough that no-one cares.
And the little drop-down wire that holds your cup in the cupholder (MY 92-94) was made on tools designed by my father.
I appreciate the acknowledgement of design being so good it’s almost invisible. Today’s trucks are OVER DESIGNED, with too many elements, too much styling, too many creases, and that type of stuff can look good for a short time, but ages poorly.
Meanwhile, simple designs like this and a lot of 90s designs, are just …. so clean and minimal. Not to throw shade at car stylists, but I feel like they’re just trying too hard, and some of the best car designs ever created are more like industrial/product design than transportation design.
It makes sense if you think about it, check out the 10 principles of good design by Dieter Rams here: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fo06VT1XEAAatx0.jpg
This is a very honest design, there are no fake vents, fake scoops, fake exhaust tips, etc. It’s also easily understandable, useful, unobtrusive, and that last principle: as little design as possible. Today’s cars just look gross to me.
Two more pieces of feedback, no the 454SS was not the original muscle truck, that crown goes to the Little Red Express which came out in 1978.
And lastly, most importantly, if you’re including the GMT400 AND the Burbans, you are forgetting about one very important, ultra epic vehicle that wears the same corporate mug: The Chevy Astro/GMC Safari!
I’m a huge fan of the Astro for so many reasons, but the combination of fullsize truck parts in a MINIVAN (yes it’s a minivan) with optional AWD is just amazing. The reason I don’t own a full size truck is the wheelbase; and the shorter wheel base of the Astro means I can turn a boat around up near the top of my driveway, and makes them better off road vehicles than the burbans or trucks. The wheelbase and overhangs are more similar to a wrangler. Anyway. Please edit your article and include the Astro because they are awesome.
I like them so much I bought a second astro to tow behind my main astro. 😛
Came here to point up the Astro/Safari twins. They wore the exact same suit and it fit them exactly as well – and one hell of a lot better than the first-gen models’ style. Ugh. I was gobsmacked the first time I caught a glimpse of the second-gen Astro after having learned not to see the first-gens, being they were frankly plug-ugly.
I think the short wheelbase first gen RS is cool, the factory side louvers were rad.
https://www.astrosafari.com/attachments/468-jpg.960/
That said I like the second gen better, and post 95 is has the newer interior which I feel is a big upgrade in comparison.
Thank you for pointing out the Little Red Express – the original muscle truck!
I’m enjoying your channel: real people without hype doing interesting stuff. You seem a good team—and I definitely relate to ‘This is the stupidest thing ever!’ 🙂
Hey, I somehow couldn’t get the link to work: what’s the name of that NZ aero/hypermiling channel?
Thanks! I have trouble focusing because I’m passionate about so many things; lots of new content coming up shortly but I have a big announcement to make first.
I believe you’re looking for Julian Edgar! His channel is great, and if you’re interested in aerodynamics he has so many wonderful, educational videos:
https://www.youtube.com/c/julianedgar
Cheers!
Pretty much the platonic ideal of “truck” to me.
Or you could easily go the other way, that it’s Aristotelian – it has the virtue of being exactly suited for its purpose in our world.
To me this is the very definition of ‘truck’. Like flip to it in the dictionary and this is what you’ll see.