Yea the AWD adds some more weight. In fact I'll bet it weighs more than a 4X4. When making some serious power though the AWD would be very nice though.

Its amazing too that at $39K+ it only comes with the base stereo and climate control! My truck was over 10K cheaper and had BOTH of the options above.

For the money I would save on an SS you could buy a radix or whipple and build a REAL SS!

 

Both of those times are high. I think they must have been run at a high altitude track. I know for a fact that my SS did 15.339@86.27 at sea level in 80 degree weather and with a 20mph headwind (when it was stock, no weight reduction). Others have done 15.2 and 15.1 times. You can get close to that with the Regular Cab Silverado with a 5.3, but no Ext Cab Silverado with a 5.3 can touch that till you start modifying. Also keep in mind, these times are on trucks that are barely broken in. I only had 2500 miles on my SS when I did the 15.339 time.
With the Radix, my SS does 13.92@93. That is still slower than what most say about stock Lightning times, although there does seem to be a rather alarming variation in quoted track times for the Lightning 13.7-13.2 (even a few stories in the 12's ) I think some of the Lightning guys take a bit of license with the term "stock"

 

Car and Driver got a 14.97 in their SS test, sounds like Truckin' did theirs in the mountains.

 

IMO the ss is a rip-off.I would never pay that much for the truck.It has good features(4wd,wheels)GM should have upped the power or drop the price 5-7 thousand.The L is a much better value.My DMAX runs better times with Juice and air filter at 7300lbs. P.S gets 18.5mpg at 75mph.

 

Wouldn't a fairer comparison be a Silverado SS vs a Ford Harley Davidson Edition? Silverado would still lose but it'd be closer.

 

Yes it would be a better comparison, but if you give the SS a supercharger too, the HD is toast

 

One of my friends did a 14.7 on his stock 2002 harley at the track in Edinburg. The weather was about 70 degrees.