Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Chevrolet Colorado
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I could be mistaken but I think the Trailblazer is the Colorado SUV.
I, too, hope that Chevrolet does not overprice the truck. The S-10 and Sonoma are way over priced. For the price of an LS reg. cab you can get a Ranger Extended Cab!
Of course, the statement that the Librerty and the Freelander are the only small truck like SUVS is a little wrong. You have the: Isuzu Rodeo, Nissan Extera, Nissan Pathfinder, above mentioned Vatara, Toyota FourRunner, Ford Explorer.
go to
http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/stories/shreveport/page1.html
For a midsize it seems awfully small, especially the overall width at a disappointing 67.8 inches. I have travelled in Nissan Frontier Crew (71.6") and that is none too Wide. It also confirms their poor/lack of tire selection with a 265-75-15 for all the Z71 series
(a real odd size). Hello GM. there is still time to wake up and smell the coffee.
The Colorado will come available with an I4 and an I5 engine. The Vortec 2800 I4 (2.8L) will provide ~175HP. The Vortec 3500 I5 (3.5L) will provide ~200HP.
The truck isn't meant to replace the full size trucks. It's meant to do just what it's going to: be a midsize truck. The I5 is supposed to be either stronger or outperform any V6 in it's class, too. Just wait until it is available for review from Edmunds, or test drive for yourself. :-)
Colorado vs the S10. This sure was a downer; I was very excited about
this MIDSIZE truck; but now I would really like someone with GM
connections to explain where the MIDSIZE designation comes from
Here is what I found comparing the Crew Cab versions:
Colorado Width 67.6 S10 is 67.9
height 67.9 S10 is 63.4
Headroom F/R 39.3/37.1 S10 39.6/38.2
Legroom F/R 42.2/34.4 S10 42.4/34.6
Shoulder F/R 57.1/57.1 S10 57.1/57.2
And here is the kicker
The Maximum Towing Capacity of the Colorado is 4000 lb.. vs 5200 lb.
for the S10.
I sure feel like someone has rained on my parade and I sure hope that
the MSRP will be in line with these specs.
GM engineers must be great at optical illusionism to make this truck
appear a lot bigger than it really is.
The only consolation is that the cargo box of the Colorado is approx. 5
inches longer.
As for a Colorado/Canyon SUV, C&D had a spy photo of a Hummer H3 mule which is based on the GMT 355 (Colorado/Canyon) chassis. Expect a 30K pricetag though when it goes on sale!
My roommate is a mammoth. He's 6'7" and weighs 330. I'm not the skinniest kid on the block either, but he can pick me up with one arm.
... he drives what we call Das Boot because that's the only thing he can fit in.
older rangers used 265/75-15" tires. they're not that scarce. why they don't use ZR2 31" tires is beyond me. only the engineers know.
Walter Chan
2fastdre.
Walter Chan
Thanks,
-mike-
Chevy, if your listening, OFFER THE I-6. While you're at it, offer a "long bed" option on the crew cab like the Nissan Frontier (6' bed). With that combination, I don't think you could build them fast enough.
I would guess that in another year or so GM will up the ante one way or another.
gm tried that with GEO a few years ago and it didn't work. chrysler tried rebadged chrysler/dodge/mitsubishi's with eagle and that ended up in the dumps.
so if gm has the experience, why do they continue to just rebadge vehicles. Make the styling look different, even if the interior is the same, make sure the styling looks different to bring more customers to both brands every year. they may not have to dish GMC, but i think it is worthless and they can make room to get rid of one more brand of vehicles.
http://osx.wieck.com/pv/WKA/2003/08/21/WKA2003082138576_pv.jpg
"...the Colorado could shuffle Chevrolet right to the head of the pack in the realm of compact pickups."
"...the Canyon could turn GMC into a major player in the realm of midsize pickups."
I really hope that they designed enough space into the Colorado to fit the I-6 at a later time, if they didn't then they are simply stupid.
I also hope that there will come a time when we will be able to buy compact and midsize truck with diesels. Diesel technology is getting so advanced and we are missing out on it.
Just think - if you had say a smaller I-5 or I-6 diesel in it that made around 180 HP and 300 LB-FT of torque then you could tow 5000 LBS like nothing while getting better gas mileage than you you ever thought possible.
2FastDre.
I have driven a Quad Cab, that is the four door model Dakota, 4X4 with the V8 and found it neither very powerful, or very fuel efficient. In fact, the thing averaged only 14-16 on a good day, and that was with me using the throttle lightly. I think the I-5 in the Colorado will be more than sufficient, and if it turns in over 20MPG then who cares if it does not act exactly like a V8. Those engines are overated I think, in fact you can have more fun in a little 6 or 4 cylinder sports car than in a V8 truck, without paying the mileage penalty. Finally the only V8 that I ever was impressed with was the Ford 5.4 Triton, not a Chevy V8 or gasp a Dakota V8
MT
This vehicle is going to be awesome in so many ways, but give us more power. It is a truck after all. For those worried about fuel efficiency in this vehicle, I'm sure the 4 cylinder fits the bill perfectly. If you thought the Dakota v-8 4x4 wasn't very powerful, the Colorado ought to be an outright dog since it weighs about the same and has 75lbs of torque and 15 hp less than the Dodge 4.7 v-8. Not sure how the 5 cylinder will be "more than sufficient".