Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Chevrolet Colorado

2456721

Comments

  • aldan93aldan93 Member Posts: 202
    V8 might me in the works for this or the in line 6, because the 5 is just a sawed of version. I've owned a Dodge Dakota, don't make the same mistake I did. I traded that thing in for a Trailblazer. Dakota have nice style, but it was the worst reliable vehicle I was ever owned, tons of electrical probs. If you live in the salt belt I would highly not recommend one.
  • ghislainghislain Member Posts: 34
    From all the Specs I have seen so far, the Z71 version of the Colorado will come with P265/75-15 tires. Isn't that an odd size tire which is not widely used and will be very costly and hard to find at replacement. It also gives you no choice except to go to smaller tires: I definitely think that GM has to wake up and offer 16" and or 17" rims which would seem to make a lot more sense.
  • kingquad1kingquad1 Member Posts: 37
    GM will never wakeup! they just like to follow!
  • tpfilmtpfilm Member Posts: 3
    For all those asking about an SUV version of the new Colorado you only need to look at the Trailblazer. They share front ends, front interior and several other key components. The Trailblazer is just like the Blazer, closely related to it's pick-up cousin. In this case we got the SUV before the pick-up.
    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!
  • tpfilmtpfilm Member Posts: 3
    Even though Chevy is killing the Tracker: bye, bye... you can get a better deal with the Grand Vitara... will Suzuki not continue the Vitara line? It seems that they should. I see a lot of Vitaras around.
    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.
  • hoffman9hoffman9 Member Posts: 2
    I have found several sites on the internet that have indicated that GM and Honda have already or are working on an agreement for Honda to furnish GM with V-6 engines. I can find no specifics but one of the local Honda dealers says that its done and the engines will be available in the new Colorado/Canyon. If true I think it would be a good move on GM's part. I wonder if anyone else has additional info?
  • aldan93aldan93 Member Posts: 202
    your getting the new I5 in the colorado, gm just built a new 300+ million dollar plant that is awesome!!!!!to produce this engine, 215 hp
  • hoffman9hoffman9 Member Posts: 2
    I just find it hard to believe that GM is going to offer a new truck with a choice of only two engines. Look at what's available on the Silverado for example. I will be surprised and disappointed if later at least a 6 is not offered or maybe a V8. The hp/weight ratio with the I4 or I5 (even at 215 -220 hp)on the Colorado isn't too good. My 2cents.....
  • ghislainghislain Member Posts: 34
    See on page 2 a white Canyon Crew Cab; pretty nice.
    go to
    http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/stories/shreveport/page1.html
  • ghislainghislain Member Posts: 34
    GM Canada has finally put something up on their WEB site about the Colorado, please Check URL. http://www.gmcanada.com/english/vehicles/chevytrucks/colorado/col- o_overview.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.
  • ffmcobaltffmcobalt Member Posts: 20
    Get realistic. This isn't a full size truck. This is a midsize. The full size trucks have the V8's with the Duramax available. There simply has to be distinction between the full size and the midsize. If the midsized truck came with the largest size gasoline engine available, why on earth would many people buy a full size truck? It's hugely more expensive for not much more truck. There needs to be very difinitive lines between the two classes.

    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. :-)
  • samstormsamstorm Member Posts: 1
    Does anyone know?
  • aldan93aldan93 Member Posts: 202
    Thats what I'm hearing, AUG/SEP don't expect any, 0% or 3k cash back until at least spring 04!!
  • ffmcobaltffmcobalt Member Posts: 20
    The Chevrolet Colorado goes in to production on October 8th in Shreveport. Typically it takes 2-2.5 months to hit dealership lots.
  • ghislainghislain Member Posts: 34
    Just been on the GM Web sites and decided to compare the Specs for the
    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.
  • thecargonzothecargonzo Member Posts: 31
    Check out what I wote in post's 22 and 25. It's global platform sharing and bigger isn't better overseas (personal experience talking). That is why GMC markets the current Sonoma as a "midsize" now.

    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!
  • cp4hcp4h Member Posts: 18
    Does anybody know if the new truck can comfortable accomodate a family of four ? (not in a pinch)
  • ffmcobaltffmcobalt Member Posts: 20
    Yes, there will be a crew cab option that should easily be able to seat a family of four, unless you're norwegian or something like my roommate. :)

    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.
  • aldan93aldan93 Member Posts: 202
    Expect 2004's in showrooms around end of SEPT.
  • tbunder1tbunder1 Member Posts: 257
    a 265/75-15" is essentially the same as a 31x10.50-15". so it's no big deal to replace them. they're probably the cheapest tires around. when you get up to 16" and 17" tires, you lose sidewall rubber and gain mega $ on price.
    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.
  • walterchanwalterchan Member Posts: 61
    Since GM decided to name their new mid-size pickup truck, Chevrolet Colorado, will it distracts some state of Colorado buyers because of the name? I think the Colorado isn't a good model name that GM created.

                       Walter Chan
  • 2fastdre2fastdre Member Posts: 59
    I really like the whole Chevy Colorado thing! It looks like the rear seat area on the 4-door models will be bigger than the S10 and that is nice. There will be a lot of combinations to choose from and that is nice. I love the idea of relatively small and high-tech engines! Performance and Fuel Economy can and should co-exist. This is why I would like to request that Colorado come with a 4 or 6 cylinder diesel engine in 2006 or 2007! Chevrolet, you have to take this request seriously! There will be low sulfur Diesel fuel available (starting in 2006). This way you can have excellent performance, excellent fuel economy, and much cleaner emissions! Anyway, I am very excited about this truck. I am waiting for them to show up in the show room.

    2fastdre.
  • dorkenheimerdorkenheimer Member Posts: 3
    If they both come form the same factory in Indiana, would there be any advantage to buying the GMC version?
  • logic1logic1 Member Posts: 2,433
    will be built in Shreveport, Louisiana. And no, there will not be significant differences between them.
  • walterchanwalterchan Member Posts: 61
    I received the 2004 Chevrolet Colorado brochure today in the mail. Pretty interesting to see that the artwork in this brochure is related to guys style.

                                  Walter Chan
  • boikoboiko Member Posts: 82
    Other then cosmetic differences, are there any other significant reasons to buy one over the other...?

    Thanks,
    -mike-
  • jauto98jauto98 Member Posts: 77
    If you want the sport suspension (lower ride height, 17in wheels, monochromatic paint job), you will have to get the Colorado as the Canyon does not offer it. Other than that, no real siginificant differences that I can think of.
  • aldan93aldan93 Member Posts: 202
    Guys these things are gonna be hotter than grease, the after market is gonna love these vehicles!!! WOW GM finally got it correct with these two!!
  • theo2709theo2709 Member Posts: 476
    What is the point of offering a GMC version if the Chevy version has the same if not MORE options? GMC seems to have lost its way once Cadillac entered the SUV market, with the Yukon Denali priced just a few thousand than an Escalade (at MSRP, anyway). It just makes me question the existence of GMC more. If GM dropped GMC and just offered higher-priced Chevy's, wouldn't the new combined Silverado outsell the F-150? It seems Ford has done pretty well without a luxury truck brand, so I think that GM can do the same. It seems like an easy process: drop GMC, stop offering huge rebates, make MSRP closer to retail, upgrade interior materials, and voilà! The perfect competitor to the F-150 and Tundras of the world (not to mention the Titan). My worry is that GMC will turn into something like Mercury, where they just rebadge something ("Professional Grade Engineering") and attempt to sell it for thousands more. GMC does not have that kind of name recognition, and I think GM would be doing itself a favor by killing GMC.
  • lonestartjlonestartj Member Posts: 25
    Guys, what do you think about the Colorado's 4,000 lb towing capacity? I've been a Chevy man for a long time, looking to trade in my S-10 on a new Colorado, but 4,000 lbs seems pretty measley to me. The I-5 will have less torque than my 4.3, will be rated to tow 1,200 pounds less, but this is supposed to be a mid-size? Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma both offer 5,000 lb ratings. Dakota w/ a V-8 blows them all away. My S-10 is only marginal for my 2,500 lb boat, I sure don't want to take a step backward in that department. I'd rather not move up to a full-sized (and there's no Dodge in my future), but the Colorado may be a disappointment for me.
    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.
  • coonhoundcoonhound Member Posts: 174
    I too am torqued off at the reduced torque and towing capacity. At first, somewhere on this board it was reported that they would have 5000 Lb. tow rating. But, not so, and my old Astro with 5500 Lbs. and the 4.3 will have to suffice.

    I would guess that in another year or so GM will up the ante one way or another.
  • brianbmbrianbm Member Posts: 55
    The I-5 and I-4 may be fine, but they also sound like engines designed to help keep corporate CAFE numbers presentable. Has anyone seen inside a prototype's hood, or a spy shot of the engine compartment? Could the I-6 from which the new engines are derived be installed, or would a V-6 design be necessary to offer a higher torque engine? Or, in the alternative, perhaps a turbocharged edition of the currently announced inlines could be installed. That ought up the torque ante - if it happens. Is the I-6 capable of surviving a turbo installation?
  • wsag26wsag26 Member Posts: 124
    many people still buy GMC's but the problem is: who wants a rebadged chevy?
    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.
  • rhighrhigh Member Posts: 6
    What will be the 0 to 60 times on the I-5 4x4 in the extendend cab version?
  • lonestartjlonestartj Member Posts: 25
    Not sure of the times, but did notice that they're offering 4.10 gears as an option, at least on the crew cab 4x4. That ought to help on the low end.
  • aldan93aldan93 Member Posts: 202
    What would you ever have thats weighs over 5,000 lbs to tow? I have owned all kinds of boats, the 21 footer i have know is 2900 lbs? 5,000, you would have what? a small 29 footer?
  • aldan93aldan93 Member Posts: 202
    Spy photos? its no secret get a brochure, I have seen these at the GM powertrain plant in NY, they could easily fit a I6 in them , but they won't not for a while anyway.
  • jauto98jauto98 Member Posts: 77
    hmmm... not to sure the 4.2L I6 will fit as a the 3.5L I5 looks pretty cramp in my opinion from this picture.

    http://osx.wieck.com/pv/WKA/2003/08/21/WKA2003082138576_pv.jpg
  • dorkenheimerdorkenheimer Member Posts: 3
    If it has a compact price, I don't care if they call it midsize, but I suspect they plan to offer a midsize price for this compact. Even Edmunds is getting confused:
     
    "...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."
  • lonestartjlonestartj Member Posts: 25
    I'll probably never tow anything over 5,000 lbs (especially with the Colorado, since it is only rated for 4,000 max). I doubt I'll tow anything over 3,000 or so (that's what my boat is). But, it's always a good idea to have more capacity than needed. Towing no more than 75% of max capacity is a good rule of thumb and gives a margin of safety. That puts the Colorado right at the limit with my boat. Pulling 3,000 lbs with a truck rated for 4,000 will work it a lot harder than one rated for 5,000 or more. It just irks me that this new vehicle is supposed to be an improvement over the S-10, but for my purposes, it looks like a big step backwards. Toyota Frontier and Nissan Tacoma rate 5,000 for crying out loud!
  • ctreisctreis Member Posts: 1
    lonestartj, where did you find those tow ratings? i've looked for them with no luck. i'm dissappointed that the new trucks will only be able to handle 4000lbs. hopefully they'll eventually drop in the 4.2L. thanks!
  • lonestartjlonestartj Member Posts: 25
    ctreis, go back to post #69, someone posted a link there that has all the specs.
  • 2fastdre2fastdre Member Posts: 59
    Manufacturers usually say conservative figures for towing and other specs. So if you live in the plains - you could probably tow a little more than 4000 lbs without killing anything.

    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.
  • lonestartjlonestartj Member Posts: 25
    I'm with you on that, if they put a small diesel in it, they'd have a huge hit on their hands. Gas mileage would go up, potentially more torque. Jeep is supposedly putting a small diesel in their Liberty in the near future for US consumption, it will be interesting to see how that plays out.
  • corvettecorvette Member Posts: 10,236
    October Car and Driver has a review of the Colorado which mentions the towing capacity topping out at 4,000 lbs. They implied that it is not an issue of engine power, that most people who want to tow more than 4,000 lbs. buy a full-size truck, and that by capping the tow rating at 4,000 lbs., they were able to make other design improvements. Fuel economy was listed as 19-23 city, 23-31 highway. I assume that the 19 city, 23 highway figure would be for a 3.5 liter 4x4 crew cab automatic, and the 23 city, 31 highway figure would be for a 2.8 L regular cab 4x2 manual.
  • lonestartjlonestartj Member Posts: 25
    I saw that Car and Driver article also. It makes sense (sort of) from Chevy's prospective, it will push more buyers into the full-sized. However, what doesn't make sense is dropping the tow rating 1,000 lbs or more below that of the current S-10 and all of their mini-truck competitors when they're trying to create a "mid-sized" vehicle. They will lose some sales because of this no doubt.
  • matt_2003matt_2003 Member Posts: 9
    Hello there truck people. I have been looking at this discussion for a while and must add my thoughts about it. Personally I believe the Colorado will be an excellent truck, a much better pickup than the current and aging s-10. On the other hand, it really bugs me when everybody thinks that Chevy must put a V8 in this truck. Also, the comparisons with the Dakota are downright false and annoying.

    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
  • lonestartjlonestartj Member Posts: 25
    I don't think Chevy needs a v-8 in this vehicle, but a 5 cylinder, with less torque than the aging 4.3 v-6? Come on, at least drop in the I-6 from the trailblazer. With 275hp and 275lbs of torque, that would be more than enough.

    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".
  • aldan93aldan93 Member Posts: 202
    You people have it all wrong, its called physics, If you have a truck that weighs around 3200 lbs, aluminum engine, lots of light weight tech. for better fuel MPG, your towing is going to suffer. The reason they do not have higher towing capacity depends on a lot of things, trust me the drive train on these things are bullet proof!!!!! BUT when the truck weigh less, the center of gravity is different and a million other things, NHTSB must be considered, so a safe 3500 lbs limit is set!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If your pulling 6500 lbs with a 2900 lbs frame good luck in the wind a skid situation, sure it will pull it, but but, over 1,000 things to consider when setting a towing cap. safety is #1, #2 is reality, spend the extra 5k and get 6,000 lbs with the full size, GM could make this thing tow 6500 lbs but the ride would suffer with a stiffer suspension!!!!!!People want car-like trucks, thats why over 50% of new cars sold are on a truck platform!!!!!!! Not everyone tows, maybe 20% of owners, how many need 6500lbs? maybe 10% why make a truck that has a harsh ride to be able to tow 6500lbs? to only appeal to %10 of most drivers? My $2
This discussion has been closed.