First Drive: 2015 Chevrolet Colorado & GMC Canyon

[moab11]

I'd still love to see one of these beside a fullsize, the one I saw driving around a few weeks ago looked a lot bigger than I was expecting, as in not much smaller than a full size truck.

[Zane]

I'd still love to see one of these beside a fullsize, the one I saw driving around a few weeks ago looked a lot bigger than I was expecting, as in not much smaller than a full size truck.

You're right. They are a lot closer now. Here's a comparison I put together. Look how much the Colorado has grown!

 

2015 Silverado Double Cab

Overall Length: 230-inches

Overall Width: 80-inches

Overall Height:73.9-inches

Wheelbase: 143.5-inches

2015 Colorado Extended cab

Overall Length: 212.7-inches

Overall Width:74.3-inches

Overall Height:70.3-inches

Wheelbase: 128.3-inches

2012 Colorado Extended cab

Overall Length: 207.1-inches

Overall Width:67.6-inches

Overall Height:64.9-inches

Wheelbase: 126-inches

[BIGDOGx]

Did they give any valid reasons on why they have insane restrictions in place with colors and option choices between the different packages?

[Zane]

Did they give any valid reasons on why they have insane restrictions in place with colors and option choices between the different packages?

Part of it is just start-up restrictions. Some of the color restrictions are just GM being GM.

[BIGDOGx]

Part of it is just start-up restrictions. Some of the color restrictions are just GM being GM.

 

Too bad because that copper red color would look great on a all terrain packaged Canyon.

[moab11]

 

You're right. They are a lot closer now. Here's a comparison I put together. Look how much the Colorado has grown!

 

2015 Silverado Double Cab

Overall Length: 230-inches

Overall Width: 80-inches

Overall Height:73.9-inches

Wheelbase: 143.5-inches

2015 Colorado Extended cab

Overall Length: 212.7-inches

Overall Width:74.3-inches

Overall Height:70.3-inches

Wheelbase: 128.3-inches

2012 Colorado Extended cab

Overall Length: 207.1-inches

Overall Width:67.6-inches

Overall Height:64.9-inches

Wheelbase: 126-inches

 

Even crazier when you look at the S-10 dimensions

 

2003 S-10 Extended Cab 4x4

Overall Length: 205.3 inches

Overall Width: 67.9 inches

Overall Height: 63.4 inches

Wheelbase: 122.9 inches

 

With the pricing being so close to the full size trucks, the dimensions being very close as well as the capabilities, I think GM will have a harder time selling these. The S-10/Sonoma were so popular because there was a bigger difference in price/size/capabilities, thus eliminating a lot of the comparison shopping between the compact trucks and fullsize trucks. I do honestly hope that these do well though, and wish this option was available when I sold my Sonoma ZR2 as I was looking for something a bit newer and didn't really need a fullsize.

 

[Silverado4x4]

Here is my opinion...

1) No V8?... WOuld not have to be a big one, the little 4.8 or whatever it was that GM was offereing not too long ago might not be a bad little combo in this little truck... With that said, I have a V8 Buick Rainer, the SUV is a blast to drive, but admittedly can be a pain to work on the starter, spark plugs and exhaust manifolds...

2) I am not sure if the lack of features killed the previous generation or the fact that there was not much price difference between the Large and mid size trucks. The S10 main complaint was the fact it was small, but they sold a ton of them.

3) The 1st gen Colorado and Canyon were homely, they never grew on me.. However these vehicles look way better. A step in the right direction.

3) The GMC is more appealing to me than the Chevy.

4) Now they need to make a Blazer, Envoy and Rainer replacement...

With the HP and torque numbers of the 3.6 the 4.8 is not much better in the torque dept. HP is the same on the 3.6 vs the 4.8 so a V8 is not really needed in these trucks.

 

The truck is limited to its towing specs so a bunch of torque from a V8 is not needed cause your limited to the vehicle. Some people seem to forget HP numbers don't really mean nothing its the torque that is the strength of the motor and gets the job done.

[servantsalesmen]

 

Close, the Envoy was replaced by the Acadia, the Trailblazer was replaced by the Traverse and the Rainer by the Enclave. The Equinox is about the same size as the old Blazers.

Technically you're right but I had the platform right! Lol

[okfoz]

With the HP and torque numbers of the 3.6 the 4.8 is not much better in the torque dept. HP is the same on the 3.6 vs the 4.8 so a V8 is not really needed in these trucks.

 

The truck is limited to its towing specs so a bunch of torque from a V8 is not needed cause your limited to the vehicle. Some people seem to forget HP numbers don't really mean nothing its the torque that is the strength of the motor and gets the job done.

Going by the "Numbers" you are absolutely correct. However, there is a reason why the Silverado uses a V8 and not an equivelant HP V6... The power curve, torque curve, HP curve for engines with more pistons is better. You drive a 4 cyl Solstice with 260HP and then drive a 3rd generation Firebird with 225, even with ear muffs on you will swear that the 225hp car is faster, even if it is heavier... It has to do with how long the power band is.

 

Furthermore, even if the performance numbers are the same, both run a 1/4 mile in exactly the same time, a Normally Asperated V8 is a much better driving experience every time over a Normally Asperated V6. Why do you think that the Corvette has had only a V8 since 1955? Why does Ferrari still use a 12 cyl, when you can get the same power out of an 8 cyl? Because of acceleration.

 

John

[okfoz]

Even crazier when you look at the S-10 dimensions

 

2003 S-10 Extended Cab 4x4

Overall Length: 205.3 inches

Overall Width: 67.9 inches

Overall Height: 63.4 inches

Wheelbase: 122.9 inches

 

What I find even Crazier is this

60-66 C/K Pickup

Wheelbase 115 in (2,921 mm) (short box)^[1]

127 in (3,226 mm) (long box)

133 in (3,378 mm) (1961–63 long box)^[2] Length 186.875 in (4,747 mm) SWB^[2]

206 in (5,232 mm) Standard^[2]

216.25 in (5,493 mm) LWB^[2] Width 78.75 in (2,000 mm)^[2] Height 71.25 in (1,810 mm)^[2]

 

73-87 C/K Pickup

Wheelbase 117.5 in (2,984 mm)

135.5 in (3,442 mm)

164.5 in (4,178 mm) Length 191.5 in (4,864 mm)(1973–75)

191.3 in (4,859 mm)(1987)

211.8 in (5,380 mm)^[4] Height 69.8 in (1,773 mm)

 

88-97 C/K Pickup

Wheelbase 117.5 in (2,984 mm)

131.5 in (3,340 mm)

141.5 in (3,594 mm)

155.5 in (3,950 mm) Length 194.5 in (4,940 mm)

213.1 in (5,413 mm)

218.5 in (5,550 mm)

237.4 in (6,030 mm) Width 76.8 in (1,951 mm)

77.1 in (1,958 mm) Height 73.2 in (1,859 mm)

72.6 in (1,844 mm)

 

98-07 Silverado

Wheelbase 119 in (3,023 mm)

133 in (3,378 mm)

143.5 in (3,645 mm) Length 203 in (5,156 mm)

227 in (5,766 mm)

246 in (6,248 mm)

Hybrid: 230.2 in (5,847 mm) Width 78.5 in (1,994 mm) Height 74 in (1,880 mm)

77 in (1,956 mm)

 

 

Info from Wikipedia

[Crf450r420]

What MPG do these get? If they get similar to full size and all else is similar. It would mean these are just easier to park really. Also a 4.8 V8 could be a good option. Should make great torque remade as direct injection.

[KARNUT]

Going by the "Numbers" you are absolutely correct. However, there is a reason why the Silverado uses a V8 and not an equivelant HP V6... The power curve, torque curve, HP curve for engines with more pistons is better. You drive a 4 cyl Solstice with 260HP and then drive a 3rd generation Firebird with 225, even with ear muffs on you will swear that the 225hp car is faster, even if it is heavier... It has to do with how long the power band is.

 

Furthermore, even if the performance numbers are the same, both run a 1/4 mile in exactly the same time, a Normally Asperated V8 is a much better driving experience every time over a Normally Asperated V6. Why do you think that the Corvette has had only a V8 since 1955? Why does Ferrari still use a 12 cyl, when you can get the same power out of an 8 cyl? Because of acceleration.

 

John

I use to think that way too. The V8 in the Vette is for sound. When we when looking to buy in 2011 our GMC dealer also sells Hyundai. We drove the V8 one and the V6 one. The V8 was 7k more, both cars are silent and fast. We bought the V6, 0 to 60 5.3, 1/4 mile 13.5, makes no sound, just fast. We also have a 2001 Acura R Spec, a 9.5k spinning 4cyl. Ill put it next to a few V8s of that day. Nothing beats the sound of a V8, but quiet it doesn't matter. Remember the Grand National Buick?

[STINSAN3]

I really like the GMC Canyon, I will see how they do after its been like 6 months or so.
Maybe next year, I might consider getting the Diesel. Just according how expensive and how they perform.
I hardly tow at all with my truck right now, since the miles are getting high on it. Might sell it and get a new one.

[hicountry]

Going by the "Numbers" you are absolutely correct. However, there is a reason why the Silverado uses a V8 and not an equivelant HP V6... The power curve, torque curve, HP curve for engines with more pistons is better. You drive a 4 cyl Solstice with 260HP and then drive a 3rd generation Firebird with 225, even with ear muffs on you will swear that the 225hp car is faster, even if it is heavier... It has to do with how long the power band is.

 

Furthermore, even if the performance numbers are the same, both run a 1/4 mile in exactly the same time, a Normally Asperated V8 is a much better driving experience every time over a Normally Asperated V6. Why do you think that the Corvette has had only a V8 since 1955? Why does Ferrari still use a 12 cyl, when you can get the same power out of an 8 cyl? Because of acceleration.

 

John

 

I agree. And some of us just like V-8's better, they certainly sound better, it's not just about the numbers.

 

Also, trucks are not just about hauling and towing, I got out of cars and into trucks years ago as my daily driver because at the same time I got bigger all the cars I liked got smaller, with the windshields being closer to horizontal every year. I prefer trucks because of the ease of getting in and out and having decent headroom, but I use one more like a car, with very little hauling and towing. And I suspect I am not the only one.

[revitupfaster]

The Canyon is a very good looking truck. I can't say that about the Colorado. Talk about an ugly duckling, and I'm a "died in the wool" Chevy fan.

 

They definitely should have followed the same pattern with the Colorado as they did with the Canyon.........make it mirror it's big brother.