Colorado Vs Competition

[Mgoblue2]

One of my friends and I went looking at the Colorado crew cab. Not a bad truck but a little pricey I think. He is trading in a 2005 Dodge Magnum, and needs the bed of the truck. He now how ever is looking at the Frontier. I am going to look at the Nissans tomorrow with him and see how it stands up to the rado. If anybody can give me any insight on some comparisons or anything I would appreciate it Thanks. I will also fill in as best I can on my own comparison

Edited August 9, 2006 by Mgoblue2

[ocnblu]

If he's concerned about horsepower ratings, tell him to wait for the '07 Colorado with the 3.7L, 242 hp inline 5.

If he's concerned about interior decor (which is a wash, imo), tell him to wait for the small but noticeable changes reportedly made to the Colorado interior for '07.

[lakefire]

If he's concerned about horsepower ratings, tell him to wait for the '07 Colorado with the 3.7L, 242 hp inline 5.

If he's concerned about interior decor (which is a wash, imo), tell him to wait for the small but noticeable changes reportedly made to the Colorado interior for '07.

177298[/snapback]

Any pictures of those changes. The reason I bought a dakota is 1) interior of colorado sucks, and 2) they have fake plastic bolts on the wheels.

[bowtie_dude]

There is no reason to buy a Colorado over any of its competition, other than price. The Colorado exceeds at nothing in its class.

[FAPTurbo]

There is no reason to buy a Colorado over any of its competition, other than price.  The Colorado exceeds at nothing in its class.

177310[/snapback]

Sad, but true. It's got one hell of an anemic engine that doesn't save much fuel anyway in 5 cylinder setup and the interior is craptastic. This is coming from a guy who drives a 1990 Sierra for Chrissake.

The Frontier is supposed to be a very good truck, and it's V6 gives the Dodge Dakota V8 a run for its money.

[Bazzy]

2001-2004 Tacoma! I own a 2001 myself, it's awesome. The Colorado is complete $h!, another weak point of Chevy's lineup. There's a reason the 2001-2004 Tacoma had the best resale value of any vehicle

Edited August 8, 2006 by Bazzy

[RJB]

My friend has a Frontier and it is going in soon for 2 recalls and a warranty fix. The one recall I only know about and I forget the other one, anyway it has to have all the door handles replaced, the warranty fix is the a/c won't shutoff no matter what. He said the tires that came on it, b/f goodrich long trails give the thing the worst vibrations at highway speed that for the longest time he thought it was driveline related. The engine though is pretty damn good! He has the 6-speed manual and it will grab 3rd gear!! The styling inside is a little quirky for me, but all in all not a bad truck.

The Colorado/Canyon should have had the L6 in the first place and be done with it. Come on 290 h.p in that truck would be kickass with that engine. I'm not sold on the L5, its quite a vibration nightmare. I don't know how Audi got their 5 cylinder engines to be so good at the time.

[ocnblu]

To each his own I guess, but I still get a twinge of jazz when I realize how solid and quiet my truck is after 2 1/2 years and 38k miles of me driving it like it's not mine. It has held up much better than any of the S-10s I've owned. Sunday on the Northeast Extension of the PA turnpike, I kept a (few years old, V6) Dakota at bay up to the speed limiter, which is apparently set at a higher speed than Dodge's. Under the right conditions, I have been able to catch 3rd gear as well. I also bought an '86.5 Nissan Hardbody, new. Nothing mechanical ever went wrong with it, but the paint job was horrible and there was no rust protection under the paint. Stone chips on the hood grew to be rusty, 2 inch scabs. It would not surprise me if Nissan still preps their sheetmetal the same as then. If you really look at the Frontier interior, it is made from the same stuff as the Chevy, except it is all scrolly and with odd textures. The seat upholstery material looks like a fishnet.

I'll stick with GM because of my experience with their vehicles.

Edited August 8, 2006 by ocnblu

[Terex]

GM just announced a price reduction on the 2007 MY Colorado. Price on all models lowered by $1465 MSRP (not a rebate).

[Terex]

GM just announced a price reduction on the 2007 MY Colorado. Price on all models lowered by $1465 MSRP (not a rebate).

[Derek77]

There is no reason to buy a Colorado over any of its competition, other than price.  The Colorado exceeds at nothing in its class.

177310[/snapback]

Not to steal this thread, but what should the next or updated Colorado exceed at compared to the competition? Size? Economy? Handling? Hawling?

I think we might see a truck that is the same size but better handling, mpg, and price. I think the market is changing toward "real" compact trucks, not little, full size trucks.

[bowtie_dude]

Not to steal this thread, but what should the next or updated Colorado exceed at compared to the competition? Size? Economy? Handling? Hawling?

I think we might see a truck that is the same size but better handling, mpg, and price. I think the market is changing toward "real" compact trucks, not little, full size trucks.

177477[/snapback]

Powertrain, interior refinement, hauling/towing capability, functionality.

Take everything in the new 900 trucks and shrink it down accordingly. I-4, I-5 and a V8 need to be offered along with a proper automatic and of course a 5/6-spd manual. The BEST thing about the current Rado is the trim options, so keep those. Offer better looking wheels, the current look like plastic and a much more refined interior design, like from the Acadia or something.

[Newbiewar]

If he's concerned about horsepower ratings, tell him to wait for the '07 Colorado with the 3.7L, 242 hp inline 5.

If he's concerned about interior decor (which is a wash, imo), tell him to wait for the small but noticeable changes reportedly made to the Colorado interior for '07.

177298[/snapback]

we've got 07's on the lot...

no wait is necessary

[bowtie_dude]

we've got 07's on the lot...

no wait is necessary

177549[/snapback]

What changed with the interior? If it still has the same center stack design with the "sunk-in" radio insert, then its still garbage.

[Cremazie]

I love my Colorado, it's has a little punch, just peaky. the extra 20 odd ponies will make the truck better. The interior fit is really good, not much noise. The ride is better and much quieter than my RSX was. I had a Tacoma out and it didn't seem much more powerful(despite the extra 19 hp and extra gear) and the ride wasn't as good. The interior was nicer but the color availability of grey and grey turns me off so much. (oak only available on the gold truck).

[Drew Dowdell]

I really like the people who trash the Colorado because they expect it to have a Lexus RX330 like interior.

It's a truck people! It's ment to do work! Trucks aren't ment to be luxury cruisers. If you want a mommymobile so badly so you can haul your double latte around, get an Enclave.

Answer this, does the Colorado fill the need of a !small! truck that has the ability to haul a lot of junk over it's lifetime and be rugged.

How many Tacomas out there do actual work? How many Colorados?

[Newbiewar]

What changed with the interior?  If it still has the same center stack design with the "sunk-in" radio insert, then its still garbage.

177551[/snapback]

didnt look inside, my customer was just a window shopper, but it did have the 242 hp motor...

[bowtie_dude]

I really like the people who trash the Colorado because they expect it to have a Lexus RX330 like interior.

It's a truck people! It's ment to do work! Trucks aren't ment to be luxury cruisers. If you want a mommymobile so badly so you can haul your double latte around, get an Enclave.

Answer this, does the Colorado fill the need of a !small! truck that has the ability to haul a lot of junk over it's lifetime and be rugged.

How many Tacomas out there do actual work? How many Colorados?

177560[/snapback]

So the Colorado is meant to be "more rugged" than the competition? Is that why its less capable? Is that why its tow/haul ratings are less than that of the smaller truck it replaced?

I don't have Colorado/Canyon sales numbers (GM Media is messed up), but the Tacoma sold over 15k units last months. I don't think the Colorado/Canyon have sold that many since launch.

[Newbiewar]

So the Colorado is meant to be "more rugged" than the competition?  Is that why its less capable?  Is that why its tow/haul ratings are less than that of the smaller truck it replaced?

I don't have Colorado/Canyon sales numbers (GM Media is messed up), but the Tacoma sold over 15k units last months.  I don't think the Colorado/Canyon have sold that many since launch.

177588[/snapback]

IIRC Tacoma has #1 sales

Colorodo has #2... let me check to make sure

[Intrepidation]

Get the Frontier, I beleieve it's probably the best in it's class. Most HP, lotsa torque, good and useful interior design, lots of features in the bed and in the cabin, looks pretty good too.

The Colorado is the worst truck in it's class, even for price, cuz you can probably get a Ranger cheaper...Power stucks, interior stucks, I heard build quality is bad, even the paint job isn't very good.

How does the Colorado stack up against the competition? Two words: It doesn't

He could consider a Dakota, thoug he'd want at least the mid-level V8 for any meaningful towing. It's styling is a bit polarizing, but in person it looks pretty good. I've sat in one, and while the plastics in the interior are hard and kinda cheap...the gauges are easy to read, the controls are logical and simple, and the seats (leather) were incredibly comfortable. Gotta watch out for price though

Edited August 8, 2006 by Dodgefan

[Flybrian]

The Frontier looks like it was smashed in the face.

[bowtie_dude]

The Frontier looks like it was smashed in the face.

177623[/snapback]

And the Tacoma looks like it was designed by Warner Bros, but given the choice, I'd get either over the Colorado.

[BlkHhr104]

Well at least its cheaper and better looking then the fugly car-magazine favorite Ridgeline, and I think there is one pick-up that the Colorado is better then, the Raider, which production is coming to end in 08 I hear.

[hyperv6]

If given a choice of a new Colorado or a brand new 1997 Sonoma ext ZQ8, I would take the new 1997 like I already have.

The new truck is just plain cheap in build and feel. The iterior is the worst since the 1982 Camaro!

I am waiting to upgrade to a car next time I buy and keep my old truck to haul as my next vehicle will not by a Colorado.

[ocnblu]

Now see, I'm of the opposite mind. But then again, I've only owned 5 brand new S-10s before I bought my first-year Colorado. Maybe I don't have enough experience with the older small GM trucks. And I'd rather have an interior made of the plastic (which has some "give" to it) in this truck rather than the rock-hard stuff that feels like it will crack if you press on it. Heck, the dashboards in pre-'99 fullsize trucks cracked quite often, made of really crappy, hard, brittle stuff... just like the '98 and up S trucks.

The new Dakota's interior is very similar to the Colorado/Canyon's... just as "plain"... why does no one pick on Dodge? Is it because of the truck's ugly, jutting chin, overwrought side contours, and goofy taillights, so it gets a free pass on its interior? Just wondering.

[Flybrian]

The new Dakota's interior is very similar to the Colorado/Canyon's... just as "plain"... why does no one pick on Dodge?  Is it because of the truck's ugly, jutting chin, overwrought side contours, and goofy taillights, so it gets a free pass on its interior?  Just wondering.

177726[/snapback]

Yeah...you haven't been reading my posts.

[CARBIZ]

The Colorado is well priced in this market, but I gotta admit it hasn't grown on me. If based solely on looks, I'd lease (never buy it, that's for sure) a Dakota. One of our parts guys has a 2005 quad cab (or whatever they call it) and I liked it. I like the Dakota better than the Ram, which I do find too exaggerated in styling.

Compared to the S-10, the Colorado rides and handles better, but I think GM could have gone a little farther on the interior. I do not like the cloth seats at all. I am sure they will age well, but they are cheap LOOKING. Emphasis on looking because, again, I suspect they will age well which means the materials aren't cheap, just LOOK cheap.

Just my two cents.

[hyperv6]

Well my interior in my 97 in not worn broken cracked or even has a rattle even with the ZQ8 suspension.

The dash in the new truck looks like it was made by rubbermaid but out of vcheaper material. The fabric of the seats is some of the poorest looking I have seen.

I have driven many of the new trucks and they do ride well and handle good [the new ZQ8 did not imporve over the old] . The metal used in the tail gate seems lighter.

I do notice the 5 cylinder is more powerful than my 4.3.

Over all it is a good truck but far from what it should have been. Most of the mid class truck are not up to the full size standards in comfort or quality, no matter who built it.

It will be a cold day before I would pay 25K for a new loaded ZQ8 Colorado, just not enough there to attract me. I would spend the money on a loaded Solstice or Sky and keep the truck I have. It is 9 years old and nothing is wrong with it or it's rust free body. Besides it is paid for.

Plus the 1997 ZQ8 on the on ramps and autocross track is still a blast!

[ocnblu]

hyperv6, good enough, sir. I too love the friendly style of the older small GM trucks, or I wouldn't have bought so many. I've been happy with my new truck though.

Carbiz... the cloth upholstery material in the Dakota is the same stuff used in the Colorado, it seems to me. I have looked at other vehicles as well, and have seen the same type of cloth in some other Mopar vehicles, as well as Fords. Maybe the mills were running a special?

[haypops]

The Ranger and the Colorado seem to be in a class of their own. Someone posted that the ranger is cheaper. They seem to raised the price around here. Maybe to make up for decreased sales?

The four cylinder (2.9 L.) seems to be in a class by ityeself. The price of gas is over $3 a gallon and rising quickly. I want a 4 cylinder Canyon when I replace my 115 hp Sonoma. I think it will sufice nicely.

[CARBIZ]

Blu, you may not be far off the mark. This nylon-type cloth that GM is using in the Cobalt, Colorado, Equinox and others just looks crappy. I prefer the cloth in the Optra, for Gawd's sake! Hell, the fabric in my '91 Caprice looked better!

I'm no expert, but I gotta think someone in Detroit (or wherever the decision to use this fabric was made) must know something I don't, like maybe it will last a thousand years. I'm back in a Malibu again and I really don't like the fabric.

And, yeah, Dodge's fabrics/interior materials seem to be sliding backward, too.

[GMmania]

If he wants horse power go with the frontier but the frontier can be a little bet more then the colorado. But nissan most likly can last longer then Chevy.

COLORADO's Vortec engine

I-4 175hp

I-5 220hp

FRONTIER's engine

V4 154hp

v6 265hp

[Cremazie]

^Those are old numbers

The I5 is 242hp now and I would argue the life expectancy of the Colorado!

[ocnblu]

Oh heck yeah. The Nissan will be returning to earth as iron oxide while the Chevy will still be going down the road.

[Guest YellowJacket894]

We looked at Canyon a few months back, a black Crew Cab model that rang up at twenty-seven thousand, and I thought the truck was great. Had decent punch and the seats were nice and firm.

I don't know how reliable the new GMT-355s are, but our '98 S10 is damn near bullet-proof. It's well over the 150,000 mile hill now, but it still has the original clutch (it's a manual)...and just about everything else. Save for the predictable oil changes, matainance is dirt cheap. (By the way, this makes the second S-Series truck we've owned. We used to have a black 1988 GMC S-15 "High Sierra," and it lasted well over the 200,000 mile mark before rust had started to eat the bed away and the engine had the occasional f@#k-up. And that truck, by the way, was a rebuilt wreck. Can a Tacoma do anything the S-15 or S-10 did? $h!, no.)

As how to improve the Colorado, I would suggest exterior and interior changes all-around. The next-generation truck (and rumored SUV) should essentially be a scaled-down GMT-900 (borrowing a good amount of the suspension and platform from the larger truck).

Edited August 15, 2006 by YellowJacket894

[Variance]

Oh heck yeah.  The Nissan will be returning to earth as iron oxide while the Chevy will still be going down the road.

180737[/snapback]

I'm pretty sure the Frontier is stamped from the same metal the Colorado is.

[76ChevyTrucker]

that's true Variance, but GM's trucks have a tendency to last longer, even though the minerals that came together to form that Iron didnt know they were going to be a Chevrolet a few thousand years later. Ask me about my '76 some time and I'll give you the rundown.

[daves87rs]

The rado' isn't a bad truck-but it is behind anything else out there(expect the ranger)

The only thing that saves these trucklets are the engines, the many choices of

stuff, and the fact that they are looking as least as dependable as the s- trucks..

A co-worker has a 04 ext cab with the 5- it now has 105k on it-and it still runs

great-short of a few parts that went due to milage and abuse (she is not easy on

it at all), it has been very good truck...

A local business by me has a small fleet of Canyons and Rados'-and it says that

they are great trucks-he plans to buy a few more..a few of those trucks are already over 150k....

I had an s-10, which was a kick-butt dependable truck...

I think these new trucklets should be cheaper...then they would be a good value..

I have considered a Rado' ext cab...base truck with the 4 banger....

We'll see....

[76ChevyTrucker]

We've got two GMC Canyons in our delivery fleet at CarQuest and they've only had one major problem. One of the trucks had a rock fly up and punch through the condenser....that had to be replaced. Other than that, they've had oil changes and brakes, nothing else.

[ocnblu]

Variance, that's true, but there's a difference in how the metal is prepared.

[Mgoblue2]

Just to update everyone. he went with the Nissan. I have to agree while the Colorado is way easier to look at then the Frontier, the frontier's interior was worlds ahead of the Colorado. If gm would update the interior of this truck it wouldn't be bad at all. But the main difference is that the Nissan has a much better interior. I actually liked both trucks, even tough some things are out of place ( door handles and stuff) the Nissan did have a better interior. He looked at a ls rado with the I-5 basic truck not many options at all, and wound up going with a Frontier LE with out leather. The Colorado was cheaper but it really didn't match up that well to the Nissan. And as far as people saying the I-5 isn't big enough, drive it and see for yourself, it felt more powerful than the 265 hp Nissan, much more kick to it. Overall not a bad truck an interior update with better quality and this would be a top truck.

[ocnblu]

Well, I can't say much because I owned one too, an '86.5 Hardbody. Mechanically, it was good, if a little sluggish with the standard 31" tires, but the body was not made to resist rust at all, seemingly.

I wish him good luck.

[capriceman]

i miss my scottesdale with the 305. it beat a fire bird in a race in its day. and it could tow, haul, and off road better than any mid size today.

[tama z71]

www.coloradofans.com

the Colorado Bible