Jump to content
News
Reviews
Discussons
Activity
Create New...
Close

Everyone's talking Lambdas and T900s...

bowtie_dude

By bowtie_dude
in Chevrolet

 Share

Recommended Posts

bowtie_dude Newbie

bowtie_dude

Posted
Posted

...but what the hell is going on with the Colorado and Canyon? In current form, they're a joke. Anyone know if there's a planned MCE for 2009? And will they get a next gen replacement? I see enough Dakotas, Tacomas, and Frontiers running around to know the market is there and GM sure is flopping in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
haypops Newbie

haypops

Posted
Posted

Your guess is as good as mine. It does get the V8 for the '08 MY (same as H3 Alpha), but I don't know about '10. It could be a diesel I suppose.

and

i read somewhere (maight have been here) that they are to get a small turbo diesel

thanks to both of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RJB Newbie

RJB

Posted
Posted

I am curious to see what 08 has in store. I like the Canyon in particular better than the Colorado, and much to everyones dismay I do like the 5 cylinder. I've experinced firsthand that these engines are pretty damn durable, they just need even more oomph. But the upcoming engines will take care of that. Now as far as the interior/exterior that remains to be seen. But the way GM is going with their whirlwind upgrades to their interiors these days I can only imagine it will be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
turbo200 Newbie

turbo200

Posted
Posted

I've driven these...I can't say the powertrain was the part I disliked. The super vague steering and jouncy uncontrolled ride were worse than an Explorer from last century that used to be in the family. Was it the model I tested? I don't think so...it was fairly well loaded and did not have an offroad package that would penalize the driving dynamics. It jsut didn't drive well at all. The ergonomics and relation of the driver to the dash and steering wheel were typical GM....in short the most uncomfortable, bench type driving situation. The engine was also uninvigorating but I didn't find it underwhelming. The couple years older Nissan Frontier I tested right after felt much more solid, secure, and reassuring to drive. Why does GM insist on building cars directly designed for the big roads of the Midwest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thegriffon Newbie

thegriffon

Posted
Posted

...but what the hell is going on with the Colorado and Canyon? In current form, they're a joke. Anyone know if there's a planned MCE for 2009? And will they get a next gen replacement? I see enough Dakotas, Tacomas, and Frontiers running around to know the market is there and GM sure is flopping in it.

Colorado is still the #2 compact truck, but less than half the volume of the Tacoma lately. GM do Brasil is working on the next-gen model, as the S10 is still #1 in Latin America.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Northstar Newbie

Northstar

Posted
Posted

I think you are going to have to say something more than that. OHC or OHV, 60* or 90*? Gotta dish the info on this one.

There is a 4.1L something on the way, but I don't know what. It would make sense that it would be a V6, though. Probably OHV. It's also going in the T900s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hyperv6 Newbie

hyperv6

Posted
Posted

I need a new small truck now and will not buy what they offer.

Drivetrain is not an issue with me as the I5 has more guts than my 4.3.

As for the syling it is not the best but I could live with it if I had to.

The interior is the worst I have ever seen in a GM vehicle. It is as bad as a earliy 80's Chevette.

This truck could live with out an V8 but it could use a good V6 or better yet the OHC I6. These are not trucks that see heavy use and good power and good torque is all they need. They do need to be sound and trouble free to compete.

As of now I would not give up my used Sonoma for a Colorado or Caynon for anything.

If they can not give me a good truck I will settle for a 300 HP Camaro V6 for my daily driver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
drew770 Newbie

drew770

Posted
Posted

Well, I think the Colorado/Canyon is an example of GM lack of focus. The 5 cylinder is not on par with competitors, interior is horrible and the exterior styling is not as attractive as the Tacoma and Frontier.

But as much as a dislike the twins and is disqusted at the lack of GM's focus, the Ford Ranger is much much worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CARBIZ Newbie

CARBIZ

Posted
Posted

Interesting the divide. In my opinion, the Colorado is a great little truck. The problem is lack of advertising. The Silverado/Tahoe gets all the glory. GM is spread too thin. The ebony interior upgrade for 2007 makes a helluva difference to the interior. I want to know who okayed the $h!ty nylon material that pollutes the Cobalt/Malibu and Colorado and have this person shot.

The Dakota does well because DCX hasn't screwed around with the name and because DCX only has to advertise the Dakota, not a Plymouth or Desoto or Fargo version, too! GM needs to flout the gas mileage numbers from the highest rafters, but doesn't have the money to do that. So, the 5 cylinder gets trashed by the "enthusiasts" and Dodge gets all the thunder with the gas guzzling hemi.

Remember, folks: in places where gasoline is over $4 a gallon, nobody wants a V-8. Brace yourselves for the fall. Until Detroit gets that, Chevrolet and Ford are going to get their asses kicked. I can't wait to watch the Camaro flop. More Detroit stupidity. GM needs to find something to wrap its truck division around (like Dodge did with the hemi) and stick to it.

Then fire everyone who had anything to do with the seats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Intrepidation

Intrepidation

Posted
Posted

Interesting the divide. In my opinion, the Colorado is a great little truck. The problem is lack of advertising. The Silverado/Tahoe gets all the glory. GM is spread too thin. The ebony interior upgrade for 2007 makes a helluva difference to the interior. I want to know who okayed the $h!ty nylon material that pollutes the Cobalt/Malibu and Colorado and have this person shot.

The Dakota does well because DCX hasn't screwed around with the name and because DCX only has to advertise the Dakota, not a Plymouth or Desoto or Fargo version, too! GM needs to flout the gas mileage numbers from the highest rafters, but doesn't have the money to do that. So, the 5 cylinder gets trashed by the "enthusiasts" and Dodge gets all the thunder with the gas guzzling hemi.

Remember, folks: in places where gasoline is over $4 a gallon, nobody wants a V-8. Brace yourselves for the fall. Until Detroit gets that, Chevrolet and Ford are going to get their asses kicked. I can't wait to watch the Camaro flop. More Detroit stupidity. GM needs to find something to wrap its truck division around (like Dodge did with the hemi) and stick to it.

Then fire everyone who had anything to do with the seats.

Well the Dakota also has a reputation for "just right" size, as well as V6 and V8 options. The botched up the redesign by giving it an awkward front end and a V8 that basicaly outclassed by Nissan's V8. The rectified it wih a nicely upgraded 4.7L, and gave it a better front end...sales should improve if they advertise it. The Colorado's problem is that it only has the one engine...give some options for people who want more power and not just good gas mileage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CARBIZ Newbie

CARBIZ

Posted
Posted

Actually, the Colorado has TWO engines, the 5 cylinder being the larger of the two. There is way too much talk about "class leading" this and "class leading" that. The Dakota carved out a niche for itself when it first came out because it was larger than either the S-10 or Ranger. I almost bought one myself in '87 when I was looking at new vehicles. People will buy the Dakota or the Colorado more on price, looks and handling. The five cylinder is no slouch. I only mention the hemi-thing because it is a clever marketing ploy - nothing else. With the price ranges in crew cab Colorados, it isn't much of a leap to go to a full-size Silverado anyway.

GM is well-poised for $4 a gallon gasoline with these trucks, and my understanding is that they were co-engineered by Isuzu anyway, so it was probably cheaper to do. A refresh soon would be welcome, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Intrepidation

Intrepidation

Posted
Posted

You can't get a HEMI in a Dakota, just a H.O. 4.7L V8.

I know that and so does Carbiz, although I think the 4.7L's improvements are helped by borrowing tricks from the 5.7 hemi, if I'm not mistaken.

It puts out 290 horsepower now, that's best in class by about 30 horsepower (give or take). It's a much better engine now than it was. There's also the V6 for those who want something more fuel effecient.

I have a question since Isuzu was up...why oh why did they not bring their D-Max over isntead of slapping their badge on the Colorado? It's the best looking of the trucks IMO, and it's actually different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ponchoman49 Newbie

ponchoman49

Posted
Posted

Well, I think the Colorado/Canyon is an example of GM lack of focus. The 5 cylinder is not on par with competitors, interior is horrible and the exterior styling is not as attractive as the Tacoma and Frontier.

But as much as a dislike the twins and is disqusted at the lack of GM's focus, the Ford Ranger is much much worst.

I agree about the interior but saying the exterior is worse than the Toyota is stretching things a bit. My biggest wish list on these trucks would be a higher quality interior and availability of the smooth 3.6 liter V6 and a 6 speed automatic or manual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

I've whitelisted
Continue without support

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search