A small muscle car based on the Chevy Colorado

[woolsocks]

I just had this thought today. The lightest Colorado weighs only about 3300 pounds. And it is body-on-frame and RWD. So what if you took a stock Colorado chassis (short wheelbase) with a 5.3 V-8, lowered it, and designed an entirely new body for it, making it into a light and powerful muscle car? True, there no doubt would be handling issues, with the Colorado having live axles--not exactly ideal. But then again, it could be really pure and fun, and could even tow 6000 pounds! What do you guys think?

[vonVeezelsnider]

I've conjectured to myself about taking a GMT-900 frame, lowering it and putting a Cadillac Sixteen body on it... this is much in the same spirit- maybe it would work.

[FAPTurbo]

Isn't that similar to what they did with the SSR? I don't think that formula was all that successful.

[loki]

Isn't that similar to what they did with the SSR? I don't think that formula was all that successful.

the ssr was on the trailblazer frame GMT 360..?.... same idea, yes, but still different. vs a gmt 355, right?

[Robert Hall]

the ssr was on the trailblazer frame GMT 360..?.... same idea, yes, but still different. vs a gmt 355, right?

I thought the SSR was on the S10 frame.

[Drew Dowdell]

nope. it was on 360

[woolsocks]

I think the key here is that the SSR weighed 4760 pounds--300 pounds heavier than even a normal Trailblazer. Not to mention that the SSR could only seat two people, was too expensive, and couldn't tow or carry very much. If the SSR had weighed <3500 pounds, seated 4, and cost only $25,000 instead of $42,000, how much better do you think it would of sold?

[ocnblu]

Wasn't the Bel Air Concept of a few years ago on a GMT360 frame? I don't see why it wouldn't work.

[Camino LS6]

It would work just fine, and be inexpensive to do.

But...

[woolsocks]

It would work just fine, and be inexpensive to do.

But...

The reason I posted this topic was to find out what comes after the "but...". Is there a legitimate reason to not do it besides the fact that it would at least partially compete with the Camaro? Seeing as it "would work just fine, and be inexpensive to do", I'm really surprised that some third-party company with coach-building experience isn't offering something like it.

[Hudson]

Wasn't the Bel Air Concept of a few years ago on a GMT360 frame? I don't see why it wouldn't work.

No, but close. It was actually very similar to the theme of this thread. The Bel Air was a Colorado chassis with a (turbocharged, I believe) inline-five engine. But it definitely had a car body on a truck frame.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Hudson

[Camino LS6]

The reason I posted this topic was to find out what comes after the "but...". Is there a legitimate reason to not do it besides the fact that it would at least partially compete with the Camaro? Seeing as it "would work just fine, and be inexpensive to do", I'm really surprised that some third-party company with coach-building experience isn't offering something like it.

The "buts" are numerous.

- As you say, it would compete with Camaro to a point.

- It would be panned in the press for being on an antiquated chassis.

- It would be tough to make a business case for.

- It may impact GM's CAFE numbers negatively.

...and so on.

Personally, I like the idea.

[loki]

Personally, I like the idea.

cause it could easily be the successor to the camino? lol

could be a good wagon platform too!

Edited April 7, 2010 by loki

[Camino LS6]

Not really, it's just that the idea of a small, light, inexpensive RWD V8 musclecar appeals to me generally.

Wagon/Camino variants would just be icing on a cake I already like.

[thedriver]

Having driven a Canyon crew cab with the 5.3, I can say it definitely moves... With a lighter more aerodynamic body it would be killer. How hard to put a classic body on this frame?

[RjION]

How about a smaller lighter Camaro.