Chevrolet News:All-New 2023 Chevrolet Colorado goes All Turbo

[Drew Dowdell]

Since going on sale in 2014, the Chevrolet Colorado has only seen minor styling tweaks and updates.  For eight years the 2.5 liter 4-cylinder and 3.6-liter V6 were the primary engines available with the interesting and fuel-efficient 4-cylinder turbo diesel. 2018 was the best year for this model's run, with Chevy selling 134,842 Colorados, but sales have dropped since then as new and updated entries in the form of the Ford Ranger, Toyota Tacoma, and Nissan Frontier have hit the market.  In 2022, the Colorado and its Canyon brother were officially the oldest mid-size trucks on the market.

For 2023, Chevrolet has completely redesigned the Colorado with new looks, interior, and a simpler engine lineup.  Gone is the 4-cylinder/6-cylinder/Diesel choice, replaced instead with the 2.7-liter 4-cylinder Turbo that has been doing duty in the Silverado and Sierra since 2019.  The engine will be offered in three power options: the base 2.7-liter Turbo with 237 horsepower and 259 lb-ft of torque, the 2.7-liter Turbo Plus with 310 horsepower and 390 lb-ft of torque, and the 2.7-liter Turbo High-Output with 310 horsepower and 430 lb-ft of torque.

Output Variant	Horsepower	Torque (lb.-ft.)	Max Trailering4	Availability
2.7L Turbo	237	259	3,500 lbs.	Standard: WT & LT
2.7L Turbo Plus	310	390	7,700 lbs.	Standard: Z71 & Trail Boss Available: WT & LT
2.7L Turbo High-Output	310	430	7,700 lbs.	Standard: ZR2

 

The engines have received upgrades for 2023 including a stiffer engine block, 30% stiffer crankshaft, as well as diesel engine materials for increased durability. The new base engine offers 18% more horsepower and 36% more torque than the outgoing 2.5 liter 4-cylinder, while both of the higher output engines out power and out torque both the V6 and diesel predecessors. No matter which engine tune you choose, you get a 2nd generation of the previously offered 8-speed automatic with refinements for smoother shifting and quicker downshifts.  Fuel economy ratings haven't been made available yet, but we expect the higher output engines will beat the outgoing V6, while the base engine will probably lose some efficiency in favor of the additional power.

The chassis is all new with a 3.1-inch longer wheelbase than the current Crew Cab model with a short box.  The front overhang has been shortened to improve the approach angle. The Trail Boss trim gets a 2-inch factory lift and a 3-inch wider front track, while the ZR2 gets a 3-inch lift on Multimatic DSSV dampers and a 3-inch wider front track. Ground clearance on the ZR2 is up to 10.7 inches.

2023 Colorado Dimensions

	2023 WT & LT	2023 Z71	2023 Trail Boss	2023 ZR2
Wheelbase:	131.4 in.	131.4 in.	131.4 in.	131.4 in.
Length:	213 in.	213 in.	213.2 in.	212.7 in.
Maximum Height:	78.8 in.	79.6 in.	79.9 in.	81.9 in.
Track (front):	62.8 in.	62.6 in.	66.2 in.	66.3 in.
Off-road Approach Angle:	N/A	29.1 deg.	30.5 deg.	38.3 deg.
Off-road Departure Angle:	N/A	22.3 deg.	22.4 deg.	25.1 deg.
Break-over Angle:	N/A	19.5 deg.	21 deg.	24.6 deg.
Ground Clearance:	7.9 in.	8.9 in.	9.5 in.	10.7 in.

Many of the driver safety technologies such as Forward Collision Alert and Land Departure Warning carryover, while for 2023, the Colorado gains Automatic Emergency Braking, Front Pedestrian Braking, Lane Keep Assist, and IntelliBeam automatic high-beams as standard.  Available for all models is Blind Zone Steering Assist, Rear Cross Traffic Braking, Adaptive Cruise Control, HD Surround Vision, and Rear Pedestrian Alert.

The Infotainment system has been updated to the GM's latest edition and sports an 11.3-inch-diagonal touch screen with Google Built-In. The system is capable of displaying a readout for off-roading, including Overlanding (altitude and GPS guidance), Terrain (pitch, roll and tire pressure), and Baja (g-force, wheel slip indicator and transfer case status) driving situations.  Depending on trim, owners can select up to 10 camera views, including a segment-first under-body camera.  The cameras enable Chevy's Trailering App with Hitch Guidance and Hitch View.

What is a truck without its bed? The Colorado gets several nifty new features.  Standard on the ZR2 and available on other models is a segment-first built-in tailgate storage box. When the tailgate is down, the lid opens a 45-inch-wide and 4-inch deep compartment with a drain. The tailgate can be positioned midway between fully closed and fully open enabling storage of longer items.  Two motorcycle tire grooves are built into the front bed wall. Also available is a bed-mounted 110-volt power outlet.

The 2023 Chevrolet Colorado goes on sale in the first half of 2023 and is being assembled at their plant in Wentzville, Missouri.  Pricing is not yet available.

 

View full article

[ccap41]

This looks SOOOOOO much better than the outgoing model! 

Also, the 2.7 should have been in this the second the Silverado got it. I think any of those output levels will suffice no problem here. 

[Drew Dowdell]

56 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

This looks SOOOOOO much better than the outgoing model! 

Also, the 2.7 should have been in this the second the Silverado got it. I think any of those output levels will suffice no problem here. 

I could see myself in a nice Z71. I don't need the ZR2, I'm not under any illusion that I'll ever go off-road.

Remember that the previous one actually dates back further than what we got here in the US.  It probably wasn't compatible with the new engine without some major changes, so they held it back until the replacement.

[G. David Felt]

Nice for an Ice! ?

[smk4565]

Looks like good improvements over the prior model.  Turbo 4 is a good idea as well.

Not sure why they don't just go with 2 tune levels on the engine, two versions of the engine, both making 310 hp seems a bit meaningless.

[surreal1272]

19 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Looks like good improvements over the prior model.  Turbo 4 is a good idea as well.

Not sure why they don't just go with 2 tune levels on the engine, two versions of the engine, both making 310 hp seems a bit meaningless.

Not meaningless at all when one has 40 more in torque. 
 

Overall, this is a major upgrade even thigh the current Colorados are still decent mid-size trucks. The interior is night and day better. 

Edited July 28, 2022 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

46 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Not meaningless at all when one has 40 more in torque. 
 

Overall, this is a major upgrade even thigh the current Colorados are still decent mid-size trucks. The interior is night and day better. 

So just make the high output version.

A hybrid would be a better 3rd option since Ford has the Maverick and F150 hybrids and I assume will do a Ranger hybrid.

[riviera74]

18 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

So just make the high output version.

A hybrid would be a better 3rd option since Ford has the Maverick and F150 hybrids and I assume will do a Ranger hybrid.

Who would actually BUY a hybrid pickup truck, midsize or full size?  I do hope that the Colorado/Canyon see a real sales increase thanks to those changes.  (Is this an MCE or an all-new truck?)

[surreal1272]

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

So just make the high output version.

A hybrid would be a better 3rd option since Ford has the Maverick and F150 hybrids and I assume will do a Ranger hybrid.

It's called "options" which is commonplace with domestic trucks. There is also really no need for a hybrid either when an EV is probably right behind this (especially given that an EV Silverado is due in in a year (as a '24 model). The Colorado will probably be a a year or three behind it. If there were no EVs, then a hybrid option would suit but I just don't see that here given GMs obvious long term plans.

1 hour ago, riviera74 said:

Who would actually BUY a hybrid pickup truck, midsize or full size?  I do hope that the Colorado/Canyon see a real sales increase thanks to those changes.  (Is this an MCE or an all-new truck?)

This too. The Maverick gets the expedition here since it is a smaller pick up and also FWD so just a different beach altogether. Hybrid RWD trucks just don't gain much on the MPG front for whatever reason. 

[smk4565]

15 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

It's called "options" which is commonplace with domestic trucks. There is also really no need for a hybrid either when an EV is probably right behind this (especially given that an EV Silverado is due in in a year (as a '24 model). The Colorado will probably be a a year or three behind it. If there were no EVs, then a hybrid option would suit but I just don't see that here given GMs obvious long term plans.

This too. The Maverick gets the expedition here since it is a smaller pick up and also FWD so just a different beach altogether. Hybrid RWD trucks just don't gain much on the MPG front for whatever reason. 

"options" would be offering a hybrid too, could be a plug-in.

The thing EV trucks are bad at are towing, because it zaps the range.  So something like a hybrid F150 could tow long distance, and still have their pro-power onboard thing that lets you power a job site or camp site or whatever electric tools or camping stuff you want to plug in.  

[surreal1272]

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

"options" would be offering a hybrid too, could be a plug-in.

Your "option" requires a heavier re-investment since the last plug-in Chevy was killed off two years ago (Volt). Again, their EV plan kills any need for a hybrid of any kind here considering the minimal gains I just discussed above. I am not going to go back and forth on this.

 

And yes, EVs lose range when towing. Last time I checked, gas powered trucks lose a bunch of energy too when towing. That is mostly made up hype, short of extreme towing.

Edited July 29, 2022 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

The Silverado makes 310 hp and 420 lb-ft,  the F150 430 hp and 570 lb-ft.   + 120 hp, +150 lb-ft, + 5 mpg for the hybrid.  Seems like more than a minimal gain, but I get GM doesn't want to spend money on anything ICE related, and just get the switch to EV as fast as possible, which is fine if they do the switch fast.  If they plan on another 10-15 years of ICE, then might as well hybrid it.

[Robert Hall]

Good looking truck...nice interior. The underbody camera is a neat feature.

[surreal1272]

8 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The Silverado makes 310 hp and 420 lb-ft,  the F150 430 hp and 570 lb-ft.   + 120 hp, +150 lb-ft, + 5 mpg for the hybrid.  Seems like more than a minimal gain, but I get GM doesn't want to spend money on anything ICE related, and just get the switch to EV as fast as possible, which is fine if they do the switch fast.  If they plan on another 10-15 years of ICE, then might as well hybrid it.

There’s a very important part you are missing in that comparison. That hybrid is considerably more expansive than that 2.7L Chevy (about $10K more last I checked). That 5 MPG does not make up the huge price difference. Another part you’re not getting is the huge gulf between the volume of full size vs mid size trucks. Ford could justify a hybrid with their huge sales numbers. There is no case for a hybrid for Chevy and the Colorado, knowing that simple fact. 

8 hours ago, smk4565 said:

If they plan on another 10-15 years of ICE, then might as well hybrid it.

Again, with an electric Silverado coming in a year or so, that is clearly NOT their plan. Not sure what you are not understanding here. 

Edited July 29, 2022 by surreal1272

[ccap41]

I am a little surprised they didn't electrify this in any way. It would have been a great way to corner the 30mpg capable truck market. 

I know the Maverick can achieve that but, this obviously can do more work and 30mpg would probably cut into Maverick sales, assuming it wasn't 50k. 

[Robert Hall]

I wonder if the new Ranger will offer a hybrid or EV version..it's due out in the next year or so?   I assume it will offer the same powertrains as the Bronco.

Edited July 29, 2022 by Robert Hall

[Drew Dowdell]

21 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Looks like good improvements over the prior model.  Turbo 4 is a good idea as well.

Not sure why they don't just go with 2 tune levels on the engine, two versions of the engine, both making 310 hp seems a bit meaningless.

That's partially my fault that you don't see it.  For some reason the chart breaks in the forum version of the article, but if you view it from the front page, you'll see that the highest tune is only for the ZR2 model. In both cases the engines get their peak torque at 3000 rpm, but the ZR2 gets 40 additional torques.  Along with other performance stuff, it makes the ZR2 more specialer. 

[Drew Dowdell]

All I can say is be here Monday morning for some interesting news from a competitor. 

[ccap41]

1 hour ago, Robert Hall said:

I wonder if the new Ranger will offer a hybrid or EV version..it's due out in the next year or so?   I assume it will offer the same powertrains as the Bronco.

I believe it's rumored to possibly get the Lighting treatment. I think they patented the names Maverick Lightning and Ranger Lightning. 

[G. David Felt]

2 hours ago, ccap41 said:

I am a little surprised they didn't electrify this in any way. It would have been a great way to corner the 30mpg capable truck market. 

I know the Maverick can achieve that but, this obviously can do more work and 30mpg would probably cut into Maverick sales, assuming it wasn't 50k. 

Ford I suspect due to existing Hybrids already was going down that road where GM had killed the VOLT and was not looking to Hybrid anything, so at this point, EV is the future, this is a very nice and decent stop gap till then.

[ccap41]

1 minute ago, David said:

this is a very nice and decent stop gap till then.

This isn't a stop-gap at all. This is just the same thing they've done for 100 years, 100% ICE. 

This appears to be a pretty awesome product, but it isn't a stop-gap-anything. It's just another truck. 

[Drew Dowdell]

4 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I believe it's rumored to possibly get the Lighting treatment. I think they patented the names Maverick Lightning and Ranger Lightning. 

I think a Maverick Lightning is way off.  Manufacturers sometimes just trademark* names to grab them or hold on to them.  GM routinely renews trademarks on names that have gone out of production years ago.... only once in a while do they come back, like Electra.  There is such a thing as trademark trolls that try to guess the names of upcoming products and then hold them ransom. 

[ccap41]

9 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I think a Maverick Lightning is way off.  Manufacturers sometimes just trademark* names to grab them or hold on to them.  GM routinely renews trademarks on names that have gone out of production years ago.... only once in a while do they come back, like Electra.  There is such a thing as trademark trolls that try to guess the names of upcoming products and then hold them ransom. 

Oh yeah, I don't think a full EV Maverick will be here anytime "soon", just saying that it may be in the pipeline. 

[Drew Dowdell]

9 minutes ago, David said:

Ford I suspect due to existing Hybrids already was going down that road where GM had killed the VOLT and was not looking to Hybrid anything, so at this point, EV is the future, this is a very nice and decent stop gap till then.

GM has/had like 6 completely different hybrid systems developed, that said, the Colorado would never have gotten Voltec as it was the second most expensive hybrid powertrain they ever designed. (The first being the 2-mode hybrid, but at least they split those costs with Daimler-Chrysler and BMW). The other option would have been the hybrid from the CT6, but they aren't putting the powertrain from an $80k car into a $27k base truck.

At best, it would have been a modified version of the final Malibu Hybrid, but that would not have stood up to truck duty because it uses a CVT.

[ccap41]

Just now, Drew Dowdell said:

The other option would have been the hybrid from the CT6, but they aren't putting the powertrain from an $80k car into a $27k base truck.

Well, I certainly wouldn't put anything like that past them. They claimed the 2.7T was for trucks only then it appeared in 50k Cadillacs and then in 27k trucks again. 

[surreal1272]

1 hour ago, David said:

Ford I suspect due to existing Hybrids already was going down that road where GM had killed the VOLT and was not looking to Hybrid anything, so at this point, EV is the future, this is a very nice and decent stop gap till then.

Exactly the point I made to SMK. There is no longer an existing hybrid set up for GM to even use at this point and with EVs right around the corner, it doesn’t make sense to put money into it. 

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

At best, it would have been a modified version of the final Malibu Hybrid, but that would not have stood up to truck duty because it uses a CVT.

The “CVT” part as well as the fact that this is a RWD truck whereas the Maverick is FWD with mates up better with a CVT. The Colorado better never go the CVT route. 

[Drew Dowdell]

14 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

The “CVT” part as well as the fact that this is a RWD truck whereas the Maverick is FWD with mates up better with a CVT. The Colorado better never go the CVT route. 

Not all CVTs are bad. It’s just that what is now the traditional CVT isn’t great. There are other designs using planetary gear sets that would do very well in trucks (they were part of the Tahoe 2-Mode hybrid). CVTs and hybrid usually go hand in hand because it’s the best way to blend power from two sources.  But not all CVTs are the rubber-band-drive units found in Nissans and Subarus.

[surreal1272]

11 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Not all CVTs are bad. It’s just that what is now the traditional CVT isn’t great. There are other designs using planetary gear sets that would do very well in trucks (they were part of the Tahoe 2-Mode hybrid). CVTs and hybrid usually go hand in hand because it’s the best way to blend power from two sources.  But not all CVTs are the rubber-band-drive units found in Nissans and Subarus.

True but even the best CVT is worse than your average four speed automatic IMO lol. Just don’t care for them at all. 

[Drew Dowdell]

52 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

True but even the best CVT is worse than your average four speed automatic IMO lol. Just don’t care for them at all. 

As it is unlikely you’ve gotten to drive the “best” CVT, planetary systems in my view, probably not fair to judge. 

[surreal1272]

42 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

As it is unlikely you’ve gotten to drive the “best” CVT, planetary systems in my view, probably not fair to judge. 

Maybe. Define "best". Here is a list of CVT autos I have driven (may be missing one or two from my dealership days in AZ).

 

2009 & 2016 Nissan Altima-The 2016 is clearly less of a rubber band driven pain than the '09 but that is not saying a whole lot.

2017 Nissan Pathfinder-A nice CUV that is ruined by the power sapping action of the CVT.

2016 Jeep Compass (a 2200 miles drive back from NC to AZ in 2017 so I have far more "experience" with this than any other CVT). The absolute worst of the worst. Garbage in every way. The only way I could pass on the interstate, without getting run over in the passing lane, was to resume cruise control at a preset higher speed. That it is the only time it had anything resembling spirted acceleration. Just one the worst cars I have ever experienced and that is coming from someone who was tortured with an '81 Chevette, 4 speed stick with no A/C and vinyl in the south, for three years as his first car in high school.

 

2021 Kia Soul. Having driven a 2015 and '16 model of the 2.0 with six speed automatic, I am very familiar with these as well. The CVT is the technical best of the bunch, but again that is not saying much because the 6 speed auto was far superior for acceleration and overall driving satisfaction. 

 

1.Kia

2. Pathfinder

3.Altima (both years)

 

 

 

 

 

1,023,124,819,01...(you get the picture). Compass

 

This is all just my very humble opinion, of course, but there it is. Just no to CVTs when there are far better options out there. 

Edited July 29, 2022 by surreal1272

[smk4565]

6 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

I wonder if the new Ranger will offer a hybrid or EV version..it's due out in the next year or so?   I assume it will offer the same powertrains as the Bronco.

The new Tacoma is expected to offer a hybrid and a full EV.  If they can be the segment sales leader with a truck that is old as dirt, then I think they could be pretty tough with the rumored engines, those being the Lexus turbo 4-cylinder and the Tundra's twin turbo V6 hybrid.  I would assume the Ranger gets the Bronco powertrains and a Raptor version will happen, so Toyota will put the Tundra engine in the Tacoma to battle the Raptor.

[Drew Dowdell]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

Maybe. Define "best". Here is a list of CVT autos I have driven (may be missing one or two from my dealership days in AZ).

 

2009 & 2016 Nissan Altima-The 2016 is clearly less of a rubber band driven pain than the '09 but that is not saying a whole lot.

2017 Nissan Pathfinder-A nice CUV that is ruined by the power sapping action of the CVT.

2016 Jeep Compass (a 2200 miles drive back from NC to AZ in 2017 so I have far more "experience" with this than any other CVT). The absolute worst of the worst. Garbage in every way. The only way I could pass on the interstate, without getting run over in the passing lane, was to resume cruise control at a preset higher speed. That it is the only time it had anything resembling spirted acceleration. Just one the worst cars I have ever experienced and that is coming from someone who was tortured with an '81 Chevette, 4 speed stick with no A/C and vinyl in the south, for three years as his first car in high school.

 

2021 Kia Soul. Having driven a 2015 and '16 model of the 2.0 with six speed automatic, I am very familiar with these as well. The CVT is the technical best of the bunch, but again that is not saying much because the 6 speed auto was far superior for acceleration and overall driving satisfaction. 

 

1.Kia

2. Pathfinder

3.Altima (both years)

 

 

 

 

 

1,023,124,819,01...(you get the picture). Compass

 

This is all just my very humble opinion, of course, but there it is. Just no to CVTs when there are far better options out there. 

All of those are the rubber band style CVT.  None of them are planetary. The only planetary CVTs that I can think of are inside the 2-mode Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade, but those also are tied to traditional automatics, yes both in a single unit. They have an unusual but not unpleasant acceleration 

The CT6 PHEV uses 2 planetary eCVTs plus one non-electric planetary CVT. Strangest “shifting” pattern of all because the engine can go on and off at anytime, but it does feel like there are gears doing work in there . It was the next generation of Voltec but used ICE for additional performance while Voltec was only used electric propulsion 

[G. David Felt]

53 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The new Tacoma is expected to offer a hybrid and a full EV.  If they can be the segment sales leader with a truck that is old as dirt, then I think they could be pretty tough with the rumored engines, those being the Lexus turbo 4-cylinder and the Tundra's twin turbo V6 hybrid.  I would assume the Ranger gets the Bronco powertrains and a Raptor version will happen, so Toyota will put the Tundra engine in the Tacoma to battle the Raptor.

Makes sense that Toyota would use their old hybrid systems from the Prius line as they are so far behind on the EV front. This is the only way to offer something competitive to the market as they scramble to get going on EVs.

GM choose to not go the Hybrid route but focus on the EV route and I think it will serve them well as the various stories of the Cadillac Dealer meeting seems to show that GM has a heavy stable of EVs coming and Cadillac is going to lead in this effort ahead of the Asian or European brands.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-6957783447205478400-37dt?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web

I would be willing to bet since Cadillac has stated they will have much more announcements this coming fall that we will see various new models including even the electric Escalade at this show possibly.

Home | 2022 Cadillac Fall Festival

I would also be willing to say that GM will probably be first to have a mid-size EV truck as the Silverado is looking good, I can easily see them scale this down to mid-size which would sell hot for them too.

 

 

[surreal1272]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

All of those are the rubber band style CVT.  None of them are planetary. The only planetary CVTs that I can think of are inside the 2-mode Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade, but those also are tied to traditional automatics, yes both in a single unit. They have an unusual but not unpleasant acceleration 

The CT6 PHEV uses 2 planetary eCVTs plus one non-electric planetary CVT. Strangest “shifting” pattern of all because the engine can go on and off at anytime, but it does feel like there are gears doing work in there . It was the next generation of Voltec but used ICE for additional performance while Voltec was only used electric propulsion 

I knew there were other options out but it kind of proves my point about CVTs. It takes overcomplicating it with double units or as an assist to a primary running transmission. One of the original points of the CVT was it's supposed simplicity and fewer moving parts to break (cheaper) yet the only way to make it livable is to modify it from its simplicity. 

31 minutes ago, David said:

Makes sense that Toyota would use their old hybrid systems from the Prius line as they are so far behind on the EV front

On the flip side, they are far ahead the hybrid front so it makes double sense to port one over tot eh Tacoma, especially given the addition of one to the Tundra. Chevy does not necessarily need a hybrid when their full size brother no longer offer one and the EV version of it is coming in a year or so. There just isn't a good business case for a hybrid IMO.

[surreal1272]

2026 is the target year for the EV Colorado/Canyon twins, which puts just two years behind the Silverado. Maybe a year long on that but it solids what I was getting at earlier regarding GM and their lack of hybrid options in favor of full on EV plans. Barra told everyone it would eventually be EV and nothing else. Nothing about that says that hybrid powertrains were in their long term or even short term plans. Would have made no sense, financially speaking.

 

https://gmauthority.com/blog/2022/07/chevy-colorado-ev-gmc-canyon-ev-to-appear-in-2026-says-report/

[smk4565]

14 hours ago, David said:

Makes sense that Toyota would use their old hybrid systems from the Prius line as they are so far behind on the EV front. This is the only way to offer something competitive to the market as they scramble to get going on EVs.

GM choose to not go the Hybrid route but focus on the EV route and I think it will serve them well as the various stories of the Cadillac Dealer meeting seems to show that GM has a heavy stable of EVs coming and Cadillac is going to lead in this effort ahead of the Asian or European brands.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/activity-6957783447205478400-37dt?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web

I would be willing to bet since Cadillac has stated they will have much more announcements this coming fall that we will see various new models including even the electric Escalade at this show possibly.

Home | 2022 Cadillac Fall Festival

I would also be willing to say that GM will probably be first to have a mid-size EV truck as the Silverado is looking good, I can easily see them scale this down to mid-size which would sell hot for them too.

 

Toyota isn't using the Prius system if they are using the Tundra's system in the Tacoma.  The Tundra's hybrid system I think puts the electric motor attached to the transmission, I know it works differently than the Prius.  Then Toyota has the 3rd system where the ICE engine powers the front wheels, and an electric motor powers the rear like in the Sienna and Highlander, but that obviously won't be used for a Tacoma.  They need something for rear drive, which leaves the hybrid V6 form the Lexus LS or the hybrid twin turbo V6 from the Tundra, and I'd imagine they'd use the Tundra's.

Going all in on EV might be the better strategy too, the faster you can convert the line over to EV, probably the better in the long run.

[surreal1272]

7 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Going all in on EV might be the better strategy too, the faster you can convert the line over to EV, probably the better in the long run.

Yet you spoke the complete opposite earlier in the thread when it came to Chevy. You questioned why Chevy didn't have a hybrid option, knowing good and well what that reason was. Nice backpedal though.

[smk4565]

6 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Yet you spoke the complete opposite earlier in the thread when it came to Chevy. You questioned why Chevy didn't have a hybrid option, knowing good and well what that reason was. Nice backpedal though.

Going all EV might be a better better strategy, not a for sure thing.  But GM isn't really going all EV, they will still be making ICE cars until 2035.  All in would be killing the gas Silverado in 2024 and selling only the EV model.  But that isn't their plan, this 2.7 turbo 4 or the 6.2 V8 in the Silverado could still be on the market in 12 years.  Who is going to want a 420 hp V8 in 2034?  Unless part of this plan is to make the ICE cars look like crap so people buy the EV.

Personally, I'd like to see all the whole car market go EV, but EV's are still too expensive for that to happen right now, and no one outside Tesla has manufacturing scale to do it.  

[surreal1272]

And none of what you just said there changes the fact that you were wrong before and no amount of bar moving by you changes that.

[Drew Dowdell]

On 7/29/2022 at 3:29 PM, Drew Dowdell said:

All I can say is be here Monday morning for some interesting news from a competitor.