GM's Colorado/Canyon Pickups' Lackluster Sales: Down 7% as Tacoma is up 7%

[Tiger]

The answer is not as simple...

1. They don't advertise the Colorado/Canyon. Most powerful & best MPG for a 4 banger in the class...by far...not that anyone would ever know.

2. On the lots there are 2-3 of these max in the corner...hidden by 60 Silverados/Sierra's. The Tacoma gets equal billing vs. the Tundra on Toy's lots.

3. Dealers have NO incentive to sell them over a Silvy.

4. Stabilitrak, optional engine(s), towing capacity, and long beds are conspicuously absent.

5. Colorado's can be had MUCH better equipped vs. a Toyota Tacoma...
a. Sunroof, leather seats, power/heated options, ONSTAR, XM, etc. are items a Taco doesn't offer.

6. IMHO it is hard to compare these Isuzu based trucks to the Toyota Tacoma...
a. The old Tacoma was archaic, smaller, and simpler.
b. The NEW Tacoma is 6+ inches wider...completely different class of vehicle. That said, have you driven one? VERY overated and unchanged since 05 introduction...the truck has issues!

[Cortazzo]

I was thinking about getting a colorado, i love the exterior looks. The interior is garbage and could certainly use an improvement, but honestly in a pickup it doesn't bother me all that much. The engines, more than enough for that size of vehicle, the tacoma and frontier are a lot bigger and need those 250+ v6s to move around. The price on the other hand is way to high for what you get. You can't charge high 20s-30s for this thing in any configuration. That's why it doesn't sell, you can get the larger 'midsize' pickups for the same price, and they will carry and tow more. GM should have sliced the MSRP deeply and I think you'd see the complaints of the interior and powertrain vanish.

[Olds88]

Originally Posted by PeterPuck

The Colorado/Canyon is a FAR better vehicle than the S-10, and the 5-cylinder engine is just fine for this vehicle. Far better than the 4.3 dog they were using.

The problem with the truck is that it unfriendly to sit in and unpleasant to to look at.

The S-10 was more inviting, interior and exterior-wise. If GM was going to develop the Colorado but neglect what makes a vehicle appealing to the average buyer, they should have just refreshed the S-10 again. At least it was cheap...

The 4.3 was far from a dog. It was a damn near bulletproof motor. My 94 S10 Blazer had it and never gave me problems. Just because it isn't a new motor doesn't make it a bad one. The colorado should really have the TrailBlazers inline-six as an option though, that is a sweet motor.

[Ming]

Originally Posted by Tiger

The answer is not as simple...

1. They don't advertise the Colorado/Canyon. Most powerful & best MPG for a 4 banger in the class...by far...not that anyone would ever know.

You mean you don't remember that impactful and awesome Shanaia Twain "Feel Like a Woman" Colorado commercial?

[gardnet1]

I would have bought a crew cab if the interiors weren't so depressingly cheap. I don't have a problem with the engine.

[skylark68]

GM just needs to revise the interior on mid and upper level trims for the truck, and offer the 5.3 V-8 as an option across the board for people who want V-8 performance without the size of the Silverado/Sierra. That shouldn't be too hard for GM to figure out and execute.

The five cylinder is a nice engine and runs like a scalded dog, but a V-8 should be offered to trump Nissan/Toyota.

I've always thought that the new Tacoma competed better with the Dakota, and not the Colorado/Canyon. Appearance wise it seems much larger than the GM twins.

[unkillsam]

Originally Posted by Olds88

The 4.3 was far from a dog. It was a damn near bulletproof motor. My 94 S10 Blazer had it and never gave me problems. Just because it isn't a new motor doesn't make it a bad one. The colorado should really have the TrailBlazers inline-six as an option though, that is a sweet motor.

Yeah it was a dog. 190hp/260 tq. out of 4.3 liters sucks.

It was basically an updated GenII smallblock with 2 cylinders cut off. Considering that they had stopped using the GenII's back in like 93, the motor was severly outdated.

[stick076]

Best Interior Layout - 98+ S10
Best Interior Quality - 94-97 S10
Best Seats - 94-97 S10
Best Utility - S10
Best Motor - S10 4.3
Best Driving - Colorado

GM took one step forward with the Colorado but another 8 steps backward on top of it. It doesn't need a V8 and shouldn't have one. When has anyone honestly seen a bigger motor help sales? ...yeah, the 5.3 in the Monte sure helped... At the time, the S10 was the most inviting and the nicest to drive. It had a fuel efficient 4 cyl and a 6 cylinder that was just plain fun.

Now we have a horrible interior, a 4 and 5 cyl that get about the same mileage, a bigger truck with a smaller motor, decreased utility with a 4k tow rating, etc. I wanted a Colorado real bad before they came out...and newer improved S10 right? wrong.

So, overall the S10 was a better truck. Sales will back up my case as well.

How does a small truck NOT prosper when gas is $3/gallon?????

But what do I know, I only was GM's target customer for it.

[Z28x]

Colorado is an awesome looking truck, it is the perfect size. The truck is very solid and rides great, the only thing it needs is a new interior that is better than the competitions (maybe on par with the Silverado) and a V8 or 3.6L V6. 4cyl. diesel wouldn't hurt either.

Oh, and lower the price another $2000 across the board, widen the gap between Colorado and Silverado and under cut the Toyota Tacoma.

[exmechanic]

Originally Posted by skylark68

GM just needs to revise the interior on mid and upper level trims for the truck, and offer the 5.3 V-8 as an option across the board for people who want V-8 performance without the size of the Silverado/Sierra. That shouldn't be too hard for GM to figure out and execute.

The five cylinder is a nice engine and runs like a scalded dog, but a V-8 should be offered to trump Nissan/Toyota.

I've always thought that the new Tacoma competed better with the Dakota, and not the Colorado/Canyon. Appearance wise it seems much larger than the GM twins.

If memory serves me correctly, it is coming with a 5.3l V-8, probably only in the crew.

[jeffdursty]

I have both a 07 Aveo and 06 Colorado Crew cab Z71. The Aveo interior is much better and the materials on the dash of the Aveo are identical to the Tacom I tested out. Which the interior blows away the Colorado.

Points that have not been pointed out about the Colorado where it excells over the competition. The Colorado has better turning radius than the comp. The Colorado has better off-road manners than the comp. It is much easier to park than the comp. The size of this truck is a true compact and gives you lots of room inside. The Tacoma was a bigger truck. I decided that I wanted a compact and the Tacoma is as big as the last gen Tundra. No one wants to point this out for some reason.

When I go out in the woods hunting give me the Colorado 10 out of 10 times. You can keep your bloated pigs (Tacoma, Frontier, Dakota) I want a nibble and capable Truck. I've got just that.

GM please gut and redo the interior and add one more gear in the trany that is where the Colorado fails and those are the only places it fails period.

[88Fiero]

Being a salesperson, I can tell you what one of the problems are. Cost!!! It is priced close to the sierra. GM screwed up on the pricing of this truck. I have clients, friends who have purchased the Canyon. They love the truck. Larry bought the base regular cab with the 4. Evertime I see him he tells me he has a problem with his truck. Then he laughs and says the damn thing doesn't use any gas. His last fill up was in the 30 range. He is a happy camper. He traded in a full size extended cab. He loves it. I feel if GM is going to keep the cheap interior in the truck, drop the price! We can sell all they make if they price it were it belongs. And GM Stop pricing the chevys cheaper. That is bull****. But will GM listen? Hell no. Anyway the Canyon is a great truck, it just needs some respect from GM.

[tseas930]

I sell Chevy's for a living. I even drive an S-10. I love how my S-10 looks but I wish i had the powertrain and ride of the Colorado. My opinion...Make it look as good as the GMT-900's inside and out and rename it S-10. Then you'll see sales turn around.

[rsbaker]

If GM would produce this Colorado they'd have lots of sales! I'm not a truck guy but I'd buy this.

[armycam68]

I have a 2004 Colorado Z-71 4X4. As I said in other posts....it's marginal. It's approaching 20k miles on the clock. So far a new gas cap, a tie rod end, and front end alignment. BTW the 04's had the incorrect alignment so there goes the General tires. I'll be buying new tires shortly.
The truck is difficult to board. A $525 side step package makes you feel like you own a Kennworth. It has the turning radius of the Queen Mary. All my S-10's with off road tires were easy to board, but the Colorado Z-85 can't be purchased with the off road tires so pack another three or four grand on the price just to get a truck that will go in the snow. The motor and running gears are fine. It's not a powerhouse, but it's sufficient and constantly gives me 17-19 mpg around town. Sadly, it sounds like a UPS truck!. The interior is a cut above a CJ-5..........cheap.
I priced a new Colorado yesterday....same truck as I own. Mine in 2004 was $28,200 in ........the 07........$27,620. The 07 has a $2K rebate, the 08 has a $500 rebate..........Both are over priced! I can buy an GMC Envoy for the same money because of rebates and get a nicer vehicle.
GM still has the habit of selling the same vehicle year after year without any improvements. What's new on the Colorado from 04-08........paint colors.
If I were to buy a new Colorado in the same color, the neighbors would never know the difference! I would have a new payment book for the same old thing!
I had seven S-10 trucks. They were trouble free, easy to board, looked good, and comfortable. After 36 months, I just can't warm-up to my Colorado.
my wife refuses to drive it...........never had that problem with my S-10 Maxi Cabs!