Long Term Test: 2004 GMC Canyon

[giagastormer]

By editors at Edmunds.com



We're now more than 7,000 miles into our GMC Canyon ownership experience, and the editorial staff has formed some hard opinions on our truck's engine performance, handling characteristics and interior accommodations. Although we generally like the Canyon, some weaknesses are becoming apparent — and with a fully redesigned Dodge Dakota, Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma arriving in the next few months, these don't bode well for the success of GM's compact truck line.

The performance of our SLE extended cab's five-cylinder engine continues to be a popular topic of discussion. Although most drivers find the acceleration adequate, none of us regard it as an impressive power plant for a $28,000 truck.

After taking a 1,800-mile road trip to New Mexico and back, Senior Road Test Editor Ed Hellwig had this to say: "Out on the wide-open highways of Arizona and New Mexico, the Canyon moved along just above the 75-mph speed limit without much trouble. Climbing any type of long grade usually required pulling it down to third gear to maintain a reasonable speed. High-speed passing takes awhile, so I made sure to leave plenty of room when it came to going around big trucks."

Senior Content Editor Erin Riches, who used the Canyon for her long commutes, gave a similar report. "The inline five has ample power for driving around the suburbs and for most freeway travel. However, it runs out of steam when climbing highway grades — you really have to stay on the gas to maintain speed. Running the air conditioning at half-blast on very hot days also sapped its strength, even when I was just running errands around town. In either instance, its efforts were accompanied by plenty of noise and, occasionally, dash vibration. This was annoying, but I did like the fact that this engine was quiet and unobtrusive once it settled into a cruising speed."

Full Review




They said alot of good things about it, the Consumer rating was 9.5 out of 10! :woot2:

[navarre92589]

sounds like a pretty good all around vehichle

[giagastormer]

I don't see the what's the big deal about the interior. Everything is well laid out, and easy to use. The materials may not feel great, but they are no doubt a huge leap over the S10.

There is no way that a fully loaded one is worth north of $28,000. Well, with incentives the price seems much more appealing I guess. I would wait for the eXtreme model to come out, or maybe get a 2004 ZQ8, if I could afford one.

[Ming]

We are spoiled by horsepower these days. A compact truck in the 1980's often had little more than 100 horsepower, and I still see contractors using the old relics for work, hauling this or that, not to mention the custom truck guys who love those old underpowered trucks - slam them an inch off the ground and give them noisy exhausts.

The I-5 serves a purpose: Fuel economy. The other truck makers would be wise to remember this. If you can't afford or don't want a full size truck, why would you want to pay V8 gasoline prices?

That said, I'd like to see a turbo I-5 or the Inline 6 just to quiet the complaints from the complainers. And better interior materials.

[giagastormer]

I just finished reading the consumer review for the Canyon at Edmunds, and most people who own the Canyon are getting over 20 mpg in mixed driving, with the I5!

Now lets see you get that kind of gas mileage with the 2005 Dakota 4.7!

[Dumb_Ass_2003]

"While it doesn't seem like a bite-sized version of a 'real' truck like the old S-10 did, it also doesn't feel like a huge behemoth whose sole purpose is to make up for deficiently sized aspects of my anatomy."

:lol:

[ChevyLaxMan]

Over time people will warm up to the gm twins. I don't believe there is anything wrong with their interiors either. I dont know how anyone can complain about the interior either, have they looked at the toy, dakota, RANGER? The looks are not that aggressive on these trucks but just like their predecessors they will age very well. Once again, just look at the competition. GM would be wise to offer an optional larger powerplant to shut up some critics but their current gas mileages seem to be fantastic. My mother's v6 accord only gets 20 around town and as i have heard that is the norm for these vehicles too.
P.S. still holding out on the ls2/turbo5 six speed ss to embarace the lightning/ram10

[usa1]

Originally posted by giagastormer@Sep 5 2004, 09:16 PM
I don't see the what's the big deal about the interior. Everything is well laid out, and easy to use. The materials may not feel great, but they are no doubt a huge leap over the S10.

Raise your expectations for GM. The new trucks will be here for a LONG time and needs to compete with other companies trucks, not the outdated S-10. Unfortunately, the new Tacoma looks like it will be the new benchmark for small trucks. The new Dakota is huge and the Ranger is really long in the tooth.

Mark

[dav305z]

if Toyota came out with an i-5 powered truck, editors would be tripping over themselves to marvel at its great fuel economy, and praise the company for going against the trend of thirsty engines to build a high tech powerplant.
if you want a superpowerful engine then you probably wouldnt be in the market for a compact truck anyway.

[GMObsession6]

very cool they look so much better than the prvious model

[tgagneguam]

Originally posted by usa1@Sep 6 2004, 03:42 AM
Raise your expectations for GM. The new trucks will be here for a LONG time and needs to compete with other companies trucks, not the outdated S-10. Unfortunately, the new Tacoma looks like it will be the new benchmark for small trucks. The new Dakota is huge and the Ranger is really long in the tooth.

Mark

I'm with Mark on this one. You don't set sales records by merely offering something pretty good. Challenge yourself, GM. Why not raise the bar rather than simply measuring up? These trucks are fine, I suppose, but they're certainly not class-leading (please, no posts on how some obscure point like shoulder room is best in class).

I also agree with Mark on one point in particular, which I'll gladly paraphrase: we all know that these trucks will be around forever and an eternity, so the fact that they're merely adequate now makes me wonder what they'll be like in 6 years. Just because Ford decided to neglect the once awesome Ranger does not excuse GM acting similarly with its new twins.

[Askani]

I guess it must be me, but I find the majority of GM's interiors very nice, and the majotiy of *** interiors to be rather strange to say the least.

As far as engines go, the S-10/Sonoma never got the "Bigger" engine, and they sold tons... So don't expect to see a bigger engine in these. The market for high HP compact trucks should be miniscule at best, if you really want more Hp, then buy a ZQ8 and slap on a procharger, done and done...However, I would like to see the Xtreme with an intake/exhaust/chip package, bump it up an extra 25Hp. Much in the way slp did for the Seeker/Express, which are bad@ss trucks that Chevy should have promoted much better, or at the very least educated their dealer network about...

[SUPERBADD75]

guys, when discussing the power thing, remember that the I5 is the OPTIONAL engine. if you want fuel economy you'll buy the 4-banger, if you want a powerful truck you buy the biggest they have, and against the competition the I5 isn't enough, and certainly won't be when the new models from Nissan, Dodge, and Toyota come out. i checked the max tow ratings of Toyota, Ford, and Nissan (with the most powerful available engine in each) against the Colorado, and they all beat it hands down by at least 700lbs. that's on '04 model trucks. the '05s are going to be even more powerful for Toyota and Nissan, and Dodge offers a V8 which is even more trouble. the power issue is a big deal, don't try to deny it.

as far as the interior issue goes i agree with this statement...

usa1 Posted on Sep 6 2004, 03:42 AM
 

Raise your expectations for GM. The new trucks will be here for a LONG time and needs to compete with other companies trucks, not the outdated S-10. Unfortunately, the new Tacoma looks like it will be the new benchmark for small trucks.

don't compare the new truck to the old ones, compare it to what it has to compete against for people's money. i was very underwhelmed the first time i sat in a Canyon. i thought it should be much nicer, and figured it would be since it was a clean sheet design, but was so sadly mistaken. GM needs to realize that people aren't buying their products for reasons other than reliability. people want a vehicle that looks and feels nice, and the Canyon/Colorado don't. i've owned 2 Rangers ('96 and '00) and other than being a bit too small, i prefer the interior of those trucks to the GM compacts. they seriously need to dump the cheap hard plastic interiors and offer a little better than what they do now or they'll be outclassed by everyone else.

[Dumb_Ass_2003]

Originally posted by SUPERBADD75@Sep 5 2004, 10:49 PM
guys, when discussing the power thing, remember that the I5 is the OPTIONAL engine. if you want fuel economy you'll buy the 4-banger, if you want a powerful truck you buy the biggest they have

And I guess if you want something that offers both adequate power and good fuel mileage, like the average buyer, then the I5 is perfect.

[banzai79]

I recently test drove one and the interior is just as good as anything out there, even better. I agree that the I-5 could use some more guts though. It has a high powerband...for a truck, anyway.....and just has that "I don't really want to go" feeling. It's not bad, and I still really liked it, but power is an issue. I'm not really sure why that is, either. The HP numbers sound good but it's like the engine is just reluctant to generate the numbers...it's kind of weird.