GM Inside News Forum banner
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
277 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
We are all pretty much in agreement that the Colorado is one of the more desprete GM products as proven by a previous post. My question to you is how would you go about improving it to where it would sale? Would you go with the unit body or the standard body on frame design? GM is out sold tremendously by Toyota and Ford in this segment so gaining back lost market share is going to be tough. How would you do it?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
20,962 Posts
If GM kills off Hummer, the former H3T could serve well as a Canyon/Colorado replacement. Overall, the GMT-355 replacement needs to be more capable, more powerful, but at the same time more fuel efficient to compete with toyota. It should also look slightly more appealing and modern.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,431 Posts
The S10 was much more competative....but then again, Ford's latest full redesign in 2003 (last year for the S10) was 1992. The last full redesign for the S10 was 1994- but it was significantly updated with vortec powertrains and a better quality interior.

Nissan products were lame at the time. The only real competitor to the S10 was the Dakota and the Tacoma- and that is only because the Tacoma was simply a great little truck and the Dakota had a later redesign and a good price.

Since 2004, every competitor has had a major overhaul. Even Ford has updated the Ranger several times.

My point is that GM is going to have to put up the same effort in the mid sized trucks as they do in the T900s.

The T355 was actually supposed to be out sooner (like in 1999), but I've read that the design was postponed because it could not fit the wide 4.3L V6. This drove development of the Atlas line. The Colorado was essentially an Isuzu/GM partnership that didn't take into account the different demands in different markets. The Nissan and Toyota products are much more flexible in that respect.

GM needs to get moving on a design to replace the T355 chassis worldwide (to include a mid sized pickup and SUV the same size as the Colorado)- and it needs to be competative in all markets. That's a tough road, but Toyota and Nissan are both doing well now because of it. It should not be unit body.....that is an American market thing. If Chevrolet want's a unit body truck, then the Theta chassis or Equinox should be modified. There will always be a need for real trucks and SUVs, and that's why the Colorado/Rodeo/Trailblazer should be merged on one new chassis worldwide with input from every market it competes in.

The Colorado isn't a bad truck, but GM can't redesign their products in this market every 10 years like they used to. They can't postpone a project 5 years and expect it to still be competative.

Lets face it: Toyota is going to force GM to make better trucks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
885 Posts
The S10 was much more competative....but then again, Ford's latest full redesign in 2003 (last year for the S10) was 1992. The last full redesign for the S10 was 1994- but it was significantly updated with vortec powertrains and a better quality interior.

Nissan products were lame at the time. The only real competitor to the S10 was the Dakota and the Tacoma- and that is only because the Tacoma was simply a great little truck and the Dakota had a later redesign and a good price.

Since 2004, every competitor has had a major overhaul. Even Ford has updated the Ranger several times.

My point is that GM is going to have to put up the same effort in the mid sized trucks as they do in the T900s.

The T355 was actually supposed to be out sooner (like in 1999), but I've read that the design was postponed because it could not fit the wide 4.3L V6. This drove development of the Atlas line. The Colorado was essentially an Isuzu/GM partnership that didn't take into account the different demands in different markets. The Nissan and Toyota products are much more flexible in that respect.

GM needs to get moving on a design to replace the T355 chassis worldwide (to include a mid sized pickup and SUV the same size as the Colorado)- and it needs to be competative in all markets. That's a tough road, but Toyota and Nissan are both doing well now because of it. It should not be unit body.....that is an American market thing. If Chevrolet want's a unit body truck, then the Theta chassis or Equinox should be modified. There will always be a need for real trucks and SUVs, and that's why the Colorado/Rodeo/Trailblazer should be merged on one new chassis worldwide with input from every market it competes in.

The Colorado isn't a bad truck, but GM can't redesign their products in this market every 10 years like they used to. They can't postpone a project 5 years and expect it to still be competative.

Lets face it: Toyota is going to force GM to make better trucks.
Toyota may force GM to make better trucks, but CAFE will force GM to make fewer trucks. Personally, I think the GMT355's are done and a unibody unit of some type will replace them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
112 Posts
If GM kills off Hummer, the former H3T could serve well as a Canyon/Colorado replacement. Overall, the GMT-355 replacement needs to be more capable, more powerful, but at the same time more fuel efficient to compete with toyota. It should also look slightly more appealing and modern.
I agree with you 100%, especially now that Ford is working a new med size F100 just below the F150.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
885 Posts
make it look like holden colorado,give it a completly new interior,similar to traverse.cut the i5. give it the 2.3 4 cyl from equinox,diesel version,3.0 diesel v6,3.6 di v6
People. This is GM we're talking about. And for once, they finally have their heads screwed on straight producing some quality cars. They need to keep that momentum going in this market. There will be little, if any, money available to do a proper redesign of the GMT355 platform as it currently stands.

Personally, I really like these little trucks and have said that while I agree they could be better, they really are capable and competent trucks able to do what they were designed to do.

But, if GM were smart, just like they came out w/ the first large CUV, they would be smart to instead come out with the first economical and affordable CUT. If they could beat the Ridgeline to the punch of producing an economical, fuel efficient and reasonably capable CUT type pickup as a compact, one easily affordable by many families, they will have a winner.

Why do they need to do this? The GMT355's aren't selling. Even a good redesign is no guarantee they will sell. The only logical thing to do is to put their money into something that they can advertise and point a finger to show they are fuel efficient, innovative and first to market with a truly compact CUT truck. That is the GM that breaks the mold.

Ford creating an F100 is ludicrous. They are pandering to the exact same truck mentality that got them into the mess they're in. While Ford states they want to have the most fuel efficient lineup, they're dumping their money on a new F100 larger than the ranger. If the F100's fuel economy isn't at least 4mpg better than the full-size pickups nor considerably cheaper, they too will suffer the same fate as the GMT355's and the aging Ranger.

GM's only saving grace right now is to show industry leadership as they've done w/ the Aura, the Malibu, the GMT900's, Corvette, the Lambda's, the XFE Cobalt's and hopefully the Volt. Only way they can do this is thru innovation and quality product to market. More of the same in the compact arena won't cut it. If you can undercut the Tacoma on price, provide a considerable bump in FE and upstage them on innovation, you can make Toyota look like the GM of old in the truck market.

GM needs to change it's perception in the market place. More of the same in the compact arena is NOT the answer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts


3.6L DI V6 and a small diesel option
This truck looks like an Uplander in the front...OUCH!

The reason why the Colorados are not selling is that they do not get the mileage nessisary to appeal to the current market of crazed people demanding ultra high mileage. They get about the same mileage as the full sized trucks because they try to maintain as much of the capability of a truck as possible, and cram it into a smaller package. They are not geared right for mileage but rather for pulling and hauling. They are heavy( relative to the fuel sippers that are so hot right now ) and thirsty little trucks that do a great job of maintaining good capability for those who do not need a full size truck( i e, me ) Giving that this was the initial mission of these trucks and why they were designed in the first place, I do not understand all of the bashing. To make the current colorado a fuel sipper, you would have to axe its capability to where you basicly have a cramped up car with a bed on the back

The midsize trucks are not selling well because of what I feared would happen. Buyers are either going with the full size trucks or jumping down to a car or small efficient crossover, and not even considering the midsize trucks. And those who do buy midsize are going with the Toyota Taco just because of the Toyota name. Do I blame them? No. GM was happy to sell it's cheapo S10's when Toyota was making the first generation Toyota small truck and later the first Tacomas( thought to be some of the most reliable trucks around as you still see them today )

Let me end by saying that I do not believe that GM still makes an inferior truck as I believe GM has made major strides to correct this with the Colorado. I believe also that the current Taco is not Toyota's best work and that they are doing the same thing that GM did with the S10's. This is why though the Colorado beats the Tacoma in most categorys and is usually cheaper with an older design, it still outsells GM 3 to 1. The past comes back to hurt you, and it did in this case as GM is still living the nightmare of the public remembering the cheapness of the S10s and the quality of the Toyotas and the sales reflect this
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
I had the great misfortune of driving a 'loaner' Canyon while my Sierra was in the shop.

The Canyon is junk. It has a gutless yet noisy engine, lousy interior design, cheap materials, hideous exterior, etc. The only way to "save" it is to scrap it and start over. Truthfully, I'd rather drive an origianl '84/85 S10 than a Canyon/Colorado.

But what I find interesting is this knee-jerk reaction that GM and people here are having to the current market. For years the cars were ignored while the truck & SUV craze roared. Now that a 'car craze' has started, everyone wants to ignore trucks and concentrate only on cars. There's a lesson to be learned here. Don't completely ignore ANY segment because you never know what is going to be "hot" next year.

GM would be wise to fix the Colorado/Canyon or replace it with a decent product in the same market. If not for today's sales, then do it for tomorrow's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
157 Posts
I had the great misfortune of driving a 'loaner' Canyon while my Sierra was in the shop.

The Canyon is junk. It has a gutless yet noisy engine, lousy interior design, cheap materials, hideous exterior, etc. The only way to "save" it is to scrap it and start over. Truthfully, I'd rather drive an origianl '84/85 S10 than a Canyon/Colorado.

But what I find interesting is this knee-jerk reaction that GM and people here are having to the current market. For years the cars were ignored while the truck & SUV craze roared. Now that a 'car craze' has started, everyone wants to ignore trucks and concentrate only on cars. There's a lesson to be learned here. Don't completely ignore ANY segment because you never know what is going to be "hot" next year.

GM would be wise to fix the Colorado/Canyon or replace it with a decent product in the same market. If not for today's sales, then do it for tomorrow's.
And what truck in the class is so much better the Colorado/Canyon that causes them to need fixing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
195 Posts
And what truck in the class is so much better the Colorado/Canyon that causes them to need fixing?
There are at least two in the only category that matters (sales):
SOURCE
Toyota Tacoma (over 84,000 sold YTD)
15 year old Ford Ranger (over 40,000 sold YTD)

Compared to the Colorado selling 32,000 YTD. Canyon sales are so low they don't even make the top-10 list.

I don't know when the Taco was last updated, but if GM's new products can't even match a 15 year old Ford design, then I'd say GM needs to "fix" something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
836 Posts
Whoa, what is that? I've never seen it before, doesn't look that bad either.
thats the colorado crew cab z71 concept, its from 2006 or 2007. It does have some really cool ideas, jagged headlights that flow with the hoodline, and i think chevy is on to something with these big wheel wells, but i dont think the execution was quite right with the silverado, hopefully the next colorado will have it better. kind of like this concept but a little smaller
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,121 Posts
I think that the Colorado and Canyon should move to an updated GMT-360 platform, along with the Envoy and Trailblazer. They can use both the 3.6 DI V6, or 4.2 inline 6 and the 5.3 V8. 6 speed autos and 5 speed manuals across the board, a better dash design, better quality all around, and better fuel economy.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
20,962 Posts
thats the colorado crew cab z71 concept, its from 2006 or 2007. It does have some really cool ideas, jagged headlights that flow with the hoodline, and i think chevy is on to something with these big wheel wells, but i dont think the execution was quite right with the silverado, hopefully the next colorado will have it better. kind of like this concept but a little smaller
WOW.
Make it GM. You know you want to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,903 Posts
There are at least two in the only category that matters (sales):
SOURCE
Toyota Tacoma (over 84,000 sold YTD)
15 year old Ford Ranger (over 40,000 sold YTD)

Compared to the Colorado selling 32,000 YTD. Canyon sales are so low they don't even make the top-10 list.

I don't know when the Taco was last updated, but if GM's new products can't even match a 15 year old Ford design, then I'd say GM needs to "fix" something.
Its unfortunate that GM doesn't market the Colorado and Canyon twins because they are good trucks. I have one and so far its been very reliable. As far as performance goes, my Colorado will smoke the Ranger. Hell, I had some guy in a V8 Silverado try to hole shot me at a stop light the other day and he ended up watching me pull away from him. Granted my truck is a reg. cab so its the lightest version, and with the 3.7L 5-cyl, 3.73 rear gear and 240hp its pretty dam quick . Its much roomier than a Ranger, the interior may not have the soft touch materials, but it will last much longer in the California sun because of this. Lots of people bash these trucks but have probably never driven them, and the ones who have, probably drove the 4 cyl which is down on power but still more than competive with other 4 cyl powerplants. The mileage isn't great but I don't expect that a 5 cyl with
240hp and a four speed trans to be a fuel miser. A 5 or 6 speed automatic would be a nice addition and help with the fuel mileage though.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top