2015 US Chevy Colorado

Zomby Woof wrote:

kevlarcorolla wrote: Exactly,plus if its as a big a turd for reliability as the duramax than they sure got a winner on their hands.

I had heard that about the duramax diesels, so I asked some people I know that work on them everyday. They told me there's nothing wrong with a Duramax. The problem is, people tune them, make big power, then blow them up. Leave the stock, or mild tune and they're very good. The real turkey, they said, is the Ford Diesel.

I actually compared it to the 94 K1500 W/T (options: AC, auto) I learned to drive in, same size and weight roughly. The 94 is a better truck IMHO

How long have you been driving the new Canyon? Just based on the fact that it's new and modern, I would be surprised if it didn't completely blow away a full size 1500 from the nineties.

We have a couple of Duramaxs running around the shop (one shop truck, 2 are the techs)

The stone stock one hasn't given us any trouble, (all though the brake feel scares the crap out of me.) The other two have moderate and mild tunes.

The moderate tune has had more tranny problems from the allison than anything. Apparently when you get above the 525hp range they start to slip. Just $2k away from getting it beefed up to handle it all.

All trucks are over 150k miles.

The only thing I can tell you definite about the Duramax is the fuel system is marginal. A little booster pump to help the IP does wonders for these engines. Even the moderate tune, before it got breathed on, really showed improvement over stock with just the addition of the pump. Nothing else, just the pump. Apparently the IP can't suck and blow enough at WOT in stock form. Just needs enough help to deliver to the IP so it can pressurize the CR.

As a Ford guy, I would take a Duramax over the 6.0 and 6.4 PowerStrokes. I can't make an informed statement on the new 6.7 Powerstroke.

My experience is that the boss and his father both have duramax trucks,the boss bought a 2500 flat deck for hauling crap around.Completly stock in every sense,quit running with just over 200kms(approx. 120,000 miles for the yanks)and the best guess at the dealer was $6700 to replace a bunch of fuel system,injectors yada yada with no promise that was the problem.Now for a truck made in such numbers and low milage intended to work a long hard life that's not exactly acceptable,not sure where the truck went but it sure didn't get another penny invested by us. His dads truck is a cream puff used for towing the 5th wheel to florida and parking for the winter,it runs about the same as the other truck just before it was put down.And those are better than the fords??

I'll stick with my fleet of Toyotas thanks.

I gotta say, the 6.0 Ford diesel is a turd, every one we trade goes straight to the auction, we won't even try to sell them. The 7.3 is much better, and this comes from not only trade in experience but also the local Ford techs and a co worker who between himself his dad and a brother own 6 F350 diesels.

If I was going full size 'Murican diesel truck it would be a Duramax or a Cummins. As far as the new VM Motori V6 in the half ton Ram, well, I hope the marriage works better than the Liberty diesel fiasco did.

NGTD wrote: In reply to Kenny_McCormic: Well I have seen a brand-new Sierra with a "carpet-delete" option that gets you a rubber floor, so maybe in the Canyon too.

That is exactly how I'd want mine too. I am very interested in what the pricing will be. Call me a sucker but if I can get my hands on one for around $30K... count me in.

I was just comparing envelopes between the new Sierra and Canyon.

The 2014 Sierra is 80 x 74.2 so 5936 in^2 for frontal area
The 2015 Canyon is 74.3 x 78.9 so 5862 in^2.

Weight is very similar.

Unless they do something really tricky with aero and engines, the fuel economy will be an interesting sales pitch. The whole point of a smaller truck is a fuel economy and daily driver friendliness.

I miss my 94 Ranger.

Curmudgeon wrote: If I was going full size 'Murican diesel truck it would be a Duramax or a Cummins badged Fiat. As far as the new VM Motori V6 in the half ton Ram, well, I hope the marriage works better than the Liberty diesel fiasco did.

FTFY.

I thought the problem with the Liberty diesel was it rattled like a Peterbuilt. It wasn't a bad application just failed miserably in the NVH category. Is there something else?

I've never driven an automatic pickup that didn't think would be WAY better with a manual trans.

Sure, but did you THEN drive the manual version? Half-ton manuals are hit and miss whether they are any fun to drive quickly and by the time you get to 3/4 ton pickups they just ARENT fun. I learned on small car manuals, usually cable shifted. Maybe i got spoiled. They are able to be shifted fast, with low effort, and feel nice and smooth.

Even a miata trans feels like crap to me in comparison to the best cable shifted FWD manuals. I just put motor mounts and diff bushings on a mazdaspeed miata for a guy because it was shifting like crap 1-2 and 2-3 when driven hard. That's kind of a LOT of work to fix a problem that NEVER occurs on the kind of manuals i got spoiled on.

So i get into a big truck with a manual and floor it in first gear and everything seems great until... you have to shift, and it takes a thousand friggin microseconds to get to the next gear and even when there's no automatic truck next to you you can just picture it passing you while you wait for all 96 lbs of crap in that giant trans to get to the proper speed to let the next gear engage. And the bigger the truck the more likely it is that 1st gear is too short and 3rd gear is too tall so you have ONE good gear to enjoy before you're disappointed again.

I mean, just go out and drive big trucks with manuals. It has all the usual reliability benefits but not so much on the fun to drive aspect.

In reply to Vigo:

Precisely, everybody says, "oh I'd buy (insert utility vehicle here) if it had a small diesel and a stick!" Well, I've driven one, a German market Ford Transit 6 speed turbo diesel, not fun, very narrow powerband, extremely grabby clutch. I actually managed to stall the thing hard the first time I tried to make it move. It was harder to drive than my Yugo with a messed up vacuum advance circuit(no power out of the hole). The only thing I could think was how much better utilized the engine could have been with a computer in control of the gearing.

Honestly if I were to get a new Colorado/Canyon, I would get it with a diesel and wouldn't care if it was an automatic.

I want a truck to do the work, not me. I have driven several trucks with manuals and it's not like driving a car. The only exceptions are Compact trucks like S-10s and Rangers with 4-Cylinders. Those you need to have a manual.

Curmudgeon wrote: I gotta say, the 6.0 Ford diesel is a turd, every one we trade goes straight to the auction, we won't even try to sell them.

Give credit where credit's due - that was an IH fiasco. The Ford designed 6.7 is supposed to be about five acres better.

As far as the new VM Motori V6 in the half ton Ram, well, I hope the marriage works better than the Liberty diesel fiasco did.

i thought the issues with the Liberty were all related to the fact that it was a very large four-cylinder, with all of the shaking and drivetrain-shocking issues that go along with that. Note that the new engine is a six of similar displacement.

Drivability-wise, they weren't disagreeable, but I didn't really see the advantage of that engine over the 3.7 gas engine in that respect.

Flight Service wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote: If I was going full size 'Murican diesel truck it would be a Duramax or a Cummins badged Fiat. As far as the new VM Motori V6 in the half ton Ram, well, I hope the marriage works better than the Liberty diesel fiasco did.

FTFY. I thought the problem with the Liberty diesel was it rattled like a Peterbuilt. It wasn't a bad application just failed miserably in the NVH category. Is there something else?

Well, the deal was the transmission was not up to the task. The diesel would break the torque converter apart internally. Chrysler's 'fix' (recall F37) was to replace the converter with the same exact piece then reflash the PCM to lower engine power output. What was a reasonably decent vehicle from an acceleration standpoint (although no ball of fire, it could at least keep up with city traffic reasonably well) turned into a slow shadow of its former self which made up for that with worse fuel mileage.

SyntheticBlinkerFluid wrote: Honestly if I were to get a new Colorado/Canyon, I would get it with a diesel and wouldn't care if it was an automatic. I want a truck to do the work, not me. I have driven several trucks with manuals and it's not like driving a car. The only exceptions are Compact trucks like S-10s and Rangers with 4-Cylinders. Those you need to have a manual.

Yeah, I'll take mine with an auto. I want a useful daily not one for auto crossing. Who gives a E36 M3 about whether or not its fun to drive, its a truck. I could understand if it was because of maintainence reasons, but because of how fun it is?

Curmudgeon wrote:

Flight Service wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote: If I was going full size 'Murican diesel truck it would be a Duramax or a Cummins badged Fiat. As far as the new VM Motori V6 in the half ton Ram, well, I hope the marriage works better than the Liberty diesel fiasco did.

FTFY. I thought the problem with the Liberty diesel was it rattled like a Peterbuilt. It wasn't a bad application just failed miserably in the NVH category. Is there something else?

Well, the deal was the transmission was not up to the task. The diesel would break the torque converter apart internally. Chrysler's 'fix' (recall F37) was to replace the converter with the same exact piece then reflash the PCM to lower engine power output. What was a reasonably decent vehicle from an acceleration standpoint (although no ball of fire, it could at least keep up with city traffic reasonably well) turned into a slow shadow of its former self which made up for that with worse fuel mileage.

I am sure the owners were happy with that solution.

What is it with Chrysler underspecing transmissions? Happened with the Ram at release as well.

kevlarcorolla wrote: My experience is that the boss and his father both have duramax trucks,the boss bought a 2500 flat deck for hauling crap around.Completly stock in every sense,quit running with just over 200kms(approx. 120,000 miles for the yanks)and the best guess at the dealer was $6700 to replace a bunch of fuel system,injectors yada yada with no promise that was the problem.Now for a truck made in such numbers and low milage intended to work a long hard life that's not exactly acceptable,not sure where the truck went but it sure didn't get another penny invested by us. His dads truck is a cream puff used for towing the 5th wheel to florida and parking for the winter,it runs about the same as the other truck just before it was put down.And those are better than the fords?? I'll stick with my fleet of Toyotas thanks.

In reply to kevlarcorolla:

Well considering this isn't a "tell me you horror stories with a Duramax thread" and no one was asking you to troll along in and provide your experience I don't think you were unfairly treated.

I've owned vehicles from chev,ford,dodge,honda,subaru,geo,bmw,volvo and yes Toyota so I think that gives me a fair sample of experience to spread.There must be some reason SMART,Chevy,Honda/Acura,Porsche,Buick, Toyota/Lexus and lately even Hyundai,Kia own the top spots of auto makers with the least problems per 100 vehicles sold and have for about as long as they've been keeping track....I wonder whatever it could be?.

For clarification, this is me trolling.

I noticed in one of the press reports that the V6 hp had dropped a few.

Flight Service wrote: What is it with Chrysler underspecing transmissions? Happened with the Ram at release as well.

A lot of things have "under spec" transmissions nowadays. Lighter duty trans means better fuel economy.

A big 4-cylinder diesel like that is going to be rude to transmissions no matter what. Bigger trucks with diesel 4s get away with it because they have the room for a BEEFY trans and not as much of a desire for fuel economy. Cute-utes (and the Liberty is at its core a big cute-ute) don't have so much room, and if they weren't squeezing every tenth of a MPG out of the thing, then why bother with the engine option in the first place?

Cause and effect. Maybe Chrysler should have just traded another manufacturing plant to VW for three more years' worth of free engines, and stuck TDIs in the truck?

Knurled wrote:

Flight Service wrote: What is it with Chrysler underspecing transmissions? Happened with the Ram at release as well.

Maybe Chrysler should have just traded another manufacturing plant to VW for three more years' worth of free engines, and stuck TDIs in the truck?

Just saw this.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2014/04/spied-2015-chevrolet-colorado-duramax-diesel.html

Also saw this chart comparing the Colorado and Silverado.

-----------Silverado 2LZ Double Cab----Colorado Crew Cab Curb Weight--------4963 Lbs--------------------- 4037 Lbs

Wheelbase---------143.50------------------------ 128.3

Length-------------230.00------------------------ 212.6

Width---------------80.00------------------------- 74.3

Turning Diameter--46.90------------------------- ~41

Looks like GM will be selling three sizes of full size truck in 2015. If the new Colorado can get the same/similar fuel economy as mine, that will be impressive.

That weight number is lower than i expected.

I want an Amarok!!!!!!!

Saw some pics of the new trucks today. Apparently there are a bunch of them driving around Michigan.

This thing is HUGE for a small truck

Older Canyon on the left has a 7" lift

Doesn't look too bad, despite that gawdy front end.

I think the front ends look nice, but they look as big as the old Dakota.

Not a compact truck! A mid size truck. And what is this wailing about no manual trans? The WT 4 cylinder will be available with a manual.

I'll have to see them both in person to see which one I like better.

I like them. This is maybe what I'm looking for. I have been throwing around the idea of a Pickup and I really like the new Silverados, but I can't justify a full size truck. I will have to see how big the quad cabs are.

I think once these are available with Diesels, they will sell well.

Flight Service wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote: If I was going full size 'Murican diesel truck it would be a Duramax or a Cummins badged Fiat. As far as the new VM Motori V6 in the half ton Ram, well, I hope the marriage works better than the Liberty diesel fiasco did.

FTFY. I thought the problem with the Liberty diesel was it rattled like a Peterbuilt. It wasn't a bad application just failed miserably in the NVH category. Is there something else?

Are you saying that cummins rebadges Fiat engines? Show me where please. No Mercruisers either.