I still cant wrap my mind around how ugly these new trucks are.

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

But a mini duramax will make up for it. I'm willing to bet it will happen. Since both ford and dodge have dropped out of the mid size segment ....this is one more way for GM to capitalize and totally own the market.

A midsize with towing capability and easily 30 MPG will be to hard for many to to ignore

 

If this does happen I would think the gmc version will look better

 

They always do

 

I thought the Equinox looking colly was only for the global model?

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

Yes, the North American version will be restyled.

This article is about a diesel engine, not the styling of the global Colorado. An old image was used for the article, because the camo has not yet been taken off the North American version.

 

That'd be nice. I could drop it in my Chevy. But they are still ugly as shit.

 

I'd buy one. By the time they come out, I'll be able to buy my own hopefully.

 

should call it a mule, looks like a chevy terrain screwed a donkey and this is the gelding result.

 

I wonder how it will stack up against the Ram 1500 Diesel they are gonna release.I think 1/2ton diesels will get popular real soon.

 

Hopefully I am wrong, but I just don't see GM undercutting full size sales with a good midsize.

 

The only way they would is if the full size were cheaper. I get the feeling the diesel option is going to have a very nasty premium price tag...

 

You keep getting your panties in a bunch when it comes to pictures of the global truck. It will be restyled. I will buy a new truck with the diesel as long as they don't make you buy it as a premium package.


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

I'll believe the diesel when it gets closer to time. I've been hearing of light duty diesels for years, and GM still hasn't delivered. The biggest issue I see with the RAM having a diesel in the half ton is people using the lightweight truck as if it were a heavier duty truck. Kind of like those that use a full size 3/4 ton, pulling a 30 foot 5th wheel and a 20 foot boat behind that. The vehicle may pull it, but it is too light to be safe.

I'd like to have had a diesel as I had one in my '82 LUV (thing wouldn't move out of it's own shadow, but I got 30+ loaded or empty), and would have liked another. If I could ever hit the lottery, I'd get the diesel drive train out of Aussie 355.

Too bad it will be on the top of the line version.

 

I'm getting tired of people referring to the global versions of the truck every time new info comes out about them.
THEY WILL NOT LOOK LIKE THE GLOBAL VERSION. GO SEE THE LATEST SPY SHOTS!!

 

I think the diesel will be offered in the Colly/Canyon first, then maybe down the line in a few years they might pair one with the new 8 speed in the 1500s.

 

I just picked up my wife's 2014 Cruze Diesel last week. They have the diesel option packaged in a way where it's hard to know exactly what the diesel cost. But I speced my diesel and the same specs (leather, convenenance package, etc) but using the 1.4T and the cost difference was only $1800.

Very reasonable for so much car. The diesel Cruze has these parts above and beyond a gas Cruze: diesel engine obviously, much beefier transmission, firmer suspension, larger brakes, additional insulation, recalibrated steering for a sporty euro feel, Z link rear suspension, and electric cab heater. It drives COMPLETELY differently than a gas Cruze, not to mention it has loads more passing power.

It's a lot more car for about $2K and I'll bet that I will get $3K more for it at resale time.

I drove it 250 miles the first night I had it and I drove 80mph+ w/ the AC on and got an honest 39mpg. For the last 40 miles of the trip I slowed to 65 mph and averaged 51mpg, also w/ AC on. Very impressed.

I am eager and ready w/ my money if GM releases the 2.8L Diesel in the new midsize truck. I want it like right now.

As far as the Dodge truck goes, it's still physically too large. You can't beat physics. Wind drag, weight, etc... will continue to hinder the truck from getting truly great mpg. The Pentastar V6 DI w/ the 8 speed that is rated for 25 mpg, only gets about 15 mpg in the real world. Also, that Dodge is just hideous, just an aweful looking truck but I recognize that this is subjective.

 

As far as the Dodge truck goes, it's still physically too large. You can't beat physics. Wind drag, weight, etc... will continue to hinder the truck from getting truly great mpg. The Pentastar V6 DI w/ the 8 speed that is rated for 25 mpg, only gets about 15 mpg in the real world. Also, that Dodge is just hideous, just an aweful looking truck but I recognize that this is subjective.

I think its more of the size of the engine that's keeping the fuel mileage down rather than the size of the truck. The HDs with the 6.7 can get better than 25 (with mods obviously), so I'm not so sure I'm convinced a 3.0L diesel in a 1500 truck is enough engine to achieve very good mileage. It'll be interesting to see how they perform with some mods and the fuel and exhaust emissions crap torn off. I guess only time will tell.

But as far as the 2.8 in the "midsize" colly and canyon, I think is more promising. A smaller truck with essentially the same size engine as the 3.0 in the Ram I think it will get better fuel mileage; probably around 27 hwy.

 

I'd like to see a diesel option so after they're out for 5 years and got the bugs worked out I can reasonably buy one. Never have purchased a spankin new vehicle. .....

 

Just think, guys on the cummins 4bt swap forum are getting in the 30mpg range with an outdated 3.9l 4 banger diesel in full sized trucks. imagine what the latest technology, in a smaller displacement in a smaller truck could get...

 

Those old mechanical Cummins 4 bangers are very efficient motors. I'd actually venture to say that they're more efficient (fuel mileage wise) than any new engine. New diesel engines are just getting choked out with cat converters, EGR, and DPF filters. I'd be surprised if these new GM diesels in the colorado/canyon get more than 30 mpg from the factory. However, with aftermarket mods I could see that it may be feasible to push the 30 mpg barrier.

 

same lol its a truck

 

It's hard to say really. Theoretically the emissions crap is bad for air flow. But at low rates of air flow, like cruising down the highway, it doesn't appear to have any effect.

I am a Kenworth salesman and have a few customers that have ran DPF delete kits, I use to drive a 650+ rwhp PowerStroke, I have many friends that have DPF delete kits combined w/ other mods, I have also owned a VW tdi w/ no emissions and a program, and I just bought a Chevy Cruze Diesel for the wife last Tuesday. I have some diesel experience you could say.

My wife's Cruze, that thing gets 50 mpg down the highway at 65mph w/ the AC cranking. That is MUCH more than my no emissions tdi got, about 20% more. And the VW was a much lighter car.

A 7.3/6.0 PowerStrokeDiesel w/ no/ little emissions gets about 13-15mpg. The latest 6.7's from Ford are getting 18mpg quite easily. Once again, I don't quote that one highway trip where the economy was good. I'm actually giving you numbers from one of my customers that runs fleets of these things ran in the field by company drivers, and their fuel cards automatically keep mpg records for them. I'm also combining my personal experiences.

On the wife's new Cruze Diesel, I don't want it to turn in to a hobby like all my past diesels, I don't want it to be loud, I don't want it to smoke at all, and I don't want to give up my 100K warranty. And frankly good DPF delete kits at $1200-2500, on a car that only has fuel expenses of $9125 over the next 100k miles, it would be really hard to ever get the fuel payback. I'd need an honest 22% increase in mpg just to break even over 100K miles (assumes a DPF delete kit, egr delete, programmer, air intake, and gauges for a measly $2K. Unlikely)

Now on my new Canyon w/ the 2.8 Liter diesel engine that I really hope to be able to buy in early 2014, that truck will be a hobby and it will likely get deleted as I care more about absolute performance over mpg pay back. And w/ the truck getting much less mpg than a Cruze-D anyways the payback could potentially come much sooner. But I will be much more sedated this time around (if I will even still be able to obtain a DPF delete kit by then) and will not drive a diesel that black smokes at all nor is loud and clanky.

My wife's Cruze-D btw is freakin' awesome and the exhaust has zero smell whatsoever.

PS. the LBZ Duramaxes are a very special engine. The perfect intersection of the latest technology combined w/ few emissions. The trucks were lightweight and had tiny rims and tires, also a huge factor in mpg. So getting +20mpg is definitely not unheard of in the stockish 2 WD versions while cruising down the highway.

 

Here is a test of a Trailblazer thing that uses the 2.8 Duramax,

GMI Drives: Colorado 7 LT & LTZ

He reports 32.7 mpg on a highway trip.

I wouldn't expect anything approaching that in a 4x4 pick up driven by the likes of me, but 22mpg++ in mixed driving seems very doable w/ this drivetrain.

 

I wouldn't buy one if it was only 22 plus. I can get that in my truck now. Mine is 2wd. It you could get 25-27 then I would really look into one. I would imagine that little suv is what 3700-4000 lbs may be more? That would be close to a 2wd Colorado or even a 4wd truck.

 

I drive my 2wd '09 Canyon pretty conservatively and it gets mostly highway miles and I also average right at 21.5mpg every tank.

But I figured the new Colorado/ Canyon, is going to be larger, I'll get a 4x4 and hopefully that comes w/ some larger tires, plus the long bed, and all the new equipment and technology always adds significant weight. So if I can get 22+ mpg, basically equal my current platform, but in a truck that is way more capable, I'd be satisfied.

Of course I'd be overjoyed and would rather have a truck that gets 27mpg but I am just trying to be realistic.

I wish that I could order this truck RIGHT NOW. The specifications are exactly what I have been looking for in a new truck and the money is practically burning a hole in my pocket.

I would hope that the reduced size would result in reduced cost but frankly I'd prefer the aesthetics and mpg so much over the Sierra that I'd probably pay the same money for a Collie that I would the full size if I had too! But I'm sure I am in the minority on that one!

The other thing is thus: Screw the magazine reviewers. The two GMs I currently own are amazing vehicles. My wife's new Cruze-D is superior in every measure of driving interaction to any loaded German vehicle. My '09 Canyon w/ 116K has not had one single problem, ever. It's also dead quiet, rides so smoothly, class leading mpg, etc... Really fantastic automobiles all around. GM for life over here.

 

I would like to drive a new Cruze-D. The local dealership sold the one they had before I could drive one. A better truck would be great. Mine is ok. I love it none the less but it hasn't aged well I don't think. Anyways I don't need a bigger truck. A crew cab with more leg room would be nice though. Of course the diesel would seal the deal for me. I just hope that pricing isn't crazy.

 

Looks like a tundra

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

cool but still way ugly. should have made the new smaller 14 silverados

 

The US based Colorado is NOT going to look like the global version and your wish has already been granted...

All-New 2014-2015 Chevy Colorado Spied, Resembles Silverado | GM Authority

Next-gen Chevy Colorado looks like big brother Silverado - Autoblog

 

Those pix make it look like it's similar in size to a fullsize.

 

They are bigger. GM has already stated that they will be slightly larger than the Tacoma but smaller than the GM 1500s.

 

The new global Colorado is only something like .5 to 1.5 inches bigger than the current U.S. Colorado in just a few dimensions.

 

Per GM Inside News Insider:

You have to define nearly, the new colorados have grown but so have the new full sizes. Comparing CC to CC a new full size will be about 20 inches longer, 6 inches wider and four inches taller, that is pretty good difference in size if you ask me. Compared to the current colorado the new one will only be a few inches longer, the big thing is it will add around 6 inches in width which is great for passenger comfort, I am a big guy so that is a plus.

I like that the newer Colorado will be 6" wider than the out-going models. Beyond that, the size sounds about right to me. I still wish they'd put the 4.3 in it. Maybe I will be pleasantly surprised (not holding my breath).

 

Per GM Inside News Insider:

I like that the newer Colorado will be 6" wider than the out-going models. Beyond that, the size sounds about right to me. I still wish they'd put the 4.3 in it. Maybe I will be pleasantly surprised (not holding my breath).

That was my quote. Yeah I am happy about the extra width, I hope they find a way to add some more rear leg room as me being 6'5 pretty much no one can sit behind me with the seat all the way back and I have to pull it forward to get smaller people back there. Maybe if they add a couple inches to the back cab and get more efficient with the seat backs of the front seats and cushions of the rear seats like the silverado they can find another 3 inches of leg room back there? That would be nice as I carry people now.

From what I can find here are the differences new to old (ours) colly crew cabs, this is converting the mm to inches that are listed from the over seas companies doing the tests.

LOA 207 old 210 new
Width 67.6 old 74.1 new
height 65.2 old 70.1 new
Wheelbase 126 old 121.1 new (a few inches shorter?)
front head room 39.3 old 39.5 new (I have enough now)
front leg room 42.2 old 41.3 (im ok losing an inch as all the way back is almost too far for my 6'5 legs)
rear head room 38.3 old 38.3 new
rear leg room 34.8 old 36 new (if they can package the new seats for another inch or two would be awesome)

I really like the packaging of the tacoma rear seats that can fold up or down.

Overall bigger inside almost everywhere and slightly longer and a nice bit wider and taller.

I really wish for the 4.3 too but the 3.6 will be fine tuned for truck duty maybe around 280/280, beat both the competitors and plenty of power, though the 4.3 would kick arse!

Ya'll have a good weekend.

Tyler