VW's New Amarok at Geneva Motor Show

VW-Amarok-Canyon II
Our friends at Truck Trend Magazine have posted a bunch of photos from the Geneva Motor Show where VW showed their newest concept vehicle, the Amorak Canyon.

Designed to be a freestyle kayaking support vehicle, the Canyon is definitely worth a look. No, it's not getting ready to come over to the U.S. market (with a different name, of course), but it does have some unique styling cues and an interesting powertrain.

For more information, click here

Comments

Huh...That's actually a decent looking truck.

This is one smaller truck I'd like to see brought over to the states.

@ Mark Williams:
It's "friends." (I before E, except after C.)

Not a bad looking truck. It is definitely better looking than the global Ranger and those goofy looking Kia truck/cars that they displayed recently. I will say that the snout on this little truck is better looking than the upcoming Colorado. GM should rethink that part before releasing it.

@Jason H -- Good catch. We've corrected.

It's a nice looking truck with great dimensions IMO. If it's RWD I like it.


To blue sky with it a bit.. Id like to see a truck like this in the States with these features:

- A midgate and rear window that completely rolls down
- very versatile rear seats that recline, fold flat and maybe even flip to face back.
- A Rambox like Feature for Wheel well storage.
- 300+HP with 20 mpg City EPA rated.

It is a nice looking truck. That interesting powertrain Mark is talking about is probably a 2.0TDI.

Did I miss something? did GMC drop the name Canyon?

I think it's by far the best looking of the non-fullsize truck offerings of any brand in any market.

VW's next gen of TDI's will produce 190 hp and 286 lbs of torque from the same 2.0L displacement. That would be a pretty solid offering for a midsized truck.

the drivetrain spec sound really promising

Eventually, the naysayers will be proven wrong and smaller trucks will gain popularity in the U.S. again. It might take $6+/gallon gas, but it will come.
Too bad we smaller truck lovers don't have an option now.

Smaller trucks would do good here if their was a decent small truck offering, current small trucks get worse MPG then some of the new full size trucks and most havn't been redesigned in years.

Kayak support vehicle?!?!

Coming from someone who actually runs support and transports kayaks for groups of people, that truck would be pretty much useless.

You need a minimum of a 6.5 bed (8' much better). Not just because many kayaks would stick way way way out and teeter totter over the edge, but because a smaller bed can't accommodate an adequate rack system either. (Especially with those stupid bars!) It's handy to have vinyl seats and floors so you can hose out all the sand and mud from your passengers. That small truck might be usable for inflatable kayaks with no air. Especially with those Aussie outback bars and lights. You can't even put anything on the roof.

Don't automakers actually consult with focus groups who would use their vehicles prior to designing them or do they just make any ol' thing so long as it fits in the same spray booth used for the rest of the subcompact lineup?

As BigBoy pointed out, you can get a "small" truck that will have the v6 (because that's all they'll offer for the configuration you want) that gets the ubiquitous 16/20 mpg or you can get a full size with a v8 that gets 15/19 or sometimes a little better.

I know the big 3 could build a 30 mpg small truck. Let's look at a few facts. A 2012 Charger with v-6 and 8 speed trans gets 31 mpg. I think the Charger weighs about 4100 lbs. Why can't this combo get at least 28-30 in a s-10 or ranger type truck?

C'mon VW, show some balls and offer this truck in the U.S with the TDI.

@Bigboy, Max - The fuel economy and price difference is what is killing the small truck market. There is way too much overlap. Unless you are a hardcore small truck fan, or don't have the room for a big truck, there isn't a sound business case for buying a small truck. I was able to get my F150 for less than a comparable Tacoma Double cab long box V6, and mpg wise 14/18 F150 5.4 versus 16/21 Taco V6 auto and I get 15/20.4 if I behave.
If Ford were to bring in the global Ranger, they should give it a farely big price and mpg advantage over the F150. They could call it the F100 to keep their sales supremacy (for the sake of PR), and ditch any F150 that would have too much overlap with the F100 (Any short box model with a small engine.). That would give you a full product range under the F Series banner. F100 for light duty cargo/towing use, F150 for medium duty needs, and Super Duty for the rest of your needs.

The Amorak has a 140HP and something like 290lbs of torque. It also gets over 30mpg, can tow near 10,000lbs an costs over $34k in USD.

The next gen TDI engine sounds nice with respect to hp/tq. Hopefully it's more fuel efficient.

Now some my answer to your comments, as they do sell the Amarok in Australia.

@toycrusher84 Yes they look good

@Max Your 100% right. This is more like a European version of a SEMA concept. You will find their fuel mileage is in the 30's

@Uh huh/mhowarth |. Unfortunately it is not that "promising" .People here will not touch the Amarok because of its drivetrain and engine, 400Nm is pretty anemic and that stressed 2 Litre unit spells trouble.
Read the concepts on an Australian article on the same Amarok(Yes mine are there as well)
http://www.caradvice.com.au/161856/volkswagen-amarok-canyon-extreme-sports-pick-up-concept-revealed/

Currently the Hilux /Navara are neck and neck topping the sales list for Japanese Pickups. I have seen as many Mazda BT 50's as Rangers.

I'm starting to get tired of people complaining about this truck and VW. I have driven this truck and it is great. Especially with the stick if that's your thing. Before anyone goes off on VW about not selling this here why not read up on the chicken tax. There is a very good reason the hillux etc are not sold here. Also don't for a seccond kid yourself that Toyota likes having to build a plant here to produce trucks. It's all about the taxes. Mercedes even ships their sprinters here half assembled.

@ Robert Ryan

I know the current 2.0 is a little weak especially given its stated capacities. I'd hate to tow 6-7k lbs with that motor. I was referencing the next generations ones I read about a week or two ago. I am sure that 190/286 is for a top end model and possibly only for the Audi vehicles but those numbers should pull the stated capacities much better than the current motor but I agree it would be really tought to compete with the 3.0 diesels out there with a motor 1/3rd smaller.

For the comparisons of Chryseler's pentastar gettign 31 mpg highway in a 4100# car, first off its a car. It will be significantly more aerodynamic than a truck and that is what matters for highway figures. I'd guess that at best dropping that 8-speed and pentastar into the Ram would get you no better than 24 or 25 mpg on the highway.

I am sure after a another generation of trucks they'll really hammer on the aerodynamics to increase the highway mpg's but since the changes they need for CAFE are gradual and no company want's to leap forward due to costs and limiting incremental enhancements these changes are probably 5-6 years away.

Yes, Sandman, you did miss something. The sentence that says “with a different name, of course”. Does anyone read anymore?

Great looking tuck.

This would be on my list if they made it available here. As someone else said, one of the best looking small trucks on the market.

@mhowarth Even so, they are a bit "underdone" compared to the opposition. I think it is going to take VW a little while to get pickups. They now want to offer a pretty anemic petrol option as well. Mazda here have decided to drop petrol options on their rather ugly BT50 but Ford does offer an option on the Ranger.

Gary M....

A pickup truck is not as aerodynamic. More drag than a charger as hard to believe as that is.


Lou....
Yes, thats true. In the case of Toyo/Taco, there isn't an incentive to go smaller. Why? Because if you want a decent level of trim or some other relatively basic configuration, such as a crew cab, they only offer that with much more expensive packages, including a large v6 with automatic transmission. If they had something like a pre-runner with a 4 cyl 5 speed, which they most certainly do not, they could squeeze out a few more mpgs. Not a lot, but a few. But to say, an exterminator or a contractor that drives 100 miles a day, a few extra mpg, is a lot of money saved.

The f-150 does seem to be the leader in mpg although I don't understand why they're boasting about the eco-boost v6 when the smaller, non-ecoboost engine gets better mpg and it costs a lot less. It's also nice they offer a 6.5' box with a crew cab or at least that 8' box on supercab. Other truck makers should get wit the program in that regard.


I'll take a two-door version please, with a 6 foot bed.

http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac49/joh408/2013.jpg

F-150 Built Ford tough, without your tax dollars

GM's new incentive is you get a free combination plate of Chinese food+ an egg roll when you purchase a new HD model

@Max - I didn't look to closely at th extended cab Taco's because I needed something that could pack a family of 4 + 2 big dogs. I also wanted 5-7,000 lb towing capacity. The Taco can tow 7,000 but I didn't like the margin of safety. The 4 banger Taco 4x4's aren' really all that great with mpg . A Tacoma 2.7 L with 5 speed manual is 18/20. A 2.7 Auto 4 speed is 18/21. I agree that over the long haul a few mpg add up, but is it worth the loss of capacity, verstility, and performance? For me, I'd rather take the hit on mpg, and drive exactly what I want.

I'm impressed guys, last couple articles for the most part have actually been about the topic ! kudos to you all

back on topic, interesting truck, i think the only way a small truck is feasible is too have a lower price and better mileage compared to the full size trucks. I bought a 2004 ranger 4x4 because I didnt need the full size and thought the gas would be good, but i ended up trading it in on a f150 2 years later and got almost the same mileage and the f150 was 2 thousand cheaper than what i paid for the ranger, mind you the ranger was loaded and the f150 was a XTR, until mileage and pricing is in a proper ratio to fullsize i think they are destined to die out

it sad because in south America chevey sell the Montana which would be a small truck that would sell like hot cake it brought here. they sell all the way north of Mexico. I never got why they did not try to sell it here other than drain the middle class dry with the full sizers and selling compacts cut into profit and they think the middle class is to stupid to care that they been had. If had the money I would import the chevy Montana get to spec and sell it in the usa

Let the people in europe, asia and oceania have these little trucks if they want. I wouldnt step in one of these even if they took ten thousand off the price tag.

I have a Amarok selectable here in the uk and apart from a couple of minor problems with parking sensors I think this truck is great the 2.0 tdi produces 163bhp and 400 nm and tows my formula 240 br with ease even better than my old navara 2.5 so people need to get the size of the engine out of there minds this truck has plenty of power

Not everybody wants a 4 door truck , whens the 2 door gonna make is debut in Britain ?

Did I miss something? did GMC drop the name Canyon?
sandman 4x4

VW used the name Colorado for what is now the Touraeg SUV way back in 2003 or so. Since VW had no use for the Colorado name, GM used it for the Chevrolet midsizer that replaced the little S10. GM would go ape with the Canyon name LOL!

Il est vraiment plus efficace pour donner l'acceptation au sein des professionnels des relations appropriées avec les

I really enjoy reading some of the comments in this forum. Especially coming from Australia and I'm also an avid ute (pickup) and SUV follower. Its good to be patriotic but you sometimes have to realise there's a big world out there. I'm open to all vehicles, its not like following a sports team.

If the US made RH drive F trucks, Rams etc I would really wonder if they would take off in Australia because the global trucks can do almost anything the bigger ones can. In the last 40 years or so most Aussie tradesman and small businesses have been using them very successfully.

I just bought a new BT50 in January this year and believe it or not I considered a wide and varying range of vehicles to choose from. The vehicles where a VW Amarok, T6 Ranger, Jeep Grand Cherokee (V6 turbo diesel) a vehicle most NA people wouldn't know about (Global) and a Kia Sorento 2.2TDI.
I'll list why I didn't buy certain vehicles.

1. VW Amarok. Great looking in real life. Is under powered when expected to work. Its also the most expensive ute, especially for what you get and its made in Argentina not Germany or Europe. The price tag doesn't reflect value.

2. T6 Ranger, almost identical to my BT50 but more aesthetic. Way over priced in comparison to my BT50, by a few thousand dollars (51k for the BT50 nearly 60k for the Ford equivelant) and there was a 3-4 month wait for the Ford. I drove the BT50 away in 3 days.

3. The Jeep Grand Cherokee with its 177kw (250hp) 600nm torque (410ftlb) torque 3L V6 diesel. Appeared as great value at 58k driveaway, but none in stock for months. And I have had a very terrible experience with Jeeps in the past.

4. Kia Sorento diesel. AWD. Not good when I decided I'll get back into off roading. But great vehicle for what it is.

with the small 2.0 Litre Diesel engine and the lousy wading depth the extreme watersport maniacs should better stay ashore - on the road or parking-lot.

Is it just me, or is all this conversation falling on deaf ears? Why is this country so hell bent against keeping practical things out of this country... There is a VW plant right here in Ohio that would love to assemble the new US version of the Amarok for us here in the US. I drive a Jetta TDI, mainly because there isn't anything else as safe and well built offering 40+ mpg... add an Amarok to the equation, I'd be driving one tomorrow.

REPACKAGED GMC CANYON, do you not see the mid section, different wheel well treatments front grill and a vw 2.0 power plant, soooo! yes it is a nice looking truck. Rip the VW badge off slap a GMC badge and there you go of course VW would not offer it here in the U.S.A. look at the price of the touareg and you have your answer. You all can cut and rip and talk about this post till the cows come home but its a Repackaged GMC Canyon period ;}

Looks nice also available as twin turbo. Biggest seller to me would be the 34 mpg.

Why hasn't anyone offered a small-med sized pick-up like this with a SMALL 2.0 diesel in the US? To me it's a no brainer. Hopefully VW will be the first. I'll snatch one up for sure!

VW is stuipd. Without a ranger in this category we are stuck with Tacomas and frontiers. A VW with over 30mpg and priced around what these are would totally beat both of these hands down. And the ridgeline isn't a close match as its ugly and made by Honda.

Today, Dec. 3rd, 2013, at 11:45 AM I had a Volkswagon
Amarok pass me on Hwy 83 in Yarnell Az.

Are they in the US now??? If it is, dang, I just bought a Ram 1500. Hmm, maybe the wife will let me trade in her Yukon XL
in on one.



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2011 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com