Spied! GMC Canyon Caught Carving Curves

GMCcanyon.us05.KGP II

Photography by KGP Photography

As we get closer to the actual release date for the full-size 2014 Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra — presumably set to come out before the smaller, midsize Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon — it is easy to forget about the little brothers. This is what our spy shooters just sent us, along with a quick note: 

"We've gotten our best look yet at GM's U.S.-spec midsize pickup for 2014.  The prototype, seen here, was caught testing in Michigan and shows some key front fascia changes when compared to Chevrolet's Colorado pickup, which was originally developed for the global markets.  

"The prototype's beefier nose and taller hood definitely look more masculine compared to the smoother lines found on the global Colorado. However, the question remains:  Is this the new look for the full range of the midsize pickup for the U.S. market, or does the prototype's new front and rear styling give us a preview of the 2014 GMC Canyon, which is expected to enter the market alongside the new Chevy Colorado?  

"We've heard reported promises from GM executives, saying that the next-generation Canyon will go further than prior models to separate the GMC offering from its Chevy platform-mate. If the prototype caught here is the GMC Canyon, and the Chevy Colorado retains the styling from the globally available truck we've already seen, then it appears that GM might actually make good on its promise to make the Canyon a distinctive midsize pickup."

Our best guesses have the actual debut of the two midsize trucks at least six to eight months after the release of the full-size duo, but that could change depending on how many plant issues might crop up at the new plant in Wentzville, Mo. Then, not long after the midsize debuts, we expect the heavy-duty trucks to be the main story. This will be a very busy next 18 months for GM's truck program. 

GMCcanyon.us02.KGP II

GMCcanyon.us06.KGP II

 

Comments

Very good! GM realised that compact-mid size pick ups are still very important and they not just giving it away to Toyota/Nissan. Please bring the Ranger back to the States, Ford!

meh...

No Diesel-No Care

getting old hearing gm will make a chng to separate the twins..... chnging the frnt end doesnt make it a different truck. gm said the same thing with their fllsz when it debuted in '07... n look.... still the same truck with a diff fr end.

That truck looks awfully big and tall even for a midsize. This could be my next truck if it will pull 4,000 lbs. and get 28 mpg empty.

I will echo the statement above. At least GM isn't ignoring the compact truck segment like Ford is and also Chrysler. In the year or so I will be replacing my 2001 Ranger for another new compact truck. I have no use for a full size pickup. Also, I prefer to buy from an American based manufacturer, so I will give these GM twins a close look when they come out.

Good to see them testing this truck. I am glad to that GM will have a midsize offering and look forward to seeing and driving both the Colorado and Canyon.

This truck does not look that bad! Even thru the camo it appears to have good lines!

Unfortunately, Fred, I doubt GM has *really* done enough work on the engines and drive-trains to get 28 MPG, even with a 2wd, 4-cylinder manual single cab. Highway? Maybe. City? No way. I predict that the best average will be in the low 20s. And that's with the 4-cylinder. Perhaps 1 or 2 MPG better than current Colorados, but that's it.

As an aside, I've had an '05 extended cab, manual, 4-cyl 4WD since 32K (now at 77K), and it's been OK. Towed a lot with it from 35K to 75K, most times well over its puny tow rating of 1,900 lbs. And yes, towing with a manual destroys clutches, I know! Stuff outside of normal maintenance: Driver's side front hub replaced at 58K. Cylinder head replaced at 64K due to faulty manufacturing (covered by GM extended service bulletin). General observations: High-pitched bearing noise every now and then coming from the front-right hub area. The gear box and stick shake more than they should. Front end shakes and grumbles oddly as I'm downshifting to idle a lot. Have had the pass-lock bug not let me start the truck a handful of times. And the paint is too thin. Other than that, reliable in day-to-day operation.

Would I buy a low-mile used one again, as opposed to a Tacoma or Frontier? Hard to say. But I so know I wouldn't touch the new Colorado until it's at least 2 to 3 model years into its run. I hope GM cares enough to garner some type of foothold with this new truck. But I won't hold my breath.

To all the d-bags who say no diesel, no care. Name one midsize truck in the US that has a diesel. NONE.. so STFU already. And if it had a diesel, you wouldnt buy it anyway because of the additonal cost. And diesels in small trucks make even less sense, especially as we say in the Mahindra pos truck it did not buy you any better mileage than a gas engine not to mention the additional maintnenance cost of maintaining a diesel vehicle. It makes no economic sense.

Having said that, unless GM brings back 4 wheel disc brakes, a true offroad package, a V6 and a manual transmission I'll stick with my ZR2 til the wheels fall off.

Great platform for eco-boost type engines, considering we will probably not get the diesel :(. If they market it correctly, they could do a 4 and 6 cyclinder with turbos. It should put the F150 eco-boost MPG to shame and they could give it a TRUE SAE towing rating and brag about it ALL day long. Toyota already tests to the new standard, and they are "the" competition in this market (cann't remember if Nissan tests to the new standard as well)

@ db
I drive almost only diesel (2 duramax, 1 cummins, wife has vw jetta diesel)
I would like a smaller truck for light jobs or driving across town to pick up contracts...so no diesel-no care!!!

Hope you bring something better to the game then that junk 5 cyl and gutless 4 cyl you had in your last trucks, Obama Motors! the 4.0 and 5-speed auto transmission in the Tacoma has made itself a pretty good reputation for reliability and will walk the dog on your 5 cyl any day. we won't even waste our time comparing 4 cyl engines, save you a little bit of embarrassment. I'll be anxious to see what kind of competition my Tacoma has from Obama Motors, but I won't hold my breath.

@DB: Who are you to tell people to STFU cause they are voicing their opinion?

Yeah, we need more trucks like Tacoma and Frontier that either don't get any better mileage then full size trucks with alot more torque or they get worse! LOL!

The exception might be the 4 cylinders, but who really wants that in a 4x4 that actually gets driven down the interstate? Save that for 4x2s, well, Oxi likes his....LOL! Sure can't pull a trailer with anything bigger then a lawn mower on it!

Now, if they actually put their top of the line v-6s in them....and had some space in the bed......

DB is clearly a moron. If a 4-cyl turbo diesel was offered, it would sell like hotcakes. Apparently he's not very good at 3rd grade math. The added cost of diesel fuel is easily outweighed by the 25-30 MPG mileage you can get. Plus...the torque peaks at 1,800 RPM and after you own a small diesel for a while, it's VERY hard to go gas again. GM is making a huge mistake if they don't bring the diesel to the States.

NO DIESEL - NO CARE

Bring back the 4.2 Inline 6 and turbo it

When the new Dakota arrives this thing will be blown out of the water just after it left the starting gate.

GUTS
GLORY
FIRST TRUE MID-SIZE
INNOVATIVE
DAKOTA

people that claim to be getting the same or better mpg's in a full-size truck compared to a Tacoma are kidding you or either don't know how to calculate mpg correctly. I've owned TWO Silverado's and the BEST they ever got was 18 and that was with their little cylinder deactivation thing that would burn about a quart and a half of oil every 5,000 miles. my tacoma double cab short bed 4x4 gets 20 mpg all day everyday. I hand calculate it just like I did the two GM's. they don't need 8-speed transmissions, fairy dust cylinder deactivation, a magic carpet and tin can bodies to achieve decent mpg's. like I've said before, put a for sale sign on my Tacoma and put one on any f-150, Ram, or GM truck and sit them out beside the road and see which one sells first and you get most of your money back out of it.

Interesting conversation here. I would like to direct my first comment @ HEMI-4U

In my opinion the Dakota is the reason why the compact truck market collapsed in the US. Before the Dakota compact trucks were selling like crazy. As a child of the 80's I clearly remember the mini truck craze. Then came the Dakota, bigger but not full sized. It split the segment and broke it. Had the Dakota no come about I think that the mini truck market would have stayed strong and product development would have continued and we would have some fantastic small trucks today.

Instead the market was blurred and split and many graduated from Dakotas to full sized trucks and fleets became the main customers for the true compact trucks that were left.

The current Colorado and the past Dakota were mid sizers. The Ranger and Tacoma are true compacts.

My next point-

In the 80's before you could get a V6 in a mini truck Toyota offered a 4cyl Turbo, Nissan had their venerable 2.4 4cyl both rugged fun to drive little trucks, then the S-10 came out with the anemic 2.8 V6 and was left in the dust by the Asian 4cyls.

Those were fun times. Those little trucks were like go carts with a big trunk. I think a true compact truck that is well executed with a turbo 4 gas or a small diesel would be a good selling vehicle. With the demise of the Dakota and the mid size Colorado I think the market is ripe for the compact trucks to leap back into the mainstream and teach a new generation about economical fun. Outside of the US the compact trucks do almost all of the work.

Diesels make no economic sense most of the time when you really consider it, unless you are doing a LOT of towing. Most diesel pickups I see seem to be doing light duty work 95 percent of the time. But people still buy them. A light diesel makes no economic sense for a consumer, but people still buy them. It's the same with diesel cars. i'd love to have one, but they are so much more expensive even for a used one that it takes many years to offset the cost if you ever do. Same thing with a lot of hybrids and electric cars. I think they should put a light diesel in a midsize truck. I would probably never buy one, but I'm sure a lot of dummies would.

Blame EPA guidelines for the demise of small trucks. In the USA "footprint" is based on vehicle size. A big truck has less stringent rules to beat.
Why build a 90% size small truck for 100% cost having to meet 130% tougher guidelines?

@Lou: so would the key thing be to build the smallest full size, atleast to get in that guidline? Wonder what the requirement is to be "Fullsize"? In some classes they lump the Ridgeline in as a "FULLSIZE"

Lou, you're absolutely correct. And on top of that, they have to take a hit in profits too (which goes along with your cost comment).

@Lou-Unfortunately that is true from the link we read a couple of weeks ago provided by Luke in Colorado. It made little sense to classify smaller trucks in the same category as small cars. The rule encourages the manufacturer's to make bigger trucks. The same rule applies to station wagons which were considered the same as sedans and as a result have now become crossovers and SUVs in order to be classified as trucks in order to meet less stringent mileage standards. The EPA as a result encouraged drivers to buy less efficient vehicles. What a boneheaded decision.

Looks like it might have some of the wide wheel fenders much like the Dodge Ram..

I'd like to echo the hope that we'll get at least one diesel engine offering, especially a diesel with a manual transmission option.

I mean, come on, everywhere else in the world the Colorado has at least two separate diesel engine options. Yet here in the USA, one of the biggest truck buying markets in the world, we've got to beg and plead just to possibly get one.

@WXman

Don't get me wrong, DB is talking nonsense, but he does have a valid point in the sense that diesels are not viable in small trucks, let alone 1/2 ton trucks thanks to the Ecoboost and other turbo gas engines. YES diesels would sell if they brought them over, but they sell at a premium price (7-8k for full-size trucks for example). Even at a mild 2-3k premium for a 4cyl diesel the prices come awfully close to a full-size that will get marginally less fuel mileage, but can do much more. A compact or midsize truck requires all the same components and materials and work as a full size, so the cost to make one is very similar (it can be even more if they don't sell as many; case in point Ford ranger - that's why it was never updated for 10 years..) Truck manufactures find it hard to justify selling small trucks because of the lack of profit margin on them. They make the majority of the money on high-end vehicles (eg. Ford Limited, Harley, Platinum, King Rang etc.. )

LOLOL!!! Just what the world needs. Yet ANOTHER GovtMoCo truck. What a worthless enterprise. The GovtMoCo sissymobile Sierra and the GovtMoCo answer to a question nobody even asked Canyon. I thought Government Motors already had two trucks under Chevrolet in the Silverado and Colorado. They just took my taxpayer money and wasted it on UNNECESSARY GARBAGE.

Good for GM on coming out with a replacement small truck. Ford has forsaken the small truck buyer. They have also been neglecting all of their full size trucks the last several years by keeping the same stale body designs around. I really have begun to doubt Ford's vision the last several years. It seems like they have lost their way to be honest.

@TRXTom - The regulations break down the class of vehicle and also square feet or what they call fotprint IIRC. A "big" small truck would be at a disadvantage because it would be at the top end of the range making it tougher to meet the guidelines. In theory, it would be most beneficial to have the "smallest" big truck possible to exploit "footprint" based guidelines.
Companies stopped making/importing station wagons/estate cars into the USA because the classifications are more lax for SUV/CUV like platforms even though the square-footage is the same.
If "footprint" was based solely on fuel consumption and emissions we would see a decidely different mix of motor vehicles.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/10/how-cafe-killed-compact-trucks-and-station-wagons/

@ MOPAR MADNESS

The gov't really wasted its money bailing out pathetic Chrysler. What a sorry excuse for a company. Years and years of nothing but junk. So many of my friends and family were burned by those piles of feces. Now they are nothing but a foreign owned company.

Since the Colorado/Canyon is a world platform it's already in place. Other than some cosmetic changes and engine options it's much easier to sell these in the NA market as more of a niche model. Same could be said for the Ranger platform.

It might be a success and it might not but it's worthwhile to try a market that's all but been abandoned by the domestics.

I do think a 4cyl diesel will be a good option. VW has been selling them for years in NA so I don't know why people are frightened by them. I think we forget that diesels don't have to be 400HP tire smokers that require a premium price to own and operate.

The Toyota Turbo-4cyl you refer to was the 22RTE...more info here...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_R_engine
The 22R series of engines is probably one of the best engines made during the 1980's. My dad purchased a Toyota Std Cab 4x4 for me NEW in 1985 for $8700. I drove it for 10 yrs and 158,000 miles and sold it in 1995 for $3900. Try that with ANY car or truck made today!

Look at the last photo...look's like a padded bra...lot's of styrofoam suffed in.

The need to have independant rear supetion, or at least coils like on the Ram, these little trucks with rear leafs ride like crap, since thier even lighter in the rear then a full sizer.

@Silverado_Driver

The Tacoma a compact? Really? Have you seen the latest generation? They're BIG. The previous gen was compact.

The newer Tacamas just look bigger because most ride 4x4 ride height even 2wd models along with the fact that most are extended cab or 4 door models. If you take the time to find a regular cab model you will find it really isn't much bigger then the old body styles.

Go Toyota Tacoma!

Even with the Camouflage you cannot mistake it is a derivative of the Colorado/Dmax

http://images-2.drive.com.au/2012/06/12/3368001/17046-1055_1024-600x400.jpg

http://carspecsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2012-Holden-Colorado-rear-angel-view.jpg

@paul810 It seems the somewhat haphazard quality of US diesel and lack of Automotive high grade diesel refining capacity is a problem. Maybe in the future the situation will fall in line with global usage who knows.

Ok I guess the latest generation is not as big as I thought. Only 6 inches wider and longer than the previous generation (comparing the regular cab models)

I am glad I bought my 2011 Canyon Z71 4x4, rides smoother hauls/tows more and gets better gas mileage then my $x4 doublecab Tacoma I had. I get 23mpg loaded down with hunting gear and a 150qt cooler full of Elk meat...I would get 20mpg empty with the Taco...... I have never owned a Cheby in 40 years of driving and I like this one....I will wait a few years and see what comes out

Little guys? These trucks are over 210 inches, much bigger then current Colorado and as big as a few years ago full size. This is no deal on my part. I am still waiting on Dodge, Jeep to give us what we really want a small pickup. Around 195 to 200 inches would be about right like the old days with room for 4. I like the fiat pickup allot, add some more power and toughen it up and I am all in. Until that happens Cx-5 or Subaru small suv is only other option

NO DIESEL - NO CARE!!!!!!!!!

lou hit the nail on the head on this one. 90 percent 100 percent 130 percent. I'd still like to see a small diesel though. If it weren't for all the dang restrictions it would work great. I was looking into putting a small diesel tractor engine in a pickup. but alas too much work. Anyone heard of shade tree conversions? They say 50 mpg or more in an f150. But you end up driving a freaking turd of a truck.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzbfvbgXXKo

A 4cyl diesel in a truck will cost the same as a V6. We have them here. And the Colorado is returning about 28mpg and that is mixed driving. Highway would be significantly higher.

Yes, there are many advantages in having a diesel in a mid-size truck. Fuel economy is one and its towing ability is another.

Like I have stated these vehicles have already been designed and now the US is redesigning them. Why?

They currently have a 5 star safety rating. Can be made to carry what a HD can, and out tow some 1/2 ton NA pickups.

Its like I have been saying your vehicle industry is protected by regulations and trade barriers.

Keep the automatic gear shifter in the steering wheel column.

I think the front of the hood has been raised by padding.

@Beebee
Import a Euro IV standard turbo diesel through the net. We can buy them here.

@Big Al from Oz They are banned in the US, otherwise a lot would be doing it.
The Imports we are allowed in Australia are not allowed in the US.



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