2015 Chevrolet Colorado Should Debut Soon

ChevyColorado.rev.frnt II
Illustrations by Mark Stehrenberger

The new midsize pickups from General Motors should be getting close to their debut. We haven't been officially told where they will debut but with auto show season just around the corner, we're guessing we'll see them pretty soon in either Los Angeles, Detroit or Chicago.

GM's three-truck strategy sounds good on paper, offering truck buyers a choice between small (midsize), medium (half-tons) and large (heavy-duties), but much will be proven when we see how different each truck is in price. Prices for the Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra half-tons have gone up between 4 and 8 percent, which could have been done to give the smaller trucks a little more breathing room when they appear in dealerships sometime next year.

As you can imagine, there is a lot riding on the success of this three-truck strategy, especially since no one else in the industry is using it. Still, we believe there is interest for a smaller pickup truck that offers many of the same advantages of a bigger pickup, but at a smaller price. We'll have to wait and see if the new Chevrolet Colorado or GMC Canyon will give the Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma a reason to worry with any unique powertrains or unprecedented technology. Or will their only advantage be price?

ChevyColorado.rev.frnt.1 II

 Chevy rear hi 1 II
Colorado.rear.hi II

Comments

Great job GM for being the ONLY American auto maker for building and improving the small truck market! Others should take note!

THANKS FOR HEADS UP ON THIS MODEL!!! I WANT ONE OF THESE.

@Len: As much as I enjoy Ford, I have to agree with you there. American manufacturers have conceded the small/midsize pickup truck market to Toyota for too long.

I'm assuming that these images are artist's concepts based off both the look of the current global Colorado as well as the styling cues of the 2014 Silverado. Do we know at all if the extended cab models will feature rear-opening doors like the global Colorado, or use front-opening doors like the new Silverado? I would think it would be a lot of trouble to make new tooling just to make the Colorado look like a "mini-Silverado". But it would also make for a solid product line based on a single "look"--anyone else remember the 2nd-gen Dodge Dakota in the late 90's and how it looked essentially like a "baby" Dodge Ram?

FUTHER MORE, PLEASE PUT THIS INFO OUT TO YOUR DEALERS. MANY OF THEM (LINDSAY CHEVY) DO NOT KNOW THIS INFO.
I USE THIS LITTLE TRUCK FOR MY LANDSCAPE WORK. HAD AN '06, BUT IT WAS WRECKED AND I DESPARATELY NEED ANOTHER ONE.
PLEASE DON'T STOP PRODUCING THIS SIZE TRUCK AS MANY SMALL BUSINESSES AND UTILITY COMPANIES RELY ON THIS SIZE TRUCK. DO NOT FORCE THE COMSUMER INTO FOREIGN PLATED VEHICLES. EVEN THOUGH COMPONENTS OF AMERICAN VEHICLES ARE MADE OUT OF COUNTRY, THEY DON'T HAVE FOREIGN PLATES ON THEM! "MADE IN AMERICAN", STILL MEANS SOMETHING TO SOME OF US!
CAN'T WAIT FOR THE WASHINGTON AUTO SHOW NEXT MONTH.

Snapdragon McFisticuff = FordTrucks1

I'm going to be pissed if they don't offer a diesel as that would create a major competitive edge over the Tacoma.

If GM holds the design rendering shown here it will sell. Put the 259 horsepower 2.0 Ecotec turbo from the Malibu for the sport version and the 2.0 Turbo diesel from the Cruze for the fleet buyers.

I will be pissed if the extended cab as door handles on the back doors, looks ugly.

I hope the extended cabs don't have handles on the back doors, here is a good video of the new truck+

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBPEw0ItTok, here is a good video of the new trucks from TFL trucks

I'm not so sure it is going to sell well because it looks a lot like the old ones. GM should have made a true compact truck. It should have been clearly differentiated from the half tons in price, size, and fuel economy. This not-so-compact pickup truck just doesn't do that. The only one talking about a true compact is Ford.

Dont put the 3.6 v6 I think they should put the 4.3 eco tech3 v6 from the silverado more power and still good mpg.

The front looks a lot of the 2003-2006 tundra with the "V" shape and the two rows of chrome (plastic). Never really cared for that.

Keep dreaming about the turbo diesel.... Not gonna happen.
America, remember? "You'll drive what we give you."

I think its a good size, I don't want a little econobox truck, just something a bit smaller then the current Land yaht half tons

Beautiful. It's giving me a hard-on.

Now THAT is a truck. I would be so happy if this turns out to be what it looks like. Perfect.

A local Auto Talk Show announced that a diesel will be offered in the Colorado. The Wentzville plant that will produce this vehicle is a suburb of St Louis where the radio show is broadcasted. He has reliable info since he does consulting work with several of the manufactures including GM.
Stay tuned, the diesels are coming!

Extended cab doors don't have exterior handles based on spy photos taken so far.

Rear shock location sucks, and has knock-on effect on poor exhaust pipe positioning. GM should go to outboard opposing shocks like the Tacoma, F150 and Jeep JK.

And here's a render: http://pictures.topspeed.com/IMG/crop/201307/chevrolet-colorado_800x0w.jpg

I do think the Colorado will increase the interest in the smaller pickup segment.

A diesel will definitely be a bonus. If one looks at the $27 000, Pentastar powered, 8spd, 6ft bed Fiat/Ram then be able to buy a diesel powered Colorado Space Cab for even $24-25 000 and get much better FE, tow more what would you buy?

A lot of people are hung up on size. Trucks are becoming more and more mainstream. Lots of consumers would love to have a smaller easier to use pickup.

I see one of the main reasons for the ownership of a large pickup is tow capacity. Well, if these in diesel form can tow over 7 500lbs this will be able to subsitute a full size.

A four cylinder diesel is cheaper to produce than a V6. The drivetrains for these high torque engines already exist in your V8 pickups.

Our version of the 2.8 diesel is putting out 190hp and 350ftlb of torque. If you want to tow only 5 000lbs that would make the ideal tow vehicle.

I predict these will give the Pentastar Rams a run for their money, especially if they can make the front end look decent , unlike our fugly Colorado's.

I like the look of the Global better...hate the Chevy decided to make them look like a mini Silverado. I am excited to see a full reveal to truly get a good look and know for sure if this is what I want to purchase.

I am still hoping that the global Ranger makes an appearance here!

The last Chevy Colorado was pretty lame. I hope GM finally gets it's act together on this latest venture.

@Unclebud,
"I'm going to be pissed if they don't offer a diesel as that would create a major competitive edge over the Tacoma."

Hopefully they have tweaked more than the engine option.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/256434/2014-holden-colorado-review/

@Robert Ryan
It's a shame GM just doesn't put that extra into a vehicle.

I bet for a few hundred grand Old Man Emu could develop a far superior suspension.

GM only looked at updating the less essential aspects of this ute. The interior I hope doesn't arrive in the US.

I had a close look at one in Darwin a couple of months ago and it is behind the Amarok/BT50/Ranger.

The Izuzu Dmax gets better reviews.

From the onset GM tried to develop this ute on a budget, $2 billion. VW spent $3.5 billion developing the Amarok and Ford/Mazda spent over $4 billion on the Ranger/BT50.

But from what I read it should be okay off road.

Why didn't the make their 1500 and HD look like that, that's a good looking truck, that is if they really look like that and I'm a Ram fan!

So far the concept art and renderings for this truck look OK.

I have to admit, though, I only want this truck to succeed to light a fire under Ford and Toyota ;) They both need to re-think the "small" truck.

Now, if you could bet these in the US. They can tow okay and have diesels and are quite good off road.

Here is the SUV version of the Colorado.

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/55524/2013-holden-colorado7-lt-and-ltz-australian-launch-road-test-review

I wonder if the next Ranger will have the same front end as this Everest. The Everest is the Ranger version SUV with the 3.2 diesel.

http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor-news/ford-everest-concept-revealed-20130813-2rtna.html

If they do make a Ranger with the Everest front end it will be the nicest looking pickup around.

I hope a bench seat is an option.Im 6ft5 250lbs if only bucket seats and a floor shifter are available,count me out.

Not a good move unless all you want to sell to are exterminator fleets, cheapskates and bottom feeders.

@Hil Billee: It looks like the Holden Colorado has a bench seat available only on the DX model. This might change for the US model, I don't know.

But really, no manufacturer has offered a true, one-piece bench seat since, I think, the last 2004 F-150 Heritage XL model. Every bench seat since then has been a "40-20-40", with a flip-down console between two bucket seats. Far more useful in most situations anyway. Seriously, when was the last time anyone put 3 people across in their non-regular cab pickup truck?

PUTC seems to be perpetuating the common myth related to small truck sales " Or will their only advantage be price?" Most of the Tacoma's I see are TRD/SR5 doublecab long box 4x4's which are well within the price range of mid-level trim full sized trucks.
People buy these trucks because they want a smaller and lighter truck.

I'd like to see this truck come with a diesel. If the Ram 3.0 VM Motori truck gets 25.85 mpg (USA) empty, 22.40 mpg (USA) loaded , and 14.61 mpg (USA) towing this should be able to get 3-5 mpg better across the board.

"Most of the Tacoma's I see are TRD/SR5 doublecab long box 4x4's which are well within the price range of mid-level trim full sized trucks."

Which is why PUTC said the cheaper Colorado would compete on price. RIF. Reading is fundamental.

@Tom - oh, I read it fine but unlike you, I comprehend what I read.

Where does it say that the Colorado will have a price advantage over the Tacoma?

The speculation is that it will have a price advantage.......... but to what? They mention full sized trucks only.
Small trucks overlap in price with full sized. I used this site's search engine and this is what I found:
Tacoma - base = 16,852
F150 - base = 15,119

Tacoma - loaded = 44,378
F150 - loaded(Raptor) = 86,300

You can get an F150 cheaper than a Tacoma. As I have said there is a lot of overlap between small and large pickups.

And to repeat my comment - "PUTC seems to be perpetuating the common myth related to small truck sales " Or will their only advantage be price?"

@The Real Lou
The image appears to be a sport model (if their is such a thing as a full chassis sport vehicle).

Also, I would start making comparison on FE and tow ability if they come out in a diesel.

A diesel will tow well and give good FE.

How much does a full size that can tow 7 800lbs and give at least 30mpg cost?

"PUTC seems to be perpetuating the common myth related to small truck sales " Or will their only advantage be price?"

PUTC didn't state small truck sales only compete on price. PUTC was asking about the Colorado in comparison to the Taco. Will there be some unprescedented technology on the Colorado or will they compete against the Taco/Frontier on price?

I agree with Tom. RIF. Reading is fundamental.

I am sure Chevy will accomodate the exterminator fleets and bottom feeders on price.

@Big Al from Oz - if you go to the "Testing Season" thread, I posted a link for Robert Ryan from the "Canadian Truck King" challenge and I also broke down some of the mpg data from that test. The EB3.5 was the only motor with towing and hauling power that was close to the VM 3.0 diesel but there still was a big gap in mpg between the two.

@The Real Lou
I saw that table, I would like to know how much weight they had to tow. I couldn't see any information.

My angle was, how much will it cost for a comparable full size. Looking at our prices and using that AUD to USD price converter that Carilloski made it would be about mid 30ish for a top end diesel. Without discounts.

That would be competitive.

There would be people who would want this size vehicle in urbanised areas. You can park it in a garage. Easier to drive to the mall and park. Tow your camper/boat/toys.

If this Colorado comes with the 200hp/370ftlb diesel that will be something you guys haven't encountered yet.

I would like to read the reviews.

@Lou NC
Another thing they are pushing here is the adoption of European
Cab Chassis Pickups, that I saw in vast numbers in Europe.
Not much more expensive or cheaper in some cases, to Asian sourced Pickups, they have vastly better payload and towing, ride comfort etc. I can see them as a "coming thing" here.
You are seeing more and more of them being used in a strictly work related way or as a Motorhome base.

Lou is slagging Mark Williams and PUTC again. The blog didn't say small trucks only compete on price. They question was how the Colorado would compete against the other mid-size trucks. This is the complete quote...

We'll have to wait and see if the new Chevrolet Colorado or GMC Canyon will give the Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma a reason to worry with any unique powertrains or unprecedented technology. Or will their only advantage be price?

Uncle Bud, 2 years. Don't expect the diesels to appear any earlier than the Fall of 2015.

Lou misread the quote before going on that rant against PUTC!

The math doesn’t work anymore—the whole mid size segment is an answer to a question nobody is asking.

In the early 1980s when the S10 and the Ranger were born, cars/trucks were not mandated by the govm’t to have the following:

Anti lock brakes
Anti rollover systems
Air bags for collision protection
Sophisticated emission controls
Side impact protection

Although they were smaller than full-size trucks, they still offered automakers a potential for savings by allowing the use of components that were already part of the manufacturers inventory and/or supply chain:

Brake parts
Steering components
Cooling system pieces
Powertrain components

Because truck buyers were still in shock over the fuel price increases of the 1970s, the prospect of a smaller truck that would occasionally do big-truck work was pretty attractive. Compact trucks had already been available from Toyota and Nissan and had proved a market was there and waiting to be fulfilled.

All of that’s in the distant past.

Since then Ford, VW, GM, Honda, Chrysler all failed with their attempts at compact trucks built for the US market. Ford rode the Ranger and its Mazda B-Series twin to an ugly demise. Ditto the GM S10 and Colorado models.

The Dodge Dakotas built after 1999-2001 were actually a gem design-wise, but were a real dog in terms of build quality. The Honda Ridgeline was competing price-wise with half ton trucks—it sold well for only one or two years. The VW small pickup is best forgotten.

Since then, the Super Size American appetite has produced a truck buyer who’s no longer 5 foot 10 inches and 155 pounds. Today’s truck buy is taller and a lot heavier than the guy in the leisure suit and sideburns who wanted an Isuzu P’up 30 years ago.

Instead of looking at the Nissan Frontier and Toyota Tacoma, GM designers should have reviewed what happened with the Dodge Dakota for a clue about the chances for success with the “new” Colorado.

Even though the Dakota was a winner on paper, it took Chrysler too long to go from the drawing board to the showroom, something Detroit calls “time to market.” Ditto the Colorado/Canyon twins. By the time these trucks were in the showroom, Nissan had the current Frontier, Toyota had vastly improved the Tacoma. Ford’s alternative strategy was to squeeze every last drop out of the Ranger/S10 type of truck design. Did they ever!

For today’s designers wanting a contemporary alternative in the compact market you have to forget the economics that made a 1983 Ranger attractive to buyers thirty years ago. Those days are gone.

You can’t build cars today without costly electronic safety and emissions systems. Those components would have to be purpose-built systems, not just knockoffs from the full sized lineup. The crash-proofing of cabs and doors costs just as much to design as it does with full sized vehicles. There are no body-on-frame passenger cars to swap components with anymore. The economics no longer work.

@papa jim
I do think what has had a significant impact on the smaller pickups was the inability to import them. Importing gave them the price advantage. Once the US produced them prices increased significantly.

US full size pickups are highly controlled and protected. Design regs favour them, import tariffs protect them.

I'm in no way saying that small pickups will reign supreme, but if you guys had the ones we are able to get then they would put a dent into the full size trucks.

You just don't get these new midsizers.

Here's an article on what's occuring here with these new utes.

http://www.news.com.au/national/retiring-at-65-plunging-sales-mean-the-holden-ute-is-reaching-the-end-of-the-line/story-fncynjr2-1226747396393

@Robert Ryan
Woodalls???

For me its not all about price, I will pay 35K for a mid size truck if it has the technology, safety, and capability. I just don't want a full size size for everyday driving.

@Big Al from Oz
It appears it has an internal server problem

@Big Al--Thanks for the article about the Holden ute, interesting. The Thai based trucks with diesels would be a good fit in the US market and would be all that most would need. For myself if I needed anymore truck than a midsize I would get a 3/4 ton with a heavier frame and more capacity. GM just needs to offer a diesel as an option which would meet most of the needs of a truck owner. I like this design much better than the global Colorado.

Al, looks like the flood of cheap imports may kill your home auto manufacturing industry. I can't see how that would be good for us either. Especially since most people apparently don't want small trucks. Sure, a few here say they would buy them, and they can buy a Tacoma if that's what they want. But Tacoma sales aren't exactly spectacular, not when you factor in it's the only truck in the segment. If you guys had the option to buy full size trucks(not conversions) I wonder how that would affect mid size sales? I mean, several aussies have paid over $100,000.00 for American full size trucks.

In 1988 I bought a new S10 reg cab 4.3 Auto short w/b truck. I paid an amount equal to one-third of my net annual income to buy it. The loan terms were easy.

Not possible for most workers today. A new mid sizer will be the sort of play-toy off roader you see in the typical 32 thousand dollar Tacoma.

The math still doesn't work.

I pay cash for my vehicles, I make payments to myself for five years then pay cash. Much better to have the money earning interest in the bank rather then paying interest on a loan.



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