It's Official: New GMC Canyon on the Way

After many months of speculation and secrecy, Brian Sweeney, vice president of Buick and GMC, finally announced today that there will be a new GMC Canyon midsize pickup to be paired with the previously announced Chevy Colorado. Both trucks will be built in the soon-to-be reconditioned and upgraded truck plant in Wentzville, Mo.

Although no mechanical or engine information was released, we think it's safe to say GM will continue with the same two-truck strategy with the Chevy and GMC pair that we are all familiar with: Chevy will likely continue to be the mainstream, work-friendly, price-aggressive model, with GMC mapping out a more upscale territory for itself. And if the new large and small GMC SUVs or rumors about the new Silverado vs. Sierra exterior design are true, we'd expect more visual and body styling separation between the two.

Exact production and arrival timing to dealerships will be announced later.

“While we continue to make strong progress in fuel-economy gains on our full-size trucks, we know that there is a group of customers who want the functionality of a truck but may not need full-size pickup,” said Tony DiSalle, vice president of Buick and GMC Marketing. “We believe that introducing a new agile and efficient mid-size Canyon will meet the needs of many pickup buyers.”

We should note that because General Motors only produces and sells the Chevy Colorado overseas, there are no photos of GMC models yet (likely only to be sold in the U.S. and Canada). Below are two global Chevy Colorado models. If you want to know more about how the new Chevy Colorado (badged as a Holden Colorado in Australia) performed in our most recent Global Pickup Shootout, click here

2012-global-market-chevrolet-colorado II

2013-Chevrolet-Colorado II

Comments

@Big Al from Oz - Those SUVs would help ease the pain, but likely wouldn't fix the problem. The other problem is they'd also be preferred by fleet buyers a governments vs full-size SUVs. Also they'd cannibalize Tahoes and more earnings for Ford.

the GMC badge is a buzzkill. Government Motors Corp isn't cool at all.

@Forddude, I agree. GMC's won't be worth jack for resale now. They had their Denali run for a good 10 years though. After the Government assistance (paid back or not), it's Government Motors now and forever as far as I'm concerned. I wouldn't own one.

LOLOLOL!!! The two faux trucks. As they say, REAL trucks DON'T have Twins, Brothers or Sisters. How stupid. GMC is the PUREST definition of REDUNDANCY in the universe. Where's MY TAXMONEY BACK GOVTMOCO??? You don't NEED 2 fricken TRUCKS. I backed Chevrolet for awhile BUT not After this crap. They are STUCK with GovtMotors so the hell with em.

@DennisScarborough
I'd love to see how a Corvette looks with over 3 000lbs on its ass.

Remember these are trucks, if you want a true performance ute buy a Holden HSV Maloo. They can still carry more weight than a Corvette.

DB, why would anyone want a V8 or SFA in a mid-size truck? getting away from a gas guzzling V8 is WHY I went to a mid-size truck to begin with! I got sick and tired of my Z71's getting 16mpg all the time no matter what! I now get 20mpg on my V6 and it's not even lose to being broken in yet! I also wanted to get away from GM's tin can thin sheet metal, crappy paint jobs, squeaking brakes, and terrible customer service. I don't give a rat's you know what if the segment is shrinking or growing, all I know is my Tacoma will EASILY do 250,000 miles and STILL sell for more then ANY full-size truck, S-10, etc. find me 100 s-10's with over 200,000 miles on them that are still on the road today and will sell in 5 seconds if you stuck a "for sale" sign on one. find me a Ranger, Dakota, f-150, Z71. the Colorado and Canyon can be had with that big bad V8 and look at how they sold. Same for the Dakota. the fact is you can't beat a Toyota when it comes to small/mid-size trucks.

@DenverMike I think GM are going for a different strategy unlike Ford. The Colorado/GMC are trying to grow the midsize market for GM and take some of midsize market from Toyota. In that case it will be a win win. As the percentage of Pickup sales has actually declined since the early 2000's{Ford sold 900,000 F150's in 2004)) , this could lure disaffected buyers into the fold.

Keith, a conventional drum brake will hold a parked vehicle much better than a disc will. The GM 3/4 and 1 ton trucks and vans have a large drum brake mounted in the rear hub just for parking. The problem with discs on the 1500's was the parking drum brake was too small to hold the vehicle adequately on a hill if it was loaded to max. GVW. GM did not change to rear drums on the 1500 as a cost-cutting move, it was done for safety. As for a 'park' postion in the transmission, you should know that the park position should always be used in conjuction with the parking brake in any make of vehicle, regardless of what kind of rear brakes it has.

I agree, diesel please.

@Robert Ryan
I think the market is larger for mid size pickups in NA than is being recognised by some.

Like I stated the US yearly and August figures show a larger improvement of smaller pickup sales than full size. Proportionally much larger.

I think if the range of mid size pickups available in the NA market was to improve they would sell.

At the moment the range of current mid size trucks isn't competitive enough.

I do think our new range of dual cab utes would take sales away from some current full size customers, but they would also gain sales from SUV buyers and non owners of pickups.

Imagine what our sales of utes would be like if the offered only Greatwall quality utes with late 90s Hiluxes and Navarras and Rodeo's. Ford probably wouldn't be removing manufacturing here. Holden and Ford 1 tonners would see alot.

I would have not made this comment until recently since the Amarok, T6/BT50, Colorado/DMax etc came on the scene. I they wouldn't compete effectively against the NA 1/2 ton pickups.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there isn't a significant market for 1/2 ton pickups in NA.

@Denver Mike I have no problem with you buying a big gas guzzling V-8 Ford F-150 but don’t tell me what to buy. I guess next you will tell me who to vote for, where to worship, what to eat, and how to dress. I remember 3 to 4 years ago going to local Ford dealerships with 100s of F-150s discounted at least 10k and salesmen begging me to try one out (same with Dodge and GM). Ford in a few years will have dealer lots full of these expense Cowboy Lincolns as gas prices soar. In a few years these new fuel standards will start to take effect and in another 10 years from that date the full size truck will be declared an endangered species as were the land yachts of the 70s which I occasionally see in old car shows. I suggest that you might serious think of buy a new Raptor or other big F-150 before they start the downsizing with the carbon fiber fenders and the Eco boost V-6s and 4s.

@Big Al these guys will be brought into the 21st century kicking and screaming and blaming Obama and Big Oil. These new standards will happen regardless of who is President and what political party is in power. There will be an outcry to the government to control the price of fuel and then if that happens you will see the oil companies pull many of their operations out of America and go to Asia where the market is growing and people will pay the price. These same guys will be blaming the Chinese, the Indians, the Democrats, Green Peace, and will be asking people like me who are now driving less and driving more efficient vehicles to stop driving so they can have all the fuel. Many of these guys act like spoiled immature brats that have not grownup. They think that the World should revolve around them and their wants and needs and these big V-8 gas guzzling trucks are their toys to play out in the desert. They are part of the problem not the solution and they find it easy to blame others rather than take responsibility. That is one of the problems with this country now is instead of rising to a challenge as we have done through out our history whether it be our Revolutionary War, the Great Depression, and WW II we want to blame others and not take responsibility.

Whether GM, Ford, or Chrysler survives will not affect the survival of the planet because there will be other manufacturers that will fill the void whether it be the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, or someone else. It is much easier to complain about GM bailouts and Obama than to be responsible and take action. Big Al I agree with you that out of necessity our trucks will become more global as well whether these guys like it or not. We are now paying the piper when it comes to mounting deficits and our lifestyles. I don’t look forward to all the changes but I would much rather be proactive than whine and complain. I want to live life to the fullest and not waste what little valuable time I have whining and complaining. I see a changing future and I would rather adapt. “Change is a coming”


@Robert Ryan
You think my englif is pour, sorrie, I will have to look at the keyboard when typing :) Maybe proof read.

You get the drift.

@ big bob

I'm SOOO GLAD you brought up the fact that a drum brake holds BETTER than a disc for a parking brake. more surface area holding the better it will HOLD..... However a disc brake is MUCH nicer than a drum to STOP a vehicle..... This is EXACTLY why on the back of a Tundra there is a vented disc 13.6 inch Rotor (bigger than an f350) And WOW wouldnt you know it there is a drum located inside that rotor! ingenious huh! If you make the rotor large enough you can fit a drum inside thats adequate to hold for a parking brake, all half tons should figure this out since Toyota has done this since 2007 on the Tundra........

BUT, i will say the Tacoma STILL uses a drum in the rear.......... so we have a contradiction........ the Tacoma DOES have a booster for the rear drums to make them MORE powerful, maybe that helps. You CANNOT say they have crappy brakes because the front is a 4 piston fixed position caliper (like the tundra) and NOBODY has a 1 ton even with that on the front let alone a half ton or mid size.........

@Robert Ryan - I don't know if GM is expecting a renaissance, or if people are that unhappy with what they currently drive or its size. How many of the regulars here on PUTC sound like they're ready to step up to the plate and sign on the ......... line? There's some somewhat positive responses, but it sounds close to none and these are consummate truck guys. How about in the general public? yaaaaaawn...

I'm sure they'll sell some, but if they can get a good percentage of loaded 4X4 double cabs to move... And move off the lot without stacking cash on the hood... I wish them lots of luck.

The economy was going full blast in '04 and people were using their home equity as ATMs. Construction was way up and so were all related service industries. My income was also at an all-time high and I was one of those that bought and '04 F-150, my last major personal purchase.

The '04 F-150s were a step ahead of anything else out there, at the time and were all-new for '04.

@Jeff S
I not a greenie or as you would say in the US a liberal left wing socialist. But I do see a need for change and I agree with you. I would love big V8s to flourish as I have nothing against them. But we need to conserve energy better for our future.

I love this site because of a lot of the narrow minded people who think NA is the centre of the universe. I think the French and British had this problem in the early 20th century.

It took the British nearly half a century to realise the British Empire wasn't what it used to be.

I think the British are over it, but the French still can't get a handle on it yet. I was in France last year, beautiful country and nice people. I'm half French and my French mother lives in the US because she couldn't live in France! Imagine driving one of those funny cars :)

@DenverMike Trawling around internet forums and looking at non-fan boy responses, yes there is a bit of interest. Cannot translate that into sales(Tacoma excepted) if there is nothing to buy. If GM does start selling the Colorado in numbers, then Ford will hop on the bandwagon.

I'll take drums on the back over discs any day.

Having been a mechanic, yes disc is easier to work on. However, they sure suck for the owner in regards to performance, and longevity. Plus, your park brakes suck on trucks with discs.

@Jeff S - I guess it's like anything else they may take away soon, like civil liberties.

My V8 pickup isn't hurting anyone, I mean you could be driving your S10 harder, faster and farther than any of us, but my F-150 looks more guilty parked next to it.

I'm fine with all of this, but when gas hit the ridiculous price of $2 a gallon, they said behemoth full-size trucks would be GONE before gas hit $3 a gallon. Look at us now.

I mean, it's all relative and mid-size trucks drink almost as much depending on how it's equipped or driven. More in some situations.

Either way, it'll take some major CAFE intervention to kill V8 full-size. If so, the rest of us will always have old (current) trucks or hot rodded, modded V8 mid or hybrid full-size (where it's not a felony).

@Big Al from Ox. I wish my Keyboard could do it on remote too.
Car/Utes are much bigger in the cities than in country Australia or the NT. See a lot of new ones with upfitted bodies.

Meanwhile at Ferd and Fiat.... ZzZzZzZzZzZzZzZz....

@Kemo> Agree 100%. Salt and corrosion are a constant issue for rear discs in Canada. Drum brakes will last over 80K if adjusted throughout their life. The drum keeps the dirt and crap off the braking surface. When the wheel cylinder goes and the drum locks up, thats a PITA but under normal circumstances, drums are perfectly fine.

@Robert Ryan - I pretty sure Ford completely washed its hands of mid-size trucks in NA. It's not just a matter of how many or how big the mid-size market is, but which exact mid-sizers are moving.

The old NA Ranger moved in fairly good #'s, but way too many were stripper base models sold to fleet buyers that want the absolute cheapest regular cab and never paid retail. That part was unavoidable when you have one of the only smaller if not better mid-size from the Big 3. I doubt it'll go much better for GM, but we'll see.

The only reason Ford didn't cancel the Ranger sooner was they were milking the '93 redo for all it's worth and didn't care if fleet buyer devoured it. They're doing the same with the E-series now, which is about 100% fleet. Remember how the Crown Vic went out?

Why bother. This company is one joke of brands after another. Brands brands brands. They fail, take our money overseas, won't pay us back and continue on with a bunch of brands of the same crap. There's already a Colorado. What a waste of resources. Every other company is trying to concolidate and streamline. GM blows money like it's 1980 on pointless nonsense. Just another waste of Government money like Obama has done for the last 4 years.

Why does it resemble a Toyota or Nissan so much?

DenverMike is right about Ranger fleet sales. My fleet bought 100's of them, all regular cab stripper models, but with the 4.0L and automatic transmissions. They served us well for the most part, but starting in 2008 we changed to regular cab Colorados with the 5 cylinder/automatic drivetrain. I know the old Colorado was not a real popular truck, but truth of the matter is we are seeing that the Colorado is more reliable and has a lower cost-of-ownership than the Ranger had. Not by much, but enough to notice. The drivers prefer the Colorado simply because there is more room in the cab.

Same old comment and arguements. I don't personally care if a GMC truck wears a bowtie or a GMC logo. The problem is that there are those who care. In the USA Chevy is the big seller out of the two siblings. Why turn the more popular badge into the bucktoothed bastard stepchild? Professonal grade versus work grade?
As others have pointed out: why bitch about looks when we do not know what the NA version will look like? Same can be said for quality.

I also wanted to get away from GM's tin can thin sheet metal, crappy paint jobs, squeaking brakes, and terrible customer service.

-Tell me about it.

The '04 F-150s were a step ahead of anything else out there, at the time and were all-new for '04.

-Denvermike, I agree. It's when I switched all of my truck and car purchases from Chevy to Ford. Once I test drove that F-150, I was sold. First Ford ever and have been a Ford man from there on out. It was better built than the Chevy's with higher quality parts and had a far more luxurious interior than the Chevy's. Chevy's got cheap and Ford's became premium is how I see it. And to the guys ragging on discs, my 04 F-150 had discs and so does my 2011. I've never had any problems with them. Never even replaced the pads on my 04 before trade in last year and we live in Michigan where there's tons of salt and snow. I wouldn't even buy a truck with drums now. They fade when hot, they always stick, you can't swap shoes in seconds out in the driveway yourself like you can pads and the drum itself looks horribly cheap through the rim.

-I likewise find GMC to be a horribly redundant 'brand' if you even want to call it that. Government Motors Corp. is dead on the money. I'd never buy a GMC either. They should just sell Opel's at the Chevrolet/Cadillac dealer as an import alternative and can Buick's and GM's.

@Lou, I also agree with you. GM really has turned the Chevrolet faithful off to the entire brand doing this to their trucks. Not a good thing when it's the truck guys who are diehard loyalists in most cases. I left Chevrolet for the other reasons mentioned above but I have to say the Ford brand is viewed as a premium now and Chevrolet is not because of GMC. It doesn't just hurt Chevrolet trucks, it hurts the whole Chevrolet company. Very stupid on GM's part. If they're gonna keep the GM's around, they should at least give Chevrolet the same goods and let the free market decide which one they want. Not force Chevrolet customers away from the brand they love. Just dumb business.

The '04 F-150s were a step ahead of anything else out there, at the time and were all-new for '04.

@DenverMike, I'm with you on that. That was likewise the truck that took me from the Chevrolet to Ford brand. Within 2 minutes of seeing it I just had to have one and I never once thought that about any Ford truck before it. Chevrolet needs this next Silverado to be Their 04 F-150 that blows people away with how sharp and high quality it is. I was hoping that would happen back in 2007-8 or whenever that was that this current Silverado came out but it didn't sway me back. If anything it turned me off even more. They also need this Colorado to do much of the same but it needs to look more like a mini-Silverado IMO. This design above looks awful.

The new truck looks good, even if it does have rear drum brakes. I'm sure Ford will counter with a new Ranger (or F-100). They could name the new truck F-100, as previously mentioned, and include it in the F-Series sales figures. F-150 and Super Duty [F-250, 350, etc.]) are different sized trucks but still lumped together in sales figures.

Despite some of the arguments on here, the GMC brand is an old, old one that once had a reputation for really solid trucks. I do have to admit that they've become too similar to Chevy trucks in appearance and construction which is a pity, but rather than killing GMC for Chevy, I think they'd be smarter to pull the truck line out of Chevy and let GMC represent the company's trucks as a whole in the same way Chrysler took the Dodge name off the RAM trucks. It really helps to emphasize the truck brand rather than tying it to the relatively flimsy, sacrifice-itself-at-all-costs-to-save-the-passengers Chevy cars.

For all that some hate one over the other, since the two are so alike, I really can't understand the feuds. The Colorado is the Canyon and so on. You want a broader price range, then broaden the trim packages.

Which brings up what appears to be a common complaint there, too. I do not like all of these options packages that force you to buy things you don't want to get things you want. Sure, it's easier in the assembly line if there are fewer variations, but that really doesn't help the customer, does it? Why not just call everything in a given option package standard for a given trim level and simply forget options entirely, hmmm?

@June: That depends on what you call a step ahead. If you ask me, trucks have been making huge strides backwards--reverting essentially to cars with a bed stuck on instead of a trunk (boot) like they were in the 1910s-'20s than being a real truck any more.

@TerryHoath, I've been saying that for several years now. Huge failure on GM's part to not recognize this. They need to up Chevrolet's truck brand status like yesterday. It wasn't such a big deal until the design changes and Denali trim line came along but now it's like war between the two camps. Especially when Ford came out with the King Ranch in 1999. The Platinum, FX4 and Limited trims etc.. on top of that just sealed the deal. And now with Dodge piling on with their high dollar trims, Limiteds and such, Chevy guys are left out in the cold fuming mad. The guys who spend big dollars on Chevrolet Corvette's, Camaro's, Chevrolet Racing products, Chevrolet off-road aftermarket trucks and such have plenty of cash and are demanding Chevrolet trucks have that same premium status as Ford trucks do. The Ford guys have both premium cars and premium trucks. It's really left a bad taste in the mouths of Chevrolet loyalists I personally know and many Chevy guys on the forums.


The problem is that there are those who care. In the USA Chevy is the big seller out of the two siblings. Why turn the more popular badge into the bucktoothed bastard stepchild? Professonal grade versus work grade?

@Lou, correct and level headed as usual. GM just needs to give the Chevrolet guys what they want and let them be happy. They shoot themselves in the foot by not doing so. Then both camps (The Chevrolet truck and GM truck crowd) will be happy. GM as a whole would have so much more support from their largest base if they'd just do it. GM's way of running a business is almost mind numbing it's so ass backwards. I just shake my head watching Silverado sales slip. It's not necessary and doesn't have to be this way. Why say 'yes' to one smaller camp and then turn around to your largest camp and tell them 'no'. "You can't have this or that" like they don't have the money or the desire to own something as premium under their own favorite brand.. It's crazy to me. Especially when Ford and Dodge give their loyal customers everything they can think up. I personally feel sorry for the Chevrolet crowd.


For the Canyon, eh. If I were them I wouldn't spend much money doing it outside of the grille. The Canyon was never a big seller anyway. If they do some other stampings maybe go the Terrain route with the squared off look and leave the Chevrolet wheel openings more rounded like up above. The Colorado really needs a facelift though. I've never liked the front end or the bed for that matter. The Ranger that Ford should (and hopefully will) be bringing here is a much better looking small truck.

I think they'd be smarter to pull the truck line out of Chevy and let GMC represent the company's trucks as a whole in the same way Chrysler took the Dodge name off the RAM trucks

@DWFields, several problems with that. For one, the GM-GMC name for many is damaged goods now. Maybe GMC was the hot ticket in 1920 but then again so was an Oldsmobile and a Packard. Chevy was likewise building heavy duty military trucks and such back then so they likewise have that old reputation. Next, The Dodge Ram (or Ram) was always 1 truck in 1 division with 1 loyal fanbase. So essentially, nothing changed. Not so with GM. They have 2 different loyal fanbases, 2 different trucks and 2 different divisions. The biggest seller is also the Chevrolet 3 to 1. If anything, they'd kill off the GMC. Then if they went the Dodge route (which they won't), your equivalent would then be to call all of their trucks "GM's Silverado truck line". That would be like "Chrysler's Ram truck line"..

And then there's always the 'What if' GM did go bankrupt or out of business again in the future. They would be out of their minds to throw away the Chevrolet truck nameplate which just like Ford, is why it will always be here. Chevrolet would at least have some value to it to either be sold off like Dodge was or to soldier on as a single company. If GM wants to keep 2 trucks they just need to offer everyone from both camps whatever they want and be done with it. Pick your badge of choice as free will and move on.

Listening to these people,they either do not own a truck or have not driven one as a business,My 2008 Duramax has 175,000 miles,NO problems & still like new,Tows & runs thru the mountains of BC as always.I deal with fleets that have Fords because of price,believe me not because of reliability,cost of ownership is high & Diesel problems are still there.
Just my thoughts
derek

Fords new diesel is bulletproof. I worked on one of engineering teams who designed it. You have no clue as to what you're talking about. There are no outsourced diesels in our trucks now. I'll also add, Ford trucks generally have a higher transaction price at the dealer and hold better resale value than most trucks currently on the market. Whether it's tires, braking systems, frame strength or coatings, interior quality in base or luxury trims, paints, body metal structure, chassis and suspension components and design and right to the heart of the engine, every single aspect of our trucks is built to the highest of standards. And if something isn't right, it is immediately addressed. It might cost a little more at the dealer but we're not in the business to sell cheap when it comes to trucks. Chevrolet gave us a run for many years. That was many years ago. The Duramax is a good engine.

John

these trucks look too soft for the average American.

these trucks look too soft for the average American.

@BigRoy, WAY too soft! I too agree with some, bring back the old styling cues like the S-10 had. Both generations of the S-10 were awesome. The ZR2 was my favorite as well but I'd have liked a ZR2 package on the first generation too. I can't believe this is what the new Chevy will look like. Not good.

I am so unhappy with my employer, Ford Motor Company.
They let us make tiny updates to our trucks, but they won't let us totally redesign them. Every other manufacturer out there, with the exception of Nissan, has a newer truck, and that is frustrating for me and some of my fellow co-workers. It is an embarrassment for us because they are too cheap (or maybe too broke) to spend the money for a total redesign. That makes us look as though we don't have our creative juices flowing to come up with new products. This company is holding me back. Maybe it's time to look for something else......

I think that the new Colorado and Canyon are a step up from the current offerings. I think that the american manufacturers have lost their way on a sub full sized truck. That is why we wont get the new Ranger, its too close to f-150 sized, the Dakota needed a re-do but would have only gotten closer to the Ram in size. My son drives a 2001 S-10, that truck is the perfect size for a "personal use truck" in my opinion. I grew up in the mini truck craze of the 80's and there were some awesome little trucks from Dodge, Ford, GM, Nissan, Toyota, Mitsubishi and Mazda. They were little but capable and comfortable. When the first gen Dakota came out the industry never was the same. It was the first "too big" mini truck and marked the start of the decline. If they would build a truck that size maybe with a reliable diesel they would sell a ton of them.

As for the GM bail out I too never understood the logic of keeping GMC trucks. There has to be enormous expense in making two sets of fenders, two hoods, two sets of wheels, running two different dealership channels for a nearly identical product. It doesn't make sense.

When GM downsized I agreed with getting rid of Hummer, Saturn, it was hard but even Pontiac. But when I found out that GMC trucks would continue I was taken back. As a default shareholder now I was not in favor of that decision. The model that I would see is taking the high truck trim levels from GMC and incorporating them into the Chevy line. I think to remain competitive I would leave lux SUV's as Cadillacs and drop GMC trucks/SUV's altogether.

A GM customer would start as a Chevy customer, as they gained affluence I they could buy Buick cars and when they became executives or neared retirement they could buy Cadillacs. As a shareholder that is a plan that makes sense to me. One set of bodywork for the trucks would be a lot cheaper, as would one dealer network and one advertising campaign. Keeping GMC around is just a symbol of what is wrong with GM the company.

I hope that the new "little" trucks are awesome, I'm not too fond of the crossover styling on the front but if the truck is good that can be overlooked.

wy not a small max whit a mini Allison....

Finally a confirmation of the GMC. This should look more truck-like if they hold true to some of their recent styling trends. Just wish there wasn't such a long wait to it. I'd love a smaller truck, but don't know if it's going to be worth the wait.
As far as drum brakes..... I could care less if it's drums or not. Living in the rust belt, I'd prefer them, seen way too many issues with rear discs with seized parking brake hardware.

Now give us some power train details!

Again GM makes GMC for one reason and thats so Cadillac and Buick dealers can have a truck to sell.

Why does everyone hate on GMC :(. I own one and love it.

@DenverMike--I am not wishing for V-8s to go away, it is just that if you read the prior article posted on this site about the new regulations and their effect on pickups the manufacturers will be forced to make some drastic powertrain and size changes in order to comply. I think for the most parts heavy duties will be exempt because contractors and farmers need these but most of us don't need them. As for outlawing the V-8 this will not happen its again trying to comply with very restrictive regulations. You will still be able to keep your old trucks as will anyone but you might not drive them as much. I went to an old car show at a local car restoration shop and looked at the old cars and trucks from the 20s to the 70s. These guys were not driving their vehicles day to day but they looked like they just came off the assembly line.

As for the cost to produce a full size versus a midsize truck the cost is not that much different but that would be true of a Ford Focus versus a Fusion. Labor would be the major cost factor along with overhead and advertising then the actual raw material cost would be last.

As for these twins taking sales away from the full size that will happen to some degree but not much. GMs new full size trucks and how they are received will determine if Ford and Ram gain more sales or lose more sales. That is why GM has to knock it out of the ballpark or else they will continue to lose. The ball is in GMs court and they are responsible for their fate.

@Big Al from Oz--I never said you were an environmentalist but I thought we were in agreement that with China, India, and the rest of Asia that demand for oil would outpace production. Oil companies are in the business to optimize profits and if the emerging countries offer to pay more for oil products then they will get more. Yes we do have a pollution problem and the ice is melting but to attribute that all to the internal combustion engine does not even address the total problem. There are power plants, industrial plants, cows farting, and just we humans in general, and other factors. A lawn mower contributes more pollution than many cars and trucks combined. The developing world with old technologies contribute greatly to worldwide pollution. The concern again is demand versus supply of all resources which the demand is greater than the supply thus ever increasing resource costs. This is why we all need to adjust our living standards because we will be forced to do this out of economic necessity.

@Silverado Driver - It's well known that the Sierra has its own following and repeat buyers that won't switch over to Silverados. It's silly, I know, but killing off GMC and the Sierra would mean GM losing maybe 50K yearly truck sales.

How much trouble is it to switch over to different front end pieces? Tahoes, Suburbans and Escalades are also assembled on the Silverado's assembly line.

@Silverado Driver-I agree with you my 2008 Isuzu I-370 with the 3.7 5 cylinder has been extremely reliable and is very comfortable. I am more pleased with it than I expected to be. I think if these twins are priced right and are not too cheaply made they will do fairly well. They will never out sell full size but they we meet an unfullfilled need in the market.

@FordTrucks1: I'm impressed, FT1; a well reasoned debate. I applaud you.

However, as we've seen by at least one other commenter, Chevrolet as a brand and GM as a manufacturer has gone out of its way to offend once-loyal buyers. They've dropped almost all sense of sportiness from their family car lines (I have no desire for a four-door sedan though the coupe version of the same model at least gives some sense of "fun") and quite honestly I'm old enough now that some would say I'm in my second childhood--I simply don't want and don't NEED a 4-door car or truck. Since GM has dropped it's very popular Saturn line (of course, ruining it for their loyal customers first), then Pontiac and Oldsmobile--they've killed the three brands that really distinguished them and are quite literally having to re-invent Buick and Cadillac to fill those gaps--and failing in my opinion.

That doesn't mean I like Ford any more than I ever did, but now I like GM less than I ever have. At the moment the only reason I would buy any Chevrolet is that it was the only car available when I need a specific capability--the same way I bought my 1990 Ford F-150 where I needed to carry a large number of 8' tables and flat couldn't afford to buy new. (I still ended up spending half-again what I paid for the truck just to make it roadworthy again as it had sat under a lean-to for something like ten years but this time it was an added expense that I expected--not like other Fords I've owned.) If I wanted to buy a New pickup, the simple fact that the Canyon/Colorado are the only American-brand mid-sized trucks would be the only reason I'd even look at them and they're still too big for my taste.

I guess that's my point, too; GM has driven away many of its loyal customers through heavy-handed 'our way or no way' attitude. They've designed and even marketed several vehicles that people wanted--then priced them completely out of their planned market of mid-range buyers. The SSR sport pickup needed to START at $10,000 cheaper, even if it was a solid cab instead of a drop-top. The Volt needs to START at $10,000 cheaper to be both competitive with the Prius AND appeal to the everyday driver who tends to buy at $25K-$30K rather than the $35K-$40K range. They over-engineered both vehicles to the point they had to take a loss just to sell them.

So, splitting the truck line from the car line should benefit the company. Either drop Chevrolet as a car brand (They're all either Holdens or Opels anyway) and keep the trucks or take the trucks away from Chevy and give it its own name--like GMC.

And yes, the reason GMC has lost its luster is because over the years it migrated from being a true work truck to a luxury brand that's lost a lot of its ruggedness. GMC dump trucks, hi-cube cargo and even over-the-road tractors were as common as Ford's big industrial trucks while Chevy tended to operate in the consumer lines. Chevy and GMC both worked in WWII but quite honestly it seems to me that Dodge was the more visible brand there--Dodge and Jeep.

@DenverMike--It would make more sense for Silverado to get the Sierra sides and have everything identical except a different grill. I agree with you on that. If GMC is not going to get axed at the very least give both the better styling of the GMC. Personally GMC is the same brand as Chevy but if they want to keep GMC then at least cut the costs of separate designs and limit the options with having different trim levels. Allow Silverado to have the Denali trim package.

@FordMotorsEngineer: I hate to say this, but I think you're too close to the problem here. While I don't fault the engineering you've done, you have been constrained in many ways to making the best you can out of a bad situation. What good is doing all that good work when it's not used in the vehicles that need it? Where is the Ford Bronco? WHAT--is the Ford Explorer? The Ford Expedition? Ford has destroyed many of the models that begat the SUV market by turning them into crossovers instead of trucks.

But then, Ford is not alone here; both GM and Chrysler have done the same things to their trucks--emasculated or eliminates the ones the everyday consumer drives while turning the others into gigantic boy-toys that happen to be almost industrial-strength haulers. You've hit both extremes and totally lost sight of the middle ground. They all have--except for GM's Canyon/Colorado lines and they're still much bigger than I prefer.

@Jeff S - It just seems like even 33 mpg is unobtainable without half tons losing most of what they are today, but we'll see.

You'd think that for these twins to be successful, up to 100K full-size GM sales will be lost/cannibalized. These wouldn't be just any lost/exchanged sales. GM's full-size are not just the #1 most profitable for GM, but the #2 most profitable in the entire World. Where do you think these twins would rank? So you trade the good for the bad. Heck, makes sense to me!

Also for these twins to be successful on their own merits, financially speaking, most would have to leave the lot well equipped. How is this going to happen when they'll have the smallest, cheapest and most economical reg cab stripper made by any Big 3 OEM? Municipalities, governments and utilities plus private businesses have been waiting for a Big 3 domestic to provide a small cheap truck. Lots of sales, yes, but not the kind of sales GM needs (or anyone wants). You do know why the Frontier and Titan don't even come in reg cabs, right? Smart move by Nissan.

If the F-150 line sold mostly base strippers to (far below MSRP) fleet customers, it would not be the #1 most profitable line in the world. Not even close. Heck, it may not even turn a profit at all.



The comments to this entry are closed.