2015 GMC Canyon: Video

DSC_7510jpg_11949576164_la II

We saw the world debut of the 2015 Chevrolet Colorado at the November 2013 Los Angeles Auto Show, but the North American International Auto Show in Detroit was where GMC chose to use to debut its newest pickup truck, the 2015 Canyon. It's set to go on sale by the third quarter of this year, but we won't expect pricing until the end of summer. Our first chance to get behind the wheel won't be until early summer.

To read our First Look story, click here.



@Mark Williams. There is no video for me from your website. I had the same problem on the last article with a video. I guess it's this one?:

Looks pretty good aside from the overstated fenders and square wheelwells.

Looks better than the new 1/2 tons IMO...

Looks pretty good, although not sure I like have the seam between the bed and cab is angled.

It looks as good as all of you.

This truck is growing on me. Its the right size, the right price, looks good and has 4x4. I can fit it in a parking space at work, take it down the highway without needing to tow a gas station behind me. Hit Home Depot on the weekend for misc projects. I can take it down the narrow trail to my favorite fishing spot and tow my 3000 lb hard shell camper...all for around 35K (est). Whats not to like?

This truck makes the 2015 F150 look its bad

@johnny doe - the Canyon makes the 2014 Silverado look bad. This truck is the best looking truck in the GMC truck lineup.


A little history lesson.

It really looks like a Tacoma, just look at the cab and some other angles minus the square fenders!

I wasn't completely sold at first. After watching a few videos I'm really starting to like it... especially the All Terrain

I think these trucks will send the Ford engineers back to the drawing board just as fast as the new F-150 sent the GM engineers back to the drawing board.

The Canyon looks good from the side.

The front end is a disappointment.

Looking at the differences between the Canyon and Colorado I think the Colorado is much better looking. I would hope that Chev will improve their trim levels for the Colorado.

I think the Canyon and Colorado may just be the truck to shake up the mid size market in the US, especially the diesel.

The US will now have a refined midsize pickup on offer. These will take sales from midsize SUV buyers. Plus it might take some sales away from a few potential V6 full size trucks buyers.

We'll have to wait and see. Pricing will be important as I'm continually told on this site. But how much will the aluminium F-150 cost?

Like most full size customers, midsize customers are not pickup fans. They just want more utility than a SUV/CUV.

@Ron: Then you'd probably hate the Mitsubishi Triton.

Sorry about the delay here. Should be working now.

Hats off to GM for bringing this truck to market!

Hideous comes with a bed.

Awesome rig here GM trucks got it going on these days. Goodbye Ford moving to GM for the monster 6.2L!


Yeah, it looks like a Tacoma alright minus the hood, grille, front end, bumpers, fenders, tails and interior.

@Scott and expidition
I think the fenders are what give the Taco and Canyon a similar appearance. Someone made a comment about the it being similar to a Triton is way off the mark.


You can see how the US and global Colorado are more or less very similar from this side shot.


Here's a concept view of a new Holden Colorado, even with the US version this sure looks nicer. GM could have made a better looking midsizer.


I like this Canyon and I like the Colorado as well. It remains to be seen what the price of these trucks will be as it remains to be seen how much the new 2015 F-150 will cost. If the price difference is enough then this will help the Colorado/Canyon. Ford will have to pass enough of the costs of the aluminum bodies to make the F-150 profitable which could put it out of the reach of many. We will see.

@Jeff S - IIRC, Ford said that the aluminum F150 will not cost more but I a sure that they will do like GMC and raise prices.

@Lou BC--We will see what the price increase is on both the new F-150 and the Colorado/Canyon. Hopefully both will not have too large an increase. My other concern about the F-150's aluminum body is how much more will it cost to replace damaged body panels. It is very hard to straighten damaged aluminum. On the other hand many of the body panels on today's vehicles cannot be straightened and usually have to be replaced. The days of pulling dents out of a damaged body panels are rapidly disappearing as there are more composite body panels on vehicles.

Many of the large truck trailers used on semis that haul sand, gravel, and rocks are now made out of aluminum. I guess that is to reduce weight and possibly they do not rust like steel.

@Big Al--I like the sides of the Holden ute much better, but I could live with the new Colorado/Canyon. I actually like the looks of both the new Colorado and the new Canyon.

Ford recently lost some ground due to customer satisfaction issues. The new 150 will help turn that around IF it doesn't add to the problem.

The alloy body panels are a no brainer, they just were earlier getting to market with it. I was not a fan of the 3.5 turbo gas motor and the 3.7 six (which only offered incremental improvements in FE), but the new 2.7 is a radical move that can deliver astonishing highway mileage if it's properly configured.

Ford surely spent a lot of advertising and product-development money in recent years attempting to set themselves apart in the powertrain area, now they lifted the bar with weight reduction, as did GM's latest efforts with the midsize and the half ton.

papa jim--Ford has been very much an innovator in drive trains and the weight reduction will set them apart. The aluminum bodies could be huge success or a failure depending on quality issues and what the price of these trucks are. There is no doubt that in order to meet the new fuel standards weight reduction is critical along with more efficient drive trains and more aerodynamics. There is no one thing alone that will meet these new standards.

GM continues to use a T-Square for fender design.

@The Real Lou and Jeff S
Here's some interesting links. There are pro's and con's with aluminium, the same for steel. The steel industry is also trying to come up with aluminium alternatives.

Myself after working with aluminium structures most of my life have nothing against aluminium. I can do the job of steel, but it's different.

I'm waiting for mass produced 3D printed cars. Now that will the potential to save weight.

This article is from Reuters. It states that it will cost $2 per pound to reduce a vehicles weight using aluminium vs steel.

"If they have to go to aluminium they will, but they would love to have a steel solution," added Shaw, also chairman of automotive group of the World Steel Association.

Cutting one lb of car weight with advanced high strength steel costs about 50 cents while using aluminium costs four times as much.

"It is a very cost-effective way of reducing weight," said Armin Plath, VW's head of materials research and manufacturing."


This article from the NYC times suggests that using aluminium will give a weight saving of around 40% and using high tensile steel will give you 35%, but at virtually no cost.


@Big Al--Interesting article. If you are reusing existing aluminum then the cost of production and greenhouse effects would be much less. Also what about combining carbon fiber materials and lighter steel in body panels? I would think those would lighten vehicles and provide a cost savings over just using aluminum. Since you know more about this Al then what is your thought about this.

@Jeff S,
I think manufacturers will end up with aluminium road going vehicles.

Steel will still be used. Aluminium can't replace steel in certain applications, where high loads are exerted on small areas.

Slow moving vehicles will remain steel ie, earthmoving/mining, farming (even then aluminium will be used more).

The funny thing is aluminium has been used extensively in heavy transport for sometime using a similar philosophy to diesel. That is due to the rate of usage it is cheaper in the mid to longer term, ie, it will be cheaper than an equivalent steel constructed vehicle over the expected life cycle of the vehicle.

What I find odd is Ford is going to aluminium for the F-150 which is illogical considering it went to turbo gasoline engines. It went to gasoline because of the initial outlay was cheaper, even though Ford considered diesel the best option for a power plant. On average diesel will also return savings over a lifecycle, like an aluminium vehicle.

The aluminium F-150 will cost more for an initial outlay. I can't see it being other than that. Maybe with the profit margins on pickups currently Ford will absorb the cost and make less profit. That means less great deals on pickups in the US.

So, I assume the ultimate pickup will be an aluminium, diesel powered truck for a business owner that drives quite a few miles. Or a 3.2 diesel Transit.

If you want a pickup that you drive on weekends now and then and only drive several miles everyday a steel, gasoline truck would be better.

Now, this leaves the Ram. Which will be the better pickup. A diesel/steel Ram or a gasoline/aluminium F-150.

The 2.7 Eco Boost will be the most economical F-150 to have. But what can the 2.7 achieve? It will tow/carry a medium load, but chew up fuel.

The diesel Ram will tow a heavy load and use less fuel than the 2.7 under load.

Normal driving the 2.7 F-150 will use a tad more fuel than the diesel Ram.

I think a high tensile steel constructed diesel powered pickup should be the best (at the moment).

The Ford will be okay, but the Ram will outperform the 2.7 in most all environments. To equal the Ram for work a 3.5 Eco Boost is needed and then watch your fuel use go up when under load.

This leaves the all steel 2.8 diesel Colorado. It will outperform the diesel Ram and 2.7 F-150. But it's smaller.

A diesel Colorado would be the best pickup, due to FE advantage, towing, off roading. But it lacks the expected size for the dedicated full size buyer.

My order of preference for a US (future) pickup would be;
1. Diesel Colorado
2. Diesel Ram
3. Cummins Titan (need to more info)
4. 2.7 F-150
5. Tundra V8
6. Chev/GMC full size 1/2 ton V8
7. Tacoma
8. Frontier

As more and more information comes out my list could change.

I don't really consider your current midsizers much chop. They are very basic and feel so. That's why they are at the bottom of my list. The new diesel Colorado will be a breathe of fresh air.

@Jeff S
I put the Tundra at #5 because I think they look neat.

GM will be relying very much on the new Colorado/Canyon to make up for the deficient full size 1500s they have.

The Tacoma/Frontier I can't comment on the future of them, because no one has an idea of what they will be.

They could go to the top if they can produce a competitive vehicle.

@Jeff S
Here is some more interesting information regarding composites used in motor vehicles.


A fantastic Australian Government paper I found. Have a read. It's about a mineral called graphene. It appears without it the modern world doesn't exist. It's used on touch screens, composite carbon fibre, fast charge lithium ion batteries and on and on. Great piece, I'll research what graphene is and how much there is globally.


The comments to this entry are closed.