Agree with everything except the Front end looking like a Ranger.

Wouldn't manual mode be considered sport mode?

@Loco Sport mode? No.

Locking the auto in one gear is just that.

Sport mode is kind of like Tow/Haul because changes the entire programming of the tranny regardless of the gear it is in.

Thats a nice little truck. Maybe it will prove more reliable and better built than the s10.

Like the viewpoint expressed here and mostly agree about the shortcomings. For me it's a bummer that manual trans is the base-only option pretty much. Who makes decisions like that?

Truck owners love stick shift and clutch pedal. Something tells me that the major automakers have forgotten that.

As a result, I'm a base package shopper on this model until the six speed manual is available across the line. I think it will end up costing GM money in lost sales and lost revenues the form of guys like me who would have gone upmarket in the trim otherwise. Ditto for the six cylinder motor/stick combo.

How many others feel the same way?

Another Missed that you missed is no 4wd Auto on Colorado.

Really on #1 and #5?

Terrible engine choices. Come back with your 4.3L ecotec "truck motor" and it gets interesting.

The bed is poor excuse in vehicle design. Can't fit 48" materials flat between the wells, the "17 tie downs" are mostly a collection of stupid hooks you have to insert. What a joke. Copy Nissan's utilitrak system, it works great (much better than the idiotic system GM put in these trucks). Toyota and Ram both have a similar track system, did GM just decide they had to be different so they were going to do something that was not the same (but much stupider).

Lame excuses for "Misses", all of them.

I'll admit to not having driven one... yet, but such a 'low' final drive will hurt already 'moderate' fuel economy. If it's a six-speed tranny, low gear should be sufficient to get any load it's DESIGNED to carry/pull moving quite nicely.

No Sport mode? Who really cares? The thing's a truck, not a racecar.

Cosmetics, cosmetics. Again, who cares that it doesn't have the Chevy logo? Considering the same part can be used in both the Colo and the Canyon, it saves money.

Why do you need the rear quarter doors to open wider? Typically, you're just working front seat to back seat and that's a HUGE opening. And if the front door is open, you're certainly not worrying about how far the back door sticks out.

And the front end looks NOTHING like the Global Ranger; it looks like the Global Colorado.

I agree with the 3,73:1 gearing for the misses, the other misses are more nitpicking. Papa Jim has a good point about the manual.

"3.Why doesn't the V-6 engine cover have a Chevy logo on it?"

This makes the list as a "Top Miss"?

Roadwhale, quarter doors that fold against the bed are a big help. if you open your front door in a parking stall with a cart full of grocerys, their is no way to unload the cart with the door in the way assuming their is a car next to you, you get traped in between the doors in parking lots if the back door does not go back 180 degrees.

"...Copy Nissan's utilitrak system, it works great ..."

This. Say what you want about the Titan, but that Utilitrack system is the best tie-down system around, and it came out back in 2004. Its versatile and strong as hell. Nobody else comes close to matching it and GM's version is especially weak.

Every single manufacturer needs to copy the Utilitrack and offer it as an option.

About the manual transmission: I am also a fan of manual transmissions, but how well do they sell? That may be why they are just a base option. Doesn't the auto provide better mpg in the Colorado/canyon?

BIG miss:

Fuel Economy!!! At 17/24 mpg for the V6 4x4 with automatic transmission this is barely better than the 10 year old Tacoma. The V6 4x4 automatic transmission has a rating of 16/21, 1 mpg better city and 3 mpg better hwy. Not impressive, especially with the full size trucks getting these numbers or better.

Francis, fuel size trucks are using more technology at an added cost to get that. You want have a midsize truck get the same mileage as a mid size car or even a full size car. Aint going to happen with out added cost.

Papa Jim is right. Chevy will lose money on those people who want a stick. Lost profits there.

The first "miss" is legit but debatable, most users won't know or care, and the other five are trivial or absurd. No sport mode, are you kidding me? If you don't understand why that's silly you have no business driving a truck. The 90-degree doors are that way because GM dropped the 170-or180-whatever-degree doors years ago because it was an elaborate feature nobody cared about. I have them on my silverado and they are useless.

* i meant the others from those five.

I got several misses, although they may or may not matter to many customers shopping for a midsize pickup:

1. No sunroof option
2. No LTZ grade model to match the SLT GMC Canyon
3. Antenna on the roof may get in the way of objects on roof rack or bed rack. Antenna should be on/near the right front fender like all other trucks.

Andy,

What additional high cost technologies are required? Add cylinder de-activation and a 8+ speed transmission would be a big help for the Canyon & Colorado.

Cylinder de-activation is mostly programming. A greater amount of gears for the transmission would add some cost but not significantly especially if it's shared with other models where this V6 engine is used.

$40,000 for a fully loaded 80% of a full size pickup?

Papa Jim is right on the money with the manual transmissions. The V6 having basically the same fuel economy as the 4 cylinder really makes me want it, but it's not offered with stick. I'm still inerested in trying the 4 cyl/stick combo in these trucks, but I definitely would appreciate if more if the V6 was an option. Maybe on the diesel? From my experience, diesel manual trucks are fun to drive. Here's to hoping we get a choice.

The rear door still has to open 90° before it gets to 180°, unless it's a van-type slider.

Top misses, I'm sure I can think of more. Still need to test drive it:
1) No diesel out the door
2) No 8 or more speed auto out the door
3) No manual transmission option ... heck, Autos still have a premium on the sticker price. Flip it around and add a premium to the manual. Delete the premium for an Auto on the sticker as there is NO choice.
4) No option for a "bench" layout in the front. The Dakota had that in 1998-2004. Worked great in a pinch, not for long trips. Redesign the console area!
5) Put the auto selector level on the column ... see item 4 above. Maybe "copy the selector knob idea from Ram.
6) Wheel well covers are an option ... REALLY?!
7) No option for manual wheel locks (believe it or not, that saves fuel)

I think the interior choices, options and colors are extremely dull and disappointing for the Colorado. They do paint these frames though. I know that is a big complaint on the fullsizers. I think the sport models need step bars on the side. Nice looking truck but they didn't go all out. They're still trying to divvy up the goods between two truck lines and it shows. Attempting to justify it calling their buyers different just displays how out of touch with reality they really are.

They don't put the Bowtie on the engines because Chevrolet does not make engines any longer. This isn't the 20's-70's golden era. Chevrolet isn't even real any longer for that matter. Do you not know the company is GM/GMC and GM/GMC only? There is No Bowtie on RenCen! Especially after the restructuring in the late 70's/early 80's. The engine Should say GMC. They are General Motors Corporation engines!!! At least they Finally dumped the Chevrolet naming on the V8. It's no longer a Chevrolet smallblock but a GM/GMC smallblock. That's right, your Corvette's, Camaro's and Silverado's etc are NOT Chevrolet powered like the old days grandpa! They're GM/GMC Powered! And your Cadillacs are Not Cadillac powered like the old days either old timers. They're GM/GMC powered! Chevy is dead. And good riddance.

GMCTyler--welcome to the 21st century!

All of the bigs consolidated their engineering around common components back when I was a kid--a long time ago.

Doing so meant that Ford, Chrysler and GM could better utilize resources and economies of scale.

Downsides? None.

Two huge misses..

No all wheel drive - explains itself

Rear leaf springs - If they truly are targeting customers that have been using small crossovers, SUVs, and large sedans, then they should have went all the way to get the best ride possible. I know coils reduce payload, but it's a mid size truck. There should be a reduced payload vs a full size. I guess that makes too much sense. Also, AWD is available on most aforementioned crossovers, SUVs, and large sedans. Seems silly that if I want to make the jump to a truck I have to go backwards in drivetrain technology.

Most of the complaints are there for a reason, they need to leave some things out for mid life refresh and year to year changes, the diesel is coming and an 8 speed will be here in a few years.

The LTZ not being offered is a valid point and the pricing is kinda high, figure in a year or so we might be able to get half off what we could on fullsizer, best time to by is feb out my way when they pile on autoshow, gm card bumpups and other incentives.

Like poker, you dont show your hand, its a game, see how the new competition refreshes and go from there, they have many directions to go from here.

The comment regarding the look of the truck being similar to the Ranger as a down side is quite incorrect.

It would be like someone outside of the US stating the Silverado looks to similar to a F Series.

I see Rangers quite often and the Colorado is as similar to a Ranger as a Ram is to a Tundra.

As for the other short comings, well they aren't that short. I think overall the Colorado will provide many more positives than negatives.

These are not perfect trucks but they are very good and check most of the boxes for what I want. Overall these trucks are much better than I expected.

Miss:

- 1 engine choice: That totally depends on your body choice. If you want a crew cab 4x4, you only get 1x engine choice. What about those who want the better fuel economy and care less about the towing of a vehicle big enough to hold my family, but offers the utility of an open bed?

- Price: $30,500 for a 4 door, crew cab 4wd mid-size truck that seats 5 - OR - $32,500 for a extended cab, full size 4wd truck with the same rear leg room that seats 6. Someone is not thinking, and maybe they will attract the same kind of people?

Misses sounds more like nitpicking:

1) Lower gears? Meh like others have noted above, your average user wont know or care, from the first drive videos you guys posted it sounds like they have 0 problems moving around. Make a dedicated offroad package with bigger tires, then break out the 3.73's or heck go to 4.10's that would be a noticeable improvement.

2) Sport mode in an automatic transmission is pointless, and rarely makes a difference even in a "sports" car. Program the transmission right and it shouldnt need any special "modes". Which again from your videos it sounds like they did, you're fishing here.

3) who f*$@king cares

4) GM dumped the >90degree doors due to complexity, cost and the fact that nobody really cared.

5) From my experience the Global Ranger is one of the best looking trucks of the lot of global trucks, this isn't a problem for me (I actually think the Colorado looks even better), again you are stretching it here

You probably could have just said "we wish there were 3.73 gears offered in the Z71/All Terrain package" and been done with it... screw symetry.

Also the last time I was down in Latin America I drove an automatic Hilux, not nearly as refined as the GM 6speed but it was still really nice. Even a total control freak like me enjoyed it. I like manual transmissions because they give me something to do, but the auto's are getting better and better. Drove a new model Suburban recently and while in some windy mountain roads I put it in tow haul so that it would grade brake, and honestly it did a better job timing downshifts and holding gears than I ever did in over decade of driving a manual transmission. Same with my wife's Jetta (although that is a DSG so its a manual that the computer just drives for you).

@Chris (and people who keep using the same argument), the full size comparison is getting old. You state just the prices as if it is an apples to apples comparison.

$35,000 (34,990) for a V6 crew cab Z71(top trim model) with leather appointed seats and SatNav

-or-

$35,000 (34,650) for a V6 extended cab work truck (lowest model) with cloth seats, plastic floors, and crank windows.

OH YEAH!!! people will be cross shopping the hell out of these two trucks.

Get real!

^^meant to add, in my above comparison both are 4x4's^^

@devilsadvocate,
Like Big Al from Oz, I see the Ford Ranger all the time and it bears no resemblance to the U.S. Colorado.
The Styling of the U.S. Colorado would go well on the Global one.
Big mistake by GM not to include a diesel option, when they launched the new Colorado. Bit like launching with the 2.5 engine then announcing they would be introducing the 3.6 "Sometime in the future"

@devilsadvocate,

Just to put to it out there using the lowest buy-in "base" trim models (e.g. no leather):

2014 Nissan Titan King Cab 4x4 (same rear leg room as new crew cab colorado) is showing MSRP of $32,210. Seats 6, Max payload: 2,000 lbs. Max towing: 7,400 lbs (without the tow package)

2015 Chevy Colorado Crew Cab 4x4 is showing MSRP of $30.500. Seats 5, Max payload: 3,500 lbs (without tow package).

While i didn't line up all the points 1:1, the majority do. Comparing the "base" models is the lowest buy-in for a customer, and the difference is only ~$2,000. So less capabilities at almost the same price.

@Chris... wow just wow, I knew you were way off base but I at least assumed you were comparing a new model Chevy 1500 to a new model Colorado. You werent even comparing the same brand?

So its even worse. You are comparing a fresh from the design room floor vehicle with modern technology, vastly superior interior build quality, new materials etc etc etc with a truck that has basically not been redesigned or refreshed in over a decade.

Are you high? You would have to be to think that someone would walk into a dealership and think those two trucks are even remotely comparable, and the Colorado is still $2000 cheaper.

They are similar in only that they both have 4 driven wheels, a bed, and 4 doors. Oh and their price is similar. I don't know whether to laugh at you, or cry at the fact that you think people would actually be that stupid when buying a vehicle.

Hits
Two strong engine choices - WTF? no diesel. no wonder Ram is increasing production to 20%.

Best interior look in the segment - that is a freebee.........
The leatherette is ugly and lame (my opinion - but why not a Canyon grade interior?)

Fat front sway bar offers control and confidence
- Really - metallurgy is more important than size. (unless you are looking for a career in the adult entertainment industry)

Transmission shift software is impressive; love the manual mode
Agreed. (Then why whine about no sport mode??????)

The entire bed: rolled steel, soft-drop tailgate, 17 cargo ties, corner bumper step
Agreed.
Misses
No 3.73:1 gears for Z71 V-6 or four-cylinder
Is it really necessary?
Everyone (including the self proclaimed experts)forget about transmission ratio's.
This isn't your grandpa's 2 speed powerglide!

Really? No Sport mode for the transmission?
Hmmm. Really? Seriously?
Other than the Raptor - does any pickup have a sport mode?

Why doesn't the V-6 engine cover have a Chevy logo on it?
WTF? Reaching on that one.
Oh....... I thought that this was a Ranger when I bought it!

Extended cab doors open only 90 degrees
Okay.
Front end looks too much like the global Ford Ranger
Really?
You do know that the Ranger is not available in the USA?
I disagree.
It doesn't look like the Ranger BUT this look is becoming generic.

How about some legitimate beefs....

What about those who want to row their own?
How about a manual trans in the V6?

Some want AWD option - Canyon has it why not Colorado?

Colorado gets the "ugly stepsister" treatment in the interior department........ I like the Colorado looks better but the interior sucks......... WHY?

Diesel........ WTF?.......... where is it and why do we have to wait?

How about a mini-Raptor fighter or TRD Pro fighter?

Better MPG?

I would like a front bench seat option

Rear-hinged Rear-door wouldn't be expected to open much further as a Cab Chassis is offered; they'd hit a wider body.

My only negative is no 6 speed manual across all engines and with 4x4.

Stop being bitchy GM and offer a manual option with the v6 4x4.

Photo of the Global Ranger, big difference between the Cheverolet Colorado and it
http://photo.netcarshow.com/Ford-Ranger_Wildtrak_2012_photo_01.jpg

CNorris I totally agree with you regarding a bench front seat option.I am 6ft5 and have to spread my legs to get them under the steering wheel which results in the center console rubbing against them.On short trips I can tolerate it but any trip over 15 minutes would suck.Why GM couldn't use a Ram type hockey puck shifter and lose the center console on lower trim levels is beyond me.

Chevrolet really needs the Denali trim. In a bad way. They'd sell so many more if they had a nice trim. That high country brown is just tacky.

@Jim: "Roadwhale, quarter doors that fold against the bed are a big help. if you open your front door in a parking stall with a cart full of grocerys, their is no way to unload the cart with the door in the way assuming their is a car next to you, you get traped in between the doors in parking lots if the back door does not go back 180 degrees."

That's almost a legitimate argument, except that if you're in a parking stall that narrow, you won't get the door open that far in the first place. Easier to push your cart past the front door, open it enough to release the back door and close it again, then you've got all the room you need to load the back of the cab. And honestly, it's still far more useable than the fake 4-door look that GM's and Ram's full-sized trucks carry for their extended cab.

$40,000 for a fully loaded 80% of a full size pickup?

Posted by: nlp | Oct 1, 2014 12:04:41 PM

Don't you mean 90% full-size? Work out the measurements for yourself. It's also 90% full-sized pricing. Probably its biggest drawback.

Gm a huge miss. They call this a small truck on the chevy website. This thing is huge 10 inches longer then current Frontier!! Mpg horrible as well. Why build something so close in size to a full size. Get a 200 inch long crew cab together, even better innovate, make something like the Toyota A bat concept with a convertible bed. That way you can have a right size truck with the long bed of a full size!!!

I disagree with your "best in class" interior comment. The interior only seems good because it's new. In truth it's actually pretty bad. The Canyon got all the love while the Colorado got cheap, hard, old GM style, rental car plastics. Big mistake from GM and a big disappointment. Also Colorado owners got shafted because they can't get Auto 4WD mode, or Leather in the Z-71. Hopefully GM fixes these issues.

I have ordered a new 2015 Colorado extended cab in Laser Blue and just found out that color won't be released until the first quarter in 2015. I wasn't told this at the time I thought it was ordered.Ii was told to day it can't be ordered until mid January.
Any thing on the brochure should at least be able to orderd at any time and put you in line to get one of the first ones released.
I also wanted a v6 with manual transmission and see it isn't available.

I have a 2007 Toyota Tacoma I special ordered and has give me 0 problems. I wanted the Colorado to get black leather seats and the v6 with better MPG than my 4 cylinder manual Tacoma.