Much better than Toyota's recent efforts! I thought the Silverado was a let down, but the Colorado/Canyon twins are pretty sweet.

Not bad looking trucks at all.

FIAT is trying hard to change all that with GM.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/fiat-chrysler-ceo-asks-investors-for-help-persuading-gm-to-merge-wsj/ar-BBkQKty?ocid=iehp

The Colorado has a much nicer look than the Canyon.

The refinement of these vehicles is what makes them competitive with many other vehicles, including full size pickups to some degree. The author failed to recognise this fact.

They will tow and carry pretty much what most would ever want from a full size 1/2 ton. They will carry the family in comfort and are far easier to use in an urban environment.

Hopefully the next refurbished Taco will be more refined.

These pickups are no longer cheap and nasty vehicles. Like cars I do believe not everyone wants a full size. The Canyon at least offers a very good and competitively viable alternative.

And, it's better on fuel, wait for the diesel, it will only get better.

I see both versions all over. only thing is that the drivers all over 70 years old. i think it has more to do with price point. not everyone is a savvy truck buyer that can get 8-10k off msrp on a 1500.

GM did the twins right this time offering a traditional upscale look in the Canyon and a sportier modern look in the Colorado. The looks satisfy the majority between the two.

Still a fake nose that's murder on fuel economy. A lower, rounder, "softer" shape could up the highway mileage 20% or more.

I hope GM doesn't merge with Fiat, that would ruin Ram for sure

Nice truck BUT there isn't enough back seat room for teenagers let alone adults. I had my 13 yr old son with me when we looked at a Colorado. His knees were hitting the front seat while in the back.
We then looked at a 2015 Tacoma. The interior was horrible compared to the Colorado but the back seat was more comfortable.

This is a good truck for a young family or a new family. One your kids are getting taller than 5'8" it doesn't have the space or comfort.

@Lou_BC,
A lot of people seem to get by with a Camry, Altima, etc or even smaller.

Your kids must be over 6' 6". Big kids.

I do agree that a full size is bigger, if that is what you are insinuating.

But, go eat a McDonalds, you can supersize your meal for your 6' 6" kids, it must be better.

Big Al from Oz - my brother is 6'2" and my son's grandfather is 6'4". My son most likely will hit those numbers.

Yes people get by with Camry's etc. The last thing I want to do is sound like is DiM but why should you? I am not loyal to size of truck or brand.

I'd buy one IF if found full size to be too much of a hindrance. I am eager to see what the next gen Tacoma is like. I was surprised that the back seat was a better fit for my son.

Another point is the fact that these "small" trucks basically can fit 4 adults or 4 big kids. I've packed 4-5 kids in my F150 multiple times. I've volunteered to haul part of my son's Scout Troop out into the bush. 4 kids and gear are an easy fit in my truck... 5 in a pinch. This is 3 easy fit and 4 if you hate the 3 in the back and want to make them miserable for an hour at a time.

I've traveled with whiny kids. In some cases bigger is truly better. This truck as I have pointed out is suited well for a young or new family. Most of the Colorado/Canyon's I've seen are owned by 20's somethings and empty nesters.

Interestingly enough, the saleman I talked to said that the Colorado I looked at was the only one to sit on the lot for more than 2 weeks other than a few plain jane trucks they brought in. He said they only got 16 of them so far this year.

A Camry deffinatly has more backseat room the the Midsize trucks from anyone. I would say the interior room on a midsize is comparable to a small car like a Corolla or Focus.

Still a fake nose that's murder on fuel economy. A lower, rounder, "softer" shape could up the highway mileage 20% or more.
Posted by: Road Whale |
/QUOTE

So true,,should be more aerodynamic and sit bit lower to the ground for better handling in corners,,two wheel drive doesn't need to be so high...
I liked the previous CC models way more

If you put the front seats up a little the passengers in the back have enough leg room to where their knees do not hit the backs of the front seats. Usually when I carry passengers in the back I put the front seats up whether it be in the Isuzu, CRV, or even in my prior Taurus which had lots of leg room. The only vehicle I never had to do that was in my mother's 72 Cadillac Sedan Deville which with bench seats could hold up to 8 people because it was wider than most cars. Even the Camry or Accord would be cramped with the front seats all the way back. You just have to make allowances for most vehicles even many trucks.

I find single cab trucks bigger in front seat room then a crew cab. They have larger front doors which makes it easier to get in and out and with the seat all the way back the puller is not in your side vosion

@Jeff S.

Ah yes. The '72 Cadillac Sedan Deville's had a lot of room. I remember having my mom, dad, uncle, grandmother and my grandfather plus me (I was 14) in one during the summer of '81. It was a pillarless hardtop sedan so once you rolled down the windows, it felt very airy inside.

I loved those '71-'76 fullsized GM cars. They are some of my favorite cars of all time. They sure don't make them like that anymore and it's a shame.

@roadwhale

Which warm, dark and funky place did you pull that 20 percent highway FE figure out of? You give zero information to support your ridiculous claim.

@the other mike--My mother's 72 DeVille was metallic aqua with matching interior and a full white vinyl top (Top was a bear to keep clean). I liked the leg room in it and the ride was smooth. It had a 472 cubic inch V-8 which was relatively easy to work on and would run forever. I use to tune it up and change the oil. It was a gas hog with 8 mpgs but it was the most comfortable room car that I have ever driven and ridden in. My mother replaced it with an 84 Fifth Avenue which was nice but not nearly the interior and trunk room. I have not found a vehicle made today that is as roomy as that Cadillac. True the full size crew cab pickups have more room than most vehicles made today but not as much leg room as that 72 Cadillac. Today's vehicles are overall better with better fuel economy but there is something to be said about the land yachts of the past especially when traveling on the interstate on long trips.

@JeffS - I view adjustable seats, pedals and steering wheels from a point of driver control. I set everything up not just for my comfort but for optimum control. I don't adjust my seats to keep those in the back happy.

I keep that in mind when buying any new vehicle and if it does not literally "fit" my family then I don't buy it. We bailed on small SUV's primarily due to space and went with a mini-van. At the time I purchased my truck I was taking into consideration that one day my kids will be tall as well as the fact that I occasionally need to be able to carry a bunch of their friends. I also had 2 big Labrador retrievers at the time of purchase. Towing and hauling were also considerations. The Tacoma could not haul or tow what I wanted. The current Colorado can haul and tow what I want but it is too small in the cab.

The Colorado is definitely on my radar as my next truck but that depends on when I will need to replace my current one. An extended cab 4x2 might be a good first vehicle for my sons. I looked at entry level vehicles and most are in the 20-24k range. A base model Colorado or even Jeep Wrangler fits that price range.

@Lou BC--Agree, I wasn't saying to buy a vehicle without considering the comfort of the driver. I very seldom carry passengers and when I do I move the front seat up to give those in back more room. I was 6'1" but I am now 6' because the disks in my back have degenerated and compressed, something I would not wish upon anyone but I am lucky that I have had a good back for most of my life. My father had degenerative back when he was young and got a back operation after my younger sister was born. I find most vehicles today have less head and legroom.

I have not found a vehicle made today that is as roomy as that Cadillac.

@Jeff S

Check out the Chevy Suburban. Very roomy. Ditto the Honda Odyssey. Ford Expedition also

@papa jim--Suburban is roomy but I would still have to say the 72 Cadillac has even more legroom. If you want a vehicle approaching the interior comfort of the big cars of the 70's it would be a full size SUV or a full size truck. I am ok with a midsize or compact vehicle but if I was real tall then yes I would want something bigger.

Beautiful, powerful!
Wonderful, affordable midsize truck.

I will buy either GM Canyon or Chevrolet Colorado. My only problem for not buying it at this time or near future is my Dodge Dakota Magnum V8 running so well, so reliable. The unwanted MPG of 16-17 average but it pays off in operating costs (low insurance, low maintenance, no loan payments). My two previous vehicle were 1992 Ford Ranger cologne engine 2.8, 1998 with falcon engine 3.0. There were no complaints about those.

Sticking with DURABILITY AND TOUGHNESS!!!! TACOMA!!!!!

GM wants nothing to do with Fiat because they would be taking 10 steps backwards having the Ram pickup. I just read that Toyota wants nothing to do with Fiat either. If someone does not rescue Fiat you can kiss the inferior Ram goodbye.

@greg--Can you blame GM for not wanting to have anything to do with Fiat. "Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me." GM has already been burned once by Fiat.

I think Ram and Jeep would probably be bought out by a Chinese Corporation like Geeley. The rest of Fiat Chrysler holds little else of value.