I'm tired of all these reviews showing Colorado/Canyon superior

Don't get me wrong, they are bad ass. Love that and the Nissan 300ZX Twin Turbo. Fell in love with them as a kid. Neighbor across the street has the 300zx, still looks awesome even 20+ yrs later.

 

And overpriced

 

EW. Ridgelines are fugly as hell man, delete that comment ASAP.

 

Tread carefully Mike, last time someone attacked a Ridgeline they got called a fanboy, lmfao

 

It's the less than competitive 4cyl that in some trims makes less MPG. It's the same frame. The chassis is the same (note the hood that sweeps down to meet the windshield frame). The infamous rear drum brakes.
Your point was correct: at the time Toyota developed third gen, they hadn't seen the twins and did not feel they had to do much.

 

FIFY

 

Whatever floats your boat. What settles it is that I own one, 'nuff said. As you were.

 

Yeah, it's cool. It just sucks that in order to make that work they had to move the spare to an odd place and put the fuel tank right underneath the rear passenger seat.

 

GMC, the Gay Mans Chevy.

 

Every review outside of TW says that the Colorado/Canyon's interior is nicer. Have you looked at a Canyon SLT with Coco/Dune leather? Its looks as nice as my wife's BMW.

 

Everybody I know personally that has sat inside of both a Colorado and a 3rd Gen Tacoma has said the Chevy felt cheap and liked the Tacoma better. Small sample size, but unanimous in opinion.

 

Yeah, the guys who were expecting 300hp and 350 ft-lb of torque with 30 mpg city were delusional from the start. With CAFE standards where they are going, everybody is just going to have to get used to the idea that they aren't going to get everything in one package. Want a truck with a ton of torque to haul stuff? Then get used to the idea of lower MPG. Want a truck with good power AND good MPG, expect a transmission with 6 or more gears, power higher in the rpm range, and more downshifts. They can stand around and wish for magic engines all they want, but they don't exist. Toyota isn't going to risk their class leading truck's reputation for reliability on an completely unproven engine concept...they will try it out as an option in another vehicle first, then put it in the Tacoma after they prove it will hold up.

 

American car makers tend to make nicer looking interiors than Foreign car makers. (Obviously luxury brands NOT included in this, BMW and Volvo make beautiful interiors) The tacoma is no exception to this. I haven't seen a new Colorado or new Taco, but judging from the previous generations of both trucks I'm sure the Colorado has a nicer interior.

 

I don't think so and I own one. At least for a couple more days. (If my dealer can trade for a 4 popper) I think he is finding that hard to do. Nobody wants to let them go.

 

How about posting a pic of your interior?

 

Back in September before purchasing our Tacoma we looked at every truck available over the course of a couple weeks. My first preference when we started was to look at the Colorado. The first thing I thought of when sitting in the front seat was how ugly the dash configuration was and there was no way I'd feel happy spending $30k+ on a truck and not be happy with the cabin comforts. It was ugly enough for me to pass on the test drive because I wouldn't be happy either way. I think it was those oversized vertical vents that killed it for me. Looks like something out of a Packard. The magazine reviewers can say all they want, but what really matters is the actual consumer and this consumer ended up at the Toyota dealership.

 

Back in 94 the high performance Mustang Cobra brought a 16 valve 240 hp 5.0L to the table. That was the "powerful" motor, because there was also a 215 hp V8 and a 145 HP 3.8L V6. Those jokes sold much better than the comparable Supra's. Doesn't mean they were better cars in any way. That was my point, sales numbers aren't everything.

As far as the vehicle being "overrated", that's up to personal interpretation. I, for one, am happy that I will sell mine for 10-15k more than I bought it 8 years ago. Let it be overrated then.

 

The Tacoma is to the Colorado as the Tundra is to the Sierra. The differences are, the midsize truck field lends itself more to personal and not commercial use where many owners identify them selves as smart buyers of a more conservative truck built more toward individual recreation use and reliability then massive hauling ability in style.

The Colorado will never outsell the Taco because of the market they find themselves in. It will remain that way, regardless of how many awards it wins.

When CR looks at these midsize trucks, they are truthful about the Tacoma and have alays been. Each catagory it competes, it fell behind the larger trucks and now will probably the Colorado.

But, Consumer Reports will continue to say...the Taco is a reliable play and small work truck. They will then continue posting it's reliability numbers which for most buyers of mid size trucks, becomes exactly what they are looking for.

Let the reliability of the twins come close to matching the Taco or let the Taco numbers slip much and I feel you start seeing a bigger movement in sales numbers toward the twins. Until then, the Colorado competes more with the Sierra then the Taco.

 

Am I the only one that thinks the Colorado looks like a Hilux

 

I felt the same way. Loved the seats. I thought the exterior of the off road model looked pretty good, but resale fears kept me away. I trade too often.