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

I don't disagree that Toyota currently makes a better vehicle than GM does, in most regards. But to plug your ears and disregard any new evidence is just fanboyism.

 

After reading a couple pages of this thread, I realize fanboys never fail to crack me up. When Toyota outsells the GM Twins, it's because the are superior. When the F150 outsells any Toyota, it's because it's mass produced which means more rebates. I'm also a member of F150forums.com and they are the same way. Everything is twisted to suit the argument at hand.

Face it guys; objectively, the Twins are superior. Better/more engine options, more efficient, more capable, etc. I don't care for the looks, but that's subjective. The reliability may not be as good, but that hasn't been proven yet. And it's okay. It doesn't make the Tacoma less good. Just another option for buyers, which is a good thing. Maybe the competition will make Toyota step it up in a couple of areas.

 

I've always believed that competition is a good thing. Look at IOS and Android phones. They continue to try and out perform each other and in the end the consumer wins. They are both amazing phone systems, but I wonder how good one would be if the other didn't exist.

 

My father-in-law is a "GM Guy"...his last Tahoe he ran up to 250K miles before trading it on a Silverado. Saidd other than general maintenance and brakes it never needed anything...and he drives 30K miles a year.

Think it is all relative, some have good experiences, others have bad...and others make mountains out of molehills.

The fanboi-ism no matter the brand gets pretty old....I dunno fellas, if it has tits or wheels it will eventually give ya trouble!

I wouldn't even worry about buying a brand new Colorado Diesel...why wait 5 years to see if it is any good? If it is good...no problem, if it is bad the warranty will cover it...again...no problem. Believe the only mistake GM is making, is not having it on the dealer floors...like now!

 

Just because I wouldn't buy one doesn't mean I think it's a disaster or something. I'll remind you that I have several brands in my driveway. I know several guys who like their GMs and more power to them. For me though to go GM the truck would have to wow me, which the Colorado didn't on the test drive. Neither did the 2016 Tacoma to be honest but if I had to get a new truck I'd buy one. I'm waiting to see the new Ranger and, hopefully if they bring it, the new Frontier to see if someone can give me a truck that is worth upgrading to.

 

Btw I wouldn't trust any new Diesels over here. Not because of GM or the EPA, but because the new emissions systems have a way of ruining good engines. I don't want to have a rental more than the vehicle I bought. Waiting isn't a problem when you already have a good truck.

 

Whatever you do, don't trash a Tundra. I said they were not competitive with any of the big 3, TW slowed my page views to a crawl.
Works great when I'm not logged in, though.

 

I was just thinking outloud more or less.

Yeah, nothing really blows my socks off either...though I don't really think you can go wrong with anything out there.

 

Tundra sales figure pretty much proves it can't compete with the Big 3. I don't think it is a horrible truck.. it is just an "ok" truck...though you really never hear guys bitch about them breaking down, only the dismal fuel economy.

I have thought of getting one to haul a camper, but if I am going to get crappy fuel consumption...I want at least a 3/4 ton.

 

Like the 2gen Taco, it's an old truck and the mechanics have been around forever thought the cabin and styling change. It lacks so many features of the big three that even though it's more reliable, it just can't compete. The poor mileage just makes it worse. When corps.buy fleet trucks, a few mPG is a big deal.

 

Read the 40K long term review of the brand new 14 Corvette in this months Car and Driver. They lunched an engine at 6000 miles without running hard,Trouble with the touch screen,Manual trans was popping out of gear,Windshield cracked,Bad wheel bearing ,Needed new tires at 13K. I already knew this when it happened from my time in Corvette Forum.....and I actually drove up to Criswell's and Kerbecks looking to buy one with my PenFed GM Supplier pricing.

.So Car and Driver must have got the "bad one" Actually a few owners in the Corvette forums had grenaded engines in their 14s as well. GM's Halo car was a piece of junk for $70,000..

There's your "new evidence"....I did not buy one because when I saw them up close, they looked like they were designed by Marvel for a Transformers movie. Too much "look at me" not enough quality. The paint is horribly orange peeled.

I followed them on Corvette Forum for awhile and decided I don't want a $65,000 " look at me" car that may or may not be issue prone with a bad paint job. Plus GM service here was terrible. Took them 45 minutes and three guys to tell me my TPMS sensors were not working because they were not installed in the wheels!! Sold my 08 C6 and Bought an MX 5 instead and never looked back.

I am admittedly a "fanboy" of Toyota and Honda cars. Those Automakers earned my respect and admiration from experience. GM not so much.
I did test drive a Canyon while waiting for my Tacoma.......Could not see buying it and dealing with local warranty service.

 

Honestly it would be very hard for me to leave Toyota, since all of mine have been stellar, wish they made a 3/4 ton to tell you the truth. I think I can make a Tundra work with a Four Wheel Camper, payload is cutting it close, a 3/4 ton would be so much better though.

Have buddy who owns a electrical contracting company...his fleet trucks are Fords, his personal ride is a Tundra, said the Tundra is so much better built.

 

I don't doubt it. But you did say it. His fleet trucks are Fords. So, the number of Fords he bought outnumbered the number of Tundra he bought x to 1. That's why they sell more over all. Ford and Chevy offer so more choices for motors and levels and options. It's not quality. Never said it was.

 

Everyone is guided by by life experience and what they hear from others they respect. I had a 911 Porsche and a couple of Boxters over the years that were reliable and durable. A friend of mine had a Boxter with the intermediate shaft bearing failure. Porsche left him high and dry and due to his experience, left me wondering whether I would ever buy another.

All OEM's have problems at one time or another, whether it's Toyota with piston slap, or BMW with porous aluminum blocks, or Vette's with cratered engines, or Fords with Ecoboost problems.

It's how they deal with the problems that matter. There is no manufacturer with any perfect record. That's why I will remain open to change and will not become a fan boy to any of them.

 

Tacobella did. Pretty much sums up everything doesn't it.....

 

Did anybody realized that Colorado front suspension has plenty of room for snow chains? Not like our trucks with spindle almost touching the side wall of the tire. I wonder if somebody can make suspension for Tacoma like on Colorado. It would be nice to have couple inches of extra space with out spending on new rims.

 

What I am hearing here, is a 1ton axle swapped, SASed, Tundra. annnnnnnd, go.

 

With it's significantly less functional ground clearance, you can bet the Colorado was designed that way by mistake. Besides, it is recomended by Toyota that you put chains only in the rear. For a number of reasons. the biggest is, it's safer.

 

Never seen plastic to be significantly reducing functional ground clearance. Usually brakes of on first snow bank or rock.
The rest of the truck frame is actually much better tacked in than even my truck.
I am sure Toyota said not to use chains on the front, none of them fit in there.

But I would like to be able to not only power up but steer too in the snow/ice
I am not saying Colorado is better, just surprised that somebody in there who designed truck think about this. Clearance thing is either air spoiler or rear diff, but underside its pretty flat too.

 

Actually...I have kicked around the idea...just easier to buy a F350, the 6.2 (gas) puts out roughly the same numbers as the Tundy.

Though, this does make me wonder what the Tundra is actually capable of, and not what is on paper.

http://www.fourwheeler.com/how-to/transmission-drivetrain/2007-toyota-tundra-rear-axle/