Is The 2015 Chevy Colorado In Danger Of Becoming A Failed Experiment?

Don't see them selling more Colorado's then Tacoma's, have you seen the sales figures on pickuptrucks.com? The Tacoma sells twice the amount of the Colorado, heck add up Canyon and Colorado sales and Tacoma still beats it.

 

^^ I have seen that, its true. Here is the link. Ridgeline is only at 350!
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2015/03/best-selling-pickup-trucks-february-2015.html

But according to this the Colorado's are flying of the lot.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2015/03/februarys-fastest-and-slowest-selling-pickups.html

 

Look at that...
Ram sold more than both the offerings from Toyota....

 

That's because there is no 2015 Ridgeline so those are all leftover 2014s.

I've seen Colorados and Canyons on lots, but only one on the road so far.

 

2 day's ago I passed by a local U-haul rental, they had a brand new canyon work truck sitting out front of the store.

This morning I saw this post while lurking the colly forums.

http://www.355nation.net/forum/chas...rado-adds-box-delete-seat-delete-options.html

I have a feeling production will ramp up soon on the twins. maybe more so on the 2016 MY.

With that being said, I don't think the twins target audience are the Hardcore wheeling types found here on TW. They are going after first time truck buyers (99% suburbanites which will never leave a paved road) and fleet sales.

 

2200 lbs rated payload for a commercial 1/4 ton truck is extremely impressive. I hope the powertrain can handle it long term though. I can see that version selling extremely well. It will bite hard into F150 commercial sales, might even inspire Toyota to offer a similar version of the 2016 Tacoma or Ford to bring the Ranger to NA finally.

 

Not that I can afford to buy one, but if I was to (and I would like to) do so, I would be waiting for the diesel option that is supposed to be coming out next year.

As far as "off-roaders" it is in the same boat as a tacoma for size and suspension setup. The aftermarket is working hard to get some real performance suspension options put together for these new trucks. We plan to deviate a little from our mainly Toyota niche to include the new Colorado/Canyon as soon as we can start getting our hands on parts. Only issue I see is the initial sticker price. They are spendy. But if enough get sold, they have the ability with this new design, and drivetrain to have strong aftermarket support as the years go by.

 

Yep they are going to pick up a part of the market that Toyota has never looked at.
I see a lot of these trucks beinv out there with a alloy or glass back end used for shippers or work trucks for lawn care and spray tanks.

One clear thing they have the rear spring design down and it works.
It does not have the problems with weak springs like on the taco.

 

My brother's company is buying thousands of Colorados to replace their fleet of "well used" Rangers and Escapes.

 

I wouldn't mind a wee bit larger Tacoma. I was hoping they would make it like the Gen I Tundra which isn't all that big. Here's a good site for detailed specs/dimensions of the Gen I Tundra vs the Gen2 Tacoma.

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2005...d_cab_pickup/982/specifications/interior.html
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/2007...d_cab_pickup/316/specifications/interior.html

They're actually quite similar and IMO if Toyota would have pulled out the Gen I Tundra blueprints and made the Gen 3 like it they would have hit it out of the park.

 

Yep that was the only way Toyota would keep me looking.
Build the taco a little bigger with a larger fuel tank and better springs.

Or build a full size that is true full size with a 4 door that has a bigger bed and not the 5.5' bed.
The Tundra needs a longer bed abd better use of storage inside the cab along with better MPG.

 

Nothing is clear yet. If the truck rides on the stops with 2000 lbs on it then the sales won't be good. I'm hopeful they got it right and simply put the Silverado leaf pack on the rear axle but if they didn't I wouldn't count on that weight rating to order a whole fleet of them if I was a large operation.

So you mean Toyota should build an F150 or Silverado?

 

Drums have too many issues compared to discs. Drums are an outdated technology that a newer generation truck should be rid of. Too many parts. Springs, boots, starwheel, the fact that they need to be adjusted as they wear either by the starwheel or giving them a good workout in reverse.

And even doing the reverse gear self-adjustment workout you don't know for sure if they're adjusted properly unless you lift the rear wheels off the ground and test them by hand.

If the rear discs have the parking brake incorporated into them it's a no-brainer to have rear discs on the latest generation Tacoma.

Rear drums you can't use the parking brake in below freezing weather because the shoes will freeze solid to the drums.

 

Back to brakes.....
.
would really like to see some real world testing with loaded taco vs loaded chevy when the taco comes out.
the chevy is around 8' less on 6o to 0 mph would like to see that with 500 and 750 lb load and see if they stay in the same range % difference.

 

I wouldn't mind a little bit wider truck if it meant a 26.5 gallon gas tank like the Gen I Tundra. Gen I Tundra is about 4 inches wider than the Gen 2 Tacoma, two inches wider on each side with fender flares. Not a big deal for offroading but somehow Toyota got a 26.5 gallon gas tank on the Gen I Tundra and that is a big deal.

Toyota somehow got 49 inches between the wheelwells in the bed also on the Gen I Tundra, that's a big deal also. Toyota got 10.5 inches of ground clearance on the Gen I Tundra vs 9.4 inches ground clearance on the Tacoma.

I'm having a hard time seeing how Toyota could not match a 15 year old blueprint for the Gen 3 Tacoma. Kind of pathetic actually, they could have hit it out of the park, outclassed anything the competitors put out for the next ten years simply by using a 15 year old blueprint with some incremental technology tweaks.

 

I use my rear parking brake all the time and I live in Canada. Neither my Tacoma nor my Ranger with rear drums had the pads freeze the drum, ever. I only had this problem once and it was with my F150 with drum in disc rear brakes....

Keep mid sized trucks, well, mid sized. There's no need for a bigger and likely more expensive Tacoma. That's why the full sized class exists.

 

Likely the same result. You forget that the Colorado is still heavier than the Tacoma without any load. That difference will be the same even if both trucks have 1000 lbs in the box.

IF you stopped each truck 7-8 times in quick 300 foot pedal to the floor than brake to the floor runs, you might see some difference as those rear drums heat up. Then again if you drive like that you should likely not be driving, let alone with any load.

 

I think they will do fine, especially Colorado diesel may be next most popular offroad choice.

 

I'd still love to see the Ranger come back and Ford throw the 2.7 L Ecoboost in that truck. No diesel emissions crap required and all the powah you could ever need.

I hope the Colorado has lots of Bilistein 5100 and OME like suspension options for lifts. While King, Fox, Icon, etc lifts are the bread and butter of hardcore offroaders there are a lot of us that like having the mid priced upgrades available. Those are the kits that sell trucks with lifts to newbies who want to start exploring and guys on a family budget, not the $2K-6K do anything mid travel setups that sell trucks to people that have had 4x4's their entire life and eat, sleep, and breath 4x4.

 

A lot of it has to do with the weather.
Never had a problem in Canada or the Dakotas but in weather like we have here it sucks and happens.
Was 75 yesterday.
Got 1" of rain and now at 32 and freezing rain due to be 22 in the AM.
Stuff will ice up in that crap when it does not in the colder drier areas.