Topic: First Drive: 2015 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon

[Kris78]

While I hope these trucks do well, I am increasingly concerned that they won't.

GM needs to offer at least one other compelling emotional reason to buy this truck:
- 13.0L/100km is not that impressive. When Mr. Pritchard tested the Ram Outdoorsman with the V6 he averaged 12.9L/100km. So fuel economy isn't it.
- the prices aren't that great either, what with the huge discounts on Ram/Silverado/F-150.
- they kept a tried/tested live rear axle, which means driving dynamics won't be drastically better.
- the interior... Really? Unless it looks where better in the flesh, I think it looks awfully barren.

So of those, which to fix? I'd say the interior. If the interior could match up to CUVs costing around the same, then at least they could entice people who would consider a truck, but want the amenities of a CUV.

[pcsp]

Using the Canyon Build and price on the US website, 4X4 is $4-5K more.

These are just the lowest costs for extended cab, long box (before fees and options) on the builder:
              4x2          4x4              4x4 premium
Base    20,995       not avail
WT       22,650       27,760         $5,110
LT        26,045       30,095         $4,050
Z71     28,505        32,430         $3,925

However, these are the US builds, so I wouldn't be surprised if the 4x2 wasn't available on top trims in Canada

20% of the total vehicle price extra for a simple 4X4 option? Ouch! Bad move GM. Probably add another 20% for the diesel option. As we suspected, price could be the problem with these units. Great vehicles, great size, but many will ask "Why not get a full size for about the same coin?"

[Noto]

MSRP for a base F-150 XL is $19,999. This is obviously a ploy to advertise a sub $20k price. In reality, the same truck with 4x4 isn't $11,800 more because it has a bunch of incentives. There are very few incentives on the base truck because they've already discounted the truck via a low MSRP.

Depends on how you look at it - is the stripper model the price for which we go up, or is it an irrelevant pricing because nobody wants it?

In my opinion, once offered as a "base" model, then that is the price by which increases for trims/packages can be compared.  "I want to buy a car.  It starts at $x, but I want a moonroof.  To get the moonroof, I have to go up to trim B, which costs $y, making the effective rate of that moonroof $y-$x."

Sure, you get other options, but nobody walks into a dealership and says "I see this truck is $35,000" when it starts at $20k (stripper or otherwise).

Using the Canyon Build and price on the US website, 4X4 is $4-5K more.

These are just the lowest costs for extended cab, long box (before fees and options) on the builder:
              4x2          4x4              4x4 premium
Base    20,995       not avail
WT       22,650       27,760         $5,110
LT        26,045       30,095         $4,050
Z71     28,505        32,430         $3,925

However, these are the US builds, so I wouldn't be surprised if the 4x2 wasn't available on top trims in Canada

Thank you for looking that up for us - unlike someone else here, who wants to scold me for not being knowledgeable about truck pricing 

Last time I ever ask a question in good faith.

[nlm]

Handling vs Ridgeline
I don't think these will be better, close perhaps.
The Ridgeline is truly a "non truck" platform with it's unibody design and has suspension tweaked like an SUV.
I think that design will always give it an edge in terms of handling and comfort.

I think the Ridgeline is slightly more planted in it's drive vs. the Taco but part of this is the RL is wider.
My dad went for a quick around the town ride and didn't notice much difference between the two and wife feels just as safe and comfortable in the Taco.    I haven't had a chance to compare on gravel, hole filled roads but there's a slight noticable difference on train tracks.   (the RL being a little smoother).

I see you ended up with a Tacoma.  Congrats!  I almost pulled the trigger on one too, but went a size up.  Did you get the TRD suspension model?  I found that ridgeline was the best riding truck out there.  It really drove like a Pilot.  TRD equipped Tacoma was quite a bit more harsh and truck like, but I liked that.  It really is hard to explain as Tacoma does lack some basic things and has a few faults but Even now I keep thinking I want one for some reason.  Cant logically explain it.  Maybe it reminds me of simple vehicles I used to drive as a teen back in the day 

Agreed on how the RL and Taco feel driving-wise. Which is why I'm surprised this bold statment in the First Drive was made: "In terms of mechanical details and overall refinement the GMC and Chevy have it all over any other current mid-size model,"....without driving back-to-back with the RL it would be hard to believe that a solid axle would drive better than a IRS.

This thread is leading to only one conclusion that only autos.ca can pull-off: Mid-Size Truck COMPARO!  This segment is so small it shouldn't be hard to get the four players of Honda, GM, Toyota, Nissan to come to the party, right? Get the phones/keyboards fired up to request a demo from each with ample lead time to get the appropriate trims for the comparo.

[redman]

I've had enough of this thread. I'm going fishing

http://www.basspro.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CFPage?storeId=10151&catalogId=10051&langId=-1&pageID=5277&cm_ven=redirect&cm_cat=mktg&cm_pla=bps&cm_ite=BPSTundra&cm_sp=TytTndSep2014_RD

[OliverD]

20% of the total vehicle price extra for a simple 4X4 option? Ouch! Bad move GM. Probably add another 20% for the diesel option. As we suspected, price could be the problem with these units. Great vehicles, great size, but many will ask "Why not get a full size for about the same coin?"

That's par for the course in truck land though. To get 4WD in a Tacoma is just shy of $5k more.

[OliverD]

Depends on how you look at it - is the stripper model the price for which we go up, or is it an irrelevant pricing because nobody wants it?

In my opinion, once offered as a "base" model, then that is the price by which increases for trims/packages can be compared.  "I want to buy a car.  It starts at $x, but I want a moonroof.  To get the moonroof, I have to go up to trim B, which costs $y, making the effective rate of that moonroof $y-$x."

On the other hand, if a moonroof is a requirement then doesn't the price with the moonroof effectively become the "base" price? At that point you're likely comparing the car to its competitors instead of to the model that doesn't have a moonroof.

[Noto]

I don't see it that way.  I understand your position, but to me the base price is the lowest price for which I can buy the car, not the lowest price for which I can buy the car with the options I want.  I understand that to get options that I want, I have to pay for higher trims.  However, given the trend of bundling options into trim levels or packages, I rationalize the cost of the options that I want as a whole figure.

For example, this was our buying decision in 2010:
I can buy a Corolla for $15k, but I want ABS brakes.  The lowest trim level that offered ABS was the Corolla CE with Enhanced Convenience Package, which was about $4,000 more than the base CE.  While it also included air conditioning, etc. I was coming from a 1997 Chevy Cavalier that had A/C, but zapped so much engine power that I could never use it.  I didn't care if my 2010 Corolla had A/C, but I did need it to have ABS.  So, I saw that to get ABS, the car I needed was $4k more than the base model.  I was ok with the price, but I didn't say that the Corolla starts at $19k because of the options I need.  I said that the one I optioned is $19k, but started at $15k.

See this article - it explains what I mean:
http://driving.ca/toyota/corolla/reviews/road-test/road-test-2010-toyota-corolla-ce-2

In this case, it is not such a bad thing as it caters to those shopping on a budget — $15,160 before the optional transmission, freight, PDI and taxes. The downside is that to get two of the more popular features –air conditioning and power locks — requires another $1,905. If you want power windows, well, that adds $3,040.

At this point, the base car becomes somewhat more than entry-level. If there is a saving grace,it is that the enhanced convenience package that brings the air and power windows also includes one of the most important safety features offered today — a very good electronic traction/stability control system.

[OliverD]

I guess, but my point is that for many people who want a 4x4 truck (the majority of buyers in this country) the price of the 2WD model is irrelevant because they wouldn't consider buying it anyways.

[EV-Light]

I am not sure what will be GM's strategy to sell these...will they offer steep discounts just like everybody else offers in their full-size trucks? If not, price will be dangerously close to the bigger trucks that offer more power, more space, more and more.

I particularly like the GMC one, but I built one in the US website....and thought it was a hard pillow to swallow:

1) Canyon SLT equipped they way I like at $43,735.00
2) Sierra 1500 SLT similarly equipped, for $45,350.00

[Fobroader]

I guess, but my point is that for many people who want a 4x4 truck (the majority of buyers in this country) the price of the 2WD model is irrelevant because they wouldn't consider buying it anyways.

Exactly, I don't care if brand X truck starts at $14,995....I do not want a 2wd, regular cab, long box with no options in white.....This whole "starting at" business means nothing to me, it when you get into similarly equipped vehicles from other competitors that someones pricing can be competitive or out of line.

I am not sure what will be GM's strategy to sell these...will they offer steep discounts just like everybody else offers in their full-size trucks? If not, price will be dangerously close to the bigger trucks that offer more power, more space, more and more.

I particularly like the GMC one, but I built one in the US website....and thought it was a hard pillow to swallow:

1) Canyon SLT equipped they way I like at $43,735.00
2) Sierra 1500 SLT similarly equipped, for $45,350.00

Same problem as always.....why spend the same amount of money to have a smaller, less capable vehicle that burns pretty well the same amount of fuel?? Unless parking is at a premium or you park like Stevie Wonder....why bother with a smaller truck.

[OliverD]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

[blotter]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

that's exactly why I didn't bother driving the 1/2 tons.   I priced them, but even IF I could have one for the same price as my smaller Tacoma (with the same features)... I just didn't want that size.

[EV-Light]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

not sure if I agree with you...actually I think it's a little stupid to do that, why pay more for less?

in the case of Toyota, it's a little different...due to limited incentives their mid-size and full-size are quite far apart - the most expensive Tacoma will cost about $39k and a similarly equipped Tundra will hit $50k easy....

[Kris78]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

not sure if I agree with you...actually I think it's a little stupid to do that, why pay more for less?

in the case of Toyota, it's a little different...due to limited incentives their mid-size and full-size are quite far apart - the most expensive Tacoma will cost about $39k and a similarly equipped Tundra will hit $50k easy....

The other plus is that the Taco holds its value. Will the Colorado/Canyon twins?

[Fobroader]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

not sure if I agree with you...actually I think it's a little stupid to do that, why pay more for less?

in the case of Toyota, it's a little different...due to limited incentives their mid-size and full-size are quite far apart - the most expensive Tacoma will cost about $39k and a similarly equipped Tundra will hit $50k easy....

Its a matter of want I guess, some are willing to pay the same or more for a smaller truck.

[aquadorhj]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

not sure if I agree with you...actually I think it's a little stupid to do that,why pay more for less?

in the case of Toyota, it's a little different...due to limited incentives their mid-size and full-size are quite far apart - the most expensive Tacoma will cost about $39k and a similarly equipped Tundra will hit $50k easy....

uh..  there are many reasons.

1. big trucks simply do not FIT in a small garage.
2. smaller people may find it more comfortable to drive a truck that is the "right" size, than to buy a huge one and struggle to climb in every day.
3. why would anybody buy a Mini for $40k when Ford Taurus for similar money is bigger? different priorities.

i think it's a fantastic product.  if i could afford gas and car payment(and had a garage space) i would love to have this truck.  and choices are good.

[OliverD]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

not sure if I agree with you...actually I think it's a little stupid to do that, why pay more for less?

Who says they are paying more? The difference may be incremental but I don't think it's more.

A friend at work just picked up a used Tacoma. He simply didn't want a bigger truck so he didn't even consider them, despite the fact that he could have bought a comparable full size for the same price or less. Kind of proves my point, no?

[Fobroader]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

not sure if I agree with you...actually I think it's a little stupid to do that,why pay more for less?

in the case of Toyota, it's a little different...due to limited incentives their mid-size and full-size are quite far apart - the most expensive Tacoma will cost about $39k and a similarly equipped Tundra will hit $50k easy....

uh..  there are many reasons.

1. big trucks simply do not FIT in a small garage.
2. smaller people may find it more comfortable to drive a truck that is the "right" size, than to buy a huge one and struggle to climb in every day.
3. why would anybody buy a Mini for $40k when Ford Taurus for similar money is bigger? different priorities.

i think it's a fantastic product.  if i could afford gas and car payment(and had a garage space) i would love to have this truck.  and choices are good.

1 )I have a small garage, I can fit any 1/2 ton in it.
2 ) My wife is about 5'4"-5'5"....she can get in and out of her company Ford no problem
3 ) Trucks are all about capability, more is better 
 

[OliverD]

Some people just don't want a bigger truck. I think it's really as simple as that.

not sure if I agree with you...actually I think it's a little stupid to do that,why pay more for less?

in the case of Toyota, it's a little different...due to limited incentives their mid-size and full-size are quite far apart - the most expensive Tacoma will cost about $39k and a similarly equipped Tundra will hit $50k easy....

uh..  there are many reasons.

1. big trucks simply do not FIT in a small garage.
2. smaller people may find it more comfortable to drive a truck that is the "right" size, than to buy a huge one and struggle to climb in every day.
3. why would anybody buy a Mini for $40k when Ford Taurus for similar money is bigger? different priorities.

i think it's a fantastic product.  if i could afford gas and car payment(and had a garage space) i would love to have this truck.  and choices are good.

1 )I have a small garage, I can fit any 1/2 ton in it.
2 ) My wife is about 5'4"-5'5"....she can get in and out of her company Ford no problem
3 ) Trucks are all about capability, more is better 
 

If your garage can fit any half ton it's hardly small.

Also, some people don't NEED more capability, so why would they buy it?