Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Pickups Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon Chevrolet Colorado 
1033 messages, Last post on Oct 17, 2006 at 8:06 PM
You are in the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
Replying to: ocmike3 (Jan 29, 2005 4:49 pm) quote- Pro-Tec was 50 lbs. (23 kg) lighter than a steel bed. It didn't corrode, scratch or dent. It wasn't slippery and didn't trap water like bedliners do. But it also is a technology unfamiliar to consumers, who either are happy with considerably less-expensive bedliners or who don't care about the appearance of their nicked-up steel cargo boxes.-end The "funny" Ridgeline has- 1. A tailgate that is load rated for minimum of 300 lbs. And it opens to the side or the standard fold down. 2. Power sliding rear window that will not buffet wind when open due to special design of the roof. Nice. 3. The trunk is waterproof, has a drainplug (I'm thinking taigating and beer!) and is big enough for 3 golf bags. 4. There is additional storage available under the rear seat when folded down or it may be folded up. 5. Large center console armrest/storage that slides forward or backward. Just a few of the funny features that I would like to see on the Colorado. Funny thing is, the Ridgeline is about the same size as an Avalance in most dimensions.
|
|
|
I was talking to a co-worker this afternoon, and he and I both agreed the "perfect" vehicle for us would be a Colorado-based Avalanche-type vehicle; something you could use to haul the family and/or bigger stuff from Home Depot, but that was smaller/easier to maneuver (Avalanche won't fit in my garage), and got better gas mileage than the full-size Avalanche. Anyone else agree (or know if there's anything like this in the pipeline at GM)? |
|
|
Replying to: moparbad (Jan 30, 2005 9:03 pm) I'm curious about the Sierra bed. My Sierra only had side panels that were composite, but the "bed" was steel. When did Chev/GMC make the entire bed composite?
|
|
|
Replying to: ocmike3 (Feb 01, 2005 8:06 pm) |
|
|
|
| Well guys I`ve had my extented cab 4x4 Colorado for nearly 4 months and I have to tell you that the more I drive it the more I like it. This is the best little truck I have ever had and besides getting 20 mpg and being easy to maneuver around in traffic and park it`s fun to drive. The only trouble I`ve had is to have the front end lined up because of tire wear. I have 6800 miles on it and looking forward to many more. Buy one and see for yourself. | |
|
Replying to: motorhead1 (Feb 04, 2005 7:00 pm) Did you compare the Sport Trac to the Colorado? I have also been looking at the new Dakota, but the gas mileage has me concerned. And I think the Toyota and Nissan will be out of my price range. The regular Ranger seems too ancient. Did you consider the 4 door over the extended cab? I could probably make do with either, although the 4 door would be a bit more practical for me. Was the 4x4 vs. the 4x2 a consideration? I had a 4x2 Nissan once, and would swear I would never have a 4x2 truck again. I would get stuck in parking lots. I guess with proper weights and snow tires, it wouldn't be a huge issue. I won't be going off road with this truck.
|
|
|
Replying to: irg (Feb 05, 2005 8:32 am) Another thread has batted this Q around a bit. One theory that I go along with is that a 4X2 with traction control, ABS, aggressive snow tires on all four wheels, 300 lbs of sandbags over the axle and a driver with common sense is the equal of a 4X4 in most situations you'll ever run into. Plus you save on initial cost, maintenance and mpg. Think of it economically: Which would you d'ruther have -- a) a new 4X4 pickup, or b) a new 4X2 pickup plus enough $$$ left in your pocket to finance an Alaskan cruise for the whole fam damily. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: irg (Feb 05, 2005 8:32 am) |
|
|
One way to look at it is resale, a 4x4 truck is usually worth at at least $1000 more even after say, many years, vs a 4x2. Now where I live, I wouldn't need it, but when I used to live up east would go snowboarding, the ability to really go in snow was nice. I inherited a Mazda b2000 little econo truck 4x1 (open diff) and I grew up driving in snow, and with some firewood in the rear and even using my non-snow radials I was able to go through about 4" or more depending on conditions. But getting to a buddy's cabin involved a gravel uphill road with a hard right turn then a uphill with the last bit steeper than the rest, and one storm I tried it about 3 times but ended up walking the last 300 yards as that was as far as she was going to go. Add chains and you can indeed do a lot but of course 4x4 is easier and you can also pull people out of ditches for some fun. yea, you get worse fuel milage, but everything's a tradeoff. DD
|
|
|
Replying to: irg (Feb 05, 2005 8:32 am) I'm also considering a 4-door Colorado vs. other things, and while I like the look of the Sport Trac, I think the "real truck" nature of the Colorado/Canyon will be more beneficial down the road (both in usefulness, as well as resale). Plus I think the Sport Trac is one of the lowest-rated (i.e. worst) vehicles in terms of roll-overs. (That's just from memory, so research it yourself and see what you find.) You might check with your insurance agent once you narrow down your options and see which is cheaper to insure - I'd have to think the Colorado/Canyon would win out on that front as well though. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Pickups Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon Chevrolet Colorado
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Chevrolet Colorado
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
