Ask the Car People.SM


GMC Canyon - READ ONLY

199 messages,  Last post on Oct 17, 2006 at 9:06 PM

You are in the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon Forum.

What is this discussion about? GMC Canyon, Truck

Messages Page 2 of 21

#8 of 199 Engines for Canyon by orwoody

Dec 25, 2002 (10:00 pm)

Here is what the GM website has on new vortec I-4 and I-5 in line engines. They plan to offer them in the new Canyon.

http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpowertrain/vortecinline/index.htm
"New Vortec 3500 I-5 and 2800 I-4 Engines to Provide the Power of a V6 and the Efficiency of an I-4

Leveraging the technology of its highly successful Vortec 4200 inline six-cylinder engine, GM has created two additional inline engines with excellent driveability features for mid-size pickup customers: the Vortec 3500 inline five-cylinder and Vortec 2800 inline four-cylinder engines. Both engines will be available in the 2004 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon and will provide the power of a V6 and the efficiency of an I-4."
 
and here is another website with more tech info.
http://www.pickuptruck.com/html/news/I4I5.html

#9 of 199 Don't forget about the truck itself, the GMC Isuzu D-Max by thecargonzo

Dec 26, 2002 (9:36 am)

With all this talk about the 2.8 and 3.5 Vortec's, let's not forget the trucks themselves.
Here is a link to the Isuzu D-max:

http://www.isuzu-tis.com

(This ia a Thai site. Down on the bottom there is link to the English version)

As a GM supplier posted on the Colarado board, the Canyon/Colorado were developed by Isuzu. Isuzu is making their trucks in Thailand, the Chevy/GMC will be made in Shreveport at a new assembly facility adjacent to the old S-10/Sonoma plant. As I said on th Colorado board, a few things stand out to me:

- D-MAX's listed dimensions are similiar if not smaller than the Sonoma/S-10. All the scuttlebutt out of Detroit had these vehicles being larger, comparable to today's Dakota (which, paradoxically is reported to be getting smaller next generation). The pictures show a vehicle with a shallow, Tacoma-sized bed. Yes, I believe it is possible to fit a deeper bed, but a larger cab I don't think is in the cards.

- I say the cab is not going to change because the interior shots show an interior (dash, door hardware and steering wheel) spot on with all the spy photo interior shot of the new Chevy/GMC. Yes, owing to righthand drive in Thailand, the interior is reversed, but it looks almost identical.

Based on this and other info, some conjecture:

- These trucks will not be as big as expected. Heck, GM is now calling the present Sonoma a mid-size (http://www.gmc.com/sonoma). Why make a mid-size when you can market your old compact as one (Revenge of Ron Zarella?!?). Maybe GM got some good intel on the Dakota being shrunk and decided not to be behind the power curve. Probably GM also read the writing on the political wall (read: CAFE) and knew they needed to compensate for Yukons/Denalis, Escalades, Silverado 1500's and the like. Might be the reason GMC, quite a while after the Colarado was announced finally announced the Canyon. Corporate might have forced them to have a small truck so all the CAFE averaging pressure isn't on Chevy.

- The engine debate is also interesting. Again GM is going for fuel economy IMO. An exec practically said so when he was quoted as wanting to sell a lot of 2.8/5-speed combos. Owning both a vehicle with a 4.2L I-6 VORTEC and one with the old 4.3 V-6 Vortec, I can attest for the new engine's smoothness and higher end power. But GM is putting in an I-5 version for mileage. Even with balance shaft's it won't be as smooth. Plus, it has less torque than the 4.3. In the end it might come down to buyer's perceptions. Ford dealer's will be quick to learn "Yes, theirs is nice, but OUR's has a V-6! You will be amazed at the people who will automatically think "ah, more power" than take the time to read a spec sheet!

#10 of 199 Inline Engine Power by jgmilberg

Dec 27, 2002 (11:46 pm)

I can't for the life of me figure out this big thing about the I5, and I4 engines, both of these engines are going to out power the current 180HP2wd/190HP4wd 4.3V6 so what's the big deal?! From what I have heard the I4 will have 170HP and the I5 will have 215HP. I dramatic improvement over the piddely little 180hp2wd/190hp4wd that's currently available. Another tidbit of information the in line engines run smoother than you could ever imagine. The I6 had to have an anti-starter grind circuit installed because they were getting chewed up starters from those that couldn't tell the engine was running.
 
A SS model would be cool though, like the old S-10 Typhoon with the turbo charged 4.3, man that was a real runner there. Oh well there are aftermarket companies that will come out with the go fast stuff we crave. Now if it didn't void the factory warranty....

#11 of 199 RE: Inline Engine Power by thecargonzo

Dec 28, 2002 (5:27 am)

Yes, the 3.5L will best the 4.3 Vortec by an of 25-35 HP (depending on which version (2wd/4wd)4.3 is compared to) but it does lose 20-25lb-ft of torque in the same comparision. Will buyers be more concerned with torque output and engine size/number of cylinders? Ford's top Ranger engine is a 4 liter four with 238lb-ft of torque.
The 4.3 had this beat on both accounts. Of course, the Ranger out-sold it, so maybe the 3.5 will outsell it due to horsepower (8hp more). I'm not so sure though. With the I-6 GM out-muscled the 4.0 in the Explorer and even out HPed the
V-8. The advantage was clearly GM's. In this case though, I don't think the advantages are as clear cut. Especially with Ford salesman asking True-Blue American pick-up buyers if they want a "Japanese designed pickup with one them smaller foreign style five-cylinder engines in it."
Hopefully, GM's gambit to lower it's CAFE numbers with this truck will work, but it might be at the expense of the truck's marketability (read: fleet sales).

#12 of 199 I-5 Engine by jedai

Jan 14, 2003 (1:49 pm)

All this confusion about inline 5's. Audi and Volvo (Audi engine) had them for years and Volvo still uses them. The Acura 2.5 I5 was a great and economical motor. Acura wanted to go upmarket with the TL and dropped it for the 3.0 V6. Any automotive engineer will tell you that an I5 is the smoothest configuration, probably won't need balance shafts like big I4's. The only thing that compares is an H6 like Porsche and Subaru. I would love to have this truck with the 5 cyl. as I drive lots of miles and fuel economy is a big thing for me.

#13 of 199 RE: I-5 engine by thecargonzo

Jan 18, 2003 (6:06 pm)

The 3.5 I-5 will have twin balance shafts (rotating at twice engine speed) installed to quell the second-order vibrations still present in the I-5. The I-6 might be the engine you are thinking of, as it it suffers little second order vibrations. The outgoing 4.3L has had a single balance shaft in it since the early ninties, since the 90 degree V angle so smooth for it's 5.7L parent is not the best for V-6s. As a general rule:
 
I-4s over 1.8L will benefit from balance shafts
 
I-5s obviously can use their help to smooth things out
 
V-6s should have a V angle of 60 degrees for smoothness.
 
V-8s should have 90 degrees of V.
 
I have heard V-12s should be 75 degrees from one
source and 60 from another. Not to many of them around anyway since Jag went to V-8s so it really is almost a moot point.
 
Of course crank, connecting rod and piston design are major players in an engine's NVH characteristics too.

#14 of 199 D-max engine or D-Max engine... by cowgyrl13

Jan 27, 2003 (6:40 pm)

Thanks for the link on that Isuzu D-max. I know I will probably never buy a Canyon no matter how much I like the looks and potentially the drive of it. Reason: too many spark plugs. Give me a Canyon Crew-Cab with that Isuzu engine that is in the D-max or get Duramax to make a little I-4 or I-5 D-Max, and I will get one - maybe two. Until then, I'll just keep driving my overkill 2500HD D-Max rocket ship and a VW TDI!

#15 of 199 Cowgyrl by thecargonzo

Jan 28, 2003 (11:14 am)

From what I hear, Duramax Ltd (joint Isuzu/GM venture for the 6.6, to include the plant in Moraine, OH) was looking at producing a smaller diesel, but Isuzu's money problems was causing some problems. I believe I heard that Duramax was completely bought out by GM, so maybe there is hope. With Ford partner Navistar producing smaller P-stroke's it may be only a matter of time. Or maybe they will source a diesel overseas like they did with the early S-10s.
 
My wife like's Duramax's too. Woman must like compression ignition. Passat diesels are really popular over here as you can well imagine.
 
A 2500HD is not overkill around Orlando, it's a way to move slow traffic out of your way on I-4!

#16 of 199 pricing for the Colorado/Canyon by ghislain

Feb 25, 2003 (3:55 pm)

I have come across a WEB Site a few weeks ago that stated that apparently the Colorado/Canyon price will remain approx the same as the current S10/Somoma prices which would make Colorado/Canyon a little more palatable. I hope someone at GM is listening; your product is a tad overpriced. GM has good products but if you go to Dodge and Ford Website and use the Build your own vehicle you will see why the Dodge Quad Cabs and are multiplying like rabbits and the F150 is the best selling truck.
 
PS any idea of what the Payload and Max towing capacity of the
I5 200hp will be?

#17 of 199 Should have read I5 220hp by ghislain

Feb 26, 2003 (8:18 pm)

PS any idea of what the Payload and Max towing capacity of the
I5 220hp will be?

Messages Page 2 of 21

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement