By on April 23, 2015

2015 Chevrolet Colorado front side 2

General Motors’ return to the midsize truck segment has done wonders for the automaker and the market, but skeptics aren’t sure how long that will last.

Ever since the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon twins left for the showroom last fall, the segment has grown to over 2 percent of the overall U.S. new-vehicle market from 1.4 percent last summer, Reuters reports. Industry execs add that as many as 500,000 midsize pickups could be sold this year, double what was sold in 2014.

However, IHS Automotive analyst Tom Libby found that 9 out of 10 Colorado and Canyon owners traded in other GM cars and trucks for the smaller pickups, with over 16 percent coming from ownership of Chevrolet Silverados and GMC Sierras alone. Libby warns this could be a sign of undercutting of sales of models with higher margins.

GM execs and dealers, on the other hand, are happy with the midsize twins. GM President Dan Ammann called the duo a “very good investment,” while GMC’s director of marketing, Rich Latek, says the midsize segment as a whole is “a sleeper segment with huge opportunity.” AutoNation CEO Mike Jackson adds the Colorado and Canyon happen to have been the right trucks to come at the right time to give the segment a shot in the arm.

The party may not last for the duo, though. LMC Automotive notes that the segment would hold at 2 percent for this year, then slip back down by 2020. Meanwhile, the twins would fizzle out from projected sales of 74,000 for the Colorado and 29,500 for the Canyon this year, falling 8.4 percent and 21 percent over the next five years.

[Photo credit: Blake Z. Rong/The Truth About Cars]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

141 Comments on “General Motors Doing Well In Midsize Truck Segment, Success May Not Last...”


  • avatar
    JLGOLDEN

    I respect the idea of attempting to forecast coming market conditions and demand. But it seems that consumers are fickle and increasingly unpredictable. That said, I hate to see this talk of Colorado / Canyon “falling and fizzling” so soon after making a splash. Geez, people, let these two new stars shine in their moment of glory!

    • 0 avatar
      mike978

      +1
      Skeptics also said the Camaro would only sell well for one model year and the Verano would crash and burn. Time will tell and they may be right, but predicting doom everytime they should be right some % of the time.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      I agree, I don’t really care for these plasticky trucks, but at least let the dust settle. The diesel and inevitably the 5.3 haven’t shown up yet both which could really make a big splash. Let production get caught up, inventories get filled, and 2 model years under its belt and then we’ll take a look.

      • 0 avatar
        Clueless Economist

        Exactly right. I suspect many are waiting for two things: (1) GM to work out any first year issues and (2) the diesel which is possibly a game changer.

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          First, you have the greatest avatar coupled with user name on TTAC.

          Second, GM couldn’t develop a “game changer” diesel motor if their (bailed out) life depended on it.

          Third, have you closely inspected this midsize GM truck? It has really shoddy build quality and interior materials by PlaySckool.

          • 0 avatar
            JD-Shifty

            what a whiny snotty opinion. Did GM screw your wife at a drunken Halloween party?

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            JdN may have, at least that would make sense.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @DeadWeight – GM has an odd inclination to provide Chevy i.e. Colorado/Silverado the crappy interiors and GM i.e. Canyon/Sierra the better grade interiors. The Colorado got into Ward Auto’s Top 10 interiors this year.
            The problem with this strategy is that for many in the USA Chevy IS the only truck choice from the General.
            In Canada Sierra outsells Silverado and that stems from the difference in interiors as I see more full bling Sierra HD’s than Chevy ones.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      And you haven’t learned about this site’s GM schadenfreude yet?

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      I finally saw my first two in the wild.

      They are feckin’ HUGE on their own, and are still dwarfed by the GM fullsizers.

      When you look at inventory numbers in comparison to the Frontier or Tacoma, they lag nationally at almost 5:1 – and there are a lot more Chevy/GMC dealers in total number than Toyota or Nissan dealers.

      Inventory and production is still an issue, and good luck finding a GMC version under $30K anywhere in the country right now – the MSRP on the ones sitting on lots is crazy.

      According to Chevrolet and GMC – no cash on the hood on the Canyon or Colorado (and I’ll trust the OEM site over any aggregating site)

      Pretty early to call this a fail – right now the biggest thing holding back sales is a lack of inventory and manufacturing capacity.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      I agree 100%. I dont get what the analyst is basing his predictions on. Like theyre saying “the segment is growing, but these two are a fail waiting to happen because…well..um, what was the question again?” It seems based on absolutely nothing. Lots sold thus far to previous GM owners? So? Lots of F-Series buyers are previous Ford owners, and that doesnt seem to bother Henry’s house one bit.

      Yes, conquest sales are usually prized by automakers, but truck buyers are different. Many remain loyal to the brand when they trade in, even if it isnt for the exact model they came in with in this case.

      Im not saying these trucks are the best vehicles ever, they have their faults as with any product, but kicking their legs out from under them just as they begin to stand seems rather ignorant, especially when that conclusion seems to have no basis whatsoever.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        @JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N – agreed. GM may not be gaining conquest sales but at least they are keeping customers in the fold. Truck buyers do tend to be very loyal and conservative. GM has seen good sales gains in their full-sized ranks after a disastrous launch. The Colorado/Canyon siblings have done well in the marketplace so far.

        Many pundits and self-proclaimed experts believe that the small truck market is a highly confined niche market and GM will hit a wall because of it.

        The fact that the small truck market has expanded and old players like Nissan and Toyota have not been hurt at all by GM’s siblings shows that the small truck market isn’t as stagnant as once thought.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          @Lou_BC,
          I do think you have it quite wrong again Lou.

          The continuation of the sales by Nissan and Toyota is exactly what occurred here in Australia and yet we still have had an explosion of sales in our pickups.

          I’d go back to the drawing board with your thoughts. This is the beginning.

          You like some of the Luddites fail to see that GM with the Colorado Canyon are collecting sales from somewhere. These trucks have not created a new niche. You also aren’t taking into account the refinement and capability offered from these new midsizers. They offer what most (75%) of full size operators want.

          I often wonder about your comments. You seem to be all over the shop, then make claims that you made a statement. But all of your comments end up alluding to full size and pro Frod products. A forked tongue?

          The Colorado Canyon sales more than likely are coming from other large SUVs/CUVs and pickups. Obviously not other midsize pickups I would add.

          V6 Ford? V6 Ram? These two brands come to mind.

          Look at the recent pickup sales numbers. This should help you.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            BigAl – I live here and am familiar with the attitudes and beliefs of pickup buyers. I’m not sure why your panties are once again in a knot.

            There are those that think that GM will hit a wall due to the belief that the small truck market is just a niche. I see the small truck market as having limits just like the full sized pickup market. I do not know what that limit is just like most of us.

            10% of GM’s sales were conquests. If one uses GM’s own data for extrapolation (16% of trade-ins were Sierra/Silverado) then that means only a tiny amount of pickup buyers from other brands jumped ship.

            16% of 10% isn’t going to make Ford or Ram executives loose any sleep.

  • avatar
    Pch101

    The low conquest rate would lead one to conclude that this a matter of short-term pent-up demand and that GM will soon run out of customers if that doesn’t change.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      I suspect they’ll just go to their huge cash on the hood M.O. once the honeymoon ends.

    • 0 avatar
      golden2husky

      That makes sense, but in the truck world, brand loyalty is king. Getting a Ford guy into one of these would be like getting a Yankee fan to convert to a Redsox fan. But if GM could get car buyers – even conquest sales from low profit GM cars – into these higher profit trucks, that would be a win.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        The ominous figure is that 90% of the trade-ins were GM vehicles.

        This isn’t competition for the Silverado and Sierra or for full-size trucks in general. The problem with the numbers is that this is probably not on the radar of many of those who aren’t already GM fans, so that pipeline can be expected to drop after a year or two.

        I also wouldn’t assume that this is particularly profitable. If they are cannibalizing other vehicles, such as crossovers and sedans, then they would have been better off keeping customers in those other vehicles. Spending several hundred million dollars on this, plus reducing the profitability of other vehicles, may not have been wise.

  • avatar
    davefromcalgary

    Alas, the Twins.

    I loved my Sonoma (and want it back damnit!) and was so looking forward to the twins. I am even ok with the way they are priced (40k for a loaded Canyon seems fair to me.)

    But then I sat in one and knew I could never own one. The floor is oddly high, the cabin oddly narrow, to the point that it doesn’t feel any bigger or have more useful space inside than the Verano. Combine that with the styling fails (why oh why is the beltline not flat, and why is the box cutline not vertical!) and GM has driven away a potential customter (I was considering trying to trade up our of the Verano into one, until I sat in one and looked closely at the styling.)

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Been watching the Flames?

      • 0 avatar
        davefromcalgary

        28, you interrupt my righteous indignation at yet another GM design that is oh so close but not quite right to talk hockey? HOW DARE YOU!

        I can’t wait till the Flames get snuffed. I hate this town in playoff time. A bit shocked the Jets couldn’t even make a series against the Ducks, though I expected the Ducks would prevail, just not in 4. Overall, hoping Montreal will make some noise, but damn the east looks tough.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Well I know watching hockey is actually the law in Canada so I knew you would have an opinion. I’ve been watching the games in the gym after work. Shame to see the Jet’s get swept, I expected the Penguins to also be swept but they have one at least one game thus far. I have no opinion of Flames/Canucks but based on the game I saw I think its going to be Flames in 5 or at most 6. Islanders/Capitals has turned out be interesting, but the rest has been somewhat predictable thus far.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I’m going to the Wings-Lightning game tonight. I am a spoiled hockey fan. 24 years in the playoffs and counting.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I’ll look for you on cable.

            EDIT: Go Bolts!

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The Joe should be loud tonight (quiet by Canadian standards though). I haven’t been to a playoff game in a few years, so I’m looking forward to it. I’d love to go to Montreal for a Habs-Wings playoff game, but I bet tickets would cost well over $1500 a piece second hand. I got mine for $55/piece tonight.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Ah but the Loonie is down 21% vs USD.

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            I’ll admit, it was nice to see Winnipeg’s fans being classy in defeat, and absolutely rocking that barn.

            What is the loudest rink in the US? Chicago? Detroit must have some rabid fans too.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The loudest hockey arena the US, that I’ve been too, is Detroit when the Leafs are in town. The fans are yelling at each other the whole game. Last time I went, there were “Let’s Go Red Wings” and “Go Leafs Go” chants back and forth the whole game. Plus, there were a few fights in the stands. It was glorious. Since the Wings cut ticket prices, younger and louder fans have been going to games. It’s way less corporate than 10 years ago.

            The United Center in Chicago is loud, but it’s also the biggest barn in hockey. Boston is loud too.

            Nothing compares to Canada though. I’ve been to Air Canada Centre, Rexall, and the Saddledome. All were amazing experiences.

            The wings benefit from having the most Candian fans of any US NHL team. SW Ontario has a good amount of wings fans.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            This detour about hockey reminds me of the old joke, ” I went to the fights and a hockey game broke out”……….. in this case I went to a small pickup thread and a hockey thread broke out”

            Probably get more agreement about hockey :)

        • 0 avatar
          GS 455

          Dave, coach Maurice said 8 Jets were playing with significant injuries. Some were playing with broken bones. I know injuries are not an excuse but this just wasn’t the same team that we saw in the regular season.

          • 0 avatar
            davefromcalgary

            Yeah, and they really need a legit starting goalie. I won’t take what Pav did in the last few weeks of the season away from him, but he never has, and never will look that good again.

            So glad they dumped Kane, too. Classic case of addition by subtraction. And who knew the guys they got from the Sabres would actually step up and play lights out.

          • 0 avatar
            GS 455

            Definitely we’ll see Cheveldayoff get rid of more of the Thrashers legacy.

          • 0 avatar
            golden2husky

            The loudest hockey arena the US, that I’ve been too, is Detroit when the Leafs are in town. The fans are yelling at each other the whole game. Last time I went, there were “Let’s Go Red Wings” and “Go Leafs Go” chants back and forth the whole game. Plus, there were a few fights in the stands. It was glorious…..

            Sounds like what an Islanders/Rangers game in Madison Square Garden or the Coliseum. Talk about energy!

        • 0 avatar
          mkirk

          I was hoping for the Jets and the Flames to meet in a battle of teams Atlanta couldn’t hold on to. Can we trade you the Falcons for one of the hockey teams back? They’d have a better shot at the Grey Cup than ever getting a sniff of the Super Bowl.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Maybe next year the Jets and Flames can give us the Battle of Western Canada series.

          • 0 avatar
            GS 455

            @28 Yes! Winnipeg Jets fans would love to see them play the Flames. Everyone in The Peg still remembers Jamie Macoun injuring Dale Hawerchuk in the playoffs.

      • 0 avatar
        davefromcalgary

        Seriously though, if the Canyon was LITERALLY a 3/4 or 7/8 scale Sierra, there is absolutely no question what I would be driving next. As it is….

        Also seriously, can anyone answer why these things are so damn space inefficient?

    • 0 avatar
      JLGOLDEN

      My styling-related complaints mimic yours, specifically the oddly rising beltline. The truck would look truly handsome without this very strange upsweep. I’m a fan of flat beltlines!

    • 0 avatar
      gasser

      Verano love didn’t last too long, did it??

  • avatar
    gtemnykh

    linkhttp://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/eiouezb5iyybgxhyb7at.jpg

    “There’s just one problem when it comes to off-roading: lack of ground clearance up front. The big bumper hangs down low, as does the rubber guard beneath it, so I was constantly worried if I was going to scrape the front on the rocks. The rubber thing got kind of jammed up at least once. I would have preferred to take the front bumper off before doing this kind of thing, but the truck didn’t belong to me, so I left it in place.”

    And it’s not just that lower unpainted apron, the whole bumper is awfully low. The GM fullsizers are just as bad. Now I understand that 99% of the market will appreciate the +1 mpg highway boost much more on a daily basis than they will deal with rough terrain, but it just looks so non functional and pathetic IMO. I bet it’s low enough to be an issue with parking lot curbs.

    • 0 avatar
      mkirk

      The aftermarket will happily square you away should yo need a bumper with better approach and departure angles and more ground clearance. As a bonus I hit a deer with an ARB bumper equipped truck once and a cracked headlight was the only damage. Course you better bring your wallet.

      • 0 avatar
        gtemnykh

        Paying $1000 plus installation for an ARB or the like in order to get ground clearance that would finally exceed that of a Corolla seems kind of silly IMO. It’s totally possible to engineer a front bumper to be both aerodynamic and still allow for a good approach angle/clearance. Check out something like an RX350 or Tiguan, both totally non-offroady crossovers. They manage to have incredibly respectable approach angles and high-up bumpers, while maintaining good aero. The low hanging mug on these GM twins strike me as a potent combination of try hard blingy ‘truck’ styling and sloppy engineering.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          CUVs don’t need an airdam inches off the ground to maintain aero efficiency. Everything underneath is smoothed out where possible. The ladder frame needs the airdam as the lowest point, for optimal aero. I believe the airdams on newer trucks are meant to be easy removed.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Even if you take away the lower part of the bumper from the black plastic down, it’s still much too low.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            I saw the footage of the new aluminium FX4, 4×4 F-150 on a muddy driveway dragging the front air dam.

            It seems to be a problem endemic to US pickups.

            They are obviously designed for a manicured off road situation or sealed roads.

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      I’ve lost count of the Tahoes and Suburbans I’ve seen with that snow plow blade up front hanging crooked or lopsided. Favoring the highway over the Rubicon is one thing but GM is delivering these things unfit for a steep driveway.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      gtemnykh – GM has been the worst for low chins. The new Fords have gotten lower but not as bad as GM. Even if you don’t off-road much a heavy snowfall and -30C weather will have you cracking the sh!t out of the nose.

  • avatar
    Andy

    “9 out of 10 Colorado and Canyon owners traded in other GM cars and trucks for the smaller pickups, with over 16 percent coming from ownership of Chevrolet Silverados and GMC Sierras alone”

    I’d have said, “with ONLY 16 percent…” The fact is, they’re doing what they predicted – selling trucks to car people.

    The fact that most of those car people were GM car people is a surprise… but it may only indicate that they are just selling so darn fast. Dealer inventory is very low. People who happen to be standing around at the dealership (GM people) snap them up as soon as they hit the ground.

    I wonder how many of those sales were impulsive, i.e., someone came in for an oil change on their Malibu or Equinox, browsed the showroom out of boredom, and went home in a new Colorado?

    I wonder how many came out of Avalanches? Those weren’t “Real Truck” people in the first place, seems a Colorado would be a decent replacement for that.

    At any rate, this segment is probably going to continue growing. Didn’t we just see an article here a couple weeks ago about how even the very dated Tacoma is up some 20% this year? Plenty of people want a truck they can put in the garage, and gas prices are rising again. The new Taco will surely continue to dominate market share, but there’s room for all carmakers who want in on the action.

    I’m of the “if you build it, they will come” opinion. People want cool, quality vehicles. Nobody knew they wanted a Mini until Mini came back and was awesome. The old Colorado didn’t die because nobody wanted a smaller truck. It died because it sucked. Now that the Colorado is good, people will give it a try. I haven’t seen a single commercial (admittedly I watch very little TV), but they seem to be selling as many as they’re making, and not throwing money on the hood.

    • 0 avatar
      Mandalorian

      Agree.

      I think the Colorado/Canyon are seeing a sales surge because everyone that wants one has recently bought one. Things will probably level out sooner or later.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      Andy – I’ve only seen a few in the wild and not many on the car lot. Your rationale makes sense. Most new buyers will be GM fans as they are already frequenting GM dealers and are fine with GM products.

      Those who aren’t brand loyal will wait and watch and most likely will come on board later on. I doubt many Tacoma buyers will jump ship as GM has never compared well the Toyota in reliability.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I don’t buy the “9 out of 10” bought a Colorado Canyon in lieu of a Silverado Sierra.

    Just look at the last few monthly pickup sales numbers. These figures would show that the F-150 and Ram have lost out.

    I’ve also read an article stating that 41% of Colorado Canyon sales are from 1/2 ton customers.

    The figures in this article just don’t add up.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      If 9 out of 10 people that bought a Colorado came from a GM vehicle, the Ram and F150 didn’t lose out. But if there was another story that said 41% of the GM midsizers sales came from 1/2 tons, that would be a different ball of wax. I think we’ll have to wait a year or so to see the real story.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      @BAFO – The most it could be is 26% 1/2 ton trade-ins. But that’s only if the remaining 10% of trade-ins were all 1/2 tons, including Tundras and Titans.

      But it should scare GM, 9 of 10 traded in other GM vehicles (not just GM 1/2 tons). This likely includes a high percentage of more profitable GMs, but also likely means sales of these twins will drop severely in the coming months as GM fans get theirs, while the general market is largely unaware or unimpressed.

      • 0 avatar
        thelaine

        I hope the do well enough to make a mini raptor competitor.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          I hope they do well enough for Ford to bring a Ranger Raptor over here with a boosted to 11 2.7TT. They won’t, and I will continue to be a sad panda.

          • 0 avatar
            thelaine

            Agreed bball. Gonna end up with Taco TRD Off Road, I believe. Sorry Ford and GM.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            @bball40dtw,
            I’d love to see a 2.7 EcoBoost Ranger/BT50.

            Ford would sell quite a few here in Australia, especially when the V8 Falcon ute is gone. People who’d buy them wouldn’t care about the dismal FE from the EcoBoost.

            I wouldn’t think Ford would allow the BT50 to run the 2.7.

            I’m still a little worried about the longevity of the 2.7 EcoBoost. This is due to the removal bushes and the application of a low friction film on the bearing surfaces.

            It seems to be a “throwaway” engine.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I wouldn’t buy a 2.7TT Ranger for FE either. I’d want a fast truck with decent capability. I like some of the features of the 2.7; CGI block, aluminum ladder frame, oil cartridge on top, oil pump design, etc. I am unsure about the plastic oil pan an manifold.

            As this is the basis for the next generation of ecoboost V6s, it better be durable.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      Oops, replied to the wrong post. Mods may delete this comment if they want.

  • avatar

    I think as long as GM has little competition in this market, they will be fine as there will be profits.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    “However, IHS Automotive analyst Tom Libby found that 9 out of 10 Colorado and Canyon owners traded in other GM cars and trucks for the smaller pickups, with over 16 percent coming from ownership of Chevrolet Silverados and GMC Sierras alone.”

    This seems to indicate that roughly 16% of full-sized pickup truck owners, about 1 in 8, think their full-sized truck is simply too big for their purposes. When you add to this, “Industry execs add that as many as 500,000 midsize pickups could be sold this year, double what was sold in 2014.” the conclusion seems even more certain. But… are they small enough? What happens if Hyundai produces its Santa Cruz as a more honest pickup truck compared to the Subaru Baja or the Ford Explorer Sport Trak? What if said Santa Cruz becomes popular because it has a more honest pickup bed and a cab extension not meant to be a full-time back seat? At roughly three full feet shorter than the Colorado, it becomes eminently tempting for me as a replacement for even my current Jeep Wrangler for open-bed hauling while still being a comfortable ride for two people plus a dog.

    There are more people than you might think who consider even today’s mid-sized trucks as far too large for their purposes.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      “This seems to indicate that roughly 16% of full-sized pickup truck owners, about 1 in 8, think their full-sized truck is simply too big for their purposes.”

      Not even close. Go back and read it again.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        I did, Pch. It means the same thing now as it did before. 16% of buyers came down from full-sized trucks to the Colorado/Canyon.

        What does that mean to you?

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          It means to me that I’ve taken statistics courses, while you obviously haven’t.

          Here’s a big hint for how to start learning something: Compare the number of Silverados and Sierras that were traded in for Canyons/Colorados with the number of new Silverados and Sierras that were sold over the same period. Notice how the first number is much smaller than the second.

          Your point was wrong. If you would spend less time typing and more time learning how numbers work, then you would understand why.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          What it means is that 16% of Colorado/Canyon buyers came from a full size GM truck. It does not mean that 16% of full size truck owners think that their truck is too big.

          Based on March sales data, Silverado/Sierra owners that got rid of their full sizer and bough a Colorado/Canyon totaled 1416 sales. The Silverado/Sierra sold 63000 units in March. If we assume that 40000 previous GM full size owners bought a Silverado/Sierra, which is reasonable, it means that 3% of GM full size owners, that decided to buy another GM truck in March, think that their truck is too big.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            To go further, what these numbers tell you that these midsize trucks have no particular appeal to large truck owners, since the trade-in numbers are not pulling disproportionately from large truck owners. The share of trade-ins of large trucks is similar to the overall market share of full-size trucks.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Thank you, bball. It appears that Pch101 does NOT know how numbers work.

            The overall pickup truck market is still growing and that alone can account for the fact that Silverado/Sierra sales are still rising. The argument that they sold more than the Colorado/Canyon counters the fact that 16% of EXISTING Silverado/Sierra owners switched is completely invallid. Sure, 16% of 8860 sales is a pretty small number, but it does mean that 16% of those buyers came from a significantly larger truck which implies that the larger truck was too big for their needs.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Unbelievable.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            You certainly are, Pch. You certainly are.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            “To go further, what these numbers tell you that these midsize trucks have no particular appeal to large truck owners, since the trade-in numbers are not pulling disproportionately from large truck owners.”

            I’m not arguing that, Pch. What I’m arguing is that these sales are coming from SOMEWHERE and if only 16% are coming from full-sized GM owners and some percentage is coming from other full-sized pickup owners (shall we estimate another 20% total?) then some 64% are coming from some other type of vehicle–of which it seems the SUV/CUV market isn’t showing the growth it previously showed. Moreover, even smaller vehicles are showing a surprising jump in sales–outside of the mini-compacts. Even the new Jeep Renegade is making itself felt.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Somewhere there is a high school that is pleased to have not awarded you with a diploma.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            I received my high school diploma back in 1972, when schools actually taught you how to think instead of teaching the tests.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            In that case, you should sue your high school for malpractice.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Ran out of arguments, eh? Ah well. Guess I need to harass Denver Mike some more. He’s more fun.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            no no no, Vulpine.

            Less than 900 Colorados/Canyons came from non-GM brand owners in March. Total. It literally conquested no one. That means that virtually no F150 or RAM owners bought a GM midsizer.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Even if the 16% full sized trade in rate of Sierra/Silverado on Colorado/Canyon were to be extrapolated to other brands we must remember that ONLY 10% of sales were conquests.

            Like I said earlier 16% of 10% isn’t going to make Ford or Ram get nervous.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            I assume you have references for that, bball; I didn’t see it in the article, but I guess I might have missed it. Where was it?

            Even so, it doesn’t change my statement that the C-twin sales have to be coming from somewhere. If it’s not trucks, then where? Perhaps, as I said, CUV/SUVs?

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            And if the C-twins are pulling people out of CUV/SUVs, then a smaller truck specifically designed to enter that niche may do just as well, or even better, no? If, and I will emphasize IF, Hyundai does the Santa Cruz, I strongly recommend not passing it off as a fad any more than the CUV/SUVs are a fad. I’m betting those 10,000 or so (thank you Lou, for realizing the small truck ‘niche’ is bigger than just a few dozen) smaller-truck people will find quite a few others joining them. Maybe not as many as the full sized trucks or even the CUV/SUV market as a whole, but I am betting the number will be bigger than a mere 10,000. I, personally, could easily see 50K units per year and maybe 150,000 if the other OEMs see Hyundai’s experiment become a success. Who knows, maybe even GM’s Tornado/Montana and Fiat’s Strada will make an appearance if the Hyundai trucklet realizes unexpected popularity.

          • 0 avatar
            RobertRyan


            Ran out of arguments, eh? Ah well. Guess I need to harass Denver Mike some more. He’s more fun.”

            It is like having a class of ADHD delinquents Coming back to the matter in hand, the Hydundai Pickup could become a Global ” 1 Tonner” instead of a U.S. Mid sized Lifestyle Vehicle. Hyundai has not made a decision about either way

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            “… the Hydudai Pickup could become a Global ” 1 Tonner” instead of a U.S. Mid sized Lifestyle Vehicle. Hyundai has not made a decision Bon(sp) it”

            True, RR. We don’t know for certain and I make it quite clear that I understand that. However, the model they have presented at the auto shows is NOT a “global 1 tonner” and is very clearly discussed as a competitor to the huge SUV/CUV market in a size class well below the current mid-sized pickup truck. IF they follow up on that concept, then I believe the market will be far larger than the naysayers expect.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      @Vulpine – The Sport Trac was an honest truck, and actually more truck than the Ranger and most other midsizers. It was between a Ranger and F-150 in capability. BOF and 2-speed 4×4 of course, but not many takers. Except no strippers for the cheap skates, fleet, etc.

      The 2nd gen had IRS so Nail in Coffin.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        The first gen Sport Trac was the crew cab Ranger we never had. Same drivetrain, same 126″ WB (although I couldn’t tell you if it was the same frame, and definitely not the same body). Its only failings in my eyes were 1. the failing of every compact pickup of the time, having fullsize MPG, and 2. having an even smaller bed than either its south-of-the-border “real Ranger” cousins or its competitor, the crew cab S-10 (4.5′ bed vs. 4′)

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        With that short bed, the Sport Trac was NOT an “honest truck” for its size. There are two different ones operating in my town and to be quite blunt, not even I would have bought one when if Subaru had held on just one more year I would have bought a Baja. Why? The Sport Trac is too large, especially when carrying a mere 4-foot bed. There is no accommodation for extending the bed length by folding down a panel over the back seat as both the Avalanche and the Baja had, so it became doubly impractical.

        And as I’ve said before, heavy weight hauling or massive towing does NOT qualify a truck for my needs. Compact size while still able to carry an oversized (but not overweight) load gets my interest much more quickly. Currently, the Hyundai concept appears to be the most likely progenitor of a new Compact Truck market.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          @Vulpine – What good is the extra 6″ bed you got from the Sport Trac’s competitors? What are you hauling that would fit in the Tacoma’s bed and not the Sport Trac’s? With the tailgate down, it’s all the same. That’s not even a deal breaker for serious midsize truck shoppers.

          You just love to hear yourself complain. But in the end, you would nitpick to death any Hyundai pickup, or whatever offering. OEMs aren’t stup!d. They know too many OEMs have lost their A$$ trying to please the never satisfied.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            I gather you ignored where I said, “The Sport Trac is too large”. Granted, it’s not a RoadWhale™, but it’s still bigger than I want and has a full back seat that I don’t want. And as I said, at least the Baja had the ability to extend the bed onto the back seat in the event I wanted to carry something longer than four feet (like maybe a stack of eight-foot 5/4 deck planks?). I’d much rather have two feet hanging out over the tailgate than half their length where they could easily overbalance on acceleration and fall out. As a truck, the Sport Trac is effectively useless which is why it didn’t do well for Ford. I will grant the eight-foot bed on my old F-150 was overkill, but I never had anything hang over the tailgate like that either. My Mitsubishi only had a six-foot bed and I only had one thing hang out on it in the years I owned it. I also never overloaded it for weight, which proves to me these ridiculous load capacities are simply beyond what I would ever deign to haul. If I want to carry something that weighs a ton, I’ll hire someone else to do it; that’s not MY job.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            @Vulpine – Hyundai is much too smart to cater to the Vulpii demo’s finicky “needs”. You’d find a “problem” with it no matter what. Not enough of ‘this’, too much of ‘that’…

            Just face it, you’re way outside the norm, when an extra cab midsize is WAY TOO BIG. I don’t care if your friends all agree. They’re likely just saying so, so you’ll shut the hellup. A 4 ft bed with the tailgate down is 6 ft. Plenty big for your occasional use.

            A 6 ft bed just isn’t happening in a subcompact (length) “extra cab” pickup. Your math is way off.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            @D|M: Did I ever, ONCE say the people I’ve talked to were my “friends”? EVER? One of those people is a teller at one of my banks. She and her husband hate the size of the new, so-called Mid-Sized Trucks. She specifically mentioned an early-’80s Ford Courier. as the size they wanted. The others are all people I meet in passing; I don’t run in a clique of pickup truck owners but I do bowl in leagues consisting of over 80 members each, not even counting casual conversations with complete strangers throughout the community. Sure, full-sized trucks are most common, but there’s still those driving mid-sized to compact CUVs/SUVs that all complain today’s full-sized are simply too big; that they chose what they’re driving because they don’t need such a massive vehicle for their intermittent open-bed needs.

            Will Hyundai build the Santa Cruz? I don’t know, but I certainly hope so. Considering the vehicle it’s based on, the size will be almost exactly what I want and the fact that it’s being shown as an extended-cab model means it SHOULD be able to fit my wife’s long legs and still have enough hip room to be a comfortable drive. I won’t know for sure until I actually sit in a Santa Cruz and not the Tucson.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            It’s just too risky for Hyundai. The vulpii just need something to be a 1/2 inch off and they’ll storm off the showroom. Too many ways to get it wrong. They’d have better odds at the nearest Indian casino. And the vulpii community is tiny to begin with.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Foxes are more numerous than you think. They’re not sheep and they’re not wolves. For you to be happy, someone needs to be either a sheep or a wolf.

      • 0 avatar
        RobertRyan

        ” Even so, it doesn’t change my statement that the C-twin sales have to be coming from somewhere. If it’s not trucks, then where? Perhaps, as I said, CUV/SUVs?”
        Vulpine pretty reasonable assumption. The current selection of CUV’s and SUV’s is poor. The GM Twins offer a fresh altternative to these mediocre offerings

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N

      I think the only way one could draw such a conclusion is if it was decided before hand, and playing with the numbers is being used to (try to) justify the conclusion after the fact.

      Im so sick of hearing a very vocal minority on the internet screaming about how full size trucks are too big. If that were the case, the midsize segment wouldnt be pumped about a measley 2% market penetration as if theyve finally come out of the shadows. Im not quoting any specific numbers, but I bet Ford or GM sells more full size trucks in a matter of weeks than all midsize trucks combined sell in a year.

      If the buying public really thinks full size trucks are just too gosh-darn big, they have a funny way of showing it. Everytime an automaker has come out with a larger version (such as half ton crew cabs, HD models, the Raptor, etc.) of their full size truck, they simply cant build them fast enough.

      Besides, its not like the truck owner is losing out, MPG of full size trucks is better than its ever been (especially considering power/torque figures theyre putting out), and people seem to enjoy having a vehicle thats big and comfortable enough inside so the whole family can ride when the boat gets towed to the lake or a home improvement store is the destination, etc.

      It makes the vehicle more of a “jack of all trades” vehicle: dad’s work vehicle during the week while also being a no-compromise family truckster on the weekend. 20 years ago, taking the boat and the whole family to the lake meant dad drove the truck to pull the boat, while mom hauled the kids in another car. How is that better? And, what good is a smaller full size truck that gets 12-15 mpg when a larger, more powerful one (today) gets 17-20?

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        They complain fullsize pickups are too big, but also snivel that midsizers are also too big. They might as well complain about big rigs, since they’re not in the market for any of those either.

        But by now OEMs have figured out there’s ABSOLUTELY no pleasing them. Zero! Either the bed is 6″ too short, or 2″ too narrow. Or 6″ too long and needs 5 more inches behind the seats.

        Or if it is the right compact truck, they all want it clean and USED!

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N – agreed. Only a small minority think full sized pickups are too big and a very tiny sub-segment think current “small” trucks are too big.

        If it isn’t going to fit my wife, 2 boys (11 and 13) and 2 dogs, and carry at least 1500lbs I’m not interested in it regardless of pickup class it falls in. Small trucks have gotten larger because the cohort I am part of is the group more likely to buy a truck and more likely to have the money to get one.

        Social activists talk about the 1%’ers. That is closer to the truth in relation to those wanting something smaller than what is currently available.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          @Lou_BC,
          A very Dim’Esque comment and quite anecdotal. It isn’t what you want that counts. Not everyone lives in Hicksville BC on the edge of the Tundra.

          The Colorado Canyon will carry pretty much what most 1/2 tons sold carry and tow more than what most would ever tow with a 1/2 ton.

          It still has room for the 1.8 kids and dog. It even has some payload left.

          They brake and handle as well as a 1/2 ton. And have most any creature comfort that a 1/2 ton has and they are cheaper.

          They will not come near to displacing the 1/2 ton, but like Vulpine stated the are expected to double in sales.

          These numbers will come mainly from full size numbers.

          I wouldn’t want to have too many Ford shares. Ford will lose the most out of all the pickup manufacturers.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @BigAl – lets try this again……..spambot didn’t like my reply.

            Why the name calling? You definitely do not like anyone disagreeing with you.

            Colorado/Canyon sales so far have NOT come from full sized sales. GM reports 16% swap over from Sierra/Silverado to Canyon/Colorado.

            16% is a long way from “These numbers will come mainly from full size numbers.”

            “I wouldn’t want to have too many Ford shares. Ford will lose the most out of all the pickup manufacturers.”

            Conquest sales IS 10%…….. how is that hurting Ford?

            If we were to use 200,000 as the sales number for Colorado/Canyon that would mean only 32,000 GM buyers bailing on full sized GM pickups.

            If we use the same 200,000 and looked at conquests that is only 20,000 from other brands. Stats don’t mention Ford. Even if one applies the 16% full sized GM trade in rate to conquests then that amounts to 3,200 lost full sized pickup sales to Ford or Ram or Tundra.

            The numbers aren’t there to support your claims.

            I would consider Colorado/Canyon if there was one around to look at and test drive IF I needed to replace my truck BUT I can get 10k rebate on Sierra/Silverado. A full bling Canyon is pushing 45k and full load Colorado is 43k. Both have ZERO discounts. I’m sure that in a year or two GM will start piling on discounts to the Colorado/Canyon which would make it much more appealing to me.

            Most buyers look at it the same way I do. If price is equal why get the small truck unless that is your primary buying metric.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        “Im so sick of hearing a very vocal minority on the internet screaming about how full size trucks are too big. If that were the case, the midsize segment wouldnt be pumped about a measley 2% market penetration as if theyve finally come out of the shadows. ”

        Have you ever heard the saying, “The squeaky wheel gets the grease”? Well, apparently someone is listening to all these ‘squeaks’ as Hyundai is actively considering a true compact-sized pickup truck that will still be a functional truck for those who don’t want or need giant Tonka toys.

        I don’t fault the convenience of the crew cab pickup truck for a family; but my family consists of my wife, my dog and two cats. I don’t need and I don’t want a crew cab pickup truck. I do fault the overall grossly oversized proportions of the modern full-sized pickup truck. The cab for most of them is larger than what you find in most luxury cars–especially when it comes to head room (why do you need 6″ or more of clearance unless you always wear your ten-gallon hat?). From the front bumper to the back of a crew cab you already have a vehicle longer than most sedans and CUVs on the road–even before you put another 5.5-6.5 feet of open bed behind it–and even worse if you go for a true long-bed eight-footer. It’s the rare Suburban that’s as long as today’s full-sized pickup truck and it wasn’t all that long ago they were the same size in nearly every dimension–including length.

        No. For me a Jack-of-all-trades truck is one that lets me and my wife ride comfortably and fit our bowling bags behind the front seat with easy access PLUS an open bed for carrying things that typically cannot fit inside of an SUV/CUV. I don’t want to have to climb into the vehicle (as you do with EVERY truck in today’s market except the 2WD Toyota and Nissan while still having at least AWD capability for handling foul weather and light off-roading (meaning logging trails and dirt roads). I also personally know a couple dozen people where I live who want a true COMPACT truck–meaning 80’s sized and not what we have available today.

        The wheel has been squeaking long enough that at least a few OEMs are trying to find a grease that works for them.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          The squeaky wheel just gets annoying. If consumers were really interested, demand for true compact trucks wouldn’t have dwindled below what’s profitable. The Vulpii demo just weren’t stepping up to the plate. Now it’s a little too late. OEMs have moved on. Done. You need to do the same.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Vulpine – as Jack Baruth pointed out in his “No Fixed Abode: They Paved Manuals, and Put Up a Four-Door Coupe” story, dealerships are the car company’s client not you or I.

          Does the squeaky wheel get the grease?

          The rule for mass casualty triage “is to the greatest amount of good for the most amount of people”.
          That applies to profitability in the auto industry. They (dealers/manufacturers) will always go with what sells to the greatest number with the least effort.

          In this day and age the path of least resistance is always the preferred route.

          If you want a small truck then dealerships need to be convinced that there is good money to be made with selling small trucks as opposed to large trucks or any other product.

          If for some unforeseen circumstance my current truck were to meet a catastrophic end I’d most likely end up with another full sized truck as much as I like the looks and capabilities of the Colorado/Canyon…….

          Why?

          1. I can’t find any in a configuration I’d buy and……
          2. I can get a GM full-sizer right now for 10k off. That means the same price as a loaded crew 4×4 Colorado/Canyon.

          I’ve owned pickups from every size class so I’m not biased to a class. I buy what I want/need from what’s available.

          You want to buy what you need i.e. small truck but unless 200,000 others want the same little truck and dealers and manufacturers feel they can make money selling it to you…………………

          well, you know the rest of the story.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            As I’ve told you before Lou, your needs are different from mine. Just as you say you can’t find a GM twin in the configuration you want, I can’t find ANY truck in the configuration I want. The Nissan Frontier and the Toyota Tacoma come closest, but not close enough as they both have ‘fit’ problems between the two drivers. The Toyota specifically does not offer enough leg room and the Nissan not enough hip room, yet a Fiat 500 can fit both very comfortably. Please explain that.

            I am constantly in need of carrying light, bulky items here, there, and everywhere. My Jeep Wrangler simply doesn’t have enough load capacity unless I remove the roof–and that’s not a quick or easy process. So a true light-duty truck with an open bed but not so grossly huge as even the new Colorado AND can fit two different driver body shapes is what I need. There are enough signals in the air right now that indicate that one way or another, what I want is not that far down the road.

          • 0 avatar
            mkirk

            Whatever Vulpine. I ride in a 500 regularly and own a Frontier. My Frontier is a 70’s Fleetwood by comparison in every dimension. It isn’t even close.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Perhaps, mkirk, but it is still too small behind the wheel for my WIFE, who fits just fine behind the wheel of her Fiat 500.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Vulpine – I agree that your needs are different than my needs but that isn’t really the point.

            The point is car companies and dealerships focus on selling the most profitable product to the largest number of people.

            It isn’t brown manual transmission stationwagons and it isn’t 70’s era sized regular cab long box compact pickups either.

        • 0 avatar
          formula m

          Vulpine… You were on here commenting on every mid-size truck article for months last year and then you go buy a Fiat. Seriously you talked a lot of bs for someone who cross shopped a Fiat with a mid-size pickup truck. So you spent your money how you pleased. Stop crying for a mini truck that your 8 friends theoretically want. Small platforms from the 90’s are all larger now. ie. 15′ Corolla is almost as large as a 92 Camry.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Sorry, FM. Like the radio, your argument is obsolete. I explained the Fiat 500 easily enough–my wife flat refused to drive the F-150 and it was the only vehicle we had that she COULD drive (she can’t drive a stick).

            Small platforms are not gone. Every single OEM has cars/CUVs/SUVs sized down to mini-compact–including Mercedes if you count the Smart car. There is absolutely nothing preventing them from doing similarly with the pickup truck and several brands–including Chevrolet–already have them on the market in other countries–even as close as Mexico. It’s not that they can’t do it, it’s that they refuse to bring them into the States.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @JohnTaurus_3.0_AX4N
        Your comment;
        “Im so sick of hearing a very vocal minority on the internet screaming about how full size trucks are too big. If that were the case, the midsize segment wouldnt be pumped about a measley 2% market penetration as if theyve finally come out of the shadows. Im not quoting any specific numbers, but I bet Ford or GM sells more full size trucks in a matter of weeks than all midsize trucks combined sell in a year.”

        My response;
        “Then why the need for the chicken tax if full size pickups are so dominant? If full size pickups are so dominant they should be able to compete with the global midsizers.”

        Sort of screws up your beliefs.

        • 0 avatar
          Quentin

          No, not really. It just highlights that the market is so small that a tiny roadblock like the chicken tax is enough to not even bother offering the global midsizers in the US.

          For example, Toyota offers a built-for-market Tacoma here rather than the Hilux because the Hilux isn’t right for the US market. If the chicken tax magically went away, Toyota would still offer the Tacoma here instead of the Hilux. Different markets with different needs. Most of your other global midsizers have the same issue. They aren’t built for the US market tastes and would require too many changes and market specific certifications to bother offering here. Even without a chicken tax, the global trucks probably don’t have a business case here. They are redundant in capability with the 1/2 ton trucks and don’t offer the space. By and large, Americans want space even if they can’t fit it in the garage. Parking spots are big and most garages aren’t parked in anyway.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            Quentin – the chicken tax does have an effect on the market. Building a small pickup for the USA in the NAFTA zone costs as much as setting up shop for a full sized pickup. Example – Toyota builds both Tundra and Tacoma on the same line.

            The tariff does keep the importation of niche trucks like what Vulpine wants out of the market. VW said they’d need to sell 100,000 Amarok’s per year to justify a NAFTA zone factory. Importation means that they could make a business case with much less volume.
            An open market would have little effect on full sized sales but open up niche markets. Vulpine and 10,000 other dudes would be happy.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          @BAFO – It’s an easy riddle. I was astounded how much they wanted for crew cab midsizers. The F-150 super cab was not just thousands less, but the same seating with an extra foot wider down the middle, and an efficient (awesome really) V8 thrown in!

          And I don’t need a true “crew cab”, but most of America does, especially when they want a vehicle to do it all. Everything from work truck, to Town Car.

          With midsize crew cabs, you basically get an extra cab fullsize with a 1 foot section cut out of the middle (front to back), shortened bed, cylinders chopped off the engine, payload and towing slashed, and all for MORE MONEY!!!

          Sounds like good deal to WHO???

          The Chicken tax isn’t need for anything. Except maybe for preserving a few sales of compact to midsize cars, CUVs and midsize pickups. Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Subaru, Mazda, VW, Hyundai, etc, have to be the ones keeping the Chicken tax alive.

          • 0 avatar
            mkirk

            Umm, 22 out the door for my midsized crew cab. I shopped the full size 4 doors. If you could find a work truck termed crew cab it was 30 k.

  • avatar
    thelaine

    You are dead right JohnTaurus.

  • avatar

    I went down to the Chevrolet/GMC dealer for the first time in years last week to look at these after seeing them on Motorweek. I’m impressed, they are really nice, really stylish rigs and they struck me as being just the right size. I think they hit a sweet spot here and, although I have some overseas duty in my near future, I could see owning one of these upon my return.

  • avatar
    Beerboy12

    it would have been nice if LMC Automotive had given some reasons for their “prediction”. Unless they can justify that statement it’s just speculation.

  • avatar
    fiasco

    Looking for the manual transmission diesel 4×4 extra cab. Preferably in brown. :)

    I have an odd desire to get a Barcelona Red 4-door stick shift 4×4 V6 crew cab, but they’re gas pigs for what they are.

    My mythical perfect vehicle would run my 60 mile round-trip commute around 30 mpg empty, but still be able to yank my Lemons car or a cord of firewood on a trailer without self-destructing.

    After driving my dad’s 2006 KING RANCH DUALLY CREW CAB POWERSTOKE 4X4!!!!, I want something half the size that will tow 7,500 lbs (slowly is fine, just so long as it can do it) and get better than 11 mpg doing it (a friend’s 95ish 4×4 Dodge Cummins with 260k miles on it will get 20 mpg towing 5,500 lbs. without breaking a sweat, so it’s not unpossible).

    Come on, Generic Motors, build somethingI can’t resist!

    • 0 avatar
      gtemnykh

      “I have an odd desire to get a Barcelona Red 4-door stick shift 4×4 V6 crew cab, but they’re gas pigs for what they are.”

      No such thing, the stick shift is reserved for the bottom of the barrel 4 cylinder extra cab trucks.

      • 0 avatar
        Quentin

        Tacoma offers a 4×4, DC, 6MT, V6, and barcelona red.

        http://www.cars.com/vehicledetail/detail/631407748/overview/

        I’d wait until the new one comes out though. The engine tech has literally jumped 2 generations between the 2015 Tacoma 1GR (intake VVT only) and the 2016 Tacoma V6 (VVT on intake and exhaust, wide angle on the intake to run a modified atkinson cycle, direct and port injection). I expect it will have all the nice low end torque of the Taco’s 1GR, but have a real top end, too. The fact it will have cruising mode atkinson cycle via the wide angle VVT will really help the steady state fuel economy, too. I’m excited to see what they cook up for the next 4Runner. Hopefully this engine (and an 8 speed AT) along with a couple hundred pounds of weight reduction.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          My understanding is that Tacoma will come out with an updated truck for 2016. My youngest son has already put in his order for one and will trade his 2009 Tacoma 4-dr, 4X4 V6 in on it.

        • 0 avatar
          gtemnykh

          Oh I thought were were talking about Colorados, my apologies.

          6spd Tacos in a quad cab are rarer than hen’s teeth unfortunately, and wholly unavailable with the TRD package that gives you the locking rear diff. I’ve also heard the 6spd manual is no treat to use, the 5spd auto is boring but competent and reliable.

          I’m really turned off of the looks of the 2016 Tacoma, and am spooked by the direct injection factor, unless they implemented a ‘dual’ system with a set of injectors set in the intake runners in addition to the ones in the head (to keep valves clean). I may sound like a broken record with this stuff but I’ve yet to be convinced that any OEM has figured out the valve coking issue yet for long term use, short of redundant injection of fuel down the intake ala traditional port injection that keeps valves clean.

          I’m really worried more so than looking forward in regards to the 4Runner’s future. I should really try to snap up one of the 2014-2015 trucks in the next few years while it is possible to get a nice clean one. It would be neat to see them scale back weight and dimensions slightly back to the 3rd gen like mine (3750lb curb weight vs 4500+ lb on the new ones) I’m honestly not bothered by the current 4.0L/5spd auto MPG, 21-22 highway strikes me as totally reasonable for a sturdy high torque V6 of that displacement. I actually managed to consistently get 21 mpg in steady highway driving back from NY in my ’96 with the 3.4L, while carrying about 400lb of bench press and weights disassembled in the back. This was hand calculated, staying at 70mph, and I’m on highway friendly rubber.

          • 0 avatar
            Quentin

            You can get the TRD OR package with the 6MT and Double Cab. You can get the Pro configured that way, in fact. Here is the 6MT TRD OR DC.

            http://www.toyota.com/tacoma/features.html#!/packages/7593

            TRD Off-Road Extra Value Package: Available as part of an option package

            Toyota’s build your own site only lets you build what you can easily find at your local dealers. You can order that configuration, though, if you can find a dealer to play nice.

            My dad’s 2011 Taco is a 6MT TRD OR AC. The 6MT isn’t great, but it appropriately feels like a truck gearbox. I’ve heard throw out bearings are problematic with them, though. My dad’s hasn’t had any issues so far. We’ll see.

            The 2016 Taco does have the D4-S that uses port and direct injection. I don’t care for the blue Limited they showed, but the khaki colored OR model with black, unpainted fender flares looks pretty sweet, IMO. I like the interior a lot. They changed the 6MT, so I don’t know if they got the gearing changed to where it has 2 overdrive gears instead of just one like the current 6MT Taco. The newer engine should allow them to spread the gearing a bit and still have good drivability without going with such tight gearing.

            I had no complaints about the fuel economy in my 2010 4Runner. It was always hovering around 20~22mpg. The weight reduction would make it a little easier to drive. That heavy chassis really rolled around quite a lot on the soft suspension. I’m generally of the opinion that lighter is better.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            “That heavy chassis really rolled around quite a lot on the soft suspension”

            The answer is Rancho struts and shocks.

            ” the valve coking issue ”

            For me, Marvel’s Mystery Oil does the trick. Others use Sea Foam, AMS Oil or some other petroleum-based detergent additive.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            HDC,

            The issue is that fuel additives never reach the valves, as the injectors are placed AFTER the valves, directly in the combustion chamber. Unless you are admitting the additive as Seafoam suggests directly into a vacuum like that’s connected to the intake manifold, the valve seats and upward into the intake tracts of the head will stay sooty. There is debate as to how much of the burned on crud is deposits from combustion, and how much is from oil vapors routed via the PCV valve into the intake manifold, as is the practice on all modern cars. On the 2.0T VAG motors, I think the issue was mostly the fault of a poorly designed PCV. Folks with DI on various makes have been experimenting with oil catch cans, in fact quite a cottage industry has sprouted up selling these aftermarket kits. The fact that Toyota insists on using D4-S ‘double’ injection of both port injectors and direct injectors reinforces my opinion that carboned up intake valves are very much still an issue on this new generation of DI motors.

            Quentin, man I’m really striking out with my option package knowledge today aren’t I? I really liked the 5A TRD Quad Cab short bed I test drove, and at around $28k with discounts I’d call it a pretty decent deal. It felt closer in spirit to my 4Runner than the cushier riding and heavier 5th gen 4Runner, although I personally would derive more utility from having the new 4Runner. The nose on the ’16s bothers me, it looks very artificially tacked ontop of the existing front end and the lights look squinty. Perhaps it’s more than an illusion and there is more length in the front to help with crash testing. I agree the khaki with black flairs is a good combo. In fact on the earlier trucks, my favorite combination is the most basic quadcab, in white, with steel wheels and black plastic flares.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            gtemnykh, I’m familiar with the issue and it is an active and current debate for many people who see reduced performance in their DI vehicles, because of coking.

            In my case, the fuel injectors in my vehicles are ahead of the valves.

            A friend I know who owns a Sonata DI was also concerned since he racks up the miles.

            After much cussing and discussing this with me over a number of beers I suggested he add the detergent additive to his engine oil so some would get sucked into the combustion chamber by way of the EGR PCV system.

            He opted to add the detergent to both the fuel and the crankcase.

            He and his wife travel a lot but so far he hasn’t mentioned any problems with adding the detergent to both the fuel and the engine oil.

  • avatar
    mkirk

    I’m holding out for the Frontier with the Cummins. My Frontier has been solid. Yes, it feels cheap inside but it is cheap materials that are put together well. It’s just an honest truck.

    I like the interior of these trucks, the GMC in particular but I find the exterior odd. They don’t do anything so much better than my Frontier that I’d roll the dice on a GM product at this point.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      I thought only the Titan was getting the cummins.

      I too bet Nissan will do better with than Frontier than GM did with the twins. The twins are truly meant as a lifestyle vehicle, I bet Nissan could do much better if they aim the frontier at truck buyers.

    • 0 avatar
      gtemnykh

      “Yes, it feels cheap inside but it is cheap materials that are put together well. It’s just an honest truck.”

      I respect the heck out of Nissan trucks after seeing all generations of Nissan pickups totally dominating the landscape in Mexico. From early 80s models beat to a barely recognizable pulp but still hauling the goods to market, to the ‘hardbody’ style trucks and their D21 platform sharing successor NP300s that still make up the mainstay of commercial trucklets (quad cabs and stakebeds, regular cabs), and finally seeing Frontiers like yours in full blown Pro-X4 regalia as the vehicle of choice for management at my job site down there, I’m a believer.

      • 0 avatar
        fiasco

        Mexico and Nissans…that stirred a memory of me selling a pile Grade 8 bolts out of the Home Depot Tool Rental service parts bin (probably for some JLG scissor lift) a decade ago so two Mexican guys could rig a tow bar to a Nissan pickup they were bringing back to Mexico with them.

        From New Hampshire, which is not a friendly place if you like rust-free vehicles.

        There will always be a market for an honest truck that just gets the job done no matter what.

    • 0 avatar
      fiasco

      That could be nice as well. I have a friend who cross-shopped Tacoma and Frontier about 7 years ago and ended up with a Frontier he LOVES. 120k miles of construction sales road-warrior abuse, and while a company truck has reduced the amount he uses it, he plans to drive the wheels off the thing hunting and fishing with it. Only major issue was getting the timing chain tensioners upgraded a couple years back.

      Guess I sort of derailed this thread with my Tacoma comments. I was on NASIOC earlier today and got sucked in by a Toyota Tundra ad that featured a Hi-Lux in Chile. I liked the diesel Hi-Lux better than the Tundra. But I’m weird like that.

      • 0 avatar
        mkirk

        Think 2012 was the magic year for the Frontier. The timing chain guides were redesigned and coupled with the 2010 radiator fix the mechanical weak points were addressed. Yes, the interior scratches if you look at it funny and the paint is really thin but it is solid and the VQ40 makes it fun. Loaded up they don’t feel lime as good of a value but I still want a pro 4x.

        Nissan did a concept of the current Frontier with the 4 cylinder Cummins. That and the Titan getting the V8 are fueling the speculation. I know I would give it a serious look but I’d have to order it…I’m one of those fools that likes to roll up his own windows.

  • avatar
    canddmeyer

    I’m seeing more newer GM’s than Toyota’s, and I’m in a town that loves Toy’s. Problem for GM is, they all belong to contractors, several of which I’ve befriended, and they’re all leases. None are personal vehicles, unlike the Toyota’s.

  • avatar
    SC5door

    I care less about the size than the pricing on these things.

    Selecting 4wd adds $7,000 to the price! No thanks!

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • craiger: I’m in the information security field. How did you get around it, by forcing the ECU to accept the new...
  • Ryoku75: Isn’t this a bit like subscribing to something just to start your own car with a keyfob?
  • mjz: I too was going to suggest the Buick Cascada. It’s a newer German engineered two door convertible...
  • Corey Lewis: Which journalism are you wanting sir, please specify. 90 percent of my articles are history lessons...
  • Corey Lewis: Thanks for the detail. I will give the Volvo a look. Finding a clean one might be a tall order.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber