By on June 14, 2017

2017 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 - Image: ChevroletGeneral Motors evidently hopes you like the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon the way they are.

The midsize truck twins, which arrived in second-generation form nearly three years ago, won’t be replaced for another five years. 

According to an Auto Forecast Solutions report cited by Autoline Daily, production of the next-generation Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon won’t begin until 2022.

Of course, this doesn’t mean the Colorado and Canyon will forge ahead without updates. Already, General Motors has offered both trucks with a class-exclusive diesel engine, expanded the Canyon lineup to include a Denali model, and presented the Colorado ZR2 as the Raptor of the midsize truck world.

Expect further improvements, additions and alterations over the next half-decade.2017 GMC Canyon SLT Diesel - Image: GMCYes, another half-decade.

Pickup truck lifespans aren’t known to be short – this isn’t a ninth-gen Honda Civic that went from all-new in 2012 to facelifted in 2013 to all-new again in 2016.

Nevertheless, 2022 will be the eighth model year for the Colorado and Canyon. At the top of the pickup heap, the Ford F-150 transitions every six years on average.

But competition in America’s pickup truck arena is scarce, diminishing the need to be the newest and flashiest and freshest. Moreover, as the Colorado and Canyon reach old age, the Ford Ranger will arrive, likely spurring demand just as the Colorado and Canyon spurred greater overall interest in the midsize field in 2014 and 2015.

You’ll recall that, rather than merely grabbing its own slice of the pie, GM’s return to the segment was timed with best-ever Toyota Tacoma sales in 2015 and 2016; 2016 was also the Nissan Frontier’s best showing in 15 years. GM didn’t steal pie from Toyota and Nissan. GM expanded the pie.

If the Ford Ranger can do the same, then General Motors’ two midsize pickup trucks may also reap the benefits of renewed interest in the segment regardless of their old age.

Midsize Truck May 2017 May 2016 % Change 2017 YTD 2016 YTD % Change
Toyota Tacoma 17,654 16,544 6.7% 78,153 79,226 -1.4%
GM Colorado/Canyon 11,568 12,557 -7.9% 53,042 56,142 -5.5%
Chevrolet Colorado 9,091 9,196 -1.1% 40,670 42,178 -3.6%
GMC Canyon 2,477 3,361 -26.3% 12,372 13,964 -11.4%
Nissan Frontier 7,756 7,941 -2.3% 29,669 36,845 -19.5%
Honda Ridgeline 2,956 15,866 2 793,200%
Total 39,934 37,042 7.8% 176,730 172,215 2.6%

Meanwhile, through 2017’s first five months, U.S. sales of midsize pickup trucks are up 3 percent. The Tacoma, Colorado, Frontier, Canyon, and Honda Ridgeline claim 16 percent of all pickup truck sales. Of the 176,730 midsize pickups sold in America so far this year, 30 percent are Colorados and Canyons.

That’s down from 33 percent a year ago as the Colorado and Canyon, like the Tacoma and Frontier, suffer measurable sales declines.

[Images: General Motors]

Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Autofocus.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

36 Comments on “Like GM’s Current Midsize Trucks? Good, Because Colorado and Canyon Are Hanging Around Until 2022...”


  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Meh I was perfectly OK when pickup development cycles were long compared to cars. The only one who really suffered because of it was the 1981 to 1993 Dodge pickups. (Although the 1981 didn’t look that much different from the 1972.)

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Updates? We don’t need no stinkin’ updates!

  • avatar
    dwford

    The Tacoma and Frontier have reached old Ranger age at this point. So why should GM rush to completely redesign these trucks when the competition is already ancient and unlikely to be completely updated anytime soon?

  • avatar
    matt3319

    I really dont think the New Ranger, or what ever it will be called, wont effect the Tacoma. The Tacoma would be the only one I would even consider. Iowned a 2012 Tacoma Double Cab TRD Sport. It was bullet prove. Resale/trade value is absolutely insane.

    • 0 avatar
      Kyree S. Williams

      The resale value alone does it for me.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Or the mythical Ranger Raptor?

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus

        Only 17.577777777% of people have heard of it. Besides, even the Ram rides better.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          John,
          The Ranger Raptor is supposed to have coils and a Watts linkage assend.

          We’ll have to wait and see.

          Maybe the “Aussie” Raptor will run rings around the US Raptor (in temperate climates). Aussie do build some notable vehicles when they put their minds to it.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      You don’t think it won’t “e”ffect it? I’m not sure where to begin with that one.

      “or whatever it will be called”
      How about “Ford Ranger” like it is everywhere else? This isn’t Brazil where they sell old models for years after the replacement has arrived, with “New” added to the name of the replacement model to set it apart. They just tack on a name to the old model, IF it continues production, like Impala Limited or F-150 Heritage.

      Even still, the old Ranger hasn’t been sold here since 2011, I doubt people will be confused about which Ranger they’re looking at on the new side of the dealer’s lot.

      If you still had your Tacoma TuRD, it would only be 5 years old now. You can brag about how long lasting and reliable it is when you’ve had it long enough to make such a determination. 5 years is not long enough to call it bulletproof, unless it was armor plated and I can fire off some rounds into the body and watch them bounce off with no damage inflicted.

      Wow, the 2017 TrollPhucker CS-17 sure is a long lasting car! Wait. How do we know that? Oh, we don’t, because it hasn’t lasted long, yet.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I am one that keeps my vehicles for 10+ years so the resale value is not a top consideration. I actually like the Colorado/Canyon better than the competition in that it offers more standard features than the competition–rear view camera, power driver’s seat, power windows, and a few other things. Also I think that the Colorado is the best looking of all the midsize trucks. My only suggestions would be to offer at least tan and light gray interiors besides the all black interior and to offer a flat rear floor in the extended cab if you are getting the rear seat delete. Keep the 6 speed manual in the Base and WT models. I actually would consider buying the Base Colorado in silver but I am not a fan of all black interiors but I would settle for a light gray interior.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    Want smaller. Need smaller. Will not buy a mid-sized truck that’s taller than my Jeep Renegade.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Defect.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Yes, it needs to be tiny. The Mitsubishi Mirage is HUGE, my truck should be able to fit in its cargo space. A Craftsman riding lawnmower needs to look like a Mack truck next to it. It needs to be a Tonka truck I have to sit on top of to drive. That’s the only way to build a truck, and I’ll just tow my 5th wheel double-slide-out camper trailer with it, the 9 hp and pencil thin axles will be great.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Are you having a Midol evening?

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus

          Nahh, just having fun. Anyone who thinks a Honda Ridgeline is a good substitute for a V-8 Diesel truck who’s only mission in life is to tow very heavy loads needs their thinking cap adjusted.

          You’re just pi§§ed I gave you some grief in the Durango article. Are you the only one allowed to be opinionated and brash?

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            He applied for a permit, did you?

          • 0 avatar
            DeadWeight

            As the Jalopnik cool kids say, I give no fukks and The.Dodge.Durango.Is.The.Worst.Vehicle.Evah. and “New York City had so many more creative-types.”

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            JohnTortise,
            Who said a Ridgeline is a HD replacement?

            Maybe many HD owners could get by with a Ridgeline, but this is different to a replacement.

            Hmmm….I’m starting to consider you a bit soft up top.

          • 0 avatar
            Vulpine

            Knowing what you need vs what you want is what these articles are supposed to be the point. No, not even I would recommend a Ridgeline, good as the current model is, as a full-time heavy tow vehicle–not even as a part time truck for that purpose. BUT, as a part time hauler of relatively light loads (which is a half-ton’s duty after all) and modest towing of a boat or pop-up camper then the Ridgeline is a nearly ideal rig with a lot more convenience capabilities than any other full- or mid-sized rig.

            And the Ridgeline has proven itself equivalent or even superior to those other trucks as a general-purpose rig, doing what it does very well even though the others may beat it in any one or two tasks.

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        Love the satire, John. What I want is something new the same size as my something 20-years old. Every time I use my truck to haul anything, the people helping me unload it are amazed at how easy it is to unload things over the sides of the bed, which makes unloading so much faster.

        Do I worry about people who could, as Jeremy Clarkson once put it, “… nick things from the back”? Not really. The stuff I carry back there is either too large, too heavy or too dirty for them to even want to try. I do want storage space inside the cab for tools and cargo gear though, which is why extended-cab pickups were created in the first place. What I don’t need is full-time seating in a second row. If I’m forced to go that way and the seats don’t fold flush (meaning only minimal loss of cubic footage) then those seats will go the way of my Jeep Wrangler’s hard top when I bought it; it came off after the first winter and never went back on. I want space, not seating.

        • 0 avatar
          gtemnykh

          My lowly RWD Ranger’s low bed made my recent patio project much more manageable than what I imagine it might have looked like if I had a modern half-ton. Having said that, if I had to consolidate to one newer vehicle, it would be a crew-cab half ton 4wd truck.

  • avatar
    Scoutdude

    It just looks like the GM twins caused the pie to grow. What is never mentioned is how its coming caused the market to shrink as people waited to replace their current trucks until they saw what they were all about. Additionally they were introduced in a time of overall rising sales, so it is unsurprising that the sales of less than full size trucks grew overall. Now those hold outs have got their trucks and we are seeing the market shrink.

    Of course once the Ranger drops we will see something similar happen. Their are lots of anxious current Ranger owners that are holding out. Lots of fleets are holding on to their current Rangers. The county and state offer their surplus vehicles to other agencies before they are offered to the public. The only Rangers to make it to the public auctions have ~200k miles, are from the 80’s, or are totaled. So when they come out a lot of those hold outs are going to buy a lot of Rangers, while others determine that the new one is nothing like the old one and buy a Frontier.

    So the Ranger will come out the pie will seem to get larger and then it will shrink back down as all of those hold outs finally make their move.

    • 0 avatar
      Vulpine

      @Scoutdude: You really need to either use your spelling checker or proofread your statements before posting; your errors are becoming worse than annoying. —- But that’s beside the point.

      “Of course once the Ranger drops we will see something similar happen. Their are lots of anxious current Ranger owners that are holding out.”
      — I’m one of those current Ranger owners but what I’m holding out for is something similarly sized or smaller than my existing ’97, not some bubble-on-wheels version that’s so much longer and taller than my existing truck. Put my Ranger next to a modern Colorado and the size difference is more than obvious, the Colorado looks like a full-sized truck next to mine! I’m certainly not going to like a new Ranger that’s as big is the current crop of GM mid-sizers.

      This is something all those brands need to consider; that bigger is NOT better for everyone. The reason compact trucks hit it off before is BECAUSE they were small, easily maneuverable and could fit comfortably in places their bigger brethren couldn’t even begin to fit.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        I’ve just reread my comment and don’t see any spelling errors, just a their that should have been a there. What can I say I don’t proofread a posting here like I would a business communication. But as you said that is beside the point.

        My point was that there are a lot of people who would have replaced their truck already, but the word of a new Ranger on the way is making them wait, just like word of a new Colorado made people wait to see it.

        I also accounted for people like you who think the less than full size trucks have become to large with the comment “So when they come out a lot of those hold outs are going to buy a lot of Rangers, while others determine that the new one is nothing like the old one and buy a Frontier.” Which of course is what we saw when the Colorado came out. Frontier sales went up as some people determined that the new GMs were too big, too expensive or both.

        I do agree with you that loading and unloading something like the old Ranger where the bed rail is waist height instead of chest height is so much easier than many of the trucks today. On my current main pickup the bed rail is chest height making it difficult to reach things over the side. So much so that laying inside the window on the bed rail is a long hook to grab things and slide them within reach.

        I too have always been a open bed truck kind of guy, but the last 3 pickups I’ve bought all came with canopies. On the previous two it only took a few weeks until they came off and never went back on. This latest truck on the other hand I’ve kept it on since I brought it home. The difference is that it has opening sides and that has made all the difference in the world. The driver’s side has a shelf just inside that is great for things like tools, tire chains, tie downs ect, while the passenger side is open so things can be loaded or at least slid to the front or back as needed. However the time is coming to get some gravel and bark so it will come off. This time however I’m probably going to put it back on once the weather turns this fall. I’m also really liking the fact that is has the barn doors on the back and the tail gate is removed. So nice not having to reach over the tail gate when loading. But thankfully the tailgate came with the truck, though I had to make a trip to the wrecking yard to get all the hardware.

        • 0 avatar
          Vulpine

          “I’ve just reread my comment and don’t see any spelling errors, just a their that should have been a there.”
          — That’s a spelling error, is it not? It may be the correct spelling of one word but not the correct spelling of the word you intended to use. This doesn’t even mention your ‘effect’/affect error earlier.

          “My point was that there are a lot of people who would have replaced their truck already, but the word of a new Ranger on the way is making them wait, just like word of a new Colorado made people wait to see it.”
          — True as far as it goes but at the same time may not be enough for some holders of older models if it is too large, like myself.

          “I also accounted for people like you who think the less than full size trucks have become to large with the comment “So when they come out a lot of those hold outs are going to buy a lot of Rangers, while others determine that the new one is nothing like the old one and buy a Frontier.”
          — Again true as far as it goes, but then I wasn’t one of those buying a Frontier, either. Which was at least part of my point; even the Frontier today is too large for my taste and I’m not a fan of its design, inside or out. The Tacoma could come close but its seating makes it impossible for my wife to drive it because the driver’s seat doesn’t move back far enough. One of the reasons I want an extended cab is to allow more leg room and Toyota, specifically, doesn’t make use of that extra space efficiently. At least the Colorado is drivable, but much too large and the interior quality (including that of the Canyon) too questionable. My wife’s car, as a result, is a Jeep Renegade that gives her all the leg room she wants.

          “I do agree with you that loading and unloading something like the old Ranger where the bed rail is waist height instead of chest height is so much easier than many of the trucks today. …”
          — At least you understand my complaint, even if you don’t necessarily agree with every point. I appreciate that.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    As pickups become more and more daily drivers redesigns will increase in frequency. The crew cab is mainly a big middle class family hack. Like most cars, as pickups have become, the middle class is where the money is.

    Maybe the Ranger when it arrives will increase interest in the segment. Or just open the segment to a freer market.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    I don’t think it is as much of people who have aging compact and midsize trucks replacing them with newer midsize trucks but more like the crew cab pickup whether full size or midsize has become the replacement for the full size and midsize sedans. Not many fleets or older guys driving around in single cab and extended cab Rangers and S-10s are buying Colorados, Frontiers, Tacomas, and Ridgelines especially the crew cabs which seem to be what are selling the most. Without crew cabs there would be a lot less full size and midsize trucks being sold. A better comparison would be the rapid decline of the sedan as a family vehicle compared to the increase in crossovers and crew cab pickups. Sedans have become much less functional with smaller trunks and sloped roof lines that make for less headroom. There is also more profit in making and selling crossovers and crew cab pickups than the traditional sedan. Most fleet buyers and cheapskates will not pay 30k to 40k for a midsize crew cab pickup fully loaded and that is what is selling. Big Al’s comment is spot on when you look at what midsize trucks are selling and compare that to the decline of the sedan. The Colorado is what the Chevy Chevelle Malibu of the past was and the Silverado is what the Chevy Caprice and Impala was of the past. The GMC Denali is today’s version of the Buick Electra 225 and the Oldsmobile 98. The F-150 is today’s Ford Galaxy 500, LTD, and Mercury Marquis. Ram is today’s Dodge Polara. Since most of today’s sedans lack the roominess and comfort of those of the past people have gone to crossovers and crew cab pickups which offer more room and capacity with available luxury packages.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      I agree that for many the full size truck fills the need of the full size sedans of yore. Just the other night 6 of us were going out to dinner for my wife’s birthday. The F250 crew cab got the nod, even though we have a 6 passenger full size sedan and a 7 passenger mid size SUV. The width means 3 across seating without being cramped and the back seat has enough leg room for 6’+ people even with the front seat all the way back.

  • avatar
    JohnTaurus

    8 years is a long time? Evidently not for Japanese automakers selling trucks here:

    The current Tundra is 10 years old, and no replacement has been announced (since they never reached their goal of selling 200k/year, seems like they pretty much have given up and figured a modified front fascia and tailgate will do for the posers who, for some unknown reason*, do buy it).

    The Frontier is 12 years old, and good luck getting a real answer about when it’ll be replaced in North America, other than the new Navara sold elsewhere isn’t for us.

    The Titan was 12 years old when it finally was replaced, and its still on the same platform as before.

    8 years seems like a heartbeat compared to Nissan and Toyota’s truck design cycles.

    *I know the reason! Because Consumer Reports says its reliable! That’s what happens when you buy a truck and treat it like a Corolla.

    • 0 avatar
      gtemnykh

      John did a Tundra run your whole family over or something?

      Toyota makes the Tundra as an American truck made out of predominantly American parts, something that cannot be said of some of the Big 3 competition. A lot of the components on the Tundra are spec’d closer to a 3/4 ton in terms of size/durability.

      Go ahead and try to tell this guy who works on all sorts of truck for a living and bought one that it’s all just a conspiracy and that he’s a poser:
      youtu.be/PIXCTNW-KTc

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • SaulTigh: I’ve never been willing to pay actual money for a special plate of any kind. My state used to issue...
  • tankinbeans: If only we could keep our plates for 10 years in Minnesota. We currently have to replace them every 7...
  • Corey Lewis: Yeah MKV Golf had V6 in the R through 2010. A3 had a V6 similar era. But you’re forgetting the ATS...
  • Bill Wade: I had a most excellent experience at a RAM store in Idaho. A couple of emails and 15 minutes at the dealer...
  • Steve Biro: Boring? Toyota would call it “inoffensive.” That’s the message the brand wants to...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber