Chevy Colorado & GMC Canyon banner

1 - 20 of 84 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
151 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
for the last 6 months, I have been reading the ranger 5g forums, and have come to a conclusion:

Ranger Owners post topics about:

  • driver seat bottom cushion getting pinched, tore from plastic seat trim
  • to catch can or not, due to concerns about carbon buildup
  • the drivers side lean
  • poor headlights
  • transmission issues
  • the rake
  • ride bounce
Sound familiar?

I don’t have anything against the Ranger.....BUT, the Cheverolet Colorado is a far, far, better riding/handling and better looking truck.......IMO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,200 Posts
I would wonder who is buying the Ranger. I have seen a good handful of them on the road lately. Not a great number, but a few.

If the buyers are F150 owners, are they trying to compare a small truck, shorter wheel base, to the larger F150? Are they SUV/CUV owners not accustomed to trucks. Rake and bounce are two items that are inherent in a pickup truck, especially unloaded.

The other items fall into the familiar issues for GM owners.

I don't have any real issue with the exterior look of the Ranger, haven't seen anything but pictures of the interior. The reviews I have read suggest the ride is not that great. I drove my Canyon 200 miles this past weekend with 3 other guys as passengers. I was impressed with how well my truck with over 90K road with their weight in the truck. Probably had 800 pounds of passengers, and on the highway maybe 300 - 400 pounds of cargo going out. I think cargo was a little lighter on the return trip. On the logging roads, it soaked up the bumps and handled well for the half mile or so we had to drive as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
I was planning on test driving one, wife is looking for a new car and it might be a good excuse, however I dont plan on buying one at all, I just came from a range and theyll never top the previous 04-11 ranger

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
219 Posts
I test drove the Ranger during the public demo last year (the demo version). This was before I got my Canyon. I had already drove the Tacoma, Colardo saving the Ranger the last. It was 'meh' and back then, overpriced and dealers were offering shitty rates to milk the customer even more. The unit I drove had issues with the passenger rear seat (wouldn't clip back in). But it was the overall experience and cheap plastic build on the inside that made me get the canyon eventually.

Funny I drove the Asian/Pacific diesel Ranger in Fiji and loved it. The USA version is the complete opposite in terms of build/engine power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,557 Posts
The buyers are loyal Ford buyers who either went to full size, came from a SUV and now are returning to the Ranger.

The truth is there are no perfect trucks @ $35k. Ev3n the Jeep at near twice that is still noisy and will bottom out the chassis on a transition that a ZR can just crawl over.

Never discount brand loyalty as it sells more vehicles than anything. That is how the Taco is still in the game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
I’ve test driven both and haven’t pulled the trigger yet. I want to see the finalized 2021 Canyon before I decide. But I thought both were nice trucks. I liked the engine in the Ford more, but it fell short in other ways. Also saw in the latest issue of consumer reports that it has a very long stopping distance for its class. I like that magazine for pointing out practical issues with vehicles that you wouldn’t find in a test drive.
I also felt the ride was a bit floaty. I also think both are too tall. The twins can be lowered. The Ford cannot. The twins are nicer looking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
wife had the ecoboost 4 in her 2016 mustang. never did like that motor, so we traded in for a '18 GT. The colorado/canyon V6 is so much better than the ranger T4. One of the better engines ever made.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
I test drove one as well. Much like all the other fords I've driven, it felt like the shocks were blown out new... (sans the explorer, but that's not a truck so...) it wasn't bad but it just felt cheap. My uncle bought one and I parked the colorado next to his and he was shocked that you could get a CCLB on it because that's what he really wanted. :LOL: the short bed on those looks particularly short compared to the rest of the truck for whatever reason...

The V6 is just a rocket though and that alone is a major draw in for the twins...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
511 Posts
Don't see many at all here in PA. I did go to the Ford dealer a few weeks back to get a better look at them. I was not impressed. Better choices.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,200 Posts
I still think it is sad that as we sit here, five years after their initial release, no one has introduced a vehicle that I would choose over a Twin. They still get my vote, and the vote of a lot of reviewers, on their 5th birthday. Toyota made a lot of splash without any real changes to their Tacos, Nissan has been asleep at the wheel, and Honda played their CUV want to be a truck model. Ford & Jeep introduced "all-new" vehicles without knocking it out of the park even though they had a standard to judge by and several years to get it done.

Sadly, no one is giving the others any incentive to make improvements.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,557 Posts
I still think it is sad that as we sit here, five years after their initial release, no one has introduced a vehicle that I would choose over a Twin. They still get my vote, and the vote of a lot of reviewers, on their 5th birthday. Toyota made a lot of splash without any real changes to their Tacos, Nissan has been asleep at the wheel, and Honda played their CUV want to be a truck model. Ford & Jeep introduced "all-new" vehicles without knocking it out of the park even though they had a standard to judge by and several years to get it done.

Sadly, no one is giving the others any incentive to make improvements.
Well it is a difficult segment to invest in.

While these truck sell well they have no where the volume the full size have. They actually theyball rely on the global market as just Americans production would not be enough to justify the business case.

By being global many of the features we want are not used overseas. Like wise they have things we don’t get either.

The problem is they could invest more but then it would increase the price and odds are not much gain in sales. The margins on these trucks are much slimmer due to scale

I’m not sure what the others will do but I see GM adding features in the next truck like 360 cameras, updated lights, adaptive cruise and other tech on the higher trims. The tech is paid for by the other models GM already have it in.

I also expect a better interior to some level since they learned a lesson on the full size.

The problem is they need to keep the price competitive.

On full size they can keep stacking on options and people keep paying. They also can afford greater rebates if they stop buying.

The mid size truck may be one of the most difficult models to option, build and price on the market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,200 Posts
Very true hyperv6.

It would be interesting to see the financials on a specific model of vehicle, and probably to see a comparison to the financials of a Silverado versus perhaps an Equinox. Being a full width vehicle manufacturer, GM can borrow from different models to put together a different model: A lot of commonality I believe between Silverado and Tahoe, as an example. Having both body-on-frame and unibody plants, etc.

But, a nickel here, a dime there, and pretty soon we are talking a $60K Silverado.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
Well it is a difficult segment to invest in.

While these truck sell well they have no where the volume the full size have. They actually theyball rely on the global market as just Americans production would not be enough to justify the business case.

By being global many of the features we want are not used overseas. Like wise they have things we don’t get either.

The problem is they could invest more but then it would increase the price and odds are not much gain in sales. The margins on these trucks are much slimmer due to scale

I’m not sure what the others will do but I see GM adding features in the next truck like 360 cameras, updated lights, adaptive cruise and other tech on the higher trims. The tech is paid for by the other models GM already have it in.

I also expect a better interior to some level since they learned a lesson on the full size.

The problem is they need to keep the price competitive.

On full size they can keep stacking on options and people keep paying. They also can afford greater rebates if they stop buying.

The mid size truck may be one of the most difficult models to option, build and price on the market.
See... I get this to a point but like half the options I would want in the colorado... ones that are missing that I feel shouldn't be and are available in vehicles like the equinox, trax and cruze... that I can option out for significantly less and get a heck of a lot more in in some cases. The only thing I can say is that the price of midsized trucks haven't moved all that much... which i guess dictates why these things are allowed to slide?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,557 Posts
See... I get this to a point but like half the options I would want in the colorado... ones that are missing that I feel shouldn't be and are available in vehicles like the equinox, trax and cruze... that I can option out for significantly less and get a heck of a lot more in in some cases. The only thing I can say is that the price of midsized trucks haven't moved all that much... which i guess dictates why these things are allowed to slide?
Yes prices can’t go up much or people just go full size or just don’t buy if it is too much.

Other issues also crop up like GM is changing their electrical architecture. Some things may have been delayed till the new platform arrives and has the new architecture.

There can be a ton of unknown reasons.

But getting back to the Equinox or Trax they are in much more competitive segments where you either have the tech or get left behind. Let’s face it the Colorado is competition is the Taco with rear drum brakes? Till the Ranger arrived with a couple token features there was nothing more advanced than the Colorado.

Even now the twins are still a better truck. The Ford May have adaptive cruise but they give up better ride and handling and they are priced higher than the Twins.

I with GM would float a little more advertising to why the twins are better but they only have so much money and so many more competitive segments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,200 Posts
See... I get this to a point but like half the options I would want in the colorado... ones that are missing that I feel shouldn't be and are available in vehicles like the equinox, trax and cruze... that I can option out for significantly less and get a heck of a lot more in in some cases. The only thing I can say is that the price of midsized trucks haven't moved all that much... which i guess dictates why these things are allowed to slide?
Everytime I read a comparison of options between vehicles, and someone throws out something like the options they can get on a Cruze at a much lower price point, you lose me.

Darn, I can't get an option like XYZ on my Canyon but it is available on the Cruze. Now where do I select the 7000 pound tow rating for the Cruze? The almost 3/4 ton payload capacity on the Cruze?

It would be interesting to see what each of these "little" options costs to add to a vehicle. The cost to add, as an example, push button start, on a vehicle should be the same no matter the vehicle pretty much. So, let's say it is $100.00. Pretty easy to absorb a few hundred dollar hits to a $60K Silverado, not so easy on a $30K Colorado.

Not withstanding the lack of structural integrity or powertrain to tow 7000 pounds, just the wiring and receiver themselves are almost $300 on my truck. How much tow capacity would I have to give up to pay for that push button start? 1000 pounds? 2000 pounds?

And with my tonneau cover, I have a trunk space of over 40 cubic feet. Where is that option on the Cruze?

Let me put it a different way: What would you rather have? A 7000 pound tow capacity, a 1400 pound payload capacity, a 40 cubic foot trunk, or push button start? One is a luxury, the others are essential to what a truck is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
Everytime I read a comparison of options between vehicles, and someone throws out something like the options they can get on a Cruze at a much lower price point, you lose me.

Darn, I can't get an option like XYZ on my Canyon but it is available on the Cruze. Now where do I select the 7000 pound tow rating for the Cruze? The almost 3/4 ton payload capacity on the Cruze?

It would be interesting to see what each of these "little" options costs to add to a vehicle. The cost to add, as an example, push button start, on a vehicle should be the same no matter the vehicle pretty much. So, let's say it is $100.00. Pretty easy to absorb a few hundred dollar hits to a $60K Silverado, not so easy on a $30K Colorado.

Not withstanding the lack of structural integrity or powertrain to tow 7000 pounds, just the wiring and receiver themselves are almost $300 on my truck. How much tow capacity would I have to give up to pay for that push button start? 1000 pounds? 2000 pounds?

And with my tonneau cover, I have a trunk space of over 40 cubic feet. Where is that option on the Cruze?

Let me put it a different way: What would you rather have? A 7000 pound tow capacity, a 1400 pound payload capacity, a 40 cubic foot trunk, or push button start? One is a luxury, the others are essential to what a truck is.
I get that but at the same time my 04 trailblazer had a 6300lb towing capacity a 1200lb payload capacity, 3 zone climate control power seat memory and home link among other things that this truck doesn't. And adjusted for inflation cost a hell of a lot less new than this truck did. But that being said a similar era colorado was significantly more sparse and cost more even though the platform was more or less identical... it doesnt bother me but the whole price point thing is honestly just an excuse to an extent... I'd rather lose all the bullshit safety crap and have all those savings on the truck because that add more than anything to the cost.

Edit: I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything either. I do love the truck but there are a few things that I thought would have been included almost 20 years later...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,200 Posts
I get that but at the same time my 04 trailblazer had a 6300lb towing capacity a 1200lb payload capacity, 3 zone climate control power seat memory and home link among other things that this truck doesn't. And adjusted for inflation cost a hell of a lot less new than this truck did. But that being said a similar era colorado was significantly more sparse and cost more even though the platform was more or less identical... it doesnt bother me but the whole price point thing is honestly just an excuse to an extent... I'd rather lose all the bullshit safety crap and have all those savings on the truck because that add more than anything to the cost.
I purchased a 2001 Tahoe (with most of that stuff) for about the same price that I could get a similarly equipped 2001 (or maybe it was 2002) Trailblazer. Went to dealer to check out the Trailblazer, and Bob Harris at Classic Chevrolet talked me into a Tahoe. I paid almost as much for that Tahoe in 2001 as I did for my Canyon in 2015, so you must have gotten a good price on your 2004 Trailblazer. I am remembering $31K and change for the Tahoe, and my Canyon was $32K and change.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
321 Posts
Ultimately, guys much smarter than us decide what options sell the trucks, there's always gonna be some guys saying they'd pay more for, say, adaptive cruise, forward collision, etc etc.. but they gave my truck wifi (which I've used on site to get wiring diagrams for used equipment customers want to install) .. so they made their decisions based on what would hit most demographics, and for the investment that they'd benefit most on, and same for the other models like my 2011 cruze has back up radar, I wouldn't have wanted to pay for that in a truck in 2011 (funny you bring up the cruze as it was determined not a sound investment and discontinued by the way lol)

So completely different demographics buying the cruze, trax, equinox, colorado, silverado (there's a reason the Silverado go for $40k, an arm, a leg, and a sacrifice of your first born to cthulu ) I bought a base colorado with a ton of fancy features for $23k..

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
I purchased a 2001 Tahoe (with most of that stuff) for about the same price that I could get a similarly equipped 2001 (or maybe it was 2002) Trailblazer. Went to dealer to check out the Trailblazer, and Bob Harris at Classic Chevrolet talked me into a Tahoe. I paid almost as much for that Tahoe in 2001 as I did for my Canyon in 2015, so you must have gotten a good price on your 2004 Trailblazer. I am remembering $31K and change for the Tahoe, and my Canyon was $32K and change.
That's a good price on the tahoe, especially for around here. I didn't buy my trailbalzer new and now I'm confusing the two window stickers but we did buy a similar era tahoe and escalade and had a used envoy in there as well... there was about a 15k list difference on similarly equipped ones even back then as far as tahoe and trailblazer but the TB was a base model, I meant to say envoy which was loaded but the sticker that came with that was for 31000. The Z71 tahoe which wasn't even fully loaded was 48 or something around there and the escalade was 50k. The trailblazer was 25 and you weren't even touching a base tahoe at that time for less than 39 around here but region plays a huge role too. Very interesting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
134 Posts
for the last 6 months, I have been reading the ranger 5g forums, and have come to a conclusion:

Ranger Owners post topics about:

  • driver seat bottom cushion getting pinched, tore from plastic seat trim
  • to catch can or not, due to concerns about carbon buildup
  • the drivers side lean
  • poor headlights
  • transmission issues
  • the rake
  • ride bounce
Sound familiar?

I don’t have anything against the Ranger.....BUT, the Cheverolet Colorado is a far, far, better riding/handling and better looking truck.......IMO
BTW, the 2019 Ranger was recalled today. No big deal, it just catches fire if you use the heat.
 
1 - 20 of 84 Posts
Top