They had this to say about the new F150 with the 2.7L EcoBoost:"This was to be the F-150's year. Hyped as the most thoroughly re-engineered, game-changing pickup of the millennium, these twin-turbo'd alloy haulers swaggered in with great expectations. First impressions were glowing. Of the 2.7L EcoBoost, Seabaugh said: "This little guy seriously packs a punch." Evans enthused, "This thing's like a race truck." At speed, Loh found it "an impressively tomb-quiet truck, like a library." The judges awarded Engineering Excellence points for truck firsts such as the 360-degree camera, park-distance sensors by the front wheels, panoramic sunroof, LED headlights, BoxLink hardware, materials engineering, and its impressive roster of available safety tech. Then came some grumbling. "The interiors are Wurlitzer organs of heavy-handed design," Reynolds said. Burgess found the exterior redesign less of an advancement than that of last year's Silverado. Lieberman concurred, lamenting that it didn't look "nearly enough like the stunning Atlas Concept." Dynamic complaints cropped up: Reynolds noted, "The steering is truck-sloppy. There's a wobbly indecisiveness to their true direction that bothers me." He found the 2.7's brakes "very soft on application and very grabby once they engage." Many complained that the lane keep assist fought them for control of the wheel. The bigger problem was that Ford didn't win a concurrent Chevy/Ram comparison, largely because we were unconvinced that Ford's EcoBoost/aluminum approach trumps Ram's EcoDiesel/eight-speed fuel economy play. Our Real MPG combined results give the Ram a 21-percent advantage over the 2.7L, while observed results over 350 miles with a 1,000-pound load extend that to 35 percent, furthering our impression that working an EcoBoost like a V-8 returns V-8 consumption. The Ram diesel rides better (on air or coil springs), looks better inside and out, and can be had similarly equipped for similar money. So while we remain deeply impressed with the F-150 as an engineering feat, these two examples impressed us less as trucks."Interesting indeed.

I thought this post was funny:tbirdguy 46 minutes agoAnyone who is surprised that MT chose the Colorado over the F-150 hasn't been paying attention. Over the last few years MT has been turned over to a bunch of sissified, grass-munching West Coasters who are totally out of touch with the real world. I'm sure the Colorado is fine for hauling surf boards and picnic baskets to the beach but when real men and women go to work or drive cross country, they do it in the truck that continues to benchmark the industry-- an F-150Cause around here even three quarter ton trucks sometimes take shots for being nothing but grocery getters. I just skimmed through it but it was an interesting read. Car and Driver sort of had a similar take on the F150. They liked it, but noted that all the money that went into the aluminium aspect of it took away with other areas they could have improved. I'm impressed with the payload ratings on it but I'm a bit leery of how it might handle those sorts of payloads (or trailers) given the pretty low curb weight. Pulling a 10,000 lb trailer with a 5,000 lb truck has to feel quite different than pulling a 10,000 lb trailer with an 8,000 lb truck. It'll be interesting to see the towing reports as they come in. One comment on the fuel economy difference vs the EcoDiesel - are they taking into account the difference in the price of gas vs diesel? Diesel is running $0.80/gal more than gas right now where I live.

The new Colorado will be a strong seller. Many people (including me) would prefer to not drive a full size pickup as a daily driver because the size is very large. I know, I know, the price is nearly the same as a full size truck and the fuel economy is not much better than a full size truck. But, the size is important for ease of driving every day. Ford and Chrysler should offer something in this class. Toyota has owned this class for a long time with an old offering mostly because the other automakers abandoned it (well, Nissan is still there). Full size pickups have grown in size in recent years. I read somewhere that this new Colorado is about the same size as a Ford F150 from the 1980's.

Fast Mopar wrote:The new Colorado will be a strong seller. Many people (including me) would prefer to not drive a full size pickup as a daily driver because the size is very large. I know, I know, the price is nearly the same as a full size truck and the fuel economy is not much better than a full size truck. But, the size is important for ease of driving every day. Ford and Chrysler should offer something in this class. Toyota has owned this class for a long time with an old offering mostly because the other automakers abandoned it (well, Nissan is still there). Full size pickups have grown in size in recent years. I read somewhere that this new Colorado is about the same size as a Ford F150 from the 1980's.X 2. My son bought an extended cab, 2008 Colorado Z 71 (off road package) new, in 2008. He didn't want a full size truck, for the reasons you gave. His 2008 Colorado was a great truck. Two problems...a radio speaker gave out and a steering hose needed it's clamp tightened. All that went wrong from 2008 to 2014 and he put 130,000 Kms on it.Same brakes, same tires...although the tires were ready for replacement at the end of his ownership.He traded it in on a new 2014 Jeep Patriot SUV, 4WD, trail rated. So far so good. The Jeep Patriot is a smaller SUV...but he wasn't interested in a full size pickup or Suburban/Expedition type SUV.Both vehicles made in North America.

Many have forecast the demise of Ford as the truck leader for a long time but it's not happening. I agree with tbirdguy's assessment of magazine vehicle testers.

Motor Trend 2015 Truck of the Year | Good Sam Community

RobertRyan
Explorer
Dec 16, 2014
boocoodinkydow wrote:
BenK wrote:

Now with France/Europe planning to ban diesel's in 'cars', but allow in commercial
and 'trucks'...that may make it over to North America some day...

The ultimate spin!! Paris has banned access to conjested areas by diesel powered cars & London is speculating following suit. That falls far short of your claim of a ban of diesels in cars! Euro 5 emission standards failed to address nitrogen oxide & nitrogen dioxide emissions from Diesel engines & are now paying the price. In addition, most European regulation enforcements are much more lax than our epa watch dogs. Real world tests show nox emissions 6 fold of the sterile lab tests. Euro 6 standards have just been adapted this year but still fall short of our tier 2 standards that we have had in effect since 2008. There's absolutely no correlation between what's happening in Europe to our situation.

Not quite true, US Tier Diesels are banned in Australia, CO2 and particulates too high. No the European regulations are not more lax than the U.S. different emphasis., Diesels
emit CO2, modern EFI Gas Petrol engines emit more Nitrides than any Diesel
boocoodinkydow
Explorer
Dec 16, 2014
BenK wrote:

Now with France/Europe planning to ban diesel's in 'cars', but allow in commercial
and 'trucks'...that may make it over to North America some day...

The ultimate spin!! Paris has banned access to conjested areas by diesel powered cars & London is speculating following suit. That falls far short of your claim of a ban of diesels in cars! Euro 5 emission standards failed to address nitrogen oxide & nitrogen dioxide emissions from Diesel engines & are now paying the price. In addition, most European regulation enforcements are much more lax than our epa watch dogs. Real world tests show nox emissions 6 fold of the sterile lab tests. Euro 6 standards have just been adapted this year but still fall short of our tier 2 standards that we have had in effect since 2008. There's absolutely no correlation between what's happening in Europe to our situation.
RobertRyan
Explorer
Dec 16, 2014
mich800 wrote:
obgraham wrote:
Since when did Towing become the main purpose of a small pickup? Well, except here on an RV web-board, I guess.

I'd just like a small truck for the stuff I have to use a utility trailer for now -- going to the dump, grab some cement bags, and pretending I can fix stuff myself. I don't need a freekin F350 for that!

I think the issue is these are not the mini trucks of past but approaching the 1/2 ton market relative to size. So now we wait and see if GM can successfully carve out this niche that is really a blurred small truck/half ton truck. I personally would be up for a small truck just to do errands around town or lugging the bikes to the trail. But the Colorado is so close to the 1/2 ton market I would just go slightly bigger.

Not just in the US, the Global Pickups are as big as the 1/2 tons of the late 1990's. Admittedly they will not take 4 in SUV comfort but can tow 8000lb and have payloads slightly over 3000lb for single/extended cabs.
New trend in Australia is to use the European Cab Chassis Van Pickups. Max towing is 8000lb, but payloads vary from 6,000-10,000lb. Much more civilised than either a light Japanese Truck or a F250/F350
brulaz
Explorer
Dec 13, 2014
BenK wrote:

...
Remember, the most efficient ICE today is a 2 cycle diesel. I know of no current
production 2 cycle diesel for automotive. 40%...meaning of the potential energy
in a unit of fuel (diesel or gasoline), the 2 cycle diesel puts down to pavement
40% of that potential
...

Not in production yet, but still ...
Scale this up a bit for trucks ...
BenK
Explorer
Dec 13, 2014
On diesel...when was considering going diesel around 99-early 2000's, decided
against it after seeing the SMOG freight train coming down the tracks.

Now with France/Europe planning to ban diesel's in 'cars', but allow in commercial
and 'trucks'...that may make it over to North America some day...

Especially in light of the now faster pace of development for GDICI (gassers) with
diesel like power curves and close MPG numbers

Remember, the most efficient ICE today is a 2 cycle diesel. I know of no current
production 2 cycle diesel for automotive. 40%...meaning of the potential energy
in a unit of fuel (diesel or gasoline), the 2 cycle diesel puts down to pavement
40% of that potential

60% is lost out the tail pipe and radiated (radiator, etc)

So it is looking like there will other choices other than diesel for that kind
of power...and who knows what other IP is out there playing in that
60% lost energy
ksss
Explorer
Dec 13, 2014
mich800 wrote:
obgraham wrote:
Since when did Towing become the main purpose of a small pickup? Well, except here on an RV web-board, I guess.

I'd just like a small truck for the stuff I have to use a utility trailer for now -- going to the dump, grab some cement bags, and pretending I can fix stuff myself. I don't need a freekin F350 for that!

I think the issue is these are not the mini trucks of past but approaching the 1/2 ton market relative to size. So now we wait and see if GM can successfully carve out this niche that is really a blurred small truck/half ton truck. I personally would be up for a small truck just to do errands around town or lugging the bikes to the trail. But the Colorado is so close to the 1/2 ton market I would just go slightly bigger.

That is why I think the diesel version of the pickup can become the anchor of this program. IF the Canyon can deliver mid 30's mpg with respectable tow ratings. The MPG will make the decision to go compact easier for those on the fence between the Canyon and the Silverado. If they build a Trailblazer off the same chassis with the same powerplant options, I think the potential is there for a significant homerun for GM.
mich800
Explorer
Dec 12, 2014
obgraham wrote:
Since when did Towing become the main purpose of a small pickup? Well, except here on an RV web-board, I guess.

I'd just like a small truck for the stuff I have to use a utility trailer for now -- going to the dump, grab some cement bags, and pretending I can fix stuff myself. I don't need a freekin F350 for that!

I think the issue is these are not the mini trucks of past but approaching the 1/2 ton market relative to size. So now we wait and see if GM can successfully carve out this niche that is really a blurred small truck/half ton truck. I personally would be up for a small truck just to do errands around town or lugging the bikes to the trail. But the Colorado is so close to the 1/2 ton market I would just go slightly bigger.
obgraham
Explorer
Dec 11, 2014
Since when did Towing become the main purpose of a small pickup? Well, except here on an RV web-board, I guess.

I'd just like a small truck for the stuff I have to use a utility trailer for now -- going to the dump, grab some cement bags, and pretending I can fix stuff myself. I don't need a freekin F350 for that!
NC_Hauler
Explorer
Dec 09, 2014
GWolfe wrote:
Back in the 80s yes the D-50 was made by Mitsubishi. The Dakota was made by Chrysler.

That was the one I was thinking of, the D50...My dad owned several Dakotas, pretty good truck that he towed a little 19' TT with.
GWolfe
Explorer
Dec 09, 2014
Back in the 80s yes the D-50 was made by Mitsubishi. The Dakota was made by Chrysler.