Forum Discussion
55 Replies
- 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.
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.- 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.
- I thought this post was funny:
tbirdguy 46 minutes ago
Anyone 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-150
Cause 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. - 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.
