Grogmister
Sharpshooter
- Sep 13, 2012
- 438
- 43
Im intruded by the Trail Boss package. I have a Gladiator now and would like a few more creature comfort’s but really have no need or want for a full size truck anymore. We will see what they actually look like in person and what stupid prices they put on them.
I don’t like the limited options, but I have to say I don’t hate the 2.7.I watched a couple of videos about the new Colorado. Honestly, I like the engine strategy. I haven't heard a lot negative about the 2.7 in the Silverado and Cadillacs it is used in. Looks good. If I was into hard-core off-roading (as hard core as a stock truck can do, anyway), it would be worth a look. I think the 2.7 will probably be much more durable than the 3.6.
I took a serious look at the present gen Colorado with the diesel, but I just have to many long legged family members.
Mojave is definitely the best IMO but that being said I’m not paying $60k for any truck. I have enjoyed my Gladiator but I don't LOVE it like most Jeep people. Not sure what I will buy next but if prices stay stupid I will keep the Gladiator.I drove a couple of Gladiators. The Mojave was probably my favorite, if it had more power it would have been a strong contender for me. Trim to comparable trim, the Colorado tends to be the cheaper of the two. If Jeep put the new Hurricane in the Gladiator, that would be an interesting package.
If the supply chains don’t straighten out and the lots get full again, trucks will go for a premium—new or used.Mojave is definitely the best IMO but that being said I’m not paying $60k for any truck. I have enjoyed my Gladiator but I don't LOVE it like most Jeep people. Not sure what I will buy next but if prices stay stupid I will keep the Gladiator.
The new truck has a new redesigned HD 8 speed auto. Most of the problems with the old 8 speed had been addressed over the years but the internet has kept them alive.Also not many people on the forums think the 8sp tranny is worth a crap, apparently it's been very problematic.
I’ve heard people say it looks like a toco. Eh, I don’t see a strong resemblance.Chevrolet Tacoma?
I don’t dispute that the trucks you’ve listed exist. Finding one in the marketplace is a different story, at least around my area. For now I’ll keep driving my 1986 F250 bullnose, but I’ll keep looking for those models. Thank you.
C'mon GM make the 3.0 an option.
The 2.7 is not an ideal truck engine, especially for a fullsize.
There are people already doing the swap. Heck the 5.3/4.8 would be a good optionThe 3.0 diesel? It's an inline six and is a fraction of an inch from being 3' long. I'd be surprised if there's room to fit it in a Colorado's engine bay but I've been surprised before.
Really nice looking trucks, although the idea of taking them off road through the brush makes me cringe.
There are people already doing the swap. Heck the 5.3/4.8 would be a good option
The issue is the 2.7 being the only option. It's not going to have any upsides to anyone doing more than driving around town. Granted there is a market for that. There is also a market for people that need a useable truck that isn't one of the behemoths that the full-sized have grown into.
Needs a different option for people that will actually use it, but GM is more interested in forcing an upsell on you to get it.
Oh it's plenty of power. The problem is how that power is derived. We already know how turbo engines behave.Granted, I haven't driven one but I fail to see how 310hp/430ft-lbs isn't a useful amount of power in a midsize truck and while backed by an 8 speed. I did a lot of work with much less power through a 3 speed auto or 4 speed stick. Other than the 318 in the Dakota for awhile, has OEM put a V8 in their midsize/compact truck ever?
Agree on truck size. As a fun fact, today's "midsize" Ranger has almost the exact same foot print as a 1970's full size Ford F-series. How that space is used is obviously different, but the overall dimesions are remarkably same-same.
Oh it's plenty of power. The problem is how that power is derived. We already know how turbo engines behave.
If I made a prediction about MPG's I would say basically identical ratings to the 5.3. 1-2 increase in city. Same on highway.
In real world usage that may be true under some conditions. Put it in the hills it will be less mileage than the 5.3.Put a load behind it of much weight or wind resistance and it will be a huge impact, I wouldn't be surprised to see single digits.
So the question really is, what is the benefit of running an engine that is at 70-80% of it's capability over running an engine that is 40% of it's capability.
Edit: yes the 5.3 Colorado is a thing and it's super sought after