Chevy Colorado Engine Suck?

Question

Why doesn't Chevy or GMC offer a V6 in their small trucks while all the other truck manufactures do. I test drove their Colorado with the I5 and was very disappointed with the torque and power it had. I used to have a 97 S-10 4X4 with the 4.3 before my 2007 Ranger and loved it, but after 280,000 the engine threw a rod, so it was time for a new truck. Until they give me my 4.3 V6 back in their small trucks, I will never buy another GM truck again. I now drive a 2007 Ford Ranger 4X4 with a 4.0 V6 and am very pleased with it simply because it has a V6 with torque while the colorado has no torque. Way to go Ford for making a small dependable truck with a V6 as GM can't seem to do that. EAT THAT GM, hope you read this Detroit.

Answer 1

Your question is what exactly?

Answer 2

Because Chevy sucks. What else would you expect from the worst auto manufacturer. They offered a 4.3L Vortec V6 in the S-10 pickup, and it got marginally better fuel mileage than the I5 engine in the Colorado/Canyon. They were trying to build an economical truck, but just like their economical "Cobalt" they failed miserably. But the Cobalts are another story. GM screwed up in the first place when they quit making the S-10 pickups. The last year on the S-10 they decided to make a true 4 door model, which Ford has yet to create in the Ranger, and then left all the S-10 lovers high and dry when they brought out their POS Canyon/Colorado model wanna-be trucks. My jeep blows away their new compact trucks as far as power, maneuverability, speed, and towing capability. I love my jeep and I'm going to be trading in my Chevy Cobalt on a new Toyota Tundra Crewmax in January.

You should have got a Toyota Tacoma. They're more reliable than Ford Rangers. Although the 93 Ford Ranger I have now has been through hell (no thanks to my cousin) and it still runs pretty well. I just don't see the long term service out of Fords that Toyota can get.

From an answer above, saying that the I5 engine has more horse power that's great, but they still can't run with the Ford Ranger, Dodge Dakota, Toyota Tacoma. I've heard more problems with GM vehicles starting years ago with lack of power, which is still apparently a problem because a lot of people are getting rid of their GM vehicles and buying Toyota's now that Toyota built a real work truck, which by far out-performs all the GM trucks.

Answer 3

I am from Detroit and I am reading this. The Colorado is a Compact Pickup what exactly were you expecting, full size performance. also the new motors available are way better the the old. I quote consumer guide auto " Available in regular, extended, and crew cab form, Colorado and Canyon differed in trim details but shared a platform and introduced two new GM truck engines. Replacing a 120-horsepower 2.2-liter as the base four-cylinder was a 175-horsepower 2.8-liter. A 220-horsepower 3.5-liter inline five-cylinder substituted for the previous 190-horsepower 4.3-liter V6."


that is just horse power don't even get me started on the all the other improvements made from the s10.

also a word of advice, butt dynos are not a good thing to judge a vehicle by.

oh and by the way the ranger has horrible rating and supposedly plagued with problems. The B-series is an old design Maybe you should have done your research.

Answer 4

I agree the engine options in the Colorado and Canyon suck. I also used to own a s-10 pickup, but it was a 92 4.3 tbi. When I was looking for a newer truck to replace my aging s-10, I was shocked to find that there is no v6 offered in the colorado, but still test drove it anyway. I ended up hating the engine due to there being no low end power. I ended up getting a used 05 silverado with the 4.3. Granted it is a stripped down base model, I got what I wanted, a dependable gm truck with a v6. The minute they put a V6 in that colorado, I will gladly trade this silverado in and get one.

Answer 5

Yup it is a crappy motor. They gave us a 4 cyl, a 5cyl, and an 8 cylinder but no 6 cyl? Should have been a v6 or an inline 6. GM had plenty of v6 options or they could have made an inline 6. Too bad cause at least the truck had a rear bench seat unlike the Ford Ranger. If the Ranger had a rear bench seat it would have been a great truck.

Answer 6

one person mentioned a 4.3 diesel..i think they meant the 4.5 liter duramax diesel GM will be putting in their half ton trucks starting in 2009. That will be a sweet engine. Anyway, i agree with you about the 4.3, although i don't think the I5 is that bad. 4.3's are just 350's with the front two cylinders missing, which is why they were so reliable. I have a 350 v8 in my silverado right now, i wish they never got rid of those.

Answer 7

Chevy has a 4.3l diesel coming out in 09/10 line up with more torque than the gas engine and more mpg I like the ford ranger they are not really rugged in the 4x4 parts the cv joints seem to go every 30.000 miles. I hope GM will use the 4.3l diesel in their small trucks it would make a lot of since to me

Answer 8

ok i bought a new piece of cr-p ford f-350 with a 460 v8,when i bought the dang thing the drive shaft fell out before i even got out of the parking lot,#2 it had fact maintenance it threw a rod at 75.000miles.
why would any one want a ford,now i only buy GM

Answer 9

I have an 05 chevy colorado 5 cylinder the most amazing thing that ever haf 4 wheels under it, 97,000 miles neber had s wrench on it. Only steers and queers drive a hunk of junk toyota!!!!

Answer 10

we've one, this is wonderful for only using around in yet no longer quite some the rest. The metallic is skinny and easly dented and scratched, the gas millage is nice, (4cyl) and it good to seem at yet we would not have bought it if we had time-commemorated you may desire to no longer do something with it......only my opinion

Answer 11

chevy owns all,all hail to the king chevy. The best muscle cars ever broo