GM compact trucks in shadow of big brothers

TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO

The GMC Canyon and sister compact pickup Chevrolet Colorado, shown, debuted as 2004s in late fall 2003, replacing the unlamented S-10 and Sonoma.

Mark Toljagic

SPECIAL TO THE STAR

"You tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is, never try."

Good thing General Motors has never taken Homer Simpson's fatherly advice to heart.

Even while it revamps its business model by slashing brands and casting off hundreds of dealers, it continues to offer vehicles in segments where it is somewhat outgunned – in this case, the compact truck market.

Replacing the prehistoric Chevrolet S-10 and GMC Sonoma – no kidding, these trucklets premiered in 1981 – the Chevy Colorado and near-identical GMC Canyon rolled out in fall 2003.

Though bigger than their predecessors, the all-new pair remained slightly smaller than the Dodge Dakota, the mid-size truck benchmark.

To amplify their pumped-up size, GM assigned bolder styling and new, "trucky" names.

CONFIGURATION

Choice is the key to success in the truck market. Riding on a shorter wheelbase, the regular-cab Colorado/Canyon offered seating for two or three, along with a six-foot box out back.

Two different cabs were available on the longer-wheelbase chassis: an extended cab with two rear-hinged, half-doors that opened to a pair of awkward rear seats (with the six-foot box behind), as well as a proper four-door "crew cab" with a five-foot box.

The trick tailgate could be locked into place at 55 degrees, where it matched the same height as the rear wheelhouses, allowing 4x8-foot sheet goods to be stacked flat on top.

Owners roundly criticized the interior furnishings for their rental-truck drabness, industrial-grade plastic and mediocre assembly – which sometimes produced a cacophony of sounds.

"It rattles, creaks and groans," reported the owner of a '06 Colorado on the net. "The dash makes noise and overall the truck just sounds old."

At least there were lots of storage cubbyholes. The rear seat of the crew cab offered a good amount of legroom, but the seatback was too upright for sustained comfort.

Buyers had a choice of two engines: a 175 hp DOHC 2.8 L four-cylinder and a 220 hp DOHC 3.5 L in-line five, both derived by lopping cylinders off the 4.2 L straight-six that had earned raves in the TrailBlazer sport-utility.

An Aisin five-speed manual and a Hydra-Matic four-speed automatic made up the transmission choices. The trucks offered rear-wheel drive or optional four-wheel drive with low-range gearing; the 4WD system had to be disengaged on dry pavement, however.

All body styles could be equipped with a Z71 off-road suspension package that offered higher ground clearance, even on rear-drive models.

A locking rear differential was optional, too.

The pair received more power for 2007. The base engine was a 185 hp 2.9 L four-cylinder, while standard on 4WD Crews and optional on other models was a 242 hp 3.7 L five-cylinder, gaining 22 hp over the previous five.

To help spur sales, GM stuffed its 5.3 L V8, good for 300 hp, in selected 2009 models.

ON THE ROAD

The 220 hp five-cylinder took 8.7 seconds in a 0-to-96 km/h acceleration run – not too shabby for a 4x4 truck. But tie the 175 hp four-banger down with an automatic and four doors and acceleration can really bog down, owners grumbled.

The steering drew criticism for its high effort and numb feel, and the back end was prone to hopping sideways on washboard gravel roads.

On the positive side, the Colorado/Canyon is at home in the snow, and can make quick work of backwoods paths and steep, rough inclines. Its compact dimensions are well suited for off-road trails.

Many owners complained their trucks could barely return 20 miles per imperial gallon (14 L/100 km) in mixed driving.

Others reported consumption rates scarcely better than GM's full-size pickups.

"The five-cylinder gets only three more m.p.g. than my eight cylinder did," posted a disgruntled driver.

WHAT OWNERS REPORTED

Built in GM's plant in Shreveport, La., the Colorado/Canyon earned unqualified praise from some owners, but strong rebukes from others.

"My 2005 Colorado had to have its 3.5 L Vortex engine replaced at 40,000 km. Metal filings were found in the oil. The lobes on the camshaft were burnt and worn," read an unfortunate web posting.

While the two engines are both chips off the same block, the larger five-cylinder appears to exhibit more mechanical problems, including bent valves, faulty head gaskets and complete failure.

Early 2004 models left the factory with an "open left or right roof weld seam" under the windshield moulding, permitting water leaks. Later models had wet carpets, too, sometimes traced to a bad gasket on the high-mounted brake lamp.

There's no shortage of other headaches, including poor air conditioners, faulty fan controls, leaky drivetrain seals, driveline vibration, poor alignment, wonky electrics, bad steering pumps and thin, dent-prone sheet metal.

Add the questionable gas mileage and many owners have abandoned compact trucks to return to full-size pickups – a segment where GM happens to excel. Homer's Mr. Plow would approve.

We would like to know about your ownership experience with these models: Nissan Maxima, Suzuki Grand Vitara and Saab 9-2X. Email toljagic@ca.inter.net.

More videos from Wheels.ca and our partners