2015 Chevy Colorado

[Boston Fit]

Kudos to General Motors for following their heart and taking a chance by offering manual transmission in their 2015 Chevy Colorado pickup:

"Regarding the manual transmission, [Mark] Reuss [GM North America President] said, 'I’m making a bet on this. If you look at the past data, it’s probably not a financially sound decision. But we’re creating something here that hasn’t been created before. So we’re going to take some risks.'"

(Emphasis added)

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/1 ... nsmission/

[theholycow]

What are they creating that hasn't been created before?

Also,

The stick shift will be available on the base extended-cab, two-wheel-drive WT model.

...that'll suffice for InlinePaul, Clutchdisc, and maybe myself, but I get the feeling that it will be priced lower and bought by a few people who'd rather have an automatic but can't spend the money and will resent it. Maybe not. Perhaps that effect has disappeared.

[AHTOXA]

There's been a buzz about the new Colorado on the auto enthusiast boards.

If I can get a 4-cyl 4x4 and a manual, this tuck may very well be my next vehicle in a couple of years.

[potownrob]

despite the bad press, i'd like a colorado w/ the I-5 engine, unless they offer the 6.

[tankinbeans]

I think it'd be interesting to own a 5 cylinder mobile. Split the diff between 4s and 6s. I've never owned a v8 and don't feel I've missed anything.

I already know my next newer car will be something about the size of the Blazer, hopefully a manual, and with better fuel mileage. That way I can go back down to one vehicle. I've determined that I don't like having to fold into lower slung cars and being lost in a sea of SUVs and trucklets. I know I'll be contributing to that sea of trucklets, but I won't feel quite so vulnerable.

[potownrob]

I think it'd be interesting to own a 5 cylinder mobile. Split the diff between 4s and 6s. I've never owned a v8 and don't feel I've missed anything.

I already know my next newer car will be something about the size of the Blazer, hopefully a manual, and with better fuel mileage. That way I can go back down to one vehicle. I've determined that I don't like having to fold into lower slung cars and being lost in a sea of SUVs and trucklets. I know I'll be contributing to that sea of trucklets, but I won't feel quite so vulnerable.

if someone had plugged the I-5 before I had my Jetta, i'd straight-up laugh at them. it's hard to really describe the character of this engine and how it reminds me that (despite outward appearances and first impressions) i got something different.

[theholycow]

if someone had plugged the I-5 before I had my Jetta, i'd straight-up laugh at them. it's hard to really describe the character of this engine and how it reminds me that (despite outward appearances and first impressions) i got something different.

I too would have been skeptical.

I find it pretty easy to describe. It's smooth and willing to work from below idle RPM, yet happy to rev up and keeps making more power as you rev it up. Just a lovely powerplant all around. Granted, while I might expect the smoothness and low-RPM love from any I5, the continuously increasing power delivery with increased RPM may be specific to that VW engine.

[potownrob]

if someone had plugged the I-5 before I had my Jetta, i'd straight-up laugh at them. it's hard to really describe the character of this engine and how it reminds me that (despite outward appearances and first impressions) i got something different.

I too would have been skeptical.

I find it pretty easy to describe. It's smooth and willing to work from below idle RPM, yet happy to rev up and keeps making more power as you rev it up. Just a lovely powerplant all around. Granted, while I might expect the smoothness and low-RPM love from any I5, the continuously increasing power delivery with increased RPM may be specific to that VW engine.

that might explain my addiction!! the sound is something else too. i think i may have picked the perfect car as a first full-time automatic driver - it's not boring like most of my other cars.

[AHTOXA]

I don't believe the new Colorado will have the I5 (but I didn't read into it much). THe old I5 is known to be just fine. The truck as a whole was rather 'meh'.

[theholycow]

I don't believe the new Colorado will have the I5 (but I didn't read into it much). THe old I5 is known to be just fine. The truck as a whole was rather 'meh'.

That's the opposite of every review I've seen of I5-equipped Colorados. People disliked the engine (insufficient power) but liked the rest of the truck.

[ClutchDisc]

No I5 for the new Colorado, I think it's two 4cyl, (one is a diesel coming later) and a 6cyl. Just as theholycow said, I'm perfectly happy with the manual only being offered on the base model. That's all I would ever want anyway. I think overall the truck looks kinda weird...at least from the front anyway. The back looks good. I also dislike the fact that you can't get a single cab anymore.

That being said, I still like the Toyota Tacoma better. Looks much better in my opinion, comes in a single cab, less options on the base model, and I believe a much lower price tag.

[Boston Fit]

I get the feeling that it will be priced lower and bought by a few people who'd rather have an automatic but can't spend the money and will resent it.

Interesting point. Industry-wide, I wonder how many new car buyers prefer automatic but forego it based on a (ballpark) $1,500 manual transmission discount. I tend to think that type of buyer is rare, but I'm only guessing.

What's noteworthy here is the comment by GM North's America's chief. If taken at face value, he seems to be saying that financial projections alone do not justify offering manual transmission on the Colorado; that he is rolling the dice based on something less tangible. Is it someone's gut feel, perhaps a stick shift enthusiast somewhere in GM's ranks? A way to generate buzz among certain consumer segments? Whatever the reason, it's good to see that Chevy is bucking the trend and offering m/t on a new pickup.

[theholycow]

Clutchdisc, you're missing the bigger picture. If it's only offered on the base model then that will be fine for you, for as long as they offer it. However, that's not good for the chances of it continuing to be offered and it's not good for the general image of it in the automotive world.

Boston Fit, I agree. However, I wonder what it might mean if not taken at face value. Is there some other reason why it makes sense for them to include it (another market where it will be sold, some regulations, etc)? Is he putting it out there just because it's great but making a dire forecast to sabotage it or so there will be an excuse to cancel it when it is a loss?

[ClutchDisc]

Clutchdisc, you're missing the bigger picture. If it's only offered on the base model then that will be fine for you, for as long as they offer it. However, that's not good for the chances of it continuing to be offered and it's not good for the general image of it in the automotive world.

True, I guess I didn't convey what I meant very well. I meant that if they never discontinued that option, and only had it on the base model, that would be fine with me....but obviously it would be a lot better if it was offered on all the trim levels.

[Boston Fit]

Boston Fit, I agree. However, I wonder what it might mean if not taken at face value. Is there some other reason why it makes sense for them to include it (another market where it will be sold, some regulations, etc)? Is he putting it out there just because it's great but making a dire forecast to sabotage it or so there will be an excuse to cancel it when it is a loss?

holycow: My first reaction is that I don't see much incentive for him to make that statement if it's not true. Hypothetically speaking, the only conceivable hidden agenda I can think of is to advertise a lower starting MSRP (making the perceived price more attractive). In terms of a foreign-market rationale, it seems unlikely to me that GM would offer m/t in the U.S. just because they do so elsewhere. I think it's common for manufacturers to tailor their offerings for specific markets, unless I am misunderstanding you. As for needing a handy excuse in case m/t flops, I don't see shareholders or the Board giving him a pass based on a comment like that.

In sum, my hunch is that he is taking a chance on m/t because he thinks it will succeed, even if he might be acting on intuition in the absence of hard numbers. But one thing I am pretty sure about is this: even if the economics do not weigh in favor of m/t, they cannot heavily disfavor it. The decision must have been close to a wash.