'15 Colorado/Canyon Pricing

2015 Chevrolet Colorado Pricing Starts At $20,995, GMC Canyon At $21,880

Quote :

GM released pricing details on the upcoming Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon midsize pickup trucks. The base Colorado, which features an extended cab and a 205-hp 2.5-liter inline-4 engine, mated to a six-speed manual transmission starts at $20,995 including $895 destination, while the base Canyon starts at $21,880 including $925 destination.

Both trucks come standard with a 200-hp 2.5-liter I-4 mated to a six-speed manual transmission. The base Colorado features power windows, a locking tailgate, and back-up camera as standard. Available options for the Colorado will include a 305-horsepower 3.6-liter V-6 with a 6-speed automatic transmission, 4G LTE with a built-in WiFi hotspot, Forward Collision Alert and Land Departure Warning, and an accessory system for assisting in cargo organization and storage. General Motors notes that full option pricing will be available closer to launch.

The crew cab comes with either a 5- or 6-foot bed, while extended cab models come only with the 6-foot box. Some pricing examples were provided; the Colorado LT crew cab with 2WD and the 5-foot box has a starting price of $27,985, and the Colorado Z71 crew cab 4x4 with the 5-foot box starts at $34,990.

Helping to justify the price difference, the Canyon comes standard with LED headlights, a four-way power driver’s seat, and unique 16-inch aluminum wheels. Also available is the SLE trim level, starting at $27,520. The SLE model adds aluminum interior trim, soft-touch instrument panel and door pads, EZ-lift-and-lower tailgate, 8.0-inch diagonal touchscreen with Intellilink infotainment system, and OnStar 4G LTE Wi-Fi hotspot. A 4WD Canyon SLT crew cab short box model begins at $37,875, and includes leather-trimmed seating, automatic climate control, 18-inch polished cast-aluminum wheels, remote start and an automatic locking rear differential.

GM says EPA numbers and torque figures will be released closer to the trucks' fall 2014 launch date.

Truck Trend

I'm going to take a hard look at the GMC Crew Cab version when it comes out. Price and mileage will play a huge part. If the gas mileage is pretty much the same as what I have now, not interested.

The Chevy version resembles butt gravy, IMHO. The nose is horrendous.

Once you get some options on those trucks the price jumps into the mid 30k range. If there isn't a big enough MPG difference between them and full size I think many will just opt for the bigger truck. That's what happened before. More functionality with no fuel or price penalty makes the step up to full size an easy choice. There are those that just don't want the larger truck and don't care what the MPG, price, and capability differences are, but I don't believe they are the majority.

Scout wrote:

Once you get some options on those trucks the price jumps into the mid 30k range.  If there isn't a big enough MPG difference between them and full size I think many will just opt for the bigger truck.  That's what happened before.  More functionality with no fuel or price penalty makes the step up to full size an easy choice.  There are those that just don't want the larger truck and don't care what the MPG, price, and capability differences are, but I don't believe they are the majority.  

that's what I was thinking..

"A 4WD Canyon SLT crew cab short box model begins at $37,875"

for 40K I got my loaded ram sport, so no thanks on a canyon for almost the same price

The only game changer here in my opinion will be the diesel options in 2016 model year. They are rumoured to be hitting 30 mpg. If the price isn't bloated out of range then GM could have a winner.

Breathing Borla wrote:

that's what I was thinking..

"A 4WD Canyon SLT crew cab short box model begins at $37,875"

for 40K I got my loaded ram sport, so no thanks on a canyon for almost the same price

That assumes buyers of these trucks will pay MSRP where the full size trucks are discounted $6k to $10k.  That's likely not to occur. These trucks will highly likely carry some consistent level of incentives as well after the new wears off.

A relatively loaded '15 F150 can now cross $60k MSRP.  $60k - $38k = $22k difference

My '13 F150 MSRP'd at $53k.  The Canyon would be $15k MSRP difference.

2015 GMC Canyon & Chevy Colorado Prices Compared To Closest Rivals

Quote :

Here's how the new trucks list prices line up to their equivalents from Nissan and Toyota:









Keep in mind the prices here are "bases," but at trim levels that looked close as possible across the board.

With only base MSRP of these three GM configuration, we can't do a direct comparison across the lineup yet. Nor can we do a full cost of ownership analysis without fuel economy estimates on the Colorado or Canyon.

Other things to note; the Tacoma appears to be the only truck in this list that's got a regular-cab (true two-door) option (not discussed because there's no Colorado/Canyon single cab). Also, GM only provided a price on the GMC Canyon SLE in "extended cab" which makes this chart a little more imperfect.

While the front page of Nissan's website put their Frontier "starting at" $17,000-something, and Toyota's claims "$18,000" on the Tacoma, that changes as soon as you open the configurator... we'll have to dig a little harder to figure out how you can get one of their trucks that cheap.

What jumps out at me is the downright excellent volumetric efficiency GM is juicing out of their V6, which is significantly smaller than the level-up option from their Japanese rivals. No torque figures from GM yet, but it looks like they're leaving Toyota's V6, hacking out a paltry 236 horsepower, in the dust. Better hope that TRD exhaust in the TRD Pro package adds all kinds of muscle.

Do these comparisons change anyone's opinions about the Canyon or Colorado price point? Any particular factor you'd like to see torn apart in greater detail?

Truck Yeah

The configuration builders are now available on the Chevrolet and GMC sites.  I built a very nice equipped GMC Canyon SLT 4x4 for $41,090 MSRP.  Over $12k less than what my F150 MSRP'd.  It seems as the full sizes got more expensive it made monetary room for the mid-size trucks.

If this is true, then GM is shooting themselves in the foot. No way can these trucks cost $12000 less to produce. If a large percentage of buyers choose these over full size GM trucks, that may be the nail in the coffin. However, I personally doubt this will happen, as actual purchase prices will be very comparable.

That would extrapolate that the mid-size trucks need to carry same profit margin to be successful, which isn't the case.  Nor do other platforms have the same development cost, as they are spread across many international markets.  Nor is MSRP the sole factor in profitability.  Nor do they have the same addressable market.

Full size trucks are sold exclusively in North America, the mid-size trucks are sold in many international markets as a global truck.  

It would seem the better question would be does it cost manufacturers $12,000 more to produce full size trucks?  Looking around at other vehicles they sell, MSRP's, and likely profit margins are much less per unit.  Back years ago it was established that full size trucks and SUV's carry around a $10k profit margin.  Outside of limited volume and exotics there's not another volume platform that can command that kind of margin over hundreds of thousands of units.

If a $12k lower price difference is too low for the mid-size, what dollar difference fits the business plan and profitability better?

Even full size trucks often sell for $5k to $10k lower than their own MSRP.  Hasn't seemed to hurt any of the full size truck manufacturers as they have been profitable overall.

Automotive News is reporting that GM is aiming (total, Colorado/Canyon) production at 100 to 130k for 2015. Some of the total will go to Canada and Mexico.

That is my point. Production costs are surely within a couple thousand, or less. Full size trucks are the cash cow for US auto manufacturers. Probably 12-15 thousand profit per vehicle average. If customers buy these slightly less than full size trucks instead of full size, there is a 12-15 thousand dollar loss. There will be some cross shopping from Ford and FCA, but the majority will come from within GM. If GM has to rely on anything but truck profits to survive, they're done. That's why Ford said smaller trucks weren't profitable. Translation: not mega profitable. They already have a small global platform developed, cost would be minimal. Why take away from the cow?

No wonder Ford couldn't sell any F150's, producing the Ranger for decades cannibalized F150 sales. Stupid Ford and GM. They'll never learn.

Lotsa people never learn. The ranger was not a nearly full size truck. Also profit margins were thin. The year after Ford axed the Ranger(2012) small truck sales increased by 40,000. That's Toyota, Nissan and GM combined. Ford full size truck sales increased by 60,000. Doesn't look like it's Ford that's stupid.

A Ranger with a 4 banger EcoBoost and the 2.7V6 EcoBoost would be a winner, IMHO.

And I think the Colorado/Canyon Diesel will sell everyone they can crank out too, at a premium.

Truth wrote:

The year after Ford axed the Ranger(2012) small truck sales increased by 40,000. That's Toyota, Nissan and GM combined. Ford full size truck sales increased by 60,000. Doesn't look like it's Ford that's stupid.

Slow down there hoss, way to many variables going on in that time period to claim the 60K increase for the F150 was due to the death of the ranger.

I still contend that a modern S10/Ranger sized truck would sell just fine in todays market. Maybe not 300K/yr but enough to keep a small assembly plant running.

Maybe I should have mentioned Ford sold over 70,000 Rangers in 2011. That might be a relevant variable.

Towards the end the Ranger was out selling the Colorado/Canyon as well.
Just shows, IMO, there is a market for a decent product in that size. Unfortunately for GM the twins were not it.

That's right, and they aren't now. Too close to full size from appearances. I remember Ford saying they were losing money on Ranger sales, but it was a stepping stone for first time truck buyers. At the end of it's cycle, they said buyers could get a base full size for comparable money. Maybe, maybe not. Probably not now though.

We still have 2 Rangers at work. The supervisor that drives one doesn't like to take it home because he claims the gas tank is small and the mileage is terrible. I didn't know that, I would have thought they would get good mileage. Besides, we fill up at the township pumps so we don't have to put out any money to fuel them up.

The Rangers with the four bangers had so-so decent fuel mileage, but the sixes... not so much!

joemac wrote:

No wonder Ford couldn't sell any F150's, producing the Ranger for decades cannibalized F150 sales.

I don't buy it ... you're not serious are you? The Ranger was the last of a breed- it was a true compact truck and for most people in the market for that class of truck (I was one) a full size is hardly on the radar screen for a number of different reasons- size, price, and mpg/ operating costs. I agree with Diesel Dan- there still a market for a true compact size truck. In its heyday (the early 2000's iirc) the Ranger sold in excess of 300,000 units a year. The Ranger's problem was that Ford starved it to death- there is little difference between my '02 and the '011's (rear disc brakes, side air bags, stability control, instruments, seat fabric). If Ford had kept updating the Ranger like it used too it might be a different story. I think the other issue was that the N/A Ranger didn't fit into the "One Ford" corporate strategy like most all their other vehicles- having two different and mostly unrelated Rangers in the corporate lineup was a no no (full size pickups are the notable exception). Even the 2015 Mustang is being sold in Europe.  

The new midsize GM twins? ... they are an answer to a question nobody (or at least very few) are asking. It suffers from the "midsize disease"- it's too close in price, size, and mpg to the Silverado/ Sierra.

Not serious at all. It was a loaded sarcastic statement aimed at Truth's posts.

Using Chevrolet.com's vehicle configuration utility.

'15 Colorado Crew short box WT 4x4 MSRP $30,580
'14 Silverado Crew short box WT1 4x4 MSRP $37,945

20% difference in MSRP

'15 Colorado Crew short box LT 4x4 MSRP $32,960
'14 Silverado Crew short box LT 4x4 MSRP $40,920

20% difference in MSRP

'15 Colorado Crew short box LTZ Z71 4x4 loaded MSRP $40,695
'14 Silverado Crew short box LTZ Z71 4x4 loaded MSRP $56,170

28% difference in MSRP

Loaded qualification includes true truck considerations examples: spray on liner, side steps, trailer harness, not individual preference add-ons like wheel locks, bed nets, tonneau covers.