Appearances can be deceiving. Take the honey badger, for example. It looks cute and demure, but it’ll absolutely rip your nuts off. On the other hand, baseball isn’t the most exciting sport to watch on TV, but being at a game is properly exciting. The original Chevrolet Colorado is yet another great example of having more than meets the eye. It might not be the most exciting-looking truck, but it features some neat ideas that simply haven’t been tried on small trucks in America since.
Launched in the third quarter of 2003 for the 2004 model year, the original Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon are prime examples of first-mover disadvantage, in that they came out right before everyone else redesigned their midsize trucks. In 2004, Car And Driver said of the GMC Canyon, “Right now, though, the Canyon stands as the gotta-have in the compact-truck class–tops in ride, fit and finish, solidity, impact isolation, and general driving refinement.”
By 2005, however, the climate changed, and the Colorado placed dead last in a five-truck comparison test against the redesigned Dodge Dakota, Toyota Tacoma, and Nissan Frontier, along with the then-new Honda Ridgeline. Here’s just a snippet of why, as per Car And Driver.
Everyone commented on the plain-Jane interior, the least inviting of the crowd, and if you like industrial-grade plastic, you’ll love the dashboard. The brake pedal is positioned too high off the floor. The front buckets feel flat and flimsy, as if they were providing the bare minimum of support but nothing more.
The rear seat isn’t any better since the backrest is uncomfortably close to vertical. Worst of all, that backrest simply folds down on top of the bottom cushion, leaving an angled, high shelf that reduces the usability of the space. The other trucks all have better folding solutions. One tester commented, “It’s as if Chevy were looking for ways not to compete.”
Ouch. It’s easy to forget just how much sub-full-sized trucks improved in the mid-aughts, and the Colorado and Canyon were not on the receiving end of those creature comfort improvements. However, look a bit deeper and something interesting happens — despite being one of the most conventional, old-school compact pickup trucks of its generation, GM’s entry-level trucks for the 2000s were deeply, endearingly weird.
The Colorado’s predecessor, the S-10, came standard with a little 2.2-liter four-cylinder engine making a measly 120 horsepower. This clearly wouldn’t be enough for the next-generation truck, so GM went with something bigger. Much, much bigger. Standard at launch was a 2.8-liter four-cylinder engine cranking out 175 horsepower and 185 lb.-ft. of torque. It’s worth noting that 2.8 liters of displacement is absolutely huge for a four-banger, and it only got bigger from there. In 2007, capacity grew to 2.9 liters, making it the largest gasoline-powered four-cylinder engine sold in an American-market light-duty vehicle since the Titanic three-liter unit in the Porsche 968.
That’s an interesting footnote in engine history, but what if you wanted more power? Well, in the beginning, the Colorado also offered a twin-cam 3.5-liter inline-five with dual balance shafts. Essentially a Vortec 4.2-liter inline-six minus one cylinder, the initial 3.5-liter version of the Vortec 3500 pumped out a somewhat mediocre 220 horsepower and 225 lb.-ft. of torque. Not hugely impressive output for the displacement, but not only did it line up nicely with what many competitors offered at the time, it also had a wide power band. Peak torque kicked in at just 2,800 rpm, peak power arrived at 5,600 rpm, and this engine didn’t hit redline until 6,300 rpm. Starting in 2007, this five-banger was bored out to 3.7 liters, and output climbed to 242 horsepower and 242 lb.-ft. of torque at a peakier 4,600 rpm.
With Car And Driver clocking zero-to-60 mph in 8.9 seconds from a 3.5-liter crew cab four-wheel-drive automatic GMC Canyon, these five-banger Colorados and Canyons won’t blow anyone’s socks off. However, the unusual choice of an inline-five does have an edge when it comes to the time-honored shitbox truck tradition of, uh, chopping the muffler off. Uncorking a five-cylinder Colorado actually results in something that sounds borderline exotic. Paired with the standard five-speed manual gearbox, this could be a fun little parts hauler. However, if a deeper note is what you’re looking for in a compact truck, Chevrolet made buyers wait. The wait was worth it.
For 2009, Chevrolet pulled the gloves off and dropped a variant of its 5.3-liter V8 into the Colorado. Called the LH8, this 9.9:1-compression, rather basic motor relied on sheer displacement to pump out 300 horsepower and 320 lb.-ft. of torque. For 2010, the LH8 was replaced by the LH9, which gained variable valve timing. How about that? Output stayed absolutely steady, but the updated engine could run on E85, and power even stayed steady for 2011 through 2012, when the LH9 saw a slight drop in compression from 9.9:1 to 9.7:1.
Mind you, the only transmission Chevrolet paired with the V8 was the infamous 4L60E, a four-speed automatic unit that might suddenly decide to have six neutrals if you get a bit too spicy with the loud pedal. Still, when in operable condition, it didn’t do much to hamper acceleration of the V8 Colorado, with Car And Driver running from zero-to-60 mph in 6.7 seconds. Even by today’s ludicrous standards, you wouldn’t exactly call that slow. Oh, and V8 models also got ZQ8 sport suspension, a faster steering ratio, and some cosmetic sundries like badges and body-color flares. If that wasn’t quite enough for you, you could even get a Sport trim with body-color bumpers, 18-inch alloy wheels, and a color-keyed grille. However, the sportiest-looking package didn’t quite live long enough to see the heyday of the V8, which is a shame. It was glorious.
Aww yeah, it’s time to talk about the 2005 to 2007 Colorado XTREME. God, I love street trucks. This package took a regular Colorado and threw on 18-inch wheels, a mesh grille, chromed headlight housings, a full body kit, unique gauges, and — on two-wheel-drive models — the ZQ8 sports suspension. It also deleted all the chrome and added some badging, and the result was a street truck that looked the business. Sure, it wasn’t any quicker than a regular Colorado, but it gave off the right image.
Were the original Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon perfect trucks? No. Early 3.5-liter inline-five models did have issues with their valve seats, teething issues were common during the inaugural 2004 model year, and every complaint about interior materials is 100 percent accurate. At the same time, while models like the Toyota Tacoma and Dodge Dakota grew in width, the Colorado and Canyon kept things compact, with a width excluding mirrors of just 67.6 inches. However, in the context of today, there’s something appealing about the size of a true compact truck, particularly when you factor in the passenger-hauling ability of an optional crew cab.
In hindsight, the original Chevrolet Colorado and its GMC Canyon twin were hits, even if they never quite achieved the ubiquity or model longevity of the Ford Ranger. They were common sights, from fleet-spec regular cab work trucks outside auto parts stores to crew cab Z71 4×4 five-bangers in suburban driveways, and for the most part, they seem to hold up okay. Perhaps best of all, they’re still reasonably priced on the used market, so if you find one with a clean body and frame for a reasonable price, it seems like a decent option for a cheap compact truck.
(Photo credits: Chevrolet)
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
The Opel Speedster And Vauxhall VX220 Are Featherweight Sports Cars Worth Waiting Another Year For: GM Hit Or Miss
-
How GM Beat Everyone To The Punch With A Hybrid Pickup Truck And Then Completely Fell Off The Tracks
-
This Chevy Camaro Trim May Be One Of The Most Underrated And Forgotten Sports Cars Of All Time
-
The Front-Wheel-Drive Lotus Elan Was Technically A GM Product, As Weird As That Sounds
-
Why The Pontiac Solstice Deserves Its Flowers: GM Hit Or Miss
Please send tips about cool car things to tips@theautopian.com. You could even win a prize!
I always liked these, they’ve dried up mostly it seems already. I wanted an extreme 3.5 with 5 speed when those came out when I was in high school. What I’d really like to do is put a 3.7 straight 5 backed by a Solstice redline transmission in my brothers ‘68 Firebird though. That would be fun and weird.
Yeah I’ve kept a look out for these too as a non-crew cab beater truck, but when a listing does pop up they are usually very well used…like just send it to the scrapper.
Yep, all run back into the earth. Always baffled me the big 3 have never been better at rust proofing, given they all are based in Michigan. Volvos practically never rust.
I never test drove one of these, but I was very attracted to the styling (exterior only, that interior is crap) and size. As noted, this is when trucks started to grow and this was a bit of a holdout that I appreciated.
As an equal opportunity lover of beater trucks, I approve.
YES! Thank you for doing my request! As with all GM products they had a lot of potential that was poorly executed. I still keep my eyes out for a clean Xtreme or just a clean V8 3LT or 3SC package.
Awesome article! Thanks again Thomas!
I mean I get why this is true, but it is a bit funny to consider how a 5.6L V8 is considered unremarkable, if not small in some contexts.
NO, They weren’t. It was pre-bailout GM. They were garbage then. And they are old garbage now. The interior was the cheapest trash GM could find and it was just sooo boring looking. it was a vast expanse of single color plastic. In or around 2010 or maybe 2011, I test drove a used, very low mile (roughly 25k) 2009 V8 extended cab Colorado ZQ8. I was driving a ~13 year old v6 5spd ext cab ZQ8 S10 at that time (which I still own today) The interior was still just as bland and boring as it was in 2004. And with under 30k miles it had more interior squeaks and rattles than my 150K+ S10. That says a lot. The 5.3 in stock form was extremely underwhelming. Now granted, a good custom tune would have helped immensely. But 300 hp should have felt like a rocket in a small truck. And it just didn’t. Again, keeping in mind these opinions were coming from someone driving a mid-90’s GM product.
The coolness aspect in question seems more like an “outside looking in” type assessment. And on top of that, it was the first iteration of what has now become typical GM truck design hideousness.
My Colorado suits my needs, but those S10’s were great, miss them. I had a ’97 and a ’93 (2.8 5-speed) before that. We went through a bunch of them in the fleet, the only thing that kills them is body rust. We had a 2.2 get to 520,000 miles and never had the head off, the tinworm finally got so bad it didn’t show well anymore so we scrapped it, and that was a sad day.
I bought a 2004 Crew Cab with the I5. Biggest POS ever. The passenger side doors didn’t fit right and had wind whistling noise on the highway. The fender flares, which were supposed to be attached to the bed with adhesive strips, wiggled around and ground the paint down to bare metal in no time. Battery voltage warning came on for no good reason (TSB to fix that). It was truly a God-awful cheap vehicle. The interior was horrible, all hard plastic – even the dash. Not even sure why I bought it now. Got rid of it after sliding it into the cement divider on the highway in an awful snow storm.
I had an ’07 GMC Canyon, and it was a fantastic little truck. When I was 20 years old and single, it did everything I needed. The extended cab was cramped for passengers, but anyone that wanted a ride didn’t complain. With 4×4 and the G80 autolocker, that thing worked excellent off road.
Much like a Cummins in a Dodge/RAM, a great engine has no value if it’s in a crap truck.
Last I saw used 12V and 24V Cummins were selling for a pretty penny.
Around 2013 I had a coworker with a 2009 Colorado crew cab with the V8 and the Z71 package. It was a sweet truck, and he absolutely babied the thing. I didn’t dare ask him how much he paid for it because I knew it was probably more than he would have paid for a Silverado or Sierra, but I was still always a bit envious of his truck when I parked my old Sport Trac next to it.
fun fact the original honda ridgeline has a faster 0-60 and quarter mile time than the v8 colorado. That being said the ls engine is just a few bolt ons away from some serious horsepower
that’s because the Honda has VTEC, which adds like 1000 hp 😀
(sorry, I had to)
mostly due to lack of traction on the colorado and the slow 4 speed trans. the honda has awd and 6 speed
“Just wait til that VTEC kicks in, YO!”
The OG Ridgeline was a mid 7 truck while the Colorado V8 did 0-60 in under 7s.
But overall the Ridgeline is the better vehicle
I mean I remember them, I think they’d make a good overland rig platform with the off-road capacity..
Street truck? Well maybe with a 4JJ1 Swap:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-l-Rvu8ZfI
All over Thailand tuning from trucks to rice-paddy tractors to long boat outboards.
But then I remember Toyota made the X-Runner Tacoma with a six-speed and an available TRD supercharger
I like these truck quite a lot, and came close to buying two new ones. When I bought my new ’06 Sierra, I nearly bought a leftover regular cab ’05 Z-71 4×4 Colorado, with the 5- cylinder engine, in the oh so trendy at the time copper color. The Sierra was cheap, and Colorado was even cheaper, but the regular cab 4×4 rode really rough. Or maybe the tires were just flat spotted from sitting on the lot for a year. I spent a little more and got a truck I’m still dailying 18 years later, so it worked out OK.
A few years later, I toyed with the idea of trading the Sierra in for a totally stripped out new 4-cylinder 5-speed 2wd regular cab Colorado that has been sitting at a different dealer for many months. I liked it, but decided it wasn’t going to save enough money to be worth the significant downgrade.
The amazing thing about these trucks, is how roomy the single cabs are. I am not a small man, but that manual trans truck had so much leg room I had to pull the seat up a click in order to fully engage the clutch. I’d love to have a cheap one now as an around town beater.
The sucky thing about them, is they have captured rotors. You have to take the hubs off to change the front brakes, or use an on vehicle lathe to turn them down. So brake jobs are … Complicated.
My brother has one and he couldn’t figure out why brake jobs cost so much.
I did a quick look and bust out laughing when I saw this and said yup, that’s why, and why anti seize is your friend on those hub bolts.
Not what I’d call a fun time on changing those.
No, I don’t imagine so, especially in the rust belt (which I live in).
When I needed a front hub changed due to a bearing that was on its way out, I paid my favorite independent mechanic to do the job, and I knew I would be fighting a rusty nightmare. Of the work of getting my Sierra’s left front up off he said, “That’s the worst non-Dodge hub I’ve ever seen! You never would’ve gotten that off in your driveway. You could’ve taken those bolts off and driven to Michigan, and that fucker wouldn’t have come off!”
I’m REALLY glad I paid him to do that job.
Same here, I’m glad to finally have gotten an induction heater for some of these bastard bolts that have become one with the car.
From what i was told was the shop he took his to, they broke 3 tools trying to get the old bolts and hub out.
Itd almost make more sense to buy whole new parts and swap the whole assembly out than to dick with taking them apart up here in salt land
I think a lot of people do that, but even taking out the assembly is still going to be something of a fight.
Very plausible, especially up here in salt land
I had a honey badger once.
But I value my nuts.
Divorce can be a good thing.
The Colorado makes me feel funny.
I had no idea the thing even existed until this year. That is completely baffling to me. I cannot figure out how that’s even possible. It’s like an inverse Mandela effect, where there is a very distinct lack of existence of this thing in my universe when it did, in fact, exist. I find this conundrum quite unsettling.
GM sold so many trucks/suvs in this era and they were so bland and vanilla looking they all looked the same. you noticed them but you did not notice you noticed them!
ZQ8 suspension on the prior S10 made such a huge difference in how those little trucks handled.
Absolutely, did the full swap onto my 4cyl/5sp truck, and paired with Oops, wrong size Dunlop direzzas, that truck could out hustle civic si’s in our club on back roads during fun drives.
Really wished I kept that truck
Too bad they never got the I6, which seems like an oversight given the SUV platform that had it…
allegedly everything fits, I’ve been thinking of doing the I6 swap in one for some time now
A hopped up AmeriBarra is just what the doctor ordered for surprising people.
That’s pretty much the plan!
I’ve been looking at these. The local shop has one nicely lowered on some wheels that looks like they belong on some JDM build. I’d want base-base W/T; short bed single cab with the black plastic grille with sealed beam headlights. Parts runner.
I had no idea they ever offered a V8 in these.
Same here. I’ve been revisiting the Colorado with the thoughts of dropping a V8 in one, but the aftermarket solutions aren’t exactly cheap. My nephew informed me that a V8 was in fact available for like a year, which could simplify/cheapen things a bit.
they were unobtainium and only the top spec trim level so the high price and 4 speed transmission turned people away. A silverado was actually cheaper due to heavy incentives.
Not to mention the full size got better fuel economy cause it had a 6 speed to the 4 speed in the mini twins.
Yep, I had no idea they did that. GM had a brief but glorious phase where they realized you could cram the 5.3 LS into just about anything. I’m convinced that they would have put it in the Malibu if not for some residual corporate culture of “Car must be this big to get a V8”.
probably not available in the malibu because while the engine and trans fit the steering column wouldn’t fit or some crap like that.
yes they were available from 09 to 12 but quite rare. The rarest trim was the ZQ8 (lowered suspension 2WD) with total production just north of 1000 units. Not exactly expensive but you could get a full size base truck with 2WD and extended cab or crew cab for the same price (around $30K)
I started looking for one of these a few years back, but when I asked my mechanic friend about the 5-cylinder, the string of expletives that followed quickly had me rethinking my plans.
’07 and up are solid. With the displacement change came a fix for all the valvetrain issues in both engines.
You forgot to mention the 3rd badge engineered variant, The Hummer H3 and H3T
Don’t forget the 4th: Isuzu i-series!
The 3 seconds it lasted.
It lasted 3 years and did get the upgraded engines for the latter 2.
Or the 6th: Holden Colorado!
The i-series is the one I’d want to own. The interior quality was definitely more on par with my expectations of Isuzu vs the Canyon.
Agreed, I’ve been trying to find an i-370. I like the Isuzu grille for some reason.
That’s like hen’s teeth
The H3 was more than badge engineering. It was the only SUV available on the platform, AND the beefed up the running gear. They have heavier duty front & rear diffs.
I have a ’12 Colorado with the 3.7 five that I use as my winter/chore truck. This is the truck everyone needs. Just enough truck to do homeowner truck things but not ridiculously huge, and they’re old enough now that you won’t mind denting or scratching them.
The thing to know about these is they can develop terminal frame rot; I forget exactly where but I think it’s by the cab mounts? We had to scrap one at work for that reason, so check before you buy. Also the oil pump is in the timing cover like an old Buick and subject to wear, if you hear a lot of clickity clack or a persistent oil pressure light it’s timing cover time.
I also like that I can cross “five cylinder” off my lifetime list.
the engine sound of the 5 cylinder in the Audi RS3 and TTRS lives rent free in my head. maybe one day!
What you described in your first 2 sentences is exactly how to describe the 05-19 Nissan Frontier. With the difference being the Nissan is reliable, easy to work on, parts are everywhere and cheap, and they are (subjectively) decent looking.
If someone told me they had 2 trucks available for me, an I5 Colorado and a V6 Frontier identically equipped, same price and both had 100k miles on them, there is not a chance in hell I would ever consider the Colorado.
Ha! Well the Colorado was what was available to me, and my ’97 S10 had gotten to the point the seat was soon to fall through the floor! The Colorado has 266,000 on it and been pretty reliable so far. Nothing’s quite like an honest working truck and I always feel it’s better to get them secondhand so you’re not being too careful with it. Gets in the way of work.
Of course I would’ve gone with the Frontier too. But no one in their right mind should pay the same for a used Colorado.
It was easy to find a 3.7 I-5 Colorado for the same price as a QR25 Frontier, though. And that’s a no brainer, too.
I always liked the single cab variants of these two, particularly after TST’s review of that turbo’d GMC. My only issue was that I remember hearing that you need wheel bearing seals and to take the hub out to do front brakes on them, which is just dumb imo.
The one I did had unitized wheel bearings, seal and hub like everything else these days except the rotor was bolted to the hub from the back side.
Ah, I must be getting things confused. Happens!
Still not a great design though. Especially when the Silverado & Cobalt, a bigger truck and the cheap economy car, have a bit simpler braking system to replace.
Is that brake design an Isuzu thing? IIRC Isuzu did most of the engineering on this platform.
If we had emoji’s, you’d be looking at the shoulder shrug one because I have no clue about that lol.
the LH8 and LH9 were aluminum block LS motors. 5.3 liters. they really were pretty good. especially the LH8 as they mostly came without AFM.
Should of existed from day 1 as the inline 6 was garbage and I doubt the 5.3 was worse in mpg or eco stuff.
with full time AWD and 4.10 gears, my H3 Alpha with the LH8 gets 15 pretty regularly. Sounds terrible in theory, but it is on par with most of the comparable jeeps I know.
Sorry I want a truck with a one piece crankshaft.
And my first impression was not a truck but a tiny car mounted on a frame. Even the ranger had easy entry and headroom, while the Colorado had a small entry you needed to climb to.
And when you think about the fact that the Ranger at that time, still used a cab that was designed in the 80’s and released in the early 90’s. Meanwhile the Colorado was brand new and was already outdated.