My own personal review of the Colorado Sport

Discussion in 'OT Driven' started by footratfunkface, Jan 17, 2004.

  1. footratfunkface

    footratfunkface New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Covington, GA
    cliff notes at bottom

    well, i spent my lunch break today "test driving" our only colorado sport at the chevy dealership for which i work. these are my findings, as they relate to my personal preferences in a sport truck. i gave it a full run-through, including stop and go lunchtime mall traffic, interstate fast-lane driving, and parking lot slalom course driving. i let the truck warm up very well before the "test."

    first off, the ergonomics of the colorado suck. i mean suck with a capital HARDCORE. the one i drove was an extended cab with "bucket" front seats, with a console separating them. i use quotes because the seats have NO side support, and the bottoms feel like they're actually curved in the opposite direction that a bucket seat should curve. it's like sitting on a mound of hard foam padding. the seats are about two inches too high for my liking, and i'm only 5' 11". i was in no danger of bumping my noggin on the roof, but i was up way too high over the steering wheel (i like to be behind it, not on top of it like a bus driver). i could not seem to find a proper placement for the seat on its track so as to allow proper extension of both the arms and the legs at the same time. in essence, if i could stretch my legs, i couldn't reach the wheel. if i could reach the wheel, my feet were tucked too much. i eventually opted for being able to hold the wheel. a telescoping steering column would've fixed this, or just proper length on the column to begin with. the shift lever was too short. the steering wheel is smooth, with no texture to speak of, pretty much eliminating the ability to turn quickly. forget about one handed turning. your hands will slide right off the wheel. you know those holes they generally put in the wheel (one large one at 12 o'clock, and two on each side at the bottom, around 4-5 and 7-8 o'clock)? those two smaller ones are too small to even fit a hand in. which begs the question: why have them?

    the truck i tested was equipped with the 3.5L I5 and a 4 speed automatic transmission. my initial impression with this engine was that it had no power. i was mistaken. the problem is that the powerband is so high in the rpm range that you have to get on the gas to get it to pick up at all. so, normal traffic driving is a pain in the ass, because you can't just idle forward. it doesn't go anywhere. easing on the gas doesn't seem to do anything, because you have to get it up to about 4K before it really wants to move. but, once going, the truck seemed to like staying there. highways seem to be its thing. the governor is set betwixt 95 and 100 mph, seemed like about 98. possibly because the tires are only rated for that, i don't know. oh, this thing won't spin the tires. it makes a "ssk" sound for maybe a quarter-second, then it's done. the tires won't break loose. i wish i had checked what kind they were. i'd imagine goodyear eagle GTII's or RS-A's or something.

    the gauges: shitty. nice layout and looks, but there are only 4 gauges on this truck that i tested. there were the obligatory speedometer and tach, and then an oil pressure gauge and a fuel gauge. no coolant temp, no voltage, nothing. oh, there's a digital odometer, but i don't count that. the gauges are also awkward to look at from so high in the cab. it seems like you have to duck a little to look dead-on at the speedometer, which is annoying if you're trying to make sure you don't speed (speeding was done in excess during this test, but there were times when i didn't want to, for fear of the police station that i work near).

    handling: worse than my 98 s10 with a 2.2 and standard suspension. this thing is supposed to be the sport model, and have a tighter suspension and all that. i can't imagine how slushy the suspension and handling on the standard model is. the steering gearbox was tight, but stiff. you have to fight it to turn. because of the lack of grip on the steering wheel, this ability to corner sharply is worsened. the suspension is not all that tight, and the truck could stand to be lowered another inch at least, both from a handling and aesthetic angle. i ran over road reflectors purposely to test the feel of the ride quality over less than perfect streets. you can't feel the reflectors when you hit them. in my s10, you know damn well when you hit one. like i said, the colorado sport is well suited for highway driving, where you can drive fast in a straight line. in the parking lot concrete island slalom, this truck made the course, but not as fast as i could've done in even a silverado. the parts truck i driver all day, every day would've done better with tight cornering. there's just too much effort involved, which slows down the ability of the driver and the truck to take changing direction quickly very well.

    also, i didn't play with it much to test the EQ, but the stereo on this thing sucks, except in the fact that it has all your normal functions: cd, radio, blah blah. the sound quality is thin, and while turning up the bass end of the EQ might've fixed it, i can leave the EQ flat in my s10 and it's FINE.

    cliff notes: looks good, but sucks a fat one in actuality. i wish i had checked the sticker price. maybe i'll get that on monday. whatever it is, it's too high.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2004
  2. Supernoma

    Supernoma servus publicae OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2002
    Messages:
    11,823
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Dayton, OH
    Yeah, I took on for a spin last month. Really lacks in the low end. I like my torquey 4.3 over this high tech 3.5. Also noticed.... drum brakes, on all models. Rear anit-sway bar only on sport models. GM can do better then this, it's like 2 steps forward, 2 steps back.
     
  3. footratfunkface

    footratfunkface New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Covington, GA
    no, it's like 1 step forward, then having your nuts punted 50 yards back.

    the ONLY thing i like about it is the looks, and ONLY on the sport models, which are offered in ONLY three colors. that's retarded. and the sport model sits nearly, if not, as high as the S10's standard suspension. and the Z71 suspension is offered on both the 2WD and the 4WD colorados. that's retarded also. and the Z71 is only like 1.5" higher than the standard. that also is retarded. if you're going to lift it, lift it. don't waste time and money by doing something half-assed. but, it seems as though half-assed is the theme of the colorado. i have seen two colorados on the road. one was another employee doing the same thing i did with the same colorado. the other was a standard baseline model that someone had just bought and had driven about a mile down the road from us. i bet he regretted that decision about 5 miles further.
     
  4. footratfunkface

    footratfunkface New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    5,844
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Covington, GA
    or, just put in the P-code 5.3 from the trailblazers. it's an aluminum block and heads. weeeee! but it sells for $7000, even to us employees.
     
  5. Surgie

    Surgie Mein Führer, I can walk!

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2001
    Messages:
    69,008
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Knoxville, TN
    Just as I was starting to warm up to their appearance we start hearing about all the 'little' problems with them, ahh well :sad2:

    A v8 sport colorado would be absolutely badass but GM will NEVER do it :wtc:

    From what i've heard from people the I6 from the trailblazer is too long to fit into a colorado/canyon, so either an i5 turbo or a v8 would have to be the next power level. Hell I'd be happy with a 4.8l v8 in there but oh well :o
     

Share This Page