Sources: GM Working on Return to Small Truck Roots

Poltergeist

Ghost in the Machine
Aug 1, 2006
29,563
1
36
Ontario, Calif.
www.poltergeist.us
attachment.php


While other manufacturers have announced plans to completely abandon the slow-selling midsize pickup segment, General Motors apparently thinks there's still life and new opportunity to be found in small trucks. GM is said to be working on a new compact runabout that's reminiscent of the original Chevrolet S-10, according to our sources.

The current Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon twins have been steadily losing sales and market share over the past few years. Year to date, the Colorado is down 30.3 percent from a year earlier and the Canyon is off 28.5 percent. Newly retired former GM vice chairman Bob Lutz said in February that the future of the two trucks were uncertain and, last year, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said it was GM's plan to end production at the Shreveport plant where the Colorado and Canyon are produced by 2012.

The two biggest players in the segment today are the best-selling Toyota Tacoma, which still sells more than 100,000 units annually, and the long-in-the-tooth Ford Ranger.

But some have complained that the Tacoma is too big -- it grew to its current size in 2005 -- and expensive. And Ford says it will end production of the Ranger next year because small truck buyers can make do with a small car or fuel-efficient F-150. Small truck buyers have also moved into full-size pickups because the cost of entry-level half-ton trucks is often close to the price tag of midsize pickups.

Those reasons are said to be enough to open the door for GM to potentially offer a modern take on a small truck that's similar in size to the compact pickups of the 1980s, when the segment sold more than 1 million trucks annually.

Through April of this year, only 87,985 compact and midsize trucks have been sold, according to J.D. Power and Associates' Power Information Network sales figures.

The key elements of success for GM's future small truck would be fuel economy that’s greater than its full-size pickups and a window sticker that’s significantly less. It would also be a completely different and smaller platform than the planned next-generation overseas version of the Colorado that will be built in Thailand.

GM isn't the only manufacturer still serious about small trucks. Chrysler has said it hopes to produce a successor to the Dodge Dakota, which ends production in 2011, and Toyota's subsidiary Scion has said it's also considering offering a true compact pickup.

If our sources are correct -- and we're confident they are -- we think this is a brilliant move on GM's part to take advantage of a segment that's only down on its luck because the product choice today is so poor.
 

Attachments

  • 6a00d83451b3c669e20133eea9de76970b-800wi.jpg
    6a00d83451b3c669e20133eea9de76970b-800wi.jpg
    59.4 KB · Views: 178

rick67

New member
Jan 20, 2010
50
0
0
Indiana
love S10's Currently own a '92 with 357,000 miles, a 2000 Jimmy with 229,000 miles (blown eng, currently replacing ) and a 2002 S10 rcsb with 195,000 Owned probably 6 others.
 

TheBac

Why do I keep doing this?
Staff member
Apr 19, 2008
15,610
1,866
113
Mid Michigan
The only way this would work is if the small truck got 30+mpg, was fun to drive, and had enough power to haul its max payload.
 

rick67

New member
Jan 20, 2010
50
0
0
Indiana
My 95 RCSB (RIP) had a 2.2 5 speed. Drove it from home (near Anderson, IN) to Cleavland and back to Sandusky on half a tank of gas. 31.22mpg Was stock except for exh. Totaled it about a month later. Tboned a car that pulled out in front of me. Was running about 50 mph.Broke my sternum, messed up my knee and shoulder, broke some teeth. Still hurt, and it's been a year.
 

seth999

Wheeewwwww!!!
Jul 1, 2009
439
0
0
Corbin,KY
IDK but I love the 80's s-10 IMO even though not fuel efficient the 4.3l v-6 was the best option and even had enough power to be fun...im sure with a newer version they could cut the fuel consumption though
 

SmokeShow

Well-known member
Nov 30, 2006
6,818
34
48
43
Lawrenceburg, KY
Yeah, a Dmax in one sure won't help that price tag any.

I started out with my first 2 vehicles being s-10s. My 2nd one was a 93 rc sb 2.8 with 5spd. Still miss this truck today. I know u all are tagging on the 2.8, but mine musts been special. I do know it wasn't the stock engine so maybe someone put the 3.4 in it out of a camaro of that time? It ran extremely well. In fact, believe it or not, I could run with or beat 4.3 trucks! It ran amazingly! The first one was an 88 with an auto also with the 2.8. It WAS a turd though and couldn't pull the hat off your head. Something was definitely special about the 93!

Unless they r around 10k base & 15k decked out & get much better mpg, I'd rather buy a used FS with Dmax with more payload & reasonable mpg.
 
Last edited:

duratothemax

<--- slippery roads
Aug 28, 2006
7,139
10
0
Wyoming
one of my friends had a 2 door Jeep cherokee with a 2.8 V6. It had almost 200,000 miles on it....original engine....we sat for hours trying to figure out how that thing made it that far. :rofl:
 

duratothemax

<--- slippery roads
Aug 28, 2006
7,139
10
0
Wyoming
I don't what they would use engine wise but the ecotech would be a nice 4 banger for it. And GM is coming out with a twin (mini) turbo V6 that would probably make it a screamer on the street.

oh great, I can already hear the ford guys whining that "GM copied ford on the idea of a smaller V6 twin turbo" :rolleyes:
 

duramax3388

Member
May 22, 2008
447
0
16
44
Zanesville Ohio
I started out with my first 2 vehicles being s-10s. My 2nd one was a 93 rc sb 2.8 with 5spd. Still miss this truck today. I know u all are tagging on the 2.8, but mine musts been special. I do know it wasn't the stock engine so maybe someone put the 3.4 in it out of a camaro of that time? It ran extremely well. In fact, believe it or not, I could run with or beat 4.3 trucks! It ran amazingly! The first one was an 88 with an auto also with the 2.8. It WAS a turd though and couldn't pull the hat off your head. Something was definitely special about the 93!

Unless they r around 10k base & 15k decked out & get much better mpg, I'd rather buy a used FS with Dmax with more payload & reasonable mpg.
i had a 92 with a 2.8 and a 5sp. it was a great truck shouldnt of ever sold it :( i bet the crap out of that thing and it never gave me a bit of trouble. on the 3.4 thing i dont think you could put one in with a 5sp. something about the flywheel wouldn't work they would only work with autos thats the info i always found anyways.




I don't what they would use engine wise but the ecotech would be a nice 4 banger for it. And GM is coming out with a twin (mini) turbo V6 that would probably make it a screamer on the street.

oh great, I can already hear the ford guys whining that "GM copied ford on the idea of a smaller V6 twin turbo" :rolleyes:

cyclone and Typhon? spelling?
 

MadMaxx61

Devilmaxx
Oct 13, 2008
5,458
1
36
39
Windsor, Ont, Canada
i had a 92 with a 2.8 and a 5sp. it was a great truck shouldnt of ever sold it :( i bet the crap out of that thing and it never gave me a bit of trouble. on the 3.4 thing i dont think you could put one in with a 5sp. something about the flywheel wouldn't work they would only work with autos thats the info i always found anyways.








cyclone and Typhon? spelling?

Syclone

Humm I have always liked them 4.3L v6 turbo and AWD
 

jheyob

Member
Jan 30, 2009
305
0
16
Okeana OH/West Lafayette IN
heh heh, just got the temp plates for my new dd...1986 S10 rc sb with the iron duke and 4 speed...gotta love those little things. First truck was a crew cab s10 and this thing looks tiny even compared to it haha
 

carcrafter22

< Danger Ranger
Dec 22, 2006
130
0
0
Burleson,Tx
Good ridance, I cant stand those little trucks! they are over priced and under powered not to mention they have less cabin space than a miata. For a few bucks more you can buy an extended cab full size with a v6 or small v8.