So, I built my truck:
So, I built my truck:
Keith Tanner said:JG Pasterjak said:Hey I get to tow with it!
Picking up an NC MX5 shell tomorrow morning and taking it over to Tom's. It's engineless, but it'll still be 3500-4000lbs with trailer and everything. That'll tell us something, anyway.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING TOM
What, is this the first you're hearing about my Miata hoarding problem?
i swear gm released a facelift for the previous gen last year, or am i just stupid.
It's been awhile since I bought a new car but what is the bullet for 'Teen Driver' under the 'Safety & Security' listing on the window sticker? It looks separate from the 'Chevy Safety Assist' bullet... Is there a physical safety component/software/device to the Colorado or is that on all new cars (or GM) now?
I already have a teen driver and can't afford another if this is standard equipment (just kidding)... But as a dad to a 16 YO driver I'm just curious to what safety components that speaks of.
Tom Suddard said:What, is this the first you're hearing about my Miata hoarding problem?
I'd like that on a t-shirt please...and maybe a bumper sticker, too.
I hear that we have some towing impressions coming up soon.
Reading the fine print...
Manufacturers make it sort of hard to figure out what the real tow rating is. Recent research for one of these mid-size trucks said with a certain model you could tow 7,500 lb.... but they noted that trailer would be recommended to have a frontal area of less than 55 square feet.
In reply to David S. Wallens :
WAITING
Sounds like someone got stung by a wasp during our towing excercise. :(
David S. Wallens said:Sounds like someone got stung by a wasp during our towing excercise. :(
Two wasps, actually. Or maybe the same wasp twice. Anyway, Tom's gate has wasps in it so after two stings I gave up and just brought the MX5 to my house.
The Colorado with a trailer behind it is clearly a smaller truck, but the powertrain feels completely down to clown with this sized load. 65-70mph on the freeway with tons of traffic and frequent speed adjustments was no big deal. And with the cruise set at 68 it would loaf along at about 1500rpm. Over about 32 miles of towing, with probably 20 of those on the highway and the rest around town it averaged 14.8mpg. Not amazing, but not Tundra-esque, either.
I think my biggest complaint is the tiny mirrors. They're not really suitable for towing as they have a very narrow view angle and are just plain small. Some supplemental towing mirrors would be in order if you were taking a road trip with a trailer.
You can certainly feel the load behind you. I'd estimate that was about 3800-4000lbs of trailer and engineless Miata back there and it definitely made itself known, but didn't upset balance much. Beyond 5000lbs you'd really start to feel it, but for folks with a Miata or CRX you'll have zero complaints. The ride may actually be slightly better with some weight on the hitch, too. it's very bouncy with no load.
Overall, I say B-minus. It's got good power for this level of tow, and would be an easy button for someone with a small car. It would be a fine place to spend some time for an overnight tow, but the cabin and cargo area may start to feel cramped for a longer tow, or if you load up on spares ad supplies. But I can't criticize it for not being a larger truck, because that's not the point of the truck to begin with.
Tiny, tiny mirrors. Points deducted.
In reply to Purple Frog (Forum Supporter) :
Ford is the only one I know of that puts out a trailer frontal area 'consideration' number, for every vehicle they manufacture, above which "may significantly reduce the performance of your towing vehicle." It's a lawyers vs idiots thing.
The published frontal area appears to be a simple direct mathematical relationship to the tow rating, which results in the 1,000 pound tow rating of the Mustang giving it a laughably ridiculous 12 sq-ft trailer frontal area. It doesn't matter whether it's a CUV, SUV, midsize truck, or fullsize truck, if they have the same tow rating they have the same frontal area consideration.
This is just pointing to things like further reduced fuel economy, increased wind sensitivity, and benefiting from locking out gears when towing an RV that you might not lock out when towing the same weight of open deck or low profile enclosed trailer.
In reply to JG Pasterjak :
I think my 2010 Frontier averages the same 14-15 mpg highway towing either of my RX-7s. Car and trailer combined is a little over 3800 lbs with the FB, 4300 with the FC. My friend once had the old diesel Colorado and got 20 mpg towing a modern Z28 Camaro out to Colorado. I wanted that truck but the mpg gains didn't offset the $40k buy-in.
On one hand I wish I got the chance to try this one to see how it compares to my 2015 Frontier but also I don't want to be tempted to replace a perfectly good truck just yet. From what I am reading it looks the Colorado could be a solid option for when the day comes that my truck needs to be replaced, hopefully that is not for a while though.
What we really want to know, of course, is how much effect the towing had on the range. Because we've only just learned that trucks towing can't go as far as trucks that aren't towing.
I kid ;)
More seriously, what's the observed average fuel economy been like before the trailer got hooked up?
IIRC, Andre of TFL got 23 mpg on a 100 mile test loop. He has over 5K miles on his Trail Boss now.
THIS !
Keith Tanner said:What we really want to know, of course, is how much effect the towing had on the range. Because we've only just learned that trucks towing can't go as far as trucks that aren't towing.
I kid ;)
More seriously, what's the observed average fuel economy been like before the trailer got hooked up?
fasted58 said:IIRC, Andre of TFL got 23 mpg on a 100 mile test loop. He has over 5K miles on his Trail Boss now.
Yeah the overall average since the last time the meter had been reset was showing like 22.x mpg.
In reply to JG Pasterjak :
Are you telling me that towing an open trailer at slow speeds dropped your range by 36%?!?!?!
THIS WILL NEVER REPLACE MY F-650 DUALLY!!!
(How's that Keith?)
ChrisTropea said:On one hand I wish I got the chance to try this one to see how it compares to my 2015 Frontier but also I don't want to be tempted to replace a perfectly good truck just yet. From what I am reading it looks the Colorado could be a solid option for when the day comes that my truck needs to be replaced, hopefully that is not for a while though.
Your Dessert Runner will last forever.
In reply to David S. Wallens :
*as long as he doesn't move to the rust belt. My 2010 is slowly losing the battle to corrosion..
David S. Wallens said:Your Dessert Runner will last forever.
2WD suitable for desserts? 
David S. Wallens said:Oh yeah, a photo from one of the garden centers.
Is that Butchers Nursery? I drive by all the time but have never stopped.
In reply to TJL (Forum Supporter) :
It is! First time going and was happy with the service and selection. We’ll be back.
You'll need to log in to post.
