Colorado/Canyon Duramax Diesel DEAD in 2023

[Kaisen]

According to a few sources (unconfirmed by GM as of now) GM is planning to drop the 2.8L Duramax for the new 2023 redesign of the Colorado/Canyon. Also gone is the 3.6L. Both will be replaced by the 2.7L Turbo four / 10 speed from the Silverado/Sierra.


If for some reason you still want a Duramax Diesel Colorado, buy a 2021 or 2022

 

[nickw]

According to a few sources (unconfirmed by GM as of now) GM is planning to drop the 2.8L Duramax for the new 2023 redesign of the Colorado/Canyon. Also gone is the 3.6L. Both will be replaced by the 2.7L Turbo four / 10 speed from the Silverado/Sierra.


If for some reason you still want a Duramax Diesel Colorado, buy a 2021 or 2022

The 2.7 is going to be great in that platform......

 

[spectre6000]

I'm not sure it'll even make it that long. They've already sold the Rayong facility, and I imagine production will stop some time this year if it hasn't already. 2020 will likely be the last model year to come with a diesel from the factory.

 

[plainjaneFJC]

Add 160hp, lose 10lb in torque, seems like a good deal to me. Personally I am over diesel. Having bought 5 new diesel trucks in the past 18 years, plus a few used ones, I am ready to stick with gas. I look forward to not messing with fuel filters, def, expensive oil changes and higher fuel prices. Like said above that 2.7 gas should be a winner.

 

[blubullett]

I'm all over this. The turbo 4 with that trans is going to be awesome.

 

[McCarthy]

The turbo four/10 speed in the Ranger is amazing, so I would imagine this will be as good. Diesels only make sense in the large trucks (F350/3500) imo... Even then if you're not towing heavy why buy one.

 

[Jacobm]

While I've always wanted a diesel ZR2 Bison since they came out, if it's anything similar to power/torque curves and efficiency of Ford's turbo 2.7 it'll be great. I've heard the EcoBoost 2.7 described as pulling like a diesel motor, while getting good fuel economy, and being cheap to run as a gas motor.

 

[Allstone overland]

It’s supposed to be the same engine that’s in the Silverado so whatever the figures on that are , it should be similar. Which isnt that good for fuel economy.

 

[WheresYourColorado]

Call me old-school but I dont believe any truck should be limited to one motor option. A v6 or diesel should remain in the line-up, period. To me its like making all trucks 4x4. Many people dont want it so why force it down their throats. GM took a good share of the market by offering the twins with the diesel. Thats why I have mine, best towing and economy in the same truck (at the time at least). Now its weighted down with bumper, winch, etc and I still get 24mpg mixed driving and able to tow my horses with ease.
I feel the move to turbos is similar to the move to auto transmissions. As midsize truck consumers we'll just have to deal it.....unless they release a new k5....

 

[Deleted member 9101]

I've heard the EcoBoost 2.7 described as pulling like a diesel motor, while getting good fuel economy, and being cheap to run as a gas motor.

The 2.7 is definitely a good motor. Most people get hung up on the displacement and never look at the power it makes, especially down low.

 

[plainjaneFJC]

A guy I watch a lot on youtube has a Silverado with the 3.0l diesel and that POS has been in the shop multiple times in a 6 month period.

 

[roving1]

I loved diesels historically. While this engine wasn't bad it shined above its true worth due to everyone else having gutless revvy V6's with crappier transmissions (gear ratios).

The emissions compliance battle for such a boutique engines in NA spec is a losing battle. As is long term reliability for any modern diesel not produced in huge volumes. So many things can put this engine into limp mode its not even funny.

The 2.7 and 10 speed will be better in every metric and probably has a better chance at long term reliability.

You go back 5-10 years and have this engine with a manual I would be all over it. These days not a chance for me.

The diesel funeral already happened for me years ago. This is just a formality.

 

[skyfree]

FWIW, Car and Driver did a fuel economy test on the Silverado version of this engine and it got 10mpg less than the 2.8 Duramax in the Canyon (different vehicles though!). https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a25953794/chevrolet-silverado-four-cylinder-fuel-economy-test/. Was also worse than the 5.3 V8 by 2mpg.

It will be interesting to see how it performs in the ZR2 version of the Colorado -- especially off-road. The numbers look great, but that diesel is sweet when crawling, and with the big fuel tank the range is far beyond what my friends lugging extra fuel in cans can make. To me those 2 things are more important than HP.

I agree with the emissions sentiments though. It's crazy to engineer something like that and then destroy the efficiency by pumping exhaust back into the intake. Luckily an EGR defeat is fairly easy and inexpensive if you are so inclined.

 

[Beltfed]

I cannot stand Ford's eco boost line of engines - I use them at work.

Toyota lost me when they dropped the venerable 4.0l for the 3.5l, and as much as I love minivans, I wasn't going to go with the Gladiator with one of their power-plants in one. Had Chevrolet not offered the 2.8l Diesel with the Bison package, I wouldn't have bought one of their trucks either.

 

[Grassland]

Been pretty happy with our 3.6 Pentastar in the GC, and the 3.7 in my F150 and Transit 250.
1 of the reasons the Ranger and new Explorer turned me off is no NA V6 option.
I agree with Peglegfury that not offering optional engines is unappealing.
The NA V6s of now aren't the under powered fuel suckers of 20 years ago, and have 2-4 extra gears than those old vehicles.

The emissions targets killed the modern diesel, unless you are willing to delete all that, and take on the risks/penalties etc.