spectre6000
Observer
Ah! Beat me to it! I minored in philosophy. This is fun. Kant fan, personally.
Meanwhile, let's rein it back in a bit...
It's more or less down to the following:
The Gladiator for sure has character (my preferred moniker for the phenomenon we've been trying to nail down). Its shortcomings are that it's kinda big, kinda expensive, no diesel (yet), no toppers (yet), poor road manners, noisy, etc. Also, kind of more than I NEED. My preferred studded snows only come in 33"s, and that's almost not enough tire for the platform.
The Colorado's character is a bit less proven, and may require time. That aside, it's a better overall fit on paper. It definitely has some cheapness to it as well (is this a character element?).
Either will get the job done with aplomb, but that 500K checkbox REQUIRES character or I, like anyone else, will eventually get bored and move on or find some shinier thing. The cost and utility is suspect with the one, and the character with the other... I'm willing to sacrifice some cost and utility for character; that sacrifice itself is kinda at the core of what character is, as previously defined.
So, does the Colorado have character... Overall visual aesthetic, not really... The Bison package ads some visual interest for sure, but I don't know that it rises to the level of character; at least not enough for its own sake. Although, it's very clearly a world market vehicle adapted to the US market, and that's a relatively rare phenomenon in the category. You really see it in the nose (not on the Canyon), and the Americanization is all in the wheel wells.
The capability is definitely a character attribute. Sacrificing some payload, towing capacity, and fuel economy are sort of character elements. I see it as Colorado : ZR2 : Bison :: Camaro : SS : Z28. Aside probably from malaise-related issues, a base Camaro is pretty bland and not likely to stick around. An SS is much more interesting, but you've really gotta be into it. A Z28? I'm not really a muscle car guy, but I'd own one for sure given the right opportunity.
Also, the everyday niceties, I feel, will have a tendency to endear the owner to the machine. My BMW had a nice interior and some nice features in addition to an excellent drivetrain and chassis, and that made it a nice place to be. I don't think that's necessarily a worthy thing unto itself. I don't know that anyone is going to be collecting classic Lexus LSes or anything... Mercedes S-Class, Maybach, Rolls Royce, Bentley... People do get into those and work hard to keep them on the road.
In fact, could that be a negative? If it's too 'nice' does it get boring? My bus was hell in the Dallas summers... Driving on the highway with the ceiling vent open and the aftermarket air deflectors directing the air directly down onto the top of my sweaty bald head meant road schmutz would accumulate after a while and I looked dirty. Once on a road trip through a particularly cold stretch of road, we ended up shoving dirty laundry up above the sun visors to block the drafts. The bench seat was vinyl, and vinyl is always gross. It was incredibly loud without either a mattress over the engine compartment or a cab divider. For all that though, it was a blast to drive. Conversely, my brother owns a Kia (uppercase) Soul. To swap terminology, it has no (lowercase) soul. It's a nice place to be with AC, reasonable NVH, a functional stereo, etc., but a cross country road trip in a Soul would be soul crushing. The car (which doesn't necessarily need to be part of the trip) doesn't contribute as much as it could; it's a prop, not a player. Before anyone says something to the effect of "but would you want to drive something every day with the sort of character I described above?", YES!!!! It's fantastic! That's what character means! What would otherwise be considered faults are somehow transformed into a new thing: character. It's not a negative (though maybe a bit in the moment), and these things, despite sounding dreadful, are looked back on with a smile physically on my face as I type this.
Overall of this is definitely an element of hindsight. There are some cars that are clearly 'classics' from the start. Many others have to be revealed with time. The same things that make Beetles classics could likely be said about a K-Car. I actually knew a guy who was really into K-Cars, but even he knew that was weird. What's really the difference between them that makes one a winner and the other a loser? Quality maybe... The VWs were genuinely good quality cars, and the K-Cars were crap from day one. I'm pretty sure, I was into a very different kind of car back then... Mostly Batmobiles, IIRC. The Colorado's cheapness may cause it to swing a bit toward the K-Car rather than the VW. The Gladiator, IIRC from my brief visit with one, did not have any noticeable quality issues, but it was also the first truck I looked at.
This is all manner of disjointed... Sorry. Thinking 'aloud' for the sake of the conversation. This is very good stuff!
