Comparison shopping: Colorado, Gladiator, Tacoma

[85_Ranger4x4]

A V6 Diesel... Two stroke AND could be had NA... Now that's an odd duck... Any known applications? All I can find is "industrial applications".

Maybe cabover trucks?


I am not overly familiar with them but bumped into their existence while researching smaller engines they put in tractors. Detroits were everywhere at one time.

The turbo’d 4.3 in the syclone and typhoon made 280 understated hp. I recall they were pretty impressive for the early 90’s, mid 4s 0-60 and 13sec quarters.

They’re pretty collectable today, both the syclone and the typhoon came from pedestrian roots and I’d imagine their owners today would say those vehicles have some soul.

That is good but they probably would not stay together with 90's tech in a half ton doing 350 things.

 

[Mike W.]

Detroit stop building trucks in the mid 70's. We now have cars with a box behind it..Don't like your engine choices call your congressman...

 

[LimaMikeMike]

That is good but they probably would not stay together with 90's tech in a half ton doing 350 things.

I was commenting on the quote on how the 4.3 could have evolved if it had better heads and a turbo. It doesn’t compare to modern turbo V6 that would replace a V8 today, like you said technology has evolved.

The sy/ty 4.3 still was pretty stout motor for it’s time though, a good portion were raced and/or subjected to some kind of abuse and still are today.

 

[nickw]

When the 2nd gen Canyon and Colorado were released for the 2015 model year, a lot of comments on the internet suggested the 4.3L would have been a better choice for dropping under the hood of a (midsize) pickup truck than the 3.6L. The 4.3L is perceived as a much more "truck worthy" engine by many.

Each engine definitely has it's pros and cons, and neither would make every buyer and journalist happy.

I have also seen, than it is very difficult, and often impossible to change somebody's mind on these kinds of subjects. If somebody feels that all V6 engines are car based, and don't belong in trucks, you are probably not going to change their mind by typing words in a text box on an internet forum.

Hopefully nobody is that stubborn since the fact of the matter is there were V6's design for truck use only:

GMC V6 engine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They go up to 7.8L's too....or you can bolt the suckers together and get the "twin six" 11.5L beast.

The 7.8L put out more power and more torque at lower RPM than the older 12V cummins.....obviously at the detriment of fuel mileage:

GMC gas 7.8 V6 = 254 hp and 442 lb/ft @ 1400 RPM
Cummins 5.9 12v = 160-215 hp and 400-440 lb/ft @ 1600 RPM

 

[Todd780]

Hopefully nobody is that stubborn since the fact of the matter is there were V6's design for truck use only:

GMC V6 engine - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They go up to 7.8L's too....or you can bolt the suckers together and get the "twin six" 11.5L beast.

The 7.8L put out more power and more torque at lower RPM than the older 12V cummins.....obviously at the detriment of fuel mileage:

GMC gas 7.8 V6 = 254 hp and 442 lb/ft @ 1400 RPM
Cummins 5.9 12v = 160-215 hp and 400-440 lb/ft @ 1600 RPM

I believe the V6 used in the 60's GMC was. As far as I know, most GM cars in the 60's that had a 6 cylinder were straight 6's.

1960s-Era GMC 5.0 Liter Was The First V6 Engine In Pickup Trucks: History Alley

The 5.0 was the smallest V6 in the family. The biggest was 7.8 liters (478 cubic inches).

gmauthority.com

Beat ya to it a page ago, lol

 

[nickw]

Beat ya to it a page ago, lol

Damn! That's what I get for skipping ahead!

 

[spectre6000]

It warrants saying, and I haven't directly said it: I stand corrected. There have been V6 engines designed explicitly for trucks. I still don't like them in trucks, and wish there were an inline 6 option. Lacking that, a diesel inline four isn't a bad option at all.

 

[LimaMikeMike]

It warrants saying, and I haven't directly said it: I stand corrected. There have been V6 engines designed explicitly for trucks. I still don't like them in trucks, and wish there were an inline 6 option. Lacking that, a diesel inline four isn't a bad option at all.

Meh, the original VM 428 that the baby max is based on was introduced 20yrs ago in the euro version of the Dodge Caravan.

Soooo.... it’s not a car engine, technically it’s a minivan engine.?

Discuss amongst yourselves..........?

 

[Mike W.]

Driving a diesel Colorado reminded me of a 1982 VW Rabbit I owned..except the Rabbit had more trunk space..

 

[LimaMikeMike]

Driving a diesel Colorado reminded me of a 1982 VW Rabbit I owned..except the Rabbit had more trunk space..

Does Nissan still make trucks? I haven’t seen one in a while...?

 

[Mike W.]

Nissan even have a truck motor still..not the sewing machine motors the competition boosts about..

 

[AbleGuy]

I still... wish there were an inline 6 option....

I don’t know...my experience with one was, the big straight six in my 1986 Ford F-100 4x4 gave me lots of grief and headaches from day one and continued to do so until I got rid of it after only a 14,000 miles

 

[spectre6000]

Actually, I have to admit the diesel Colorado reminded me a bit of my dad's 2012(?) TDI Passat. Nothing like my M1009, but I expected it to be more along those lines given all the work they put into making it not "diesel-y". Opposite ends of the diesel spectrum.

 

[Todd780]

Discuss amongst yourselves..........?

Will do.....

 

[AbleGuy]

I’m re-posting this article, so you don’t have to spend lots of time digging way back thru this thread to find this comparison test:

A Comparison of the Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro vs. Jeep Gladiator Rubicon vs. Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 Bison: Mojave Road Run

Web link:

Toyota Tacoma TRD Pro vs. Jeep Gladiator Rubicon vs. Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 Bison: Mojave Road Run