Chevrolet’s “three-truck” strategy seems to have served the brand well, especially with the mid-size offering in the Chevrolet Colorado. The 2016 Chevrolet Colorado continues to remain one of the fastest-selling vehicles on the market, and its 2.8L Duramax Diesel offering continues to see a waiting list. Yet even though the Colorado is the smallest pickup truck Chevrolet currently sells in America, it’s still a giant compared to the last-generation Colorado, and even more so compared to the popular S-10 of the 90’s and early 2000’s. These days, we think there’s still an untapped market for a truck of that size.
In creating these exclusive renderings alongside RM Design, we entertain the thought of what a modern Chevrolet S-10 would be like. Slotting below the Chevrolet Colorado, an entry-level S-10 truck could manage to command a lower price point than its bigger brother, and would fit into the lifestyle of customers who just don’t need or have the space for a full-size or even a mid-size truck.
We believe that based on its compact nature, the hypothetical S-10 could be fine on a unibody structure, not unlike the Chevrolet Montana pickup, sold in South America. Though a traditional body-on-frame setup could be more capable in terms of towing and payload as well as more profitable — so we could see it going that way as well. Powering the truck would be the four-cylinder variety, such as a 1.6L turbo, a naturally aspirated 2.5L, and/or perhaps even an Opel-sourced 1.6L BiTurbo diesel. A truck this compact could also benefit from electrification, and could be the first pickup truck with an extended range electric vehicle/PHEV drivetrain, a la the Chevrolet Volt.
The Chevrolet S-10 rendering is meant to capture the nature of a no-frills work truck that would be perfect for contractors without much heavy equipment, and not much need for high towing capabilities or hauling capabilities. Of course, we would expect Chevy to also offer our hypothetical S-10 in less plebeian, more feature-rich trim levels… but the general design of the vehicle would be mostly the same.
Hash the design out among yourselves in the comment section below, and let us know if a truck like this would fit your needs, and find home in your driveway.
Comments
so if they built it, it would look like a Chevy City express cutaway van with a box?
Replace “City Express” with “2017 Sonic” and you are on the right track 🙂
Or 2017 Trax (so basically 2017 sonic). Also, needs more hexagon in the grille :p
Those are slightly modified Traverse headlights.
I would think a truck like this would suffer from overlap of the Colorado. I really don’t think many would pick it over the Colorado simply because it would be too small. Unlike the 80s and 90s when people were fine with small, now you have people that want as much functionality and space that they can get out of a vehicle, hence why CUVs are so popular. I could be wrong but I don’t think a truck like this would find many buyers with the Colorado on the lots.
u ut ute ute Ute UTE UTE UTE UTE!!
The biggest challenge this truck would face is pricing a well equipped model at under $20K. Far less people would buy a small truck just because they like small trucks today compared to the 1990’s.
Make it an EV or a hybrid, price it right and sell a whole bunch and generate tons of CAFE credits that you can use to support the full size market.
Oh yeah, another important part — first to market
I can picture a GMC variant that has all the options, more aggressive styling, crew cab variant, and a luxury Denali trim to top it off with Magnetic Ride Control and a performance variant.
Speaking of no frills truck. I think that’s why I loved my 90 Cheyenne so much. Single cab, long bed, 4.3 V6, 2 WD, W/T. Crank windows, manual locks, no radio, no airbags, vinyl floors and a bench seat. I miss it dearly and I miss the simplicity of Chevrolet trucks. Somewhere trucks became SUVs with the back open.
They can use the D2XX chassis used by the 2016 Chevy Cruze meaning a base price of under $16K and Chevy can equip it with a variant of the LWC 1.6L DOHC-4v 4-cyl turbo geared for torque instead of horsepower with the optional diesel 1.6L CDTI makes roughly 140 horsepower and 240 pound-feet of torque in the Euro-market Opel Astra that is planned for use in the 2017 Cruze.
Well here are some thoughts.
Is it unibody or body of frame. You have two groups here to satisfy, Most want a frame and RWD but there is a small segment for unibody and FWD.
Cost just how much would it cost in realistic pricing.
The Future appears to hold the Colorado as the truck to take on the half ton ratings as we may see the full size take on a heavier rating as a base model as a 3/4 ton. As it is now none of the full size meet the future regulations including the Turbo 6 Aluminum Fords. So moving the trucks to a higher rating would remove some of the CAFE issues as they have lower standards with the 3/4 ton class. Think like the old Heavy Halfs GM used to sell.
Towing? can it, will it and how much.
I really miss my Sonoma and would love to see a smaller truck but there will be many questions on just what the market will take. lets face it the old Honda Ridgeline never set the world on fire and we have yet to see how the new improved one is performing yet as a unibody FWD. It has it’s fans but not in the numbers of the other trucks.
I like the idea here but if I were in charge I would hate to have to make a decision here as this is just not a slam dunk idea.
One idea in this small segment is how about an Avalanche like Ute. Small bed with a opening cab that could expand the bed? But then you get back to cost? It would not be cheap.
I wish the full size trucks were what they were in the 90’s. Really, it was when the 07 model came out with it’s large bulging fenders that the full size trucks crossed the line into super size territory. Nor did I like it, not just for the overbearing size but I don’t care for the look either. Previous generation trucks while lacking the refinement of newer models, were just cleaner looking and easier to live with day in and day out. Had they stayed the same and had the Colorado/S-10 remained the same size wise, we would have an ideal truck line again IMO.
That said, we have what we have. So I think this S-10 idea is perfect. I would prefer a structural uni body masterpiece with a composite bed and even door panels. When gas prices rise (and they will), it could be the best selling truck on the market for mass consumption. I always preferred the first (2) square body and round body S-10’s to the Colorado that came after. And while this new Colorado is nice, I think I’d prefer the S-10. With the proper styling, they’d have hit. Just imagine the gas mileage possible with a modern high strength steel uni body design and composites. Add to it, the S-10 (like the C-10) already has name recognition.
I think they need a regular cab long bed work truck with a HD payload package. Heavier springs/brakes/tires etc. with current 4 cylinder diesel.
I’d rather see an el Camino, but one like the original concept of the 1st gen. More for work not just all about performance.
I think this is why the actual designers design the truck. That rendering is horrible
It is a good start. The Colorado for me is too big in the wrong places (height off ground) too small (width&headroom). I loved the old El Camino and if we could make one a bit beefier – with more cab room and why not make it upscale. They say Mercedes will have a truck in a few years. It is in the works. Upscale trucks that are easy to get in and out; get decent mileage; and can handle a modest payload are still in demand. I do not see that the Colorado filled the bill. I got another Silverado LTZ because I found the LT package on the colorado lacking … Just cause one needs a truck doesn’t mean they don’t want/need some luxury. So I would like to see more cab and more luxury in something akin to the El Camino.
AND MAKE IT HYBRID… ABSOLUTELY!!!!! LET’S START MAKING THAT TECHNOLOGY WORK. Can’t restrict it to little cars forever.
I think it looks great!! I wish GM would make this.
Great idea, if it is a real truck, not front wheel drive unibody!
Keep your heads mate. Use the old S10 frame and suspension (proven durable and reliable)> No use to redesign a proven design. This will keep the cost down. Same for powertrain and engine selection.
Don’t let the Brazilians anywhere near the design. The Colorado and its cousin look (underneath and inside) like something Dodge did in the ’80s and ’90s!!!! (and that’s coming from a lifelong GM guy)
As cool as the old S-10 was, there’s no way it could be sold in today’s market. There’s tons of re-engineering that would need to happen, on account of government mandated safety standards, tech fitments, re-evaluating quality/durability… a multitude of things.
Don’t really need to render it, just need to post a picture of the South American Chevy Montana truck
If they would give it a good feature content to price ratio I think they wouldn’t be able to make enough of them.
Overall, it looks great, I’d buy it. The only things I am not digging are the tail lamp/tailgate area and that the box could stand to be a little shorter.
If it were the size of the 1st gen Colorado, that would be perfect.
But the styling is a miss.
Looks too foreign.
Need to make it blocky-er, stronger, more like a truck and less like a car with a bed on it.
And there would need to be a ZQ8 model, replete with high (relative) HP, manual trans, RWD with LSD, sport suspension, big 4 wheel disc brakes available in a regular cab, short bed.
This is what I need and want !
I loved the S-10 !! Perfect size and it did everything I needed it to do.
And it fit in the garage with plenty of space around it.
First Gen Colorado was ok but not as good as the S-10.
Build it and I will for sure buy it !
I really enjoyed all my old s10’s and would love to see GM release a new one.
The key to its success would be price. The colorado is priced to high. Chevy could focus the s10 on fuel economy. A decent 4 cylinder with a manual transmission. Payload, lowing, luxury features wont matter, anyone wanting that stuff can move up to colorado/silverado. Keep it cheap and economical and use it to offset MPG average of bigger trucks.
I drove my 1988 S-10 with zero frills. I mean zero frills, no a/c, manual steering, manual 6 speed with 2.5 ltr. 4 cylinder for 11 years. Loved that truck. If it wasn’t for me getting stationed overseas I believe I’d still have truck today. I like how the 88 version was not uni-body. I truly wish a simple small truck could once again be available.
OH MY GOSH YES,,,,,,I HAD A 1993 AND DROVE IT FOR OVER 20 YEARS AND STILL GOT A THOUSAND BUCKS FOR IT. 200,000 MILES. YES I WILL BY 2 THIS TIME NO PROBLEM. WAITING WAITING WAITING. OWN THE CANYON BUT WANT SMALLER.
The car makers are all quite capable of making a nice small and affordable Pickup. But will they do it? Ford teased us with the new Ford Ranger for 2019 but instead of a small compact pickup truck they gave us a Mid size vehicle. Must be catering to F150 Masses. No thanks. For some reason they think we all want an SUV pickup/vehicles and we have plenty of money to spare. I was tempted to buy a Ford ranger back in 2004, but was so cheaply made, It wasn’t worth the money. Please note, that here in Canada they tag on quite a bit more money for what you can get in the U.S.
Does everyone really need a Mastodon sized “mid-sized” pickup? My old 1997 S10 regularly hauled a ton or more of; rock, dirt, etc., and still averaged 27 MPG with an extended cab 6 ft bed. With the current 2.5l, 4 banger and a modern transmission it would get 40 MPG, or better. For cripes sake my old 63 Valiant averaged 27 MPG with a 225 slant 6. GM can do better if they only want the segment. I don’t want to buy a Ford just because GM has abandoned folks like me. Who can afford a $35-50K vehicle?
I sold my 2015 Silverado LTZ after owning Chevy Trucks and Silverados all my life. I bought a Honda Ridgeline.. AWD and it is fantastic…. I don’t tow.. but that is the only drawback if you tow a lot.. but it handles 5000 pounds + some. depends if it is on the flat. it can handle a bit more… The ridgeline is EZ to get in and out.. Interior is like a car.. It has a nice bed with a secure trunk.. no need for a tonneau.. it has 110 and speakers in the bed… No bedliners needed either…