so 18.3 MPG on a dessert boss. basically 33" tires. offroad front bumper and safari bar in the front and sport bar in bed w/ light bar, heavier wheels. Added weight and created more drag. plus driving in cold and rain with winter fuel. Honestly got better economy than i thought it would
I loved how it took ONLY FIVE touch screen events to reset the trip information. This does not include Steven showing how to move the fuel info to the driver cluster. Instead of one or two clicks with a button on the wheel you need five presses on the touch screen. Technology at its best to be user friendly!
I have a regular 2023 ZR2 Colorado with the 33’s and no safari bar and no sport or light bars. Basically it’s stock so far with about 1,000 miles on it and I get about the same fuel economy. I do love the truck so far despite that. The desert boss is not worth the extra money in my opinion, however the Bison/AEV for the ‘24 MY might be for some. I paid just over $48K USD (not including tax and fees) for mine with Convenience and tech package, and I think this is one of the best values in the truck market right now. Unfortunately the Bose system wasn’t available to order at the time and the only feature I wish I had.
I just bought a 2024 zr2 black with the camo cloth seat heated seat and steering wheel and spray in bed liner for 42,850 usd ......employee discount lol
We don't buy them for MPG. Well I don't. I have waited 35 years to finally be able to own an off road truck. Hard work and patience. No regrets to own it with all the negatives many find. I have the ZR2 2023. I am 57 and probably look foolish with the grin the truck gives me.... so far, I love the truck..Except the getting used to the no button/knob for the lights. I hope others can find some fun with it as well. Still great video and I enjoy the honesty I find here.
@@nicholassmith7048the engine is also running 27 psi of boost. The 2.7 wasn’t made for fuel economy. In peak power it’s using the same fuel as a 6-7 liter v8. The small displacement turbo is for emissions because it’s more efficient with DI and high cylinder pressures. Very cool engine imo
Yup, plus it's a couple hundred pounds heavier. I think when I get mine I'm going to buy a second set of wheels and tires, same size, just more "street-y" tires (Michelin Defender LTX M/S's like I run on my RAV4) for running to work etc. They're still good tires in the snow and dirt (did both this weekend up near Durango), but I'm sure that, especially when running near max tire pressure, I'll get 1-2 extra mpg plus a better ride.
GM does an excellent job at making sure each specific product model has the correct MPG labeled for its configuration and not just a generic one for all the models. If it has a lift and/or bigger tires like the Trail Boss, ZR2, or the Bison, it has a more specific EPA MPG sticker that says what it should get but some manufacturers don’t do it for different models or unique trims and Ram being one of them that in the past did not have a MPG label for the Rebel so instead they just used the regular Ram MPG label and TFL noted that in a test when they had a Rebel.
11 місяців тому+8
Great video. I always prefer simpler tech in my vehicles. This high tech stuff just requires too many steps to do what used to take one or two. Let alone the cost to replace this stuff when it breaks if you are looking at long term ownership.
Never mind when all that crap fails in a few years you won't be able to get any of it fixed. Throw the vehicle away because the garbage tablet in the dash quits working and cannot be replaced. Way too much reliance on all that touch screen crap for important vehicle accessory operation....if you want a touch screen radio control, ok, fine, but they've gone way too far putting all the HVAC controls, and other controls into those tablets.
They need to bring back the diesel ZR2 Colorado. This new gen looks great and has "diesel technology" in the engine, it just doesn't get diesel MPG's. I can't see myself ever getting rid of my Duramax. I might add to my fleet, but I won't replace it.
I agree. I thought the idea today was to get better milage. If downsizing to a four cylinder gas engine from a six gets less fuel milage then why buy a mid size. GM needs to bring back the diesel a (RELIABLE DIESEL) for the mid sized trucks. I have the 2018 Colorado and I have always been blown away by how great the milage is.
@@robm3357…Emissions are the reasons for the down sized turbo engines versus the naturally aspirated engines, not really about mpg but it’s still important .
Wow...and I thought my 2021 Jeep Gladiator (Rubicon) was a gas-guzzler. But this ZR2 video makes me feel better now...all Warm & Fuzzy inside. "Jeep Wave," -- BR
Maybe I'm in the minority here but, these large screens are a deterrent from buying not an incentive. In a truck I want simple manual easy to use controls. Stuff I can operate dirty, wet, and with gloves on.
Old man rant!😂. The inside of trucks are starting to look like an airplane dash, more sh#t than you can shake a stick at. Confusing, distracting, and totally unnecessary. It does increase the price and greater chance of electric glitches. Give me the off road goodies with simple analog gauges, one or maybe two drive modes and you can throw in cruise control and some safety features. I don’t need or will use that computer on the dash. Pretty sure Steve’s dad would agree. I’m not talking about a fleet truck just a trim with more modest tech and simple switches and knobs that last decades. Sorry for rant, but if you have a 70 year old dad you probably understand.
I agree with you....I'm not that old, but hate all that electronic shit they've gone to in vehicles...that stupid tablet in the dash is 100% distracting...they whine about people playing on their phones while driving.....so what do automakers do, put a huge touch screen tablet in the dash for drivers to be completely distracted with trying to change radio stations, HVAC settings, etc. All that crap should be banned period. Nothing wrong with buttons, and knobs that worked for over 100 years. Oh, wait that stuff didn't fail and crash every time you turned around LOL. Gotta build vehicles with 100% failure rates for their electronics.
I wish GM would put the 3.0 diesel in a body on frame Trailblazer. I have no use for a painted sheet metal open box. The slight increase in engine weight would be offset by an enclosed rear body. Mpg and towing capabilities would be very good.
It won't fit. The inline 6 is way too long. They had trouble packaging it in the suburbans already, they literally designed the 1500's around the spec of the diesel because they knew it would be problematic. GM needs to update the 2.8 4 cylinder diesel. If they would put a little effort into that diesel instead of phoning home like they did the rest of the truck it'd be a little more desirable.
@JohnSmith-ev1sm is absolutely correct. It's way too big. It would make more sense for gm to bring back thier turbo 4cyl baby max with more Hp and torque. Give thier customers an additional motor option.
I think they could have made the 3.0 fit. BMW's 3.0 D is a similar overall dimension and they fit it in their small X3 crossover. GM used to fit their Atlas 4.2 Inline 6 in a smaller GMC Envoy. I think the actual issue is either the combination of engine and transmission length (since the 3.0 is designed to fit the 10-speed) or GM simply did not want to incur the costs associated with reworking it to fit the 8 speed or putting the 10 speed in this truck.
I'm not sure exactly what the Desert Boss brings to the table but the light bar, sport bar and grill guard won't help the gas milage. As for the winter tires, they are probably lighter than the stock tire and I'm not sure which one gives better milage specially in the wet. It's not surprising the updated Colorado struggles to best the older version when you consider the wider stance. You're pushing more air at speed and it will hurt the milage.
Crazy. My 2022 F-150 2.7 4X4 stx on oem 33's gets 26 mpgs @ 65 mph. Bigger, more comfortable, tows more. Has more power. (Ford under rates the 2.7. It makes it's rated power at the wheels. Been dyno verified by many people)
As a daily driver I’m averaging 23 mpg at 53 mph almost 28 mpg on highway ,that’s on a 2021 ZR2 with a V6 . I baby it. Love the truck. I live in New England and the fuel mileage goes down a little in the winter but I didn’t buy it for that. It’s an awesome truck .
My '95 Chevy S10 Zr2 regular cab short bed averages 18 mph riding it around the small town and rural area where I live so the trail bosses 18.3 isn't bad considering it's much bigger (heavier) and more powerful than my little S10 Zr2. I'd love to have the new 4 cylinder turbo in a new truck the size of my S10.
I'm glad you did this review. It's a nice-looking truck and it has everything I personally would want and need living here in the USA. I am hearing issues have been surfacing on the Colorado's and Canyons. I'm not really sure if I should move forward and get the colorado zr2.
I owned a 2019 Colorado with the V6 and was very happy to upgrade to the new 2023 LT model. The old truck was decent on fuel, Typically sitting in the 10.4-10.8 l/100km range. New truck is worse in that regard favours the higher 10’s and into the low 11.2-4 range but the best result is the transmission. Such an improvement over the previous model. Smooth and no more clunky down shifts. I wish they still offered the 6’ bed length but much happier with the new truck even if it has some turbo lag. Ps. Im 6’1” and very comfortable however i do not have a sunroof.
I've been getting 23/24 mpg with a 2023 LT 2wd mostly highway driving. My 2007 Silverado double cab, 4wd 5.3L averages 21-23 mpg highway. Now highway in the area I live in is all 60mph speed limit.
Long story short, the Toyota 2.4 without iForce is simply an evolutionary engine. The 2.7 on the other hand along with the iForce can be revolutionary powerplants. Reliability on both will be determined in the future. You cannot compare a non-tuned 2.4 with a 2.7 L3B So far the 2.7 has an exceptional track record, throughout a number of years.
@ALMX5DP the fact that it produces a lot more torque than most modern v8s including ecoboost engines, the output down low just like a diesel, the forged internals and sleeved cylinders, the stroke. Designed by the diesel team. Better drive towing than even more torque heavy v8s, dosent need to downshift to climb a hill while towing like the 5.3 or 6.2 does, the dual volute turbo setup, the electronic cooling system. I'm gonna say it ready... the fuel mileage. When driven like a truck and not a.rqce car it's impossible not to get well over 20mpg unloaded. Mainly all about heavy torque down low. Never been an engine like it. Turbo 4s of the past sacrifice torque for horsepower, this engine sacrifices horsepower for torque. A true truck engine. It's glorius. Ever heard of Fords Godzilla v8, this 4 banger hamster wheel produces almost as much torque.
@ALMX5DP the 2.4 is an incremental upgrade by Toyota, the 2.7 HO is a huge leap. Watch TFL race between these two to see the power difference. It's dramatic. I know racing dosent mean much for trucks since often the highest torque setups are slower but in this case you have the higher torque vehicle pooping down Toyotas throat
@@thewireman134 seems more evolutionary even if it produces very healthy numbers. Just curious if any of those aforementioned aspects are distinctly lacking from the Tacomas engine. It also seems to produce decent output for its displacement.
I mean it's a turbo 4 banger 4wd with massive tires and tons of heavy crap tacked on.. What was everyone expecting. That's why I got the fully loaded 2WD LT model because it has the better fuel economy and the mods I want won't reduce it by much. I'm averaging 25+ mpg on highway and 20 mpg in the city. I love this truck!
@EGGINFOOLS not only that but one of the best if not the best diesel ever engineered for light truck duties. The 2.7 has its own benefits though for sure. I have gotten over 30mpg a couple times and 26+ a decent amount. Admittedly not as good as the 3.0, but I went 2.7 because of the emission and DEF and fuel price factor
Anyone with 1/2 a brain would know putting a smaller engine in something isn't going to get better fuel economy, especially when you load it down with heavier/larger tires and wheels, and all the other unnecessary offroad crap, and electronic junk they have in them. I'm surprised they managed 18mpg out of it. But that's not any better than a V8 in the real world.
I was thinking of buying one ,but the gas consumption and price turned me off!..way to go Chevy..As Usual an awesome!! Video Thank you Truck King you guys are the best 👌👍🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
So the real world mpg is 18, right in with the other midsize trucks. I did see the TFL guys getting 23 ish mpg in their new Tacoma 4x4 Off Road, a 5 mpg or almost 30% better than the Chevy. It will be interesting to see what the Tacoma TRD Pro does with the hybrid drivetrain. I know the I Force is more about adding power than efficiency, but I'm looking forward to some real world test on it.
Huge power difference. The Tacoma has 278hp and 317 lb ft of torque. The ZR2 has 310hp and 430 lb ft of torque. They’re not even in the same ballpark. Not to mention the bigger off-road tires versus the highway tires on the TFL Tacoma. It’s no wonder there’s a difference in mpg.
My 2020 Z71 3.6lt best was 8.5lt/100km hwy with tail wind no towing, normally 8.9 to 9.7. Towing a 16 foot lund boat with camping gear, etc was 13.7 to 14.2l/100km
Yea but - it's over priced and only appropriate for those with the income to buy one I would not chase this price only because it's the best looking truck out there. I would like to see manufacturers give us good trucks with less bells and whistles. and about 1/2 the price. This thing is beautiful. Great review!
@@mikesawyer1336 Agree! Way overpriced and if the economy continues to decline as hyperinflation continues to increase, vehicle manufacturers have made the decision to raise prices, manufacture less vehicles to have significant less overhead while increasing profits.
It was clearly rented. Not a TK style to have a suit. I thought that Steve had a wedding to attend after the Chicago show and that’s why he had the suit on.
Jeep gladiator diesel on 37 inch tires with tons of search and rescue gear. 23 MPG all day long. My friend has a Colorado with a diesel. He will never get rid of it.
22’ Gladiator Mojave on 37” tires, steel bumper, winch, aluminum canopy, roof top tent and 2” lift. Just did a 200km round trip city and hwy, 14.9L/100km. 3.6 v6 and stock 4.10 gears. Overall, that’s disappointing to see and makes me feel better about my mpg
I just got my ZR2, not desert boss, and so far city is around 12, and can't 15 hwy. I'm hoping it just needs to be broken in since I only have 250 miles on it so far. It is very capable and an awesome truck, I just wish the hwy mpg was a little better.
Motor Trend test results for a new ‘24 Tacoma and a’23 Colorado Trail Boss with the mid power rating and the results were not good for the Tacoma. The Trail Boss beat it by more than a second in both 0-60 and quarter mile times.
I'm waiting to see 0-60 times with broken a in Tacomas and with the I Force hybrid system. I did see the TFL guys got over 23 mpg in their new Tacoma 4x4, but their early 0-60 wasn't impressive.
Given today's fuel technology, they've really failed in the fuel economy world in all these vehicles....many of these turbo engines now get worse fuel economy than the V8's they replaced. Not impressed with the way any of these automakers have gone with pickups.
Truck king is still out to lunch on the power delivery. The 2.7 makes 348tq @ 1500, that's still massive. Every other review talks about good the low end torque in on the 2.7L. Fuel economy also isn't a surprise. The new truck is Heavier, it has much larger tires and is even less aerodynamic.
…Yes it does, and it’s the biggest reason why vehicles are growing larger in size so as to fit into a more favorable EPA CAFE(Corporate Average Fuel Economy) class.
I'm so glad GM remembered to make an affordable little truck for the average folks. A basic more economical little truck that is built on practicality and affordability.
Probably. However, if you look at the base MSRP of a ZR2 trim $48k then it’s a bargain compared to what they are selling the new Tacomas nowadays. You can get the ZR2 for MSRP. I just saw a video on a different channel where they showed a 2WD !!!! Sport for $46k with distributor add on (useless predator step, aesthetic XP package, etc). 2WD Sport Tacoma $46k vs ZR2 4WD two lockers 35s, steel bumpers, skid plates, equivalent tech for $48k. You don’t need the desert Boss or AEV or Bison packages on the Chevy.
@@is6566 just gotta find right dealer. I just bought new Tacoma for my wife two months ago. Trail team special edition. Locker, all safety features and factory lift. 42k.
@@is6566 only paid 42k for wife’s Tacoma two months ago. 4WD, locker, factory lift , all safety equipment, trail team special edition. Guess it just matters on dealer.
The truck did pretty well overall. Considering the new Tacoma will have you filling up more due to the smaller tank size for the new model. I heard the departure angles are not amazing on the TRD. Online reviewers, including TFL, have said that the Tacoma engine sounds like a small tractor. I'd hold off truck of the year nomination. Just because it says Toyota, doesn't mean that it's going to be the eternal champion.
My nz colorado is pushing 9yrs old, 2" lift, chopped front bumper, rooftop tent, 32s over the factory 29s...and as a diesel (only option) I can average less than 10ltr per 100...best 100k is 8.8...on the factory set up, best 100k was 6😅
Wow I can’t afford to put gas in that. I own the Colorado diesel and get an easy 28 mpg combined If mpg was really the goal why would GM cancel the diesel? Also the people that own the 3.0 diesel in the full sized truck brag about getting amazing fuel milage. And it’s that fuel milage is why the full sized trucks with the 3.0 diesel is so popular. Wake up GM and bring back a RELIABLE diesel to the mid sized trucks.
It’s not about mpg. It’s about emissions. You can thank the govt. for that. And with diesel costing $1 more per gallon, you aren’t saving anything over the gas engine.
@@Holden-McGroin if it was about emissions why is GMs 3.0 so popular and spreading across SUVs like Cadillac. The emissions from today’s diesels is very low. Diesel and gas is almost the same price in Canada depending on the time of year. Heating season drives the price up. Gas in Atlantic Canada right now is 6.43 a U.S. gal. 16 MPG is very poor. Even at a dollar more a gallon the diesel is cheaper to run.
The capabilities, looks, ect take precedent over "this" trucks MPG's. I have a 21' ZR2 & MPG was the least thing on my list. Yes, it's important to an extent, but if you are buying ANY truck for mpg's then you don't need one or really use it as intended. I'd still wait on a "24/25" year model before getting this new redesigned one. Seems quite a few are having screen glitches, turn signal issues, draining batteries from over air updates, squeakes/rattles, & more. Nice(expensive) truck though:)
Colorado has been more reliable than Tacoma since 2016. Check repairpal for reliability and NHTSA for recalls. Tacoma has more than double the recalls than the Colorado. Type Tacoma problems or Tundra problems in the search bar. They're all about the same with reliability nowadays. Buy what you like
My 2016 Tacoma was the worst vehicle I've ever owned. If you want the new one you should consider waiting until the second or third year. My new Colorado has been excellent, though.
I have a 91 GMC regular cab 4x4 with a 305 5spd with 265K for milage on it. I can get 28mpg at 65mph all day long! No matter the weather! I run 33's as well! I think Auto company's making new trucks now a days, don't give a crap about MPG because of the EV push going on.
Yes 33's. The winter tires in this video aren't the usual tire. I believe it's usually the Goodyear Terrritory MT like you'd see on a Bronco. The Bison AEV comes with 35's. The Bison is also probably worth the money the Desert Boss not so much (in my opinion).
Because they're notoriously crap and were bailed out using our tax dollars once, get numerous tax subsidies on a regular basis all over North America, as well as being very close to failing again. They should be under a microscope, especially at these prices.
When i drive on long trips to my camp i get pretty well same economy with my 20 Tundra. I bet towing a good size trailer with this and it will be even thirstier
I live in the White Mountains, NH U.S.A. and just got into a new toyota 4runner limited, for $47,200. Prices are droping like flys, I got a better TRUCK, fot half the price, just off the boat from The Holly Ground of Tahara, Japan, LIVE FREE OR DIE - 13
Good looking truck, yeah, way too expensive, however, your real-world fuel mileage pretty much matched the competition's EPA ratings (so maybe a 'wash', and just buy what you want).
Dont forget the desert boss has 35" tires, something that no other truck offers in this class, this surely effects economy more than a light bar. Also 90% of this engines torque is avalable at 1600RPM i thought, thats 387 ft/pounds. The taco maxes out at what 318? Makes no sense. Seems more like a one sided bashing than a review. Fact of the matter is this engine is a MONSTER, with monster power, I have a Canyon Denali 2.7 HO with 15k miles so I am aware. This engine is a marvel and is the least shift happy truck i have owned. Yes that includes the 3.0 10-speed. I have also owned a 5.3. a 5.7, and a 3.0 Duramax. This engine out accelerates each handily. Last review you made it seem like the best truck ever, and this one seems to be mostly negative. Jumping on the Toyota fanboi wagon i see
@02hreblue30 I stand corrected on the tire size, thanks for clarifying. Either way at 65mph I'm often kissing 26mpg in the Denali which also has 33's albeit a little more pedestrian type tread. In addition the 2.7Twill annihilate the 2.4T. Were talking an extra 100+ foot pounds of torque here. It's not some made up number it's real.
Ok friends, let’s talk about this torque power! Sounds like you’re complaining about the torque and where it comes in, I’d rather see it come in around 3000 than 1600 because 4cyl engines are higher rev engines and you don’t spend a lot of time at 1600 if it was a diesel I would say low RPM torque is a must but you’re talking about a 4cyl engine which with turbo coming in at about the same RPM doesn’t it make sense for the torque power to come in has the turbo, just my opinion
so 18.3 MPG on a dessert boss. basically 33" tires. offroad front bumper and safari bar in the front and sport bar in bed w/ light bar, heavier wheels. Added weight and created more drag. plus driving in cold and rain with winter fuel. Honestly got better economy than i thought it would
I loved how it took ONLY FIVE touch screen events to reset the trip information. This does not include Steven showing how to move the fuel info to the driver cluster.
Instead of one or two clicks with a button on the wheel you need five presses on the touch screen. Technology at its best to be user friendly!
I know... "Newer" isn't always better! So incredible dumb. Leave it to GM....🤨
I have a regular 2023 ZR2 Colorado with the 33’s and no safari bar and no sport or light bars. Basically it’s stock so far with about 1,000 miles on it and I get about the same fuel economy. I do love the truck so far despite that. The desert boss is not worth the extra money in my opinion, however the Bison/AEV for the ‘24 MY might be for some. I paid just over $48K USD (not including tax and fees) for mine with Convenience and tech package, and I think this is one of the best values in the truck market right now. Unfortunately the Bose system wasn’t available to order at the time and the only feature I wish I had.
I just bought a 2024 zr2 black with the camo cloth seat heated seat and steering wheel and spray in bed liner for 42,850 usd ......employee discount lol
@@acoaks84 nice! Wish I had that employee discount! Enjoy your truck!
We don't buy them for MPG. Well I don't. I have waited 35 years to finally be able to own an off road truck. Hard work and patience. No regrets to own it with all the negatives many find. I have the ZR2 2023. I am 57 and probably look foolish with the grin the truck gives me.... so far, I love the truck..Except the getting used to the no button/knob for the lights. I hope others can find some fun with it as well. Still great video and I enjoy the honesty I find here.
I agree and can relate to everything you said. Much better value in the standard ZR2 than the Desert Boss
Bigger tires, bigger overall truck, and more power, why would you think it would get better fuel economy?
Because GM downsized the engine to a smaller turbo 4-cylinder.
@@nicholassmith7048for a smaller engine to produce more power you need to force more air and more fuel.
@@nicholassmith7048the engine is also running 27 psi of boost. The 2.7 wasn’t made for fuel economy. In peak power it’s using the same fuel as a 6-7 liter v8. The small displacement turbo is for emissions because it’s more efficient with DI and high cylinder pressures. Very cool engine imo
Yup, plus it's a couple hundred pounds heavier. I think when I get mine I'm going to buy a second set of wheels and tires, same size, just more "street-y" tires (Michelin Defender LTX M/S's like I run on my RAV4) for running to work etc. They're still good tires in the snow and dirt (did both this weekend up near Durango), but I'm sure that, especially when running near max tire pressure, I'll get 1-2 extra mpg plus a better ride.
Bigger tires, bigger truck, bigger excuses!
I mean, I get that it has some compromises, but this truck gets worse mileage than some HDs!
I hate this trend of putting everything you need to access inside a digital display. It’s too distracting.
Nice truck, crazy money though. I live in Canada and the prices of vehicles are outrageous.
GM does an excellent job at making sure each specific product model has the correct MPG labeled for its configuration and not just a generic one for all the models.
If it has a lift and/or bigger tires like the Trail Boss, ZR2, or the Bison, it has a more specific EPA MPG sticker that says what it should get but some manufacturers don’t do it for different models or unique trims and Ram being one of them that in the past did not have a MPG label for the Rebel so instead they just used the regular Ram MPG label and TFL noted that in a test when they had a Rebel.
Great video. I always prefer simpler tech in my vehicles. This high tech stuff just requires too many steps to do what used to take one or two. Let alone the cost to replace this stuff when it breaks if you are looking at long term ownership.
Never mind when all that crap fails in a few years you won't be able to get any of it fixed. Throw the vehicle away because the garbage tablet in the dash quits working and cannot be replaced. Way too much reliance on all that touch screen crap for important vehicle accessory operation....if you want a touch screen radio control, ok, fine, but they've gone way too far putting all the HVAC controls, and other controls into those tablets.
They need to bring back the diesel ZR2 Colorado. This new gen looks great and has "diesel technology" in the engine, it just doesn't get diesel MPG's. I can't see myself ever getting rid of my Duramax. I might add to my fleet, but I won't replace it.
I agree. I thought the idea today was to get better milage. If downsizing to a four cylinder gas engine from a six gets less fuel milage then why buy a mid size.
GM needs to bring back the diesel a (RELIABLE DIESEL) for the mid sized trucks.
I have the 2018 Colorado and I have always been blown away by how great the milage is.
@@robm3357…Emissions are the reasons for the down sized turbo engines versus the naturally aspirated engines, not really about mpg but it’s still important .
Australia, Brasil, Mexico all the midsize trucks are Diesel. You can buy a Ford Ranger with 3.0l . Sad here in the USA they don't have it.
Wow...and I thought my 2021 Jeep Gladiator (Rubicon) was a gas-guzzler. But this ZR2 video makes me feel better now...all Warm & Fuzzy inside. "Jeep Wave,"
-- BR
Maybe I'm in the minority here but, these large screens are a deterrent from buying not an incentive. In a truck I want simple manual easy to use controls. Stuff I can operate dirty, wet, and with gloves on.
Old man rant!😂. The inside of trucks are starting to look like an airplane dash, more sh#t than you can shake a stick at. Confusing, distracting, and totally unnecessary. It does increase the price and greater chance of electric glitches. Give me the off road goodies with simple analog gauges, one or maybe two drive modes and you can throw in cruise control and some safety features. I don’t need or will use that computer on the dash. Pretty sure Steve’s dad would agree. I’m not talking about a fleet truck just a trim with more modest tech and simple switches and knobs that last decades. Sorry for rant, but if you have a 70 year old dad you probably understand.
I agree with you....I'm not that old, but hate all that electronic shit they've gone to in vehicles...that stupid tablet in the dash is 100% distracting...they whine about people playing on their phones while driving.....so what do automakers do, put a huge touch screen tablet in the dash for drivers to be completely distracted with trying to change radio stations, HVAC settings, etc. All that crap should be banned period. Nothing wrong with buttons, and knobs that worked for over 100 years. Oh, wait that stuff didn't fail and crash every time you turned around LOL. Gotta build vehicles with 100% failure rates for their electronics.
I wish GM would put the 3.0 diesel in a body on frame Trailblazer. I have no use for a painted sheet metal open box. The slight increase in engine weight would be offset by an enclosed rear body. Mpg and towing capabilities would be very good.
It won't fit. The inline 6 is way too long. They had trouble packaging it in the suburbans already, they literally designed the 1500's around the spec of the diesel because they knew it would be problematic. GM needs to update the 2.8 4 cylinder diesel. If they would put a little effort into that diesel instead of phoning home like they did the rest of the truck it'd be a little more desirable.
@JohnSmith-ev1sm is absolutely correct. It's way too big. It would make more sense for gm to bring back thier turbo 4cyl baby max with more Hp and torque. Give thier customers an additional motor option.
I think they could have made the 3.0 fit. BMW's 3.0 D is a similar overall dimension and they fit it in their small X3 crossover. GM used to fit their Atlas 4.2 Inline 6 in a smaller GMC Envoy.
I think the actual issue is either the combination of engine and transmission length (since the 3.0 is designed to fit the 10-speed) or GM simply did not want to incur the costs associated with reworking it to fit the 8 speed or putting the 10 speed in this truck.
@@JohnSmith-ev1sm it's only 4" longer than the 4.2. Make the hood 3" longer, take 1” out of the cowl/tunnel.
The 3.0 diesel weighs more than the 6.2 gas v8. No way it’s going in a midsize
Imagine if they modified this chassis to be a 4Runner competitor.
I'm not sure exactly what the Desert Boss brings to the table but the light bar, sport bar and grill guard won't help the gas milage. As for the winter tires, they are probably lighter than the stock tire and I'm not sure which one gives better milage specially in the wet. It's not surprising the updated Colorado struggles to best the older version when you consider the wider stance. You're pushing more air at speed and it will hurt the milage.
I love how nobody in California could afford the luxury price Bison’s!
Crazy. My 2022 F-150 2.7 4X4 stx on oem 33's gets 26 mpgs @ 65 mph. Bigger, more comfortable, tows more. Has more power. (Ford under rates the 2.7. It makes it's rated power at the wheels. Been dyno verified by many people)
As a daily driver I’m averaging 23 mpg at 53 mph almost 28 mpg on highway ,that’s on a 2021 ZR2 with a V6 . I baby it. Love the truck. I live in New England and the fuel mileage goes down a little in the winter but I didn’t buy it for that. It’s an awesome truck .
My '95 Chevy S10 Zr2 regular cab short bed averages 18 mph riding it around the small town and rural area where I live so the trail bosses 18.3 isn't bad considering it's much bigger (heavier) and more powerful than my little S10 Zr2. I'd love to have the new 4 cylinder turbo in a new truck the size of my S10.
18 mpg on winter tires with the extra weight on the package isn’t bad. Normal ZR2 should be getting 19.5 or somewhere in that range
I have a 23 and you are right. I am averaging 19.7
I'd guess a standard Colorado would get around the low 20's for fuel economy then? If you don't get all that offroad crap.
I'm glad you did this review. It's a nice-looking truck and it has everything I personally would want and need living here in the USA. I am hearing issues have been surfacing on the Colorado's and Canyons. I'm not really sure if I should move forward and get the colorado zr2.
I owned a 2019 Colorado with the V6 and was very happy to upgrade to the new 2023 LT model. The old truck was decent on fuel, Typically sitting in the 10.4-10.8 l/100km range. New truck is worse in that regard favours the higher 10’s and into the low 11.2-4 range but the best result is the transmission. Such an improvement over the previous model. Smooth and no more clunky down shifts. I wish they still offered the 6’ bed length but much happier with the new truck even if it has some turbo lag.
Ps. Im 6’1” and very comfortable however i do not have a sunroof.
Waiting on the “Prairie Boss” version.
With the 'Dusk and Dawn" appearance package.
Also waiting for the "Parking Lot Boss" version with 'Costco and Walmart' package.
@@mikek5298 I hear it comes with tassels.
I've been getting 22.4 mpg over 9 months and 27k miles on my 23 Trailboss.
I get 24MPG over long trips with 23 Frontier V6!
What size tires do you have?
I’ve been getting 19mpg in my trail boss but I have 32.6 in tires and it’s -15c outside
Over priced!!..absolutely no thanks 👎👎..Awesome video as usual Thank you for sharing
Cheapest truck in the segment, and only truck to offer 35s on a midsize, expensive sure, overpriced, no
its way over priced, must be a trudeau voter 👆
They would have been better off putting an up to date tech 4.8 in this platform.
4.8?
I've been getting 23/24 mpg with a 2023 LT 2wd mostly highway driving. My 2007 Silverado double cab, 4wd 5.3L averages 21-23 mpg highway. Now highway in the area I live in is all 60mph speed limit.
Long story short, the Toyota 2.4 without iForce is simply an evolutionary engine. The 2.7 on the other hand along with the iForce can be revolutionary powerplants. Reliability on both will be determined in the future. You cannot compare a non-tuned 2.4 with a 2.7 L3B So far the 2.7 has an exceptional track record, throughout a number of years.
What makes the 2.7 revolutionary relative to the standard 2.4?
@ALMX5DP the fact that it produces a lot more torque than most modern v8s including ecoboost engines, the output down low just like a diesel, the forged internals and sleeved cylinders, the stroke. Designed by the diesel team. Better drive towing than even more torque heavy v8s, dosent need to downshift to climb a hill while towing like the 5.3 or 6.2 does, the dual volute turbo setup, the electronic cooling system. I'm gonna say it ready... the fuel mileage. When driven like a truck and not a.rqce car it's impossible not to get well over 20mpg unloaded. Mainly all about heavy torque down low. Never been an engine like it. Turbo 4s of the past sacrifice torque for horsepower, this engine sacrifices horsepower for torque. A true truck engine. It's glorius. Ever heard of Fords Godzilla v8, this 4 banger hamster wheel produces almost as much torque.
@ALMX5DP the 2.4 is an incremental upgrade by Toyota, the 2.7 HO is a huge leap. Watch TFL race between these two to see the power difference. It's dramatic. I know racing dosent mean much for trucks since often the highest torque setups are slower but in this case you have the higher torque vehicle pooping down Toyotas throat
@ALMX5DP every v8 on the market will drag the taco sideways down the road. NOT the case with the Turbomax
@@thewireman134 seems more evolutionary even if it produces very healthy numbers. Just curious if any of those aforementioned aspects are distinctly lacking from the Tacomas engine. It also seems to produce decent output for its displacement.
I mean it's a turbo 4 banger 4wd with massive tires and tons of heavy crap tacked on.. What was everyone expecting. That's why I got the fully loaded 2WD LT model because it has the better fuel economy and the mods I want won't reduce it by much. I'm averaging 25+ mpg on highway and 20 mpg in the city. I love this truck!
My Trail Boss 3.0L got 9.5L/100 with a snowmobile in the bed yesterday on the TCH. It's sad the 4cyl isn't better.
you're comparing a diesel to a gas. Makes no sense
@EGGINFOOLS not only that but one of the best if not the best diesel ever engineered for light truck duties. The 2.7 has its own benefits though for sure. I have gotten over 30mpg a couple times and 26+ a decent amount. Admittedly not as good as the 3.0, but I went 2.7 because of the emission and DEF and fuel price factor
Anyone with 1/2 a brain would know putting a smaller engine in something isn't going to get better fuel economy, especially when you load it down with heavier/larger tires and wheels, and all the other unnecessary offroad crap, and electronic junk they have in them. I'm surprised they managed 18mpg out of it. But that's not any better than a V8 in the real world.
I was thinking of buying one ,but the gas consumption and price turned me off!..way to go Chevy..As Usual an awesome!! Video Thank you Truck King you guys are the best 👌👍🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
So the real world mpg is 18, right in with the other midsize trucks. I did see the TFL guys getting 23 ish mpg in their new Tacoma 4x4 Off Road, a 5 mpg or almost 30% better than the Chevy. It will be interesting to see what the Tacoma TRD Pro does with the hybrid drivetrain. I know the I Force is more about adding power than efficiency, but I'm looking forward to some real world test on it.
Huge power difference. The Tacoma has 278hp and 317 lb ft of torque. The ZR2 has 310hp and 430 lb ft of torque. They’re not even in the same ballpark. Not to mention the bigger off-road tires versus the highway tires on the TFL Tacoma. It’s no wonder there’s a difference in mpg.
Really nice looking truck. Just wondering if there are issues on this truck. I'm not liking where you turn on the headlights.
My experience with GM/Chevy products…..near constant electronic issues, maybe this one will be different (doubt it will be)
You don’t have to turn the lights on. They are automatic. You can even have them come on when you use your wipers.
My 2020 Z71 3.6lt best was 8.5lt/100km hwy with tail wind no towing, normally 8.9 to 9.7. Towing a 16 foot lund boat with camping gear, etc was 13.7 to 14.2l/100km
Looks the best of all trucks in its class!
Yea but - it's over priced and only appropriate for those with the income to buy one I would not chase this price only because it's the best looking truck out there. I would like to see manufacturers give us good trucks with less bells and whistles. and about 1/2 the price. This thing is beautiful. Great review!
@@mikesawyer1336 Agree! Way overpriced and if the economy continues to decline as hyperinflation continues to increase, vehicle manufacturers have made the decision to raise prices, manufacture less vehicles to have significant less overhead while increasing profits.
Winter is rough for fuel economy my 2020 silverado does 10L/100km in summer like 17L/100km
Great point. And elevation
That’s a big difference
Never had that problem in Alaska myself
Even when going from summer to winter tires the change was not that much
What’s the outside temp for those changes in fuel economy?
Where's the suit?
He took it back to the store. ;-) OK, I keed, I keed! Just funnin' around! I like the guy. ;-)
It was clearly rented. Not a TK style to have a suit. I thought that Steve had a wedding to attend after the Chicago show and that’s why he had the suit on.
Jeep gladiator diesel on 37 inch tires with tons of search and rescue gear.
23 MPG all day long.
My friend has a Colorado with a diesel.
He will never get rid of it.
22’ Gladiator Mojave on 37” tires, steel bumper, winch, aluminum canopy, roof top tent and 2” lift. Just did a 200km round trip city and hwy, 14.9L/100km. 3.6 v6 and stock 4.10 gears. Overall, that’s disappointing to see and makes me feel better about my mpg
I just got my ZR2, not desert boss, and so far city is around 12, and can't 15 hwy. I'm hoping it just needs to be broken in since I only have 250 miles on it so far. It is very capable and an awesome truck, I just wish the hwy mpg was a little better.
even my 5.0 f150 gets 21 mpg on the highway during winter. with todays tech, these numbers should be way higher.
Is your F-150 lifted running on larger tires like this Colorado is?
To put the price in perspective. My 2017, F-150 Lariat Special Edition Loaded FX4 had an MSRP of $77,000!
Motor Trend test results for a new ‘24 Tacoma and a’23 Colorado Trail Boss with the mid power rating and the results were not good for the Tacoma. The Trail Boss beat it by more than a second in both 0-60 and quarter mile times.
I'm waiting to see 0-60 times with broken a in Tacomas and with the I Force hybrid system. I did see the TFL guys got over 23 mpg in their new Tacoma 4x4, but their early 0-60 wasn't impressive.
Given today's fuel technology, they've really failed in the fuel economy world in all these vehicles....many of these turbo engines now get worse fuel economy than the V8's they replaced. Not impressed with the way any of these automakers have gone with pickups.
Does the Colorado ZR2 that you were driving that day have a Headup display and is that even an option?
Truck king is still out to lunch on the power delivery. The 2.7 makes 348tq @ 1500, that's still massive. Every other review talks about good the low end torque in on the 2.7L.
Fuel economy also isn't a surprise. The new truck is Heavier, it has much larger tires and is even less aerodynamic.
When I drove it off the lot on a full tank It said over 450 miles of range. Now a week later on a full tank it tops at 299. What’s the deal?
It gathered more data and recalibrated the estimate.
The EPA and automotive manufacturers have a wheel base × stance = equation that dictates what the allowances are for mpg.
Huh? Source for this equation or whatever allowances.
…Yes it does, and it’s the biggest reason why vehicles are growing larger in size so as to fit into a more favorable EPA CAFE(Corporate Average Fuel Economy) class.
I do not think I could live with a 4 cylinder. I love the 6.2L in my full size pickup.
I'm so glad GM remembered to make an affordable little truck for the average folks. A basic more economical little truck that is built on practicality and affordability.
Sarcasm?
Probably. However, if you look at the base MSRP of a ZR2 trim $48k then it’s a bargain compared to what they are selling the new Tacomas nowadays. You can get the ZR2 for MSRP.
I just saw a video on a different channel where they showed a 2WD !!!! Sport for $46k with distributor add on (useless predator step, aesthetic XP package, etc). 2WD Sport Tacoma $46k vs ZR2 4WD two lockers 35s, steel bumpers, skid plates, equivalent tech for $48k. You don’t need the desert Boss or AEV or Bison packages on the Chevy.
@@is6566 just gotta find right dealer. I just bought new Tacoma for my wife two months ago. Trail team special edition. Locker, all safety features and factory lift. 42k.
Correction ZR2 33-inch tire NOT 35. Still bigger than the Taco Sport 2WD
@@is6566 only paid 42k for wife’s Tacoma two months ago. 4WD, locker, factory lift , all safety equipment, trail team special edition. Guess it just matters on dealer.
These Auto Manufacturers are not going to survive at these Prices. That truck at most should be 35k.
35K for a ZR2 DB? Not realistic at all.
Only if it didn't have the amount of technology that it does, but then people would complain that it doesn't have enough.
Alway appreciate your thoughts on how taller drivers comfort will be...
The truck did pretty well overall. Considering the new Tacoma will have you filling up more due to the smaller tank size for the new model. I heard the departure angles are not amazing on the TRD. Online reviewers, including TFL, have said that the Tacoma engine sounds like a small tractor. I'd hold off truck of the year nomination. Just because it says Toyota, doesn't mean that it's going to be the eternal champion.
My nz colorado is pushing 9yrs old, 2" lift, chopped front bumper, rooftop tent, 32s over the factory 29s...and as a diesel (only option) I can average less than 10ltr per 100...best 100k is 8.8...on the factory set up, best 100k was 6😅
I have an 08 tundra 4x4 w the 5.7, a lift, 410 rear end, a 6 spd, and 35’s and I got 13.5 mpg. Wow!
Wow I can’t afford to put gas in that.
I own the Colorado diesel and get an easy 28 mpg combined
If mpg was really the goal why would GM cancel the diesel?
Also the people that own the 3.0 diesel in the full sized truck brag about getting amazing fuel milage. And it’s that fuel milage is why the full sized trucks with the 3.0 diesel is so popular.
Wake up GM and bring back a RELIABLE diesel to the mid sized trucks.
It’s not about mpg. It’s about emissions. You can thank the govt. for that. And with diesel costing $1 more per gallon, you aren’t saving anything over the gas engine.
@@Holden-McGroin if it was about emissions why is GMs 3.0 so popular and spreading across SUVs like Cadillac. The emissions from today’s diesels is very low.
Diesel and gas is almost the same price in Canada depending on the time of year. Heating season drives the price up. Gas in Atlantic Canada right now is 6.43 a U.S. gal. 16 MPG is very poor. Even at a dollar more a gallon the diesel is cheaper to run.
@@robm3357I don’t really follow what’s going on in Canadia. Gas is about $3/gal, diesel is $4. That’s 25% more cost for 25% more mpg.
The capabilities, looks, ect take precedent over "this" trucks MPG's. I have a 21' ZR2 & MPG was the least thing on my list. Yes, it's important to an extent, but if you are buying ANY truck for mpg's then you don't need one or really use it as intended. I'd still wait on a "24/25" year model before getting this new redesigned one. Seems quite a few are having screen glitches, turn signal issues, draining batteries from over air updates, squeakes/rattles, & more. Nice(expensive) truck though:)
Such a great looking truck. I’m in the market for a mid size but I’m not sure I can trust GM reliability. Will test drive along with the Tacoma.
Colorado has been more reliable than Tacoma since 2016. Check repairpal for reliability and NHTSA for recalls. Tacoma has more than double the recalls than the Colorado.
Type Tacoma problems or Tundra problems in the search bar. They're all about the same with reliability nowadays.
Buy what you like
@@shiftmotorsports9803thanks I’ll look into it.
Drove one for 3 years with 0 issues.
My 2016 Tacoma was the worst vehicle I've ever owned. If you want the new one you should consider waiting until the second or third year. My new Colorado has been excellent, though.
I love the truck, but it may cost me arms and legs, great video
I have a 91 GMC regular cab 4x4 with a 305 5spd with 265K for milage on it. I can get 28mpg at 65mph all day long! No matter the weather! I run 33's as well!
I think Auto company's making new trucks now a days, don't give a crap about MPG because of the EV push going on.
I have a ZR2 and have a Bison edition getting built. This DB version is not worth it for the money imo.
The Desert Boss comes with 33" tires.
35s
Yes 33's. The winter tires in this video aren't the usual tire. I believe it's usually the Goodyear Terrritory MT like you'd see on a Bronco. The Bison AEV comes with 35's. The Bison is also probably worth the money the Desert Boss not so much (in my opinion).
The interior of the 2nd gen is SOOOO much better that the 3rd gen on. They softened it up like a Tesla or something. Definately not as tough looking.
I named 2025 FORD ranger Raptor “sport truck of the year” and named “2024 ZR2 bison, sport trucks of the year!”
May I ask why there is a hyper critical approach towards GM products?
Because they're notoriously crap and were bailed out using our tax dollars once, get numerous tax subsidies on a regular basis all over North America, as well as being very close to failing again.
They should be under a microscope, especially at these prices.
You may not.
When i drive on long trips to my camp i get pretty well same economy with my 20 Tundra. I bet towing a good size trailer with this and it will be even thirstier
The 3.0 duramax would fix that mpg problem. GM engineers talked about how the 2.7 was built like a diesel. Why didn't they just make it a diesel? 🤷♂️
Gets better MPG than my RCSB 4x4 4.8 sierra
Dang my half ton Silverado with a rough country 3.5 in lift and 33s averages 17.5.
the best mpg i get is 16 , how are u getting 18 ? o.o
I live in the White Mountains, NH U.S.A. and just got into a new toyota 4runner limited, for $47,200. Prices are droping like flys, I got a better TRUCK, fot half the price, just off the boat from The Holly Ground of Tahara, Japan, LIVE FREE OR DIE - 13
GM should add the LZO to the Colorado
to me, in 2024 - when you have turbo and hybridization options, displacement, and computer tuning, there is no reason to have a 'luggy' powertrain.
Maybe they can build a truck for 100K with masage seat and a 24" screen which sipps 15 liter
So what was the point GM, other than to get rid of the naturally aspirated gas motor and the diesel motor?
I'm getting better mileage on my 24 z71 than I did with my 21. 13/100km on my 21 to 11.5/100km on my 24.
Good looking truck, yeah, way too expensive, however, your real-world fuel mileage pretty much matched the competition's EPA ratings (so maybe a 'wash', and just buy what you want).
Beautiful truck but the gas mileage for a four cylinder is horrendous
I’d say Chevrolet built this as intended…. High speed runner where you are high in the power band vs low speed rock crawler.
Dont forget the desert boss has 35" tires, something that no other truck offers in this class, this surely effects economy more than a light bar. Also 90% of this engines torque is avalable at 1600RPM i thought, thats 387 ft/pounds. The taco maxes out at what 318? Makes no sense. Seems more like a one sided bashing than a review. Fact of the matter is this engine is a MONSTER, with monster power, I have a Canyon Denali 2.7 HO with 15k miles so I am aware. This engine is a marvel and is the least shift happy truck i have owned. Yes that includes the 3.0 10-speed. I have also owned a 5.3. a 5.7, and a 3.0 Duramax. This engine out accelerates each handily. Last review you made it seem like the best truck ever, and this one seems to be mostly negative. Jumping on the Toyota fanboi wagon i see
Bison has 35
@@02hreblue30 Correct, the Desert boss runs on 285/70R/17 which are 33's.
@02hreblue30 I stand corrected on the tire size, thanks for clarifying. Either way at 65mph I'm often kissing 26mpg in the Denali which also has 33's albeit a little more pedestrian type tread. In addition the 2.7Twill annihilate the 2.4T. Were talking an extra 100+ foot pounds of torque here. It's not some made up number it's real.
You’re right he is a Toyota fanboy
And the Chevy “fan boy” speaks😂
Over 400 lb ft of torque. I ain’t gonna complain about fuel economy lol
GM needs to offer the I6 Duramax
Guess they should have left the six as an option maybe?
You should use a gps odo. Because I'm better your speedo/odometer is off
The Tacoma has way less power. I’ve recently test driven both and the Colorado definitely has more power , I have no idea what you’re talking about
Guess I can stick with the Silverado 1500 over this!
Wow, poor fuel economy for a 4 banger. I get 14.9 per 100 with my 2014 first gen 6.2 Raptor and only paid 15k for it.
Good looking truck
I'd give up some mpg's in exchange for long-term reliability.
Then Toyota is perfect for you.
Easily one of the Colorados of all time
Just wait till that display go's out , have too scrape the whole truck.
The aerodynamic drag extra hp bigger tires and extra weight is why it gets alot worse
Stupid expensive for mid size truck. This is about $20,000 too much.
Worst case ontario
I guess with the EV models being built, it gives the manufacturers more “cap room” to sell less-efficient models for folks who don’t care?
No one buys a truck for great mpg, good video.
Yeah, so Ford Maverick must be standing on dealer lots everywhere waiting for buyers.
This car has a huge Cons: no digital camera rear view mirrors
$80k CDN for a four cylinder! 😳
Ok friends, let’s talk about this torque power! Sounds like you’re complaining about the torque and where it comes in, I’d rather see it come in around 3000 than 1600 because 4cyl engines are higher rev engines and you don’t spend a lot of time at 1600 if it was a diesel I would say low RPM torque is a must but you’re talking about a 4cyl engine which with turbo coming in at about the same RPM doesn’t it make sense for the torque power to come in has the turbo, just my opinion
California street has the worst’s road in the globe and country. That’s why Americans built this truck for us in California!