Well i got rid of my baby against my will. I dont think it can be replaced, but the new Chevy Colorado is not bad. What do you guys think? The old L:

The Colorado:


It's got the 225hp I5 and a 5spd tranny.. 3.42 rear end. Decently quick but nothin compared to the good ole L

 

Here's a couple more shots

 

I think it's a cool looking little truck.

 

i like it.

the L was better but the colorado is straight

 

what happened to you....a lightning for a pretend boy box racer truck when you had the real deal? as long as your happy, that's all that matters, every time I comment - on ford, I draw out the bleed blue forders, but this is not going to go well, Why were you forced to give up the L ?

 

i had to give up the L because for me to take it to school i would have to be listed as the primary driver for insurance. (Before I got rid of it I was listed as occasional driver, but I was the only one who drove it) Making that switch would have brought my rates to nearly 4k a year!!! The Colorado is less than 1/2 that, and gets twice the gas mileage. Plus it's a pretty neat little truck IMO.. Scratches the tires on the 1-2 and 2-3...

 

I like the Red, but I bet a White one would look good to. Don't worry about it man, you have a sweet truck. As long as your paying the bills it doesn't matter what anybody says. Sometimes in life you have to do things you don't want to do. You might not think so now, but giving it up to afford school a little better is a good reason to get rid of your Lightning. After you get out of school and get that killer job just think what you will be able to roll in!

 

Call me immoral, but I would have lied my @$$ off...
But, not being the liar that the Lightning would have forced me to be; you did good with what you got...

That red is nice...

 

Throw a turbo on that bad boy; and, you're in business.

 

what did she run you?...I like it a whole lot...

 

Good luck. I just finished reading the 5-way comparison in Car and Driver and they picked it dead last. I know this is from a car magazine but I have sat in one and I must agree with the criticism of the interior.

Read this:
Car and Driver

Highs: Meaty tires that work well off-road, narrow body helps maneuverability.

Lows: Rental-car interior décor, thrashy engine, upright rear backrest.

The Verdict: It's a good thing it's cheap.

With only 4090 pounds to haul around—697 less than the Dakota—the Colorado's five-banger should have been the little engine that could. It wasn't. The Colorado was the slowest in all the acceleration tests but passing, trailing the speedy Tacoma by 1.6 seconds to 60 mph. And although the Colorado has the best EPA fuel-economy numbers (17/22), the Tacoma averaged 17 mpg during our 600-mile drive, 1 mpg better than the Colorado managed.

True, these trucks are not sports cars, but all things being equal, would you want the slowest one? And it wasn't just engine grunt that landed the Chevrolet in last place.

Everyone commented on the plain-Jane interior, the least inviting of the crowd, and if you like industrial-grade plastic, you'll love the dashboard. The brake pedal is positioned too high off the floor. The front buckets feel flat and flimsy, as if they were providing the bare minimum of support but nothing more.

The rear seat isn't any better since the backrest is uncomfortably close to vertical. Worst of all, that backrest simply folds down on top of the bottom cushion, leaving an angled, high shelf that reduces the usability of the space. The other trucks all have better folding solutions. One tester commented, "It's as if Chevy were looking for ways not to compete."

We weren't thrilled with the chassis, either. The steering drew criticism for its high effort and numb feel, and the back end skated sideways when we drove on rippled dirt roads.

The Chevy did make some friends on the upward jaunt to Manson Acres. It is 7.7 inches narrower than the Ridgeline, so it had more room to maneuver on the trail. Plus, you can dial in minute adjustments to the throttle, which helped the Colorado creep up and over the most difficult and threatening rocks. The part-time four-wheel-drive system has an automatically locking rear differential, and the Colorado felt like the rockhound of the group.

In the end, what really stung us was how little innovative thinking went into the Colorado. Whereas the three Japanese trucks have some type of protective coating, storage pockets, or tie-down rails that make the bed a more useful feature, all the Chevy has is a two-position tailgate that can be held at a 90- or 55-degree angle. And despite having a narrow inline engine that should theoretically leave more room for the front tires to turn, the Chevy has the largest turning circle, 44.3 feet, despite being one of the shorter trucks in the test.

GM had 20 years to get its compact pickup right. The Colorado should be better.

 

stickered for 27,900... walked out the door with it for 21. Those employee prices are real tough to beat.
Interior comment: yeah the seats suck, they're sooo flat. I think I might go with a katzkin interior set up. The engine is a little thrashy but its still a lot of fun to drive.

 

Not a bad looking truck...not bad at all.

Execpt one thing. I hate the way Chevy did their headlights. Other then that.

Are you happy with it, birdy....really?

 

I still can't get used to the front end on the Colorado's. The way the headlights and parking lights are set up....they look "upside down" to me. Anyway, congrats on the new purchase!

 

That bothers me too. Can someone actually sit in the back of that thing or will your knees be cramped up like the older body tacomas.