It's official: GMC Canyon V8 option confirmed
by Alex Nunez on Sep 14th 2007 at 7:55PM 
Well, the rumor came true. Mike Levine at Pickuptruck.com noticed that at the website for the '08 GMC Canyon, a V8 engine is listed as an option coming in early 2008. Mike called up the General and got confirmation that yes, a V8 is indeed coming for both 2WD and 4WD versions of the midsize pickup. They wouldn't confirm which V8 the Canyon's getting, but since that platform's already been modified to accommodate the 5.3L unit for the HUMMER H3 Alpha, it's likely to be the same one. Considering that the 5.3 does just fine in the much larger Sierra, it ought to be a hoot in the Canyon. GM hasn't put up a web page for the '08 Chevy Colorado yet, but we have to believe that whatever Canyon gets, Colorado will, too.
[Source: PickupTruck.com]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Viv 7:59PM (9/14/2007)
About time. But are the base models still languishing with the I-5 or did they get a six too?
Reply
Alex Nunez 8:08PM (9/14/2007)
No six. 2.9L I-4, 3.7L I-5, and the 5.3L (presumably) V8.
MikeW 10:55PM (9/14/2007)
No, they are languishing with a 4 speed automatic.
Where is the 6L45 or 50 for these trucks.
Forget the V8, don't try to be like the dakota. Be your own truck. Get variable intake valve timing. Get the 3.7 I5 to 250hp and the 2.9 I4 to 200hp. That is more than plenty.
The neocons are about to mess up iran.
Don 12:21AM (9/15/2007)
I'll take mine with the 2.9L 4, and manual tranny, Alex!
The Other Bob 8:26AM (9/15/2007)
MikeW - As if adding a gear or two to a pickup truck will save us from foreign oil?
Anyway, the 5.3L is flex fuel, that will burn less imported fuel than any alternative powertrains or added gears will save. It won't save you $ at the pump, but if you don't want to burn imported fuels, that's the way to go.
Jared 11:38AM (9/15/2007)
To MikeW,
This is your truck then the 3.7L has 242 hp and the 2.9L has 185hp. Not to far off your needs 8 hp and 15hp respectively.
Not only that but amazing fuel economy for a mid-size pickup with those performance numbers.
MikeW 5:18PM (9/16/2007)
Mileage/performance will go up with the 6 speed automatic.
Adding variable intake valve timing will also improve mileage (slightly, the variable exhaust timing's purpose was to improve emissions and mileage)
Compare the ratios of the 6L50 to 4L60.
4.065, 2.371, 1.551, 1.157, 0.855, 0.674 R-3.2 (The new reverse is shorter than the old first, back that trailer up a hill!)
3.059, 1.625, 1, 0.696, R-2.294
GM could raise the tow rating (after upsizing the brakes) or maybe do a honda thing, 35% greater if it is a boat.
for 4x2 apps. D6 D5 D4 D3 and put a button at the end for 2nd gear start.
for 4x4 apps. D6 D4 D2 L and put a button at the end, that locks out top gear. So you can step down from 6th to 1st. and if in L, the button can be 2nd gear start. i.e. Low range & 2nd gear.
seoultrain 8:02PM (9/14/2007)
haha, the canyon. The front of the car always seemed like it was upside down, kinda like this kid:
http://familyguy.wikia.com/images/b/ba/JakeTucker.jpg
the headlights underneath the turn signals just looks weird.
Reply
Paul Y 8:13PM (9/14/2007)
It does look odd, but I assure you, it's not bad to be in front of one at night if you drive a sensible car.
FWIW, I do know this firsthand, as my dad has an '04 Colorado, and it's postively refreshing to not have the headlights aimed at your rear view mirror.
Dave 9:13AM (9/15/2007)
I agree the truck is kind of weird looking and that was the turn off to me. I think it looks slightly better than the Colorado, but I don't understand the designers finished product. The previous S10 was much more capable in towing, hauling, this truck was a step backward all though pretty nice otherwise.
2010 will be the redesign and the pictures floating around show a much better design improvement. I also will take the 4-banger.
Eric 1:37PM (9/15/2007)
The front end of GM's trucks is looking more and more like Clark Griswold's Wagonqueen Family Truckster from "Family Vacation"
Phillip 8:32PM (9/14/2007)
Amen, to the street trucks and to the 4x4 guys, its about damn time the I5 could be replaced. Should'a never taken out the 4.3L V6 for that little motor.
Reply
Jared 11:13AM (9/15/2007)
The 4.3L was old technology and allthough bigger was not stronger or nearly as fuel efficient.
Justin 2:28PM (9/16/2007)
Pretty sure the 3.5 I5 is bigger than the compact ohv 4.3. You're confusing physical size and displacement. And it made a buttload of low end torque (265 lb-ft at like 2800 rpm) so it was just as strong as the 3.5 on the low end, it just needed attention to improve the top end power. But anywho the general should derive a new pushrod 4.0-4.3 v6 derived from the ls v8's
Tim 8:46PM (9/14/2007)
I'd be interested in one (or the Colorado) if they boxed the frames.
Reply
Barney 10:13PM (9/14/2007)
Why?
tikirob 9:03PM (9/14/2007)
Well this is nice but the interior still suffers. When I test drove the Colorado I really did not mind the I5. I think the V8 would be great. But we decided on the Frontier instead. It had the power and the interior was much nicer.
Rob
http://www.movie-cat.com
Reply
far jr 9:15PM (9/14/2007)
What is going on with the compact truck market in the US?
Small, maneuverable, efficient, and economical to own. Think compact trucks in the 80's. That to me defines a compact truck.
V-8 engines, mid-size plus dimensions, full size truck pricing. Fuel economy which is barely better than full size trucks. Not really the traits I would value in this segment.
Oh well, maybe that is why I just bought a full-size instead. This V-8 version will sell, but is it really needed? How about a nice diesel instead?
Reply
why not the LS2/LS7? 10:34PM (9/14/2007)
As one of the car mags put it "the race is on to build the biggest small truck".
Look at an old Ranger, S-10 or HiLux. Then look at the "small trucks" now. Makes no sense.
Of course, you look at the current F-150, and you see the logical extreme of this madness. If small trucks are big, the big trucks have to be bigger. That vehicle is far too large for a half-ton truck. They made it so heavy they had to improve the engine efficiency and add a gear to the tranny just to tread water on the fuel mileage.
bathtub gin 11:27PM (9/14/2007)
Compact pickups are almost dead. I read somewhere that Toyota was the only compact to sell more than 100,000 last year. Kind of sad when you consider that Ford sold 330k Rangers in 2000, before they let it languish. Guess they don't want to sell me another truck.