2019 Chevrolet Colorado Diesel Takes a Mysterious Fuel Economy Hit

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Until an automaker comes along with something better, your cheapest bet for highway fuel economy in a pickup is the Duramax diesel-powered Chevrolet Colorado and its GMC Canyon twin. The full-size Ford F-150 with 3.0-liter diesel V6 matches it in economy, but not price.

Boasting a 30 mpg EPA rating for highway consumption, the oil-burning midsizers command a premium over their lesser siblings, but make up for it with thriftiness and heaps of torque. The 2.8-liter inline-four generates 369 lb-ft of twist — far more grunt than the 275 lb-ft on offer from GM’s 3.6-liter V6.

However, there’s a mystery afoot. The EPA ratings for the newest Colorado and Canyon diesels show a drop in city and combined efficiency for the 2019 model year, despite the powertrains being a carry-over.

As not all 2019 Colorado and Canyon models have received a rating from the EPA, we only have the four-cylinder gas models and the rear-drive diesel to go on. (H/T to Bozi Tatarevic, by the way.)

The 2.5-liter models see the same rating as last year, but the 4×2 diesel, equipped with the same 2.8-liter and six-speed automatic the 2018 models (to the best of our knowledge), sees its fuel consumption drop by 2 mpg in the city and combined cycle.

Whereas the 2018 4×2 diesel carried a rating of 22 mpg city, 30 mpg highway, and 25 mpg combined, the EPA rates the 2019 model at 20 mpg/30 mpg/23 mpg. The 2019 Canyon diesel, of which only the 4×2 version carries a rating, sees the same change. What’s the deal? And why the 2 mpg drop in combined economy while the highway figure stays the same?

We’re not aware of any changes to gearing, axle ratio, or engine tune between the two model years, making the EPA’s rating a head-scratcher. After reaching out to General Motors on Monday, we were told the automaker was looking into the issue, and would get back to us when it had more information. So far, no word, but we hold out hope for an explanation. We’ll deliver that when it arrives.

In the meantime, there’s still no official word on the fuel economy of two thrifty new GM engines: the 3.0-liter diesel inline-six bound for the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra, and the turbocharged 2.7-liter “Tripower” inline-four bound for the same models. It’s GM’s hope that Ford’s light-duty diesel takes a backseat to the General’s effort.

[Image: General Motors]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 9 comments
  • Uh oh, is GM doing a little fibbing again? Well, at least they arnt killing anybody again....yet.

  • Gregsfc Gregsfc on Dec 09, 2018

    Actually, since the hit in the fuel economy estimate took place with respect to the best-fuel-saving version of the Colorado/Canyon Duramax, which puts it now down to 20/30/23 for city, highway and mixed driving; now we should say that the F150 Power Stroke Diesel V6 is now the fuel economy champ of all pickup trucks at 22/30/25. It's worth noting, however, that Ford's PSD takes a much harder hit for the 4WD version versus the 2WD with this much higher rating. As for price, the F150 PSD is a full $10K more in it's starting price versus the 4 cylinder diesel in the smaller truck; and the smaller Duramax is not quite a great value in its own realm, as it's $36K starting price is a full $14K above the cheapest gas-powered version of the same truck. And the F150 PSD's starting price at around $46.4K, which is $17K more than the cheapest gas-powered version of an F150. So if you want or need a well-featured pickup with a diesel, you have to pay a bunch; but if you didn't need a well-featured pickup and only a basic one, but wanted a diesel, well then you can't even have one.

  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X I would only buy with manual. Even if the auto is repaired, it will most likely fail again. Just a bad design.
  • Fed65767768 This is a good buy despite the mods, as unlike most Focii this old there's little rust.
  • Ashley My father had a '69 Malibu that I took cross-country with a lot of detour on the way back. It was OK, but nothing spectacular, and after I got back he had nothing but trouble with it until it finally died in 1974. I had a Malibu rental in 2003 and at one point parked it next to a restored '69 in a shopping center parking lot in Redding, CA. I imagine the two of them had lots to discuss while we were eating at the restaurant inside.
  • 2ACL My girlfriend currently drives a 2018 SE hatch. Automatic, but I've been handling the fluid services (looking to do another along with the filter soon) and it's been a solid runner for her. My only issue with its dynamics is the transmission's gingerly kick down out of corners (the SEL is the lowest trim that offers manual control functionality IIRC). Otherwise, none of the quirks that've blighted the Powershift's reputation have manifested.A stick would drastically extend its life expectancy. I know she isn't as committed to stick life though, which influenced my approval.
  • MaintenanceCosts GM hasn't put any effort into any Cadillacs except the Blackwings and the electrics. They're getting out what they put in. Pretty simple, really.The XT4/5/6 are all just slightly up-styled versions of Chevy products, but priced as if they were on dedicated luxury platforms like the BMW and Benz competitors to the larger two. The XT6 is especially embarrassing.Even the Escalade is just a Tahoe/Suburban with a few trick design touches and a halfhearted materials upgrade. The good news for Cadillac is that the Tahoe/Suburban are seen as upscale enough that a half-a$s upgrade to them can be a legitimate luxury car.Where's the "gotta have it" factor? Where are the dazzling interior designs? Where's the swagger? Until those show up the brand is just a set of memories.
Next