CD Article: 2010 Chevrolet Equinox

[Mitlov]

Equinox and Traverse.

GM is really getting its money's worth using across the board that distinctive Chevrolet front end. Soon to appear on a Corvette? 

Nothing wrong with that.  Could play the same game with Audi and many others.

[drederick]

Equinox and Traverse.

GM is really getting its money's worth using across the board that distinctive Chevrolet front end. Soon to appear on a Corvette? 

Your going to love the 2011 Orlando..... and whatever is beside it then

[safristi]

....ORLANDO!..not another Mickey Mouse crossdressover ....


 the basic Equi has the knocks to be a good seller...but those WALL-E guages...keep them ROUND and GOOD LOOKIN'..............folk percieve SYMMETRY as BEAUTY.......when will they EVER learn..............nice guages ,great steering wheel and BIG KNOBS....

[Mitlov]

the basic Equi has the knocks to be a good seller...but those WALL-E guages...keep them ROUND and GOOD LOOKIN'..............folk percieve SYMMETRY as BEAUTY.......when will they EVER learn..............

Those gauges ARE symmetrical.

[safristi]

U sir are correctly  symmetrical BUTT ! UGLY too.................... .................if u take each guage seperately they are assymetrical.................

[Rupert]

What was needed here IMO, was an Equinox along the lines of the Rondo or Mazda 5. No all wheel drive and thus a flat floor. Giving up a feature of little value IMO for most of us and gaining greater utility. Perhaps the SUV phenomina has run it's course.

[sirAQUAMAN64]

What was needed here IMO, was an Equinox along the lines of the Rondo or Mazda 5. No all wheel drive and thus a flat floor. Giving up a feature of little value IMO for most of us and gaining greater utility. Perhaps the SUV phenomina has run it's course.

Will see something more along those lines with the upcoming Chevy Orlando.

[inco]

When will that one be coming? Looks production ready.

[drederick]

What was needed here IMO, was an Equinox along the lines of the Rondo or Mazda 5. No all wheel drive and thus a flat floor. Giving up a feature of little value IMO for most of us and gaining greater utility. Perhaps the SUV phenomina has run it's course.

"No all wheel drive and thus a flat floor" <- do you mean the floor infront of the rear seat? My 05 fwd has a perfectly lat floor and so does the 2010 appear to as well:
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2009/01/equinox-up-close.html

Equinox = CR-V and Rav4

Orlando (which should replace the HHR) will more than likely compete with the Rondo and Mazda 5 (although the Mazda 5 kicks ass with its sliding doors - love it!)

[Rupert]

I meant flat floor when second and third (if present) row seats folded down into the floor. When provisions for AWD are made they take up the space required for this feature weather AWD is included or not. I am very pleased to hear that a vehicle is coming from Chev along the Rondo/M5 lines. I think that this is the battlefield that must be won or at least tied, now. Forget about AWD...it's history along with the term SUV. What are people doing...sitting up there anyway...come on down and join the rest of the human race...we ain't so bad.

[Trainman]

The Sienna, AWD or not, has a flat floor when the rear seats are folded.  And my Forester, with AWD, also has a flat load floor when the rear seats are folded.  And my Pathfinder had a flat load floor with the rear seats folded, with its RWD system to boot.  2 of those 3 can also take a full size spare in the regular space, only the Sienna AWD loses a spare and needs run-flats.  It can be done. 

[Rupert]

If you sit high enough. Anyway, the Sienna middle seats have to be removed and put somewhere to get the floor. I have to take your word about the Subaru...if the second row seats fold into the floor ...it's a neat trick.

[tpl]

Rupert, why do you say AWD is history?   

[Mitlov]

Rupert, why do you say AWD is history?   

Because he wants us all driving around in 90 horsepower subcompact hatchbacks and refers to ANY other sort of vehicle as obsolete?

[Rupert]

I think that anyone can have an opinion. Because it does not agree with yours...there is no need to be nasty.

Why do I think it is history...well apart from getting you going better, I do not think it provides much of anything else. Nothing to help stopping at all. The vast majority of us manage quite well without it even in Canada. Which leads to my point that this vast majority would find much more value in the ability to fold all seats into the floor and have a completely flat deck and my opinion that the extra drive provisions get in the way of this...perhaps not the rear seat position. Anyway I think that thoughts along these lines will overwhealm 4WD inclusion and people will prefer to have utility rather than the complication of extra parts that most don't even notice the difference for being there. Except for the cost thereof.
Remember the huge fins on the rear of cars...no doubt they were there for stability at speed.

Yes I do believe in less HP...so what. I also think that higher speed limits could go along with less HP. Motoring in the old days had this and it was far superior to now. We only had 40 HP back then and it was plenty.

[tpl]

hmmmmmm.  I remember 40 bhp AND higher speed limits.   It is indeed true that a low powered car, as long as that power is delivered smoothly is fun to drive "fast". My 34 bhp Sprite and 100 bhp MGB being examples of this. In fact the heavy and low powered MGB was, under many conditions, easier to drive fast than my lighter and much more powerful Lotus.   

HOWEVER those days and those roads are long gone.

I have owned two AWD cars and found that the extra grip given by having the traction loading spread between all 4 tires was an advantage for cornering as well as acceleration in all slippery conditions. Also  being able to steer the car on the throttle rather than the permanent understeer of FWD was not a bad thing. Note tho' that both my cars were true AWD not "slip and grip".
I have to agree that stopping was negatively affected by the weight of the extra machinery.

Folding the seats flat..   My current Golf GTI has this problem, nothing to do with AWD but the fancy-schmancy independent rear suspension rather than VWs old twist beam axle couple with rear seat squabs that do not fold up actually give the car much less carrying capacity than previous ( Mk II and Mk III) models.  The Fit now is a paragon of virtue in this regard as it was designed as a load carrier.  I had two SAABs also that had perfect flat decks when the seats were folded.  So I do agree that is a good thing and I suspect that its not that difficuct to do at design time RWD or AWD notwithstanding.

So Rupert I am with you on low power sometimes.  20 years holidaying in France driving 1.4l gas and 1.9 litre  diesels in the Pyrenees not to mention the UK years driving the best motive power that BMC could build (  ).   I have driven more V12s than V8s and never owned either. Only owned two 6 cyl engines in my life as well.

[safristi]

..pleeze tpl..NO PICS of yer "pyronees"...... ..................i drive a V2.........it's a rrocket 'cos it's a MO'BIKE......

[Erik]

Orlando looks pretty nice



Nice looking interior too.

[21Rouge]

Dont you think that blunt chopped off rear end is somewhat reminiscent of the Aztec??

[Erik]

Dont you think that blunt chopped off rear end is somewhat reminiscent of the Aztec??

Nope. Not at all.