Saturday, July 09, 2011
Say what you will about legacy costs, screwball UAW agreements, and brand hyperproliferation, General Motors has undeniably talented designers and engineers.
These folks have in recent years created stellar products, such as the current Cadillac CTS, the new Chevrolet Malibu, and a quartet of well-executed full-size crossovers.
The problem, though, is that GM’s efforts—including the above standouts—tend to arrive late to their games. And even then, many whiff in their first at bat, only hitting home runs during their second generation. By the time GM gets into it, the competition has put a few runs on the scoreboard, and the General spends the rest of the game playing catch-up.
Such is the case with the 2010 Chevrolet Equinox compact crossover. Following a rather milquetoast first generation (it arrived nearly a decade after the U.S.-market Toyota RAV4), the nearly all-new Equinox is far more praiseworthy, a fact you can tell simply by scanning its winsome styling. Like its big, three-row brother, the Chevrolet Traverse, the 2010 Equinox is sleek and rather large for its class. It’s expressively styled, with a hunkered-down road stance and more sparkling body jewelry than a Las Vegas cancan dancer’s. Fat fender flares break up the tall body sides, and blackout D-pillars visually shorten what is ultimately a long vehicle by wrapping the upper rear end in what looks like one piece of glass. Body seams are kept to a minimum, with paper-thin slits replacing the outgoing model’s finger-thick gaps. Slick.
The problem, though, is that GM’s efforts—including the above standouts—tend to arrive late to their games. And even then, many whiff in their first at bat, only hitting home runs during their second generation. By the time GM gets into it, the competition has put a few runs on the scoreboard, and the General spends the rest of the game playing catch-up.
Such is the case with the 2010 Chevrolet Equinox compact crossover. Following a rather milquetoast first generation (it arrived nearly a decade after the U.S.-market Toyota RAV4), the nearly all-new Equinox is far more praiseworthy, a fact you can tell simply by scanning its winsome styling. Like its big, three-row brother, the Chevrolet Traverse, the 2010 Equinox is sleek and rather large for its class. It’s expressively styled, with a hunkered-down road stance and more sparkling body jewelry than a Las Vegas cancan dancer’s. Fat fender flares break up the tall body sides, and blackout D-pillars visually shorten what is ultimately a long vehicle by wrapping the upper rear end in what looks like one piece of glass. Body seams are kept to a minimum, with paper-thin slits replacing the outgoing model’s finger-thick gaps. Slick.
Swank, Spacious Interior
More glitz can be found inside. The Equinox’s dashboard is easily the most futuristic and detailed in its class, with silver-trimmed, Camaro-like “squircle” gauges bracketing a classy LCD containing an array of trip- and vehicle-related data. The dash and the door panels are rendered in a variety of silver, gray, and chrome materials. They’re mostly rigid except for the main touch points, and the center-stack button arrangement takes some learning. We sampled three different color choices: all black, chocolate and black, and black and stone gray, with our favorite being the latter. Each is subtly enhanced with red seat stitching and red rubber liners in most of the storage cubbies (of which there are lots). The elbow-deep center console is equipped with a power port, USB and aux jacks, and, most important, a light in the event that you drop something into that deep abyss.
Remedying one of the previous model’s chief shortcomings, the front buckets are far more comfortable and supportive than the chair-shaped balloons that came with the last Equinox, and the wide rear seat (it slides up to eight inches fore-and-aft) is no longer as flat as a diving board. Those short of thigh might find the cushions in front a touch long, but otherwise, the seating position is exceptional.
For our drive opportunity, Chevy brought along a couple of base model competitors, a Toyota RAV4 and a Honda CR-V (which, incidentally, placed first and second in our 2008 “Mud Puppies” comparo) for side-by-side comparison. With almost no options, both were predictably spartan next to the comfortably equipped Equinoxes we had been driving all day. However, we were surprised at just how dated their designs appeared and how comparatively cheap the materials were. Although we’ve complained about lackluster materials in recent Toyotas, the fact that the Equinox outshined the Honda was unexpected.
Fuel Economy First, Speed Later
For the first time, the Equinox is offered with a four-cylinder engine. In spite of developing just three fewer hp than the previous model’s 3.4-liter V-6 (182 versus 185), the direct-injected, 2.4-liter four achieves a remarkable 22 mpg city/32 mpg highway when driving only the front wheels and 20/29 with all-wheel drive. The smaller engine also allowed Chevy to keep the Equinox’s weight from exploding, at least in base trim, which Chevy pegs at 3750 pounds. An available 264-hp, 3.0-liter V-6 serves as the step-up engine (replacing last year’s 3.6-liter V-6). Fuel economy with that engine drops to a less remarkable but still respectable 18/25 mpg (17/24 for AWD).
Now, although the Equinox is certainly on the porky side no matter what’s under the hood, we found ourselves attracted to the four-cylinder model. With a claimed 0-to-60 time of a leisurely 8.7 seconds, according to GM, it isn’t all that much slower than the V-6, which GM puts at a mediocre 7.8 seconds. Our impressions confirm that both get about the task of acceleration in a rather relaxed fashion, although each is smooth and quiet as it revs to its redline.
Both engines feature direct injection and are mated to six-speed automatic transmissions with manumatic shifting (still a novelty in this class). To actuate the manual mode, one must slip the gear selector down to “M” and then use the thumb rocker on the side of the shift lever to execute up- and downshifts; there are no steering-wheel controls or separate gates to work with. We see this manual-shifting capability as geared more to those who tow than to gear-rowing enthusiasts. Response seemed crisper and quicker when the gearbox was simply left in drive, anyway. Learn More...
Source : http://www.caranddriver.com
Posted in: 
0 komentar:
Post a Comment