GMC Terrain, Equinox, and SRX Forum banner

1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I guess I was more than a little disappointed with the results of this test presented by Motortrend, April 2019 edition.

Eighth place out of eight: (Last Place)

It's hard to argue with the results, although I believe if the test version had a 2.0 engine, the outcome may have been much different.

What hurt the most was the following comment:

"Feels like it was designed to be rented, not owned."

https://www.motortrend.com/cars/honda/cr-v/2019/compact-suv-big-test-chevrolet-equinox-honda-cr-v-hyundai-tucson-jeep-cherokee-mazda-cx-5-nissan-rogue-subaru-forester-and-toyota-rav4/ < Click Link
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,477 Posts
Oh well! The more important thing is *reliability* anyway, and we won’t know who wins *that* segment of the competition for at least 5 more years (although the “true” reliability window is really more like 10 years)...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
956 Posts
It's hard to argue with the results, although I believe if the test version had a 2.0 engine, the outcome may have been much different.



Seems like they didn't do a good job of having similar trim levels and engines.


They mentioned the Start Stop was better than others and gave good marks for the infotainment center.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,059 Posts
I don't put much stock in the magazine reviews.
I'm not going to let someone tell me how to spend 30K to 35K of my money.
Thru the years I have bought many cars and trust my instincts, preferences, and research.

When ready to buy, drive it and make your decision.
If I'm wrong it's on me, not some mag writer with no skin in the game.
My $0.02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
I don't put much stock in the magazine reviews.
I'm not going to let someone tell me how to spend 30K to 35K of my money.
Thru the years I have bought many cars and trust my instincts, preferences, and research.

When ready to buy, drive it and make your decision.
If I'm wrong it's on me, not some mag writer with no skin in the game.
My $0.02
I agree with you. I don't use MT or Consumer Reports as a credible, authoritative source when it comes to purchasing decisions. I'll do my personal research and then test drive myself, with my wife, to determine which vehicles meet OUR requirements. The ONLY vehicle we have not followed that process with is our '12 Camaro; never even a test drive before we drove it home.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,055 Posts
Same here, we buy on styling, functionality based on our needs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
Not realizing that this thread was here, I had started my own in the Equinox General Discussion forum. So I'm copying my original post from that thread over here.

I got the latest Motor Trend yesterday (I know, it's the Weekly Reader of car magazines) but I still enjoy looking at it. So they did an article 'Who makes the best small SUV?'. There were eight vehicles in the test and we came in eighth. They didn't like much of anything about it. They did not test with the 2.0T engine which would also have had wider tires for better handling and stopping in addition to more power. They used an AWD LT. The CX5 was not tested with it's 2.5 Turbo either. Maybe they were going for mid level models from each company. But they did test with the turbo Cherokee that has 270 hp., so go figure.

For Performance, Ride and Handling, they said that the Equinoxes "...ride and handling is just as irritating as it's acceleration, routinely plowing and pushing through corners". It seems to me that I've read several reviews where the Equinox was favorably compared to the CX5, which everyone says has the best handling in this segment. Who knows? Maybe the MT staff had a bug up their collective butts the day that they tested. They did like the start/stop system on the Nox. One point in our favor.

For the Cockpit and Cabin they said the Equinox was spacious, but "Everything about this Equinox screams rental car". They did like the infotainment system and the back-seat package which had great legroom.

I'm taking all of this with a giant grain of salt. I have a '16 Equinox which has never won any popularity contests with reviewers either. But it's a competent vehicle and I like it. I liked the '19 2.0T that I drove the other week. I liked it a lot and will probably get one when the time comes, regardless what the magazines say. But it was disappointing to see MT's test results.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
I read that review. Pure, utter garbage.

These guys decided the Equinox was going to finish last before the test was even done.

The funniest part is there are other reviews on their site that contradict some of the things they claimed in this one. Such as this quote from when they had the Equinox as a contender for 2018 Motor Trend SUV of the year.

The Chevy handles well, too, with exceptional body control and sporty steering.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
185 Posts
Haters are going to hate... Most magazines are in love with the Toylex brands or Nissan or Honda. Now the new darlings are the KIA and Hyundai offerings for 8 seats. People on this board may not be swayed by these reports but many minions are and they believe that those Japanese offerings are the second coming. It is no surprise that they think the Terrain/Equinox are rental vehicles for that is what is offered at Budget or Tilden or Discount. Writers tend to ignore those vehicles that they rent as being beneath them. Now if they can get Camrys or Turdras to rent they may change their tune a little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
955 Posts
If it makes us feel any better, the 2019 JD Vehicle Dependability Study rates Chevy at #4 and Honda at #19.
To me, that is a far more believable piece of data. It comes pretty close to the criteria for random sampling in a public survey--and it's from the actual user, rather than someone whose prime purpose is to sell advertising space in the magazine they're selling. Self-licking ice cream cone!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
I guess I was more than a little disappointed with the results of this test presented by Motortrend, April 2019 edition.

Eighth place out of eight: (Last Place)

It's hard to argue with the results, although I believe if the test version had a 2.0 engine, the outcome may have been much different.

What hurt the most was the following comment:

"Feels like it was designed to be rented, not owned."

https://www.motortrend.com/cars/honda/cr-v/2019/compact-suv-big-test-chevrolet-equinox-honda-cr-v-hyundai-tucson-jeep-cherokee-mazda-cx-5-nissan-rogue-subaru-forester-and-toyota-rav4/ < Click Link

My advice is to forget what these magazines and companies say. It's obvious some of them are getting kickbacks or something.
I saw them talk about how awesome the interior of the RAV4 was; meanwhile when I sat in it, it was awful. Anyone rating that thing above the Equinox is either blind or deaf. I say deaf because of all the engine and transmission whining.

I think it's great Chevy sold so many Equinoxes last year despite all of these publications trying to bash them, in many cases unfounded.
Consumer Reports kept recommending the CR-V; look at it, gas in the oil. It's been a clunker for years now.

Subaru is another one. They are all fan boys of Subaru, meanwhile, everyone I know that has owned one has had countless problems.
These are not unbiased opinions and that's VERY obvious the moment you drive all the vehicles.

I think Edmunds is closer to being fair with it's reviews and even them are biased because they still have the CRV on top too, lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
What puzzles me is there is no mention of the vehicles that are equipped with a CVT. That alone is the deal breaker for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
We're talking about a belt drive. Sliding conical pulleys to change drive ratios. In a 3500 lb vehicle. A copy of the old Reeves drive. And a 4 - 6000 dollar replacement charge. And numerous failures at under 100k miles. Makes a 5 speed manual look real good to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
491 Posts
Discussion Starter #18 (Edited)
Please educate me. What are the negative aspects of a CVT?
.
The negatives vs a conventional automatic transmission.
1 The engine normally runs at a higher rpm, more noise, vibration, harshness, sometimes droning.
2 Sometimes chattering, slippage, overheating, jerking, shuddering, sudden loss of acceleration.
3 Typically cannot be repaired, cost of $3,000 - $5,000 to replace.
4 Typically don't last as long, many failures before 100,000 miles.
5 Not durable with higher torque output engines.
6 It's a mechanical steel chain/belt running in a pair of steel variable dimension pulleys. What more needs to be said?

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
And talking on MT reviews, didn't they name the Vega a car of the year? 1980 Citation? Renault (something) in early 80s? Seen any lately? 'Nuff said.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
335 Posts
The best small SUV is the one I drive! Even if you have the same make / model mine is still better. Yes I'm being facetious, but its true.

Seriously I have owned a CRV and Foresters and I am not impressed. The AWD system in the CRV is a joke at best. The engine is terribly under powered and buzzy. The boxer engine in the Subaru is horribly unreliable. If the people with the GM I4's think they have it bad, its got nothing on the boxer from Subaru.
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top