Last post on Oct 15, 2013 at 8:22 AM
You are in the SUVs
What is this discussion about?
GMC Acadia, Hyundai Santa Fe, Ford Taurus X, Toyota RAV4, Nissan Rogue, Honda Accord Crosstour, Dodge Journey, Car Buying, Car Comparisons, SUV
Sep 29, 2009 (10:57 am)
Same 179hp 2.5l from last year, but they made a backup came standard even on the base model. Good idea. It's the type that is in the rear view mirror.
Sport package mandates run-flats - deal killer for me after all the negative feedback in the Sienna threads. It gets the spare off the back, but now that you have a backup cam, I'd pick the spare over the run-flats any day.
#7019 of 7355 Re: SUV comparisons [ateixeira]
Sep 29, 2009 (12:02 pm)
The reviews complain about the reluctancy of the tranny to downshift, so drivers may have been compensating for that by adding more throttle. Ironically the result is poor mileage, when the original aim was to improve efficiency.
Good point. Our Enclave was the same way. It upshifted way too early so we were always having to get on the gas to get it to downshift to have enough power. GM came out with a software update for the tranny with the warning that it would/could have a negative impact on mileage. It delayed the shift points and the TC lock-up. The update made the vehicle shift like it should have in the first place. Our mileage did not go down at all, and may have increased ever so slightly.
Moral of the story - what is good for mileage ratings may not be good in the real world.
#7020 of 7355 Re: SUV comparisons [zman3]
Sep 29, 2009 (12:04 pm)
Interesting, especially the part about your mileage not dropping.
#7021 of 7355 Re: SUV comparisons [ateixeira]
Sep 29, 2009 (12:27 pm)
I had the same experience with the same tranny flash as zman on my '08 Acadia: shifted much better, MPG unchanged.
#7022 of 7355 Re: SUV comparisons [loach]
Sep 30, 2009 (5:03 am)
I think if you drive like a little old woman on a Sunday morning the original tranny programming on the Lambda's may have been fine. If you drive even remotely aggressively then it was not tuned properly. My main gripe is that it would upshift part way through a left (or right) handed turn. As soon as we were going straight again and wanted some power to accelerate it would have to downshift. Now it stays in the lower gear through the turn.
It was like getting a different vehicle.
#7023 of 7355 Re: Enclave/Acadia/Outlook shifting
Sep 30, 2009 (7:39 am)
I've started driving my Outlook more and my old Trooper less in the past 2 months. ('08 Outlook new August 2008). My take on the tranny is that 5th and 6th are overdrive and double overdrive and work best on flat roads. Around town and in hilly terrain downshifting to a lower gear is required. It seems to me that say going uphill on the Interstate at 65-75 that the tranny usually downshifts from 6th to 4th once it needs to keep up the speed, esp if you are using cruise. I think I can ease on and off the accelerator and moderate the shifting and probably get better gas mileage than letting cruise handle that with the excessive downshifting.
About a month ago I started driving in the 'L' position and using the +/- button on the shift handle. Around town I'll shift down to 2 or 3 when stopping at a light and upshift when rpm get around 2300-2500 which seems to keep it in a decent power range. When up to speed (1200 rpm or so 45 mph) if I need a little more power for acceleration or up a hill, I will down shift to 4th or 5th then back up to 6th when the need is satisfied.
Mileage reading for past 500 miles or so is hanging at 20.5. Driving is about half city street (very mild stop and go, more go than stop) and about half Interstate or open highway around the metro Memphis area.
I have not been out on the open highway much lately since I've started this, but dropping back to 5th up hill seems to usually add enough power to 'smooth' out the uphill sections rather than wait until the computer drops it down to 4th.
Anyway, this is just the way I've started driving the Outlook. Years ago I had several 4 or 5 speed manual tranny cars and like to shift sometimes. My Outlook has the Trailer package with Trailer Mode switch. I have used that just a little and that seems to hold to higher shift points and might be another option if you feel you need a little better power band.
#7024 of 7355 Equinox Reviewed by CR
Oct 03, 2009 (5:33 am)
They got 21mpg from the 4 banger, 18 mpg for the V6. Very disappointing, IMHO.
At least they were both AWD models.
Still, 21mpg doean't match the RAV4 or the Forester base engines, heck even the RAV4 V6 beats the 'nox.
You gotta wonder if those EPA numbers are a bit optimistic. This is the 3rd review that didn't even come close.
0-60 in 10.7 seconds is also back-of-the-pack (V6 does it in 9.1s).
Overall they called it "competitive" but ranked it much lower than the class leaders.
#7025 of 7355 Re: Equinox Reviewed by CR [ateixeira]
Oct 05, 2009 (8:52 am)
0-60 in 10.7 seconds is also back-of-the-pack (V6 does it in 9.1s).
That's the first I've paid attention to those figures. Not good. Not good at all.
I don't subscribe to CR myself. Can you tell us if their tests are typically more conservative when test driving than say, MT or C&D? I recall them being a good bit less performance oriented than other mags but can't say for sure now. If they still are more conservative then those FE numbers look even worse IMO.
#7026 of 7355 Re: Equinox Reviewed by CR [ateixeira]
Oct 05, 2009 (10:15 am)
Not discounting that the FE and power figures are poor in class, I still don't get why 0-60 in 10 seconds is so bad. I've owned a few vehicles that were slower than that and drive one currently. Only one ever gave the impression of being underpowered and slow - a 92 Pathfinder with a 150hp V6. Don't buy an SUV, even a small one for "sporty" performance IMHO. Don't misunderstand, I like a vehicle that can be quick and handle well and I own one of those too, it's just not my criteria for a family hauler. Silk purse out of a sow's ear and all that.
#7027 of 7355 Re: Equinox Reviewed by CR [baggs32]
Oct 05, 2009 (10:20 am)
IMHO, yes. I read it as if I were thinking to myself "what car would they recommend for my aunt Edna".
Disclaimer: I don't actually have an aunt Edna.
Basically they are very practical. Having said that, a sporty car like a Boxster can and does score very high.
They do not use brake-torqueing to improve 0-60 numbers, so they tend to be on the slow side. Still, just about every Equinox competitor does better.
Their mileage figures are not usually high - I do better in each car I own, tie for my Miata, which I drive hard.
Having said that, the RAV4 V6 did better. The class best for a non-hybrid is the Forester with the manual transmission, at 25mpg actual, and EPA numbers aren't nearly as good as the 'nox.
Gotta wonder if GM was a bit optimistic with their EPA test. GM performs the test, though I believe the EPA will run tests to verify some (not all) of the cars a manufacturer submits.