2010 Chevrolet Equinox expected to get 32mpg highway

[MikeMike]

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2...to-hit-32-mpg-highway/

Back in January when General Motors rolled out the new 2010 Chevy Equinox, they announced the four cylinder version with the new 2.4-liter direct injected EcoTec was expected to get 30 mpg on EPA highway cycle. Since then, the powertrain engineers have continued to tweak the calibrations to eke out every last mile from every gallon of gas. The EPA is still finishing up its evaluation of the Equinox, but Chevy spokesman Brian Goebel sent out a note this morning that the latest internal tests at GM are showing the Equinox hitting 32 mpg on the highway cycle. In the city, the Equinox is expected to get rated at 22 mpg. Those numbers easily top competitors like the Honda CR-V at 20/27 city/highway mpg and the Toyota RAV4 at 22/28 mpg.

damn gas guzzling sedans.

 

[Excelsior]

That is pretty sweet really.

 

[HannibalX]

That's a sharp looking little vehicle (yes, little, it looks huge in the photos).

Edit: It's also $2.5k cheaper starting than the 2009 model it's replacing according to Edmunds.

 

[halik]

0-60 in 2 minutes?

Impressive, but at the same time you are shoving a tiny-tiney motor into a heavy car.

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: halik
0-60 in 2 minutes?

Impressive, but at the same time you are shoving a tiny-tiney into a heavy car.

Well for instance a Toyota Highlander with the 2.7liter I-4 has about the same weight/power ratio and AFAIK it has 'enough' power to not feel completely anemic. At least thats what I gather from reviews and from my own experience in a 2002 Highlander with the 2.4L 4 cylinder and a 4 speed transmission.

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: Excelsior

Originally posted by: halik
0-60 in 2 minutes?

Impressive, but at the same time you are shoving a tiny-tiney into a heavy car.

Well for instance a Toyota Highlander with the 2.7liter I-4 has about the same weight/power ratio and AFAIK it has 'enough' power to not feel completely anemic. At least thats what I gather from reviews and from my own experience in a 2002 Highlander with the 2.4L 4 cylinder and a 4 speed transmission.

note that most manufacturers now adays will make the vehicle feel more peppy by changing how the throttle inputs... take most toyota 4 cylinders, their throttle tip in is abrupt in order to make it feel more powerful than it really is.

 

[exar333]

Originally posted by: halik
0-60 in 2 minutes?

Impressive, but at the same time you are shoving a tiny-tiney into a heavy car.

I wouldn't recommend towing, but the engine would be plenty good for regular driving. If you want a decent amount of space plus good fuel efficiency, this looks like an amazing vehicle.

 

[HannibalX]

Originally posted by: halik
0-60 in 2 minutes?

Impressive, but at the same time you are shoving a tiny-tiney into a heavy car.

About the same as the Honda CR-V which has no 6 cylinder option even if you wanted one.

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

Originally posted by: Excelsior

Originally posted by: halik
0-60 in 2 minutes?

Impressive, but at the same time you are shoving a tiny-tiney into a heavy car.

Well for instance a Toyota Highlander with the 2.7liter I-4 has about the same weight/power ratio and AFAIK it has 'enough' power to not feel completely anemic. At least thats what I gather from reviews and from my own experience in a 2002 Highlander with the 2.4L 4 cylinder and a 4 speed transmission.

note that most manufacturers now adays will make the vehicle feel more peppy by changing how the throttle inputs... take most toyota 4 cylinders, their throttle tip in is abrupt in order to make it feel more powerful than it really is.

Well yeah, but that doesn't concern me. All most drivers care about is how the car feels and if feels faster than it really is, great. That is a plus in my book, especially if it gets good mileage too.

 

[Doggiedog]

Is this apples to apples?

I notice a lot of times in commercials, they will compare a 2WD model against a 4WD model and only list it in the illegible fine print.

 

[SearchMaster]

Looks great - I have no need for an SUV (large or small), but it appears to be an impressive package all the way around.

 

[StageLeft]

Pretty good indeed and nice looking vehicle.

 

[PingSpike]

Wonder what the AWD one gets? Probably comes standard with the v6 though.

 

[Q]

I hope GM can pull through, making some nice lookin' cars now