2010 Chevy Equinox photos

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
8
0
Not bad. But the front nose looks a little boxy for my taste. But I like the engine options on it.
 

Howard

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
47,989
10
81
I think it looks really good. Great design job.

EDIT: The steering wheel looks like a cod piece.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Very nice! I wish Chevy would change their logo too to signify a re-birth like several Japanese makers have done. Plus it just looks bland.

Only issue I have is having a center console at all but it seems to be a trend more and more SUV's and x-overs are taking away your lateral leg room.:( I'll stick with full size and SUV trucks.
 

ponyo

Lifer
Feb 14, 2002
19,689
2,811
126
Not a fan of the looks or the car. Then again I don't like vehicles like the CRV or the Rav4 so maybe I'm biased against these type of vehicles.
 

Pocatello

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 1999
9,754
2
76
GM has been making some nice vehicles of late. Hopefully it's not too late. Still need to cut some fat.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
31,570
9,941
136
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Yep, 8 replies in 12 hours...

Splitting the forums was a fucking great idea.

so what says the president of the anti-SUV brigade? :p

i don't care about the SUV/CUV market too much, so there's little reason for me to post here (even though my parents are looking at something like a hyundai santa fe to replace my mom's van that got wrecked in an accident. stupid driver :| mom is ok though :))

i wonder why they didn't use the 2.0T from the cobalt SS et al for the four cylinder version? seems like the added HP and torque would be well suited for a vehicle the size of the equinox, and offers more power than either the powerplants shown, while probably giving better fuel economy to boot :confused:
 

fstime

Diamond Member
Jan 18, 2004
4,384
5
81
I don't care for the silver trim around the side vents and handles, looks very cheap.

It is overall good though and definitely an improvement.
 

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Yep, 8 replies in 12 hours...

Splitting the forums was a fucking great idea.

so what says the president of the anti-SUV brigade? :p

i don't care about the SUV/CUV market too much, so there's little reason for me to post here (even though my parents are looking at something like a hyundai santa fe to replace my mom's van that got wrecked in an accident. stupid driver :| mom is ok though :))

i wonder why they didn't use the 2.0T from the cobalt SS et al for the four cylinder version? seems like the added HP and torque would be well suited for a vehicle the size of the equinox, and offers more power than either the powerplants shown, while probably giving better fuel economy to boot :confused:

the 2.0l DI engine as found in the SS, GXP/Redline is not only turbod, but requires 93, also is 360 hp... 80 more than the 1.4l, it is more expensive, more specialized...
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,714
164
106
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Yep, 8 replies in 12 hours...

Splitting the forums was a fucking great idea.

I'm on the same page....not enough people specifically go to the garage vs. the discussions we had in OT when car stuff was involved.

That being said...this looks like a great improvement in a very popular market segment in the US. 30mpg is fantastic for this sized car.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
31,570
9,941
136
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
the 2.0l DI engine as found in the SS, GXP/Redline is not only turbod, but requires 93, also is 360 hp... 80 more than the 1.4l, it is more expensive, more specialized...

using the 2.0T would allow them to use one engine across the entire model line though, saving lots of $$ i'd imagine. just because it's meant for the SS/GXP/RL crowd doesn't mean it can't be tuned for more light-footed driving.
 

MikeMike

Lifer
Feb 6, 2000
45,885
66
91
Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
the 2.0l DI engine as found in the SS, GXP/Redline is not only turbod, but requires 93, also is 360 hp... 80 more than the 1.4l, it is more expensive, more specialized...

using the 2.0T would allow them to use one engine across the entire model line though, saving lots of $$ i'd imagine. just because it's meant for the SS/GXP/RL crowd doesn't mean it can't be tuned for more light-footed driving.

this 2.4l engine is going to go in MANY other vehicles, dont forget that...

and manowar, what if this crappy soccer mom SUV gets > mpg than your car... isnt that the main reason ppl hate SUV's?