GM announces new DI 2.4l 4 cyl and DI 3.0 V6, 30 mpg for 2010 Equinox w/ 4 cyl

[MikeMike]

http://www.leftlanenews.com/gm...4-plus-new-30l-v6.html

General Motors on Thursday announced its 2010 Chevrolet Equinox crossover will come equipped with a 2.4-liter direct-injection four-cylinder Ecotec engine delivering 180 horsepower at 6700 rpm and 172 pound-feet of torque at 4900 rpm. Perhaps most importantly, the engine promises to deliver 30 mpg on the highway. That tops Ford?s new 2.5-liter I4, which produces 170 hp and returns a highway EPA rating of 28 mpg.

GM also announced plans to offer the new Equinox with a 3.0-liter V6 delivering 255 horsepower and 214 pound-feet of torque. Also featuring direct injection, the motor has an isolated fuel injector system that promises quieter operation than other DI engines. Rubber isolators are used with the fuel rail to eliminate metal-to-metal contact that would otherwise transmit noise and vibration from the high-pressure fuel system.

?We first introduced direct injection in North America in the 2007 Saturn Sky Red Line and the Pontiac Solstice GXP,? said Tom Stephens, executive vice president, GM Global Powertrain and Global Quality. ?We?ve been rolling out the technology across our portfolio as quickly as we can so that our customers will have additional fuel savings options. Direct injection is a state-of-the art engineering solution because it enables improved fuel economy and lower emissions without sacrificing power.?

Thats a LOT better than anything TM or HMC have out for 09, and i havent seen many plans for a 30mpg small xover from them either (the venza came out this year and gets 28 mpg iirc)

 

[Chunkee]

fuel efficient engines are nice. how about they work on quality of other aspects, like the fit and finish; usability and quality of materials used inside the car as well. i think most people, including myself, do not mind paying a little more for a better product, rather than skimping as much as possible to increase margins so much that resales tanks into oblivion.

 

[mwmorph]

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
http://www.leftlanenews.com/gm...4-plus-new-30l-v6.html

General Motors on Thursday announced its 2010 Chevrolet Equinox crossover will come equipped with a 2.4-liter direct-injection four-cylinder Ecotec engine delivering 180 horsepower at 6700 rpm and 172 pound-feet of torque at 4900 rpm. Perhaps most importantly, the engine promises to deliver 30 mpg on the highway. That tops Ford?s new 2.5-liter I4, which produces 170 hp and returns a highway EPA rating of 28 mpg.

GM also announced plans to offer the new Equinox with a 3.0-liter V6 delivering 255 horsepower and 214 pound-feet of torque. Also featuring direct injection, the motor has an isolated fuel injector system that promises quieter operation than other DI engines. Rubber isolators are used with the fuel rail to eliminate metal-to-metal contact that would otherwise transmit noise and vibration from the high-pressure fuel system.

?We first introduced direct injection in North America in the 2007 Saturn Sky Red Line and the Pontiac Solstice GXP,? said Tom Stephens, executive vice president, GM Global Powertrain and Global Quality. ?We?ve been rolling out the technology across our portfolio as quickly as we can so that our customers will have additional fuel savings options. Direct injection is a state-of-the art engineering solution because it enables improved fuel economy and lower emissions without sacrificing power.?

Thats a LOT better than anything TM or HMC have out for 09, and i havent seen many plans for a 30mpg small xover from them either (the venza came out this year and gets 28 mpg iirc)

The Venza gets 21/29 with a 2.7L 4 cylinder putting out 182hp/182ft/lbs. Everything else between a Venza and Equinox is a wash as far as size and capacity is concerned. 70lbs here, 1" there, etc (except width, the Venza is almost 4" wider).

It comes down to personal choice imho. Both are competitive.

Equinox +
More towing capacity 3500lbs v.s. 2500lbs
Highway mpg, maybe city mpg? ??/30 v.s. 21/29
Front and rear headroom 40.9/40.1 v.s. 39.6/39.3
Front and rear leg room 41.2/40.2 v.s. 40.2/39.1
Cargo capacity behind rear seats 35.2/30.7

Venza +
Tighter turning circle 39.1ft v.s. 41.8ft
Max cargo capacity 70ft^3 v.s. 69ft^3
Front and rear shoulder room 60/59 v.s. 55.7/55.9
Front and rear hip room 56/56.5 v.s. 51.1/51.3
Torque 182lb/ft v.s. 172lb/ft

 

[DivideBYZero]

GDI tech is not new. Mitsubishi intrduced it into production cars in JDM models around 15 years ago.

Diesel engines of the same config and capacity would be a better solution.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Chunkee
fuel efficient engines are nice. how about they work on quality of other aspects, like the fit and finish; usability and quality of materials used inside the car as well. i think most people, including myself, do not mind paying a little more for a better product, rather than skimping as much as possible to increase margins so much that resales tanks into oblivion.

Look at an '05 Equinox and then look at an '09 Traverse and tell me they didn't make a gian leap in interior fit and finish.

GM can't win. They improve fit and finish and then people piss and moan about milage. They improve milage and then they piss and moan about the interior.

As for the Comparison against the Venza look at pricing. The Venza starts at like 26k. A brand new Equinox is like 21k after discounts. $5,000 is $100 a month in payments difference.

 

[SickBeast]

GM should try letting one of their top engineers design a car from the bottom up with complete control over the process (similar to what Nissan and Honda do).

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
GM should try letting one of their top engineers design a car from the bottom up with complete control over the process (similar to what Nissan and Honda do).

See the problem with this statement is that you think the engineers have any input on how the final product will get released. The accountants ultimate decide what gets put into the car in order to save on costs.

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: vi edit

Originally posted by: Chunkee
fuel efficient engines are nice. how about they work on quality of other aspects, like the fit and finish; usability and quality of materials used inside the car as well. i think most people, including myself, do not mind paying a little more for a better product, rather than skimping as much as possible to increase margins so much that resales tanks into oblivion.

Look at an '05 Equinox and then look at an '09 Traverse and tell me they didn't make a gian leap in interior fit and finish.

GM can't win. They improve fit and finish and then people piss and moan about milage. They improve milage and then they piss and moan about the interior.

As for the Comparison against the Venza look at pricing. The Venza starts at like 26k. A brand new Equinox is like 21k after discounts. $5,000 is $100 a month in payments difference.

Anandtech will NEVER get it.

 

[PricklyPete]

Originally posted by: vi edit

Originally posted by: Chunkee
fuel efficient engines are nice. how about they work on quality of other aspects, like the fit and finish; usability and quality of materials used inside the car as well. i think most people, including myself, do not mind paying a little more for a better product, rather than skimping as much as possible to increase margins so much that resales tanks into oblivion.

Look at an '05 Equinox and then look at an '09 Traverse and tell me they didn't make a gian leap in interior fit and finish.

GM can't win. They improve fit and finish and then people piss and moan about milage. They improve milage and then they piss and moan about the interior.

As for the Comparison against the Venza look at pricing. The Venza starts at like 26k. A brand new Equinox is like 21k after discounts. $5,000 is $100 a month in payments difference.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[evident]

good, now don't fuck up the interior, ergonomics and electronics like they always do

 

[RU482]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
GDI tech is not new. Mitsubishi intrduced it into production cars in JDM models around 15 years ago.

Diesel engines of the same config and capacity would be a better solution.

yeah...put diesel engines in all passenger cars...like the price of diesel is so low now, lets double the demand for it.

Diesel, as it is today, is about as economically practical on a wide scale as ethanol is.

 

[ViviTheMage]

gasoline effecient is great...but 30mpg is not a huge accomplishment...nor is using that fossil fuel still.

somethign 50mpg + would be much better, not sure how possible that would be ...

 

[MikeMike]

you guys comparing pricing, sizing, etc need to remember that the 2010 equinox is going to be ALL new...

 

[PingSpike]

I wonder if it'll still have the 3500lb towing capacity. At any rate, I briefly rode in my aunt-in-laws equinox and I liked it. I thought it had a useful size while not being a bear. My wife has some irrational hatred of anything with an SUV label on it. If you could get 30mpg highway (which, if my experience versus EPA ratings holds somewhat true...would mean about 30 combined) that would be a pretty interesting vehicle.

 

[PricklyPete]

Originally posted by: ViviTheMage
gasoline effecient is great...but 30mpg is not a huge accomplishment...nor is using that fossil fuel still.

somethign 50mpg + would be much better, not sure how possible that would be ...

You do realize we are talking about a decent sized cross-over vehicle right?

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: evident
good, now don't fuck up the interior, ergonomics and electronics like they always do

Apparently you haven't driven the new models that have came out in the last year or two. They're significantly better.

 

[Bignate603]

Originally posted by: ViviTheMage
gasoline effecient is great...but 30mpg is not a huge accomplishment...nor is using that fossil fuel still.

somethign 50mpg + would be much better, not sure how possible that would be ...

Um... 30 mpg out of an SUV is pretty good. I love how people talk about how a car should be and don't really think about what they're saying. If it was so easy to replace oil or get 100 mpg a company would be doing it and selling cars for as much cash as they possibly could. Stuff like that isn't on the market because it's just not as easy as people make it out to be.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: ViviTheMage
gasoline effecient is great...but 30mpg is not a huge accomplishment...nor is using that fossil fuel still.

somethign 50mpg + would be much better, not sure how possible that would be ...

Um... 30 mpg out of an SUV is pretty good. I love how people talk about how a car should be and don't really think about what they're saying. If it was so easy to replace oil or get 100 mpg a company would be doing it and selling cars for as much cash as they possibly could. Stuff like that isn't on the market because it's just not as easy as people make it out to be.

but we can legislate 100mpg! :disgust:

 

[PhoKingGuy]

Too bad the Venza was raped with an ugly stick

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: evident
good, now don't fuck up the interior, ergonomics and electronics like they always do

Apparently you haven't driven the new models that have came out in the last year or two. They're significantly better.

still not good enough, at least hte malibu and equinox. seriously

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: evident

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: evident
good, now don't fuck up the interior, ergonomics and electronics like they always do

Apparently you haven't driven the new models that have came out in the last year or two. They're significantly better.

still not good enough, at least hte malibu and equinox. seriously

Apparently you haven't driven the new models

 

[DivideBYZero]

Originally posted by: RU482

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
GDI tech is not new. Mitsubishi intrduced it into production cars in JDM models around 15 years ago.

Diesel engines of the same config and capacity would be a better solution.

yeah...put diesel engines in all passenger cars...like the price of diesel is so low now, lets double the demand for it.

Diesel, as it is today, is about as economically practical on a wide scale as ethanol is.

If you think the US diesel price is high because of demand you're mistaken.

Modern diesels are simply better than the gas equivelents for these type of applications. A 2.4l turbocharged diesel will be pulling 40mpg+ and giving you significant torque gains.

You need to get into a modern diesel and try it out, rather than just spitting vitriol against them.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero

Originally posted by: RU482

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
GDI tech is not new. Mitsubishi intrduced it into production cars in JDM models around 15 years ago.

Diesel engines of the same config and capacity would be a better solution.

yeah...put diesel engines in all passenger cars...like the price of diesel is so low now, lets double the demand for it.

Diesel, as it is today, is about as economically practical on a wide scale as ethanol is.

If you think the US diesel price is high because of demand you're mistaken.

Modern diesels are simply better than the gas equivelents for these type of applications. A 2.4l turbocharged diesel will be pulling 40mpg+ and giving you significant torque gains.

You need to get into a modern diesel and try it out, rather than just spitting vitriol against them.

Honestly, it doesn't even matter to the end user why diesel prices are high. They are. Its currently 60% more expensive per gallon here then regular gasoline. I don't think they get 60% better mileage then a comparable gasoline engine. And there are precious few affordable cars available in the states that use it.

I don't have any problem with diesel technology, but according to my toilet reading Europe is currently soaking up most the fuel due to policies over there. That leaves us with less, and its more expensive.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: Turin39789

Originally posted by: evident

Originally posted by: Bignate603

Originally posted by: evident
good, now don't fuck up the interior, ergonomics and electronics like they always do

Apparently you haven't driven the new models that have came out in the last year or two. They're significantly better.

still not good enough, at least hte malibu and equinox. seriously

Apparently you haven't driven the new models

ok

 

[Pandaren]

This engine looks good on paper, but it only matches what you can buy from some Japanese manufacturers today.

Nissan has had for years a Direct Injection engine that puts out similar #'s:

Here's the engine in the Altima:
QR25DE ? 2.5-liter DOHC 16-valve 4-cylinder
Horsepower ? 175 hp @ 5,600 rpm [2]
Torque ? 180 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm [2]

I'll believe the EPA #'s when the official specs are out.

Also I'd like to point out that EPA #'s depend a lot on the transmission. The I4 Malibu can get 32-33 MPG with the auto 6 transmission, but it absolutely sucks to drive.

NYTimes review

I had high hopes for the 6-speed, but in several hundred miles of driving it proved somewhat disappointing. At highway speeds it was slow to figure out that it needed to shift from sixth to fifth for more acceleration, unless I pushed hard on the gas pedal.

Then at times the 6-speed seemed clumsy. A few upshifts were slam-bam harsh, even under light acceleration.

My friends who have rented the 6spd Malibu came to the same conclusion -- it handles very well and is quiet, but the transmission is frustrating and the throttle is sluggish because the car is heavy. Everyone preferred Ford's products