GMC Upsizes the Acadia for 2024; New 2.5L Turbo-4

This really rocks, love the AT4 version.

So back to the old days of Traverse, Acadia and Enclave being the same size.  Kind of creates a size gap between the Terrain and Acadia although at the same time I don't know if you really need a Blazer size SUV, or a Venza, or Passport.  People either get that small SUV or go for a 3 row vehicle.

Finally making amends for their big mistake. 
 

yet, ^^^the gap you mention could be filled by rebadging the current Acadia. The smaller size did work better for some and that is a worthwhile market segment on its own. Just not the same sales volume. 
 

even Toyota has the Highlander and the Grand Highlander now. 

They could have done an Acadia and an Acadia XL like they do with the Yukon.     (I'd like to see someone use the 'Big' and 'Bigger' naming).

20 hours ago, regfootball said:

Finally making amends for their big mistake. 
 

yet, ^^^the gap you mention could be filled by rebadging the current Acadia. The smaller size did work better for some and that is a worthwhile market segment on its own. Just not the same sales volume. 
 

even Toyota has the Highlander and the Grand Highlander now. 

I need to look it up, but I think the Traverse and Acadia are back to being the same size again. It looks like the Traverse shrank.  This leads me to wonder what will happen to Enclave and XT6.  Enclave always had the larger body while XT6 is on a very slightly lengthened Acadia wheelbase, but longer overall length.

5 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I need to look it up, but I think the Traverse and Acadia are back to being the same size again. It looks like the Traverse shrank.  This leads me to wonder what will happen to Enclave and XT6.  Enclave always had the larger body while XT6 is on a very slightly lengthened Acadia wheelbase, but longer overall length.

If this

https://burlappcar.com/2023/06/2024-buick-enclave.html

is accurate to what the new Enclave will be, it can just get in my belly right now

perfect step up for me from the TourX but I might as well dream because can’t likely afford anything anymore 

6 hours ago, regfootball said:

If this

https://burlappcar.com/2023/06/2024-buick-enclave.html

is accurate to what the new Enclave will be, it can just get in my belly right now

perfect step up for me from the TourX but I might as well dream because can’t likely afford anything anymore 

 

 

The hood proportions and height are probably wrong on that. The new platform is taller and has a stubby nose because it's built for a 4-cylinder.

7 hours ago, regfootball said:

perfect step up for me from the TourX but I might as well dream because can’t likely afford anything anymore 

i completely forgot you have a TourX. I want one of those really bad right now. They seem like such a great overall package. 

9 hours ago, regfootball said:

If this

https://burlappcar.com/2023/06/2024-buick-enclave.html

is accurate to what the new Enclave will be, it can just get in my belly right now

perfect step up for me from the TourX but I might as well dream because can’t likely afford anything anymore 

 

 

Wish they would build it like that, but I doubt it, not SUV enough.

Sadly that as an EV would ROCK!

GMC Acadia AT4 Rocks

What I like:

• Stance of this SUV, looks rugged, looks like a perfect tool to get around the PNW.
• Dark grill, tired of all the chrome on the Denali, which is Chrome Overload.
• Style is right on
• Green house is well proportioned
• ground clearance is excellent
• Front hood proportions is good even if this was an EV, it would have a great FRUNK
• Proper placement of the center top hood antenna
• Quad exhaust looks great
• Rim to tire proportions look good

What I dislike:

• I know it is for crash safety, but belt line is a bit high for me
• D pillar looks like a major blind spot, I know for roll over protection probably
• Plastic wheel well with reflectors I am just not feeling as I think it looks awkward
• Interior is nice, but I really hope they offer more choices than the bloody damn BLACK only Interior
• Plastic rear bumper looks like it could easily be pulled off if caught on something when off-roading
• HATE the Chrome strip across the rear bumper
• Wish the plastic reflectors in the bumper would have led illumination.

Over all, I like the stance, look of this SUV, but there are things that I just do not like as stated and a few more.

18 minutes ago, David said:

Plastic wheel well with reflectors I am just not feeling as I think it looks awkward

Those are AT4 only

A 2.5L 4cylinder is the standard engine?  Are they taking notes from Mazda?  Mazda has been doing that in their SkyActiv engines (virtually all models) for the past several years now.

19 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

A 2.5L 4cylinder is the standard engine?  Are they taking notes from Mazda?  Mazda has been doing that in their SkyActiv engines (virtually all models) for the past several years now.

No, Mazda gives you a turbo inline six now in this class, and rear wheel drive.  Far superior drivetrain.

I like Mazda.   (I thought Id start off by saying to let people know about how I feel about Mazda)

But Mazda done inline 6 with a turbo on a RWD theme to go upmarket.   Commendable Id say.  If this was 1999.

GMC started going upmarket about that time and coincidentally,  offered an inline 6.   Ironically, Mazda almost introduced a brand new luxo brand 10 years prior but the leaders that be didnt have enough confidence to pull it off like their crosstown rivals Honda, Toyota and Nissan done...   But they did sell that one car they enginnered as their first luxo brand vehicle into a Mazda but it didnt quite hit the sales mark so the  leaders were quite correct in the fear and assumptions of a new luxo Mazda brand not succeeding.

Also, Lexus SUCCEEDED with a TON of transverse V6, FWD  sedans and CUVs without the dumb moniker of ultimate driving machines and right wheel drive---RWD.  

What Im trying to say is that 

1. inline 6 turbos in 2024 at the dawn of the EV era might just BE too little too late for an image boost and market shift for Mazda

2.  GMC has succeeded going up...UP market WITHOUT the use of an inline 6.  Their big models use V8s, but their smaller offerings use, since the last 40 years, the tried and true transverse V6 WITH FWD bias AWD.   

3.  I may bitch about CUVs quite often, but a transverse V6 and FWD is not necessarily an inferior drivetrain to a RWD set-up.    It depends what the vehicle is set up for and what the driver needs of his sedan or CUV.    Ill argue that an inline 6 ON TOP of the front wheel axles would ALSO be a shytty set-up REGARDLESS of the rears pushing the car forward.   As much of a shytty set-up as having a shytty tuned transverse V6 with the fronts pulling the car.  

BMW CUVs with inline sixes are nothing to write home about.  And I would bet the Mazda CUV would be the same shyttyness as the Bimmers.   And what is also tricky is that inline 6es tend to be quite long making them NOT ideal in certain packaging criteria regarding...well, comfort for the passenger in the cabin. And being RWD also cuts into that said comfort.  You know...for luxury purposes.    

 I could be wrong though, with my assesment of things.  

But probably not since I have NEVER drank from the BMW fountain and their so called definition of luxury.   With driving dynamics.  Yeah...I never biught into that hot garbage either.  At least not with their econobox offerings.   

4. Mazda made and continue to make some pretty cool and sporty,  small FWD cars with transverse 4 pots.   

5. GMC need NOT learn ANYTHING from Mazda.   Not even BMW.  GMC done success their way.  They need to inspire to Frank Sinatra and continue on doing what they do.  

6. There is a reason why inline 6s went away m at the end of the 70s mostly in favour of transverse 4s and 6s.   Because in MANY aspects, it was NOT the superior drivetrain.   V8 with RWD for performance and transverse V6 for packaging.   

Sure inline 6s are smoother, but there are many negatives attached to the inlline config.  

VW had MAJOR success in combining V and Inline.  Quite a good engine.  Sporty cars too using that set-up WITH FWD and AWD.   BMW does inline 6s good.  THAT is their thing. Just like GM does pushrod V8s good. That is their thing.  But an inline 6 is NOT the end all be all.  

Since GMC went Hummer

Since GMC is serious with AT4, GMC may NOW need to dip themselves into this realm. 

and then maybe revisit this

22 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

6. There is a reason why inline 6s went away m at the end of the 70s mostly in favour of transverse 4s and 6s.   Because in MANY aspects, it was NOT the superior drivetrain.   V8 with RWD for performance and transverse V6 for packaging.   

Sure inline 6s are smoother, but there are many negatives attached to the inlline config.  

VW had MAJOR success in combining V and Inline.  Quite a good engine.  Sporty cars too using that set-up WITH FWD and AWD.   BMW does inline 6s good.  THAT is their thing. Just like GM does pushrod V8s good. That is their thing.  But an inline 6 is NOT the end all be all.  

 

I don't think there is any negative to the Inline 6 other than they are too long/wide if you try to put it in a front wheel drive car.  And most car makers the past 40 years wanted to build mediocre front wheel drive cars.  Unless you have a V12, nothing is going to beat inline 6 smoothness.

Although shortly none of this will matter, the electric powertrain being superior to all these ICE powertrains.  And Mazda is too late, an inline six 5-10 years ago maybe would have been a good idea instead of turbo 4's or to replace the Ford sourced V6s from back in the day, but they should have put that money into batteries and electric motors.  Mazda probably won't be here in 10 years.

22 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

and then maybe revisit this

 

 

EV will allow them to do this.  Where as you can't fit a supercharged V8 into a GMC Terrain, you can put 2 electric motors making 500 hp in there.  You can put 500 hp in a Trax or a Bolt and have an EV that is like $30k after tax credits that can beat a $150,000 Corvette Z06 in a drag race.  EV lets you make anything fast, which will also make the performance cars of yesterday look bad. 

CAFE is basically the reason small trucks are dead, the Maverick only meets CAFE because it is a hybrid.  But in EV land, GM can bring back a small truck like a Maverick, have a 200 hp version, a 400 hp dual motor, an 800 hp quad motor if they want to.

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

EV will allow them to do this.  Where as you can't fit a supercharged V8 into a GMC Terrain, you can put 2 electric motors making 500 hp in there.  You can put 500 hp in a Trax or a Bolt and have an EV that is like $30k after tax credits that can beat a $150,000 Corvette Z06 in a drag race.  EV lets you make anything fast, which will also make the performance cars of yesterday look bad. 

CAFE is basically the reason small trucks are dead, the Maverick only meets CAFE because it is a hybrid.  But in EV land, GM can bring back a small truck like a Maverick, have a 200 hp version, a 400 hp dual motor, an 800 hp quad motor if they want to.

 

 

Yes. That is EXACTLY why I mentioned the Typhoon and Syclone with the same breath as hinting at battery electric technology and why I think that Mazda offering an inline 6 at THIS point in time to change image is too little too late. 

I am not at all surprised at GMC never again revisiting a speed performance smallish SUV and pick-up truck.  The Syclone and Typhoon were not well recieved by the public back in the day.  The concept of zero ground clearance and no hauling capacity on utilitaerian vehicles  confused people.  And GMC as a brand wasnt coveted either.  But like you said, today is a different time.  GMC has brand cachet where GMC could re-enter the realm of speed oriented CUVs and pick-ups and join the ranks of Porsche Cayennes, Lambo Urus and the like with Battery Electrics.   As you said.  

12 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I don't think there is any negative to the Inline 6 other than they are too long/wide if you try to put it in a front wheel drive car.  And most car makers the past 40 years wanted to build mediocre front wheel drive cars.  Unless you have a V12, nothing is going to beat inline 6 smoothness.

I think inline 6s are OVERrated.  

Smoothness is just about the ONLY advantage I see in the world that consisted of stringent CAFE measures, downsize-ment and fuel economy.  From the 1970s until just about the 2000s.   The V6, in longtitude form in a RWD config but ESPECIALLY in tranverse form for FWD was just about THE only way to go.   For packaging purposes because cars did get smaller but I6 were also gas guzzlers...   

Inline 6s made sense again from 2000s up until today because of new technologies making I6s more frugal on gasoline consumption.  Couple that with turbocharging and these engines were beasts.  But then again, supercharged V8s not only come in smaller packages as compared to I6s, especially in OHV form, may make similar power, but a whole LOT more TORQUE...   

And... in the freewheelin' days of the 1960s, when gas mileage was not an issue but huge horsepower was, big cubed V8s were the answer.   Because NO I6 could even come CLOSE to the horsepower those big block V8s produced.  And...when big crass noise exited the huge ass muscle car when revving up the big V8 and the whole road shook, never mind the car itself, smoothness was NOT a factor...   And...472 and 500 some odd cubic inched V8 Cadillacs and 460 cubic inched Lincolns tuned to be revving up lazily just as smooth as an I6.   Couple those Caddys and Lincolns with that pillowy suspensions they had and smoothness was unparalleled.   Only French cars were smoother.   And the DS from Citroen had a buzzy I4.   The SM had a V6...   Answer: hydropneumatic suspension. 

Engine smoothness is cool and all.  But where I live, shytty road surfaces are a thing and honestly,  I6s are a moot point.  So yeah... a better suspension ABSORBING potholes is a much more appreciated asset than an I6.   

So yeah, these are just a few reasons why I think inline 6s ARE overrated.  

Stellantis is going I6 too though.

Stellantis is doing this for different reasons.  The French group part  HAS EV technology and has seen success selling them in Europe already.  This R&D technology was created and existed BEFORE  the French Group bought out FCA. So for Stellantis, R&D for EVs has been invested and continue to do so.   And with the advent of Chrysler engineers, the SRT guys, more engineering brain power has entered the fray. 

 There are plenty of Stellantis brands with an already established performance image with a plethora of performance vehicles to make a good business case in introducing as a final internal combustion engine offering in their line-up.  Couple that Stellantis ALSO has a bevy of luxury minded brands as well, an I6 for smoothness is yet another good reason to engineer a last internal combustion offering ever as an inline 6. 

55 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Yes. That is EXACTLY why I mentioned the Typhoon and Syclone with the same breath as hinting at battery electric technology and why I think that Mazda offering an inline 6 at THIS point in time to change image is too little too late. 

I am not at all surprised at GMC never again revisiting a speed performance smallish SUV and pick-up truck.  The Syclone and Typhoon were not well recieved by the public back in the day.  The concept of zero ground clearance and no hauling capacity on utilitaerian vehicles  confused people.  And GMC as a brand wasnt coveted either.  But like you said, today is a different time.  GMC has brand cachet where GMC could re-enter the realm of speed oriented CUVs and pick-ups and join the ranks of Porsche Cayennes, Lambo Urus and the like with Battery Electrics.   As you said.  

I don't think anyone is cross shopping GMC with Porsche or Lamborghini, but in terms of straight line speed everything can be fast and basically take away the advantage that the V12 expensive cars used to have over smaller cars that could only fit a turbo 4 or maybe a V6 into.  

The Hyundai Ionic 5 N has 641 hp, so the EV age means you can get small crossovers with supercar horsepower.  GMC could put out a Terrain EV with 600 hp and people would say why doesn't it have 650 to beat the Hyundai, which is stupid since all these numbers are stupid, but that is where we are at.  If the horsepower wars continue into EV's you'll see a Malibu or Equinox with 1,000 hp some day, which doesn't really make sense.  

So I hope every manufacturer does a few select crazy horsepower EV's but more importantly is who can build the affordable EV's that people will actually buy.  That Ioniq 5 N is probably a $70-75,000 car, and how many people really want a $75,000 hatchback?  90% of buyers are going to look for who can give decent range with 225 hp at a $30-35,000 price point.  

On 9/15/2023 at 8:38 AM, ccap41 said:

i completely forgot you have a TourX. I want one of those really bad right now. They seem like such a great overall package. 

Just had my four year carversary the other day….just about 37000 on the odometer ….

7 hours ago, regfootball said:

Just had my four year carversary the other day….just about 37000 on the odometer ….

What're your thoughts/opinions of it? What year is it? What are things you love about it and things you hate about it? 

7 hours ago, regfootball said:

Just had my four year carversary the other day….just about 37000 on the odometer ….

9 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

What're your thoughts/opinions of it? What year is it? What are things you love about it and things you hate about it? 

I would suggest he updates his thread with a good Love/Hate review of his Tour-X after 37,000 miles.