Chevrolet News:The 2018 Chevrolet Equinox Could Have Looked So Much Different

[William Maley]

If it weren't for focus groups, the design of the 2018 Chevrolet Equinox could have looked so much different.

Speaking to Automotive News, chief engineer of the 2018 Equinox Mark Cieslak revealed that focus groups weren't not impressed with the first designs of the redesigned model. They described the design as being bulky, 'not compelling', and looking a bit odd. If this was old GM, they would have gone forward with the design.

"Back in the day, we would have probably just kept going," said Cieslak.

"What we had on paper we felt was not going to win."

But this being the new GM where bean counters lost a fair amount of influence, the decision was made to go back to the drawing board. At the time, GM was scrambling to fix the Malibu as its redesign earned poor reviews and a drop in sales which likely played a part in this decision. They needed to get the Equinox redesign right as the model it would replace was very popular. There were concerns that this could cause the new Equinox to be delayed. But in the end, the team were able to design a new Equinox without falling off schedule.

Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

View full article

[Drew Dowdell]

Well that explains why they extended the previous generation by 2 years with that lackluster facelift. 

[Robert Hall]

The side door window shape reminds me of the previous Malibu, esp the rear door windows.  

[David]

Interesting, at least GM listened to the focus groups and did the right thing. If the potential customers will not like it, trash it and start over.

Todays market is one not to let be lazy or just meh. You have to always listen to the customers and push the edge.

Honda might have move up in edgy design language, but is Meh in overall driving dynamic and excitement.

It's like living on cold mush breakfast cereal. 

[ccap41]

Is it a good thing though? Customers don't know what will look good in 5-10 years they just know what things look like now and what they're used to seeing. They didn't push anything  

The Camaro got focus groups...of Camaro owners.. and look what we got. The same thing and their sales haven't taken off like most do with a brand new car. 

Edited March 27, 2017 by ccap41

[ocnblu]

To me it skews too far toward feminine.  Cooties.  Plus it drags its belly in the dirt.  Piggy.

[daves87rs]

It it pushing more Korean this way.....not bad, but kinda boring as well. Liked the fact the old Nox had a kinda boxier shape to it.....

[Drew Dowdell]

Well we don't know what the one they tossed looks like. 

[Cmicasa the Great]

14 hours ago, ccap41 said:

Is it a good thing though? Customers don't know what will look good in 5-10 years they just know what things look like now and what they're used to seeing. They didn't push anything  

The Camaro got focus groups...of Camaro owners.. and look what we got. The same thing and their sales haven't taken off like most do with a brand new car. 

The thing is that technically the Camaro groups got it right. Especially considering they moved the Camaro from a Full-Size platform to a compact one. The sales deficiency comes from lack of fleet sales IMO.. especially when compared to what Ford has done with the Mustang and FCA has done with the Chally. The only other thing Camaro team could have done would have simply left the car alone in styling.. trying to literally replicate the Camaro5 with no changes at all to visuals.. much in the way the Challenger folks have done. Well I guess they could improve (by simply going back to the 2010-2012 model) taillights

[Cmicasa the Great]

12 hours ago, ocnblu said:

To me it skews too far toward feminine.  Cooties.  Plus it drags its belly in the dirt.  Piggy.

I think that is the point. The smaller CUV market normally skews to women. The Terrain on the other hand still looks more masculine.. at least to me. AND there may be a huge set-up for Chevy trying to get ready for a Trailblazer (based on Colorado7) launch

[ccap41]

6 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

The thing is that technically the Camaro groups got it right.

How? How did they "technically" get it right? There's no measure of right or wrong other than people buying or not buying the product.

 

7 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

The only other thing Camaro team could have done would have simply left the car alone in styling.. trying to literally replicate the Camaro5 with no changes at all to visuals..

That IS what they did. WE, enthusiasts, know the difference but I would wager $100 that average Joe and Jane couldn't pick one from the other on a drive-by.

 

8 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

much in the way the Challenger folks have done.

That was only a refresh not a whole new car, assuming you're talking about the 2015 refresh.

[Cmicasa the Great]

22 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

How? How did they "technically" get it right? There's no measure of right or wrong other than people buying or not buying the product.

 

That IS what they did. WE, enthusiasts, know the difference but I would wager $100 that average Joe and Jane couldn't pick one from the other on a drive-by.

 

That was only a refresh not a whole new car, assuming you're talking about the 2015 refresh.

The Camaro 6 is technically a waaaaaaay better car than the Camaro 5. I hate using the analogy when it comes to sales but saying what U are saying essentially means that the Corolla.. is the best car on the copact market because it has sold for longer and more so than all other compacts. Same for the Camry. I personally don't kno anyone who would say that the Corolla is a better car than the Cruze, Civic, or Mazda 3

Well there is not a necessity for revolution in car design every 5 years anymore. The Challenger is a prime example of this.. to your next comment.. Refresh??? The Challenger has been the same since 2006 for all intents with a simply change to front and rear clips to anyone looking. Its design is still HOT. There was no need to change it IMO. Ford could have left the Mustang alone.. the pre-facelift was actually slick.. but they effed it up. The Camaro rear end is the only negative I see on it.. it should have been left the same going all the way back to 2013 when they made the change from the 4 squares. Ironically I feel the same about the ATS front. The original front was better looking, IMO, than the change that took place for 2015.

Point is that in terms of sales Chevy could do a bunch of things to boost their numbers.. the first being dump to fleet by about 25-30% like the other two Pony Cars

and seriously.. no one can tell me that.. looking like the old one or otherwise.. that this car is not effin SWEET 

[ccap41]

6 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

The Camaro 6 is technically a waaaaaaay better car than the Camaro 5. I hate using the analogy when it comes to sales but saying what U are saying essentially means that the Corolla.. is the best car on the copact market because it has sold for longer and more so than all other compacts. Same for the Camry. I personally don't kno anyone who would say that the Corolla is a better car than the Cruze, Civic, or Mazda 3

It is a better car as a whole, EASILY. But we're strictly talking about exterior design/looks. That's why there really isn't much of a way to measure. There's usually a good sales bump for a new generation just because it's the new, hip thing and they look BRAND NEW. I also am not a huge sales-talk fan but new generations always create a decent bump in sales. The Gen5 outsold the Gen6 every year it was sold compared to the first year for Gen6.

 

17 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Well there is not a necessity for revolution in car design every 5 years anymore.

I agree. I think automakers need to spread the costs out longer than 5 years. Life cycles should be more in the 8 year range with a good refresh at the 4 year mark. Buuuuut competition always makes them do it sooner.

[Cmicasa the Great]

51 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

It is a better car as a whole, EASILY. But we're strictly talking about exterior design/looks. That's why there really isn't much of a way to measure. There's usually a good sales bump for a new generation just because it's the new, hip thing and they look BRAND NEW. I also am not a huge sales-talk fan but new generations always create a decent bump in sales. The Gen5 outsold the Gen6 every year it was sold compared to the first year for Gen6.

Gen 5 had a 7 year glut of Camaro/Firebird fans. Granted New generations normally create a sales bump.. but I can't stress the fact that the new GM is doing business has nothing to do with NORMALLY.. especially when it pertains to them. In other words the numbers are not the true measure by which GM, under Barra rule is gauging things. The old GM.. (1980-2009),  even the newish GM ( 2009-2013) under Smith to Wagoner to Henderson (Whitaker was too short and Akerson, IMO, started this new way of business) saw sales as a gauge of success. Barra sees profit and innovation as the measure. I prefer this.. as a fan cars and a stock holder.  Also.. the Camaro is a PLATFORM (Camaro, CTS, ATS)vehicle similar to the previous. I wouldn't be surprised if the Alpha Global sales are similar to the ZETA (Commodore, Caprice, Omega, Lumina, Camaro) Global sales 2016-2017 because as much as people like to dog out the ATS, for instance, its doing pretty decently globally. I kno that sounds like an excuse.. but from a business stand point if its producing more profit.. not producing and selling like this then why wouldn't U. 2015's $9.7 and '16s $9.5 Billion is hard to argue against. This is after leaning out and not adding a bunch of rental fat. 

BTW.. I always though that the Challenger should have been outselling the Camaro and Mustang for that matter.. simply because it really isn't as performance focused as the two. Its a big family coupe that happens to use the old Detroit option of a big engine. It kinda has a niche of its own.. and Sergio, if U notice, really hasn't effed with it. Considering it and the Charger are his only sellers in the CAR world, I could see both being the same for another 2 years min.

 

 

[Stew]

the are putting BIG money on the hoods of Camaros right now, so I don't know how the whole profit over sales thing is working for it.  You are right though, a lot of the 5th gens success was because of a backup of fans waiting for it.  I love the exterior of the new Camaro.  For me I feel like the tightened up the lines to a point they should have been from the beginning.  I think they could have done much better with the interior, particularly style-wise.   they also didn't fix the most major issues of visibility and space. 

[ccap41]

12 minutes ago, Stew said:

For me I feel like the tightened up the lines to a point they should have been from the beginning. 

Agreeeeed!

13 minutes ago, Stew said:

they also didn't fix the most major issues of visibility and space. 

Also, Agreed. lol

Honestly, if I could see out of one of these it would be ahead of the Mustang on my list. It just performs so damn well and my driving style suits the low end grunt of the LT1 over the Coyote.

[Cmicasa the Great]

1 hour ago, Stew said:

the are putting BIG money on the hoods of Camaros right now, so I don't know how the whole profit over sales thing is working for it.  You are right though, a lot of the 5th gens success was because of a backup of fans waiting for it.  I love the exterior of the new Camaro.  For me I feel like the tightened up the lines to a point they should have been from the beginning.  I think they could have done much better with the interior, particularly style-wise.   they also didn't fix the most major issues of visibility and space. 

Big Money??? $3000 on Loyal or 3500 on Conquest buyers.. on a car that starts off at $1700 more than the Mustang.. WHICH IS DOING THE EXACT SAME REBATE. Your point is NULL. Believe me I checked all of that before I made my original post.. just in case a dullard tried to fuck with me

[ccap41]

Just now, Cmicasa the Great said:

Big Money??? $3000 on Loyal or 3500 on Conquest buyers.. on a car that starts off at $1700 more than the Mustang.. WHICH IS DOING THE EXACT SAME REBATE. Your point is NULL

A friend's son on FB got a 2016 1SS for 28k.

[Cmicasa the Great]

4 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

A friend's son on FB got a 2016 1SS for 28k.

A friend of mine.. in REAL LIFE.. got a 17 Mustang GT for $29K

 

COME ON... COOOOOME ON!!!

[ccap41]

9 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

A friend of mine.. in REAL LIFE.. got a 17 Mustang GT for $29K

 

COME ON... COOOOOME ON!!!

I'm not arguing Mustang discounts at all, am I? YOU brought mustang discounts into this.

[Cmicasa the Great]

4 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I'm not arguing Mustang discounts at all, am I? YOU brought mustang discounts into this.

I didn't bring the Mustang discounts in as a put-down.. I brought them in because the Mustang and the Camaro are in the same segment... competitors.. and each is a gauge of the other. If one does something then the other must follow. That shill Stew tried to make a thing of the incentives.. as if GM was actually losing money on a car that they obviously artificially priced higher

[Stew]

19 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

Big Money??? $3000 on Loyal or 3500 on Conquest buyers.. on a car that starts off at $1700 more than the Mustang.. WHICH IS DOING THE EXACT SAME REBATE. Your point is NULL. Believe me I checked all of that before I made my original post.. just in case a dullard tried to f@#k with me

There are dealership selling them for as much as 10 grand off............

1 minute ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

I didn't bring the Mustang discounts in as a put-down.. I brought them in because the Mustang and the Camaro are in the same segment... competitors.. and each is a gauge of the other. If one does something then the other must follow. That shill Stew tried to make a thing of the incentives.. as if GM was actually losing money on a car that they obviously artificially priced higher

The shill would be the one that thinks GM can do no wrong no matter what...........

[Cmicasa the Great]

Mustang too.. Challenger HELLCAT too.. 

[Stew]

5 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

 

LOL, we aren't talking about the Mustang, but for the heck of it, the Mustang is in it's 3rd model year with a MAJOR update coming up soon.  the Camaro is in year 2 with no major update over the horizon.   They started having to offer rebates almost immediately after the Camaro came out BTW. 

Off topic, but that has to be the best looking RC I have seen. 

Edited March 28, 2017 by Stew

[David]

OK, Here is what is posted for Washington on both Camaro and Mustang!

[oldshurst442]

Hey, @Cmicasa the Great  

 

Ill make you famous!

Casa, the Camaro6 LOOKS EXACTLY like a copy then pasted and reduced by 10-15% Camaro5.

There are more VISUAL differences between a 1970 Camaro versus a 1978 Camaro than the Zeta Camaro versus the Alpha Camaro!

There are more VISUAL differences between a 1982 Camaro then there is a 1992 Camaro!

There are more VISUAL differences between a 1993 Camaro and a 2002 Camaro!

The Camaro6 is an absolute MONSTER of a car performance wise...VISUALLY though...it leaves much to be desired.

The Camaro6 should have been the Camaro5 visually and dimensionally. GM had to make do withy the Zeta platform, and that is GREAT! So the Camaro5 is what it was, which at the end was a FAN-PHOQUING-TASTIC car that was LOOOONG in the tooth in the VISUAL department...and what does GM do for the next gen? GM copy and pastes the Camaro5 and reduces it by 10-15%....

The Camaro6 should have NOT looked that way. It SHOULD have taken a different approach.

But @Cmicasa the Great, its OK...we had are showdown at the OK Corral a looong time ago regarding this! Time to move forward.

A little reminder...

Transformers the Movie came out in 2007 when we got a glimpse of what the Camaro will look like...we are in 2017....that is a decade of having a similar look!

Deny is all you could do...but unlike Johnny Ringo, I am your huckleberry and I do NOT back down and I certainly don't lose to you!

 

 

 

[David]

Back on topic, Interesting deals on the Equinox in Washington State:

2018 Models

2017 & 2016 models

[oldshurst442]

About this new Equinox that the focus group supposedly got right that GM changed the look to this one...

HOW THE PHOQUE DO I KNOW THE FOCUS GROUP GOT IT RIGHT?

1a. There is no picture of the previous non focus group Equinox so I could at least compare and see for myself!!!

1b. If there is such as story...it could be #fakenews just for #fakenews sake to sell a story to tell us how new GM is different than the old GM!!!

2. Only time will tell as SALES SALES SALES against its COMPETITION COMPETITION COMPETITION will determine if the focus group got it right!

TALK ABOUT FLUFF MARKETING!!!

AND WE GAVE WINGS SHYTE BECAUSE FoMoCo BULLSHYTED US WITH FLUFF LIKE THIS!!!

Edited March 28, 2017 by oldshurst442

[hyperv6]

Here is the deal. 

Now we know why it was delayed. 

Two while some may not like this now sales will determine the success. Looking around it is no better or worse than any of the others so performance and interior will determine much of how it does. Function plays a bigger roll here. 

I hated the Terrain and now own one. These things grow on you and GM has enough  a models that one should appeals to someone. 

The Camaro is fine it is the fact Coupes are a hard sell and price. Add to this the boomers that were buying them in their 50-60's are now in their 70's and have moved on. 

The Camaro 5 also was a car built under duress. They had to take an older platform that was updated. convert it to a smaller coupe than the GTO and make it work. They made a mistake buy taking the show car and not changing it enough on the inside. It clear to the Camaro team they need to change the inside but GM wanted it left alone. 

The Camaro group did help but also much of what they said was also not done too. GM gets the blessing or curse for any results the advisory group could only pass along their ideas that were used and more often not used. I know someone in the group so I have heard of their recommendations. 

Keep this a good value, Make it drive and ride better than the others. Keep it reliable. Make it user friendly and you will sell a crap load of these. 

As for appealing to women well they buy 80% of them so who else would you make it appeal to. The GMC is a little more butch so it will pick up those lead when they dance. 

My wife was not impressed as it did not look to sit as high. She likes that on her present Terrain. Right now she is on the Acadia Denali  as it is a little larger but not as large as it used to be. By the time we replace her car it may be something else by then in this ever changing market. 

I am not an SUV guy but if GM just builds on what they had in the last model it will do fine. It may not pass the others all up as this is a loyal group but if they can just slowly increase market share it is a win.

The reviews will be critical as many who buy in this segment can't check their own oil. They read and trust what others say and the first reviews are positive. Next high crash results will be important too. 

I think they should make things like the heated wheel and vented seats an option that can be had in many levels as this would be something women would like. Simple comfort items like this can make or break a deal as people buy features and utility here not styling. 

By the way the rejection story here is a GM story and the work of media. I think they did it for two reasons. One if it leaked out they would have to explain so get in front of it. Second it is being used to show they listened and cared enough to get it right as they say. 

These things are two key points to the non enthusiast as they do not know automakers like we do. 

To understand this segment toss out everything you know as an automotive enthusiast as this is the anti enthusiast vehicle. If it made sense to you then they missed the market demo.  

Note too on the last model it was too large, it was to heavy, it had too much cheap plastic, it was too old and as time when on it sold better and better. None of it made sense but it worked. This segment is not your normal buyer. 

Edited March 28, 2017 by hyperv6

[regfootball]

Re: Camaro. 

If they simply reskinned the new one with a taller roof and carved out some legroom I think you'd see sales take off. The rakish look is great but it is really hurting sales. 

The new equinox is nice but a little cramped in front compared to the outgoing version. Some may not care but some will perceive it as downsized. I think they should be careful to not make too many of them with the 1.5. Put the 2.0 in most of them. Keep the price down.

otherwise they really did feminize it but as many years of big RAV4 and Crv sales attest, they may be ok here. They really should have left the terrain boxy and butch though

[daves87rs]

9 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

I think that is the point. The smaller CUV market normally skews to women. The Terrain on the other hand still looks more masculine.. at least to me. AND there may be a huge set-up for Chevy trying to get ready for a Trailblazer (based on Colorado7) launch

 

Dare I say, you'd be right on! I disappointed in the way the new Nox is going, but a soon to be greenlighted TB would make it worth it.....

One of the times we can thank Ford for that....

[David]

How about we DROP the Tank Windows and give it a more open greenhouse to let natural light in. I have talked with many camaro fans and while many love the performance, they hate the tiny side greenhouse windows.

Yes, I know that the higher doors with side impact pillars give it the 5 star rating for side safety, but I have to think they could still get that rating and have more natural light into the auto.

[oldshurst442]

How about we also move on from the pseudo 1967-1969( they say its more 1969 than 1967) retro look and evolve the bloody model...

As much as I LOVE the Challenger, I feel that the Challenger also has played out its retroness if anybody thinks Im being hypocritical....I CAAAAANT WAIT for a Guilia platform Chally to make an entrance if FCA and Dodge exist long enough for that to happen... 

Edited March 29, 2017 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

these designs mentioned here are iconic; they've basically reached their zenith. Change for changes' sake- what does that accomplish?

[hyperv6]

1 hour ago, regfootball said:

Re: Camaro. 

If they simply reskinned the new one with a taller roof and carved out some legroom I think you'd see sales take off. The rakish look is great but it is really hurting sales. 

The new equinox is nice but a little cramped in front compared to the outgoing version. Some may not care but some will perceive it as downsized. I think they should be careful to not make too many of them with the 1.5. Put the 2.0 in most of them. Keep the price down.

otherwise they really did feminize it but as many years of big RAV4 and Crv sales attest, they may be ok here. They really should have left the terrain boxy and butch though

And add two doors and put a hatch on the back with a third row then it would fix the sales. LOL! 

It is a damn good coupe and it is in a segment that is very limited. Mustang and Dodge both are not burning up the sales charts and even the smaller coupes from Asia are not setting the world on fire either. 

[oldshurst442]

33 minutes ago, balthazar said:

these designs mentioned here are iconic; they've basically reached their zenith. Change for changes' sake- what does that accomplish?

I dont know?

You wanna buy the same car over and over and over and over and over again?

About the Camaro...

The Camaro has had 3 ZENITH designs...3.

 

The 2nd and 3rd gen defining the 1970s and 1980s respectively.

If that was the case, not changing for changing's sake, we'd be still having the 1st generation NEVER experiencing the 2nd or the 3rd...

[ccap41]

14 hours ago, dfelt said:

How about we DROP the Tank Windows and give it a more open greenhouse to let natural light in. I have talked with many camaro fans and while many love the performance, they hate the tiny side greenhouse windows.

Agreed. If only the Camaro would open up the sightlines I would almost guarantee I'd want one over a Mustang. The performance is undeniable and w/ my driving style the low end tw of the LT1 favors me more than the Coyote. You just can't see out of the damn thing. My buddy w/ a 5th gen offered to give me his keys when we were going from a restaurant to a bar a few weeks ago but he stated, "it'll be a bastard to try and park there" referring to the sucky parking lot we were going to to begin with and then how crappy the visibility is in his car. I said no thanks, for now.

 

14 hours ago, dfelt said:

Yes, I know that the higher doors with side impact pillars give it the 5 star rating for side safety, but I have to think they could still get that rating and have more natural light into the auto.

EVERYBODY else accomplished this. No reason they can't.

13 hours ago, balthazar said:

these designs mentioned here are iconic; they've basically reached their zenith. Change for changes' sake- what does that accomplish?

You can evolve a body style without changing "just to change". Look at the Mustang for example, or that above pictured Lambo.

Camaro existed in the 70's-2002 without this current design. Throw those some retro bones as well. You don't always have to mimic the originals to be retro. The 2002 Catfish Camaro looked nothing like the original but that's not bad.

[ccap41]

12 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

I dont know?

You wanna buy the same car over and over and over and over and over again?

About the Camaro...

The Camaro has had 3 ZENITH designs...3.

 

The 2nd and 3rd gen defining the 1970s and 1980s respectively.

If that was the case, not changing for changing's sake, we'd be still having the 1st generation NEVER experiencing the 2nd or the 3rd...

YES! Throw some homage to #2 & #3! And would you look at that...the driver can see out of those cars as well. Weird.

I completely agree with that entire post, @oldshurst442!

[regfootball]

15 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

I dont know?

You wanna buy the same car over and over and over and over and over again?

About the Camaro...

The Camaro has had 3 ZENITH designs...3.

 

The 2nd and 3rd gen defining the 1970s and 1980s respectively.

If that was the case, not changing for changing's sake, we'd be still having the 1st generation NEVER experiencing the 2nd or the 3rd...

Note that these 2/3 gen camaros look sexy as hell, and perform, but don't have mailslot windows and smashed down roofs. I bet you can get an actual human in the backseat of those too

[hyperv6]

4 hours ago, regfootball said:

Note that these 2/3 gen camaros look sexy as hell, and perform, but don't have mailslot windows and smashed down roofs. I bet you can get an actual human in the backseat of those too

They didn't also have the crash regulation, the mpg regulations and all the petty preconceived notions of what a Camaro souled look like.

while retro is cool it is also a easy way out on the lack of styling creativity. Less risk less gains in creating a future classic.

i warned years ago here that Retro is a two edged sword where you get the good of the past but fail to progress to new and even better designs. 

Just look at the box Mini is in. They try to break out but remain stuck with their past. Global sales bail them out.

The back seat of the Camaro sucked since the first gen. Do Kid your self. It is bad today and it was not much better then. 

That is just the nature of a sport coupe. 

You take a muscle coupe and take away the risky styling and then you end up with a 04 GTO.

Lets face it half of you will be up set no matter which direction they go and 95% of you are not going to buy the car anyways. Just be honest here!

[David]

True, fun to drive, but not to own. Happy with my SUV's!  

[Suaviloquent]

There's a big problem with this Equinox, and it's the Top-end pricing.

Anybody looking at this as a legititmate contender to the CR-V and it is, will find that even with having a turbo engine standard, top-end models lose value compeletly to the Honda, and it's a juggernaut in this segment.

When Honda can deliver a larger vehicle, with a more potent engine and more features, and more fuel economy and a lower price to boot, plus better resale....I find it conceivable that a major redesign was done. But honestly, I recognized this trend recently. Almost all of GM's new sedans or coupes are truly excellent. But their crossovers are just merely competitive in their segments. Yeah, go ahead combine the incoming Terrain, but that's supposed to be a near-luxury crossover, and it gets the 1.5T standard too. 

With the diesel and 2.0T not even out yet, crossing the $40k barrier with a resized, no longer mid-sized crossover is a little tough. Plus, what the hell is that kind of value when a nice Traverse can be had for a little more change?

[hyperv6]

The Camaro has a big advantage over the Mustang. In the Camaro Gen 6 my head hit the headliner. In the Mustang my head hit the real glass. If given the choice the headliner would prove to be much better on the melon. LOL! 

[Robert Hall]

46 minutes ago, hyperv6 said:

The Camaro has a big advantage over the Mustang. In the Camaro Gen 6 my head hit the headliner. In the Mustang my head hit the real glass. If given the choice the headliner would prove to be much better on the melon. LOL! 

I know what you mean...I rode in the back seat of a current Mustang a couple years ago, just a brief trip to lunch and back...my head was against the rear window, rode up front also.   The new Mustangs seem smaller inside than the previous ones--they seem even smaller inside than my boxy Fox era GT.   

[regfootball]

I visited a lot of a chevy Mazda dealer today while we are traveling. 

They had a nice new Equinox on the lot. Loaded up but of course still the 1.5. Looks really good!  It was parked next to the outgoing one. The outgoing one looks old and tired now. The new one does look a bit smaller, but also looks sleeker. Even if it's feminized, it might draw some new attention.  

Of course they had a price tag of like 37,000 on it. Srsly?

and about 50 feet away is a new cx-9, a few of them actually. With tags on them ranging from 37k to 40k......

Edited March 30, 2017 by regfootball

[ocnblu]

10 hours ago, Suaviloquent said:

There's a big problem with this Equinox, and it's the Top-end pricing.

Anybody looking at this as a legititmate contender to the CR-V and it is, will find that even with having a turbo engine standard, top-end models lose value compeletly to the Honda, and it's a juggernaut in this segment.

When Honda can deliver a larger vehicle, with a more potent engine and more features, and more fuel economy and a lower price to boot, plus better resale....I find it conceivable that a major redesign was done. But honestly, I recognized this trend recently. Almost all of GM's new sedans or coupes are truly excellent. But their crossovers are just merely competitive in their segments. Yeah, go ahead combine the incoming Terrain, but that's supposed to be a near-luxury crossover, and it gets the 1.5T standard too. 

With the diesel and 2.0T not even out yet, crossing the $40k barrier with a resized, no longer mid-sized crossover is a little tough. Plus, what the hell is that kind of value when a nice Traverse can be had for a little more change?

New CR-V will easily remain king of the segment.  Equinox is a bit of a miss, imo, with pricing... value for money spent, being an elephant in the room.  I totally agree with Suave here.

On the Camaro, there are only two iconic designs, and all other Camaros have been variations on them.  First gen '67-'69 and second gen '70-'81.  Third and fourth gen were riffs on the second gen ethos.  5 and 6 are riffs on the first-gen.  Not to say that the competition isn't doing the same thing...

 

Edited March 30, 2017 by ocnblu

[Drew Dowdell]

I like the looks of the new Equinox, but like @ocnblu I fear that GM is going to get to ambitious with pricing and it will hurt sales.   A fully loaded CR-V Touring with AWD, sunroof, NAV, and Driving Autotronics is $33,695.  A Chevrolet Equinox Premier AWD similarly equipped (but active cruise control doesn't appear to be available) is $37,900.  The outgoing CX-5 is $34,600.... A completely loaded Cherokee Trailhawk V6 is still slightly less money than the Equinox

So I see Chevy having to rebate these down a bit to keep them moving. 

[frogger]

Checked one out this week too, quite liked it, but not enough.  I would rather get a Sportwagen Alltrack or a larger more practical cuv for the same price or less like a CRV.

 

[Stew]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

I like the looks of the new Equinox, but like @ocnblu I fear that GM is going to get to ambitious with pricing and it will hurt sales.   A fully loaded CR-V Touring with AWD, sunroof, NAV, and Driving Autotronics is $33,695.  A Chevrolet Equinox Premier AWD similarly equipped (but active cruise control doesn't appear to be available) is $37,900.  The outgoing CX-5 is $34,600.... A completely loaded Cherokee Trailhawk V6 is still slightly less money than the Equinox

So I see Chevy having to rebate these down a bit to keep them moving. 

It doesn't help either that the Equinox seems like a minor step forward while the CR-V has taken a quantum leap.  I liked the last gen Equinox, especially the later models with the 3.6 V6 and thought the last CR-V was an overrated POS.  That has changed. 

[ocnblu]

It is like they're building in a need for the perpetuation of rebates with this pricing scheme.  Sad.

The somewhat brawny new CR-V is proof you can have a CUV that appeals to both sexes, and the interior in the Honda is simply beautiful.

Over here though I am anxiously awaiting my new Compass.

 

 

 

Edited March 31, 2017 by ocnblu