ccap41

It's very interesting that they would change that much within the same vehicle. I have no issue with either in their respective ways.

For that little money, I would absolutely jump on this if I had a garage and it was wired for a charger. Shet, that's a good deal. I can't click that link but if for me to do that, it would also have to be 12,000-15,000 miles/yr. Those low-mile leases of 8,000-10,000 miles wouldn't cut it.

Ahhh I keep forgetting about that vehicle! It looks sharp. That would be high on the sub-compact list along with the CX-30. They must be pretty different in size because "sub-20k" for the Trailblazer vs $21,800 for the CX-30. I would absolutely have to have the 1.3 w/ AWD and the 9-spd though, in the Trailblazer.

I had a loaner EcoSport and while it had some nice things it felt cheap as hell, overall. It just didn't feel like a 28k vehicle(that was the sticker on a pretty loaded SEL). I could not imagine spending that kind of money on that vehicle. It easily had the feel of a sub-20k vehicle. I haven't spent any time in the other sub-compact SUVs but the new Mazda CX-30 would be the first place I would look if I was in the market for a new sub-compact SUV. I doubt there are any discounts on those though as they're brand new and there probably aren't many or any on lots yet. I was not a fan of the overall ride of the EcoSport. It wasn't like any one thing was bad or anything like that but the thing that stood out to me was when driving on the interstate, it felt twitchy. I have to assume that's a short wheelbase thing but I didn't like that. That was really the only glaring handling thing that I didn't like. That makes sense to me from my non-scientific eyes. I see waaaay more crew cabs with short beds than anything else.

Did you guys look at other compact CUVs or just diehard GM people?

Congrats on getting something new but what attracted to you a ...Chevy Trax...?

I think that looks really sharp.

I mean.. They're somewhat useless for the look they bring to the table but at least they aren't actually 100% useless. It's still a pain in the hind to open the hoods because the hood is like neck-height to me at 5'8" and the leverage with those hooks isn't the greatest.

Yeah, i get what you're saying. People definitely loved them. they sold like hotcakes at their absurd prices. Also, those hood hooks were used to open the hood as it opened Corvette-style.

The grille looks juuuuuust a tad off on an otherwise very attractive package. The diesel option is a really cool touch.

I always thought the H2 looked terrible because it looked like a bloated H1 but it really did have the off-road goodies suited for a civilian, mass-marketed, Hummer-branded vehicle.

This looks great.

SUVs being down for a company switching to only SUVs doesn't look great but I guess a couple new products arriving late in 2019(one of them being a botched launch) should set them up for a solid 2020. It's great to see the Expedition finally taking off.

Typo.

I get that and agree the people buying them aren't looking to race them but 169hp from a n/a motor(meaning it also has dogsh!t for torque) matched to a CVT is a combo to reads passing problems. Those GLAs and X1s atleast produce some torque. They also make a considerable amount more horsepower and probably around 100 lb-ft more torque. GLA produces 208hp/258tq X1 produces 228hp/258tq It is a completely different landscape there with much different driving circumstances.

You can also get a 2.3T with 295hp and a plug-in hybrid with 25 miles of EV range and 266hp in the Corsair.

Good lord... Nothing with a luxury brand should have ANYTHING with 169hp.

I almost always go to when my light comes on which the car reads ~50 miles till empty. I don't feel the need to fill up earlier unless I foresee terrible weather or a road trip in the near future.

I mean... I get that but not everything can be 60-100k and 500-700hp..

Of course warranties are about bean counters, i the end. Had Hyundai and Kia not thrown massive warranties on their vehicles, they never would have taken off.

That's because OEM's have to warranty their products for years and tens of thousands of miles.

Just... never mind...

"nobody cares what the national average is" uhhh.. how else would we all compare prices/costs when we all live in different locations? Still, you should have looked up the vehicle we're talking about. 24 or 28 gallon tanks. Yeah, on a performance vehicle I am all for paying whatever premium as it isn't driven 100% of the time and it's all out of pure enjoyment. Buuuuut... we're talking about a stock Silverado 6.2. That is not what I could classify as a "fast truck". It is very quick and serves its job exceptionally but, imo, it doesn't warrant the premium fuel prices.

IMO, life is too short to piss money down the drain on premium vs regular for a non-performance vehicle...like a truck..

Maybe you didn't realize the 2019 Silverado is brand new and the "been for decades" thing is irrelevant. You also must be picky and choosey with your STL prices as I drove past two stations this morning at 2.29/gal. Here is a REAL image of gasoline prices in the STL area, not whatever you are looking for. Even premium prices are lower that whatever you were searching for. That's a very reasonable price and especially if you have a membership, get your gas there as well. Because he said "5--6 bucks per tank".