Drew Dowdell

They need one, but it can't be a rebadge of a Trax. They need to head the Renegade route and put a completely different body on the thing, probably raise the ride height a bit and give a little more driver control over the AWD system. The Trax AWD is already excellent for a softroader, but putting the ability to lock it into 4x4 mode and having some hill descent control would be good additions. Oh, and put a professional grade engine in there. The 1.6T gasser and the 1.6T Whisper diesel would do just fine.

Fake news has been in the press a lot lately, so I figured let's generate some of our own. Rules: 1. It has to be automotive related, no politics, not even a hint of politics. 2. It has to be plausible enough to be believable by someone who isn't a car enthusiast. (I.E., no Tucker is not resuming operations, no GM is not reviving Pontiac) 3. Write it as if it were a press release or news announcement.

The reality is, in daily driving around suburbia, you're really just driving a 1.5T minus the T. 1.5 liters in a large compact aren't all that fun.

Exactly. While it might feel you are just lightly using the gas pedal, the computer is amplifying that throttle input. In the case of my Encore, 1/4 pedal throttle is actually over 55% throttle reported by the throttle position sensor. It's because of this that small turbos are able to really ace the EPA tests because the EPA test accelerates ridiculously slow, so the turbo doesn't spool up the same way it does in the real world. It's why in the real world, a Fusion 2.0T with less power gets lower fuel economy than a brick shaped 300c 3.6 V6. One might think they're being gentle in the Fusion, but in reality, the throttle is probably cresting 50% under most acceleration situations just to give good feel. My grandmother downsized from a Lacrosse V6 AWD to a Regal 2.0T AWD last January, and while she really likes her new car, she has mentioned that the fuel economy is disappointing especially now that she went from a V6 to a 4-cylinder. .... and she drives like a grandmother. I'll have a Ford 2.7 EB and a GMC Sierra 5.3, nearly identically equipped, both 6-speed autos, coming up for a test in about 2 weeks. The results should be interesting.

This is the wrong thread on this and I intend to start one in the near future... but suffice it to say that I have full proof and will happily present it in an article coming up in a month or two that Ford (And GM, and Honda, and anyone else who is using a turbo) is fooling the driver by way of throttle calibration. I'll show my full findings in the article, but the long story short is that a naturally aspirated engine runs around 10% throttle at idle while turbo engines run around 20% throttle at idle. Furthermore, the throttle on a naturally aspirated engine opens less to accelerate, generally less than 40%, while turbo engines generally go well over 50%. These numbers are not from a "feel of the foot" measurement but from actual throttle position sensor readouts from various cars. So while your Escape feels like it's not using much throttle to get moving, the truth is that the computer is amplifying the movement of your foot more than it actually moves. The reading also gives me the amount of boost provided when its a turbo engine. I bought an OBDII reader to deal with issues on my CR-V, but I found out it will give you the throttle position reading as well which allows me to collect the data relative to different cars. I'm aiming for late October to finish the article because I'll have a fleet of cars to test it on in mid october.

I really wanted one of these when they came out.

I don't take advice on being manly from a guy who's manliness is so fragile a taller overdrive gear and an underbody shield on a Cruze can be shattered by it.

Lord... didn't I say let bygones be bygones? IF you must know, it was with regard to throttle position, turbos, and power output.

Guys, I was more looking for factory sleepers, and jokes to go with.

The Outlander will get you into an AWD 3 row crossover for $26k MSRP, $31k MSRP gets you a V6 and leather...and we all know you can do better than MSRP at a Mitsubishi dealership. For that price they are not terrible if you're not looking for fluff and just need that sort of functionality. Plus they have as long a warranty as a Kia. The Bolt's packaging makes it much larger inside than it is on the outside.

Chrysler has been in partnership with VW on and off since at least 1978.

Most cars are fluff over function, crossovers of all shapes in particular, LOL. If all you're looking for is function and little fluff, the best value in this segment is actually the Mitsubishi Outlander.

As far as the name, I'm "meh" about it.... names don't matter or mean anything anymore outside of pony cars. Also, even though the XT5 hasn't done anything to wow me, I will give it this: It feels very very spacious for that class of vehicle and the 3.6 will be stupid fast in this Chevy.

I guess it wasn't clear because I don't understand what the issue is with choices in the same showroom. If you want upright, go for a Traverse, Acadia, Terrain, or Enclave. Traverse, though the largest in the segment, is still considered in the mid-size category since it competes on price with Explorer, Durango, and Pilot. As the title to the article says, this is filling a gap between Traverse and Equinox that Chevy has currently that some of the competition already has filled (Ford, Nissan, VW, Lexus, Lincoln) or will be filling (Honda, Acura)

And the difference in cargo area width between the Murano and Pathfinder is a massive 0.9 inches in the Pathfinder's favor.

Then buy a Pathfinder or Traverse if golf is that important to you. That's why there are choices. Most of these will go to soccer moms.

That's why there are other choices in the GM showroom. If that's what you need, they will happily direct you to the Traverse or GMC/Buick dealer for an Acadia/Envision. But... just putting this out there on what everyone should expect to see.

Exactly... these aren't being sold to people going camping for a week, people who do that will buy an Explorer over the Edge, Pathfinder over the Murano, etc.. These are for urban warriors who "need" an SUV to go to Ikea once a year. Well, he called them a fail when they are not. That was my point of contention. Going to disagree with you on GM producing something unique here. Even under the Camo it looks like it's going to have the same general silhouette as the Edge or Murano. Aside from the likely Traverse face, it will blend right in with the others. Heck, it might even get a "floating roof".

We're enthusiasts, these vehicles aren't meant for us. These are for people who get excited over daring shades of beige on beige. There are a lot of people out there who buy them.

Those are also good sellers (except the ZDX)... so just because you don't fit in one doesn't mean they shouldn't be sold.

Pick a sleeper, describe it in an accurate but funny way. Only rule: Must be a true sleeper, so all sports cars and pony cars are out. 1. 1987 Buick Regal T-Type.... for when Nana is late for bingo but has 355 lb-ft of torque under her right orthopedic shoe.

Pilot was the largest in the segment till the 2018 Traverse came out. Honda could fit another crossover between Pilot and CRV

Justa buncha wagons

I don't think it will change Tesla's status as a status symbol... I just think that people will get tired of waiting. I could go get a lease on any number of plug-in hybrids today and still have time left before my Model 3 was ready. I know of two people personally who have already canceled their reservations.

I agree with you.. Model 3 buyers will not move over to a Leaf. If they would, that would already be happening with the Bolt. However, in a few of the Tesla groups I follow online, more than a handful seem to be getting frustrated with the slowness of the Model 3 rollout and Tesla's attempts to push them into a substantially more expensive Model S. They're not going to Leafs or Bolts, they're just going to other luxury marques or just sticking with what they have.