# From a Cruze to an Equinox for a few days



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

I'd say your coworker is either jealous or simply doesn't understand the joy of rowing your own gears.


----------



## brian v (Dec 25, 2011)

Well I thought ya got rid of yer dang cruzen for an equinox ...


----------



## txcruze26 (Jul 7, 2015)

on the automatic, you can go M1-6, for a person that doesn't know how to drive Manual, could you learn with this? Obviously not the clutch part but figuring out when to down and up shift.


----------



## Patman (May 7, 2011)

brian v said:


> Well I thought ya got rid of yer dang cruzen for an equinox ...


I was afraid people would take the title the wrong way. After driving the Equinox(at least this one), I would more likely than not be back in the market for another car! I guess it has it utility but not for me!


----------



## Patman (May 7, 2011)

obermd said:


> I'd say your coworker is either jealous or simply doesn't understand the joy of rowing your own gears.


Not many do anymore! Most are surprised to see mine and even when I see one, I am curious as to the owner.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

Good god those things are underpowered pigs. I felt like I was constantly winding it out to 3500+ RPM in normal driving. 

Otherwise they're an OK car in my opinion. It's a nice size compared to say, an Escape, but the Escape is 500x better from behind the wheel.


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

jblackburn said:


> Good god those things are underpowered pigs.


If you get an AWD 2.4L, and think it's a race car, sure. My in-laws have one - it's fine.

The 3.6 has far more balls.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

MP81 said:


> If you get an AWD 2.4L, sure.
> 
> The 3.6 has far more balls.


FWD 2.4 was what I had. 90% of them are the 2.4. And the 3.6 is terrible on gas for its size and can only be optioned on upper trim levels. 

GM really needs to put a small turbo engine or worthwhile 4 cyl (is the GM 2.5 any better?) in one, and lose some weight. I think it's due for a complete redesign next year though.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

I had one as my loaner too during my rack replacement. ive felt big rigs that have more get up and go.... always drone and always trying to find power in high rpms. it guzzles gas at a alarming rate.. with eco turned on and my hyper mile driving i didnt really come close to epa city. what a rolling turd of a car in most aspects. comfort was good as was viability and ride


----------



## _MerF_ (Mar 24, 2015)

That's pretty much exactly how I thought the Equinox would be, which is a shame because I like the styling of it.

Once I've got the Cruze paid down/off, it's Silverado time for me.


----------



## sparkman (Oct 15, 2015)

_MerF_ said:


> That's pretty much exactly how I thought the Equinox would be, which is a shame because I like the styling of it.
> 
> Once I've got the Cruze paid down/off, it's Silverado time for me.



x2!


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

jblackburn said:


> FWD 2.4 was what I had. 90% of them are the 2.4. And the 3.6 is terrible on gas for its size and can only be optioned on upper trim levels.
> 
> GM really needs to put a small turbo engine or worthwhile 4 cyl (is the GM 2.5 any better?) in one, and lose some weight. I think it's due for a complete redesign next year though.


It's old architecture - but it sells *really* well. Why mess with what works while also developing a new lighter program? Doesn't make sense.

Also - did you turn Eco _off_? On the in-laws, the tip-in felt like half the pedal with Eco on. With it off, I was perfectly happy driving it - and clearly so are over 200,000 people a year.


----------



## sparkman (Oct 15, 2015)

MP81 said:


> *It's old architecture - but it sells really well.* Why mess with what works while also developing a new lighter program? Doesn't make sense.
> 
> Also - did you turn Eco _off_? On the in-laws, the tip-in felt like half the pedal with Eco on. With it off, I was perfectly happy driving it - and clearly so are over 200,000 people a year.


Very true. Kinda like how Toyota didn't change anything with their Tundra 5.7L V8. Sure it sucks for gas, but sales have not hurt because of it. They know that engine will last 250k miles with little to no issues.


----------



## Patman (May 7, 2011)

On the way home dealer called and car was ready. Remember I was quoted @$700. Well it turned out they only needed to change the disk and pressure plate(didn't need slave cylinder or flywheel) Said disk was @85% worn. $360 with an oil change and tire rotation. Drives like new car again! I wonder if the first dealer I went to would have figured out problem yet?


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

MP81 said:


> It's old architecture - but it sells *really* well. Why mess with what works while also developing a new lighter program? Doesn't make sense.
> 
> Also - did you turn Eco _off_? On the in-laws, the tip-in felt like half the pedal with Eco on. With it off, I was perfectly happy driving it - and clearly so are over 200,000 people a year.


Yep, Eco was off.

The platform is fine. It's not fun to drive, but it's capable and a good size for a family car. The base engine is a huge disappointment in a time where most 4 cylinder engines are actually surprisingly ok. All I'm trying to get at. And I drive a **** Cruze - it's not like THAT'S a fast car. 

FWIW, I feel the RAV4 is underpowered as well. The CR-V, CX-5, Santa Fe, Escape w/ Ecoboost...all get around ok. I actually love small crossovers, but this is one I'd pass on.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

Imo the only descent crossover power wise is the escape with the 2.0T. The crv is embarrassing slow, the cx-5 was meh but my second favorite, the Santa fe is ok but is hyundai and they have turbo issues up the backside. The equinox was junk when we looked at them. Gm needs to step up their game.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

txcruze26 said:


> on the automatic, you can go M1-6, for a person that doesn't know how to drive Manual, could you learn with this? Obviously not the clutch part but figuring out when to down and up shift.


Nope. The computer still does too much.


----------



## au201 (May 18, 2013)

My mom has a V6 terrain (same thing). It's the 3.0 before they came out with the 3.6 in the Equinox and terrain but it has much better power and doesn't strain nearly as much as the 4 banger. It does okay on gas. The 3.6 (family friend has one) does much better. The sticker still says 23 highway but they consistently get 27-28 on the highway out of it and theirs is AWD loaded. Her lifetime average is 22.7 and she does a lot of city. If you take the V6 Equinox and terrain at face value, it doesn't look very good, but then you realize it's rated the same MPG (almost) as the bigger Traverse with the same engine and something doesn't add up. Not sure why GM elected not to retest the car with the 3.6 in it (which is the general consensus of what happened over on the Equinox and terrain forums). 

I know a guy on that forum got 33.x mpg out of the 3.6 FWD on a round trip over 200 miles hand calculated. Haven't been over there in a while but I wanna say his lifetime average was something close to 30mpg 

Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

Patman said:


> On the way home dealer called and car was ready. Remember I was quoted @$700. Well it turned out they only needed to change the disk and pressure plate(didn't need slave cylinder or flywheel) Said disk was @85% worn. $360 with an oil change and tire rotation. Drives like new car again! I wonder if the first dealer I went to would have figured out problem yet?


Excellent. The first dealership probably doesn't even know what a clutch is (other than $$$)


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

MP81 said:


> If you get an AWD 2.4L, and think it's a race car, sure. My in-laws have one - it's fine.


Two of my family members have them as well, I've driven them thousands of miles. I found even the FWD version with the 2.4L is under-powered with not enough low end torque for a car so large. 75MPH with a cruze automatic will never leave 6th gear on most interstate grades, An equinox/terrain downshifts to over 4000RPM to maintain 75mph on every hill. Really shows how the turbo and its much lower peak torque improves how a car drives. Sure a 2.4L makes 24lb-ft more peak torque than the 1.4T, however the 2.4L needs to be turning 4900RPM to hit those numbers while the automatic 1.4T has peak torque starting at 1850RPM. 

I've heard rumors that the Malibu's all new 1.5T will be replacing the 2.4L with the redesign, hopefully next generation will get better than 22-24MPG at 75mph(2.4L FWD).


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

My 2009 escape which is fully loaded and v6 awd gets 21 us mpg city and 27.5 us mpg hwy.


----------



## Patman (May 7, 2011)

The Equinox is back where it belongs at the dealer. I had it for 2 days and it was enough to say I would not buy one! First day coming home got stuck in traffic and it burned lots of gas(not sure if that was in Eco mode or not) and the new car smell was horrendous LOL. Co worker has a 2007 Equinox and seems to like it. Anyway happy to have my car back for $350 for a new clutch and oil change.


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

spacedout said:


> I've heard rumors that the Malibu's all new 1.5T will be replacing the 2.4L with the redesign, hopefully next generation will get better than 22-24MPG at 75mph(2.4L FWD).


The in-laws _average_ far more than that, with AWD - and neither of them as a light foot.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

MP81 said:


> The in-laws _average_ far more than that, with AWD - and neither of them as a light foot.


Best I could ever get with an Equnox/Terrain 2.4L FWD is 32mpg going 55-65mph. At 75mph+ though the 2.4L is really working to move all that weight and over 4000+ miles I averaged 22-24mpg. Most people like me that drive 80% highway or more average 28mpg or less still. My parents have a 2015 Equinox 2.4L/FWD and drive 80% city, even driving it easy they only average 17-22MPG.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

spacedout said:


> Best I could ever get with an Equnox/Terrain 2.4L FWD is 32mpg going 55-65mph. At 75mph+ though the 2.4L is really working to move all that weight and over 4000+ miles I averaged 22-24mpg. Most people like me that drive 80% highway or more average 28mpg or less still. My parents have a 2015 Equinox 2.4L/FWD and drive 80% city, even driving it easy they only average 17-22MPG.


I did about 23.7 for the day in my rental. Heavy city driving. Still, that's better than my family's other V6 small SUVs (01 Escape FWD/05 Liberty 4WD - they'll do that on a 100% highway trip).


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

jblackburn said:


> I did about 23.7 for the day in my rental. Heavy city driving. Still, that's better than my family's other V6 small SUVs (01 Escape FWD/05 Liberty 4WD - they'll do that on a 100% highway trip).


Escapes didn't get descent mileage until the 2009 model year. The 6F35 made a huge difference.


----------

