Chevy officials have stated that the 2009 Chevy Traverse crossover is going to have more power and better fuel efficiency than the 2008 Saturn Outlook, Buick Enclave and GMC Acadia.
The all-new Traverse is powered by a direct injection 3.6L V6 that puts out 288 horsepower and 270 lb-ft of torque, which is 18 more horsepower and 22 more lb-ft of torque than the current Lambda crossovers. The EPA has rated the FWD Traverse at 17/24 mpg and the AWD Traverse at 16/23. All of the GM crossovers will eventually be powered by the new 3.6L engine, but not all will have the same towing capabilities. The Outlook is only capable of towing 4,500 pounds, while the Traverse can tow up to 5,200 thanks to its larger grille that improves cooling for the engine and transmission.
Full Story: Detroit News
Related Stories:
Chicago 2008: 2009 Chevy Traverse Unveiled...Chevy Gets a New Crossover
Comments (17)
Crossovers are just vehicles for people who's ego won't allow them to drive a mini van or station wagon.
Whatever.
Not a bad looking vehicle.
Posted by zippy | June 25, 2008 7:29 AM
Posted on June 25, 2008 07:29
Oh, you mean they're not for people who don't need a truck based SUV?
Posted by Jung | June 25, 2008 8:22 AM
Posted on June 25, 2008 08:22
MARKETING 101: If it looks like a station wagon, drives like a station wagon, and is purchased by people in the market for a station wagon, it must be a cross-over utility vehicle.
Posted by Tommy Boy | June 25, 2008 8:42 AM
Posted on June 25, 2008 08:42
Why can we not apply the Direct Injection to a little smaller V6 to make the same Power as the older Lamda's, and much better fuel econo? Why does it always have to be more power, and little improvement in Econo?
Posted by Rob | June 25, 2008 9:11 AM
Posted on June 25, 2008 09:11
Not quite sure how this is news since all Lamdas (Outlook, Enclave and Acadia) will get the DI engine in 09.
Posted by radkon | June 25, 2008 9:40 AM
Posted on June 25, 2008 09:40
When the EPA 35 MPG CAFE (unfunded) mandate went through, the car makers agreed that engine power could not be sacrificed like it had been with previous raises in the CAFE.
The reason is that people feel that power is safety, the ability to accelerate from danger, etc. People buy based on HP. Otherwise, best in class HP --wouldnt-- be a sales point. Thus more HP with modest improvment in fuel econ > less HP with better econ.
Finally, it takes a lot of money to develop a new engine. My guess is GM saw the 3.6 DI as the best way to improve HP and econ for cost, holding onto less HP/more econ for a later date, once some profit has been reaped from current models.
Posted by stahlight | June 25, 2008 10:01 AM
Posted on June 25, 2008 10:01
The name sucks. The front grill is ugly. Looks like an Equinox or Malibu. I do give GM Credit on getting a more energy efficient power train that gets more horse power as well. But please fix the front grill and change the name to something else. Just take example from it's cousin the Buick Enclave. The Enclave looks totally like a Lexus. That's why people will buy it. Also how about some clear lights in the back??
Posted by Tony | June 25, 2008 10:18 AM
Posted on June 25, 2008 10:18
"better fuel efficiency than the 2008 Saturn Outlook"?
Last time I looked, the current V6 was 16/24. So I guess that 1MPG increase in city driving justifies the "better fuel efficiency" statement? Come on...16/24 versus 17/24 will be turned into some marketing speak about "increased fueld economny".
What GM really needs is a crossover that gets 20+ in the city and high twenties on the freeway.
Strap a CVT onto this thing or somethin'.
Posted by Matt | June 25, 2008 12:11 PM
Posted on June 25, 2008 12:11
That is a really freakin' boring vehicle. I'm sure it will be a hit.
Posted by Jung | June 25, 2008 12:30 PM
Posted on June 25, 2008 12:30
looks like I'm in the minority, but I actually like the looks, and for the size and power, I think the fuel economy is fine. I swore off domestics a long time ago, but I think I'm actually interested in this one. quick, someone else say something positive about it so I can become combative and hate it
Posted by akkadain | June 25, 2008 1:28 PM
Posted on June 25, 2008 13:28
Positive... positive...OH! At least it doesn't have any "feature" labels emblazoned across its flanks like "fuel Injection," "ABS," or "Overdrive" that GM is fond of slapping on their outdated vehicles.
Posted by Jung | June 25, 2008 1:42 PM
Posted on June 25, 2008 13:42
Positive... positive...OH! At least it doesn't have any "feature" labels emblazoned across its flanks like "fuel Injection," "ABS," or "Overdrive" that GM is fond of slapping on their outdated vehicles.
Posted by Jung | June 25, 2008 1:51 PM
Posted on June 25, 2008 13:51
HIDEOUS! ABSOLUTELY HIDEOUS!!
Posted by Cappy | June 25, 2008 2:26 PM
Posted on June 25, 2008 14:26
If its priced right it should sell quite well. Hopefully the quality is there.
Posted by Tim | June 25, 2008 5:09 PM
Posted on June 25, 2008 17:09
cross-over?
aaaah from useless into ugly... got it.
Posted by waldorf and statler | June 25, 2008 6:01 PM
Posted on June 25, 2008 18:01
That's one sexy ride.
Posted by Sabby | June 26, 2008 7:24 AM
Posted on June 26, 2008 07:24
This SUV may bring me out of my full size pickup... Very nice. Only gripe so far: Why is the Aux jack for the radio so high on the dash? I do like Ford's idea with a USB jack in the center console to put a MP3 player hidden inside and control via the radio controls. Wires hanging everywhere bother me anymore. The USB trick from Ford takes away the power need too for an MP3 player. At least they'll have Bluetooth for cell phones now I understand. That's a good move on GM's part.
Posted by Narg | June 30, 2008 12:46 PM
Posted on June 30, 2008 12:46