Detroit Auto Show 2016: The 2017 GMC Acadia

It's interesting, for the first time in a long time, GM is aiming squarely at the Grand Cherokee and Explorer. 

the downsize is a mistake.  The Acadia was hugely successful, they still need an Acadia sized entry in the showroom.  This would have been better off as 'Envoy'.

Hmmm... I'm not sure how much I like those squinty headlights... 

Love this, and I do not think the shrinking in size will hurt GM or the sales of the Acadia. This is a lovely looking CUV!

the downsize is a mistake.  The Acadia was hugely successful, they still need an Acadia sized entry in the showroom.  This would have been better off as 'Envoy'.

You keep saying that like there isn't going to be a long-wheel base Enclave sitting in the same showroom.  If there is a huge drop in Acadia sales that Enclave is unable to pick up, they can always do an Acadia XL.  If you're looking for the most cubic feet per dollar, GM would invite you do visit a Chevrolet showroom.  The GMC showroom is for people with money. 

the downsize is a mistake.  The Acadia was hugely successful, they still need an Acadia sized entry in the showroom.  This would have been better off as 'Envoy'.

Envoy is DEAD.

And it should be. Always felt as tho it was weird.. crazy even to have the Acadia.. which was visually the size of the Yukon sitting on the same lot. Let me be clear.. At Buick and Saturn, at the time, the Enclave and Outlook made sense. The Acadia and Traverse only made sense if .. and I mean IF... the rumors were turning out to be true (I don't kno if U guys remember) that the Tahoe and Yukon were dying off.. leaving on the Suburban and XL as a ways and means to counter CAFE. Having the FWD based, V6 wearing CUVs were the answer. Obviously they didn't die.. Lambdas are somewhat redundant on the lots, and in this situation.. U might see a slightly cheaper Yukon and Tahoe result if the Traverse takes the same diet.

Again.. Enclave should STAY the same size.. the Acadia being primed to go up against the Grand Cherokee, (and Explorer) show real life in the GMC brand. Especially the All-Terrain. My girlfriend who was considering an Acadia just recently.. saw these pics and said "Yes.. that's exactly what I would want. Sized like the GC, but probably way more reliable."  She owned a GC from 2011 to 2012. 

Loving this. Actually looks like an SUV again. Size wise the interior volume, sans some of the cargo room is the same or better (2nd row has more legroom) 

The front is pretty decent. The midsection is very nice. The rear is handsome. Put them all together and it is an extremely incohesive design, imo. It doesn't look like a GMC.

As for the downsize, just what exactly is GM doing here? What does this mean for the Traverse? Will there be no GMC to fill the role of the outgoing Acadia? I just don't get it. None of our reps seem to have any idea about any of this. Go figure. 

I think the interior combination showed in the press photos is kind of drab. Varying shades of beige and brown. And it doesn't even appear as a upgrade either.

Gotta see the other combinations.

I agree with Frisky, it just looks a bit messy to me as well.

Looks a lot like an Explorer from the front and side, the tail lights remind me of Durango and Grand Cherokee. Overall it looks good, and GM needs a true mid size SUV and this is it.

I'd imagine the Terrain/Equinox is shrinking also. Buick will have the Enclave as the full size. It cuts down overlap which I think is good. Plus Cadillac is getting more crossovers and you want to drive the money toward the higher margin Caddies if possible.

Despite mythical 'overlap' here, GM is taking a hugely successful anchor product for GMC and basically gutting it and redefining it. Acadia saved and made GMC relevant for a lot of buyers, in particular during a rough patch in the economy. You're going to now ask a lot of non enthusiast buyers, who know exactly what an Acadia is, to completely change what it is. You have no proof they wanted it to change, and no guarantee people want a frame based Yukon or any guarantee that the enclave wasn't a better option to downsize. Plus there are people who liked the choice of enclave vs terrain.

On top of that the looks are ruined, it doesn't look as tough or as premium. And a four cylinder will illicit laughter.

This is part of a strategy of having to comply with fuel economy regs and emissions crap. Crossovers are booming so much there is no way gmc had to do this. To introduce this new sized vehicle it should have gotten the envoy name or a new name.

Sort of reeks of 'what is a CTS' anymore. We all know how successful that is.

Acadia was a success because it was larger than a grand Cherokee. All gmc needed to do was add a model to take that on. Redefining what an Acadia is is a mistake. Even if they think the name equity is what ultimately helps them.

2013 Malibu. Look at what good making it smaller did for them there too.

I wonder if Chevrolet will get a version that is this size? This not a bad look vehicle. I do not like the headlights. I prefer a quad headlight design.  This vehicle looks like someone redesigned the GMC Envoy. It looks like the old Envoy.. The similarities may be intentional.  It is placed in the same segment as Ford Explorer now.

That may be a good thing. The impressive thing is the 700 pound weight loss.

I'm liking what I'm seeing, and was thinking in '19 of returning to a SUV.  I want to see the SLE/SLT styling now.

Despite mythical 'overlap' here, GM is taking a hugely successful anchor product for GMC and basically gutting it and redefining it. Acadia saved and made GMC relevant for a lot of buyers, in particular during a rough patch in the economy. You're going to now ask a lot of non enthusiast buyers, who know exactly what an Acadia is, to completely change what it is. You have no proof they wanted it to change, and no guarantee people want a frame based Yukon or any guarantee that the enclave wasn't a better option to downsize. Plus there are people who liked the choice of enclave vs terrain.

On top of that the looks are ruined, it doesn't look as tough or as premium. And a four cylinder will illicit laughter.

This is part of a strategy of having to comply with fuel economy regs and emissions crap. Crossovers are booming so much there is no way gmc had to do this. To introduce this new sized vehicle it should have gotten the envoy name or a new name.

Sort of reeks of 'what is a CTS' anymore. We all know how successful that is.

Acadia was a success because it was larger than a grand Cherokee. All gmc needed to do was add a model to take that on. Redefining what an Acadia is is a mistake. Even if they think the name equity is what ultimately helps them.

2013 Malibu. Look at what good making it smaller did for them there too.

-1 on your comments as I have to totally disagree. I loved the first generation and second of the Acadia,but always thought is was a weird child that did not really fit in with the rest. Yes some loved the weirdness and might not stay with the third generation but this auto is sexy in a professional way and I believe continue to do well for GMC.

I myself think the inside and outside is an outstanding change for the model and will bring in more people to the fold.

Reg.. U want to play it safe for the sake of playing it safe. GM is wise to differentiate these vehicles via size. The Acadia was almost spot-on in size to the Yukon. In think instead if playing it safe, GM sees the sales of both the GC and the Explorer and wants those sales too.. independent of the other brands.

The rear door window shape reminds me of the old Isuzu Rodeo and Ascender

700 pounds is probably misleading, if that comparison is a crude in line 4 cylinder no one wants compared to the old v6.

When apples to apples get out on the scale it won't be 700 pounds difference we are talking about.

The other misleading assumption is that creating more spacing between an Acadia and Yukon is what people want. People buy the Acadia because of the efficIent packaging and car chassis. You get a Yukon for the truck frame and different ride and drive that the truck gives. You put up with the horrendously inefficient rear seat and cargo packaging as a sacrifice for the truck frame (even though navigator seems to do this right)

It's why people buy ridge lines vs f 150s. They ride and drive different and specialize in different ways.

Last year GM sold 96K Acadias, Ford sold 249K Explorers, while the GC move 196K. Now obviously the LAMBDAS beat both of them when U combine them at 277K.. the Traverse moving the most, but I see what GMC is trying to do with their TRUCK brand.. and grab some of those sales currently going to the Explorer and GC.

I for one never really thought of the Acadia, due to size, as a direct competitor to the GC. I looked it more as an alternative to the Yukon.  Perhaps a competitor to the Explorer, Pilot.. or Highlander

700 pounds is probably misleading, if that comparison is a crude in line 4 cylinder no one wants compared to the old v6.

When apples to apples get out on the scale it won't be 700 pounds difference we are talking about.

The other misleading assumption is that creating more spacing between an Acadia and Yukon is what people want. People buy the Acadia because of the efficIent packaging and car chassis. You get a Yukon for the truck frame and different ride and drive that the truck gives. You put up with the horrendously inefficient rear seat and cargo packaging as a sacrifice for the truck frame (even though navigator seems to do this right)

Navigator has IRS. It barely gives additional legroom in that and the Expy. The packaging of the Acadia is huge. GM should have never indulged people with it. Bottom line is that it looks like they have repackaged it in a way that won't effect the interior room very much at all.. while giving the second row occupants more room. The give-up is in the cargo area. Also.. due to the availability of the Long WB of the upcoming Enclave, if GM sees the need they can certainly intro a LWB Acadia in the way they did with the Envoy.. this vehicle rightful ancestor

700 pounds is probably misleading, if that comparison is a crude in line 4 cylinder no one wants compared to the old v6.

When apples to apples get out on the scale it won't be 700 pounds difference we are talking about.

The other misleading assumption is that creating more spacing between an Acadia and Yukon is what people want. People buy the Acadia because of the efficIent packaging and car chassis. You get a Yukon for the truck frame and different ride and drive that the truck gives. You put up with the horrendously inefficient rear seat and cargo packaging as a sacrifice for the truck frame (even though navigator seems to do this right)

It's why people buy ridge lines vs f 150s. They ride and drive different and specialize in different ways.

GM has been pretty on point with weight predictions, Camaro SS lost 200 lbs, V6 and 4-cylinder lost 300 and 400 lbs respectively, CT6 is as light as the CTS, Malibu lost 300 lbs. Even if the 700 lbs refers to the 4-cylinder, the V6 will still be 500+ lbs lighter than the outgoing model. It's the difference of two NFL linebackers riding in the back of your car, automakers would kill for those gains.

Explorer has deficiencies in packaging due to it's too short of wheelbase and long overhangs.

Explorer is closer in length to the current Acadia than this new one.

just curious as to the platform this is based off of. it reminds me an awful lot of the south american trailblazer... is there a reason for that or am i just delusional?

 

700 pounds is probably misleading, if that comparison is a crude in line 4 cylinder no one wants compared to the old v6.

When apples to apples get out on the scale it won't be 700 pounds difference we are talking about.

The other misleading assumption is that creating more spacing between an Acadia and Yukon is what people want. People buy the Acadia because of the efficIent packaging and car chassis. You get a Yukon for the truck frame and different ride and drive that the truck gives. You put up with the horrendously inefficient rear seat and cargo packaging as a sacrifice for the truck frame (even though navigator seems to do this right)

 

 

 

Navigator has IRS. It barely gives additional legroom in that and the Expy. The packaging of the Acadia is huge. GM should have never indulged people with it. Bottom line is that it looks like they have repackaged it in a way that won't effect the interior room very much at all.. while giving the second row occupants more room. The give-up is in the cargo area. Also.. due to the availability of the Long WB of the upcoming Enclave, if GM sees the need they can certainly intro a LWB Acadia in the way they did with the Envoy.. this vehicle rightful ancestor

 

There is 3 inches more legroom in the Expy than the Subruban(3rd row).

37.7in vs 34.5in

The current Traverse has 33.2in of 3rd row leg room.

Take that how you'd like. I just looked it up because I was curious when I read what you said Casa. 

just curious as to the platform this is based off of. it reminds me an awful lot of the south american trailblazer... is there a reason for that or am i just delusional?

The south american trailblazer is based on the Colorado and it's no featherweight. The Acadia is FWD/AWD on the heavily modified Lambda platform, I'm not sure GM's new coding for it.

I do admire a company willing to shrink a vehicle rather than continue to just blow it up until it fits the next class up...like everything else ever made save for the Miata. 

 

just curious as to the platform this is based off of. it reminds me an awful lot of the south american trailblazer... is there a reason for that or am i just delusional?

 

The south american trailblazer is based on the Colorado and it's no featherweight. The Acadia is FWD/AWD on the heavily modified Lambda platform, I'm not sure GM's new coding for it.

 

It's on a new platform called C1XX. No real sharing with Lambda to speak of.  Shared with the new XT5.

Here are my shots of the GMC Acadia from the show.   To me, this is the biggest evidence that the Terrain will shrink significantly next refresh.  In 5-passenger trim, the Acadia is dangerously close to the Terrain in interior room with almost all of the extra space happening behind the 2nd row.

 

 

just curious as to the platform this is based off of. it reminds me an awful lot of the south american trailblazer... is there a reason for that or am i just delusional?

 

The south american trailblazer is based on the Colorado and it's no featherweight. The Acadia is FWD/AWD on the heavily modified Lambda platform, I'm not sure GM's new coding for it.

 

 

It's on a new platform called C1XX. No real sharing with Lambda to speak of.  Shared with the new XT5.

Here are my shots of the GMC Acadia from the show.   To me, this is the biggest evidence that the Terrain will shrink significantly next refresh.  In 5-passenger trim, the Acadia is dangerously close to the Terrain in interior room with almost all of the extra space happening behind the 2nd row.

 

 

Thank you for the clarification! The Lambda part was an educated guess. The D2XX and E2XX underpinning GM's new FWD sedans are based on the Delta and Epsilon platforms in some capacity, I didn't know the Lambda chassis was being ditched after one extended generation.

Everything is going to have a 4-cylinder. If you want to complain you could complain that it is not turbocharged. But I think the 2.5 liter four is the right base engine. I'd guess they want to lower the price a bit and set up shop in the mid-size segment.

I think Terrain will shrink to Escape size. And this makes sense. People are used to a Terrain costing X and an Acadia costing Y. When you slide them down the Acadia costing X seems like great value. The opposite of adding $10k to the CTS and being surprised that buyers went away.

 

 

 

just curious as to the platform this is based off of. it reminds me an awful lot of the south american trailblazer... is there a reason for that or am i just delusional?

 

The south american trailblazer is based on the Colorado and it's no featherweight. The Acadia is FWD/AWD on the heavily modified Lambda platform, I'm not sure GM's new coding for it.

 

 

It's on a new platform called C1XX. No real sharing with Lambda to speak of.  Shared with the new XT5.

Here are my shots of the GMC Acadia from the show.   To me, this is the biggest evidence that the Terrain will shrink significantly next refresh.  In 5-passenger trim, the Acadia is dangerously close to the Terrain in interior room with almost all of the extra space happening behind the 2nd row.

 

 

 

Thank you for the clarification! The Lambda part was an educated guess. The D2XX and E2XX underpinning GM's new FWD sedans are based on the Delta and Epsilon platforms in some capacity, I didn't know the Lambda chassis was being ditched after one extended generation.

 

The Chi platform back in the day was supposed to be the "sedan" version of the Lambda platform and used for big cars like the Lucerne and DTS.  2007 happened and that Chi platform didn't. Epsilon was never intially intended to be stretched to the lengths it has been and thats why the XTS, Lacrosse and Impala have some weight issues.

I imagine the only reason the Lambda platform lasted as long as it has (though with bargain basement updates) is because of the huge volumes that GM continues to enjoy on them.   Now this new C platform should give GM a lot more breathing room to share among more vehicles. 

 

 

just curious as to the platform this is based off of. it reminds me an awful lot of the south american trailblazer... is there a reason for that or am i just delusional?

 

The south american trailblazer is based on the Colorado and it's no featherweight. The Acadia is FWD/AWD on the heavily modified Lambda platform, I'm not sure GM's new coding for it.

 

 

It's on a new platform called C1XX. No real sharing with Lambda to speak of.  Shared with the new XT5.

Here are my shots of the GMC Acadia from the show.   To me, this is the biggest evidence that the Terrain will shrink significantly next refresh.  In 5-passenger trim, the Acadia is dangerously close to the Terrain in interior room with almost all of the extra space happening behind the 2nd row.

 

 

seems like the wheelbase and length are Dodge Journey sized more than anything.  If the width of the vehicle is comparable to the Journey, then in fact yes, it's going down towards Terrain sized.  In another thread somewhere, I suggested what GM was probably doing was something along the lines of the last XL-7......something more akin to a stretched equinox.  Dimensions maybe not far off that?  (i have yet to see the width of the 17 Acadia).

GM's not going to lower the price, but it will move a whole size class down.  This does not seem like a recipe for success.  Time will tell.

I just remember when the Lambdas came out.  Everyone loved the package.  People traded in their Blazers and Envoys and Raniers and stuff en masse.  People like my wife's boss when they get kids go to buy the first CUV and gush over the new Acadia they get because adults can sit in the third row.  Wanted the GMC because they didn't want the Chevy and they wanted something trucky.  

Now GM is taking that away.  Take away the size, the style, etc.  Makes no sense.  A 2017 with a 3.6 may end up getting 1 mpg more on the EPA.  In the real world, you may or may not see that either.  Ask an owner of a 2008 Saturn Vue V6 if they get any better mpg than someone driving a 2008 Acadia.  Yeah, it's not going to get hardly nay better real world mpg.

Of course I am of the mindset that the Terrain and Equinox shouldn't downsize (their interior space).  Escape is a nice garagable size but some may find it a bit small.  CRv has nice space but the whole package their is a tin rattle trap.  GM can take the weight out of their products without making them into CRv's.  I get that the product groups are global now, but GM is seriously cutting themselves in the foot on this one.

I guess its time to pick up a Dodge Journey.

Everything is going to have a 4-cylinder. If you want to complain you could complain that it is not turbocharged. But I think the 2.5 liter four is the right base engine. I'd guess they want to lower the price a bit and set up shop in the mid-size segment.

I think Terrain will shrink to Escape size. And this makes sense. People are used to a Terrain costing X and an Acadia costing Y. When you slide them down the Acadia costing X seems like great value. The opposite of adding $10k to the CTS and being surprised that buyers went away.

you driven anything with the 2.5?  There's a reason its being banished to the trucks and CUV's.......

Forget the 700lb weight loss compared to the current Acadia, how much heavier is this than a current Terrain? Because it's a dog in I4 guise.

just curious as to the platform this is based off of. it reminds me an awful lot of the south american trailblazer... is there a reason for that or am i just delusional?

It and the XT5 are on the same platform called C1xx, which is a variant of the E(psilon)2XX for CUVs.. The two aforementioned are on SWB while the Traverse and Enclave are gonna be on the LWB version.

 

 

700 pounds is probably misleading, if that comparison is a crude in line 4 cylinder no one wants compared to the old v6.

When apples to apples get out on the scale it won't be 700 pounds difference we are talking about.

The other misleading assumption is that creating more spacing between an Acadia and Yukon is what people want. People buy the Acadia because of the efficIent packaging and car chassis. You get a Yukon for the truck frame and different ride and drive that the truck gives. You put up with the horrendously inefficient rear seat and cargo packaging as a sacrifice for the truck frame (even though navigator seems to do this right)

 

 

 

Navigator has IRS. It barely gives additional legroom in that and the Expy. The packaging of the Acadia is huge. GM should have never indulged people with it. Bottom line is that it looks like they have repackaged it in a way that won't effect the interior room very much at all.. while giving the second row occupants more room. The give-up is in the cargo area. Also.. due to the availability of the Long WB of the upcoming Enclave, if GM sees the need they can certainly intro a LWB Acadia in the way they did with the Envoy.. this vehicle rightful ancestor

 

There is 3 inches more legroom in the Expy than the Subruban(3rd row).

37.7in vs 34.5in

 

The current Traverse has 33.2in of 3rd row leg room.

 

Take that how you'd like. I just looked it up because I was curious when I read what you said Casa. 

 

We've had this discussion before over at MT after a C&D comparo.. Passenger space in the second row was a stalemate basically.. but the Tahoe lost in the 3rd row.. which I concede, but doesn't have any effect on my particular use as I personally and investigating clean ways of removing the third row all together. I have in the past and really wish they hadn't of given into people in this dept and left the 3rd row removable. When I got my Yukon, I had forgotten I had a third row in my Tahoe, I had taken them out so long ago. I traded it in and realized afterwards.. and ended up having to sell them on Ebay for $1000.  Based on popularity,... people seemingly don't give DAMN.. about that extra space concentrated on by Ford for the Passengers. They may just be a lot like me and LOOOOOOOOOVE the fact that they.. the driver and front row passenger can swing THEIR feet back in forth. 

Eff I care about rear seat passengers if I'm scrunched up in the front. I put my seat back as far as I can get it.. and will crush your damn legs if it gets me comfy

 

Of course I am of the mindset that the Terrain and Equinox shouldn't downsize (their interior space).  Escape is a nice garagable size but some may find it a bit small.  CRv has nice space but the whole package their is a tin rattle trap.  GM can take the weight out of their products without making them into CRv's.  I get that the product groups are global now, but GM is seriously cutting themselves in the foot on this one.

 

 

 

U do realize that the new levels will be Yukon XL, Yukon, Acadia, Terrain.. and a vehicle, possibly Granite (?) under that right? Also... as said before by myself and a few others.. the option for a LWB is not out of the question 

 

 

 

just curious as to the platform this is based off of. it reminds me an awful lot of the south american trailblazer... is there a reason for that or am i just delusional?

 

The south american trailblazer is based on the Colorado and it's no featherweight. The Acadia is FWD/AWD on the heavily modified Lambda platform, I'm not sure GM's new coding for it.

 

 

It's on a new platform called C1XX. No real sharing with Lambda to speak of.  Shared with the new XT5.

Here are my shots of the GMC Acadia from the show.   To me, this is the biggest evidence that the Terrain will shrink significantly next refresh.  In 5-passenger trim, the Acadia is dangerously close to the Terrain in interior room with almost all of the extra space happening behind the 2nd row.

 

 

 

seems like the wheelbase and length are Dodge Journey sized more than anything.  If the width of the vehicle is comparable to the Journey, then in fact yes, it's going down towards Terrain sized.  In another thread somewhere, I suggested what GM was probably doing was something along the lines of the last XL-7......something more akin to a stretched equinox.  Dimensions maybe not far off that?  (i have yet to see the width of the 17 Acadia).

 

GM's not going to lower the price, but it will move a whole size class down.  This does not seem like a recipe for success.  Time will tell.

 

I just remember when the Lambdas came out.  Everyone loved the package.  People traded in their Blazers and Envoys and Raniers and stuff en masse.  People like my wife's boss when they get kids go to buy the first CUV and gush over the new Acadia they get because adults can sit in the third row.  Wanted the GMC because they didn't want the Chevy and they wanted something trucky.  

 

Now GM is taking that away.  Take away the size, the style, etc.  Makes no sense.  A 2017 with a 3.6 may end up getting 1 mpg more on the EPA.  In the real world, you may or may not see that either.  Ask an owner of a 2008 Saturn Vue V6 if they get any better mpg than someone driving a 2008 Acadia.  Yeah, it's not going to get hardly nay better real world mpg.

 

Of course I am of the mindset that the Terrain and Equinox shouldn't downsize (their interior space).  Escape is a nice garagable size but some may find it a bit small.  CRv has nice space but the whole package their is a tin rattle trap.  GM can take the weight out of their products without making them into CRv's.  I get that the product groups are global now, but GM is seriously cutting themselves in the foot on this one.

 

I guess its time to pick up a Dodge Journey.

Everything is going to have a 4-cylinder. If you want to complain you could complain that it is not turbocharged. But I think the 2.5 liter four is the right base engine. I'd guess they want to lower the price a bit and set up shop in the mid-size segment.

I think Terrain will shrink to Escape size. And this makes sense. People are used to a Terrain costing X and an Acadia costing Y. When you slide them down the Acadia costing X seems like great value. The opposite of adding $10k to the CTS and being surprised that buyers went away.

you driven anything with the 2.5?  There's a reason its being banished to the trucks and CUV's.......

 

The 2.5 is good enough for the Cadillac ATS, must be good enough for a GMC truck.

I drove a Malibu rental with a 2.5 once.  I guess it was fine in that, I wouldn't want one though.  They had to put some kind of 4 cylinder in it.  I guess they could have used a turbo 4 but maybe thought it would raise cost and get worse fuel economy, or require more maintenance.

Coupla things. Its hilarious that some are trying to dog the vehicle out because it has a base 4Cylinder in it. Buy the 6 if U have a problem with it. 

Not to mention the Terrain has the 2.4L in it, for '15 at least.. 182HP/172lbs torque .. this has the 2.5L in it with 194HP/190 lbs of torque

I'm a bit skeptical on the 2.5 also. I think they could have helped things had they used the 8 speed auto.

I'm a bit skeptical on the 2.5 also. I think they could have helped things had they used the 8 speed auto.

I'm not. I wouldn't touch one with your wallet.. but then again I think a Cadillac CTS-VSport has 220 ponies less than I'm willing to pay for. 

Point is that put a non-turbo 4 banger in front of commentary of any enthusiasts and he/she will find some reason to hate it. Put it in front of the mainstream buyer.. and U will see 70+% of your sales not giving a $h! about 0-60 times as the buy that 4 cylinder 

The 8-speed would have helped.  If you have 8 gears you can get away with a less powerful engine.

The Jeep Cherokee has a 184 hp 2.4 liter four, the Hyundai Santa Fe a 190 hp 2.4 liter four.  I don't think the 190 hp four in the Acadia is much different than what others are offering.  And they do offer a V6 if you want that.  Most crossover buyers aren't looking for 300 hp and high performance.  If they wanted 0-60 time and nimble handling they wouldn't be buying a mid-size crossover, they'd get a 3-series.  These crossover/SUV buyers will look for cargo space and fuel economy, and not care if the 0-60 time is 9 seconds.

The 8-speed would have helped.  If you have 8 gears you can get away with a less powerful engine.

 

The Jeep Cherokee has a 184 hp 2.4 liter four, the Hyundai Santa Fe a 190 hp 2.4 liter four.  I don't think the 190 hp four in the Acadia is much different than what others are offering.  And they do offer a V6 if you want that.  Most crossover buyers aren't looking for 300 hp and high performance.  If they wanted 0-60 time and nimble handling they wouldn't be buying a mid-size crossover, they'd get an 3-series ATS.

Fixed that for U

Also... people. I think I really see where GM is going with this. 

The 8-speed would have helped.  If you have 8 gears you can get away with a less powerful engine.

 

The Jeep Cherokee has a 184 hp 2.4 liter four, the Hyundai Santa Fe a 190 hp 2.4 liter four.  I don't think the 190 hp four in the Acadia is much different than what others are offering.  And they do offer a V6 if you want that.  Most crossover buyers aren't looking for 300 hp and high performance.  If they wanted 0-60 time and nimble handling they wouldn't be buying a mid-size crossover, they'd get a 3-series.  These crossover/SUV buyers will look for cargo space and fuel economy, and not care if the 0-60 time is 9 seconds.

First: That would be the Santa Fe Sport. The regular Santa Fe comes with a 3.3L V6.

Second: The two vehicles you listed are somewhat smaller than the Acadia

I wonder if Chevrolet will get a version that is this size? This not a bad look vehicle. I do not like the headlights. I prefer a quad headlight design.  This vehicle looks like someone redesigned the GMC Envoy. It looks like the old Envoy.. The similarities may be intentional.  It is placed in the same segment as Ford Explorer now.

That may be a good thing. The impressive thing is the 700 pound weight loss.

Possibly. From a story early in January - 

 

Meanwhile at Chevrolet, sources say the brand is considering a new midsize model to slot in between the Equinox and Traverse. This model would come with three-rows and compete against the likes of the Toyota Highlander and Ford Edge. Chevrolet is expected to move the Equinox slight down market and the Traverse slightly up market to give the new model some breathing room.

 

 

Of course I am of the mindset that the Terrain and Equinox shouldn't downsize (their interior space).  Escape is a nice garagable size but some may find it a bit small.  CRv has nice space but the whole package their is a tin rattle trap.  GM can take the weight out of their products without making them into CRv's.  I get that the product groups are global now, but GM is seriously cutting themselves in the foot on this one.

 

 

 

 

 

U do realize that the new levels will be Yukon XL, Yukon, Acadia, Terrain.. and a vehicle, possibly Granite (?) under that right? Also... as said before by myself and a few others.. the option for a LWB is not out of the question 

 

i sure hope the returning Acadia lessees have that option of that XL available to them when they turn in the ones they have.  Both the regular version and the "XL" should be available at the same time, launch so there are no gaps for the lessees.

 

The 8-speed would have helped.  If you have 8 gears you can get away with a less powerful engine.

 

The Jeep Cherokee has a 184 hp 2.4 liter four, the Hyundai Santa Fe a 190 hp 2.4 liter four.  I don't think the 190 hp four in the Acadia is much different than what others are offering.  And they do offer a V6 if you want that.  Most crossover buyers aren't looking for 300 hp and high performance.  If they wanted 0-60 time and nimble handling they wouldn't be buying a mid-size crossover, they'd get a 3-series.  These crossover/SUV buyers will look for cargo space and fuel economy, and not care if the 0-60 time is 9 seconds.

First: That would be the Santa Fe Sport. The regular Santa Fe comes with a 3.3L V6.

Second: The two vehicles you listed are somewhat smaller than the Acadia

 

I did think that the Cherokee was smaller, but perhaps more in line with Acadia than Grand Cherokee..  Perhaps a better comparison is the Toyota Highlander which has a 185 hp 4-cylinder as standard.

Sounds like the new Acadia will still be a few inches longer than the GC, similar wheelbase, and about a foot longer than the Cherokee...close to the Highlander,  and maybe 4 inches shorter than the Explorer, 6 inches shorter than the Durango (which is about 2 inches shorter than the current Acadia).  Definitely within the midsize CUV/SUV sweet spot.

First thing I thought when I looked at it was "Durango", but now I see the resemblance to the old Envoy, which is still seen quite a bit in my area, the Envoy being a genuine SUV, BOF with longitudinal engine.  Second glance makes me snicker a bit at the "All Terrain" model, with its giant wheels, low profile tires and CUV low-slung stance.  Makes me want to put the word "progress" in quotation marks.  It's for poseurs, this All-Terrain concept (even on the Sierra and Canyon), but I have to concede... it is geared toward how customers will actually use them, not some mythical, masculine ideal where guys go on real adventures on weekends... not to a Starbucks in the corner of the mall parking lot.

If Ford does the same thing to the Bronco, there are going to be a lot of disillusioned Ford lovers out there.  Seems like the only SUV drivers who care about real adventure anymore are second, and subsequent, owners of Wranglers.

 

 

 

Of course I am of the mindset that the Terrain and Equinox shouldn't downsize (their interior space).  Escape is a nice garagable size but some may find it a bit small.  CRv has nice space but the whole package their is a tin rattle trap.  GM can take the weight out of their products without making them into CRv's.  I get that the product groups are global now, but GM is seriously cutting themselves in the foot on this one.

 

 

 

 

 

U do realize that the new levels will be Yukon XL, Yukon, Acadia, Terrain.. and a vehicle, possibly Granite (?) under that right? Also... as said before by myself and a few others.. the option for a LWB is not out of the question 

 

i sure hope the returning Acadia lessees have that option of that XL available to them when they turn in the ones they have.  Both the regular version and the "XL" should be available at the same time, launch so there are no gaps for the lessees.

 

Actually.. internal data will show whether this was a good idea probably up to 4-5 months in to release. Basically because the old one will still be on the lot.. competing with the new one. If I were GM.. I wouldn't even drop the price of the Lambda one to move out old metal. I'd leave it wherever it is.. thus being able to truly gauge the take rate and why. That will tell them whether a LWB is a necessity right off the bat. At that point.. product planning can call on Spring Hill to start taking some of the Enclave or Traverse production for the GMC

First thing I thought when I looked at it was "Durango", but now I see the resemblance to the old Envoy, which is still seen quite a bit in my area, the Envoy being a genuine SUV, BOF with longitudinal engine.  Second glance makes me snicker a bit at the "All Terrain" model, with its giant wheels, low profile tires and CUV low-slung stance.  Makes me want to put the word "progress" in quotation marks.  It's for poseurs, this All-Terrain concept (even on the Sierra and Canyon), but I have to concede... it is geared toward how customers will actually use them, not some mythical, masculine ideal where guys go on real adventures on weekends... not to a Starbucks in the corner of the mall parking lot.

 

If Ford does the same thing to the Bronco, there are going to be a lot of disillusioned Ford lovers out there.  Seems like the only SUV drivers who care about real adventure anymore are second, and subsequent, owners of Wranglers.

I kno plenty of H3 owners who do. I am still hoping that the H3, in particular, along with the H3T (with the new Wrangler PU announcement) get a revival

First thing I thought when I looked at it was "Durango", but now I see the resemblance to the old Envoy, which is still seen quite a bit in my area, the Envoy being a genuine SUV, BOF with longitudinal engine. Second glance makes me snicker a bit at the "All Terrain" model, with its giant wheels, low profile tires and CUV low-slung stance. Makes me want to put the word "progress" in quotation marks. It's for poseurs, this All-Terrain concept (even on the Sierra and Canyon), but I have to concede... it is geared toward how customers will actually use them, not some mythical, masculine ideal where guys go on real adventures on weekends... not to a Starbucks in the corner of the mall parking lot.

The song used for GMC advertising is an ironic choice, since one of the lines in Eminence Front is 'it's a put on'.

Interesting..it's already up on the GMC site, w/ pics showing off the Denali version also..

 

 

 

700 pounds is probably misleading, if that comparison is a crude in line 4 cylinder no one wants compared to the old v6.

When apples to apples get out on the scale it won't be 700 pounds difference we are talking about.

The other misleading assumption is that creating more spacing between an Acadia and Yukon is what people want. People buy the Acadia because of the efficIent packaging and car chassis. You get a Yukon for the truck frame and different ride and drive that the truck gives. You put up with the horrendously inefficient rear seat and cargo packaging as a sacrifice for the truck frame (even though navigator seems to do this right)

 

 

 

Navigator has IRS. It barely gives additional legroom in that and the Expy. The packaging of the Acadia is huge. GM should have never indulged people with it. Bottom line is that it looks like they have repackaged it in a way that won't effect the interior room very much at all.. while giving the second row occupants more room. The give-up is in the cargo area. Also.. due to the availability of the Long WB of the upcoming Enclave, if GM sees the need they can certainly intro a LWB Acadia in the way they did with the Envoy.. this vehicle rightful ancestor

 

There is 3 inches more legroom in the Expy than the Subruban(3rd row).

37.7in vs 34.5in

 

The current Traverse has 33.2in of 3rd row leg room.

 

Take that how you'd like. I just looked it up because I was curious when I read what you said Casa. 

 

 

 

We've had this discussion before over at MT after a C&D comparo.. Passenger space in the second row was a stalemate basically.. but the Tahoe lost in the 3rd row.. which I concede, but doesn't have any effect on my particular use as I personally and investigating clean ways of removing the third row all together. I have in the past and really wish they hadn't of given into people in this dept and left the 3rd row removable. When I got my Yukon, I had forgotten I had a third row in my Tahoe, I had taken them out so long ago. I traded it in and realized afterwards.. and ended up having to sell them on Ebay for $1000.  Based on popularity,... people seemingly don't give DAMN.. about that extra space concentrated on by Ford for the Passengers. They may just be a lot like me and LOOOOOOOOOVE the fact that they.. the driver and front row passenger can swing THEIR feet back in forth. 

 

 

 

Eff I care about rear seat passengers if I'm scrunched up in the front. I put my seat back as far as I can get it.. and will crush your damn legs if it gets me comfy

 

Yes, you are correct. I wasn't disputing anything other than just looking it up because I didn't remember any of the numbers. And me personally, I don't care about the 3rd row because hopefully I never need one to use but it is for those who do actually use it. I've been in the 3rd row of an Acadia on a few occasions and it really was not that bad so knowing the Tahoe and Expedition are larger makes me not worry much about the "smaller" Tahoe's 3rd row. 

I'm working on an article right now to show where the GMC fits.

I like this.  I love the exterior and the interior is pretty nice.  Anyone have any info what all the All-Terrain package gives as far as off-road ability?