All-Electric Blazer SS Preview by Chevrolet

Doesn't really show a whole lot but am I the only who feels like this is not going to look all that different from the IC Blazer?

Hope so.

It just occurred to me that the IC Blazer is getting a redesign for 2023 so while an EV version won't look like this current IC Blazer, I am still wondering how much of a distinction there will be between the two.

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

It just occurred to me that the IC Blazer is getting a redesign for 2023 so while an EV version won't look like this current IC Blazer, I am still wondering how much of a distinction there will be between the two.

Hopefully GM understands that they do not need weird style on an EV and just style the ICE/EV the same.

Here is the new refreshed Blazer for 2023 model year.

2023 Chevrolet Blazer Infographic.pdf

Video and pictures here: Chevrolet Blazer - 2023

29 minutes ago, David said:

Hopefully GM understands that they do not need weird style on an EV and just style the ICE/EV the same.

Here is the new re-designed Blazer for 2023 model year.

2023 Chevrolet Blazer Infographic.pdf

Video and pictures here: Chevrolet Blazer - 2023

That is not really a redesign to me. That is a refresh and I sincerely hope for something a little more new for the EV version but it does not look promising. I realize that I am also probably in the minority here. 

18 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

That is not really a redesign to me. That is a refresh and I sincerely hope for something a little more new for the EV version but it does not look promising. I realize that I am also probably in the minority here. 

Yeah, that's just an MCE for the Ice version. 

43 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

That is not really a redesign to me. That is a refresh and I sincerely hope for something a little more new for the EV version but it does not look promising. I realize that I am also probably in the minority here. 

Realized that in the press release they say re-design, but in the flyer I downloaded and posted it says refreshed. LOL, clearly left hand is not talking to the right hand!

Will be interesting to see what the Blazer SS EV ends up looking like. Clearly they can show it off soon since for sale spring 2023 means they have to start production this fall I would think.

The current Blazer sucks, so I hope they make this Blazer SS an off road oriented vehicle since they can't make Broncos, Wranglers and 4Runners fast enough.  The market is in this off roaders, GM is missing out big time on this market with way too many Chevy/Buick/GMC mall cruiser crossovers that are all too similar to each other.

I like GM using Equinox, Silverado, Blazer names for their EV's and not doing some sort of EV1, EV2, EV3, EV4, EV5 garbage like Kia (and yes I know GM made an EV1).  Stick with established names, even if they are killing the Blazer name with bad product, they could still save it if this EV is good.

10 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The current Blazer sucks, so I hope they make this Blazer SS an off-road oriented vehicle since they can't make Broncos, Wranglers and 4Runners fast enough.  The market is in these off roaders, GM is missing out big time on this market with way too many Chevy/Buick/GMC mall cruiser crossovers that are all too similar to each other.

I like GM using Equinox, Silverado, Blazer names for their EV's and not doing some sort of EV1, EV2, EV3, EV4, EV5 garbage like Kia (and yes I know GM made an EV1).  Stick with established names, even if they are killing the Blazer name with bad product, they could still save it if this EV is good.

Nope, wrong, Blazer SS is an on-road performance ride. Z71 Blazer would be the off-road performance version. Bison Blazer is another off-road package version for performance fun. Chevrolet has plenty of competitor packages to go up against Jeep.

9 hours ago, David said:

Chevrolet has plenty of competitor packages to go up against Jeep.

Going to have to disagree with you there. Chevy has not one direct competitor for Jeep, and definitely when it comes to true off road SUVs like the Wrangler. I’m not sweating the naming use of the Blazer like Mr fake outrage above but to say that Chevy competes with Jeep is a reach. 

9 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I like GM using Equinox, Silverado, Blazer names for their EV's and not doing some sort of EV1, EV2, EV3, EV4, EV5 garbage like Kia (and yes I know GM made an EV1

…or EQS, EQE, etc. 

3 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

Going to have to disagree with you there. Chevy has not one direct competitor for Jeep, and definitely when it comes to true off road SUVs like the Wrangler. I’m not sweating the naming use of the Blazer like Mr fake outrage above but to say that Chevy competes with Jeep is a reach. 

…or EQS, EQE, etc. 

I understand that they do not have a head-to-head competitor to Jeep, but would the Z71, Trailboss Z71, ZR2, ZR2 Bison, or how about the AT4 or AT4X for the GMC line. It appears that GM has made all their various Off-Road packages available on all trucks and SUVs in 2022 per looking at their web sites. https://www.chevrolet.com and https://www.gmc.com 

Have to say these are bad ass looking trucks:

Where are the German Trucks to compete with these? ?

GM has off road pick ups, although no Raptor or TRX competitor.  But GM doesn't have anything like a Wrangler or Bronco.

And I assume this Blazer SS will be like a Mustang Mach-E competitor, maybe larger since an Equinox EV would be the size of a Mach-E, but same idea, crossover that is fast in straight line, swoopy styling or sporty look.

finally chevy sniffs a clue and puts a decent size screen in the blazer (10")

still has the dumb ass vents on the dash

blazer is a nice drive, v6 used to be standard now they keep forcing you up the price ladder to keep that (3LT)

Blazer could stand to be larger inside.....not much size difference inside between the already cramped Equinox and the Blazer.  Gotta move up to the Traverse for stretch your elbols out kind of room.  Not exactly good at 50+ price

44 minutes ago, regfootball said:

finally chevy sniffs a clue and puts a decent size screen in the blazer (10")

still has the dumb ass vents on the dash

blazer is a nice drive, v6 used to be standard now they keep forcing you up the price ladder to keep that (3LT)

Blazer could stand to be larger inside.....not much size difference inside between the already cramped Equinox and the Blazer.  Gotta move up to the Traverse for stretch your elbols out kind of room.  Not exactly good at 50+ price

Will be interesting to see what the internal dimensions are once this is out since it is on the Ultium platform. Gain internal room but keep the same external dimensions?

On 3/11/2022 at 2:09 PM, David said:

Will be interesting to see what the internal dimensions are once this is out since it is on the Ultium platform. Gain internal room but keep the same external dimensions?

I'd hope that is the case, but my fear is they make it smaller inside.

5 hours ago, regfootball said:

I'd hope that is the case, but my fear is they make it smaller inside.

That makes no sense, electric is smaller and uses less space, interior should be more spacious.

Battery packs.

On 3/12/2022 at 8:50 PM, balthazar said:

Battery packs.

That is a crock, unlike the hump for the transmission, the differentials and drive line, ICE takes up way more room than an electric power train. You know this, over 2,000 parts in a basic ICE and about 20 in an electric motor. ICE takes up way more interior space than a flat battery pack between the frame and the electric motors. 

I learned much from you on older auto's, do not blame battery packs for taking up interior space when you know that is not true.

? Space -height-wise- either has to come OUT of the interior, or the body shell is placed on TOP of the pack, making for a taller vehicle. Its one or the other.

1 minute ago, balthazar said:

? Space -height-wise- either has to come OUT of the interior, or the body shell is placed on TOP of the pack, making for a taller vehicle. Its one or the other.

That is not true, otherwise we would not have the few EV cars and Tesla has proven you do not have that issue.

And since EVERYTHING today has a center console anyway, front passenger compartment having a trans hump or not is inconsequential. 

30 minutes ago, balthazar said:

And since EVERYTHING today has a center console anyway, front passenger compartment having a trans hump or not is inconsequential. 

Not true, yes allot have an arm rest, but with there no longer being a transmission tunnel needed, you get far more leg space.

If we only looked at Chevrolet Silverado E then yes we have not gained anything and I truly believe they could have done this with more leg room.

Rivian has created a nice open space for their truck and still has the same features Chevrolet has that is built into the dash. Yet even the Silverado D does not have the bulge of the transmission tunnel pushing against the accelerator so there is more space even in this truck over comparable ICE trucks.

Maybe YOU are bending your legs sideways and angling them off beyond the footprint of the front seat bottom... but how you're working the accelerator that way I can't imagine. C'mon, be realistic- that space is not 'legroom' and that's not eh way legroom is measured.

^Yeah, I've never had a reason to have my legs in the center..not sitting cross-legged on the floor doing yoga.  Without a trans/exhaust tunnel maybe more room in the center for storage.  Can always use more cubbies..

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

? Space -height-wise- either has to come OUT of the interior, or the body shell is placed on TOP of the pack, making for a taller vehicle. Its one or the other.

Like a BOF truck or SUV..the cab sits on top of the frame..I assume the Ford Lightning is like this..

Anything to convince oneself.

- - - - -
I'll use a current Malibu- because there's one in the driveway here.

The floorpan of it isn't flat- it contours to fit around various things. Of course- there's no longitudinal trans or driveshaft.
And who cares what the floorpan does under the butt or in-between passengers.
However, the lowest portion of a Malibu's floorpan is 1/2-in BELOW the bottom of the rocker panel. 

From what I can find online, a Tesla Model S battery pack measures 3.1 or 3.5" tall... but that's just the battery pack. That goes inside a sealed enclosure, for protection (and I think cooling). So is the whole thing 3.25-4" tall? More? I couldn't find the spec.

How would that fit below a current Malibu body shell? Either the shell sits on top of that & rises 3 & a half inches, it comes out of the interior, or a combo thereof.

Model S has a long wheelbase (116.5"), so some of the height constriction can be regained by stretching the seating position and playing around with seat height. Malibu is 111.4" (2016); less 'wiggle room' to play with... unless you go up.

But a battery enclosure placed under the floor cannot exist in another dimension- it takes up physical space.

6 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Anything to convince oneself.

But a battery enclosure placed under the floor cannot exist in another dimension- it takes up physical space.

For car-style EVs, yes, I could see the battery pack resulting in less footroom/floorspace than an ICE car of similar size...but for truckular BOF EVs like the Lightning, Hummer, and Silverado EV, the body sits on top of the frame like  on a real truck and the battery pack is within the frame under the floor?   So in theory, truckular EVs could have a pretty flat floor w/ no center hump...

Current gen Model S enclosure:  

2 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

For car-style EVs, yes, I could see the battery pack resulting in less footroom/floorspace than an ICE car of similar size...but for truckular BOF EVs like the Lightning, Hummer, and Silverado EV, the body sits on top of the frame like  on a real truck and the battery pack is within the frame under the floor?   So in theory, truckular EVs could have a pretty flat floor w/ no center hump...

Agreed- trucks have plenty of structure height. The floor in my Sierra is just about completely flat- in the rear the center hump is barely an inch tall. Good thing- the kW-age needs to be up there to move the weight.

CT5 is a half-inch shorter than the Model S in wheelbase, but has the same front legroom and a few inches more in the rear.

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

Anything to convince oneself.

- - - - -
I'll use a current Malibu- because there's one in the driveway here.

The floorpan of it isn't flat- it contours to fit around various things. Of course- there's no longitudinal trans or driveshaft.
And who cares what the floorpan does under the butt or in-between passengers.
However, the lowest portion of a Malibu's floorpan is 1/2-in BELOW the bottom of the rocker panel. 

From what I can find online, a Tesla Model S battery pack measures 3.1 or 3.5" tall... but that's just the battery pack. That goes inside a sealed enclosure, for protection (and I think cooling). So is the whole thing 3.25-4" tall? More? I couldn't find the spec.

How would that fit below a current Malibu body shell? Either the shell sits on top of that & rises 3 & a half inches, it comes out of the interior, or a combo thereof.

Model S has a long wheelbase (116.5"), so some of the height constriction can be regained by stretching the seating position and playing around with seat height. Malibu is 111.4" (2016); less 'wiggle room' to play with... unless you go up.

But a battery enclosure placed under the floor cannot exist in another dimension- it takes up physical space.

It is not about convincing oneself, you have probably never had the leg space problems one with 40" long legs has. Rivian front is set up the way I love my 1994 GMC Suburban as while it has a center console, the leg area allows for the natura V of a guy sitting in the drivers seat since unlike woman who can have both of their legs together while they drive, guys have some junk that gets squeezed unless you just very small package.

Even in my Escalade, I hate that my right leg is up against the center area. 

I love this space that the Suburban had and no Humans do not need a ton of storage space, seems so many are hoarders. 

I think Rivian has nailed it for the interior.

What the hell are you learning about fitting into a Rivian from a picture?!?

Rivian has three inches LESS front leg room than an Escalade. You're not going to find that they 'nailed it'.

Keep on convincing yourself tho.

'The leg area allows for a guy to sit with his knees spread' - That's tru of everything back to...oh; the dawn of the motor vehicle. What a bizarre statement.

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

What the hell are you learning about fitting into a Rivian from a picture?!?

He showed and told you exactly why yet you think it has to do with length when he clearly told you otherwise. 

I only have a 36 inch inseam w/ 38 waist, 6'0"...in most vehicles, I find I have to have the seat all the way back, reclined a bit, and raised up off the floor because I like to see over the dash..but not so high my head hits the ceiling.   Old cars without seat height or backrest adjustment and lack of steering column tilt/telescope can be a pain to get comfortable in.   

^ New ones can be too - one is very 'contained' in modern, narrow vehicles with thicker doors, wide consoles and high cowls; not much room to shift position despite a power/positionable seat. I'm not tall (5'8"), but I stiffen up if I can't shift around to (slightly) different positions on longer drives. That said, I don't really have complaints about my wife's Malibu on long trips (2 hrs), I just think there could be more room.

4 hours ago, balthazar said:

^ New ones can be too - one is very 'contained' in modern, narrow vehicles with thicker doors, wide consoles and high cowls; not much room to shift position despite a power/positionable seat. I'm not tall (5'8"), but I stiffen up if I can't shift around to (slightly) different positions on longer drives. That said, I don't really have complaints about my wife's Malibu on long trips (2 hrs), I just think there could be more room.

Would agree with you that to me the Malibu and pretty much all current cars from GM need more space as they are just way too tight for people over the national average height.

It’s not a GM problem, it’s an industry problem.

Maybe the ‘all-in’ dreamers about an electric car future can add ‘real full-size cars’ to their wish list of unwanted body styles that somehow magically an electric motor is going to make viable again. ?

On 3/12/2022 at 10:21 PM, David said:

That makes no sense, electric is smaller and uses less space, interior should be more spacious.

it's GM we're talking about here.  they do dumb stuff like that.