First Drive: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse

[K.C.]

<walks up with daddy, looks at it> I like it. . .Let's go.

[Guest aatbloke]

Unless it comes with a turbodiesel - no thanks.

[pow]

Unless it comes with a turbodiesel - no thanks.

Interestingly, its 17/24 mpg is just one fewer than GL320 CDI's 18/24. "Real-world" fuel consumption may be a different matter.

[ZL-1]

"Real-world" fuel consumption may be a different matter.

Yeah, but it's all that matters as it is "real-world" fuel consumption that makes your wallet hurt more or less :AH-HA_wink:

[regfootball]

real world numbers i have investigated are all over the map with the lambdas. sometimes not great in town, often very high numbers on the highway. one person i work with gets great mpg......better than the pilot owners i know.

[saturnd00d]

I simply argued equity for a brand goes down when you have a competing version of the same car you're selling, inter-company. the fact that there are now four versions of the same exact car hurt each car's ultimate success and unique attributes. that in turn takes away from the brand and the distinct products if offers and segments it competes in, which is why we've seen so many discussions on the net lately about which brand is most expendable based simply on the similarity of the product at each brand.

Has anyone actually thought that perhaps one family, who wants the Enclave, but can't afford to get the Enclave with certain options might scale down to the Acadia instead, which would allow them to drive the "type" of vehicle they wanted with the options they wanted as well? I am one such person, who was considering a Lambda and was going to seriously look into the Acadia. I liked both the Acadia and Outlook, with the Enclave being way too far out of reach for my pocketbook. The deciding difference between the Acadia and Outlook, for me, was whether or not I could get the Acadia with the options I wanted, for the price point I wanted to spend. I knew that I could have went with the Outlook and get the options I wanted, so regardless, it was the price that decided for me.

In truth, I ddn't go with either of them. I decided that I wasn't considering a Lambda out of need, but rather, out of want. I went with an 08 Vue with the 4 cyl instead, which was what fit my "needs" the best. Sure, V6 power would have been great, and so on, but I didn't need all that.

Getting back to choice though, pricepoint is huge. More huge, in fact, than I think some people realize. With today's economy, people are looking at price more than anything. The Traverse seems like it's made to appeal to budget-minded consumers, or ones that are crunching the numbers. I hope that GM understands that it might hurt the Chevy brand by giving it a product that is sub-par with fit 'n finish, and interior materials just to introduce a pricepoint for the mainstream budget consumer. At the same time, when you have a product trying to turn Chevy around, like the new malibu, it gives consumers the impression of inconsistency within the brand.

I think they would have done better to introduce the Outlook under Chevy and axe it from Saturn instead (as much as I liked it as a Saturn). This way, people still get the great build quality, interior materials, and exterior looks that was from the Outlook, rather than a product that looks budget from the outside-in.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

I'm glad that enzl puts up with the blind loyalty and continues to post meaningful, well thought out arguments that balance out some of the more radical "Let's defend GM at all costs, they have never done anything wrong, it's everyone else's fault gallery"

Are you f*cking kidding me?!?!?!

I AGREED with enzl, of all people, in the Cadillac Lambda thread about GM needing new management. ALL I do is constantly bitch bout GM's "ignorant" (a direct quote that I have used MANY times) decisions about product, brands, marketing and consumer psychology. Yet, you guys throw this up in my face as status quo. Maybe 'some' people around here should open their eyes more often.

enzl isn't a GM hater or basher, if he did it would be "OMG GM sucks, Toyota rules, etc." He's critical to it because he wants it to succeed and it gets frustrating when it shoots itself in the foot, taking 1 step forward and 2 steps back.

Or...

enzl is a dealer and bitches because GM is not making him a lot of money right now. But instead of blaming that on the VARIETY of problems that have lead to our sad state, he insists on blaming GM because it is easy.

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Thanks to DF above---You gotta admit there's a problem before you can fix things---here's hoping there's a few more 'pessimists' on staff to help GM right the ship.

Yeah, because I'm not a pessimist at all

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Of all coincidences, our district manager dropped by today. We had a wee pow-wow about the bankruptcy situation, the bad news on the media, etc. Wow, if you think I am touchy on the issue, he makes me look like an import humper!

In his learned opinion, GM needs to take off the gloves and start attacking the media. GM is doing more things right than at any time in its history, yet it is still taking it up the #ss for perceived injustices of the past. He feels GM needs an entire war department to go after the media outlets that keep bringing up the negative bulls#%t that is threatening to swamp the boat.

As a side bar, I want to go on record as saying it isn't just about GM that I am sick of the media. I am just sick of the media in general. Whether it is a politician innocently calling Asians 'Orientals' (as happened recently in Toronto), or some drunk driver that accidentally kills a pedestrian, the media harps and harps on issues until they are beaten to death.

I can barely watch the news any more because every station or paper is trying to come up with a new slant on how to beat a 'hot' subject to death. Everyone is reaching for that Pullitzer and they don't care whose lives they destroy in the process. In the 40 odd years that I have been paying attention to 'current events,' I gotta say that the freedom of the press has gotten out of hand. Maybe there is too much competition between the various outlets, or maybe liberal arts degrees aren't worth the paper they are printed on, but from innocent slanting of an article to outright fabrications, I venture to say that fully HALF of what we read in print or see on TV is pure, unadulterated crap.

It shames me to think of how this freedom of the press is being abused. I can hardly blame the Chinese government for wanting to clamp down on the press in their country. Our press has become a wasteland of the disenfranchised, jaded and lazy.

This is not merely about blaming the press for GM's failures. This is about the entire downfall of our civilization unless we start demanding more from the press.

I agree 110%...

The media needs to be censored and GM needs to start fighting dirty (My GOD! How many times have I typed that now) if it wants to survive.

That's all.... Death or fight. Your choice GM.

[haypops]

I In his learned opinion, GM needs to take off the gloves and start attacking the media.

II I gotta say that the freedom of the press has gotten out of hand.

I. While I can't really comment on whether GM should fight the media or not, I would remind you that GM did just that when the Los Angeles Times auto writer (Oneal?) went after the G6 at its introduction(including withholding advertising). I think it proved neither beneficial or disastrous.

Sincerely,

John McCain and Barry Obama

II. It is not the freedom of the press that has gotten out of hand, but rather the quality of the people who work there. Constant staff reductions have left those behind demoralized and frequently selected for the "less able" among them. I understand that GM may be hurting for equity, but it would be interesting if they could see their way clear to buy a couple of big city newspapers on the cheap. They could funnel it through OnStar perhaps.

[CARBIZ]

I. While I can't really comment on whether GM should fight the media or not, I would remind you that GM did just that when the Los Angeles Times auto writer (Oneal?) went after the G6 at its introduction(including withholding advertising). I think it proved neither beneficial or disastrous.

Sincerely,

John McCain and Barry Obama

II. It is not the freedom of the press that has gotten out of hand, but rather the quality of the people who work there. Constant staff reductions have left those behind demoralized and frequently selected for the "less able" among them. I understand that GM may be hurting for equity, but it would be interesting if they could see their way clear to buy a couple of big city newspapers on the cheap. They could funnel it through OnStar perhaps.

I watched Lions for Lambs last night on DVD. For those who enjoy political commentaries, it was a decent movie. Tom Cruise plays the quintessential politician: follow the party line, say what the public wants to hear and speak from both sides of your mouth at the same time. Meryl Streep plays the old warhorse journalist whose morality has been sucked dry by the corporate system of national news. Tom Cruise points out that the media is just as much to blame in the messes we are facing in today's world because they don't question enough, or ask the wrong questions.

Robert Redford plays an aging political science professor who is trying to inspire his charges to DO something about the mess we are in, rather than 'skirt the flames' as he states in a reference to Nero and Rome burning.

Too many people take the easy way out in life. We don't want to question the status quo. I say: question everything. We think we live in a free world and have a free press, but I say those assumptions are wrong.

[haypops]

I watched Lions for Lambs last night on DVD. For those who enjoy political commentaries, it was a decent movie.

I will keep an eye our for it. Thanks.

[regfootball]

pops is right. the quality of the press is so bad. read all the car reviews and its painfully obvious. they are all trying for their unique angle to attack something, but they all say the same thing. they dont research anything and often they only drive it a few miles. in the end the article has little to no substance.

which is what angers me. the public needs to stop asking 'what's the best car' and simply ask 'what's the best car for ME'?

get your fat asses off the couch and go test drive and price these things!

instead, we rely on &#036;h&#33; houses like The Truth About Cars to inform the masses. Thank You. Motor Trend and Edmunds are supposed industry leaders and they display some of the worst writing I've seen yet.

Our local paper, the venomous liberal editorialist had spewed some diatribe the other day. Bus ridership is up here now with high gas and stuff. Cool. But the metro transit said it has to raise fares to help pay for the fuel cost increases. Keep in mind the buses are pretty well subsidized and not in any way self sufficient. But this liberal ass had the gall to say we need to keep fares the same! mainly because the bus is so important to the poor and all that. Tax the cars more but not let people drive like they want........So let's just subsizidize it even more! Fock!

People make the press out to be experts and truth is they are not even close. One pubic hairs width above the mendoza line is all they are.

Edited July 5, 2008 by regfootball

[The O.C.]

you make it sound like there will be no net increase in volume and share with the new chevy entry. you're wrong. so, why do they sell 4 different brands of milk at the grocery store?

Uh....different milk producers?

<duh>

[The O.C.]

GM has far too much brand overlap. I was recently watching a program about British Leyland, and many of their problems were based on the fact that many of their divisions competed directly with each other, much as many of GM's brands do. They waste development dollars trying to give many brands essentially the same car, and they don't have anywhere near the needed market share to pull that off. G6, Malibu, Aura, all are in the exact same segment. All are on the same platform. If there were only one, GM could have spent twice as much on just one of them to make a fantastic product and still saved money. Sure they are tuned for slightly different tastes, but it's not anything substantial. The G6 is just a FWD family sedan in the same way that the Malibu or Camry are, and it sure is no Altima. GM needs to stop wasting money on completely redundant product and stop competing with itself.

Exactly. I saw that same program recently. Was it CNN? I forget.....but it was scary the parallels between British Leyland and today's General Motors.

[The O.C.]

and your opinion on this ignores that if Gm shuts down 3/4 of its brands and half its dealers they are not gonna sell nowhere near the number of cars they do now.

Actually......business and marketing 101 says that is not the case. (Thank you GMI Engineering & Management Institute.)

It's very likely, and very possibly, that General Motors would increase volume with remaining brands at or near levels they were at. Now, understandably this is most prevalent in like models. The accepted business theory is......if you did away, say, with Outlook and Acadia, and threw your marketing, advertising, and product support into Traverse and Enclave, you'd make up that lost volume and/or profit.

If you magically did away with Saturn.....and threw all that financial support into the existing Chevy brand.....well....you can imagine how that would bolster Chevy's marketplace performance. No Outlook.....all into Traverse. No Aura.....all into Malibu. No Vue.....all into Equinox. No Sky.....throw it at (Pontiac) Solstice.

[CARBIZ]

There is one problem with that theory, and I am not saying it is wrong because I am of the opinion that GM does need to ditch a few brands, but one cannot assume that ALL or even MOST sales from lost brands can be salvaged.

Case in point: I saw recent sales stats for the dealer where I used to work (now closed) and the surrounding GM dealers. I can tell you that the 'lost sales' from closing that dealer were not recouped by the surrounding GM dealers. Admittedly, the Toronto market is in freefall right now, but sales of surrounding dealers are down, and the closest GM dealer's sales are a sad joke.

Whichever path GM chooses, it will be painful.

[The O.C.]

It's obvious I'm beating my head against the wall. I'll take the Toureg v. Cayenne or Altima v. Max (I note there are no takers for that pic comparison)

against:

Terrazza v. Uplander v. Montana OR Colorado v. Canyon OR N cars OR X cars OR 9-7X, T-blazer, Ranier, Bravada, Envoy--I mean, that list alone is COMIC!

Keep on sipping the Kool-Aid boys---I'll be sure to keep the lights on for ya!

Thanks to DF above---You gotta admit there's a problem before you can fix things---here's hoping there's a few more 'pessimists' on staff to help GM right the ship.

How 'bout Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade?

Except for the front end styling, it's hard, if not impossible, to tell them apart! Although we do well with Escalades here, it is many times VERY difficult to differentiate the Escalade from Tahoe and Yukon....by enough to compensate for the $70K price tag.

[haypops]

It's very likely, and very possibly, that General Motors would increase volume with remaining brands at or near levels they were at. Now, understandably this is most prevalent in like models. The accepted business theory is......if you did away, say, with Outlook and Acadia, and threw your marketing, advertising, and product support into Traverse and Enclave, you'd make up that lost volume and/or profit.

4 lambdas does seem one or two too many. One of the problems is the last one (traverse) is probably the nicest. Another problem is that the Enclave and Travers are similar while the Saturn and Arcadia do resemble each other. It would make sense that the BOP sales arm would get one not two versions. However the Arcadia is nicer than the Outlook. It is little wonder that Saturn sales don't match the other "twins" with the lest number of dealers and the least attractive version. Looking forward is a lot different than looking back. At this point there is no reason to drop a paid for vehicle.

[regfootball]

i just test drove an outlook today. i'm not sure how it hurts saturn. or gm. i don't want the buick. i might like the acadia but its usually higher priced and i love the saturn dealership experience (i prefer the aura to the malibu btw). the chevy would be nice but i like the saturn dealers. most chevy dealers i shop at suck and none of them are gonna give up their &#036;h&#33;ty franchises. and where will the folks in the rural areas who only have chevy dealers get their lambdas? The traverse will absolutely boom in those areas.

leaving chevy out of the mix means no lambdas for a lot of the less populated areas. saturn only has like 500 dealers, they prob sell a lot of outlooks per dealer. someone compare outlooks sold at each saturn place vs. acadias.

bottom line, if the segment and while the segment is doing well, its ok to multibrand a chassis. and the outlook is likely a bridge product as i mentioned before.

you all have to remember that when chevy introduced the tahoe and short wb yukon the suv segment boomed and gm benefitted big time from the multibrand multimodel model. likewise with when the trailblazer/envoy debuted. we never give GM credit for that, do we?

when they redid the gmt900's it was a natural to continue all those successful products. and they did continue to sell well. an unpredicted gas price swing and total assbang of the economy meant that makers with smaller cheaper vehicles benfitted. This was GM's fault. they did not anticipate that swing. this is what they should be criticized for. and that's purely management. it has nothing to do with brands. if GM's management had more small cars spread across more of the brands it would actually benefit them.

personally my favorite is for them to sell all GM brands in a brand superstore under one roof (then maybe you could eliminate one brand) but until the dealer group is willing to give without getting blown to give up their union like franchise bit, then i still maintain that shuttering brands is likely too spendy. maybe GM needs to do bankruptcy or get a huge investor infusion to buy off all the bloodsuckers. like the union, when this is done, that will be the only road to progress.

by the way the outlook drives beautifully. i also scoped out a new pilot today. man is that thing crap. but they will lineup with their magazines in hand. because someone told them so.

if the rick came to me and said 'get rid of 2 lambdas' i would keep the GMC and chevy. i would get a new sportier slightly smaller outlook in the vein of the CX9 and the enclave would be reformed into something more akin to the veracruz/rx/rendezxous.

i think if GM gets rid of brands, what you might see is more the merging of BPG into the chevy channel. that might be doable if that's what you wanted to do. then chevy doesnt have to only sell low priced trailer park junk. that way you could get rid of GMC even but you'd have to upgrade chevy products. then buick and pontiac could have fewer models and there would be less crossover (i.e you wouldnt need a g5). might not be a bad plan. then cadillac is separate, so is saturn. Saturn could absorb opel and saab models in that scenario and there are so few saturn dealers to begin with in limited regions only already. saturns existing dealer netowrk is not the old time old school bloodsuckers like the ones that have held on for decades.

Edited July 6, 2008 by regfootball

[CARBIZ]

I would think the Traverse and Enclave would make more sense, IMO. The Enclave because it is 'higher end' and has gotten lots of critical attention, and the Traverse because it can get the volume. The Acadia makes less sense with the Enclave being at the same store and the Saturn won't sell if they gave a set of Tupperware with it, so why bother?

[haypops]

I. saturn only has like 500 dealers, they prob sell a lot of outlooks per dealer. someone compare outlooks sold at each saturn place vs. acadias.

II.

by the way the outlook drives beautifully. i also scoped out a new pilot today. man is that thing crap.

I. I believe that the number is closer to 400 and falling.

II. I don't know if the Pilot is crap, but it is surprising how each change to it makes it uglier.

[regfootball]

saturn has a solid lineup and a great dealer experience and NOBODY KNOWS.

finally inspected a FLEX today. kind of makes the lambdas seem ancient in styling. lambdas are still the best package as far as 3 rows for people and cargo. but man, i was skeptical on the Flex and i gotta tell ya, it really is a game changer and is polarizing. It's probably gonna kill any serious intention i had of pricing the lambda for myself.

Edited July 6, 2008 by regfootball

[rkmdogs]

I haven't been reading this website much recently, but after reading the 7 pages of this blog-----

I have one thing to say.

This is supposed to be a pro-GM website.

Why don't all you bitchers go play somewhere else?

You all have spewed enough hot air about sh-t that you can't do anything about to float an entire fleet of

airships!

If you think some other product is better ---- go to their website and bitch!

Positive comments are what makes for improvments, not nag,nag,nag.

The bottom line on all of this B/S is where do the final checks go? If it is overseas, then go get your paycheck

in rice kernels! ---- 'cause you are not keeping dollars home where they can do more "work."

All of the manufacturers are plagued with the same problem. That's a Congress who thinks that they

know more about vehicle design than the manufacturers, and tell them how to do it via regulation!

I would still like to know when they started handing out birth certificates with a lifetime warranty?

Our Government regs appear to be that way.....

Let's get positive in the comments dept.

[Croc]

Edited July 12, 2008 by Croc

[saturnd00d]

The chevy Travisty is a terrible looking Lambda. Sorry guys, it looks dorky no mater which angle you are looking at it from. The Enclave is definitely needed, the Acadia is a sales champ, the outlook (in my opinion) looks way better than this thing, however if chevy needs a Lambda (I don't see why but whatever), then GM should have re-assigned the outlook to be under chevy, and not design some retarded looking thing AKA the travisty that they did. It's awkward, and downright ugly, inside and out. How any of you could think it looks better than the outlook is beyond me. At least the outlook isn't weird looking, and it has some euro flare to it. The Travisty looks like it had 3 different designers, one for each section of it, and then they all merged designs and took it from there.

God this thing is ugly. I'd rather buy a 1 year old Outlook or Acadia for the same price as a Travisty with all the bells and whistles.

[frogger]

The Acadia is the only Lambda I think looks good/flows well past the rear passenger doors.

I do like the Traverse interior though.

[rkmdogs]

The Acadia is the only Lambda I think looks good/flows well past the rear passenger doors.

I do like the Traverse interior though.

Both of you need to get rid of your slant-eyed glasses! Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, ----

and I think the Traverse is the BEST of the lot!

So there!----pf-f-ft!

Put that in your negative teacup!