GM News: GM Shelves Diesel Option for Equinox and Terrain

[William Maley]

There will be one less engine option for the Chevrolet Equinox and GMC Terrain come the 2020 model year. The Car Connection first reported the news on the Equinox yesterday morning, while Autoblog followed with the Terrain news later in the day. Both stories reported the same reason for cancellation, they didn't sell.

"We did discontinue the diesel engine option in the 2020 Chevrolet Equinox due to low demand," said Chevrolet spokesman Kevin Kelly.

The news doesn't come as a shock to us. Diesel engines have gotten a bad rap since the Volkswagen diesel emission scandal came to light, causing sales to drop. The value argument was also tough for both models. A diesel Equinox started at $30,795. But only for $100 more, you could have gotten into the 2.0L turbo-four that offered better performance. Over at the Terrain, the diesel cost around $2,000 more than the 2.0 turbo-four. Diesel fuel is more expensive than its gas counterpart as well.

That will leave the upcoming Mazda CX-5 Skyactiv-D as the only diesel option in the compact crossover class. But as we have noted previously, the diesel option is quite expensive (begins at $42,045) and fuel economy figures are disappointing (27 City/30 Highway/28 Combined).

Source: The Car Connection, Autoblog

View full article

[riviera74]

No surprise here.  Diesel is on its way out, for better or worse.  The primary market for this class of crossovers do not care for diesel anything, so no more diesels.

I also suspect that an BEV option would sell better than the diesels that were just canceled.

[smk4565]

Agreed, diesel is done.  Except maybe in big trucks.  Elsewhere the people just don’t want it.

[ocnblu]

Number one:  they never advertised it.  This was an amazing combination of economy and power.  38-39 MPG in this class of vehicle is UNHEARD OF  (in more ways than one, unfortunately).

Pundits said ppl want economy, first and foremost.  That was a lie.

[regfootball]

well, back in 2013 when gas was 4 bucks i think this would have gone over more.  I drove one for a short drive once, and it felt peppy, but the numbers don't suggest it's fast.  It was decently smooth if i remember.  Far better option than the 1.5 in the equinox, at least when it's AWD.

Knowing GM they probably limit the shit out of your options when you choose the diesel.

I'm willing to bet this is the end forever of diesel in GM cars for anything besides pickups from now on.

Edited July 13, 2019 by regfootball

[surreal1272]

54 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Number one:  they never advertised it.  This was an amazing combination of economy and power.  38-39 MPG in this class of vehicle is UNHEARD OF  (in more ways than one, unfortunately).

Pundits said ppl want economy, first and foremost.  That was a lie.

Guess all diesels suck from lack of advertising then. Can’t have anything to do with factors like what was mentioned in the article. 

 

“But only for $100 more, you could have gotten into the 2.0L turbo-four that offered better performance. Over at the Terrain, the diesel cost around $2,000 more than the 2.0 turbo-four. Diesel fuel is more expensive than its gas counterpart as well.”

 

Diesel here is, on average, 25-30 cents per gallon higher than unleaded gas. It’s not hard to figure out why most folks just aren’t buying them. 

44 minutes ago, regfootball said:

well, back in 2013 when gas was 4 bucks i think this would have gone over more.  I drove one for a short drive once, and it felt peppy, but the numbers don't suggest it's fast.  It was decently smooth if i remember.  Far better option than the 1.5 in the equinox, at least when it's AWD.

Knowing GM they probably limit the $h! out of your options when you choose the diesel.

I'm willing to bet this is the end forever of diesel in GM cars for anything besides pickups from now on.

Going to Chevrolet’s site and selecting the Diesel engine puts it at LT trim which is not limited in options from what I can see. 

Edited July 13, 2019 by surreal1272

[surreal1272]

1 hour ago, ocnblu said:

Number one:  they never advertised it.  This was an amazing combination of economy and power.  38-39 MPG in this class of vehicle is UNHEARD OF  (in more ways than one, unfortunately).

Pundits said ppl want economy, first and foremost.  That was a lie.

It’s gets 28 MPG city which is where most soccer moms use them, making it not so great when you factor in the extra fuels costs of diesel. 

[ocnblu]

23 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

It’s gets 28 MPG city which is where most soccer moms use them, making it not so great when you factor in the extra fuels costs of diesel. 

?  Read Motor Trend's real world economy test.  Read Car & Driver's test.

[riviera74]

31 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

?  Read Motor Trend's real world economy test.  Read Car & Driver's test.

Either way, few soccer moms want a diesel-fueled crossover.  Usually the biggest buyers are those who need the hauling and towing superiority that comes with a diesel engine.  Those are truck buyers, not car/CUV buyers.  The typical buyer is the issue, not the fact that the diesel engines did not have the typically sky-high MPGs expected from them.

[surreal1272]

1 hour ago, ocnblu said:

?  Read Motor Trend's real world economy test.  Read Car & Driver's test.

And? The rated MPGs are 28 City/38 Highway. Real world tests will always vary and you missed the point entirely. Riviera covered part of my point pretty well. 

 

We will just skip the C&D part of the review where they were critical of its lethargic operation. 

Edited July 14, 2019 by surreal1272

[G. David Felt]

Fact Woman buy more of this class of CUV than Men.

Fact if pulling, a Diesel Truck or full size SUV does it better.

Fact, Woman hate greasy, dirty things, Diesel is a very dirty fuel that stains cloths and just about everything. Woman hate to fuel just regular gas and now you want them to fuel with a dirtier fuel that also costs way more.

When you have to pay a premium for the power train plus an extra 60 cents per gallon for Diesel, it needs to return double to triple of the 28 MPG to even be considered by most people.

[Cremazie]

They never had any in stock anywhere... of course they weren’t selling 

[balthazar]

10 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Fact, Woman hate greasy, dirty things, Diesel is a very dirty fuel that stains cloths and just about everything. Woman hate to fuel just regular gas and now you want them to fuel with a dirtier fuel that also costs way more.

Where are all these angry, diesel-spraying women who are incapable of a simple vehicle refueling? Did we somehow slide back to the 1950s (or whenever it was when women were apparently utterly incapable)?

Edited July 14, 2019 by balthazar

[daves87rs]

Not surprised....it truly is on the way out.

At some point gas prices will shoot up hard yet again-and that is why EV is going to pick up and bury diesel -or at least what is left.

It’d the reason why the rest of the word is dumping diesel and going with smaller ICE and EV based cars....

[ocnblu]

Everybody in here knows GM sucks at marketing, and has for a while.

Plus it took a long while for this to make the rounds in the press, I saw this in the GM Order Guide weeks ago.

[surreal1272]

15 hours ago, balthazar said:

Where are all these angry, diesel-spraying women who are incapable of a simple vehicle refueling? Did we somehow slide back to the 1950s (or whenever it was when women were apparently utterly incapable)?

14 years ago, when I was driving a AAA tow truck, I towed two Camrys on the same day for the very same thing. Both drivers somehow put Diesel into their gas tanks and naturally both cars shut down after about twenty feet. There are stupid people everywhere, is my point here. 

[Robert Hall]

1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

14 years ago, when I was driving a AAA tow truck, I towed two Camrys on the same day for the very same thing. Both drivers somehow put Diesel into their gas tanks and naturally both cars shut down after about twenty feet. There are stupid people everywhere, is my point here. 

I could see that happening at BP gas stations...they have their unleaded pump handles in green, instead of just the diesel at other station chains. 

[riviera74]

9 hours ago, ocnblu said:

Everybody in here knows GM sucks at marketing, and has for a while.

Plus it took a long while for this to make the rounds in the press, I saw this in the GM Order Guide weeks ago.

How would you fix GM's marketing for each class of vehicle?

[ocnblu]

20 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

How would you fix GM's marketing for each class of vehicle?

Question is too broad.

[riviera74]

15 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

Question is too broad.

OK.  Start with the XT4/XT5/XT6.

[William Maley]

6 hours ago, riviera74 said:

How would you fix GM's marketing for each class of vehicle?

Hire Matthew McConaughey to spout out random nonsense...

Wait.

[daves87rs]

6 hours ago, riviera74 said:

How would you fix GM's marketing for each class of vehicle?

Well, I’d start with reintroducing GM to things called the TV and YouTube........

[G. David Felt]

GM Marketing needs to get back to Basic's.

Focus on family and the uses that auto's can have that Families would want to use it for. 

Show trucks doing things like hauling an RV trailer, boat with family inside of the truck enjoying the interior amenities.

Show SUV's / CUV's doing the same thing pulling a PWC, or 2 person small RV. Couples having some we time in a National Park.

Show cars out on the town for the night with couples and families.

Cadillac XT family of CUVs should be shown being driven into a golf course with a young couple planning to enjoy a round of golf. Show a senior couple with grandkids pulling into an amusement park arriving in luxury for a fun filled day.

It does not take rocket science to match up common use cases to how various auto's are used and highlight the superior nature of those auto's to the public on why they should buy GM.

Arrive in the 21st Century driving a GM!

[G. David Felt]

On 7/13/2019 at 7:34 PM, balthazar said:

Where are all these angry, diesel-spraying women who are incapable of a simple vehicle refueling? Did we somehow slide back to the 1950s (or whenever it was when women were apparently utterly incapable)?

Never said they were angry, diesel-spraying woman. Just a fact woman do not like dirty greasy things and would when given the option not have to deal with gassing up an auto.

Ford put together an all womans engineering team who designed and built key parts of the Ford Flex. They first used the design of a vacuum sealed gas door with no gas cap as it removed one more dirty item that woman did not like to touch. As such, we have now seen this copied and in use by plenty of various auto companies on their auto lines.

I bet if you asked your wife about this, she would say she would rather not have to touch a gas cap or fuel an auto if she had her choice.

[Robert Hall]

Re: marketing....for example, Jeep has successfully capitalized on the outdoor adventure imagery with their ads for decades,  GM could do the same with their various CUVs/SUVs..

[ccap41]

On 7/13/2019 at 6:48 PM, riviera74 said:

Either way, few soccer moms want a diesel-fueled crossover.  Usually the biggest buyers are those who need the hauling and towing superiority that comes with a diesel engine.  Those are truck buyers, not car/CUV buyers.  The typical buyer is the issue, not the fact that the diesel engines did not have the typically sky-high MPGs expected from them.

Tell that to the millions of Jetta TDI owners.. 

[ccap41]

People are COMPLETELY looking past the fact the 2.0T drinks premium fuel which costs MORE than diesel while getting significantly worse fuel economy. 

The article compares it to the 2.0T because of dollars but you're paying for efficiency and efficiency is what you get with the diesel engine. 

@dfelt mentioned women hate fueling up, well you'll be doing it less often with the diesel than either gas engine. Maybe it's a better option. 

On 7/13/2019 at 9:34 PM, balthazar said:

Where are all these angry, diesel-spraying women who are incapable of a simple vehicle refueling? Did we somehow slide back to the 1950s (or whenever it was when women were apparently utterly incapable)?

I'm yet to meet somebody who's complained about getting fuel on themselves.. because most people aren't all willy-nilly with the nozzle. 

[Robert Hall]

16 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

 

I'm yet to meet somebody who's complained about getting fuel on themselves.. because most people aren't all willy-nilly with the nozzle. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTrxEQnPtAg

[Drew Dowdell]

On 7/13/2019 at 10:33 PM, Cremazie said:

They never had any in stock anywhere... of course they weren’t selling 

I looked... they were very hard to find.  My friend who sells GMCs never even had one on his lot. 

[Drew Dowdell]

28 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

People are COMPLETELY looking past the fact the 2.0T drinks premium fuel which costs MORE than diesel while getting significantly worse fuel economy. 

The article compares it to the 2.0T because of dollars but you're paying for efficiency and efficiency is what you get with the diesel engine. 

@dfelt mentioned women hate fueling up, well you'll be doing it less often with the diesel than either gas engine. Maybe it's a better option. 

I'm yet to meet somebody who's complained about getting fuel on themselves.. because most people aren't all willy-nilly with the nozzle. 

I've been really suspect of the EPA highway figures for a while now.  I nearly always beat the highway rating, and I'm not driving slow.  When I had the Terrain 2.0T last year, I got 31mpg. 

 

 

[ccap41]

Yeah, I beat highway and combined ratings as well but the best comparison is epa ratings. If we want to add 10% to the diesel(which as known to easily exceed highway ratings) we can do that do and say 30.9mpg for the 2.0T and 41.8mpg for the turbo diesel. That is still a very significant difference for something using a cheaper fuel as well. 

Also, what was the hand calculated number? Computers are almost always optimistic. 

[Drew Dowdell]

Yeah, I probably would have beaten EPA by even more if it was the diesel. 

No, it wasn't a hand calculated number.  Direct injected engines have the best fuel economy calculations because the fuel is so precisely metered. 

[ccap41]

9 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

No, it wasn't a hand calculated number.  Direct injected engines have the best fuel economy calculations because the fuel is so precisely metered. 

And yet, they're still never all that accurate. 

[balthazar]

7 hours ago, dfelt said:

Never said they were angry, diesel-spraying woman. Just a fact woman do not like dirty greasy things and would when given the option not have to deal with gassing up an auto.

I bet if you asked your wife about this, she would say she would rather not have to touch a gas cap or fuel an auto if she had her choice.

We live in Jersey; she's never pumped her own gas. lol
But your statement is not a "fact", its a stereotype, and not that I gravitate towards these sort of labels at all, but it's kinda sexist. There are a significant quantity to women who race, build, repair & customize vehicles, and aren't afraid of a little dirt.

[Robert Hall]

Speaking of disappearing diesel options, I saw Ford was cancelling their US market diesel Transit Connect...apparently it was announced last year but never produced. 

[Drew Dowdell]

4 hours ago, ccap41 said:

And yet, they're still never all that accurate. 

Then my Encore is getting truly abysmal mileage for such an underpowered vehicle. 25.4 mpg yesterday coming home from NJ.

[ccap41]

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Then my Encore is getting truly abysmal mileage for such an underpowered vehicle. 25.4 mpg yesterday coming home from NJ.

I would wager good money your computer is optimistic if you calculated it over the next 1000 miles. 

They're a polarizing group but the TFLtruck/car/off-road guys test an awful lot of vehicles and have a pretty good and consistent test procedure and most computers state a higher mpg than what they are actually getting. Most are within 1mpg so nothing crazy but high is high. All of my computers have been higher than what I actually calculate and I've even tried using the same exact pump to eliminate one variable. 

This is my MKC’s numbers since ownership. 

Rated: 18/25/21 city/hwy/combined

[Robert Hall]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Then my Encore is getting truly abysmal mileage for such an underpowered vehicle. 25.4 mpg yesterday coming home from NJ.

Wow... I've never checked the mileage of my sister's Trax, but I've seen 25 or better occasionally in my 3.6 GC on road trips. 

[G. David Felt]

8 hours ago, ccap41 said:

Tell that to the millions of Jetta TDI owners.. 

Are we sure there are millions, otherwise I would be seeing them far more often than a couple times a year. Maybe 20 to 30 thousand owners across North America.

[frogger]

Up here TDI was popular, over 100k were in  the 2.0tdi 2009-2015 generation that needed the emissions fix.

[ccap41]

13 hours ago, dfelt said:

Are we sure there are millions, otherwise I would be seeing them far more often than a couple times a year. Maybe 20 to 30 thousand owners across North America.

https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/guide-to-the-volkswagen-dieselgate-emissions-recall-

Try 550,000 in the US, 11 million worldwide. That's just what was affected by their scandal. 

 

[ccap41]

You also wouldn't notice one passing you in the other direction. The only real difference is the badge on the trunk or hatch. 

[surreal1272]

On 7/15/2019 at 7:50 AM, ccap41 said:

People are COMPLETELY looking past the fact the 2.0T drinks premium fuel which costs MORE than diesel while getting significantly worse fuel economy. 

The article compares it to the 2.0T because of dollars but you're paying for efficiency and efficiency is what you get with the diesel engine. 

@dfelt mentioned women hate fueling up, well you'll be doing it less often with the diesel than either gas engine. Maybe it's a better option. 

I'm yet to meet somebody who's complained about getting fuel on themselves.. because most people aren't all willy-nilly with the nozzle. 

What is also being ignored is the dismal performance of the Diesel when compared to the 2.0T. This has been remarked in almost every review of the Diesel. Here’s a snippet from the C&D review (and a common theme with most reviews of it). 

Likes: Gutsy optional 2.0T engine, athletic handling for a crossover, great steering.  
Dislikes: Lethargic 1.5T and diesel engines, harsh ride on large optional wheels.

 

And another snippet from MT. 

At the track, the 2018 Equinox TD hit 60 mph in 9.0 seconds and completed the quarter mile in 16.9 seconds at 81 mph, which is on the slower side of the segment.

 

 

It didn’t help matters that it was saddled with the pathetic six speed instead of the 9 speed in the 2.0. 

Edited July 17, 2019 by surreal1272

[ccap41]

1 minute ago, surreal1272 said:

What is also being ignored is the dismal performance of the Diesel when compared to the 2.0T. This has been remarked in almost every review of the Diesel. Here’s a snippet from the C&D review (and a common theme with most reviews of it). 

Likes: Gutsy optional 2.0T engine, athletic handling for a crossover, great steering.  
Dislikes: Lethargic 1.5T and diesel engines, harsh ride on large optional wheels.

Absolutely. Performance-wise it is more comparable to their 1.5T, cost close to the 2.0T, fuel economy(considering fuel prices) closer to the 1.5T.

It's stuck in the middle, imo. I just don't like the article comparing it price-wise to the 2.0T because it is clearly designed (and marketed..?) towards fuel economy yet they're using the 2.0T as the reason for it going away. 

[surreal1272]

29 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Absolutely. Performance-wise it is more comparable to their 1.5T, cost close to the 2.0T, fuel economy(considering fuel prices) closer to the 1.5T.

It's stuck in the middle, imo. I just don't like the article comparing it price-wise to the 2.0T because it is clearly designed (and marketed..?) towards fuel economy yet they're using the 2.0T as the reason for it going away. 

The other part of that comparison mentioned that the TD Nox was $3800 higher than a similar equipped 1.5L model. Things like that had it doomed from the get go. The only small GM diesel vehicle worth a damn (to me) is the Colorado. While I would not own one, I got some time behind the wheel of one last year and it was very "punchy" (thank you torque) compared to the base four banger. Problem with that though was also the price. However, it stands a better chance of survival in the truck market because of its work use advantages. Diesels are wasted on things like the Nox and Cruze.

[Drew Dowdell]

Plus, they never told anyone about it. 

[G. David Felt]

Marketing FAILURE of GM! This is the biggest problem with GM is their lack of Marketing!

[riviera74]

39 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Marketing FAILURE of GM! This is the biggest problem with GM is their lack of Marketing!

True, but does anyone want a unibody FWD crossover with a diesel engine?  Look at those who buy those vehicles: those buyers do NOT want diesel.  The diesel engine in question belongs in a midsize truck, not a unibody FWD crossover.

[G. David Felt]

7 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

True, but does anyone want a unibody FWD crossover with a diesel engine?  Look at those who buy those vehicles: those buyers do NOT want diesel.  The diesel engine in question belongs in a midsize truck, not a unibody FWD crossover.

Yes it should be in the Mid size and full size trucks, it can also go into a AWD CUV if properly marketed to the proper target group.

AWD Terrain or Equinox pulling an RV for a couple and highlighting the torque for getting up and over passes is the message that should have been sold on this.

EXAMPLE:

Does your current ride run out of steam pulling your RV up and over the pass?

Get into a New GMC Terrain AWD Diesel, the Torque that never stops giving and sail over the pass with pulling torque power of GM's newest turbo charged Diesel motor with clean emissions.

Get out in play in your new Terrain Diesel, living the life you want to live!

 

[riviera74]

Good idea.  What a missed opportunity.  Typical GM marketing--missing opportunities, even when one is staring at them in the face.  Mary Barra needs to fire those losers and hire some real imaginative types who can sell ice to Eskimoes.