Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Chevrolet Equinox

1656668707174

Comments

  • grosloupgrosloup Posts: 239
    I know what you're talking about. Before my 2005 Equinox I owned a 1999 Venture almost the same as your Montana but it's a Chevrolet and "Yes Sir" do I ever miss those heated mirrors we sure need those up here with our winters and the automatic level control suspension on the Venture was great. The engine in my Venture was a 3.4 L but I didn't have any problem with it but I noticed that the Equinox is a bit more expensive on gas.
    You're right my Equinox is a LT, heated leather seats, sun roof, inboard computer/compass, aluminium 17's wheels they told me "fully loaded".
    Fully loaded without heated mirrors? NAH!
  • jim_dandyjim_dandy Posts: 94
    So far, wife and I put 34,000miles on our Equinox since purchased Jan 2005. Still looks good, runs and drives great! No problems to date. The 3.4L is a strong proven GM design which is assembled overseas. I have no problem with GM saving some money by out sourcing the assembly of their V6.
    The 3.4L has been in GM cars since the mid 1990's. My bother currently has over 100,000 miles on his. It is a reliable engine design, thats easy to assemble, and has a timing chain which lasts the life of the engine.
    The best part is I save $400+ every 60,000 miles, since I don't have replace a timingbelt/waterpump.
    I also think that GM did a nice job with mating nice smooth [non-permissible content removed] transmission with
    the 3.4L.
    So far, the Equinox is a keeper for us.
  • grosloupgrosloup Posts: 239
    Right on! Jim Dandy

    Bought my LT, FWD in May 2005 and so far so good. I love it. Purrrrs like a kitten.
  • bob171bob171 Posts: 2
    well then obviously you havent drove other vehicles. this was the worst vehicle i ever bought. i had significant problems after the first few days of owning it. check engine light came on periodically....took many visits to figure out that something clogged the vent hose off the gas tank. if that was even the problem. they replaced the computer..stilll had problems. the evap canister was cracked. the turning radius on these vehicles was worse then my full size truck...had to make many more 3 point turns. brakes were shot after 20,000 miles. the gas mileage sucked. i was lucky to get 18 miles to the gallon...mostly averaged around 15. the snow build up on the front windshield was terrible due to the inset windshield, and tough to clean off. and then finally the loud backfiring noise that they couldnt figure out. after many attempts...gm put out a tech bulletin saying that this was normal operation of the evap sensor selenoid..and they refused to do anything about it..and believe me i contacted everyone from the dealership, to a high executive officer at gm , and they still wouldnt help me. all they did was pass the buck...its not the dealers fault because it should be under gm waranty..yeah right...its not gms fault because the dealer is responsible because they actually purchased the vehicle from gm, so its their problem....blah blah blah..ive heard it all , but after 6 months and filing a complaint with the better business bureau under the lemon law( free by the way)..and after 3 offers by gm to avoid arbitration, gm finally agreed to buy my vehicle back from me. just so this wouldnt be made public information. the only thing i liked about it was all the room on the inside....but the 30000 dollar price tag wasnt. thats why i bought a toyota and i will never buy another gm product again!
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    I have to differ with you on the 3.4L engine. I've had two of them, and they have both failed me. The one in my 2000 Olds Alero has breeched the intake manifold gasket, and is leaking coolant out onto the ground. The one in my 2001 Chevy Venture just over heated because the cooling fan relay is faulty. Now coolant is in the oil and the engine is knocking. I fear the engine is toasted. Only 79,000 miles on the Venture, and 80,000 on the Alero, and no, I don't neglect them. Not impressed with the 3.4L ChiCom assembled engine, nor with GM in general, though I have plenty of their cars.
  • grosloupgrosloup Posts: 239
    For the bad gas mileage it always depends on how you drive, then some poeple are harder on brakes than others, the turning radius is reasonable and quite understanding for a 108 inches wheelbase vehicule (this you should have known before buying it) it's not G.M.'s fault, the snow build up is obvious I could see the problem even though I bought mine in may and about that loud? backfirering noise... they all do that and yes it is normal.
    I've owned G.M. products since my first vehicule ( 8 in all ) since 1975. My first car was a used car then the rest were all bought new. Can't say a word about bad quality, maybe I was lucky? Sure I had some problems with my cars but mechanic will always be mechanic, you'll never get a perfect car. And my next vehicule will still be probably a G.M. again.
    I'm not the type of guy who throw a dozen of eggs in the garbage because one of them was cracked.
  • faroutfarout Posts: 1,609
    Were you aware the of engines orgin? I n the sales guide it says not to say anything about it unless asked. There appears to be a slip it in if you have to, but don't bring it up unless you really have to. Thanks for your imput.

    farout
  • jim_dandyjim_dandy Posts: 94
    Wow! I'm just minding my own business,
    thinking life is great in my trouble free Equinox,
    cruzin down the hi speed digital highway, then BAM!

    Crap! a "Hit and Run Blogger"

    Oh what a feeling!

    Hey Jim, do ya think we can convert him?

    No it's too late, he's gone to the Dark Side. ;)
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Crap! a "Hit and Run Blogger"

    Hey, I still have the Venture, and a GMC Sierra right now as well, so I'm not exactly on the Dark Side. Just not thrilled with this 3.4L ChiCom lightweight motor.
  • "Obviously" I have driven alot of cars in my time and the Equinox is a great vehicle.
    All car manufactures have seen there share of problems, even Toyota.

    Google "Toyota Sludge" and you will see what I mean.

    The Equinox is a smooth running SUV.
    No complaints here. :)
  • gmanydaygmanyday Posts: 4
    Hi there.
    I dont mean to step on your toes, but suggesting to someone to buy a hyundai????.I agree that at first glance they may seem like an attractive option, however in the end they are not a wise choice.Maintenance is expensive,parts are ridiculously expensive,mysterious check engine light that is almost always on for some reason or other......etc.etc..etc. I'm a certified automotive technician and have been so for nearly 13 years and i can tell you that we see our fair share of hyundais and about 7 out of 10 owners say they wouldn't consider buying another one.Yes they have excellent warranties(they have no choice, its probably their strongest selling point) however most people want to buy a good vehicle, not a good warranty.Personally i want to get in my car in the morning and get to work on time and not have to console myself by saying "at least the warranty is good".The equinox is an excellent vehicle that will get you Where you want to go, When you want to go, with absolutely no fuss and in great comfort and style.Plus if you have kids, especially teens the rear seat is by far the most spacious in its class and even more spacious than many full size s.u.v's
  • philwphilw Posts: 5
    So, 13 years as an auto mechanic ...Well how about 22 years as a Hyundai owner and not one of them has cost me a dime. I even owned a pony. My personal history and that of all of my friends who own Hyundai brand vehicles speaks for itself. I find that problems may occur with Hyundais when untrained technicians with per-conceived negative ideas about Hyundais, attempt to fix cars that they don't know. That would be like a VW tech trying to fix a Chevy. When I service my Chevy, I go to a GM dealer. My Hyundai dealer would always look after my Hyundai issues; but that's never happened because my Hyundais have never needed Hyundai service. I drive my Equinox every day for work. It starts it runs and it stays on the road. It's noisier than a Santa Fe, it's smaller than a Santa Fe, it's less peppy than a Santa Fe, and it's every bit as reliable as a Santa Fe. Oh and did I mention that the Santa Fe is less expensive to own than the Equinox? The fit and finish is better on the Santa Fe. Hey the Santa Fe has heated exterior mirrors. (something you would think would be standard on a vehicle destined for the North American market) .
    My point is The Santa Fe is a much better bang for the buck. And you don't have to drive North American brands to get comfort, reliability and good value; that's just false.
    Our family (brothers, sisters in-laws etc..) owns 25+ vehicles. I have to say that the GM's see the shop more frequently than the Hyundais. The Fords are the worse. The Chryslers don't do well beyond 3 years (60Kms). I just have no hesitation to recommend Hyundais. They are all excellent value for the dollar.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    mysterious check engine light that is almost always on for some reason or other....

    I don't want to start a war here - but this is interesting to me - I have indeed experienced a fair amount of Check Engine lights on Hyundais, and especially Kias.....however, the brand that has almost universal mystery lights on in my experience is good ol' General Motors. In fact, the "Service Engine Soon" light is currently lit in my 2002 GMC Sierra pickup as we write this! It's 2 knock sensors that are both faulting, and require dismantling of the intake manifold and everything on top of it to get to them.

    Hyundai isn't perfect, but IMO, it's better than, or no worse than, GM as far as mystery lights are concerned, and I've sold a ton of both cars.
  • elfjonelfjon Posts: 1
    some may say there is a price for performance, but the Equinox carries neither. the engine is slow and every ineffiecient. 3.4L in a V6 should be making well over 200 hp. in the Equinox, they make only 185 hp. that's less than the 3.0L V6 in the Escape, and the same as the V6 in the Sportage, which uses significantly less fuel. GM as a much better V6 in so many of their other cars...the 3.6L. fortunatley, it is available in the Equinox, but only the top trim level. At least it will offer better fuel economy and a better tranismission.

    handling needs to be improved also. the steering is light and unresponsive. at least it is smooth. they either need to kill the nasty electric steering and get the hydraulic steering back, or retune it so that it is up to par with the Malibu's. Body roll is pretty significant and the turning circle is huge. a long wheelbase is great, but then the steering needs to be that much more responsive.

    the ride is ok, but it can get bouncy on the highway.

    the exterior may look ok (compared to its twin the Torrent, the Equinox is dated), but the interior quality is deplorable. GM really needs to nicen up the inside. Make the easts more comfortable, get rid of the plastic, move the sifter to the floor with a console, and more the window switches to the door where the belong. at least the rear seats are roomy and slide. the cargo area is pretty big too.
  • jim_dandyjim_dandy Posts: 94
    I do like the Ford Escape, engine and fuel economy is about the same, but I like the looks of the Equinox better. Both have towing capability of 3500lbs. Ford makes nice trucks.

    Now the Kia Sportage is a whole different animal compared to the Equinox or Escape.
    Or should I say, a squirrel compared to a jack rabbit.

    The Sportage can't even tow 3500lbs.!
    The Sportage mpg is 17/23mpg. Equinox is 17/24mpg.
    The Sportage engine 173hp/178ft-lb torque. Equinox is 185hp/210ft-lb torque.
    The Sportage has black bumpers. Equinox is colored keyed.
    The Sportage looks Blahhhh! :P The Equinox looks Sporty. :shades:

    I also went to the Sportage "Maintenance and Repair" blog site.
    Check out message #299.
    lmp4, "Kia Sportage Maintenance and Repair" #299, 18 Mar 2008 3:05 am
    There is a great discussion with pics on a 2001 Kia Sportage "Exploding Transfer Case".
    So much for a reliable Kia drivetrain.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    I agree completely with your assessment of the Kia. They aren't really close to either the Escape or the Equinoxious.

    I have purchased both for customers - Personally, I prefer the Escape of the 3. It's a Japanese design (Mazda), built in Michigan, the Equinox is a GM design, built in Mexico. The Kia is Korean, not that there's anything wrong with that - but it's built in Korea and VietNam. If you get the VietNam edition, they tend to have problems. I rented a Sportage and put 800 miles on it in Costa Rica in a week. It performed flawlessly, but was less fun and less comfy than either the Escape or the Equinox.

    Beyond all that though, the Equinox is very nice driving and designed very well in the interior. The Escape is a tad more solid to me, and would be my first choice, either in the Escape, Mazda Tribute or Mercury Mariner version. 3 flavors, if you will, of the same candy. YMMV, but that's how I feel, having experience with all 3.
  • commuter10commuter10 Posts: 26
    I love my Equinox too. A small point. The Equinox is made in Canada at a joint GM-Suzuki plan with an engine made at a joint GM Shanghai motors plant with a Japanese Aisan transmission.

    I have 22,000 miles on my 2006 and it has performed well so far.
  • gmanydaygmanyday Posts: 4
    hey there! Just to let you know the equinox is indeed a G.M design,however it is built in Ontario Canada not in Mexico.
  • camiguycamiguy Posts: 3
    The Chevy Equinox , Pontiac Torrent and Suzuki xl-7 are made in Ingersol Ontario Canada. These suv are based on the Saturn Vue plateform. GM uses the old 3.4 litre engines but now has the new 3.6 in the sport and GXP. The Suzuki uses only the 3.6 litre engine. The Equinox was designed in GM 's Oshawa Ontario design center. Also 100 special fuel effecient Equinox were made in Oshawa to be used in selected cities in the U.S. for test markets and research.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Yes, I stand corrected, thanks to everyone. One more editorial on the engine - the 3.4L motor I have had several of, and each one has disappointed me by failing catastrophically once the car hit the 70,000 mile range, by either breaching an intake manifold gasket and leaking coolant outside the motor, or worse, INSIDE the motor - the one I currently have dumps it into the crankcase. This is not a good long-term motor, so if you're considering an Equinox, get the 3.6L motor. Just my advice. :cry:
  • commuter10commuter10 Posts: 26
    I read that the gasket problem you speak of was fixed a few years back, and was on an older domestic version of the 3.4l. What year engines were your 3.4s?

    Thanks!
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    You may be right - mine were a 2000 and a 2001. IMO though, it's still a crappy engine. Although, it seems better than it used to be in the new Equinoxes I've driven.
  • jim_dandyjim_dandy Posts: 94
    That is a none issue with the Equinox's 3.4L.

    It has the redesigned gasket, manifold, and bolts.

    In this case it's better to stick to a motor that has the problems worked out and fixed,
    then to try and take a chance new unproven motor. Just my advice.

    By the way my local GM sevice dealer gets Equinox's in his shop with 100,000miles for routine maintenace only.
  • grosloupgrosloup Posts: 239
    I once had a 1999 chevrolet Venture and it had a 3.4 L. also and at 37,000 miles I had to replace the head gasket. Now I own a 2005 Equinox with the 3.4 L. engine and no problem with the gaskets and I'm at 22,500 miles.
    The only thing I can't figure out is that it's a bit harder on gas consumption than my Venture was. Go figure!
  • jim_dandyjim_dandy Posts: 94
    grosloup, I don't know why you Venture would be better than the Equinox, other than the different transmission and shift points the Equinox has.

    I did discover my odometer reading is not accurate with city driving. Maybe you or someone else can confirm this. I do remember reading a thread on this odometer error problem awhile back.

    In city driving, I found the Odometer .5 miles off for 5 miles driven and 1 mile off for 10 miles driven. My Odometer reading was 4.5 for 5 miles and 9.0 for 10 miles!
    I confirmed this with two other cars I owned, by taking the exact same 5 mile multiple stop-and-go route.
    The positive thing about this is the mileage warranty is longer, the negative is poorer gas mileage calculations, so 300 miles on a tank of gas is really 330miles on a tank of gas.
    At 330 miles instead of 300, this would add about 1.5 to 2.0 city mpg increase of actual gas mileage.

    On the highway, I used the mile markers to verify my odometer and found it reading 9.8 miles for 10 miles of driving. Not as bad but still .2 miles short.

    Just wondering if this is an odometer error issue with just mine or all 2005 Equinox's?
  • camiguycamiguy Posts: 3
    When the Equinox, Torrents and Suzuki come of the line they are taken to a station we call roll test. The suv goes on rollers and is driven with test equipment and computers. Things are tested such as brakes , shifting, acceleration and speedometer calibration. U.S laws give a small amount that speedometer can be out. This is what I understand. I will have to check and get back to you.
  • grosloupgrosloup Posts: 239
    Hey! I thought I was crazy but yes my odometer is wacko. I often go to the same places that I usually went with my Venture (and other vehicles) and the mileage is shorter but always using the same road. I said to myself "better not talk about this, they'll say I'm crazy". Go figure! and it's worst in city driving.
    Does this mean will have fun longer with our Nox and have a better "trade in" value? It's cheating itself on its mileage. That explains everything.

    Another little thing that I'm trying to figure out is my gas tank gage and capacitie. Sometimes my indicator light comes on, next morning I start the truck it's off, then on again and I drive with the indicator light on for 15 milles without problems (city driving) and never ran out of gas. The gas tank is suppose to be a 16.4 gal. Always afraid to run out of gas, I decide to fill it up (to the rim) and most off the time not more than 13 gal. goes in.
  • sgr5516sgr5516 Posts: 156
    I have the exact same problem with my 2005 Equinox. There is a TSB out to reprogram the PCM to correct the odometer reading. However I opted not to fix it. Why accelerate the end of the mileage warranty or extended warranty if you have one. It takes a little more time to adjust the calculations to get true MPG. But I was happy to find out the MPG is actually higher than I originally calculated before I knew of this issue.
  • grosloupgrosloup Posts: 239
    This post is not about the Equinox. But since it's an automotive forum I've got a little question. I'm thinking of joining the A.A.A. (triple A).
    Is it good or I'll just be trowing my money out the window? I own a FWD 2005 Equinox LT
  • tidestertidester Posts: 10,109
    Only you can decide whether joining is worth it. You should visit the AAA website and review the (many) benefits of membership. If you travel a lot you may find the benefits enticing.

    tidester, host
    SUVs and Smart Shopper
Sign In or Register to comment.