By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
I thought Saturn took GM card points for a two month period last year. Just about every Saturn plant has had a few week shutdown to reduce inventory. Tenn. Vue plant was shut down two weeks this past March.
GM probably wants you to buy those plastic wood, cheesey looking stick-on dash trim pieces from the dealer for a few hundred!
http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/side/s0301.htm
$3500.00 rebate and a $1000.00 cash allowance off the MSRP. The Chevrolet Nox dealer offered me $7500.00 period.They wouldn't bend on that trade-in price.(they said they use the Galves book) The Nox also has a $1000.00 rebate known as the Truckfest allowance. Both vehicles were similarly equipped with the packages or accessories I wanted. The bottom line was the Nox dealer wanted 15,700.00 plus tax and tags. The Vue dealer( which I accepted after another $200.00 more for the Tracker $9700.00) was 11,000 and my car. That was the out the door price including tax, tags, and doc fees. I sign the papers tomorrow and the car is being tire swapped at this moment for the 17"wheel pack]. I have $1500.00 on my GM points card(which I will save)...but...with 3500.00 rebate and another 1000.00 cash allowance, $4500.00 total was too much to turn down, plus $2000.00 more for my trade-in).
ENJOY!
FYI www.cami.ca is updated and back on-line.
Strippo might make sense for fleet sales but options raise the price and add to the dealers profit also. GM was stupid not having SAC ready on day one since GM cars have been getting poor side impact ratings.
Ahokie, Cargo area is not that big but the shelf helps a lot in my opinion. If you want room, you will need to go full size, the small SUVs are all lacking in this area.
http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_smsuv_current- - .htm
It would be worthwhile to wait for the tests and the bags.
Gee35, The Malibu got acceptable with SABs also.
FYI Saturn is asking for 5-7K more Honda V6's since sales are up on the VUE, especially RedLine model. Give me a proven US made engine from Honda any day over an engine made for the 3rd world.
Malibu being recalled for a safety belt anchor bolt issue.
jcmainman ::: You won't run out of power with the Nox. It has plenty judging from my test drive. The 3.5L in the Vue is better but I'd be more than pleased with the older tech. I used to get hung up on that, but I liked the Nox.
joey::: I agree with some of the earlier comments, buy a Vue, skip the points and be happy. We love ours.
Hey Vuefor2, as a Saturn faithful, if you'd like to donate $3500 to me to cover my GM points, I'd gladly join the Saturn Family.
3.4L has had some issues in the past but I understand they have been addressed. No worse than the Toyota sludge problems in numbers from what I can see. In terms of power, I rented a Venture Van in Vancouver a few years ago and we drove 4 people with luggage through the mountains with no problem.
I'm sure the 3.4 can be traced back to the V8 the pared it from. Just like the 4.3 they recently stopped using. For all GM's might, they sure are in the 70's when it comes to engine design.
It's all about efficiency and light weight these days. An iron block OHV V6 has got to be the antithesis of efficiency.
Real Wheels (Warren Brown) (Washington Post - registration link, but if you search Google News for Real Wheels, a free link will pop up).
Steve, Host
Toyota also puts out 225 hp.
I'm sure they more than match the 3.4L if they detuned them. But then they wouldn't compete in the segment. Kinda like the Malibu. Additionally the the 3.4 in the Malibu has TWO different EPA ratings.
http://www.chevrolet.com/malibu/specs.htm
Check the specs on the LT. Ooops.
And if you can't discern the difference between a Iron block/head OHV 2.5L like the old GM Tech4 vs the newer OHC designs from Nissan and Toyota, you deserve what you get.
Why not compare the 3.5 in the VUE vs the 3.4 in the NOX. That'll show you the real difference in efficiency. Or maybe the 200hp OHC engine in the Escape.
The Malibu engine is not competitve when you consider the competition has 5 speed autos vs. the Malibu's 4 speed.
Nice of you not to mention the Vue vs. Nox comparison. Just glossed right over it. Especially when that's about as apples to apples as you can get. 3.4 OHV vs 3.5 OHC. Not even the most developed OHC engine either in that it's a SOHC design. An I-vtec DOHC engine would slaughter even those numbers.
In accelleration the 3.0 in the Accord would wipe the floor with the Malibu. Not even close.
The 2005 Escape gets the same mileage as the NOX. Has 4 wheel disc brakes, a much nicer interior, and 15 more hp. It also weighs 200 lb. less than the NOX and has side curtains available now. Must be the difference between aluminum alloy 3.0 vs Iron.
3 motors, all in the wrong cars. Fact: the China 3.4L is unproven, and overpriced. Just a political bribe to the Chinese government that GM wants us to pay for. I say boycott the NOX!
You can boycott the Nox, but I imagine it will sell very well for GM - I would guess 100k plus per year. It may be a little overprice but incentives will kick in and level out the field.
I am not trying to be argumentative so please don't think I am.
I'd like the see the sales numbers after a few more months. I think the Nox will outsell the Malibu and should have had the bigger 3.5L.
The 3.4L is an oldie also, but it's been heavily revised for the Equinox application and I'm satisfied with that. It would appear the Equinox 3.4L is not quite as efficient as the 3.5L in the Malibu however.
Bottom line : As was said earlier, the real question is how it drives and performs, not how it's made and what it's made of. People obsessed with OHCs should simply shop elsewhere and the other 95% of the population who don't care can be happy.
That being said...I still want an Equinox. But it'll have to be CHEAP. Saw em advertised for $18500 this week though. Deals ought to be SWEET this winter. Even the Colorado has grreat cash back deals. And it has an OHC engine.
As on who has done a lot of reading on the topic and speaks from experience, the reason I left domestics back in the 80s was because of quality and design. I guarantee if you went to a mall and asked people coming in what was under the hood, 95%+ could not tell you if it was an OHC or not. Coming back to a good old 3800 has been wonderfull vs the 4 cyl Accord I was going to buy with the same money!!!
This subject is way off topic however, if you believe that is why people buy 'imports', that's fine. It's just not reality.
As was said earlier, Oldmobile was selling millions of cars until the Japanese made them look obsolete starting in the late 70's early 80's. The best small cars to grace domestic lots have all been imports. Chrysler imported the Mitsubishi Mirage, GM tapped Toyota, Suzuki, and now defunct Daewoo products. Fords Fiesta and Festiva were Mazda and Kia products. The domestic alternatives were the Omni, Cavalier, and Escort. Give me a break.
As I said, engine technology is a result of an overall strive to make a better vehicle which has resulted in the imports taking a larger and larger share of our marketplace.
This means that newly registered cars in China will be cleaner than ones in the US and Canada.
China.org.cn
Interesting threads the last few days and y'all keep sucking me in too. But let's try to get the posts focused on the Equinox again. Thanks,
Steve, Host
That is what you implied in your previous post. The only real engine issue that would drive people away from a OHV is reliability and they have proven very reliable and cheap to maintain over the years.
The past it the past. The Equinox is a throrughly modern design aside from the engine and even that is heavily revised. 3 of our last 7 vehicles have been GM and both have been as good if not better than the Hondas, Fords and Nissans we have had. Like I said, I used to avoid "domestics" but I see the quality is back and value is better than almost anything else.
As for the Nox, reliability may be great and I did like the way it drove (plenty of power for me), but what turned me off was the interior.
For the lease cost of a loaded Nox, for a few bucks more I am getting a loaded Volvo XC90 that looks gorgeous inside.
As far as what I meant by the "people buy import because of the engine" statement, we were talking about engines. We all know people buy imports for other reasons. Empirical data shows they make better cars. Especially long term. We can anecdote all day long but when you look at surveys done by people whose job it is to compile such data, the premium Japanese brands come out on top.
Anyway I'm curious if anyone could identify what tires GM has on the pics you see here at Edmunds. I'm thinking 17s if not even 20s but I doubt it. I'm thinking of just getting one with 16 inch wheels and maybe putting 18inch ones after. Any thoughts? I'm having a hard time finding a Nox with the LT SD package, no leather or leather seats and 17inch with the trailer package. Personally a car is 90% looks for me and if I didn't care about looks I'd certainly be driving a Vue already...but I think it looks nasty, just like a RendezVous,the Aztek or Endeavor for that matter.
Here's the link I'm referring to, in other photos there is a zoom on the tire but not enough to distinguish it.
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2005/chevrolet/equinox/100370220/photo- gallery.html?pg_type=SUV&imgsrc=&tid=edmunds.n.researchla- nding.keyvdps..1.Chevrolet*
I don't think the displacement tax is the issue. Why would you want an oversized, overweight HEMI engine that only gets 15MPG when your gas is $5-6/gal, when you get the same HP with turbo, multi-valve, variable timming, light aluminum engines?
I guess you have not experienced the joy of the huge flat spot in the upper power band on a pushrod GM V6 when you try to accelerate to pass someone. Please test one and let us know what you think.
At least Ford has a nice 3.0L OHC V6 that has 200 HP and 200lb of torque that they will put in the common man's car. Their 3.5L V6 will have 250HP/torque just like the Honda's, Nissans, etc.
Americans are wastful spoiled cowboys. We live in the past with our Hemi V8's AGAIN from the 1960's, as gas is going to $3/gal. The consumer needs to push the car makers to give us better safety, economy, value, efficency, etc.