Did I read write? Front-wheel drive? What a severe disappointment... I was all pumped to buy one until I read this. That definitely puts me out of the Enclave market.
I noticed that the build your own for the Acadia on the GMC website is now working.
I build my preferred configuration and it came to $39,549. That was for a SLT - 2 4SB with HUD and HIDs in red. This may be a bit out of my price range, even with GM Supplier Discount.
Do any of the 2nd row seats (Acadia, Outlook) slide fore and aft and lock into that position? I want to move the second row seat forward and lock it there to put an infant carrier (leg room obviously not required). This will allow me to keep one 2nd row seat forward all the time and have enough room behind that seat for entry/ exist to the third row.
I will have two car seats installed in the third row, one infant carrier in the second row and the ability to be able to access the third row to be able to buckle the kids into the third row; while retaining the usability of the second row seat for other potential passengers.
Sorry for the repeat, but really want to know: At 6' with arthritis, can I stand beside an acadia, turn and sit without squatting, or stretching up? Pilot is perfect seat height, Windstar is OK. No opportunities in my area to see (sit) one of these cars in the foreseeable future, Tango uniform
Has anyone tried both V6 engines in the Outlook, just wondered what differences (if any) there were between the 270hp and 275hp 3.6L V6? I am assuming negliable performance differences so am wondering if refinement is better in the larger hp engine?
Hondaford...in response to your request for seat height info. I am 6'2" and I had no problems getting into and out of the Outlook. Sitting position is a combination of truck/car. I mean, it's not as erect as a pick up truck, but it's not as reclined as a sedan...it's right in between. In my opinion, very comfortable with a very good view of the road.
I was told by the Saturn salesman that even the AWD is pretty much FWD until the front wheels encounter slippage. Don't know if this is completely accurate or not.
The 2nd row seat behind the passenger side is the one used to access the 3rd row seat. The one behind the driver's side does slide forward and can lock in that position as well. With the way the passenger side 2nd row folds & slides forward, keeping an infant seat there would prove to be a hassle as you would have to remove the infant carrier every time you wanted to access the 3rd row.
With 2 car seats in the 3rd row, you should still be able to seat a child back there and with the infant carrier, you should be able to seat 2 adults in the 2nd row with the infant carrier. I wouldn't take a long trip like this as it would get uncomfortable, but a short trip like this would be livable.
This is what I observed in my two looks at the Outlook. My wife and I are getting ready to have a baby, so we'll be using an infant carrier and we have two other kids as well. In all honesty, I believe we are leaning towards the captain's chairs for the 2nd row for us.
Hondaford...I responded to your other post, but with what you're stating here...you will have to climb up into the Outlook a bit, it's not at a height conducive to just turning and sitting down.
As mentioned by loach...there is only one engine. They add dual exhaust to the XR with the thinking you're gonna add the towing package, so the extra 5 hp increase comes from the dual exhaust.
Don't know about any refinement, but with the dual exhaust, you might get a little more growl when you step on the gas pedal than you would with the single exhaust.
I test drove one today... and ordered one too! There is a lot of legroom and the cabin is very quiet. There is a lot of cargo capacity, so yes, there would be plenty of space for luggage for a roadtrip. Let me know if you have any moe questions!
The 2nd row seat behind the passenger side is the one used to access the 3rd row seat. The one behind the driver's side does slide forward and can lock in that position as well. With the way the passenger side 2nd row folds & slides forward,
bit confused. What is the difference between the passenger and driver side 2nd row? I thought they worked the same.
Actually the dual exhaust is only from the cat back. So it really isn't dual exhaust per say. Just two mufflers and two tail pipes. I was surprised at the additional 5 hp
No...the 2nd row seat on the driver's side does not fold forward to allow access to the 3rd row. At least when I tried...it didn't work. When I asked the salesman, he said the one on the passenger side was the only one that slid forward.
If the 2nd row is the bench seat, it has a 60/40 split with the 40 being on the passenger side. That is the one that folds forward to allow access.
However, I have yet to see one with the captain's chairs as the 2nd row. Maybe that will allow better 3rd row access from both sides of the vehicle.
Oh yeah, the 2nd row bench seats recline a bit as well (another nice feature).
Actually the dual exhaust is only from the cat back. So it really isn't dual exhaust per say. Just two mufflers and two tail pipes. I was surprised at the additional 5 hp
dual exhaust in non performance vehicles has been that way for many years. The backpressure decrease in having two large volume mufflers makes a lot of difference.
Has anyone test driven an awd model yet? i was at a gmc dealership and they had an awd that belonged to a gm rep. a dealership employee drove it and said it was sluggish compared to the fwd model. can anyone confirm this? they wouldn't let me drive it.
i noticed that the 2 sunroofs in the acada are covered by black "thin" fabric instead of a traditional roof transition piece. i am concerned about the heat and uv's in the summer. has anyone researched the performance of the black fabric covering?
OK, and would you recommend captain's chairs or the standard bench? I know the benchin my wife's Sequioa (spelling?) is not great, and the kids wind up climbing over it anyway. Also, what features should I be interestedin and avoid? In my price range I'm hoping to get a SLT1 at about $34,000.
The sunroofs likely have a UV coating already incorporated or are inherently UV resistant, however they will probably not filter 100% of UV radiation. However, keep in mind that UV radiation also enters through the windshield, side windows, etc. etc. so no matter what the UV will get to you, although to a much lesser extent than if you had all the windows open.
It has been demonstrated that a simple cotton t-shirt acts like a SPF 4 or 8; so that piece of fabric should at least provide that much, maybe even more since it has a black dye/pigment.
I didn't get to drive one, but the salesman said it shouldn't perform any differently as the rear wheels don't actually do anything until the front wheels slip. Don't know if this is true or anything, but if what you're saying is true...it would be the first time I've ever heard of performance an AWD model being worse than the FWD version.
However, I'm still looking for where it states both sides have the smart-slide feature on the bench seat...it sure isn't in the Outlook brochure I have!
I do not know what to tell you!! If it was one side only it would say. All I know is that I was in a dealership and I opened the driver side seat system.
the person who drove the awd at the dealership was a manager. salesman will say anything. i trust this source. anyone looking at an awd will want to verify if performance is a concern.
No...the 2nd row seat on the driver's side does not fold forward to allow access to the 3rd row. At least when I tried...it didn't work. When I asked the salesman, he said the one on the passenger side was the only one that slid forward.
When I tried an XE model, I accessed the third row via the driver's side second row sliding forward so I can certainly confirm that it works. This was the bench seat - not the captain chairs, and the driver's side gets the 60 or the 60:40 split.
On this particular model however, the action was jerky as the slide mechanism was sticking. Perhaps yours was stuck?
How many driven wheels does a vehicle really need? The proliferation of SUVs on America's highways and byways over the last ten years would suggest that two simply isn't enough. But what exactly are the advantages of four-wheel drive (or all-wheel drive) versus front-wheel drive and rear-wheel drive?
First of all, before we're "driven" to confusion by all of this terminology, let's lay a few ground rules. In most automotive circles (and for the purposes of this discussion) the following acronyms will hold true:
AWD = all-wheel drive 4WD = four-wheel drive RWD = rear-wheel drive FWD = front-wheel drive Each of these drive systems has its own advantages and disadvantages which I'll cover in greater detail.
Since the majority of vehicles sold today are front-wheel drive, we'll start here. As the name suggests, FWD vehicles use only the front wheels to deliver power from the engine to the pavement. While relatively rare on the streets of America during the first half of the 20th century, FWD cars now account for approximately 70 percent of new car offerings. Why the recent switch from RWD to FWD in new cars? Well, since most vehicles carry their engines up front, it is a simpler task to get that engine power to the driven wheels when they are both on the same end of the car. Essentially, you turn the engine sideways and connect a short driveshaft between either side of the engine and the two front wheels. Less distance and fewer parts between the engine and the driven wheels means less horsepower loss through mechanical inefficiency. Additionally, fewer parts means reduced production costs and, ultimately, a lower sticker price. One final advantage of FWD is that it puts the engine weight directly over the driven wheels which can improve traction on slippery or snow-packed roads.
Despite its practical advantages, FWD has several disadvantages when related to vehicle performance. First of all, since vehicle weight shifts to the rear of a car during hard acceleration, FWD cars will always be fighting a losing battle when it comes to straight-line acceleration. Handling performance also suffers on FWD platforms since the option of using "throttle-induced oversteer" or sliding the rear end doesn't exist (unless you get really creative with the emergency brake).
In the end FWD is a very practical way to power a vehicle but its inherent design is contradictory to performance. Look at it this way: Your car came with four wheels, why put the stress of steering, braking, and acceleration on only two of them?
Take everything I just said about FWD cars and reverse it for RWD cars. Performance goes up because now the two rear wheels handle the duties of acceleration, leaving the front wheels to focus solely on directing the vehicle (plus the majority of braking). This means that when you punch it, vehicle weight transfers to the rear end, just where you want it during acceleration. You can also "steer" a RWD car with the gas pedal by applying power and sliding the rear end while in a corner. If you don't think this is an advantage, try driving a Mazda Miata and a Chevy Cavalier convertible through the same set of backroad twisties. Even though they're both top-down, four-cylinder compact cars, the experience will be very different with a clear victory in "fun factor" going to the Miata.
This doesn't necessarily make rear-wheel drive the "better" configuration since it has disadvantages too. As mentioned earlier, RWD cars require a driveshaft (and dreaded interior "hump") and a differential to get power from the engine to the rear wheels. These components add extra cost and weight to a vehicle while robbing horsepower and making RWD cars generally less efficient than FWD vehicles. This layout is also more challenging to drive in inclement weather where, without the aid of traction control, a RWD car can more easily end up on somebody's front lawn or stuck in a ditch.
I personally have an affinity for RWD because its biggest disadvantage is also its biggest advantage; it's less practical and, consequently, more fun.
Both of the previous drivetrain layouts are based on using only half of a vehicle's wheels to deliver power to the ground. But those other wheels are just sitting there, why not use them too? Actually, the concept of using all-wheel drive is not new. A Dutch manufacturer named Spyker had one of the first full-time 4WD vehicles on display at the Paris Motor Show in 1903.
While we're here let's go over what the supposed differences are between four-wheel drive and all-wheel drive. 4WD was basically the original term used to describe all four wheels being driven on early Jeeps and trucks. These systems were not very advanced in that they simply put power to all four wheels, usually after an interior shift lever was moved and/or the vehicle's hubs were manually "locked" by the operator. During this period 4WD was thought of as a purely off-road utility. Today 4WD still refers to vehicles that can opt for two- or four-wheel drive. These vehicles often have a 4WD "low" and "high" setting that can be switched using an interior lever. The "low" setting provides even greater torque for pulling or climbing in an off-road environment. The "high" is useful for slippery on-road situations like packed snow or ice. 4WD also uses a locking center differential to avoid unnecessary slippage between the right and left wheels while off-road.
AWD generally operates all the time with no "low" or "high" gearing options. While 4WD is basically an SUV term, associated with off-road use, AWD is a car/wagon/minivan term that means traction improvement for performance or bad weather reasons. Some vehicles, like the Mercury Mountaineer or the Lexus RX 300, are tougher to classify because they are SUVs in appearance but use AWD instead of 4WD. Many of these types of vehicles are being called "crossovers."
The "all" part of all-wheel drive is a bit misleading since the majority of AWD vehicles use the front wheels primarily and only direct power to the rear wheels when a sensor detects front-wheel slip. Other cars, like the Porsche 911 Turbo, use AWD for performance purposes like getting from zero-to-sixty in 3.7 seconds. Even with sufficient horsepower, a Porsche with only two-wheel drive would be traction-limited to high 4- or low 5-second zero-to-sixty times. AWD also helps keep Subaru wagons and Chrysler minivans from sliding on wet or snowy roads by redirecting power from "the wheels that slip to the wheels that grip."
So, it seems like 4WD/AWD is the best way to go, right? Well, not exactly. Both of these systems add substantial weight, complexity and cost to a vehicle. They also reduce gas mileage because of increased drag on the drivetrain. When you consider that traction control is becoming more
The bench on the drivers side slides and tilts for access to the third row. It also slides forward and back when in the seat position for legroom depending on how you need it for 2nd and 3rd rows. Exactly how much slide there is, I am not sure. I think it is up to 4 inches.
thanks for sharing the edmunds info. very helpful. it may explain the other comment the dealership person made in regards to the engine maybe not being powerful enough for the awd system to perform as well as the fwd.
The "all" part of all-wheel drive is a bit misleading since the majority of AWD vehicles use the front wheels primarily and only direct power to the rear wheels when a sensor detects front-wheel slip.
That is a key point for me. My Outback has a certain percentage torque split ( I don't recall the exact numbers) between front and rear when no slippage is detected. When slippage is sensed, the torque is redistributed as required. This leads to a situation where I sense very little slippage at all, even on very snowy surfaces.
I have heard others complain about Honda/Acura AWD systems that actually wait for front wheel slippage before engaging the rear wheels at all. This seems to appear less seamless than the Subaru design and the design seems "slow" to respond.
I will definitely drive these vehicles in the snow before I buy one.
Does anyone have any technical info the the system used in the Acadia, etc?
it may explain the other comment the dealership person made in regards to the engine maybe not being powerful enough for the awd system to perform as well as the fwd.
WOW, just goes to show you about dealerships. The "power" needed to get the vehicle going is the same whether it is FWD or RWD or AWD. With AWD it just puts some of the "too much" power to the rear. In other words instead of "wasting" power to spin the front tires some of it is used to turn the rear tires. AWD does not take or need more power. However, AWD can "take" more power. ie a bigger engine can be used and the power can be distributed to the rear to get better/faster rake off.
I would have to agree. The 200 lbs. difference between FWD and AWD should make a noticable difference in take off. Heck, even the gas milage numbers don't suffer much, 1 mpg...I'll take that!
The 275 ponies is ample enough power to move this vehicle. When I test drove it (even though it was an XE), stepping on the gas pedal proved worthwhile as the Outlook took off confidently and didn't seem to bog down or feel like it was being held back.
also had a chance to test the audio system in the acadia and outlook. both sound good. the outlook is not bose which is not necessarily a bad thing. it still sounds good. the speakers may be pioneer. still checking. but, the interesting thing is that if you get the dvd entertainment system in the acadia, it will plays 5.1 surround sound audio in dolby or dts. so, for all you acura mdx els lovers, this one's for you. i played a dire straits dvd audio disc in the dvd slot and it sounded awesome. but, you have to get the dvd entertainment system to get it. very mdx like. now, if gm can provide xm traffic, bluetooth, and an ipod interface, they would really have something.
i saw an audio input for any audio player including an ipod or other mp3 player. you need an audio cable to connect into the jack. an ipod interface (like one sold by honda and aftermarket suppliers) allows you to connect the ipod to a cable that charges your ipod and allows you to control the ipod through the car head unit..(means you do not have to touch the ipod. this allows you to hide the ipod usually in the glove box. much more benefits than an "audio in" jack. xm traffic is different than xm. it's an enhancement to regular xm (along with charges) that provides xm traffic feeds to your navigation screen and identifies accidents and traffic speeds (color coded hwys..very cool) right on your navigation display.
hopefully, this helps.
please someone tell me gm will provide both for the acadia or outlook!!
GM has an accessory that does the ipod controlling. Give the dealer a call
Personal Audio Link (PAL) The Personal Audio Link (PAL), soon to be available on select models from Chevy Accessories, turns up the volume on vehicle personalization by bringing your Apple® iPod®(1) and your vehicle audio system together.(2) Hidden within the auxiliary glove box, this cool connection lets you utilize the factory radio controls to navigate your personal music library. As an added benefit, the iPod charges while it’s connected and the ignition is on.
iPod is a mobile digital device. iPod is a trademark of Apple Computer, Inc., registered in the US and other countries. All rights reserved.
Not compatible with iPod Shuffle; may not be compatible with some older iPod models. Personal Audio Link not available with base audio system on HHR LS.
Comments
Unless you wanted RWD...
I build my preferred configuration and it came to $39,549. That was for a SLT - 2 4SB with HUD and HIDs in red. This may be a bit out of my price range, even with GM Supplier Discount.
I will have two car seats installed in the third row, one infant carrier in the second row and the ability to be able to access the third row to be able to buckle the kids into the third row; while retaining the usability of the second row seat for other potential passengers.
Thanks.
Tango uniform
Engine, 3.6L Variable Valve Timing V6
1 - Single exhaust: 270 hp (201kW) @ 6600 rpm, 248 lb-ft of
torque (336 N-m) @ 3200 rpm.
2 - Dual exhaust: 275 hp (205kW) @ 6600 rpm, 251 lb-ft of
torque (340 N-m) @ 3200 rpm.
Hope this helps you some.
With 2 car seats in the 3rd row, you should still be able to seat a child back there and with the infant carrier, you should be able to seat 2 adults in the 2nd row with the infant carrier. I wouldn't take a long trip like this as it would get uncomfortable, but a short trip like this would be livable.
This is what I observed in my two looks at the Outlook. My wife and I are getting ready to have a baby, so we'll be using an infant carrier and we have two other kids as well. In all honesty, I believe we are leaning towards the captain's chairs for the 2nd row for us.
Don't know about any refinement, but with the dual exhaust, you might get a little more growl when you step on the gas pedal than you would with the single exhaust.
bit confused. What is the difference between the passenger and driver side 2nd row? I thought they worked the same.
If the 2nd row is the bench seat, it has a 60/40 split with the 40 being on the passenger side. That is the one that folds forward to allow access.
However, I have yet to see one with the captain's chairs as the 2nd row. Maybe that will allow better 3rd row access from both sides of the vehicle.
Oh yeah, the 2nd row bench seats recline a bit as well (another nice feature).
dual exhaust in non performance vehicles has been that way for many years. The backpressure decrease in having two large volume mufflers makes a lot of difference.
Seating, 7-passenger (2-2-3 seating configuration),
includes front row captain's chairs, (AQ4) second-row
captain's chairs with Smart Slide and third row flat-folding
60/40 bench seat
1 - Requires (PCQ) Premium
the captains chair and 60/40 use the same mech.
It has been demonstrated that a simple cotton t-shirt acts like a SPF 4 or 8; so that piece of fabric should at least provide that much, maybe even more since it has a black dye/pigment.
However, I'm still looking for where it states both sides have the smart-slide feature on the bench seat...it sure isn't in the Outlook brochure I have!
look under seating and cargo capacity. It would not let me copy it.
When I tried an XE model, I accessed the third row via the driver's side second row sliding forward so I can certainly confirm that it works. This was the bench seat - not the captain chairs, and the driver's side gets the 60 or the 60:40 split.
On this particular model however, the action was jerky as the slide mechanism was sticking. Perhaps yours was stuck?
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=43847
How many driven wheels does a vehicle really need? The proliferation of SUVs on America's highways and byways over the last ten years would suggest that two simply isn't enough. But what exactly are the advantages of four-wheel drive (or all-wheel drive) versus front-wheel drive and rear-wheel drive?
First of all, before we're "driven" to confusion by all of this terminology, let's lay a few ground rules. In most automotive circles (and for the purposes of this discussion) the following acronyms will hold true:
AWD = all-wheel drive
4WD = four-wheel drive
RWD = rear-wheel drive
FWD = front-wheel drive
Each of these drive systems has its own advantages and disadvantages which I'll cover in greater detail.
Since the majority of vehicles sold today are front-wheel drive, we'll start here. As the name suggests, FWD vehicles use only the front wheels to deliver power from the engine to the pavement. While relatively rare on the streets of America during the first half of the 20th century, FWD cars now account for approximately 70 percent of new car offerings. Why the recent switch from RWD to FWD in new cars? Well, since most vehicles carry their engines up front, it is a simpler task to get that engine power to the driven wheels when they are both on the same end of the car. Essentially, you turn the engine sideways and connect a short driveshaft between either side of the engine and the two front wheels. Less distance and fewer parts between the engine and the driven wheels means less horsepower loss through mechanical inefficiency. Additionally, fewer parts means reduced production costs and, ultimately, a lower sticker price. One final advantage of FWD is that it puts the engine weight directly over the driven wheels which can improve traction on slippery or snow-packed roads.
Despite its practical advantages, FWD has several disadvantages when related to vehicle performance. First of all, since vehicle weight shifts to the rear of a car during hard acceleration, FWD cars will always be fighting a losing battle when it comes to straight-line acceleration. Handling performance also suffers on FWD platforms since the option of using "throttle-induced oversteer" or sliding the rear end doesn't exist (unless you get really creative with the emergency brake).
In the end FWD is a very practical way to power a vehicle but its inherent design is contradictory to performance. Look at it this way: Your car came with four wheels, why put the stress of steering, braking, and acceleration on only two of them?
Take everything I just said about FWD cars and reverse it for RWD cars. Performance goes up because now the two rear wheels handle the duties of acceleration, leaving the front wheels to focus solely on directing the vehicle (plus the majority of braking). This means that when you punch it, vehicle weight transfers to the rear end, just where you want it during acceleration. You can also "steer" a RWD car with the gas pedal by applying power and sliding the rear end while in a corner. If you don't think this is an advantage, try driving a Mazda Miata and a Chevy Cavalier convertible through the same set of backroad twisties. Even though they're both top-down, four-cylinder compact cars, the experience will be very different with a clear victory in "fun factor" going to the Miata.
This doesn't necessarily make rear-wheel drive the "better" configuration since it has disadvantages too. As mentioned earlier, RWD cars require a driveshaft (and dreaded interior "hump") and a differential to get power from the engine to the rear wheels. These components add extra cost and weight to a vehicle while robbing horsepower and making RWD cars generally less efficient than FWD vehicles. This layout is also more challenging to drive in inclement weather where, without the aid of traction control, a RWD car can more easily end up on somebody's front lawn or stuck in a ditch.
I personally have an affinity for RWD because its biggest disadvantage is also its biggest advantage; it's less practical and, consequently, more fun.
Both of the previous drivetrain layouts are based on using only half of a vehicle's wheels to deliver power to the ground. But those other wheels are just sitting there, why not use them too? Actually, the concept of using all-wheel drive is not new. A Dutch manufacturer named Spyker had one of the first full-time 4WD vehicles on display at the Paris Motor Show in 1903.
While we're here let's go over what the supposed differences are between four-wheel drive and all-wheel drive. 4WD was basically the original term used to describe all four wheels being driven on early Jeeps and trucks. These systems were not very advanced in that they simply put power to all four wheels, usually after an interior shift lever was moved and/or the vehicle's hubs were manually "locked" by the operator. During this period 4WD was thought of as a purely off-road utility. Today 4WD still refers to vehicles that can opt for two- or four-wheel drive. These vehicles often have a 4WD "low" and "high" setting that can be switched using an interior lever. The "low" setting provides even greater torque for pulling or climbing in an off-road environment. The "high" is useful for slippery on-road situations like packed snow or ice. 4WD also uses a locking center differential to avoid unnecessary slippage between the right and left wheels while off-road.
AWD generally operates all the time with no "low" or "high" gearing options. While 4WD is basically an SUV term, associated with off-road use, AWD is a car/wagon/minivan term that means traction improvement for performance or bad weather reasons. Some vehicles, like the Mercury Mountaineer or the Lexus RX 300, are tougher to classify because they are SUVs in appearance but use AWD instead of 4WD. Many of these types of vehicles are being called "crossovers."
The "all" part of all-wheel drive is a bit misleading since the majority of AWD vehicles use the front wheels primarily and only direct power to the rear wheels when a sensor detects front-wheel slip. Other cars, like the Porsche 911 Turbo, use AWD for performance purposes like getting from zero-to-sixty in 3.7 seconds. Even with sufficient horsepower, a Porsche with only two-wheel drive would be traction-limited to high 4- or low 5-second zero-to-sixty times. AWD also helps keep Subaru wagons and Chrysler minivans from sliding on wet or snowy roads by redirecting power from "the wheels that slip to the wheels that grip."
So, it seems like 4WD/AWD is the best way to go, right? Well, not exactly. Both of these systems add substantial weight, complexity and cost to a vehicle. They also reduce gas mileage because of increased drag on the drivetrain. When you consider that traction control is becoming more
The bench on the drivers side slides and tilts for access to the third row. It also slides forward and back when in the seat position for legroom depending on how you need it for 2nd and 3rd rows. Exactly how much slide there is, I am not sure. I think it is up to 4 inches.
If you mean something else, I can not answer.
Either way, I think my wife and I like the 2nd row captain's chairs.
Thanks for the info.
That is a key point for me. My Outback has a certain percentage torque split ( I don't recall the exact numbers) between front and rear when no slippage is detected. When slippage is sensed, the torque is redistributed as required. This leads to a situation where I sense very little slippage at all, even on very snowy surfaces.
I have heard others complain about Honda/Acura AWD systems that actually wait for front wheel slippage before engaging the rear wheels at all. This seems to appear less seamless than the Subaru design and the design seems "slow" to respond.
I will definitely drive these vehicles in the snow before I buy one.
Does anyone have any technical info the the system used in the Acadia, etc?
Karl
WOW, just goes to show you about dealerships. The "power" needed to get the vehicle going is the same whether it is FWD or RWD or AWD. With AWD it just puts some of the "too much" power to the rear. In other words instead of "wasting" power to spin the front tires some of it is used to turn the rear tires. AWD does not take or need more power. However, AWD can "take" more power. ie a bigger engine can be used and the power can be distributed to the rear to get better/faster rake off.
The 275 ponies is ample enough power to move this vehicle. When I test drove it (even though it was an XE), stepping on the gas pedal proved worthwhile as the Outlook took off confidently and didn't seem to bog down or feel like it was being held back.
Confused about this statement. The Outlook does have the XM traffic and ipod interface. Are you saying you did not see it?
an ipod interface (like one sold by honda and aftermarket suppliers) allows you to connect the ipod to a cable that charges your ipod and allows you to control the ipod through the car head unit..(means you do not have to touch the ipod. this allows you to hide the ipod usually in the glove box. much more benefits than an "audio in" jack.
xm traffic is different than xm. it's an enhancement to regular xm (along with charges) that provides xm traffic feeds to your navigation screen and identifies accidents and traffic speeds (color coded hwys..very cool) right on your navigation display.
hopefully, this helps.
please someone tell me gm will provide both for the acadia or outlook!!
Personal Audio Link (PAL)
The Personal Audio Link (PAL), soon to be available on select models from Chevy Accessories, turns up the volume on vehicle personalization by bringing your Apple® iPod®(1) and your vehicle audio system together.(2) Hidden within the auxiliary glove box, this cool connection lets you utilize the factory radio controls to navigate your personal music library. As an added benefit, the iPod charges while it’s connected and the ignition is on.
iPod is a mobile digital device. iPod is a trademark of Apple Computer, Inc., registered in the US and other countries. All rights reserved.
Not compatible with iPod Shuffle; may not be compatible with some older iPod models.
Personal Audio Link not available with base audio system on HHR LS.