I never said which I felt was better. I never said that one was better than the other. I only responded to your comments that GM was the only "Crossover" vehicle because it had a platform that was not shared.
You say you couldn't feel a difference. Why raise a ruckus over platforms when you can't even tell a discernable difference?
Yes, VW expensive for 4 motion mode. But the ride any those models, not even compare with CR-V. i really don't care who buy what. It’s just as advice. Did you drive any of those vehicles? (crossover) Or are your reading other people opinion and then doing your assumption? I never heard your opinion about them. All your post is criticizing someone. go ahead and have fun.
Styling is subjective, so arguing it is moot. The CR-V's sales (the highest of all crossovers) speak for themselves though. People like it.
Sales figures do not show why people bought them, meaning, sales may not reflect if they like styling or not. Remember, many Honda owners are loyal to the brand, and won't buy anything else. Great for Honda. Many buy a Honda because it is a Honda, not because of how they look...for the most part.
I don't know if there is any way to see this, but, I wonder how many 2007+ CR-V owners are ones that came out of a previous gen CR-V? I bet it's a lot. Retaining your customers + adding new ones = high sales. This is a formula Honda figured out years ago. This is something that has hurt the American brands.
This is something Mazda started back in 2003. When it's times for people to come out of their newer Mazda's, we will see how well they retain their customers. We all know Mazda sales are increasing quite well. They just need to retain them. On par with Honda or Toyota? Not yet, but, at least they have that goal.
I question posts that put everything down but one with no credible evidence that proves that vehicle's superiority. I'm not criticizing people. I'm always trying to learn, which is why I asked repeatedly in what way GM was better for not platform sharing. In an indirect response, you stated you couldn't tell a difference from GM to Mazda, so now I'm REALLY confused. But since you won't answer my questions directly (you just change the subject), I can move on quite happily.
And, my family put tens of thousands of miles on our CR-V before moving back to a sedan. My current car is an Accord, but have driven a Pilot, been in several Lambdas, a CX-9, and a Taurus X.
You'll notice I haven't shared an opinion on how the Lambdas, CX-9, VeraCruz, or Taurus X drive, because I have yet to form one. Until I drive something over a considerable distance, I can't say "I like how it drives" or "I don't," I can just comment on aspects that don't involve the driving experience (passenger space, comfort, styling, interior quality).
I'm not shopping, I'm just an auto enthusiast who likes talking about vehicles and learning about them.
I should have been more clear in my wording, because my context screws up my main point. When I said "People Like It" and cited number 1 sales figures, I meant "People like the CR-V," meaning the vehicle as a whole. Sorry I wasn't too clear on that one! I try to be concise around here. I guess I need a holiday break from school and work!
There's a right way to do platform sharing (Ford and Mazda do it well, I feel) and a wrong way (Cobalt and G5 from Pontiac - they're practically identical, which is a bad thing).
NO- I have to say Ford doesn't always do it so good. The MKX looks just like the Edge. That's not luxury.
Yes there is. How can you say there is not? Buicks are mechanically identical to their counterparts at GMC/Pontiac/Chevy which consistently rate lower
It's not that hard. Buick does what Lexus does. They take the Outlook and improve upon it. In most aspects. Quet tuning here. shock absorbers for smoother ride there. They improve on it so it is a better quality ride and finish than its poorer cousin. Of sourse, not as much as Lexus- they save the best stuff for Cadillac, but we won't go into that.
I meant between the CX-9 and the Edge. That's why I said Ford and Mazda, not Ford and Lincoln. You are right about the MKX, but then again EVERY Lincoln now is practically a Ford with better leather.
90% of Acadia owners not happy about their MPG here. As I said go to other forums or discussions and you will find the same about Outlook as well. I see only one thing that for some reason acadia/outlook averages less then EPA estimate while TX close to EPA estimate or in some cases gives even more. If I set cruise control on 60 mph it will give me 28MPG.
NO- I have to say Ford doesn't always do it so good. The MKX looks just like the Edge. That's not luxury.
I think he meant that Ford and Mazda share platforms together and make completely different vehicles.
On a side note....Just because the Edge and MKX look extremely similar, does not negate the MKXs' luxury status. Luxury is not defined by how it differs from it's non luxury counterpart. Example: 2006 Camry and 2006 Lexus ES330.
Buick does what Lexus does. They take the Outlook and improve upon it. In most aspects. Quet tuning here. shock absorbers for smoother ride there.
I am talking about engines and transmissions. I am not really concerned about the "reliability" factor of shock absorbers.
If GM is saving the best for Cadillac, that does not boast well for GM considering how low they factor out in terms of reliability. If you are talking about performance and technology, then you are right. They used to be much better then they are now, because Caddy now has a younger buyer, and a youthful image while Buick is their older people luxury brand, like Caddy used to be. Younger driver = harder driven vehicles. Older driver = hardly driven vehicles.
Have you seen the new ad for the CTS? "When you turn on your car, does it return the favor?" followed by a foot flooring the throttle by a young man or woman.
You guys are insane about made in japan. You remind me avs forum, people is crazy about sony or panasonic. I read their posts which looks like other brands not exist. (Philips ........). I know now why honda and toyota have crazy amount of sales, because people have stereotype made in japan is a best. But tell you any European car drives better, than made in japan in their class. Of course you will say it cost more, but it drives better or you'll say what about "reliability" factor and I never had any problems for more than 10 years (I had 4 different cars). This’s forum about Crossovers, not about made in japan. In my opinion made in japan is a chipo car. So, so engines (leaks after 100k), so,so performance (even sport cars), so so transmissions(expect Nissan cvt), seat and dash chipo material (leather seat ok ), same design outside (example: Toyota, Honda). One good thing is reliable for first 100k, after open your wallet.
That be me! I very crazy about my chipo CX-9! I too chipo to own car that costs too much before it get to 100k. I also crazy and insane about chipo so so performance of my Miata. Oh well. Back to asylum for me... :P
"I very crazy about my chipo CX-9! I too chipo to own car that costs too much before it get to 100k." That's right. Too much money for Mazda. In the end it's "mazda", not even Toyota or Honda. "I also crazy and insane about chipo so so performance of my Miata." In the end it's "mazda". Good commute car, but not a sport car. Mazda=Hyundai=KIA=Daewoo, I don't even know what would be worse or better having Mazda or Hyundai, KIA, Daewoo. All this cars have very small market in US. The each manufacture has one good car(Mazda6.....). But if I'm looking buy sedan and have chioce between Mazda6 or Nissan Altima, i will take Altima of course.
Where's the English language crossover discussion?
Interesting results from the Warranty Direct study. In particular, with Mazda at just 8.04% mechanical failures in years 3-9, why is Ford at 26.76%, given all the parts sharing? :confuse:
Maybe it's because my "chipo" Miata is made in Japan. LOL
Even that car, from 1994 to 2005, shared a 1.8l engine with the Escort GT and Mercury Tracer LTS.
I'm surprised to see such a huge discrepancy between Mazda and Ford.
why is Ford at 26.76%, given all the parts sharing?
Parts sharing does occur in the smaller passenger vehicles, mainly Mazda6/3 and Fusion/Focus. More so in the Fusion and 6 then Mazda3 and Focus. Remember, Ford has a huge line of trucks that Mazda just dose not have, or source parts from, except the B-Series/Ranger which the B-Series just does not sell.
There is a lot that is shared, but parts is only half of the equation, remember, both companies engineer their vehicles differently. That has a lot to do with how those parts perform... Look how differently the Edge and CX-9 are, yet they do share some components. I still believe it is too early to have a real gauge on how reliable they will be, but, reports so far look good.
Seriously though, I'd considered a few of the offerings from Ford when car shopping last winter. I've owned a few Ford products over the last 30 years (remember the Galaxy 500?) and they weren't too bad. However, my wife had a really bad "Escort" experience about 20 years ago and she still won't forgive and forget!
I don't know about other folks, but I've always been a little more willing to take a few risks and tolerate a few mechanical mishaps if I'm living with a car that I enjoy driving...
On a side note....Just because the Edge and MKX look extremely similar, does not negate the MKXs' luxury status. Luxury is not defined by how it differs from it's non luxury counterpart. Example: 2006 Camry and 2006 Lexus ES330.
Where have you been? Did you just move to America? Yes- similarity does negate luxury. The Lexus ES is very differentiated from the Camry. No one can tell me they look just alike. In the bad days of GM when they made a Cadillac Cavilier (the Cinnamon, i believe), it FLOPPED. Name one Lxuxury car Lexus or Acura has that looks just like a Toyota/ Honda. Name a Cadillac (excluding the Escalade). This is where Ford is messing up.
90% of Acadia owners not happy about their MPG here. As I said go to other forums or discussions and you will find the same about Outlook as well. I see only one thing that for some reason acadia/outlook averages less then EPA estimate while TX close to EPA estimate or in some cases gives even more. If I set cruise control on 60 mph it will give me 28MPG.
It's not 90%. Probably like 25%. The main reason TX owners aren't is because they know what they are getting. It's right on the sticker- 16/24 FWD, 15/22 AWD. Compare that to the Acadia's 18/26, 17/24. I doubt you get 28 mpg highway- that's 6 whole mpg better than EPA. Let's not fool ourselves. However, if someone set the Cruise to 60 in their Acadia, they would get around that.
Yes, The MKX can be called overpriced Edge. It's a lot similarities thru out different cars. It like you said es 300 to Camry, 3.2 TL (previous model) to Accord. i can see close similarity CX-7 to CX-9 or Lexus GX to 4Runner.
They used to be much better then they are now, because Caddy now has a younger buyer, and a youthful image while Buick is their older people luxury brand, like Caddy used to be. Younger driver = harder driven vehicles. Older driver = hardly driven vehicles.
okay, what does that have to do with anything?
According to this....#1
Okay, let's use a source others have actually heard of. Oh- and where was Buick on this reliablity comparison?
It's a lot similarities thru out different cars. It like you said es 300 to Camry, 3.2 TL (previous model) to Accord. i can see close similarity CX-7 to CX-9 or Lexus GX to 4Runner.
My point was that even though they have many similarities, they don't look exactly the same, unlike the Edge and MKX, which look exactly the same.
Acadia owners have website-forum http://www.acadiaforum.net. I have read all posts related to MPG. I understood that the MPG (about 22-26) get better after 3000 miles on car, and FWD, speed 55-72mph, normal load (4 pass max light luggage). Most people is getting their number from DIC which is giving higher number about 0.5-1MPG. The mpg is manually calculated most time is 24-25.
I have FWD so you are wrong in calculations - I do not know at what speed EPA estimates are but for me to get 24MPG on highway I need to drive around 75-80MPH ( or speeding which I try to avoid). Plus as posted above official MPG for Acadia FWD is same like for TX FWD or 16/24 and nobody seems to be getting it. Again to you maybe it looks like 25% but I see 90% of Acadia/Outlook owners who are disappointed and posting real life MPG less then GMC claims. Do you really want me to spend some time and quote here all those unhappy drivers? It is pretty obvious that Acadia/Outlook are more thirsty than TX - they are heavier + have bigger ground clearance, about the same hp engine and poorly programmed transmission. Users reporting real time MPG on fueleconomy website: 15-17mpg for Acadia /Outlook
Have you read one post? Most people got 17-19 in city and 22-26 highway , and 21-22 mix drive. Don't post if you have not read there anything. I 'm reading Acadia forum for past two month. It help me make a decision.
He's not reading the thread you posted, he's probably reading the FWD gas mileage thread. And even then, he's ignoring all the posts that mention lower numbers, like 21 mpg on the highway, or 13-15 mpg in the city.
City mileage will always be bad on any SUV, simply because they weigh a lot! To give credit to the Acadia, the hwy mileage was supposed to be 1-2 mpg better than lighter SUVs because of the transmission software programming. Of course, the result of this programming has meant there have been 2 "recalls" because of hesitation and gear hunting. Guess you can't get a free lunch, eh?
Yes, You're right. i'm reading mostly for FWD. I don't pull boats or RVs. We have 2-3 times snow a year. How much do you expect for size of this car? if I got 3.2tl about 17 city and 24 highway, Mazda, Toyota ...... have same problems. If you care at the pump, buy small car or hybrid. what real people say: "My FWD Acadia consistently gets 18.5-20 MPG in combo city and highway, probably 75% city driving" "my AWD Acadia.My manual calcs consistently fall around 14.9mpg. City/highway driving. Avg 23-25 mph (per DIC)." "I have an 08 SLT AWD. Average on the computer is 18-19 based upon highway and city." "Never gotten less than 18.5 on a tank in my FWD version. Probably 70% city, 30% highway average. 24 MPG on mostly highway road trip" Please, old timers don't attack people, you're opinion is valued, but is not only you. If you're not reading or reading first two posts, it's not my problem.
I have FWD so you are wrong in calculations - I do not know at what speed EPA estimates are but for me to get 24MPG on highway I need to drive around 75-80MPH ( or speeding which I try to avoid).
No- I'm right. The EPA suggests 24mpg on the highway. Reducing your speed to 65mph will probably get you just that. I have heard that you don't get suggested EPA mileage in an Acadia until you have driven it passed the 300 mile mark.
Plus as posted above official MPG for Acadia FWD is same like for TX FWD or 16/24 and nobody seems to be getting it
AMy seem to be getting 26/24- or better. I only see 25-40 percent of Acadia owners dissapointed with mileage. And i see that much complaining about TX mileage and how they get 14-15 in the city and under 20 on the highway.
they are heavier + have bigger ground clearance, about the same hp engine and poorly programmed transmission.
All of this is true, except for the transmissions- which are said to be better programmed after the corrections than Ford's 6 Speed. Yes they are heavier, and a tad larger, which would make one expeect bad mpg. But they get better than smaller CUVs- including the TX. That's smart engineering on GM's part.
And you said CUV's based off sedans aren't good CUVs!
I have said that GM crossover/SUV is not a car base CUV and you're really shouldn't compare to other CUV. Otherwise you can compare vans to CUV. Why not? It's 6-8 passenger vehicles, FWD -base models, for family use, AWD as option.
I have said that GM crossover/SUV is not a car base CUV and you're really shouldn't compare to other CUV.
Yet you said you couldn't tell a discernable difference in how a car-based one drove and how the GM drove/rode.
Otherwise you can compare vans to CUV. Why not? It's 6-8 passenger vehicles, FWD -base models, for family use, AWD as option.
I'd be willing to bet lots of people cross-shop CUVs and vans. They'll pay more for a CUV for the SUV-ish look. Vans typically offer more space and practicality than a CUV.
Please, vad1819, riddle me this. I've asked often and you always change the subject, but would really love to know what's going on in your brain...
What benefits does GM reap by not using a car-based platform, like some of its competitors do? You keep bringing that up, but never back it up with any reasoning, and I'm curious as to what your reasoning is.
I see that we will not agree with each other and thats fine. I say that TX is getting better mileage you argue that Acadia/Outlook and thats ok. Everybody entitled to their own opinion. About transmission - I have never seen a positive review about Acadia/Outlook transmission or that it fares better than TX. Please provide me a link.
About transmission - I have never seen a positive review about Acadia/Outlook transmission or that it fares better than TX.
My point with that is I have never seen a truely negative review of it. I haven't even seen a truely negative post on a forum about it. Everthing I read says the transmissions do a little gearshifting at higher speeds, but that the ride is still very smooth, and usually the "hunting" isn't really a bother. And that's what I felt after a testdrive. It does "hunt" sometimes at higher speeds, but is still smooth and refined in the driving experience. And when you step on it, it gets up.There are a few quicker choices out there, but this is no slouch. I believe GM just improved the transmission softwear, so it shouldn't search for gears as much.
I'm not trying to "diss" anyone here, but if you think a comment makes no sense, don't respond to it. That simply says you do not respect the statement.
have said that GM crossover/SUV is not a car base CUV and you're really shouldn't compare to other CUV. Otherwise you can compare vans to CUV
Van chassis are different then CUV's. Crossover vehicles are vehicles with unibody construction. This started from car based platforms. The GM lambda vehicles just don't share their platform with other cars. Unibody construction IS a car platform.
Comments
You say you couldn't feel a difference. Why raise a ruckus over platforms when you can't even tell a discernable difference?
Did you drive any of those vehicles? (crossover) Or are your reading other people opinion and then doing your assumption? I never heard your opinion about them. All your post is criticizing someone.
go ahead and have fun.
Sales figures do not show why people bought them, meaning, sales may not reflect if they like styling or not. Remember, many Honda owners are loyal to the brand, and won't buy anything else. Great for Honda. Many buy a Honda because it is a Honda, not because of how they look...for the most part.
I don't know if there is any way to see this, but, I wonder how many 2007+ CR-V owners are ones that came out of a previous gen CR-V? I bet it's a lot. Retaining your customers + adding new ones = high sales. This is a formula Honda figured out years ago. This is something that has hurt the American brands.
This is something Mazda started back in 2003. When it's times for people to come out of their newer Mazda's, we will see how well they retain their customers. We all know Mazda sales are increasing quite well. They just need to retain them. On par with Honda or Toyota? Not yet, but, at least they have that goal.
And, my family put tens of thousands of miles on our CR-V before moving back to a sedan. My current car is an Accord, but have driven a Pilot, been in several Lambdas, a CX-9, and a Taurus X.
You'll notice I haven't shared an opinion on how the Lambdas, CX-9, VeraCruz, or Taurus X drive, because I have yet to form one. Until I drive something over a considerable distance, I can't say "I like how it drives" or "I don't," I can just comment on aspects that don't involve the driving experience (passenger space, comfort, styling, interior quality).
I'm not shopping, I'm just an auto enthusiast who likes talking about vehicles and learning about them.
NO- I have to say Ford doesn't always do it so good. The MKX looks just like the Edge. That's not luxury.
It's not that hard. Buick does what Lexus does. They take the Outlook and improve upon it. In most aspects. Quet tuning here. shock absorbers for smoother ride there. They improve on it so it is a better quality ride and finish than its poorer cousin. Of sourse, not as much as Lexus- they save the best stuff for Cadillac, but we won't go into that.
By the way- where is Mazda ranked?
Its a FORD, but with BETTER LEATHER!!!!!!
:P
90% of Acadia owners not happy about their MPG here. As I said go to other forums or discussions and you will find the same about Outlook as well.
I see only one thing that for some reason acadia/outlook averages less then EPA estimate while TX close to EPA estimate or in some cases gives even more. If I set cruise control on 60 mph it will give me 28MPG.
I think he meant that Ford and Mazda share platforms together and make completely different vehicles.
On a side note....Just because the Edge and MKX look extremely similar, does not negate the MKXs' luxury status. Luxury is not defined by how it differs from it's non luxury counterpart. Example: 2006 Camry and 2006 Lexus ES330.
I am talking about engines and transmissions. I am not really concerned about the "reliability" factor of shock absorbers.
If GM is saving the best for Cadillac, that does not boast well for GM considering how low they factor out in terms of reliability. If you are talking about performance and technology, then you are right. They used to be much better then they are now, because Caddy now has a younger buyer, and a youthful image while Buick is their older people luxury brand, like Caddy used to be. Younger driver = harder driven vehicles. Older driver = hardly driven vehicles.
Have you seen the new ad for the CTS? "When you turn on your car, does it return the favor?" followed by a foot flooring the throttle by a young man or woman.
By the way- where is Mazda ranked?
According to this....#1 :P
http://www.egmcartech.com/2007/01/25/mazda-and-honda-top-the-reliability-survey/- - -
But tell you any European car drives better, than made in japan in their class. Of course you will say it cost more, but it drives better or you'll say what about "reliability" factor and I never had any problems for more than 10 years (I had 4 different cars).
This’s forum about Crossovers, not about made in japan. In my opinion made in japan is a chipo car. So, so engines (leaks after 100k), so,so performance (even sport cars), so so transmissions(expect Nissan cvt), seat and dash chipo material (leather seat ok ), same design outside (example: Toyota, Honda). One good thing is reliable for first 100k, after open your wallet.
That's right. Too much money for Mazda. In the end it's "mazda", not even Toyota or Honda.
"I also crazy and insane about chipo so so performance of my Miata."
In the end it's "mazda". Good commute car, but not a sport car.
Mazda=Hyundai=KIA=Daewoo, I don't even know what would be worse or better having Mazda or Hyundai, KIA, Daewoo. All this cars have very small market in US. The each manufacture has one good car(Mazda6.....). But if I'm looking buy sedan and have chioce between Mazda6 or Nissan Altima, i will take Altima of course.
Interesting results from the Warranty Direct study. In particular, with Mazda at just 8.04% mechanical failures in years 3-9, why is Ford at 26.76%, given all the parts sharing? :confuse:
Maybe it's because my "chipo" Miata is made in Japan. LOL
Even that car, from 1994 to 2005, shared a 1.8l engine with the Escort GT and Mercury Tracer LTS.
I'm surprised to see such a huge discrepancy between Mazda and Ford.
In the end it's "mazda". Good commute car, but not a sport car.
Actually, the Miata is one of the most recognized and respected sports cars in the world....heck, they even have their own racing circuit....
http://www.mx-5cup.com/
Yes, this is a crossover comparison, so, lets talk about crossovers.
Parts sharing does occur in the smaller passenger vehicles, mainly Mazda6/3 and Fusion/Focus. More so in the Fusion and 6 then Mazda3 and Focus. Remember, Ford has a huge line of trucks that Mazda just dose not have, or source parts from, except the B-Series/Ranger which the B-Series just does not sell.
There is a lot that is shared, but parts is only half of the equation, remember, both companies engineer their vehicles differently. That has a lot to do with how those parts perform... Look how differently the Edge and CX-9 are, yet they do share some components. I still believe it is too early to have a real gauge on how reliable they will be, but, reports so far look good.
Still, the number is more than triple. You'd think after a while of being around Mazdas, it would rub off.
Seriously though, I'd considered a few of the offerings from Ford when car shopping last winter. I've owned a few Ford products over the last 30 years (remember the Galaxy 500?) and they weren't too bad. However, my wife had a really bad "Escort" experience about 20 years ago and she still won't forgive and forget!
I don't know about other folks, but I've always been a little more willing to take a few risks and tolerate a few mechanical mishaps if I'm living with a car that I enjoy driving...
Where have you been? Did you just move to America? Yes- similarity does negate luxury. The Lexus ES is very differentiated from the Camry. No one can tell me they look just alike. In the bad days of GM when they made a Cadillac Cavilier (the Cinnamon, i believe), it FLOPPED. Name one Lxuxury car Lexus or Acura has that looks just like a Toyota/ Honda. Name a Cadillac (excluding the Escalade). This is where Ford is messing up.
I see only one thing that for some reason acadia/outlook averages less then EPA estimate while TX close to EPA estimate or in some cases gives even more. If I set cruise control on 60 mph it will give me 28MPG.
It's not 90%. Probably like 25%.
The main reason TX owners aren't is because they know what they are getting. It's right on the sticker- 16/24 FWD, 15/22 AWD. Compare that to the Acadia's 18/26, 17/24. I doubt you get 28 mpg highway- that's 6 whole mpg better than EPA. Let's not fool ourselves. However, if someone set the Cruise to 60 in their Acadia, they would get around that.
It's a lot similarities thru out different cars. It like you said es 300 to Camry, 3.2 TL (previous model) to Accord. i can see close similarity CX-7 to CX-9 or Lexus GX to 4Runner.
okay, what does that have to do with anything?
According to this....#1
Okay, let's use a source others have actually heard of. Oh- and where was Buick on this reliablity comparison?
Actually, the numbers have been revised downward for the 2008 Acadia: FWD = 16/24, and AWD = 16/22. This is from the GMC website.
My point was that even though they have many similarities, they don't look exactly the same, unlike the Edge and MKX, which look exactly the same.
I have read all posts related to MPG. I understood that the MPG (about 22-26) get better after 3000 miles on car, and FWD, speed 55-72mph, normal load (4 pass max light luggage). Most people is getting their number from DIC which is giving higher number about 0.5-1MPG. The mpg is manually calculated most time is 24-25.
Reminds me of being a valet in college, loved all the weird interior colors back in the day
Users reporting real time MPG on fueleconomy website: 15-17mpg for Acadia /Outlook
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm
http://www.acadiaforum.net/forum/index.php?topic=988.0
Here is all topic about poor MPG with numbers like 14-16mpg on average.
You should both be reading this one: GMC Acadia Real World MPG :P
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Most people got 17-19 in city and 22-26 highway , and 21-22 mix drive.
Don't post if you have not read there anything. I 'm reading Acadia forum for past two month. It help me make a decision.
City mileage will always be bad on any SUV, simply because they weigh a lot! To give credit to the Acadia, the hwy mileage was supposed to be 1-2 mpg better than lighter SUVs because of the transmission software programming. Of course, the result of this programming has meant there have been 2 "recalls" because of hesitation and gear hunting. Guess you can't get a free lunch, eh?
what real people say:
"My FWD Acadia consistently gets 18.5-20 MPG in combo city and highway, probably 75% city driving"
"my AWD Acadia.My manual calcs consistently fall around 14.9mpg. City/highway driving. Avg 23-25 mph (per DIC)."
"I have an 08 SLT AWD. Average on the computer is 18-19 based upon highway and city."
"Never gotten less than 18.5 on a tank in my FWD version. Probably 70% city, 30% highway average. 24 MPG on mostly highway road trip"
Please, old timers don't attack people, you're opinion is valued, but is not only you. If you're not reading or reading first two posts, it's not my problem.
Looking good, It is not big as GM crossovers, but will be compete with CX-9 or Taurus X.
http://www.motortrend.com/features/auto_news/2007/112_0708_2009_dodge_journey
No- I'm right. The EPA suggests 24mpg on the highway. Reducing your speed to 65mph will probably get you just that.
I have heard that you don't get suggested EPA mileage in an Acadia until you have driven it passed the 300 mile mark.
Plus as posted above official MPG for Acadia FWD is same like for TX FWD or 16/24 and nobody seems to be getting it
AMy seem to be getting 26/24- or better. I only see 25-40 percent of Acadia owners dissapointed with mileage. And i see that much complaining about TX mileage and how they get 14-15 in the city and under 20 on the highway.
they are heavier + have bigger ground clearance, about the same hp engine and poorly programmed transmission.
All of this is true, except for the transmissions- which are said to be better programmed after the corrections than Ford's 6 Speed. Yes they are heavier, and a tad larger, which would make one expeect bad mpg. But they get better than smaller CUVs- including the TX. That's smart engineering on GM's part.
Looking good, It is not big as GM crossovers, but will be compete with CX-9 or Taurus X.
What?! You like it? It's platform is based off that of the Avenger Sedan. And you said CUV's based off sedans aren't good CUVs!
I have said that GM crossover/SUV is not a car base CUV and you're really shouldn't compare to other CUV. Otherwise you can compare vans to CUV. Why not? It's 6-8 passenger vehicles, FWD -base models, for family use, AWD as option.
Yet you said you couldn't tell a discernable difference in how a car-based one drove and how the GM drove/rode.
Otherwise you can compare vans to CUV. Why not? It's 6-8 passenger vehicles, FWD -base models, for family use, AWD as option.
I'd be willing to bet lots of people cross-shop CUVs and vans. They'll pay more for a CUV for the SUV-ish look. Vans typically offer more space and practicality than a CUV.
Please, vad1819, riddle me this. I've asked often and you always change the subject, but would really love to know what's going on in your brain...
What benefits does GM reap by not using a car-based platform, like some of its competitors do? You keep bringing that up, but never back it up with any reasoning, and I'm curious as to what your reasoning is.
About transmission - I have never seen a positive review about Acadia/Outlook transmission or that it fares better than TX. Please provide me a link.
My point with that is I have never seen a truely negative review of it. I haven't even seen a truely negative post on a forum about it. Everthing I read says the transmissions do a little gearshifting at higher speeds, but that the ride is still very smooth, and usually the "hunting" isn't really a bother. And that's what I felt after a testdrive. It does "hunt" sometimes at higher speeds, but is still smooth and refined in the driving experience. And when you step on it, it gets up.There are a few quicker choices out there, but this is no slouch.
I believe GM just improved the transmission softwear, so it shouldn't search for gears as much.
I'm not trying to "diss" anyone here, but if you think a comment makes no sense, don't respond to it. That simply says you do not respect the statement.
Spend your time carrying on real arguments.
Van chassis are different then CUV's. Crossover vehicles are vehicles with unibody construction. This started from car based platforms. The GM lambda vehicles just don't share their platform with other cars. Unibody construction IS a car platform.