Chicago 2008: Chevrolet Traverse Debut

  • Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 27 comments
  • 1,536 views

YSSMAN

Super-Cool Since 2013
Premium
21,286
United States
GR-MI-USA
YSSMAN
YSSMAN
The Trailblazer replacement has arrived (whos excited?):

medium_2245811814_81520c4b93_o.jpg


medium_2245811348_45c2a943d0_o.jpg


medium_2245810982_86d2541753_o.jpg


Jalopnik
Anyone remember the Chevrolet Traverse Concept from the 2000 Chicago Auto Show? No? No matter, the full-sized crossover has changed quite a bit since then. Now, the Traverse is Chevy's shot at GM's Lambda platform, shared with the Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia, and Saturn Outlook. The Traverse is also the latest extension of Chevrolet's new, chevron-nosed design language, otherwise expressed in the 2008 Malibu. Like it or not, the Traverse is a major step forward from the company's two-box minivans. Power comes from GM's new-for-2008, 3.6-liter direct-injection DOHC V6 with variable valve timing -- it produces spry 286 hp with dual exhaust, or 281 with single.

A lot more info and photos here, if you're interested

Looks like it took a lot of style from the already successful Malibu, and one hopes this lives up to that standard. The others that it shares it's platform with (Saturn Outlook, GMC Acadia, Buick Enclave) have been selling well, and seem to be well-accepted by the press. Time will tell of course...
 
The concept took a lot of cues from the Malibu as well if I remember it correctly. It looks good though, but I can't see this being a Trailblazer replacement. What ever happened to SUV's? All we get now are these crossover things.
 
The concept took a lot of cues from the Malibu as well if I remember it correctly. It looks good though, but I can't see this being a Trailblazer replacement. What ever happened to SUV's? All we get now are these crossover things.

The very thing you bellyache about with every "Inefficient," V8-powered, high-performance vehicle. Fuel mileage.

This is a surprising position, given your very fuel-saving attitude of late.

Me? I'll pay a few more dollars for an Acadia or Enclave if I'm in the market. This one ain't doin' it for me.
 
Not all SUV's need to have V8's and be inefficient, I think the Saturn VUE proves that.
 
But that's a "Crossover." like this.

I'm just trying to figure out why you're not dancing in the isles because one of those fuel-inefficient SUVs has been replaced by a more efficient vehicle...
 
But that's a "Crossover." like this.

I'm just trying to figure out why you're not dancing in the isles because one of those fuel-inefficient SUVs has been replaced by a more efficient vehicle...

The VUE isn't an crossover, they label it an SUV therefore it is an SUV. The Traverse is a crossover since Chevy labels it as such.

**Crossovers really aren't any more efficient then the current SUV's. They still get the bad fuel mileage, they still have excess weight, they are still huge (my mom's Pacifica is awful to drive), and some can not even begin to do what an SUV can. Sure there are hybrid ones coming down the but they really aren't offering much.
 
We'll see how it really is in the end. So far, two of GMs hits have been letdowns (according to Joey), so I think I'll hold judgment until I get to sit in one.
 
Interior seems like it would be a nice place to sit but I'm still not a fan of SUVs and so I'm not exactly excited about this car. I'd much rather put the same money into buying a Malibu or G6. 👍
None the less, I do like the style and I'm sure the overall quality isn't bad either.
 
I'm interested to see how it compares in quality and refinement to the Enclave, as it clearly is the leader of the Lambda crossovers all together. The Outlook falls short of expectations, I think, especially when compared to the Aura... But if the interior can even be 80% of what is in the Malibu, I'd hope this could be a winner.

I like the look, even if it is a bit "awkward" in some spaces (ie, the tailgate)...
 
Fantastic! This thing looks great. I was so hoping they'd differentiate the Traverse quite a bit from the others, like the Enclave rather than the Acadia and Outlook. The front end looks much more aggressive and sporty. The grille is super nice. The whole package looks a lot smaller in pictures to me than the actual car, which is massive. The taillights are a bit odd, but whatevs.
 
The way today's Malibu is styled, I didn't really like it at first. I got to love it after a while. Even more so when it won North American Car of the Year. Now I'm VERY fond of the newest Malibu and all cars styled like it... including this Chevrolet Traverse (by the way, this is 100,000 times better-looking than that Malibu Maxx I severely disliked style wise). I'm very fond of European-styled cars. The Traverse has such soft lines and sweet curves. Like that beautiful girl you want to date that's so smoking hot even though she has a boyfriend. The part of the Traverse I don't like very much is how the third row side windows look. It's only a minor complaint. Other than that, I think this Traverse gets my respect. I approve by as much as 97%. Well-done designs inside and out.
 
It does looks good. Very good.

However, I think it would have horrible visibility out the back, between the tiny rear window and the back quarter windows.


PS - JohnBM01. I don't think I've seen you around here in ages.
 
-> I for one am not excited. The front looks like a fattened Malibu molded with the Equinox. The back looks weird and out of proportion. And as always, photogenic interiors, a GM speciality. I gave it B- for the effort, and whats up with the delay? The Outlook (conservative and boxy) and the Enclave (stylish and curvacious) still tops on my list among its co-platformers. :indiff:
 
Wait, I thought Isuzu left the North American market because GM had no plans for a trailblazer and GMC Canyon replacement....:lol:!
 
The VUE isn't an crossover, they label it an SUV therefore it is an SUV. The Traverse is a crossover since Chevy labels it as such.
There aren't enough :lol: smilies in the world to follow a statement like that.

**Crossovers really aren't any more efficient then the current SUV's.
They are by a wide enough margin (I'm guessing there will be a 3 MPG increase across the board when the Trailblazer is replaced with this, and this is a terrible example) that your statement about SUVs being replaced with crossovers is still ironic. Just because GM completely missed the point of a crossover when they were designing these ones doesn't mean every manufacturer is as dumb as they are.


Anyways, am I the only one who sees no point to this vehicle? As in this sits directly in Saturn the firing range of the GMC and Saturn versions that were already competing for sales?
 
There aren't enough :lol: smilies in the world to follow a statement like that.

Care to explain? Go to the Saturn website, they call the VUE an SUV and the article Brad posted said the Traverse is a Crossover. I actually saw nothing funny about my statement.


They are by a wide enough margin (I'm guessing there will be a 3 MPG increase across the board when the Trailblazer is replaced with this, and this is a terrible example) that your statement about SUVs being replaced with crossovers is still ironic. Just because GM completely missed the point of a crossover when they were designing these ones doesn't mean every manufacturer is as dumb as they are.

Every manufacturer missed the point then because to my knowledge they all do the same thing. Sure it might be "car" based but look at what is on the market. They are still big and inefficient. If automakers were going to just keep going on that why not at least make something that is somewhat useful to the small percentage of people who actually use an SUV like they should?
 
The VUE isn't an crossover, they label it an SUV therefore it is an SUV. The Traverse is a crossover since Chevy labels it as such.

"Well hot-damn, I'm in the market for a new compact truck? What's this PT Cruiser Chrysler's talking about?"

On the topic at hand: Is this not exactly what we didn't want GM doing? A bunch of rebadges? At this point, I'm pretty sure GM could recycle an old 80's Lumina and we'd still have people on here talking about how good it is.
 
"Well hot-damn, I'm in the market for a new compact truck? What's this PT Cruiser Chrysler's talking about?"

What are you talking about? Are you guys really saying the automakers are labeling their products wrong?
 
Are you really saying everything the automakers say is true? If so, then the PT Cruiser is a truck.
 
Are you really saying everything the automakers say is true? If so, then the PT Cruiser is a truck.

Where do you get it's a truck? I've never seen Chrysler classify it as one.

**Oh you are talking about what the NHTSA classifies it as. Just because it fits into a light truck category doesn't mean the automaker calls it a truck. We owned one for a time and even the dealer called it a station wagon.
 
Care to explain? Go to the Saturn website, they call the VUE an SUV and the article Brad posted said the Traverse is a Crossover. I actually saw nothing funny about my statement.
BMW calls there SUVs by the totally meaningless name of a Sport Activity Vehicle. Does that mean they are any less of a crossover than they are?
Suzuki says that one of their cars is a compact sedan, and the other practically identical car is a crossover SUV.
What the company calls a vehicle has very little bearing on what it actually is, especially in this case. When a company is selling two essentially identical vehicles, you cannot stand there and tell me one is a crossover and one is an SUV simply because the company says they are. Everything on that platform is a crossover, plain and simple. What Saturn said is marketing schlock, and you are a fool if you think that the two practically identical vehicles should be held to a different standard based on that.
Because of that, the Saturn VUE does not prove your point on how the Vue shows SUVs don't have to be inefficient, because:
A. It is not an SUV
B. It actually gets pretty bleh gas mileage for the market position it is in.


Sure it might be "car" based but look at what is on the market. They are still big and inefficient.
And compared to the equivalent sized truck based SUV, it is not.

If automakers were going to just keep going on that why not at least make something that is somewhat useful to the small percentage of people who actually use an SUV like they should?
Because people want SUV looks without SUV gas mileage. That is the entire reason why crossovers exist.
 
Fine don't believe the automakers, take your always argumentative discussions elsewhere.
 
Perhaps if you would stop bringing up information that common sense debunks I wouldn't feel the need to point out how wrong it is.


I mean, come on, they share the entire drive train, platform, suspension, transmission and even market segment with each other. It should be deftly obvious that they are both the same type of vehicle, regardless of what the company says. Besides, the fact that a crossover is an SUV pretty much wrecks your entire point alone.
 
Anyways, am I the only one who sees no point to this vehicle? As in this sits directly in Saturn the firing range of the GMC and Saturn versions that were already competing for sales?

I've attempted to rationalize GM's thought process for having all of them even with the BPG branding. I think the Chevrolet version was inevitable, but like you are implying, this pretty much negates the need for the Outlook completely.

...One wonders that because the Outlook has sold poorly compared to the Acadia and Enclave if the Traverse will end up replacing it...

And then one remembers that this one is being built in Spring Hill, Tennessee.

Meh. It really doesn't matter as long as one of the Lambda crossovers sells. That being said, between the Outlook/Acadia/Enclave, they didn't manage to outsell the Ford Edge last year...
 
Back