Traverse Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Slow day yesterday, so off to the dealer to test drive a new Silverado, Equinox and a few Blazers.



Here's my 2 cents review. My '16 Silverado is a few months from losing the bumper to bumper but may yet be a five year keeper. The new '19 with it's narrow squinty headlights, dramatic body curves and round wheel wells, and large Chevrolet lettering stamped into the tailgate gives it a nice feminine touch.....more at home with fender skirts than running boards. Tried an equivalent Z71 which rode no different than mine with 15K. Interior trim actually looked cheaper so looks like I'm hanging on to mine until the next facelift.


Blazer was a different story based upon the 2nd gen Traverse. Anyone displeased with the 9 speeds shift pattern is definitely not going to be happy with an LS powered by the 2.5l 4cyl. Weakness at the low end calls for higher revs and late shifting compared with the Premier's 3.6l 6cyl. Here again they let their designers go amok to make it look more trendy at the expense of functionality. Interior of the premier was comparable to the Traverse, but button layout was tiny and confusing. Rode as nice as the Traverse but they really screwed up with the lighting. Even the Equinox had the Blazer beat in that area. All the Blazer lines have two low mounted hi intensity discharge (halogen) projector headlights with no LED option and no fog lighting available. Those shutter type hi beam headlights have no business on a top line model.....Like the Traverse, even the Equinox Premier offers LED headlamps and halogen fogs. Tried the Blazer after dusk on a back country road and even on hi beam they are dangerously weak, and won't be a contender for replacement of the Malibu until they get their lighting straightened out.


At a mere average $2K difference between comparable Traverse and Blazer lines, the Blazer offers no rational alternative to prospective Traverse buyers in the areas of seating, cargo storage, or safety lighting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
I like the looks of the RS. A little pricey here though. The RS Starts at $40,600. Ouch!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Thomcat,

Thanks for posting this excellent comparison with the new "Blazer", We have had our AWD Traverse LT only a month when our dealer had a new Blazer on display. Thanks to your comparison - I am already feeling better about what we chose NOT to wait for. I also have to wonder why; Chevy chose the Blazer name for a "unibody" SUV?

On another note: I guess I better not try a car with LED headlights as I will never be happy with these HID projectors we have on both of our current vehicles (other car is my daily commuter, a Gen2 Volt).

And being new to this forum - I enjoy reading your posts - Very helpful; practical & technical inputs you are sharing here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
I was trying to figure out where Chevy was trying to position themselves with the Blazer? Pricing is similar to the Traverse with less interior space and no 3rd row. Is this their answer to the Ford Edge?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thomcat,

Thanks for posting this excellent comparison with the new "Blazer", We have had our AWD Traverse LT only a month when our dealer had a new Blazer on display. Thanks to your comparison - I am already feeling better about what we chose NOT to wait for. I also have to wonder why; Chevy chose the Blazer name for a "unibody" SUV?

On another note: I guess I better not try a car with LED headlights as I will never be happy with these HID projectors we have on both of our current vehicles (other car is my daily commuter, a Gen2 Volt).

And being new to this forum - I enjoy reading your posts - Very helpful; practical & technical inputs you are sharing here.

The HID projectors on my Silverado are adequate because like the Traverse they are positioned high on the body and give adequate distance coverage. Main advantage of the D lens LEDs are that there are separate LEDs for both low and high beam, each individually prefocused so on high beam both the low and high D lenses are lit for a total brightness of 4 main headlamps on the road......just like in the old days of the '60s. Plus when you stick LEDs in the fog lamps the highs go out with the fogs but you still have the brightness of 4 focused LEDs. The Blazers main headlamps are small projectors and stylishly mounted too low on the body, even worse when the shutters are engaged in low beam, and without fogs they are poor for side lighting and distance coverage.....noticed the same problem with the low mounted headlights on my '06 Colorado.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Update - Here's Chevy's current excuse why no LEDs, or fogs, on the Blazer, but indicate may be on the '20.


The whole gist of this article is that HID projectors are equal to or better than the LED projectors. Maybe? But the whole premise is incorrect, especially when applied to the '18+ Premier/HC "D" lens LEDs.



http://gmauthority.com/blog/2018/08/2019-blazer-why-not-offering-led-headlamps-is-not-a-big-deal/


Article ignores the point that they are comparing projector lenses with a single round lens which more importantly contain shutters to block off a portion of the beam/reflector to make a low beam out of a high beam. 18+ Traverses employ separate lenses for high and low beams so the "D" lenses are do not require shutters to cutoff the beam on low. In addition the "D" lenses are individually focused so when on high, both the low lenses and high lenses are lighted the road providing both near and far lighting at the same time...(just like my '60 and '65 Impalas)..in essence you have four LEDs in operation as compared to 2 in all projector lenses setup which share a single bulb/LED. I forget, but I believe that my '15 gen1s also employed separate reflectors for high and low and that both remained active on high......even though halogen, never a big problem with lighting.


Shame, it doesn't take a genius to design a car......My first look at the nose of the Blazer before I even took a test drive and I commented that the lights likely worked like crap and my test ride confirmed it! Driving unlit twisting back roads, more effective headlamps are more important than the engine.....that's why I always test ride again after dusk. And compared to everything else I've kicked around (including the gen1) the "D" lens LED night lighting is nothing short of dramatic by comparison.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
The new Blazer is on the Acadia platform isn't it? Similar in size as the Acadia All Terrain with only 2 rows of seating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
The new Blazer is on the Acadia platform isn't it? Similar in size as the Acadia All Terrain with only 2 rows of seating.
Both Acadia and Equinox platforms were reduced in size in '18 model year, Traverse and Enclave were enlarged. Both 2 row vehicles are the same size as the former gen Eqinox, so it wouldn't surprise me if they shared a platform. My guess is the next step is to introduce a 3 row Acadia XL on the gen2 Traverse platform.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
I bought the 2018 Traverse after measuring the available cargo space on every available "full size" SUV. It has double the available cargo space of the Chevy Tahoe and Suburban and 25% more than with the Highlander and Pilot. Closest in terms of cargo space was the Subaru Outbacks as they did not have the third row seats which kill cargo space. The Blazer was worse than the Highlander and the Pilot in cargo capacity.


I use a SUV as a utility vehicle and will often have our two road bicycles inside and I do this without needing to remove the wheels. The only other SUV where I could possible do this was the Outback. For more than a decade the SUV's have become sexier versions of a minivan and the utility aspect has suffered as a result. This includes having often captain's chairs for the second row which cannot fold down and extend the rear cargo space as would a bench seat. I can understand why so many people are now buying a crew cab or extended cab pickup instead of a SUV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I bought the 2018 Traverse after measuring the available cargo space on every available "full size" SUV. It has double the available cargo space of the Chevy Tahoe and Suburban and 25% more than with the Highlander and Pilot. Closest in terms of cargo space was the Subaru Outbacks as they did not have the third row seats which kill cargo space. The Blazer was worse than the Highlander and the Pilot in cargo capacity.


I use a SUV as a utility vehicle and will often have our two road bicycles inside and I do this without needing to remove the wheels. The only other SUV where I could possible do this was the Outback. For more than a decade the SUV's have become sexier versions of a minivan and the utility aspect has suffered as a result. This includes having often captain's chairs for the second row which cannot fold down and extend the rear cargo space as would a bench seat. I can understand why so many people are now buying a crew cab or extended cab pickup instead of a SUV.

Most people I know, including myself, buy two row pickups for five main advantages above an SUV.



Cargo height.....pile as high as the cab roof and long as the bed with dropped tailgate......no way you are going to stuff a lawn tractor in an enclosed SUV.



Isolation from cargo unless someone is content to smell the stink and cleanup the mess of a few yards of mulch or manure inside their SUV (even with the windows or hatch open)..... And this includes transport of dangerous cargo like propane bottles, in most States it's illegal to carry in an enclosed vehicle.


Increased road height and superior foul weather traction dues to their native rear wheel, real 4WD with a separate multispeed transfer case and locking differential. Best SUVs can do is AWD some with a 2 wheel locking feature on the rear axle. Difference being on a 4 wheel drive truck in 4Hi or 4Lo you cannot make a safe turn or even pull out of a parking space on dry pavement because the two front wheels travel different turning circumference and when locked in 4WD either it wont move or one tire on the axle will scrub and hop and damge something or make steering dangerous.....only safe to go straight on dry pavement when locked in 4WD. Not so for an AWD, some may call it 4WD with a low speed lock button, but it isn't because the front axle never fully locks and all 4 wheels are not geared 1:1 because the rear axle uses a slushbox between front and rear axles whereas 4WD has all wheels locked 1:1 through the transfer case which powers both axles with the slushbox between the engine and the transfer case.


Superior weight carrying and towing capacities.


More durable impact resistant with chassis on steel frame construction as opposed to SUVs folded sheet metal unitbodies.



They may call them SUVs but in reality they are nothing more than overpriced, puffed out, old model station wagons, stuffed with modern gizmos and gadgets and optional AWD capability. Basically no different than its unitbody cousin, the minivan and marketed for the "I won't drive a minivan, I drive an SUV crowd".


I drive a truck when I need a truck and an SUV when I need a station wagon. However, I appreciate the progress made through the years in operation and convenience from the days of my old station wagon.....I like the gen2 Traverse more than my gen1 Traverse, more than my Pilot, more than my Trailblazer (which was basically a 4WD native RWD enclosed two row truck), more than my AWD (original nametag) Pacifica & more than my T&C bloated AWD minivan, and more than my LeBaron T&C fake wood panel real station wagon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
But with an SUV you can load your all stuff like groceries etc in the warm of a cabin specially in winter. When you have a full cabin with the seats occupied what happens to the rest? If I really want a vehicule with a box behind I use my small trailer for dirt jobs like visits at the compost dump etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,700 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
But with an SUV you can load your all stuff like groceries etc in the warm of a cabin specially in winter. When you have a full cabin with the seats occupied what happens to the rest? If I really want a vehicule with a box behind I use my small trailer for dirt jobs like visits at the compost dump etc.





Of course SUVs have many advantages over trucks too. I just addressed some truck advantages over SUVs.



A trailer may be good for towing a a pile of dirt or a washing machine, but no way the Traverse is pulling a rented mobile home for a family vacation or parking in a low ceiling underground garage. Answer is to buy one of each for dedicated tasks.


Number one stupid question I get from auto insurers when they hear you want to insure three or four cars with only two drivers in the household is: "Who is driving the others?" Answer is:" Us, us, us (and me, wife won't drive the stick Camaro)......you got a problem with that?" Each serves a specific purpose Silvy=donkey, Traverse= family cruiser, Malibu=grocery getter and crap neighborhood scooter, Camaro = toy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
But since this tread starter is related to the Blazer vs Traverse I had a chance to view our first new Blazer on our dealership and I was not impressed to tell you. The size is very like the Ford Escape Jeep Cherokee with very small rear side windows that I hate. Would take a Traverse 10 to 1 instead of a Blazer. I dont see the point putting a extra vehicule between the Equinox and the Traverse family.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
I saw a Blazer last week for the first time. I too was disappointed in the Blazer. Small size, lack of finish. I had high hopes for the vehicle with the use of such an iconic name. In the end, I am extremely happy with the Traverse. In hindsight, maybe GM should have put the Blazer badge on the Traverse.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top