GM Reveals 2013 Chevrolet TrailBlazer - Page 4

jmart53 · 03-23-2012, 02:26 PM

That's how I feel about it... I don't like one single feature of it. Looks like a Jeep and an Explorer had a derp baby.

I hope it stays over in Asia/Europe.

Captain Awesome · 03-23-2012, 11:48 PM

When you see Chevy/GM ads on TV now, they don't even say the name "SUV". They talk about "Crossovers" only.

This P.C. nonsense had better stop soon.

Captain Awesome · 03-23-2012, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgformula2k

I honestly don't know what's so "awesome" about this TB. Is it the body on frame? And those 2.5 and 2.8 engines (the gasoline versions) everyone on here crapped on. It looks like a 4Runner to me. Meh. I'd rather have a Durango, at least you can get Hemi power with it. And its better looking IMO.

The Durango looks like a minivan and it has the whole "Dodge" thing going against it. I'll pass.

Stew · 03-24-2012, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

The Durango looks like a minivan and it has the whole "Dodge" thing going against it. I'll pass.

What? The new Durango looks like a minivan? Are you serious? And the whole "Dodge thing"? How about the whole running the same platform as the NEW 2012 Mercedes Benz M Class thing? I would EASILY take a Durango SUV with a proper 4WD system and a low range over any "crossover" GM has to offer right now, given i would take the Grand Cherokee over it EASILY (don't need the 3rd row and the despite being on the same platform the Jeep has much better off-road hardware available). I will say I love the current Tahoes, just too big.

Captain Awesome · 03-24-2012, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stew

What? The new Durango looks like a minivan? Are you serious? And the whole "Dodge thing"? How about the whole running the same platform as the NEW 2012 Mercedes Benz M Class thing? I would EASILY take a Durango SUV with a proper 4WD system and a low range over any "crossover" GM has to offer right now, given i would take the Grand Cherokee over it EASILY (don't need the 3rd row and the despite being on the same platform the Jeep has much better off-road hardware available). I will say I love the current Tahoes, just too big.

You have your head in the right place, but not your heart.

Look at the other topics about the Equinox and the Traverse where I complained that these "Crossover" designs are not capable enough for real world use and other people came back and argued that there was no need for a midsize SUV when "nobody wants them".

On second thought, you may have missed my past comments because someone went around deleting many of my critical posts.

So, you are definitely on the right side of the fence regarding the absolute NEED for a proper midsize SUV, with a real 4WD system and capable towing.

I have had too many bad experiences with Dodge products in the past to ever consider them. Even if they have improved their reliability since then, I simply cannot support them in any way since they turned me off permanently years ago.

Captain Awesome · 03-24-2012, 01:28 PM

The thing is that there must be a lot of people running around thinking that GM doesn't need an SUV because "there's no market" for them. I suspect these folks live and work in high-rise buildings that they walk to and from, or live where the lowest temperature they have ever seen was 40 degrees.

I live in northern NY, and there's a whole cottage industry here where the used car dealers go south and pick up the (discontinued) Trailblazer/Envoy models and bring them up here to sell. They can't keep them on the lots when fall rolls around they are very hard to find.

So much for the "GM doesn't need a midsize SUV" argument.

Stew · 03-24-2012, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

You have your head in the right place, but not your heart.

Look at the other topics about the Equinox and the Traverse where I complained that these "Crossover" designs are not capable enough for real world use and other people came back and argued that there was no need for a midsize SUV when "nobody wants them".

On second thought, you may have missed my past comments because someone went around deleting many of my critical posts.

So, you are definitely on the right side of the fence regarding the absolute NEED for a proper midsize SUV, with a real 4WD system and capable towing.

I have had too many bad experiences with Dodge products in the past to ever consider them. Even if they have improved their reliability since then, I simply cannot support them in any way since they turned me off permanently years ago.

Sounds like we have had totally seperate experiences, between my falling apart GTP, my parents imploding Regal, and my brother's leaky 09 CTS, I have the same feelings for GM. Our Chrysler products have always serviced us well though with few, if any, problems. Guess it is the luck of the draw as they say. And i agree, the tech is there to give true SUVs MPG these days. Remember that Bronco concept Ford showed a few years? It was rumored with an ecobost and then they just built it? I LOVED that thing. It and the rumored F100 truck they killed, i believe were both supposed to be on the same smaller than f-150 platform. Now I have gone off topic, sorry.

2001ragtop · 03-24-2012, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fielderLS3

It's a body on frame? God bless GM. At least there will be one company that still builds a proper mid-size SUV.

I was speechless when I saw "body on Frame".

That means this is a real truck.

This was extremely wise. People who love their Avalanche/Tahoes, they can get a vehicle like this AND it has IRS too. I wouldn't mind seeing a picture of that IRS setup, but I'm sure it works.

They grabbed a segment that doesn't have many competitors.

Captain Awesome · 03-24-2012, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2001ragtop

I was speechless when I saw "body on Frame".

That means this is a real truck.

This was extremely wise. People who love their Avalanche/Tahoes, they can get a vehicle like this AND it has IRS too. I wouldn't mind seeing a picture of that IRS setup, but I'm sure it works.

They grabbed a segment that doesn't have many competitors.

As mentioned above... the geniuses at GM are planning AGAINST providing this vehicle to the US market.

(P.S. I can't find an emoticon of an executive hitting himself over the head with a rock. Please imagine one is here in this space.)

2001ragtop · 03-24-2012, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

As mentioned above... the geniuses at GM are planning AGAINST providing this vehicle to the US market.

(P.S. I can't find an emoticon of an executive hitting himself over the head with a rock. Please imagine one is here in this space.)

I didn't realize the U.S. won't get one of these.

That sucks if that's really true.

Number 3 · 03-24-2012, 08:11 PM

So just asking.....if it was never intended for here so it wasn't engineered for here should they still bring it here? Or are you guys smarter than they are?

Captain Awesome · 03-25-2012, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Number 3

So just asking.....if it was never intended for here so it wasn't engineered for here should they still bring it here? Or are you guys smarter than they are?

Apparently, Yes.

Never intended for here = First error
Not engineered for here = Second error
Not discovering these errors = Third error
Not reversing the first 3 errors = 4th error
Not correcting by sterilization = 5th error

We are in grave danger.

Captain Awesome · 03-25-2012, 01:57 AM

It's pretty obvious that what is going on is that these ludicrous CAFE standards are meant to "nudge" us all into craptastic econoboxes and mass transit. The insidious idea is essentially to offer toy CUVs that won't hurt the average fuel economy on one hand and then sell humongous SUVs that carry a huge pricetag so that only a small number would sell.

By failing to offer anything in between, they force everyone to choose between "Too Much" or "Too Little".

This pushes the majority of buyers artificailly out of a huge market just to satisfy some bean counter that doesn't even own a car.

fielderLS3 · 03-25-2012, 01:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

It's pretty obvious that what is going on is that these ludicrous CAFE standards are meant to "nudge" us all into craptastic econoboxes and mass transit. The insidious idea is essentially to offer toy CUVs that won't hurt the average fuel economy on one hand and then sell humongous SUVs that carry a huge pricetag so that only a small number would sell.

By failing to offer anything in between, they force everyone to choose between "Too Much" or "Too Little".

This pushes the majority of buyers artificailly out of a huge market just to satisfy some bean counter that doesn't even own a car.

Just like the 70s and 80s. History always repeats itself.

03-23-2012, 02:26 PM	#43
jmart53 Drives: 2012 Cruze LTZ RS Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The Badger State Posts: 564	That's how I feel about it... I don't like one single feature of it. Looks like a Jeep and an Explorer had a derp baby. I hope it stays over in Asia/Europe. __________________

03-24-2012, 08:11 PM	#53
Number 3 Hail to the King baby! Drives: '19 XT4 2.0T & '22 VW Atlas 2.0T Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Illinois Posts: 12,301 View My Garage	So just asking.....if it was never intended for here so it wasn't engineered for here should they still bring it here? Or are you guys smarter than they are? __________________ "Speed, it seems to me, provides the one genuinely modern pleasure." - Aldous Huxley

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
MSRP or below, Dealers	KILLER74Z28	Camaro Price \| Ordering \| Tracking \| Dealers Discussions	1316	09-10-2015 07:06 AM
GM Reveals 2013 Chevrolet Sonic RS	FenwickHockey65	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	47	12-26-2011 06:03 PM
Gran Turismo 5... No Camaro?	5thGenOwner	5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions	111	12-06-2011 11:06 AM
2013 Chevrolet Malibu Eco Priced at $25,995	FenwickHockey65	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	18	11-23-2011 01:22 PM
Lets Talk About Extended Warranties for our 2010 Camaro's from the Dealership a Sec..	Black LS3	Camaro Issues / Problems \| Warranty Discussions \| TSB and Recalls	39	03-21-2010 12:38 PM

03-23-2012, 11:48 PM	#44
Captain Awesome Account Suspended Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: New York Posts: 3,746	When you see Chevy/GM ads on TV now, they don't even say the name "SUV". They talk about "Crossovers" only. This P.C. nonsense had better stop soon.

03-24-2012, 01:28 PM	#48
Captain Awesome Account Suspended Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: New York Posts: 3,746	The thing is that there must be a lot of people running around thinking that GM doesn't need an SUV because "there's no market" for them. I suspect these folks live and work in high-rise buildings that they walk to and from, or live where the lowest temperature they have ever seen was 40 degrees. I live in northern NY, and there's a whole cottage industry here where the used car dealers go south and pick up the (discontinued) Trailblazer/Envoy models and bring them up here to sell. They can't keep them on the lots when fall rolls around they are very hard to find. So much for the "GM doesn't need a midsize SUV" argument.

03-25-2012, 01:57 AM	#55
Captain Awesome Account Suspended Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: New York Posts: 3,746	It's pretty obvious that what is going on is that these ludicrous CAFE standards are meant to "nudge" us all into craptastic econoboxes and mass transit. The insidious idea is essentially to offer toy CUVs that won't hurt the average fuel economy on one hand and then sell humongous SUVs that carry a huge pricetag so that only a small number would sell. By failing to offer anything in between, they force everyone to choose between "Too Much" or "Too Little". This pushes the majority of buyers artificailly out of a huge market just to satisfy some bean counter that doesn't even own a car.