2010 Chevrolet Equinox First Drive

This has nothing at all to do with the small-to-midsize crossover utility vehicle of the same name offered by Chevrolet for the last several years. Well, except that it is possible to balance a raw egg on end in the general vicinity of any Chevy Equinox, at anytime of the year. This is because of a special gravitational dispensation awarded General Motors with use of the name "Equinox" and also because one can balance a raw egg on any day of any year, anywhere.

Also, as you might have noticed, the 2010 Chevrolet Equinox has been substantially renewed with new engines and styling, and it looks considerably more like an egg than the outgoing slab-sided thing. Chevy therefore is reaffirming the central importance of fertility symbols to the vernal equinox. Coincidence?

Classy, No Yolking
Small crossover utility vehicles are like opinions; everyone's got one. Hell, there's even one called "Tiguan," if you can believe that.

To distinguish itself in this bloated field of modern quasi-wagons, Chevrolet has nabbed the front end of its Malibu sedan, grafted it onto the rear three-quarters of a Mercedes-Benz M-Class and, because it's GM, bolted on some chrome wheels. And there you have the 2010 Chevrolet Equinox.
Read Article

tundrahq - 6/12/2009 12:30:49 PM

0 Boost

No one cares about your pithy one-liners: What good is the opinion of a guy who can't afford to actually buy the vehicle he's commenting on? The new Equinox is a nice ride - Chevy is definitely improving. Their new cost structures are going to make more vehicles like this possible.

Whelan - 6/11/2009 11:55:16 AM

+3 Boost

I would go a little further than to simply start by saying this was bolted or slabbed on to create it. Although the M-class reference is a great thing.

The outgoing Equinox was a VERY successful product for Chevy, it had good sales, was a solid car and personally I liked it a lot, the drive was comfortable yet stable.

The new Equinox will do even better in this segment and continue with its success. I like the GMC version a little more cause it has better flares and angles and looks less chic for my taste. But both will do well.

tango - 6/11/2009 12:20:42 PM

0 Boost

I am seeing a classic mistake with the styling. While it is attractive, there is a trend being repeated that if not executed correctly tends to lean into disaster. Why do manufacturers have to try to make smaller versions of bonafide attractive vehicles "cute"? The headlamps for example. What's with the underside curve? Why not keep the underside of the headlamp horizontal like in the Malibu or the Traverse? This "adjustments" ruins the new Chevrolet face. I also don't care for the Mercedes treatment at the rear. The M class is a horrendously poorly engineered and built vehicle and any reference to it is likely to be negative. Why not go with an adjusted Traverse tail treatment with a C pillar set more aft? Also the barelled tail-lights remind me of the Dodge Durango's. NOT good either. I would find the extra cash somewhere and go for the Traverse to be honest. Matter of fact, forget that...I'd skip the Chevys all together and plump for the Buick Enclave. Now THAT'S an SUV.