2018 Chevrolet Traverse first drive: Better looking, weirder shifting

[silvrsvt]

http://autoweek.com/article/car-reviews/2018-chevrolet-traverse-first-drive-cooler-and-useful-still-not-cool?utm_source=DailyDrive20170816&utm_medium=enewsletter&utm_term=headline-top&utm_content=body&utm_campaign=awdailydrive

 

Hmmm maybe thats part of the reason why we haven't seen the FWD 9 speed in a Ford product yet?

 

 

[tbone]

When I clicked on the link at first glance I thought the rear end picture of the Traverse was an Explorer used for comparison.

 

At least the new Traverse looks better than it did.

 

Perhaps you are on to something about the transmission.

Edited August 16, 2017 by tbone

[rmc523]

Here's an Autoblog review:

 

https://www.autoblog.com/2017/08/16/2018-chevy-traverse-first-drive-review-98765/

 

---

 

I agree with the Autoblogger's comment about the interior - there are a lot of bizarre shapes in there thrown in for "style." Reminds me of the Focus/Escape interiors.

[fuzzymoomoo]

Perhaps that's one reason why Ford is turning it into an 8 speed over 9?

[jpd80]

The problem is that whenever you move your foot down, it makes at least one downshift. Get a small breeze? Downshift. Going uphill? Downshift. Passing? Down, down, downshift.

 

Read more: http://autoweek.com/article/car-reviews/2018-chevrolet-traverse-first-drive-cooler-and-useful-still-not-cool#ixzz4q3bj57

 

And yet the 10-speed autos in F150 would seem to be less sensitive in regards to downshifting with small throttle changes..

 

I wonder if the Ecoboost engine's torque allows the trans to hold a gear longer and be less prone to downshift...

[rperez817]

Maybe Autoweek got a pre-production Chevy Traverse? Both Car and Driver and Consumer Reports praised the 9-speed automatic in new Traverse for being smooth and unobtrusive. http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-chevrolet-traverse-first-drive-review

https://www.consumerreports.org/suvs/2018-chevrolet-traverse-suv-first-drive-review/

[jpd80]

That is possible I guess.....

[rmc523]

That is possible I guess.....

 

 

I think other reviews have complained about the transmission in the Malibu and other vehicles too though.

[Kev-Mo]

Chevy knocked-off the modern Ford Explorer C-Pillar design that was spoke about often when the current generation Explorer was introduced.

[jpd80]

 

I think other reviews have complained about the transmission in the Malibu and other vehicles too though.

and we've heard rumors that GM was having issues with the shift quality of the 9-speed unit.

 

Perhaps Ford was wise to delay its rolout until all the issues with a new FWD/AWD auto, be that

8 or 9 speed could be sorted out and operate as well as the 10-speed auto.....

Edited August 18, 2017 by jpd80

[papilgee4evaeva]

Explorer from the side, Durango from the rear.

 

Engine lineup: NA V6 as base, turbo-4 as upgrade.

 

Only idea not copied from anyone else is the bowtie and the grille. Sheesh.

[jpd80]

I'm a little surprised that GM didn't copy the Explorer's TTV6 option..

[bdegrand]

When I clicked on the link at first glance I thought the rear end picture of the Traverse was an Explorer used for comparison.

At least the new Traverse looks better than it did.

Perhaps you are on to something about the transmission.

Agreed. It's an Explorer from the rear!

[92merc]

Well, it could be worse. They could be trying to build a BMW fighter. :-)

[akirby]

What is it with GM and their light grey cheap ass interiors?

[rmc523]

Well, it could be worse. They could be trying to build a BMW fighter. :-)

Oh just wait, that'll be rolling into your local Cadillac dealer in 5 years...

[bzcat]

I'm a little surprised that GM didn't copy the Explorer's TTV6 option..

 

Yea, the "upgrade" engine option is 2.0 turbo... which makes less power and worse EPA MPG than the 3.6 V6. Which begs the question... WTF?

 

Ford is marketing the 2.3 EB as an alternative to 3.5 V6, not an upgrade per se in the traditional sense. But the 2.3 EB offers much more torque advantage over the 3.5 and gets better EPA MPG so it makes sense for Ford and the customers. GM's 2.0 turbo seems to be the opposite... lower EPA MPG and only marginal improvement in torque.

 

As for the weird shifting 9 speed... sounds like poor programming algorithm to me. This is the first large SUV to use the 9 speed so maybe GM programed in some aggressive downshift algorithm to make sure it is not "sluggish". I'm sure a software reflash will fix it (or as someone pointed out up thread... maybe this is a pre-production car with preliminary software).

Edited September 11, 2017 by bzcat

[jpd80]

 

Yea, the "upgrade" engine option is 2.0 turbo... which makes less power and worse EPA MPG than the 3.6 V6. Which begs the question... WTF?

especially when GM charges a premium for the V6 over the 2.0T in Camaro.

 

 

 

Ford is marketing the 2.3 EB as an alternative to 3.5 V6, not an upgrade per se in the traditional sense. But the 2.3 EB offers much more torque advantage over the 3.5 and gets better EPA MPG so it makes sense for Ford and the customers. GM's 2.0 turbo seems to be the opposite... lower EPA MPG and only marginal improvement in torque.

Precisely. Ford has clear differentiation between its EB 2.3 and the 3.5, soon to be PFDI 3.3 if things go to plan..

 

 

As for the weird shifting 9 speed... sounds like poor programming algorithm to me. This is the first large SUV to use the 9 speed so maybe GM programed in some aggressive downshift algorithm to make sure it is not "sluggish". I'm sure a software reflash will fix it (or as someone pointed out up thread... maybe this is a pre-production car with preliminary software).

And the GM fans were worried that the Ford lead 10AT would be problematic,

who'd have thought their own 9AT would have these teething problems...

[grbeck]

Properly programming the new automatic transmissions seems to be a real challenge, and not just for GM. The automatic transmissions in early Acura TLXs and Honda Pilots were giving owners fits, too.

[tbone]

Properly programming the new automatic transmissions seems to be a real challenge, and not just for GM. The automatic transmissions in early Acura TLXs and Honda Pilots were giving owners fits, too.

A friend of mine who does not have brand loyalty to any specific brand, wouldn't buy the new Pilot because of the transmission. So it does happen to all manufacturers.

[meyeste]

I went and looked at one tonight, they had the $51k High Country version on display, I thought the seats looked small, and didn't feel like a seat I'd want to sit in for more than 30 minutes. I am 5'10" and weigh 170. I did like the saddle brown color of the seats in the high country model and would pay extra for them in a FORD. I think the traverse is priced high, though I am fairly certain everyone that buys a GM does it because they get a discount so MSRP's are probably rarely paid.

 

One other thing they did get right is the third row could accommodate three teenagers and it would appear with the second row seats removed and the third row seats folded down you could get a 4x8 sheet of drywall in there. I realize I'd never do this however the 4x8 drywall sheet laying flat is a benchmark I won't compromise on. Which is why I have kept my Odyssey around long past necessity, quite honestly it can almost hold as much as the 6' bed of F150. I am looking to replace both the Truck and Van with one vehicle which will likely be the next generation Explorer or the Expedition depending on the capability if the next generation Explorer.

[Anthony]

I went and looked at one tonight, they had the $51k High Country version on display, I thought the seats looked small, and didn't feel like a seat I'd want to sit in for more than 30 minutes. I am 5'10" and weigh 170. I did like the saddle brown color of the seats in the high country model and would pay extra for them in a FORD. I think the traverse is priced high, though I am fairly certain everyone that buys a GM does it because they get a discount so MSRP's are probably rarely paid.

 

One other thing they did get right is the third row could accommodate three teenagers and it would appear with the second row seats removed and the third row seats folded down you could get a 4x8 sheet of drywall in there. I realize I'd never do this however the 4x8 drywall sheet laying flat is a benchmark I won't compromise on. Which is why I have kept my Odyssey around long past necessity, quite honestly it can almost hold as much as the 6' bed of F150. I am looking to replace both the Truck and Van with one vehicle which will likely be the next generation Explorer or the Expedition depending on the capability if the next generation Explorer.

My wife has a last-gen Traverse LTZ with the saddle brown seats, they are pretty sweet looking.

 

I have not checked out the new ones yet, but a couple things you mentioned makes me think the new ones are better and worse at the same time.

 

One: the seats in my wifes Traverse are super comfy. Wide, soft, heated and cooled. We took a 6 hour drive on vacation this past summer and still felt great when we pulled into the hotel.

 

Two: you cant fit a 4X8 piece of drywall in the last gen flat on the floor. I just brought one home a few days ago for a bathroom reno. It had to go in at an angle. I really miss her old minivan for that reason.

 

I do like the style of the new ones. Im not a big fan of the style of the last gen, but my wife likes it and she drives it so I dont really care.

[tbone]

The new one is squarely aimed at the Explorer and the body bares a striking resemblance to the Explorer with the exception of the face.

[meyeste]

My wife has a last-gen Traverse LTZ with the saddle brown seats, they are pretty sweet looking.

 

I have not checked out the new ones yet, but a couple things you mentioned makes me think the new ones are better and worse at the same time.

 

One: the seats in my wifes Traverse are super comfy. Wide, soft, heated and cooled. We took a 6 hour drive on vacation this past summer and still felt great when we pulled into the hotel.

 

Two: you cant fit a 4X8 piece of drywall in the last gen flat on the floor. I just brought one home a few days ago for a bathroom reno. It had to go in at an angle. I really miss her old minivan for that reason.

 

I do like the style of the new ones. Im not a big fan of the style of the last gen, but my wife likes it and she drives it so I dont really care.

 

Good feedback thanks, the saddle brown is nice, it's been awhile since I have seen the older Traverse, other than to say I didn't notice the seats were small, I couldn't say. However as soon as I opened the door of the high country I noticed the seat width was narrow and the thickness of the cushion was slim. I always sit in every seat of any vehicle I am considering and decide whether I could handle sitting there; the answer has to be "yes" or I walk away. I didn't actually test drive the Traverse, unless they were willing to knock 7-8k I simply wouldn't consider one. Also I know better than to buy a first model year vehicle, especially from GM.

Edited October 19, 2017 by meyeste