You gotta love a truck division started by a guy named Max Grabowski. Hi! I'm Max Grabowski. I make trucks. What could be more American than that? Fast forward one hundred and six years and I’m face-to-face to face with a GMC SUV named after a diplomat with dubious powers. Go figure. And riddle me this Batman: why in the name of modern science is this four-wheeled Neanderthal still for sale at the tail end of the double-o's?
There is so much to dislike about the base Envoy that I wish to state for the record that it is by no means the worst vehicle ever sold by GM. (Rest easy TWAT fans; the Uplanderelay’s crown of thorns is safe.) Of course, that’s a bit like saying “Sure, Michael Vick was involved with dog fighting. At least he doesn’t support vivisection.”
OK, looks. The Envoy isn’t meant to be a pretty truck. And by God, it isn’t. It's not that's it's ugly. It's just that it's dull. So dull it's almost an archetype. SUV. Big, boxy and vaguely macho. Done.
That said, the Envoy’s panel gaps my only "real" complaint; they're large enough to accommodate an illegal immigrant. While some might appreciate GMC's sheetmetal homaqe to the Land Rover Defender, you've got to wonder how the company dared offer such blunderbuss construction in this age of robots and millimeter-perfect panel fitment.
Inside, it’s back to the future– I mean the past. Unlike Doc Brown’s DeLorean, the Envoy’s excursion to a simpler time begins well before the SUV reaches 88 mph. As soon as you sit down, you’re faced with a series of ugly knobs, ticky-tacky plastics and seriously kitsch faux wood trim. As Scarlet O'Hara might have said, why it's so horrendous it's quaint!
Everywhere the discerning eye looks, it lands upon a thoroughly retro lack of effort. The Envoy’s radio’s head unit comes straight from a ‘60’s sci-fi flick. The SUV’s gear lever restricts access to the HVAC controls. The center armrest is made of concrete. The glove box is useless. And the two center vents look like puppy dog eyes, imploring you to put them out of their misery.
The Envoy SLE’s seats offer up the type of thinly-padded insult only a Ford Ranger owner could love. OK, endure. My gluteus was maximized after just 90 minutes of highway driving.
Thankfully, the Envoy spares its driver said torture by reaching its destination briskly. Ye Olde 4.2-liter inline six still knows how to twist (277 ft.-lbs) and shout (291hp). Even better, the engine delivers its power smoothly right across the rev range, helping the 4967lbs. leviathan scoot from zero to 60mph in under nine seconds.
Going up hill with the [optional] 4WD system engaged, the Envoy begins to breathe hard– but in no way runs out of breath. No question: the GMC SUV is a capable “trailblazer.” Provided those trails don’t require more than eight to nine inches of ground clearance, you’re OK using all-season tires in the outback and you don’t mind carrying a few large cans of highly explosive liquid in the back (14/20 mpg), the wilderness awaits.
As far as on-road handling is concerned, remember that the Envoy is a once-upon-a-time body-on-frame design. It’s terrific for towing (6300lbs.) and lousy for anything else. Obviously, no one in their right mind would expect the Envoy to offer the car-like capabilities of a Rav4 or a CR-V, and the Envoy's ride quality is certainly up-to-snuff. But to fully grasp the full awfulness of the Envoy’s handling dynamics, we must leave the automotive universe.
At highway cruising speeds, the Envoy feels like a diesel locomotive riding on rusted rails. Turn the wheel and… nothing. The Envoy simply plunges forward (technical term: understeer). Like a train, it's best to apply a great deal of brake force (i.e. as much as you can) before reaching an obstacle– a term which the Envoy expands to include turns.
If and when the Envoy finally enters a corner, it leans in an entirely unsettling fashion (both physically and emotionally). Suffice it to say (by now), the Envoy’s handling is so atrocious that you have to wonder if its creation predates GM’s legal department.
After sampling the Envoy SLE, I tried to think of one reason why the GMC Envoy shouldn’t immediately receive the same doctoring that shuffled Old Yeller off this mortal coil. Let’s see… The Envoy’s got a rough-and-tumble frame and optional 4WD system and not enough clearance to use it. It’s ugly, thirsty, cramped and nasty. At $27k, it’s expensive for what it is (isn’t?).
Nope. Can’t do it. I’m with Forbes magazine. It advises readers seeking something sportier, more stylish, reliable or economical to keep looking. Hey, who wouldn’t?
71 Comments on “GMC Envoy SLE Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
I don’t see many of these on the road, at least not newer ones. The goofy radio follows the current trend of making sure you cannot swap it out for aftermarket head units. That’s great if the radio is good enough, not so great if your interested in DVD players and what not. Considering the target for this vehicle is 25 to 40 YO males ( to some degree ) you would think they would go for more sporting and flexibility.
Thanks for the review. The ratings are particularly hilarious (proof that short and sweet sometimes wins the day)!
GS650GL: spot on for target audience. Several of my friends/acquaintances have this car or its Chevy twin. For some reason, Explorers seem to attract more female buyers. Anywho, they often bought them when they got out of college, simply because it’s BIG, it’s a TRUCK, and it’s affordable. The fact that the thing rides horribly, sucks gas like an exotic sportscar and has only marginally more utility than my gold did not seem to bother them. “It’s a BIG TRUCK, dude”, did they keep saying.
This review made me ROFLMAO!
I just can’t believe they (GMC) still manufacture, and probably sell some of, these. The model seems to be to use any parts that’s sitting in the inventory (from past years’ GMC huge overstock) and bolt them together. Each sell turns into less inventory write-off!
This review brings back memories of the bad old days when GM’s vehicles were a joke waiting to happen.
Park this puppy next to an Acadia and you’ll see just how much of an impact Lutz has made. ‘Bout damn time too.
Let’s hope Cerberus will do the same for Chrysler.
What’s the point here? While I don’t disagree with most of your observations, the exaggeration is a bit out of frame (yeah, I know, for humor). The Envoy appeared back in 2001, so of course it’s old-tech. ‘Old Tech,’ like the 2007 heater controls in many new/redesigned Toyotas; Oh What A Feeling, moving 1970s cables inside plastic sleeves. What’s up with that? The GMC Acadia is now the relevant GM midsize SUV to evaluate. One thing I like about the Acadia is that, unlike the Envoy, it really is something different to consider from the Yukon. More fuel economy, better ride, and the same maximum cargo room.
There are quite a few of these gas swilling beasts around. The public likes em, not sure why they are for sale but nobody ever lost money under estimating the taste of the American public ;) .
I think we need some more gas guzzling trucks. You can never have enough.
Plastic knobs, faux wood, crappy handling? Nothing that we didn’t expect from an SUV review. However, I was wondering why you didn’t compare its driving dynamics to vehicles of similar size. Such as the Highlander/4Runner/Sequoia or Pilot?
In ‘02, I leased a Trailblazer, the badge engineered twin of this vehicle. My main reasons for doing so were that I needed to tow a boat, and I got a GM discount. I fully agree with this review. If anything, the Trailblazer’s interior was even worse than the Envoy’s, with coalbin gray everywhere. The quality of the leather on the seats was worse than some vinyls I have seen. The steering was slow and totally lifeless. My boat cornered better. The suspension was woefully underdamped. I got out of my lease early just to get away from this relic.
My family truckster is now an Acadia, and the difference between these two vehicles is like night and day. I’ll agree with a previous poster that Bob Lutz has had a positive effect of GM’s products, even though he doesn’t get much love on this site.
BTW, I’m still waiting for the one star rating. While reading this article, I thought this one was headed there.
I put quite a few miles on one of these in Sedona, AZ, two summers ago. We needed something with 4wd for those soft sand, rocky trails, and with enough ground clearance to avoid leaving an oil pan on a straddled rock. This was all they had. I hate throwing out the expression “worst car I’ve ever driven,” but this was as close as I’ve ever come. But I need to say something nice. The A/C worked great in the 100+ heat. And, um, it held a lot of stuff compared to a car.
Lets get one thing straight right off here: I hate this vehicle.
SUV=archetype=ugly=big macho hairy chest to pound on? This kind of stuff is really transparent and doesnt phase the alpha in the audience…or the cheerleader in his passenger seat.
Compare this to your CRV, RAV4, and even the outback and it boils down to this: The envoy is the only choice if you actually tow ANYthing of subtance (and Johnny Quarterback DOES have a boat, cheerleaders like boats too Samir). These vehicles also regularly do better than 20mpg on a highway basis. Economy is nothing spectacular, but certainly not out of bounds compared to the rest of the so-called girlie-suv segment. And even if you want to hamstring the Envoy for its jacked up status, at least mention that the CRV-RAV etc are only four inches shorter in stature (with less than one of those inches actually lowering the vehicle to the ground!) Handling is superior but thats a weight issues and without the weight, you just cant pull that boat.
Finally, even subjectively speaking, the CRV’s exterior along with the RAV4’s interior or easily just as guilty of aesthetic crimes against humanity as this abomination ever was.
The fact that its body on frame and has some smooth grunt fine. The real crimes here are the supersized heft of this sled, its price paid in handling, and the awful execution of the design/build.
“Hi! I’m Max Grabowski. I make trucks. What could be more American than that?”
. . . . That’s more of a Polish name. ;)
Great review!
“BTW, I’m still waiting for the one star rating. While reading this article, I thought this one was headed there.”
The one star rating will come when the Sebring gets reviewed.
Detroit-X: The Envoy appeared back in 2001, so of course it’s old-tech.
The GMC Acadia is now the relevant GM midsize SUV to evaluate.
No one’s disputing the vast improvement the Acadia shows over the Envoy. The question is, why are they still producing the Envoy? It was hardly a ground-breaking design in 2001 and it has even less going for it now, after being allowed to stagnate for over half a decade.
Unless GM addresses their core business practices, we’ll be saying the same things about the Acadia be in six years.
“The public likes em…”
Some of the public. My wife and I ditched our 2004 TrailBlazer at the first opportunity. My brother-in-law gave up on his lemony Envoy after about 6 months and traded it in on a Lexus (I can’t imagine how much he lost on that little transaction). Some friends of ours are currently looking to dump their 3 year old Envoy before it puts them in the poor house.
Samir’s description of the handling is dead on. I thought my TrailBlazer would be the perfect highway cruiser but instead I didn’t feel safe going over 40 mph. The only thing I thought it was good for was going out for coffee on Saturday mornings. I felt like such a man pulling in next to all the Civics and Jettas.
Great review Samir, I own a 2002 Envoy (don’t ask) and this review is spot-on.
great review…
I wonder how much of this truck’s DNA stems from the compact Chevy Blazer/GMC Jimmy. I know people that loved those trucks…back in the ’80s.
Let’s hope GM puts this model to pasture now that the Acadia is here.
there is one yet unmentioned silver rim on the whole gloomy, murky envoy saga. it is the … it is the….. offered 3 versions of the envoy.
like envoy xuv, the envoy with detachable hardtop roof. well ,looks like the massive frankenstein has tried to be versatile. and flirt with cabrio. envoy the mediocre is no worse product , than the rest of this truck baron family, the same superficial attitude to detailing, the same swaying like grandma after hip operation, the same shiny ,wrinkled like your granny`s…..egh…..forehead benches, and electronics sophistication like that of george orwell1s nightmare.
while lexuses stamping workbenches have reached Vernon Vinge`s singularity in fit and finish, the envoy still looks like an honest job done ,only done by some alabama brewery guy.if we consider that assymetry is the mother of art, then envoy is a piece of art. more like van gogh style, with barely discernible edges on panels and joyous vent gaps between most of panels.imagine,
by the time of birth , reviews were milder, smooth sippin, and homebred welcome, while todays audience, being pampered and spoiled by lexuses obsession with perfection, arrogantly turn their heads away from their own ol` country boys to get seduced by the heated suede benches of overseas pursuit of perfection. the same people, who can barely nail a picture frame to the wall, turn out to be the experts of car assembly cuisine, and only valid for caviar feinsmecking.
jurisb: like envoy xuv, the envoy with detachable hardtop roof. well ,looks like the massive frankenstein
Actually it had a retractable panel over the cargo area and an Avalanche-style midgate with a power window instead of a removable one. GMC discontinued the Envoy XUV in March, 2005.
Samir – the writing is brilliant, the vehicle execrable. As other posters have noted, this is an easy target.
Yet despite the availability of better cars and trucks from GM, the continued sale of this POS is proof positive that they remain intent on shrinking their market share. Why continue to offer a demonstrably inferior vehicle when the net effect will be to drive buyers into non-GM products? Do they somehow think that their more valued offerings will be made more desirable by the fact that they “sell” these at heavy discounts and thus alienate yet another group of buyers?
The looks are really secondary. The fact is that a very high percentage of these are never used to tow anything whatsoever, or to do any more serious off roading than inadvertently driving over a curb because the driver couldn’t see it from six feet up.
Sadly, this vehicle is continuing proof that GM really doesn’t want to get healthy.
These aren’t great vehicles, but are other midsize conventional SUVs like the Explorer and 4Runner that much better? The Toyota’s steering is at least as dead, and it feels even heavier. Understeer is the order of the day.
The Jeep Grand Cherokee is an exception; it handles better than the rest, followed by the Nissan Pathfinder.
Similarly, I don’t see that the Envoy’s styling is worse than that of its actual peers, and in most cases is better.
It’s not a CR-V, and it’s not an Acadia. Those vehicles are in different segments.
I thought the XUV’s cargo area supplier nearly went under because they geared up to build 100k, and GMC sold only 10k.
very entertaining review, thanks. i have to comment on the highly subjective assessment of fuel consumption, i.e.
Envoy 14/20 awful! sucks gas like crazy!
Acadia 16/22 remarkable! efficient!
it’s all blah blah. when you do the math and take into account the effect of driving style it’s almost a wash. there won’t be any significant gains in fuel economy until the clean diesels arrive and i personally think this country will make the switch (like europe) when people are able to sample what a modern diesel is like to drive.
fantastic writing, and once again, I am happy and impressed that TTAC reviewed a vehicle such as this, right after reviewing a brand new model (Aura).
My wife and I are/were slightly considering one of these…why? Well, with all the discounts, a 4wd model can be had for less than a similarly equipped Rav4/CRV, and we do tow a boat(wouldn't do it w/the RAV4/CRV, I would have to keep my old truck still). Also, 16/21 for a truck-based SUV of this size is pretty good, one must admit. But I can't get over a few things. 1) the interior in this vehicle, and worse, the Trailblazer, is in my opinion the absolute worst interior on the market for any vehicle available here today. 2) I sat in a Trailblazer SS at the auto show, hated the interior, and noticed that the door sills said "Chevy" on one side and "GMC" on the other. How embarrassing–especially for an auto-show specimen. Quality control on this vehicle is non-existant…work like this makes me think that the people making them don't deserve to keep their jobs. 3) 7" of ground clearance is pathetic for someone who drives off road from time to time. What is the purpose?
The 4.2L Atlas I-6 is relatively new and is apparently a great engine. The only redeemable portion of the vehicle. Also, GM is cancelling the next redo, so I guess they'll sell these for another year or two and then kaput.
GMC and Chevy should keep a midsized truck-based SUV, but make it more of a truck…I say take the H3, slide in the Atlas I-6 (or that new 4.5L GM diesel) and the new 6-speed auto, make a decent interior (the H3's is not a bad start), and keep decent ground clearance and towing capabilities. It could bring back the Blazer. On the other hand, fix up the Equinox to fulfill the car-based midsize SUV market with a decent engine, handling, interior, etc…that thing is really just as nasty as the Envoy.
My two cents.
It cracks me up when car guys review and comment on trucks as they still don’t get it. Look, getting all hung up on the qualities of the handling and steering is pointless. It’s a truck, and as such nobody really cares. At least not the target market, anyway. If they wanted something that handled, they’d buy a car. Or buy a car in addition to the truck. Maybe even have some hot speed racer, not-street-legal thing and then buy a truck to haul it to the track. Besides, what kind of handling do you really think you’re going to get when most trucks have suspensions that are not that far removed from the kind used on covered wagons. Precision steering? Again, who cares? As long as it generally goes where it’s pointed the target market isn’t going to care.
So, what does the average truck/SUV buyer care about? I’ll venture to guess plenty of room for stuff and plenty of towing capacity for more stuff.
For the domestic and reproductive truck/SUV buyer it probably falls along the lines of wanting something to safely seat all the wee ones, have room inside for some stuff, and still have enough umph left over to towing some big object like a boat or a camper. As long as it gets the job done without couphing up a piston rod or a transmission along the way they’ll overlook the fact that it steers like a paddle steamer and handles like the Radio Flyer. And when the SUV isn’t performing the role of vacation mule it’s the daily driver for the stay-at-home soccer mom.
For the active and less pro-creative guy/gal I suspect it falls along the lines of wanting something that can get themselves, maybe a couple friends, and gear out to where they plan to ski/hike/climb/snowboard/etc without getting stuck. And when that isn’t happening, the truck is the daily driver because the difference in gas mileage is still cheaper than buying a second car.
Now, about the Envoy.
It seems to me that the Envoy/Trailblazer is GM’s effort to make two diverse groups happy. The S10-based Blazer buyers and the Astro/Safari customers. Unfortunately, they failed miserably in both respects. A stock S10 in 4WD is a very capable off-roader, and both 2WD and 4WD versions are great tow vehicles. The Astro vans were extremely popular with people who needed 8 seats, a generous towing capacity, and wanted something less boat-like and less expensive than a Suburban. Why GM wanted to cancel the Astro/Safari is beyond me, but the demise of the S10 platform was expected given the thing’s tendancy to roll tits-up at the slightest provocation. So, GM mashed the two together and behold the mess we have now. It still has the ladder-frame, has plenty ot towing grunt, is less apt to flip but can’t go off-road worth beans in stock form, and can’t carry as much butts or stuff as the Astro. Brilliant.
As to ugly, that’s a standard feature on all GMC trucks. GMC has always been the ugly twin sister to the not-so-hot looking Chevrolet trucks. You can only do so much with the gaping wide-mouth grill motif. As to the craptastic interior and seats, by the review it seems that nothing has changed since my 97 Yukon was built.
To Frank Williams & all the other buddies here…
As a teen in the late 1970s I became an audio enthusiast for a time. I loved watching the industry increasing in fidelity and all the corporate-competition about that. But, I noticed that I was forever unsatisfied about my stereo system during this time. Not enough highs, not enough signal to noise, too much hiss, and don’t get me started about wow-and-flutter. Something always could have been done better. Finally I said F**k it. I wasn’t happy. I was now going to listen to the music, and not the system. And from that point on, everything got much better, and I never looked back.
In the case of the Envoy, the ‘music’ is what it does for your life, not how the ‘system’ does it. If you’re going to forever watch the fidelity of the vehicle, at the expense of the music (value/utility/scenery going by), then nothing is good enough at any price. Something always will be better.
For the Big-3, I’ve sort of come around from the “How can they be so stupid?” inclination, to the “Damn it, what can be done now?” group.
GM is producing the Envoy for several reasons: there’s a typical, too-long, GM-adjustment period from old to new. Toyota cuts it off and “Moves Forward,” GM, with it’s overpaid executive yes-men, likes to keep nailing that 2:00AM booty-call till it just don’t produce no more. It gives them “confidence.” Contracts in place get completed. Iraq gets ‘general transportation’ vehicles to get riddled with bullets (ever see all the rows of white Trailblazers in the news?). Rooms full of Jobs Bank people don’t get filled. The UAW doesn’t get prematurely pissed-off. And with the heavy discounts, people (with realistic expectations) get a good value for the price. Or even better, a 1-3 year old GMT360 vehicle at $10-15k makes a greater buy.
So where does the Swan Song of this model happen? Well, just watch; the GMT360 line will be #1 in some J.D. Power survey in the future, and then it’s gone. This always happens, and at least for two reasons: (1) GM does improve it’s vehicles over time, and (2) J.D. Power has to throw bones somewhere, and what safer place then a vehicle gone in the next year?
radimus–right on. I was going to go on a tangent of how this vehicle seems to be the result of GM trying to combine some niches and/or please too many people, and ended up with a damn-near useless vehicle…but my piece was long enough. You nailed it.
“Quality control on this vehicle is non-existant…work like this makes me think that the people making them don’t deserve to keep their jobs.”
They didn’t. A factory in OKC where these were built closed last year. I don’t know where the rest are being built.
Radimus, towing capacity was highlighted as one of the strengths of the vehicle in this article.
Handling is an unavoidable part of a car review. In case you didn’t notice, I did cut it some slack for its body-on-frame design. However, you know and I know that plenty of these will get up to highway speed. What do you do then when an offramp sneaks up on you on a road you don’t know? Or a deer jumps in front of you, because you’re such a rugged mountain man you’re takin’ your SUV out into the wild? You will turn the wheel and hope the truck pulls through.
Handling is the #1 safety feature on all moving vehicles, be it trucks or cars. Before stability control, ABS, traction control, pre-tensioners and all that jazz – comes handling.
If you notice, I don’t compare the handling to cars. This thing is miles behind its own peers, including the Cherokee (which is also better offroad).
I recall being excited when I first read about GM’s new inline 6… The power and torque outputs (at that time especially) rivaled many V8s and I remember thinking “Finally, GM has done something right”… Unfortunately, they have not made as much use of the engine as I had hoped (Why is this engine not available in the Silverado?)… and in the vehicles that it is used it is generally burdoned by too much weight. Disappointing.
The Acadia is a fine vehicle as long as you don’t want to tow anything. I am willing to live with truck like handling to get truck like towing capacity.
radimus–right on. I was going to go on a tangent of how this vehicle seems to be the result of GM trying to combine some niches and/or please too many people, and ended up with a damn-near useless vehicle…but my piece was long enough. You nailed it.
Thanks, NN. Apparently, the soccer moms must love the Trailblazer. At least around me anyway. I think GM probably kept a good portion of the former Astro market simply by default. There is just nothing else in the category that is even close. As for the S10 buyers that actually used it’s capabilities GM has lost them. The crew cab Colorado is not an adequate replacement due to the lack of the 4.3L V6 as an option. Funny how Jeep is doing so well since Ford and GM stopped building an off-road capable SUV.
I’m curious to see how well the Acadia/Outlook hold up. These things are basicly a mash-up between a FWD minivan and a SUV. They have better towing capacities than the FWD minivans do, but none of the players in the FWD minivan market have been able to build one with a bulletproof tranny. That’s a real problem when towing as the tranny takes the blunt of it.
Samir, you’re slack cuting has been noted. Thanks.
What do you do then when an offramp sneaks up on you on a road you don’t know? Or a deer jumps in front of you, because you’re such a rugged mountain man you’re takin’ your SUV out into the wild? You will turn the wheel and hope the truck pulls through.
Turning wheel and hoping it pulls through is completely the wrong angle of attack on those problems.
You don’t drive an SUV like a car. That is what got so many of those first-time SUV buyers in trouble. Many of the basic emergency maneuvers you can use with a car would roll an SUV. You have to think more like a truck driver than a car driver. For that onramp scenario you mentioned, you don’t try the panic turn to catch it. You let it pass, find a place to get turned around, and go back. Honestly, you should do the same when driving a car too but I’ll leave that discussion for another day.
For that deer you mentioned, you don’t bother trying to avoid it. If it’s too close to safely avoid without rolling the truck than you just suck it up and hit it. Same goes for most any other critter found in North America. I’m not being cruel here. It’s a simple matter of your life and safety, as well as your passengers, versus the animal’s. If you swerve to avoid the critter you stand a good chance of rolling over. That places you pretty much in the outcome of serious injury or death. If you hit it dead on, you’ll fair much better. The higher nose of the truck will keep the animal out of the windshield, and the airbags and seat belts will help protect the occupants.
Also, handling is not the #1 safety feature. The #1 safety feature sits between the steering wheel. If you have no concept of how to stay safe within the limitations of the vehicle you have no business driving it.
Also, handling is not the #1 safety feature. The #1 safety feature sits between the steering wheel. If you have no concept of how to stay safe within the limitations of the vehicle you have no business driving it.
Make that “sits behind the steering wheel.” Oh well.
Edmunds says the curb weight of the 4wd SLE is 4541, about 400# lighter than what you indicate, although still way too heavy. Isn’t this based on the same platform as the “mid-sized” Colorado truck? How do you get to 4500lbs curb weight? That’s nearly the equivilent of a full sized truck!
I rented one of these a year ago and the one thing no one has really commented on that I noticed was its incredibly inefficient packaging. I couldn’t believe that something that BIG can manage to offer less usable passenger and cargo space inside than a CRV. Whenever I see one of these things hauling kids to school I wonder if the purchaser realizes that they bought a large vehicle with the family-transport capabilities of a compact car. As others have noted, I really can’t figure out why you would buy one of these unless you have a soft spot for the driving dynamics of pickup trucks (which some folks do, believe it or not).
“If you have no concept of how to stay safe within the limitations of the vehicle you have no business driving it.”
Agreed. Which raises the question of whether folks are really making a smart trade-off in giving up a lot of useful handling capability in return for towing capacity they probably don’t need.
Radimus
Again, your point is noted.
However, when a Cherokee (or a Pilot, or Ridgeline, or a Rav4, or a CR-V) would sail through the same tests an Envoy would fail miserably at, there’s no real justification for how it handles. Why make it so bad when clearly, the technology is available to make it much better without sacrificing its ruggedness?
That’s what makes it bad.
Oh, and, there’s a reason stability control is becoming federally mandated. It’s because most people do not know how differently a truck handles as opposed to a car. It won’t stop them from buying a truck though.
“Isn’t this based on the same platform as the ‘mid-sized’ Colorado truck?”
Nope. The S-10/Sonoma and Blazer/Jimmy were built on slightly different versions of the same platform, but the Trailblazer/Envoy are built on a slightly longer and much wider platform that is completely separate from the Colorado/Canyon. But I’m a little confused by the cited weight of 4967 pounds. Perhaps that’s for the much-longer (and no longer produced) Envoy XL.
Edited to add: Yup—4967 is the weight of the 4×4 Envoy XL, whose last model year was 2006. It’s a full 16 inches longer than the regular Envoy, which is presumably where the extra 400 pounds comes from.
MW, you’re point is a good one but depending on how much towing or hauling capacity you need the compromise will swing farther from handles-like-it’s-on-rails and closer to handles-like-the-Delta-Queen. It’s just simple physics, and the various electonic compensation systems will only carry that so far.
Samir, if you want to make the point of the backwardsness of the Envoy I won’t argue. GM is just plain backwards. I’d like to see the tests you mention as while the Cherokee may give the impression of better handling in normal driving I’m having a hard time believing that it would really be any safer. Especially in the scenarios we dicussed earlier.
I won’t comment on the rest of the vehicles you mention because they really are not the same type of vehicle as an Envoy or Cherokee. The Pilot and Ridgeline are expansions on the Odyssey platform with the only engine available being a 3.5L V6 mounting transversly. Nice trucks, but not in the same class for power and towing. The RAV4 and CR-V and also in a completely different class. Apple SUVs and orange SUVs.
Oh, and, there’s a reason stability control is becoming federally mandated. It’s because most people do not know how differently a truck handles as opposed to a car. It won’t stop them from buying a truck though.
Hey, it’s a free country. ESP has it’s limits, though. And as has been demostrated in the past, too often people become emboldened and drive more recklessly thinking that the electronic nanny will bail them out. But there’s no law against stupidity. It’s too good for business.
Wasn’t this the MotorTrend SUV of the year a few years ago? Hahahaha
Radimus, I think the point of the review is that the Envoy’s handling is bad by the standards of a body on frame truck. Nobody sane expects a 5,000 lb. truck to handle like a Lotus but the trucks I have driven held a straight line well, and responded to steering inputs reasonably quickly. I think the take home here is that if you need a body on frame SUV to tow your boat, camper or whatever, there are many superior choices out there.
Radimus
Your continued enthusiasm for commenting is remarkable.
It is true that the other vehicles are not built in the same way as the Envoy. However, there is an overlap in how/why they are bought and used. Therefore, the comparison is as appropriate as comparing a FWD Acura TSX to a RWD Lexus IS 250.
Sice you asked, the Jeep Cherokee has a 0.77 skidpad rating and the Envoy has a rating of 0.7-0.72 depending on options and who you ask, which is comparable to the Toyota 4Runner.
My 2002 TrailBlazer EXT was a good truck for everything I needed. Great powertrain, reliable, great ride on the highway. It fit my three kids and the occasional Mother-in-law or cousin. Pulled my camper without a whimper. I still find the exterior design to be decent, although aging.
Sure, it was a great lease price. Yes, the dash design was awful and I wished it got better mpg.
So why is GM still producing these trucks? They are built in Moraine, OH by the UAW. GM can either build ‘em and get some money and marketshare or pay the UAW folks to sit in a warehouse and earn 80%+ of their wage anyway.
Why are folks buying them? To some of us, they look fine, do what we need, and deals can be found. Even bruised bananas look better when marked down.
My friend rented one of these things for a move to NYC a few months ago. I had to hoist myself into it, because it was so tall. It was kinda funny. The space behind the front seats was large when the back seats were put down, so we could haul alot of stuff. It went down the highway easily enough, after I got used to its sheer size (I drive a Golf). It was a little unstable in crosswinds – frankly it was scary – bit it recovered. When I got to NYC from Philly, I had been driving for about 2 hours, and I and it felt fine.
Would I buy such a vehicle? Absolutely not. Would I rent it again for an apartment move. Absolutely yes.
I think its the biggest thing I ever drove, tho. I cant imagine there are too many people who actually need one. But then again, how many people actually need a Jaguar convertible, my dreammobile of the week. Needless to say, Id rather have the Jag, and continue to rent the truck if necessary.
Samir, Radimus…
Excellent (and civilized) back and forth about handling characteristics.
RE Radimus’ comment:
Hey, it’s a free country. ESP has it’s limits, though. And as has been demostrated in the past, too often people become emboldened and drive more recklessly thinking that the electronic nanny will bail them out. But there’s no law against stupidity. It’s too good for business.
Excellent point. One can define tragedy as Financially Strapped Soccer Mom’s ESP failing as her 8 year old, (never maintained) Envoy (full of kids) hits an offramp too fast…
SUV and Truck driving anecdote: I often parallel park on a wide, one way residential street. I signal my intentions and move to the parking side of the road (leaving plenty of room to pass) before doing so.
While stopped and checking my rear I’ve observed some truck/SUV drivers tend to
(1) approach too fast and too close.
(2) quicky move to the empty side of the road while checking their side mirror.
(3) oversteer and (then) have to correct when approaching the empty side of the road’s curb.
This is rare/non-existent behaviour for car drivers…
Most people who are potential customers for this vehicle cross-shop it with the full-sized GMC Yukon/Chevy Tahoe/Suburban. GM’s full-sized utes do cost more, but they handle and ride better, have nicer interiors, and even more towing capacity. Sure the gas mileage is worse, but not significantly so. Sure they cost more, but not that much more, and the resale value is slightly better.
If you want a decent tow vehicle, get the full-sized ute. If you want a decent daily driver, get the Acadia.
Never drove one, but rode in the back of one with my wife and a child seat.
Someone hit the parked Grand Caravan I owned at the time and actually admitted it rather than haul ass into oblivion.
Enterprise was meeting the wife and me plus another body shop customer with her baby’s seat in tow at the shop to take us to our respective insurance rentals.
Compared to the much-hated-by -this -site Aztek we own the Envoy that Enterprise sent to haul us from shop to office was huge on the outside and curiously smaller than the Aztek inside. The floor and ceiling were much closer together than on Az, meaning I hit my head getting in and the vehicle interior seemed narrower, to boot.
My wife, who has ridden with our daughter and our child-seated granddaughter in the back of the Az remarked that this thing was really cramped by comparison.
Actually, the off-white interior trim didn’t seem that awful, though the chrome “bling” around the vents seemed to be arranged in such a way as to annoy the hell out of our driver.
Body lean in turns seemed much more pronounced than an Aztek’s as well.
My Aztek gets an average 22mpg city 3 seasons and 18 in winter weather below +20. AC doesn’t seem to affect mileage, but cold really knocks it down. 14/20 EPA for the Envoy means that if my experience at getting about 15% better than EPA mileage holds true here, my best in an Envoy would be 1.8 mpg lower than my worst in an Aztek.
Why would anyone want to give up 33% of one’s gas mileage for a “neater-looking” big box SUV that handles worse, accomodates passengers worse, has chrome in glaringly-wrong places.
The Aztek may be the most controversially-styled GM product, but the build quality on ours is quite good, the interior is spacious, the economy pretty good for a heavy vehicle.
I vote Trailbazer/Envoy as the worst GM vehicle that I’ve personally experienced thus far.
Zenith: if only Pontiac had not deemed it necessary to make the Aztek criminally ugly…
The Buick Rendezvous, which also does not get a lot of love, at least looked a little better. One wonders if there might have been a market for the Aztek if it came out looking more like the ‘vous.
There’s a reason why I enjoy this site – solid questions and answers without flaming. What a concept!
I personally think that GM did not go far enough in creating their new crossovers (except in the chrome department…wear sunglasses!) I don’t want to kick companies too much when they are down, but after comparing the specs of the Envoy/Trailblazer to examples like the Envoy/Outlook – the weights are around the same, the third row is still tight, and it still borders on underpowered with crummy mileage? When you go from, say a Pathfinder to Murano or a 4Runner to a Highlander, you will notice the savings at the pump – maybe in excess of 5mpg depending on driving style. However between the GM body-on-frame to crossovers, the mileage savings just aren’t there.
I do commend GM for finally realizing the truck-frame SUV craze is finally winding down, If they don’t give up following a Toyota/Honda example of constant improvement, they should have a sustained winner. These creossovers just scream for a hybrid or diesel option and if they pull that off (quickly), that is gold for their dealers.
It took GM so long (and it is still taking Ford and Chrysler ages) to get something that they could hopefully sell with a minimum of cash on the hood. I wonder if GM is starting to sweat a bit as the new Highlander hits the road soon, Mazda is selling a lot of the CX-7’s (at least in Ohio/Indiana/Kentucky), the Murano and Pilot are near the end of the current cycle and BMW and Audi are fielding decent crossovers especially now that BMW has gotten rid of some of the tooth-breaking suspension tuning issues.
I 100% agree with an earlier comment that GMC/Chevy is begging others to cross-shop when they keep this body-on-frame relic on the lots. They need to hide or destroy all traces of these fossils!!!
On a lighter note – if you want the ultimate channel-flipping commercial (besides “HEAD-ON”), the HORRID commercial of the flying gas pumps with the annoying remake of “I’ll Stop the World With You” would keep me from that dealer lot…and I used to like that song. Every single bleeping commercial break on FSN Ohio…every one.
I always chuckle to myself when I read the EPA mileage estimates. Are these based on the new methodologies? What I’d like to know is the as tested mileage when the truck is used as it was designed: full of people and their luggage, A/C on, towing a fully-laden trailer (or boat, tent trailer, etc.). I can only imagine the handling characteristics of this vehicle in this state!
As an aside, when I viewed the first picture in this review, my eye was immediately drawn past the boring, generic gray block of the Envoy to the magnificently engineered stone wall behind. That! is a fine example of beautifully-designed, useful engineering and completely puts the Envoy to shame.
True, the wall behind the truck is beautiful.