Finding More Power for Your Chevrolet Equinox Means Waiting a Little Longer
General Motors will happily let you configure a newly downsized 2018 Chevrolet Equinox, but moving up a step in power means cooling your heels for a few more months.
The third-generation crossover bowed this spring with a turbocharged 1.5-liter four-cylinder as its base powerplant, mated to a six-speed automatic transmission and front- or all-wheel-drive traction. While that mill generates 170 horsepower and 203 lb-ft of torque, more power is on the way.
Chevrolet plans to offer two engine upgrades for the slimmed-down Equinox — a turbocharged 2.0-liter four and a 1.6-liter diesel. The first of those two engines gained its emissions certification from the California Air Resources Board last week.
While not yet available on GM’s online Build & Price tool, a spokesperson for the automaker tells us the engine should appear on the configurator about the same time the uplevel Equinox hits dealer lots. When asked when that would be, Chevrolet assistant communications manager Tara Kuhnen could only say in the “summer timeframe.”
Moving up to the 2.0-liter brings 252 hp and 260 lb-ft to the table, as well as a nine-speed automatic. The automaker estimates a 29 mile-per-gallon highway fuel economy rating — 3 mpg less than the base front-drive 1.5-liter model.
Diesel models stand to see 137 hp and 240 lb-ft, plus a significant fuel economy boost. Though the Environmental Protection Agency has yet to bestow a fuel economy rating on the 1.6-liter Equinox, or the 2.0-liter for that matter, the same oil-burner allows GM to advertise a 52 mpg highway rating for its diesel Cruze. However, that model only reaches the sky-high rating via a six-speed manual transmission. When equipped with a nine-speed automatic, the highway figure lowers to 47 mpg, though the 37 mpg combined rating remains the same.
[Image: General Motors]
Join the conversation
Latest Car ReviewsRead more
Latest Product ReviewsRead more
- Jeff S Always liked this generation and thank you again Corey for an excellent and thorough series.
- Lou_BC What ever happened to Reid Bigland and his law suite against Ram?
- Lou_BC This car looks a lot like my son's 2008 4 door Mercury Grand Marquis Ultimate .
- Theflyersfan ...and then the market for large personal luxury coupes choked on a hairball right around this time as everyone lost their minds and decided that they had to get the exact same Explorer Eddie Bauer edition as four other people also had on their cul-de-sac, or worse, the woefully under-braked and scary in most manuvers Suburbans and Expeditions so they can travel in solo bliss surrounded by 5,500 pounds of unused steel and glass because 'murca dammit!!! Those were the same people who were interviewed weeping at their local Exxon station around the year 2000 when a gas price spike hit and the .75/gal gas in 1998 was now at over $2.00/gal. I look at this Lincoln, and while I wasn't a big fan of it, I did like the Thunderbirds and Cougars of that era as I thought they made a bigger statement about perceived power and wealth compared to "I drive Brayden and Ashleigh to a dozen different activities that they will dump the second they turn 13 and get tired of that stuff" crude SUVs that were becoming the rage. And I have to say the taillights of the Lincoln drove me nuts. The neon part was really cool at night - excellent effect. I recall the rest being your regular old Thomas Edison lightbulb and the look clashed royally, especially when the brakes were hit. You had an LED center brake light, incandescent brake lights, and a neon light smack in the middle. That's kind of busy.
- Cprescott Why complain? You bought an overpriced golf cart and you know full well the company routinely plays games with its owners and has outrageous repair costs and insurance rates (which no one wants to talk about).
The base engine needs about 10 -15 more horses and make the 9 speed an option for maximum mileage potential for the gas mills.
What is the cost basis rationale of offering both a 1.5 turbo four AND a 2.0 turbo four? The raw material costs between the two have to cost virtually the same to build. Both have turbo, four coilpacks, four pistons, etc. By having two drivetrains, the engineering and calibration and certification costs are absurdly higher. Does the 1.5 exist solely for EPA manipulation? Because it can't be more profitable than just equipping all of them with 2.0T's, especially considering the elimination of options. It further seems redundant when they're offering the mileage juggernaut option in the form of the 1.6 diesel as well.