2018 Chevrolet Traverse RS Is a More Expensive, De-powered, Less Efficient Front-drive Traverse

Timothy Cain
by Timothy Cain

Priced at $42,995 including destination fees, the late-arriving 2018 Chevrolet Traverse RS is an oddly positioned member of the second-generation Traverse lineup.

The RS is the only four-cylinder member of the fleet — it’s down 53 horsepower on the 3.6-liter V6 in other Traverses — and yet a basic Traverse RS costs $12,120 more than the least costly Traverse. The RS consumes more fuel on the highway, albeit slightly less in the city. It’s also available exclusively as a front-wheel-drive model.

Ah, but GM says it’s “sporty.”

According to CarsDirect, the $42,995 2018 Traverse RS resides $505 above the Traverse LT Leather; $2,795 below the Traverse Premier. All-wheel drive is, of course, an option on those models. The Traverse RS stands out with blacked-out highlights: black chrome grille, black bowtie, black roof rails, dark 20-inch wheels. (With no official images yet, the picture above is of the Traverse Premier Redline. Imagine it without the, er, red lines.)

Inside, the Traverse RS is equipped much like the comparably priced LT Leather: 8.0-inch touchscreen, heated front seats, blind spot monitoring, rear camera mirror, surround view camera, 2-2-3 seven-passenger seating configuration, power front seats, tilt steering with no telescope, Bose audio.

But while the Traverse RS shares a nine-speed automatic with the V6-powered Traverses, the RS downgrades from the 310-horsepower 3.6-liter to a 255-horsepower 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder, admittedly with 29 more lb-ft of torque. Highway fuel economy drops from 27 miles per gallon to 25; city fuel economy rises from 18 miles per gallon to 20.

Essentially then, paying for a sporty appearance package necessitates the removal of the thumping naturally aspirated V6. Fair trade? Expect to see more or less similar equipment offerings just like this from General Motors depending on demand for the Traverse RS. And if it turns out that the torquier turbo powerplant is appreciated by consumers, don’t be surprised to see its application broaden in the Traverse range.

For now, it seems like an odd choice.

[Image: General Motors]

Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Autofocus.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars and Instagram.

Timothy Cain
Timothy Cain

More by Timothy Cain

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 27 comments
  • It's the GM (General Mills) strategy - make the cereal box smaller, but raise the price, and add extra air space in the bag and in the box. Sort of like your 6.5 ounce can of tuna that's now just 5 ounces. Pretty soon they will just be a lid and a bottom with nothing in between.

  • Ponchoman49 Ponchoman49 on Oct 12, 2017

    I see nothing wrong with the new exterior styling of the new Traverse but have a real problem with GM's current insane pricing. Instead of spending the money on developing this waste of time why didn't the 2.0 liter engine instead go where it's needed most - a Sport trim level Cruze sedan or hatchback?

  • HotRod Not me personally, but yes - lower prices will dramatically increase the EV's appeal.
  • Slavuta "the price isn’t terrible by current EV standards, starting at $47,200"Not terrible for a new Toyota model. But for a Vietnamese no-name, this is terrible.
  • Slavuta This is catch22 for me. I would take RAV4 for the powertrain alone. And I wouldn't take it for the same thing. Engines have history of issues and transmission shifts like glass. So, the advantage over hard-working 1.5 is lost.My answer is simple - CX5. This is Japan built, excellent car which has only one shortage - the trunk space.
  • Slavuta "Toyota engineers have told us that they intentionally build their powertrains with longevity in mind"Engine is exactly the area where Toyota 4cyl engines had big issues even recently. There was no longevity of any kind. They didn't break, they just consumed so much oil that it was like fueling gasoline and feeding oil every time
  • Wjtinfwb Very fortunate so far; the fleet ranges from 2002 to 2023, the most expensive car to maintain we have is our 2020 Acura MDX. One significant issue was taken care of under warranty, otherwise, 6 oil changes at the Acura dealer at $89.95 for full-synthetic and a new set of Michelin Defenders and 4-wheel alignment for 1300. No complaints. a '16 Subaru Crosstrek and '16 Focus ST have each required a new battery, the Ford's was covered under warranty, Subaru's was just under $200. 2 sets of tires on the Focus, 1 set on the Subie. That's it. The Focus has 80k on it and gets synthetic ever 5k at about $90, the Crosstrek is almost identical except I'll run it to 7500 since it's not turbocharged. My '02 V10 Excursion gets one oil change a year, I do it myself for about $30 bucks with Synthetic oil and Motorcraft filter from Wal-Mart for less than $40 bucks. Otherwise it asks for nothing and never has. My new Bronco is still under warranty and has no issues. The local Ford dealer sucks so I do it myself. 6 qts. of full syn, a Motorcraft cartridge filter from Amazon. Total cost about $55 bucks. Takes me 45 minutes. All in I spend about $400/yr. maintaining cars not including tires. The Excursion will likely need some front end work this year, I've set aside a thousand bucks for that. A lot less expensive than when our fleet was smaller but all German.
Next