General Motors is currently hard at work developing its next-generation vehicle architectures, with the goal of flexibility, light weight, and reduced complexity. The most notable of these include the likes of the G2XX (Gamma replacement), D2XX (Delta replacement), E2XX (Epsilon replacement), and Omega. Importantly, the D2 and E2 architectures will underpin the next-generation of GM’s core vehicle portfolio while absorbing current free-standing architectures, including the Theta and Lambda, respectively. The move from Theta to D2 will also result in a slight reduction in the size of the next-generation Chevy Equinox and GMC Terrain.
| PLATFORM | APPLICATION | |
|---|---|---|
| DELTA | CURRENT CRUZE, ASTRA/VERANO/EXCELLE XT & GT, ORLANDO, ZAFIRA, VOLT/AMPERA | |
| THETA | CURRENT CAPTIVA, CAPTIVA SPORT/ANTARA, EQUINOX, TERRAIN |
| NEXT-GENERATION |
|---|
| CHEVY/HOLDEN CRUZE |
| OPEL ASTRA/BUICK VERANO/EXCELLE XT & GT |
| CHEVY/HOLDEN EQUINOX/CAPTIVA |
| GMC TERRAIN |
| OPEL COMPACT CUV (ANTARA) |
| BUICK COMPACT CUV (ENVISION) |
Moving the popular Equinox and Terrain crossovers from Theta to D2 will result in a smaller exterior footprint, thereby making the vehicles truly compact in size — compared to the current models’ “between compact and midsize” positioning. Doing so will allow the next-gen models to go head-to-head with market sales leaders such as the Ford Escape, Toyota RAV4, and Honda CR-V, among others. The repositioning will coincide with a similar reduction in size of the next-generation Chevrolet Traverse, GMC Acadia, and Buick Enclave as they migrate to the E2XX platform and become “true” midsize CUVs, with possible extended-length full-size variants.
More importantly, the unification of the Delta and Theta platforms into D2XX will finally unify the North American-market Chevrolet Equinox and international-market Chevrolet Captiva into a single global vehicle. Both are currently based on variants of the Theta architecture. Whether the unification will result in a common global nameplate, however, is unknown at this point.
Comments
You are incorrect about Lambda. Although the new platform shares similarities with E2xx, it is not the same. E2xx is not even the same width. The new platform is named C1xx, and it does comes in two sizes; C1Xx and C1Yx.
I think you guys mean Chevy Traverse, not Chevy Terrain.
Yupp, that was supposed to be “Chevrolet Traverse”. Fixed!
Chevrolet terrain..???? Identity crisis??
That was supposed to read “Chevrolet Traverse”. Thanks for pointing that out. Fixed!
I would not mind a slightly smaller enclave as long as they keep the towing capacity.
The verano is also a delta…
This cleared up some confusion. I think GM definitely knows what they are doing! However, I am concerned about the size of the next generation CUV’s being on a smaller platform. 8-Speeds are a must. I’d like to see some small, boosted engines for the best efficiency as possible. All engines listed have VVT, SIDI, and iVVL (unless specified).
Equinox/Terrain/Envision-
-1.6L Turbo I4 (Hybrid Optional) that has 215HP and 230FT-LBS
-2.0L Turbo I4 that has 280HP and 300FT-LBS
-2.8L TDI I4 that has 190HP and 350FT-LBS
Traverse/Acadia/Enclave –
-1.8L Turbo I4 Hybrid that has 240HP and 285FT-LBS
-3.6L V6 (AFM) that has 315HP and 280FT-LBS
Verano/Cruze/Encore-
-1.2L Turbo I3 Hybrid that has 140HP and 155FT-LBS
-1.4L Turbo I4 that has 175HP and 190FT-LBS
-1.8L Turbo I4 that has 240HP and 285FT-LBS
-2.0L TDI I4 that has 165HP and 280FT-LBS
Sonic/Spark-
-1.0L Turbo I3 that has 130HP and 145FT-LBS
-1.6L Turbo I4 that has 215HP and 230FT-LBS
-2.0L TDI I4 that has 165HP and 280FT-LBS
Malibu/Regal-
-1.6L Turbo I4 (Hybrid Optional) that has 215HP and 230FT-LBS
-2.0L TDI I4 that has 165HP and 280FT-LBS
-2.0L Turbo I4 that has 280HP and 300FT-LBS
While such a move will probably help sales, I’ve liked GMs offering of larger CUVs, in particular Terrain and Enclave. The Theta/Lamboda offerings have been unique.
I would rather see GM maintain current sizing with the new platforms, while adding an Envision varient for Chevy meaning, including Trax, four different offerings.
Had GM gone modular, this would be easy. At this rate FCA will have kits before GM.
Well here is the deal.
GM has an gap in size with the Terrain and Nox. Both are a little bigger and heavier than most in class so their MPG is marginal for what many buyers in class want. On the other hand they have more back seat room that many like.
So I see them moving down to gain MPG and to better match the size in class. What I hope is they can rework the interior better to keep the same or similar room. They could lose a little back seat room as it is a good selling point but unless you haul a lot of big adults it really make little sense. I know in out Terrain my son is the primary passenger and he moves the seat up anyways. Even moved up no adult has complained about room or even moved the seat.
Cargo space with the seat up is marginal but down it is fine.
The front seat the dash takes up a lot of room and I would like to see it reworked to make it more open up front.
I see the other Lambda models coming in a little smaller too. They nearly match the RWD SUV models in size and price. If they can cut them back a little not a lot it would give them their own space and class.
If you want a Nox or Terrain of this size and V6 you had better buy it now as there will be no V6 offered. Nor will the 4.3 make it into any FWD applications as it will not fit well and it was not designed for FWD applications.
I think we will see a transition to many lines at GM like we saw back in 77-78 where the cars were down sized but still retained a similar inside dim. They all will lose some width but you will still not be cramped inside.
The bottom line is GM needs to lose mass. My Terrain is at 4100 pounds and is only FWD and AWD adds more. I get ok MPG with the V6 nothing to complain about but others in class are doing much better in smaller lighter packages.
Some will complain but for the most part I expect they will continue to sell well. The Theta models have sold well and the odd thing is they have sold better each and every year since into. Last year was the best for both the Chevy and GMC and it is near the end of their life span.
The real question is if the Buick version comes here how will it differ from the GMC and Chevy? Or is it a China only model.
240hp in an Enclave will not make it unless they take 1000# out of it which I really doubt.
Also the turbos are a fail in my book due to unrealized MPG and their increased cost over the comparable V6. Whenever I see actual drive MPG’s from the magazines they get sub standard MPG. And it seems like many actual customers complain about the actual MPG. Sure, if you keep out of the turbo you will get better mpg but from what I read that is not what is happening. Trying to move a 5000# vehicle with a 4 cylinder will cause you to be in the turbo any time not at a steady cruising speed.
So w/o all the hyperbole: http://www.autoweek.com/article/20130610/carnews/130619995
“Consumer Reports recently tested 11 turbocharged vehicles from seven automakers to see if the vehicles delivered on fuel economy claims. The combined city-highway fuel economy for all of the vehicles came in lower than the EPA estimates by a few miles per gallon.
In addition, consumers typically pay at least $1,000 more for a turbocharged engine. So, buyers not only pay more but are likely to get lower fuel economy than with a regular engine, the magazine concluded.
Moreover, in some cases nonturbo engines can get higher fuel economy than turbocharged engines.
Honda quietly dropped the 2.4-liter four-cylinder turbo engine in the 2013 Acura RDX and replaced it with a bigger nonturbo engine that gets better fuel economy. The turbo engine, EPA rated at 19 mpg city/24 highway/21 combined, was replaced by a 3.5-liter V6 that is EPA rated at 20 mpg city/28 highway/23 combined.
The editors at pickuptrucks.com put two Ford F-150s in a towing test, one with the V6 EcoBoost twin turbo engine, the other with a 5.0-liter V8. They got better fuel economy with the larger engine, 9.4 mpg for the V8, compared with 7.2 for the V6 EcoBoost.” And there is much more data in the article.
So if you are going to drive to get fuel economy and really work to stay out of the turbo you will get better MPG. If you are going to drive like a normal person then probably not.
285FT-LBS is more than the current 3.6. Now that the Lambda’s are going to be downsized, a turbo 4 hybrid for better efficiency would make more sense. A V6 for substantial tow ratings. My Malibu 2LTZ averages 25/34 constantly (and I drive fast
Where are the Volt and the Ampera in this new lineup? Will the Cadillac ELR also be changing?
The dedicated EREVs (Volt, Ampera, ELR) are question marks at this point, as we’re being told that they could ride on a dedicated architecture of their own, or one that was significantly modified from the base D2.
The Equinox is the perfect size for us. Comfortable for 4 adults. The Captiva is too small for 4 adults. The Buick sardine can looks great but its for kids. The Equinox serves us well with the 4 banger were not trying to impress anyone at the drag strip with it.
The Equinox has a rather enormous back seat, more room with the seat all the way back than any car I’ve been in the back of and most of it is really wasted space. Captiva is a little small on rear seat room but I am 6’2″ and can fit. Also I am guessing you have never been inside the Buick sardine can because I had more room in the back of it than the Captiva and that was with the front seat situated for myself. If Chevy can get the packaging right they will be fine.
The last I read they the EREV will be bases on the D2XX but it will be more tailored to their needs this time as they were included in the plans from the start vs. being adapted after the fact.
The key I think many are missing here is this is a very flexible platform and the models can all be a little different in size etc. I ponder that say a GMC Terrain could have a longer wheel base vs. the Buck version The Chevy may be smaller than the Buick version. Keep in mind these platforms are very flexible and can and will be used to a great extent to make the vehicles more different than before.
The key here is to get them lighter as the weight of the old platform has been the biggest issue here as with less weight the MPG will climb as will the 4 cylinder performance.
As for the turbo engines. I can say I have lived with one daily for 5 years and I love it. Too many times people who are anti turbo have never lived with one. I felt I was taking a risk when I bought mine as I was never a fan of a Turbo 4 cylinder but it won my heart fast.
The key here is the new Direct injected engines are not the turbo engines of the past. For one they are very durable. second they are very efficient. and finally they are powerful not just HP but in wide flat torque curves.
My Ecotec 2.0 Turbo delivers a steady 25 MPG city and 32 Highway and I am driving it like I stole it. I am not driving for MPG. It also is in a 3200 pound HHR.
Note that the torque curve can hit 315 FT LBS at under 2,000 RPM and hold it to 5,300 RPM. This under normal driving will deliver even better MPG but I do hammer it with on ramps and highway speeds of 75-80 MPH.
I do have the GM turbo upgrade package on it that increase them HP 55-60 HP but the added torque also increased the MPG by 1-2 MPG. As explained to me by a GM engineer the increase in the torque get the vehicle up to speed faster and allows more off throttle. This in turn with the DI fuel system shuts off the fuel when you are off the gas unlike past FI systems that continue to feed fuel.
Now with that said I would not want a Turbo 4 in a 4000 pound vehicle but I would have no issue with it in a 3200-3600 pound vehicle. Having time in a new CTS with AWD it ran fine. While not a V series it was more and enough power to handle the car and AWD fine.
The bottom line is most cars are going to be 4 cylinders in 10 years this includes most CUV models too. The only way to get power from these smaller engines is a Turbo just like most of the sub 2.0 law cars in Japan have done for the last 20 years.
We are also going to be faces with cars with 3 cylinders too and it will also see a turbo to make more power but more important the low end torque needed to move the car. Ford already has one and GM will have one soon as will nearly all other major MFG.
So at this point until you spend decent time with a DI Turbo do not discount them. I like the V6 too but I can not say I am disappointed in my 2.0 Turbo. To be honest it puts my last two 3.8 Supercharged engines to shame in power and MPG. Now I would not wan the Turbo in my Terrain as the V6 does very well there and the MPG would suffer on the Turbo in something that heavy.
Useful info.
Enjoyable reading.
Thanks!
So when will the all new Equinox hit the market?