The automotive media have already received seat time with the 3.6-liter V6-powered 2019 Chevrolet Blazer, but until recently, they have yet to sample the mass market 2.5-liter four-cylinder version of the mid-size crossover.
Car and Driver got its hands on a 2.5-liter 2019 Chevrolet Blazer and said the crossover is “an entirely tolerable family vehicle that neither offends nor arouses when used as designed.” While certainly not a glowing review, there are worse things to hear about a vehicle, especially in a mass market segment such as this.
The publication described the power delivery of the 198 horsepower 2.5-liter four-cylinder engine and nine-speed automatic transmission to be “perfectly adequate,” and had little to say about the steering or braking, simply saying the Blazer “does them.” This entry-level Blazer was also riding on smaller wheels than the $51,000 Blazer RS the publication had sampled previously, helping add some much-needed compliance to the previously stiff ride.
“Don’t expect your Blazer to inspire any mountain-road gymnastics and it won’t ask much of you as a driver,” it concluded.
Car and Driver also said it preferred driving some of the Blazer’s better-priced competition in this hotly contested segment, particularly the Mazda’s CX-5 and CX-9, which the Blazer lands directly in the middle of with regard to size.
The entire write up, available at this link, is definitely worth checking out if you’ve been waiting to read a review of the 2.5-liter 2019 Chevrolet Blazer.
Car and Driver publication had previously reviewed the Blazer V6 third in a five-way crossover shootout, with the vehicle beating out the Nissan Murano and Ford Edge, but losing to the Hyundai Santa Fe and Honda Passport.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevrolet Blazer news, Chevrolet news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
Car and Tokyo magazine never likes American cars. I have not driven the Mazda but I have been a passenger in them and was not impressed with the interior comfort and layout. My sister Chevy Traverse is much more comfortable on long trips.
My sister’s Sienna is even more comfortable on long trips.
Hope they fixed the PCV system on the this 2.5L; the PVC system orifice on my 2013 Equinox 4 cyl froze shut during an early March 2019 morning drive; crankcase pressure built to the point that the rear main seal failed and engine oil was pumped out ultimately leading to engine failure; parts and labor for a GM reman engine installation >$7k…..
That shouldn’t be possible since in the event that the crankcase pressurized, the oil fill cap is designed to vent off that pressure, plus the dipstick will pop up and vent off pressure. Short tripping a vehicle in extremely cold weather is the only way you would have a PCV at risk of freezing up.
Look at the bright side, it’s still far better than the current issues Honda owners are having with fuel systems that are completely filling the crankcase with gasoline. Those engines are as good as gone with that level of contamination. Timing chains, VVT system, cylinder bores all permanently damaged and I doubt Honda will admit their problems caused expensive engine failures down the road. Not without a major legal battle.
“That shouldn’t be possible since in the event that the crankcase pressurized, the oil fill cap is designed to vent off that pressure, plus the dipstick will pop up and vent off pressure.”
You are only displaying your ignorance
For an automotive magazine to give anything less than a glowing review is strange. One of three things are going on. 1) The writer drew the short straw to review a basic vehicle. 2) GM didn’t wine, dine, fly and put the writer up in a premium hotel. 3) Both.
Then again it could just be a yet another ‘meh’ SUV in less than top trim level.
You mean to say Motortrend doesnt give their xxxxx of the year award to the highest bidder?
They should have named this vehicle ‘Lumina”……”Lumina APV”.
This is why it’s important to consider opting for the 3.6L DOHC-4v V6 because it will transform the 2019 Chevrolet Blazer into something above average and fun to drive as Car and Driver recorder 0-60 times of 6.3 seconds; but if it was available.. who wouldn’t be willing to do what Camaro buyers will probably be doing which is drop $9K for the fabulous 6.2L V8 which would transform the Blazer into a true sports CUV with 0-60 times probably close to no more than 5.6 seconds.
They’re not going to put the 6.2 V8 in this platform, period.
The Blazer is nothing but a parts bin crossover that gets lost in a parking lot of all the other similar looking vehicles . The only way GM will get any return on this car is with heavy incentives . Still not seeing any press on this and not a one on the street . Over priced and Mexican made , things that are bad news for the vehicle .
Parts bin is 100% correct.
Any true GM guy will recognize the Silverado steering wheel, the XT4/5/6 Mirrors, the Camaro air vents, the Cadillac cargo management system, the Camaro screen, the Equinox Gear selector…….I could go on, but I think you get the point.
Love the design and the engine, hate the name (with this vehicle) and the cheapness
Hell Yeah, this whole interchangeable parts concept created by Eli Whitney is for suckers.
Personally don’t mind the”parts bin”. In theory it should keep costs lower and it certainly allows the aftermarket the opportunity to create cheaper versions of the product.
If you are a Saturn, Hummer, or Pontiac owner you should be grateful for the “parts bin”.
Unfortunately the Blazer is similar to recent GM efforts with the new Silverado/Sierra, Camaro, and XT4/XT5. Way overpriced, overwraught styling, subpar interiors, and just so-so performance compared to other makes. GM needs to rethink the “pure profit” sales strategy and look to make a huge leap forward with the new SUV’s and the C8. Fire the person(s) responsible for designing the Silverado/Sierra interiors and sourcing materials. Poach them from Audi, Hyundai, Daimler, Volvo, or dare I say it Ram.
I have lived with the 2.5 engine in my 2017 Impala over a year now from Summer weather to Winter and now back to warmer temps and love it. Yes the stop/start is a little annoying and GM really should have gave us a defeat button. In every other way the 2.5 is a solid efficient engine with strong part throttle torque, a liquid smooth idle, no turbo lag, under 8 second 0-60 times, 600 miles of range on the open road and a full tank of gas all on 87 octane fuel. Simple, inexpensive and effective for a daily driver.
In the Blazer it has the new 9 speed which helps acceleration a bit and I wouldn’t be surprised to see 30 highway MPG from a highway driven example especially considering how far off the EPA is on my Impala with this engine! if the current Malibu had this drivetrain it would be tops in class for power and real world MPG considering it’s very modest 3050LB curbweight.
This and the recently announced 2.0L turbo engine Blazers will be the ones most people will buy. If they can get a cool looking Blazer with optioned safety features and accessories for less than 40k, they are good with it.
The Blazer have been garnering positive interest in the market, but sticker shock of loaded 3.6L Premium and RS models that have been reviewed by auto rags have been daunting to potential customers. Hopefully buyers will cut through the noise and find a 2.5L or 2.0L turbo Blazer a very attractive value and into their driveways.
I remember when the little S10 blazer came out in 82 everyone hated it. I bought one and ended up owning 10 of them ovr the years. And they became a hit with customizers as well. So despite its ugliness, we can always do some individualization to make it our own. The one thing I do not like on the current small SUV’s is the upsweep on the rear quarters.
Car and Driver’s love of the Mazda CX-5 and CX-7 are almost as disgusting as donald’s love affair with vladimir. It doesn’t make sense and someone’s clearly getting paid or blackmailed. Now, is the blazer better than the CX-whatever? I doubt it. Is it worse? Probably not. They both sport aggressive bodies on bland chassis. Hopefully some “real people” will buy these. If I were an “actor”, I certainly would not. But speaking of engines, your choice is for a boring four cylinder, or a minivan V6. I’d take the four, because I’m unlikely to have a good time in either, and at least less power will result in less torque steer and embarrassing wheel spin as I take off around a corner on a wet day.