GM expects a major shift in the buyer demographics for the Chevy Traverse nameplate with the arrival of the upcoming 2024 Chevy Traverse.
GM Authority Executive Editor Alex Luft learned the details of the anticipated change in the sex of 2024 Chevy Traverse purchasers during an interview with Chevy Traverse Assistant Advertising and Marketing Manager Kelsi Haas.
The Z71 trim in testing.
During the interview, Haas said the current-generation Chevy Traverse has a sales mix of 70 percent female and 30 percent male buyers. However, GM believes the release of the new Z71 trim level will get more men behind the wheel of the 2024 Chevy Traverse, leading to a more equal balance between the sexes in Traverse ownership.
The 2024 Chevy Traverse will kick off the third generation of the mid-size GM crossover. Production is expected to start in December 2023, while in the meantime, GM Authority spy photographers captured camouflage-free images of what appears to be the Z71 trim level expected to sharply increase male purchases of the model.
The photos, taken earlier this month, show a tougher-looking crossover with a beefier grille, two-tier lighting, red tow hooks, and a visible skid plate for off-road protection. The images of the likely Z71 appear throughout this article.
Beyond the exterior makeover, all trim levels of the 2024 Chevy Traverse will feature a new cockpit including a. 17.7-inch diagonal color infotainment touchscreen. Other elements will include greater interior space, more comfortable ergonomics, a redesigned steering wheel, better interior materials, and new colorways.
For motivation, as GM Authority was the first to report, the 2024 Chevy Traverse will be powered by a single engine choice, the turbocharged 2.5L I4 LK0 gasoline engine developing recently revised output figures of 328 horsepower and 326 pound-feet of torque.
The LK0 engine replaces the previous naturally aspirated 3.6L V6 LFY gasoline engine. The GM eight-speed automatic transmission provides cog swaps, while the crossover features standard FWD with AWD optionally available.
Under the body panels, the 2024 Traverse will be supported by a revised version of the long-wheelbase variant of the GM C1 platform. The platform includes several upgrades, notably including the Global B digital architecture. Production will take place at the GM Lansing Delta Township plant in Michigan.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevy Traverse news, Chevy news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
Maybe, but men don’t want under powered vehicles.
The new Traverse and Acadia will have the most horsepower and torque compared to all vehicles in it’s class LOL.
And that’s the “grocery getter your wife made you buy” class, right?
Ha ha. What’s funnier, though, is people who buy big trucks are so played by the dealers. It’s a running joke.
The ACADIA seems like it would appeal more to men, the interior is very ram-truck like and beefy looking, while the Traverse has finer lines and curves.
I have a 23 traverse Highcountry and I’m male and I love mine but to be honest I like the looks of mine better then the updated 24 but that’s just my preference.
My neighbor has one too for his personal car(AWD, but I don’t think a HighCountry), and yup, that’s his choice. Some guys like utility. I haven’t asked him what his thoughts are on the new one with the floating roof though.
no it wont. what is gm thinking (clearly not thinking)
So they are gradually ditching the 3.6. Too bad, I have two of them. Turbo 4 bangers, yuck.
Yes, and when the turbo fails in the first 50,000 miles, it will be a hassle getting it replaced and costly when the warranty expires.
The 1980’s called and want their statement back. Long gone are early turbo failures. This motor is built like a diesel and you rarely hear of those failures. The 2.7 which this is based on has a very strong reliability rating, little doubt this will be the same.
And Turbo 4 bangers with AFM, double yuck. The outgoing V6 in the Traverse does not have AFM or an over reliance on touchscreens. Also, the 2024 Traverse will have a smaller gas tank.
GM marketing and executives are using the same ‘non functioning’ part to make their decisions that they’ve been attempting to use for the last 30 yrs… and No, you should not expect any great improvements!
I agree that more men will take a look. So will the ’25 Equinox.
It’s still powered by an anemic 3.6 liter 6 banger that doesn’t make any power until you wind it up to 7 grand. Just buy the 8 cylinder Tahoe instead if you want something that can get out of it’s own shadow.
Craig, did you read the article? The 3.6L has been dropped.
This makes no marketing sense. Where does it leave the now same size Acadia, which has a much softer look to it. And yet is the ‘Professional Grade’, to to which I’ve always connected to contractors and men.
GM brands change like the tide. Lately GMC is entry level luxury with different and somewhat weird styling. Acadia seems pretty normal though.
A nice front end but that C pillar just doesn’t work. Don’t knock the turbo four cylinders until you drive one. Turbos have virtually no lag when accelerating and turbos do not strain if not overloaded, however, it’s nearly as large as the Tahoe but much lighter in weight. HP and torque are good but does that strain the engine?
The “much lighter weight” will help it to fold into a smaller, more compact shape and size when it gets into a 10+ MPH fender-bender. I’d stay with the Tahoe and try to live another day.
On the smaller crunch shape:
Yup and when it gets to the re-cycle salvage too. I’m surprised that gm didn’t put that feather in the hat, too.
Just don’t wreck.
You do realize a large unibody vehicle is safer in more crash scenarios right? This whole full frame heavy vehicle is only beneficial when meeting a smaller vehicle in certain scenarios. Unibody vehicles can better distribute their crash forces around the vehicle. Less weight to come to a stop hitting an immovable object which is just physics in play. Less likely to roll over which is one of the most deadly types of accidents. They are also better at avoiding the accident in the first place with better handling and braking. So no, in an accident I would rather it fold up around me in most cases. You can’t plan for all situations, but getting hit in to a semi from a semi it doesn’t matter what size vehicle you are in (as well as plenty of other situations). Probably the safest vehicle to be in would be a large luxury sedan, not a pick up for full size suv. Nice statement though if you can pick up on sarcasm…
Does anyone like the look of that “shark fin” C-pillar?
No, looks terrible with white paint. A darker color would obscure it.
No, LOL. Nor the red accented interiors they seem to be in love with.
I own a 2021 Acadia with the 3.6 V6. It is my 3rd with this engine. I have no interest in a 4 cylinder with a high maintenance Turbo so I will have to look elsewhere than when I replace it. The Tahoe is bigger and way heavier no matter what power plant it has
What high maintenance?
The use of that “sail” feature in rear cargo side windows is just stupid and detracts from rearward vision.
C pillar shark fin design a copy from KIA. Is that flattering? NO!
Male customer here. I bought a 23 Traverse. The 24 exterior is terrible compared to 23, especially the idiotic C-pillar fin blocking 3rd row visibility.
The age old I have the old version and it’s better than the new version. Every vehicle every manufacturer and 70% of posters feel this way. Until they don’t
The age old trying to belittle someone’s opinion by stating something that is not true. Inferring I owned a 23 before knowing anything about the 24 is outright wrong. I bought a 23 after researching both the 23 and 24. First and foremost, I didn’t want the 24’s Turbo 4-cylinder or 8-speed transmission. So, even if the 24’s exterior styling wasn’t terrible and/or didn’t have the idiotic C-pillar, I’d have still bought the 23.
The 23 was literally win, win, win for me. Better looking. 3.6 V6 with 9-speed transmission. Less expensive.
EPA emissions standards keep getting more stringent and it’s forcing the industry to make changes we’re not used to. One is a lighter vehicle and one way is a lighter engine. GM and others are now selling HP, not engines. If you the GM authority article on the 2.7 turbo it mentions of harder and stronger internal components. Most of us experience lethargic 4 cylinders of the past and it is hard pressed to accept a modern 4 cylinder turbo with HP more than most V8’s of the past. V8’s are fading away and V6’s may follow. Stellantis has the Hemi V8 on the discontinued list to be replaced by a straight six. When it comes to towing, nothing beats displacement.
You’re kidding right? I mean if you like the look of a minivan, then I get you thinking the ’23 is better looking. If you like a boxier, more truck-like, manly looking SUV then the ’24 is unquestionably better. I’d never consider buying one of the old Traverse’s. My ’24 RS in all black arrives soon. On a lot with a VIN awaiting transport. The only other car I was even looking at was a ’24 Jeep Grand Cherokee, but the tech and the looks of the ’24 Traverse RS blow away the Jeep, assuming I’m trying to stay at or under the price of the ’24 Traverse RS.
How? With the weird sail panel and a wheezing 4 cylinder as the sole power train? Classic GM blunder on ruining a solid product that people actually wanted. Now the Traverse will sink into rebate land.
You can butch it up but it still is not a vehicle for off road let alone Moab.
It is a family truckster.
Heh, Mr Griswald if you think you hate it now just wait till you drive it.
Look this is a family vehicle and bigger tires will not make it an off road beast as they try to make it look like.
Let it cater to the segment it was designed for.
Since it’s release to the public, the Traverse’s record for keeping customers coming back was never a thing. I feel that folks looking for a “Tahoe” feel without the price tag were targeted for this vehicle. Although the Tahoe has its perks for its price, it also had its fair share of flaws. Back to the “new” Traverse” and its marketing. The design resembles a mini Tahoe look. For a first glance, I think the design department did a great job. It completely molded out of the ugly cocoon that it once was. But, like we all know, you can’t polish a turd. What I mean is, by removing the sluggish V6 for a better performing I4 turbo better backs up its new design. Now it’s a completely new turd (product). For a he/him person like me in the confusing world that we live in today, it looks good! I’d consider purchasing this if it was a little higher lifted (few inches) and off roading in this thing looked realistic. Maybe consider putting a 4 cyl turbo diesel? Fuel range would be crazy in this thing! That alone would set it apart from the other brands! But don’t go nuts on the price. That’ll push customers away. Make a good product that will sell itself. That’ll keep bringing the customers back!
“the Traverse’s record for keeping customers coming back”
This is completely untrue. If you look into it, you’ll see that people are constantly bringing these back to the dealer for expensive maintenance.
Ha! I get it. I meant coming back for a new one. They hardly ever do.
I like the new front end look, but not the engine, give me a v-6. Z-71 and skid plate doesn’t make up for rubber band engine. Look at the 4-cylinder Silverados they can’t sell without big rebates.
GM must have woke whizz kids making these decisions.
You can still get the 3.6 in the Trailblazer
No you can’t, the trailblazer has never offered the 3.6.
Please find me one of these unicorn Chevy Trailblazers that has a 3.6L V6. That would be an absolute monster.
A much needed improvement in both engine and design!
The executive who approved that ridiculous reverse shark fin c pillar is probably the same one who approved downsizing the GMC Acadia in2017
I get it, why replace the V6 with a 4 banger turbo? Well, have you driven both up a grade yet? Or is this just based on personal opinions, which is welcomed. We’re in America and we’re all Americans. Please take the time to drive/try both engines up a grade, then you’ll understand. The numbers show it, specially the torque band of the turbo 4. It doesn’t make sense, but it works great!! Try it out!
Still a girly vehicle like the rav4 and crv
male here and no traverse is attractive to me. If for some reason i decided i no longer needed a truck or a large suv that can haul a trailer. but i needed a mom suv, then id pick acura rdx
Have they hired Bud Light’s marketing team? Seems they are trying to absurdly make a “tougher” looking SUV while abandoning their suburban mom family hauler base. The interior options on the Chevrolet.com site are not competitive in any way. Don’t get me started on the fact that they abandoned the Premier model.
If your looking for men to buy your vehicles. Make a real bronco competitior. Enough with the crossover mom cars….also stop using retro names to try to attract people to them. Get creative Or actually do a real tribute to the retro nameplate
They made the Chevy Beast concept… id be happy with a production version of that
The outgoing Traverse is better.
This thing looks bloated.
And the stupid “floating roof” nonsense HAS to end!!
I can’t believe the amount of racist, misogynistic, comments in here. It’s a freaking CUV, people, not a testosterone supplement. If you need a car to make you feel “more manly” then you’ve got bigger….or should I say, SMALLER, issues to deal with. I’d say get a grip but some of you don’t sound like you have enough to do so.
2022 Traverse with 12,000 miles not impress with 3.6 after it failed. But have to say I have a Chevy with turbo so far not an issues but time will tell
Does this mean the 2024 XT6 has the Global B architecture, too?
NOBODY WILL BE GETTING ONE WITH THIS STRIKE GOING ON. CMON MARY GIVE THE WORKERS A RAISE FOR A CHANGE!!!!
GM is now trying to focus on male buyers? Not everything is going to be electric CUVs for old ladies???
Bruce you are correct, I’m sure back orders are Backing up!!!!
Buy it for the OL and sit in the backseat with sunglasses on and a hat on your head.
They should left the 3.6 V6 27 city and 34-37 hwy,fwd version awesome suv
You are about 5-10 above the EPA rating….but if you can coax those kinda of fuel economy numbers out of the V6 it would be interesting to see what you could do with the 2.5 turbo 4 in the 2024 !