General Motors has announced new details concerning the 2024 Chevy Equinox EV, including range-per-charge estimates for several of the trim levels. In the new announcement, the automaker has confirmed that the Chevy Equinox EV AWD will offer an EPA-estimated 285 miles of range per charge, while also stating that the Equinox EV FWD will offer 319 miles of range. GM also expects the Equinox EV FWD to be the most-affordable all-electric vehicle to offer 319 miles of range.
The announcement also included pricing details for the new all-electric crossover, as GM Authority covered previously. The entry-level 1LT FWD starts at $34,995, including the destination freight charge ($1,395), before incentives. GM states that the new all-electric Equinox will be eligible for a Clean Vehicle Federal Tax Credit of up to $7,500, which would knock the final price for the Equinox EV 1LT FWD down to $27,495. Check out our previous coverage for more Chevy Equinox EV trim level pricing.
Late last year, Natural Resources Canada released energy efficiency ratings for the 2024 Chevy Equinox EV FWD. The calculations include a driving range of 513 km, or 319 miles, which line up with the GM’s recent confirmation. The energy efficiency estimates also include a city fuel economy equivalent of 118 MPGe, a highway fuel economy equivalent of 98 MPGe, and a combined fuel economy equivalent of 107 MPGe. According to these results, the Chevy Equinox EV is slightly less efficient than the outgoing Chevy Bolt EV and Chevy Bolt EUV, with the latter models offering an efficiency of 28 kWh per 100 miles and 29 kWh per 100 miles, respectively.
As for the bits under the skin, the Chevy Equinox EV rides on the GM BEV3 platform, with GM Ultium batteries and GM Ultium Drive motors providing motive power. Production is under way now at the GM Ramos Arizpe plant in Mexico.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevy Equinox EV news, Chevy news, GM electric vehicle news, GM business news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
Same old, same old. Poor range and high charging times. Pass.
In addition, it’s not a clean vehicle. Fossil fuels are used to generate the electricity to charge the vehicle, and more importantly, It’s more polluting to manufacture the vehicle. Is there a break even point where the vehicle will become less polluting than it’s ICE counterpart, yes. But this breakeven point is out several years beyond where anyone will have kept the vehicle, meaning the vehicle we dumped long before it breaks even and becomes less polluting.
Where I live, electricity is produce by 100% clean sources (Hydro, wind and solar). So it’s less pollution to drive electric véhicule than gaz vehicule for many places around the world.
There is no solar/wind power plant on the planet that isn’t backed up by a fossil fuel power plant.
You are right. In quebec we have a fossil fuel plant. It’s been use for 0,0049% of all the energy produced last year. Sources : hydroquebec.com
You took the words right out of my mouth…LOL….moving on!
So the previous comment was deleted, nevertheless if you google Financial Post article written by Marisa Coulton on July 13, 2023, you will see that Quebec is running out of power by 2027 because they cant keep up, theyve partnered with natural gas company to help demand, and even purchase fossil fuel produced power from the US to prop them up. So while people love lying about renewable power, the truth is it’s not that great and very hit or miss. But I never expect truth from EV or renewable propagandists.
You should check the article written by Jerome Labbé from Radio Canada , November 2, 2023. Quebec province will double is energy capacity by 2050 and invest up to 185 billions. Only wind, hydro or solar energy. We will be ok.
2050? Really? Thats awesome, because when I last looked at math, 2027 was closer to 2050.
Everything you just stated doesn’t sound valid. Please give us the sources where you received this information so we can fact-check your post. Disinformation about EVs is rampant online, and I hope you’re not another victim.
Fossil fuels are also used to keep gas pumps / stations running, transport the fuel to each station, and building ICE vehicles. The extraction of fossil fuels and enrichment for gasoline/ diesel is also incredibly dirty as well.
EVs may not be a true green solution (mass transit is) but they’re still cleaner than ICE vehicles overall. To suggest EVs are a wash is completely false.
We who have photovoltaic energy systems in our homes can charge cleanly for free. And do you get gasoline from the sky? No, and you need electricity to pump fuel, so that makes gasoline cars twice as dirty!
well, if an EV isnt a clean vehicle, then there are no vehicles that are clean. fossil fuel requires drilling, refining, transporting oil, with all of the high electric cost for refining, and dispensing. transportation requires even more oil to be drilled for, refined, transported, and dispensed, and while coal is still used for electricity, its loosing out because its make no economic sense, but that electricity is used by refiners and dispensers too. and even solar requires mining transporting of materials, and transportation of the end product. wind is the same.
there is no free lunch today. and just so you know, when we rode horses, they werent exactly clean either, seems that when the horse died, it was left where it died (which in a city meant in some cases that the remains could and did impact human food supply of the day)
Not 100% true. EV’s are cleaner than ICE cars even when taking into consideration where the electricity comes from. Don’t forget that that ICE car depends on drilling, shipping, pumping, refining, shipping again before it’s burnt at an efficiency rating of less than 30%. EV’s use 85-90% of the energy they store. ICE cars do not, they’re incredibly inefficient. The breakeven point can be anywhere from 2 to 5 years, again depending on the electricity source.
Don’t try to confuse them with facts. If Fox “News” rage heads didn’t say it, they don’t believe it.
well poor range? so how many gas vehicles can go the 300+ miles o a gallon of gas?
GM has been underestimating the range for all their EVs. I’m confident this will hit 300mi easy. It’s still more than other EVs in it’s price range.
I think you are thinking of tesla. gm has I think 1 lawsuit for range issues. From mashable about tesla, “Over the summer, a report from Reuters alleged that Tesla was purposefully inflating the EV range numbers and the company was doing so based on direct orders from its CEO Elon Musk.” A quick search of tesla range lawsuits gets a ton of hits. Ironically a search for gm range lawsuits gets ICE ones, a couple tesla ones, and 1 for bolt about range redux from a fire.
Out of Spec Reviews and InsideEVs on YT have tested the Hummer and Lyriq and both went over their range estimates. TFLEV has tested the BlazerEV and it did very well.
300 miles is reasonable here at this price point.
As for clean or not that is not the objective for GM. The point is to meet future regulations set by the government and still make money. This is about survival.
GM has 10 years to try to lower prices or get the far left green agenda politicians to back off on these future regulations Till that happens they will continue to build two of each of these models. Will see two Nox for a while.
How is reducing pollution a far left agenda only? Shouldn’t everyone be on that train?
We all know that breathable air is basically communism.
Yes but not at the expense of American jobs, consumer choice, and skyrocketing new vehicle prices that are making automobiles more and more out of the reach of the average person.
Maybe ought to blame skyrocketing corporate profits and executive compensation packages to your list of reasons car prices are going up.
Fuel economy regulations end up generally saving consumers money in the long run, as spending less on gas. And less for hospital care due to lower asthma and cancer rates.
The alleged reduced cost of healthcare by replacing ICE vehicles probably is next to nothing.
and know do you know that? and how many peer reviewed studies show that?
Studies and experts put it about $5/gal burned. But that was maybe 5 years ago. So highe now with inflation.
So over if average vehicle age is 12 years and average annual miles is 12,000 and average mpg is 25.
That works out to about $28,800 per car. That’s what the EV tax credit should be.
What good are the jobs when we can’t breathe? You honestly think consumers have choice? Hahahaha. No. We get to choose from what they offer us.
well, you might think so, but some probably dont care as longs as its not them, and they can continue to make monet
In my humble opinion 300 Miles of Range should be the absolute Bare Minimum on BEV’s going forward.
Automakers that know how to produce them can utilize differing sized Packs to achieve stated goal.
This notion that just because someone decides to purchase a smaller sized vehicle should get less range is insane.
People road-trip their small vehicles all the time.
Also, DC Fastcharging speed should be at bare minimum 170kW on any vehicle going forward.
Curious how did you come up with those numbers and especially the 170kW charge rate? Now consider where will most be charging and when. And consider how MOST drive in a given week or day. Now for those that have to just have it just because it makes them safe or not waste a minute…wait 5 to 10 years for yours I say. Meanwhile we will enjoy the incremental benefits they provide or I will be dead by the time the perfect one comes out.
@imanjunk
Very simple.
300 Miles covers the majority of drivers on a Road Trip to maybe having to make one Charging stop. Majority do not drive more than 400 miles in a single day while on a road trip.
Also, that is the range give or take that the majority of consumers are used to getting on a single fillip of gasoline. Yes there are vehicles that can get 600 Miles just like there are EV’s that can get over 500 Miles of range.
As for the 170kW charging speed being the bare minimum is that most current battery pack sizes can charge up from 10% to 80% within 25 Minutes at that speed.
If vehicles exist that can charge at 250kW and 350kW for the same price why would anyone chose a vehicle that charges at say 120kW and be willing to sit and wait longer than necessary…..None would.
Also, I could be misreading your statement but it seems like you are under the impression that ALL EV drivers will be charging at home and that is not the case. Not everyone will have access to a garage with a charger or an overnight parking spot with level 2 Charging.
Look at China. Most live in Apartments and that is why there are DC Fast Chargers that go up to 650kW
Also, 300 Miles pretty much provides range for most consumers for their week. On average Americans drive 37 Miles per day.
Why would 300 miles of range should be an absolute bare minimum?
There are plenty of gas cars that have less range than that.
Who are you to presume and impose the needs of a vehicle on other people?
There are people that live in urban environments that don’t commute very far and use other transportation means for distance travel. Why would they need an EV with more than 300 miles of range?
Sure some people will like to have an EV with more than 300 miles of range. I think people like you perpetuate this myth that these range numbers are a must.
I currently have (both a Bolt and a Volt). On my Volt I drive FAR more than the average person and live in a smaller fairly rural town and with just 50 miles of range I’m 95% electric!
Also lots of people are multi-car households. Perhaps one is a long range EV and one can be a short range EV?
And what’s the problem of offering options with multiple battery sizes so people can pick the car that suits their needs. There will be people that don’t want to spend several thousand dollars more on a battery they don’t need.
And if you tow a lot at distance 300 miles isn’t going to be enough. That’s why vehicles like the Silverado EV will have three different battery sizes. One with 450 miles of range. That’s so that you have a good 200-300 miles of towing range. And on this vehicle 170KW charging is way too slow.
An EV with 200 miles of range a 50KWh battery pack and costs $25K with a 100KW charge rate would likely be very attractive for a lot of people.
@Neromancer
You are assuming that in the Future consumers will not just have an EV as their lone vehicle.
I do not make such an assumption. Very happy that you and others are lucky enough to have two vehicles but for the majority of consumers they have one vehicle that needs to take care of all their needs.
Not so much the peak charge rate, but rather the charge curve and average time to charge 10%-80% that matters for road trips or weekly charging if you can’t charge at home or work or other convenient locations with L2 charging.
15-30 minutes for 10%-80% charge is acceptable. (15 minutes is gonna be more expensive, to 30min being less expensive)
well 300 miles range should also be required of all vehicles. less time waiting to fuel up and the higher the charge rate the better
A lot of hate for this BEV (and every other BEV) as usual – if you don’t like them, don’t buy them – GM still makes 20 other look alike ICE SUVs. Whining about them won’t change the upcoming ICE ban mandates and impossible CAFE standards. GM, like all other automakers have to deal with the consequences of clueless lawmakers’ actions, and BEVs offer the best way to increase average fuel economy (avoiding billions in fines) as hybrids are only incrementally better than their counterparts. Averaging in vehicles with 100 MPGe vs 44MPG hybrids helps – although volume will be the key. This is a solid choice with 300 miles of range at this price point. I realize most commenters on here tow 15,000 lbs 500 plus miles a day and only fuel up once a week for 1 minute, but for the rest, this will be a great daily driver especially charging at home. This is superior to any other offerings from other legacy automakers for the price. Driving a BEV in rush hour traffic is superior to any ICE car – drove my ZR2 Duramax today and I forgot how clunky it is in traffic with stopping and starting.
It would help if Barra and Farley did not have their heads up Biden’s and Newsome’s backside.
They may buy into their politics or are simply playing the game, but either way, its not helping them reverse the upcoming authoritarian increased CAFE and ICE bans. I suppose it keeps other government agencies off of their backs.
Correct. I fill up every night in my car port. Oh you meant ice vehicles. Sorry. I thought this was about how I plug in when I come home and have a full “ tank” every morning. I drive about 1000 miles a m9nth, longer trips occurs every two or three months so I really dont care if my car doesnt have 500 moles of range. At my age I need to get out and mover around every two or three gours so that happens when zi am charging on a longer trip. All those haters who post about range and charging times and how dirty the manufacture of evs are obviously dont have an ev. I guess they think mining the iron ore, aluminum etc, transporting all of that to a refinery, doing the same with oil etc and them putting it all in a vehicle delivered to the dealer happens with unicorn farts
Well spoken John, I have 13k miles on my 2023 Model Y LR that I drive daily – taken on trips to SoCal without a worry. I don’t like driving anything else, which includes my diesel truck or Porsche Cayenne S I’m selling.
The price looks good. Have to see how much option pkgs drive it up. I’m thinking by 2030 ranges will be noticeably higher, charging more efficient and available, and reliability increased. I’ll wait.
Don’t call me, I’ll call you .
Btw. Will thay be sitting on Dealer lots for 6 months waiting for “Software Fixes” ?
Less efficient than the bolt! Why is this, all the money spent on the Ultium batteries and motors and this is less efficient. This is progress? Someone should be losing their job, Mary
Its a lot heavier, bigger, and has a similar drag coefficient – hence the lower efficiency – but per pound it is way more efficient. Consider that the FWD version will weigh a minimum of 1300 lbs more than the Bolt. Add 1300 lbs to the Bolt and its kWh per 100 miles will be a lot higher. Its actually quite impressive that the Equinox is only 1 kWh more per 100 miles.
It’s called Physics. That’s why.
When the Bolt EV is updated to include Ultium next year it’s efficiency will actually increase.
Here’s a thought nobody in DC has dreamed about in their mice-sized brains. Make a Tax Credit deal with the Oil Majors to site Chargers along the Lot sides of every large Gas Station and Truck Stop in America. The major infrastructure is underground.
Just use the available vehicle space. No need to buy dedicated real estate. As EVs increase in numbers you rip out pumps and replace them with chargers.
I know …. Quantum Physics .
And how about Solar Cells on the roof over the pumps and the convenient store and a Wind Generator in the back lot. A Self-Generating Clean Energy Shell Station.
….. oh the Humanity .
In the Inflation Reduction Act there is a section for EV charging called the Corridor Program. It provides funding to setup EV charging along major transport corridors. The money is there. It just needs to be to used.
Umm,…any company can take advantage of the charging infrastructure tax credits. If “oil majors”meant to play, nothing is stopping them.
In fact shell is installing chargers at some locations and pilot j is installing chargers.
If they’re not available for purchase, it really doesn’t matter if the range is 50 feet or 80 gazillionty miles