1994 Gmc Jimmy Sle Sport Utility 2-door 4.3l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 GMC Canyon Denali isn't worth the money

In the GMC lineup, Denali is the top dog. It's the trim with all the bells and whistles, and often provides an experience comparable to Cadillac. Unfortunately that's not the case in the GMC Canyon Denali we drove recently. In the Canyon's case, the Denali trim isn't worth the price premium because it isn't luxurious enough and doesn't distinguish itself from the midlevel SLT trim. While the outside maintains the Denali look with a unique chrome grille, chrome door handles, 20-inch wheels, and big Denali badges (which a guy at a car wash immediately noticed when this editor drove past), the interior and feature set don't rise to meet the borderline Cadillac image of Denali. All GMC did to spruce up the already drab, gray, plasticky interior of the Canyon was give it black leather, some real aluminum trim, some fake wood trim, and stitched soft-touch surfaces. The aluminum and leather are nice touches, but they don't look much different from the black and aluminum-look plastic in lower trim models. The fake wood also looks really fake. They're also exactly the same upgrades as what you'll find in an SLT. But the SLT offers a dark brown color scheme as an option, which would help alleviate the dinginess, and the SLT, equipped exactly like a base Denali, costs $2,690 less at $41,575. The same issue comes up with equipment. The Denali has heated seats and steering wheel, navigation, automatic climate and navigation, but so does the SLT. The big problem here is that Denali is supposed to indicate the best, most luxurious vehicle GMC has to offer, but there's not enough differentiation — or specialness, even — to separate it from a well-optioned SLT. GMC needs to give the Denali something more. It needs some real wood trim, or perhaps some interior schemes with contrasting materials you can't find in other Canyons. It should have some other special luxury features included that can't be added to lower trim GMCs such as a heads-up display, automatic windshield wipers, push-button keyless entry and starting, things like that. The real reason to buy the Canyon Denali is really to get the prestige that the Denali badge brings, rather than the specific equipment it has — the Denali name has some value, after all. But if you can look past the badge and focus on practicality, the SLT is the runaway winner, offering the exact same experience for a notably lower price.

2018 GMC Terrain Drivers' Notes Review | Summon the Druids, it's a better Equinox

We've had plenty of time in the all-new Chevrolet Equinox, testing it with all three of its available turbocharged four-cylinders: the 1.5-liter, the 2.0-liter performance upgrade and the diesel fuel economy upgrade. Finally, however, we get a turn behind the wheel of its brother from a different corporate mother: the 2018 GMC Terrain. This duo is certainly one of the most disparate pairings in GM's long badge-engineering past, with virtually no visual similarities inside and out. They're even less similar than the last Equinox-Terrain, which themselves were a far-cry from the Blazer-Jimmy days. They're largely the same under the skin, however, including their selection of engines. For the 2018 Terrain, we sampled the 1.6-liter four-cylinder turbodiesel good for 137 horsepower and 240 pound-feet of torque. It's an unusual powertrain to be sure, as no other compact crossover SUV in this country offers one (though Mazda has been threatening to do so for years now), but boasts an EPA-estimated fuel economy rating of 28 mpg city, 39 mpg highway and 32 mpg combined with front-wheel drive. It's basically the same with all-wheel drive. The as-tested price of the SLT Diesel was a rather hefty $39,605. It did, however, have most options, including the Infotainment Package II and Driver Alert Package II that together include all the extra entertainment and safety gadgets. Contributing Editor James Riswick: Let's be honest, the main difference between the 2018 GMC Terrain and its Equinox sibling is the way they look. As such, I can definitively say I prefer the Terrain. It's far more cohesive and better proportioned than the rather dumpy Equinox. It also avoids the garish over-adornment of the last Terrain even if the floating roofline D pillar has passed its expiry date. I think the interior looks better too. As for the way it drives, the 2018 Terrain demonstrates great improvements from one generation to the next. The steering in particular is greatly superior in its feel and feedback. Body motions are also kept nicely in check. Is it a Mazda CX-5 or Ford Escape beater? No, but it's far more confidence inspiring now. So that's the good. Now, the extremely bad. This diesel engine vibrates so much I can't imagine anyone taking one for a test drive and choosing it over the 1.5-liter gasoline turbo. You feel it through the wheel, the pedals and the seat of your pants constantly. It's particularly bad when stopped and even present when just cruising on the highway.

Should heavy-duty pickup trucks have window stickers with fuel mileage estimates?

If you were to stroll into your nearest Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Nissan, or Ram dealership, you'd find a bunch of pickup trucks. Most of those would have proper window stickers labeled with things like base prices, options prices, location of manufacture, and, crucially, fuel economy estimates. But you'd also run across a number of heavy-duty trucks with no such fuel mileage data from the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA doesn't require automakers to publish the valuable miles-per-gallon measurement for vehicles with gross weight ratings that exceed 8,500 pounds. That makes it difficult for consumers to compare behemoths powered by turbocharged diesel engines – between one another, and between smaller, gasoline-fueled trucks. Consumer Reports doesn't think it should be this way, and it's spearheading an effort (PDF link) to get the government to require manufacturers to publish fuel economy estimates. In its own testing, CR found that heavy-duty pickups powered by Ford's Power Stroke, GM's Duramax, and FCA's Cummins diesel engines (which doesn't include the Ram's EcoDiesel) get worse fuel mileage than their lighter-duty gas-powered siblings. We're not so sure HD-truck buyers are unaware of this fact – big diesels don't really come into their own until big loads are placed in their beds or attached to their trailer hitches. Under heavy workloads, the diesel trucks will almost certainly return greater efficiency than a similar gas-powered truck. What's more, HD trucks with lumbering diesels in general make the driver feel more confident while towing due to greater torque at low engine RPM than gas trucks. They also offer greater max-weight limits. Still, we agree EPA fuel mileage estimates should be offered for heavy-duty pickups. And we think the comparisons provided by Consumer Reports might be interesting to potential buyers. Click here to see the results of CR's tests, and let us know what you think using the poll below. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2017 Ford F-Series Super Duty: First Drive View 22 Photos News Source: Consumer Reports Government/Legal Green Read This Chevrolet Ford GMC Nissan RAM Fuel Efficiency Truck Commercial Vehicles Diesel Vehicles poll gmc sierra hd chevy silverado hd