Perhaps not surprisingly, my choice of a Malibu as a daily driver was a bit controversial here at Curbside Classics – I think the general consensus was somewhere between “meh” and “yech.” I suspect that this week’s installment will produce a similar reaction, since this vehicle was purchased with the same thoughts in mind: what basic transportation can I get that won’t cost a fortune to lease? I had a little help from General Motors on this one, though, to achieve something that I suspect not many people are able to do.
Not long before the Malibu’s lease was up I received a mailer from Chevrolet. They were offering me a lease loyalty rebate of something like $1500, as well as some “lease pull ahead” offers. I also had a good-size chunk of money from my GM credit card that added to the pot. I was close enough to the end of the lease that I figured I’d head for the dealership to see what I could get. As with the Lincoln last week, I came prepared with stock numbers from their inventory.
At first I gravitated toward the Impala as I liked the looks of the car and its old-school Detroit iron vibe. I drove a fully-loaded LTZ model with nav system, leather and suede seating (it looks much better than it sounds), a 300 hp V-6, and massive wheels. This car was comfortable, handled pretty well (considering its size), and offered all the goodies you’d expect from a modern car. I also tried a lower-level Impala LT with the 4-cylinder engine and fewer options and wasn’t nearly as impressed. The smaller engine’s performance was on the borderline of being adequate for a car of this size, and the lower-spec trim wasn’t nearly as nice inside.
I also decided to try the Equinox LT, mostly because the lease loyalty flyer listed a promotional lease payment of about $200/month for 3 years (with all of the associated tiny print about down payments, tax, title, etc., etc., your mileage may vary). I’m not a big SUV person but I figured I’d see if it would work for us. The one I drove was the front-wheel-drive 4-cylinder model – around here, it doesn’t snow all that much so I wasn’t in the mood to spend extra money on AWD for a couple of snowstorms per year. The Equinox was nice enough – the interior was comfortable but not exactly posh, the 4-cylinder powertrain was entirely adequate, and the handling was reasonably good for an SUV. Not a ringing endorsement, I know…
After the test drives it was time for the numbers. I asked for lease payments on all three cars I drove, hoping that the incentives and GM Card money would put that fancy Impala LTZ in my garage. That hope evaporated quickly when the salesperson pushed the lease payment across the table and it was essentially double what I was paying for the Malibu. Um, not exactly. The 4-cylinder Impala wasn’t that much cheaper, either. The Equinox, however – that was another story. Thanks to the rebates and GM Card down payment that handled all the down payments hidden in the fine print, I could actually get that vehicle for the promotional lease payment (which I don’t think too many people do). Was the Equinox a dream vehicle? Not by a long shot, no. Was it a great vehicle for 200 bucks a month? You bet it was. So home we went with it.
My time with the Equinox confirmed a few things to me about cars like this. On paper, the 2.4 liter 4-cylinder engine’s 180-ish horsepower sounded perfectly reasonable (especially since I’d owned cars with much larger engines and smaller horsepower numbers) and the fuel economy was not too bad (up to 32 mpg highway). On the road, though, the tall brick-like profile and not inconsiderable weight meant that brisk acceleration required throttle applications that were, well, aggressive. Driving with your foot flat on the floor produces real-world fuel economy that doesn’t win you any ecodriving awards, either. I had the opportunity to rent a V-6 equipped Equinox and found that vehicle to be much more driveable (300 hp was more than adequate) and fuel economy in real driving wasn’t that much worse. Car-based SUVs might do better on performance and fuel economy than the truck-based ones, but it’s not THAT much better. I also got pretty tired of climbing a stepladder to wash the car since the car was almost as tall as me. (First world problems, to be sure.)
On the plus side, the car was quite roomy and certainly came in handy on the occasions when we needed to haul stuff. Those occasions were not that frequent, especially since we now lived in a much newer house that didn’t require remodeling and weekly trips to the home improvement store. It made the Costco run a lot easier, though. The interior was comfortable enough – the seats had an odd nubbly pattern for the cloth that seemed like it would last a very long time. Not particularly posh, though. Other interior materials were fine but there was quite a bit of the oft-dreaded “hard plastics.” Nothing fell apart while I owned it, though.
For those readers hoping for stories of high-speed spinouts, disintegrating transmissions, or historical car mysteries, you’ll probably be feeling somewhat disappointed by now. This car did everything I asked it to do and did so adequately (there’s that word again). Nothing to “amaze and delight,” to use marketing terms from the car industry, but nothing to annoy or irritate either. Even though I just traded this car in a year ago (in fact, a year ago this week), I don’t have any particularly strong recollection of the vehicle at all. The pictures in this post are pretty much all I have of the car – it does show up in the background of several more interesting rides of mine. This is exactly the kind of car, though, that Curbside Classic readers 30 years from now will find and say “Man, those used to be everywhere!” The Cutlass Ciera of the 2000s, perhaps?
Looking back on this particular car buying period, it does seem as though I’d been shopping in the rental car aisle – both the Equinox and Malibu were your basic rental-car spec mid-level trims, and both even came in refrigerator white. But both had the advantage of being a) really cheap to lease; b) perfectly adequate to drive; and c) very reliable for the time I owned them. As some noted in the comments to the Malibu, my ownership of some more interesting old cars probably reduced my desire to have interesting new ones. I promise, though, that next week’s installment will be way more exciting, if not a little predictable.
Nice tie-in to yesterday’s crossover article. And, in a nutshell, you’ve wonderfully listed a primary reason why I hate the damned things: Four-wheeled white bread. The perfect ‘car’ for someone who hates, or is indifferent to, cars.
I daresay that your good news of GM products being perfectly adequate and reliable in everyday use will be unbelievable and quite wrong to some readers.
Saying something nice about a GM product. Isn’t that grounds for being driven off the Internet?
My 04 Buick Rendezvous, looks aside, has been perfectly adequate and reliable since my parents bought it brand new.
What is funny is the 185hp 3.4 liter V6 in the ‘vous will handily outrun the 180hp 4 in the ’15 Equinox (my ex had one) and return almost as good of mileage to boot, in a much larger vehicle.
A new car with power options, air and a full warranty for $200/mo? Sign me up. Yes it’s an appliance. But for a guy who has play cars that really make him happy, something like this frees up a lot of time and money for those cars that really make you happy.
This. Most of my daily driving around Sarasota is done below 40 mph with much traffic and stoplights. An appliance just made sense, hence the purchase of our ’15 Highlander. Acres of hard plastic and cloth seats and I often loose it in parking lots, but at least it’s super reliable, safe, and utilitarian.
And without things breaking regularly like they did on my old Volvo V70 wagon, I get to have enough money left over after payments to put a performance exhaust on my old BMW Z3 and shop for my next project.
I’m with you on this. We also have a ’15 Highlander. White, being the ubiquitous color choice around here, does indeed make for some parking lot fun. It is an order of magnitude more refined than our perfectly adequate ’06 Gen 1 model. It fairly oozes vanilla, but does all we ask of it with competence.
When we bought the ’15 model, I gave some thought to cross-shopping, at least at Mazda. However, we’ve had a) great luck reliability-wise with several Toyotas, b) my wife really likes the brand and it’s really her car anyway , and, c) our daughter-in-law’s Toyota salesman father provides a hassle-free buying experience, with attractive “friends & family” pricing.
We’ll see what happens later this year/early next year when I shop to replace my ’02 Tacoma 4×4. My current interest lies with the Tacoma, of course, and the Colorado/Canyon. I may have to hold off until I can see the new Ranger, however.The company I work for now is a decent-sized fleet customer of GM and Ford, and the employees can access some more than attractive fleet pricing. Time will tell.
Although I don’t have an “interesting” car in my fleet at the moment, I agree that having a reliable DD frees up time and, hopefully, money to such pursuits.
Yes, GM has ridiculous lease offers from time to time on excess inventory, but only for “current GM lessees”.
So you’ll have to pay a bunch to get ON that treadmill, maybe $400/month for 2 years, but once you’ve done that, the sub-$200 offers will come flying at you.
During my brief stint of having fleet duties as an “other duty as assigned” thing at work, I bought three 2011 models with the four-cylinder and all-wheel drive. I drove one or two of them at the time; they were pleasant, well screwed together, and comfortable.
I saw one of them a while back and it’s pushing 200,000 miles. It obviously has had no problems or it would have been gone by now.
The nice thing about these, although this likely isn’t a unique trait, is the rear seat adjusting back and forth like the front seats. That certainly helps with taller rear seat passengers or odd sized loads to go in the back.
For your purposes, it sounds like it was ideal.
Not really a damning comment, but it seems as though I am reading more and more how the BASE 4 cylinder engine in these types of vehicles are at best “adequate”. If a V6 is available it sounds like the fuel economy isn’t ever much worse than it is for the 4 cylinder. Unfortunately, manufacturers are (now?) building vehicles in a way that forces customers into heavily loaded vehicles to get that V6 or in non GM cases: the higher horsepower 4 cylinder.
…which makes a grand caravan with standard 3.6 283 hp V6 seem even more like a bargain than it already is at $24k.
Even the Cadillac Cuv is now standard 4 cylinder, 3.6 V6 optional, and pricy.
I was able to get the V6 in our Highlander with the base LE trim. I initially wanted the cheapest new one I could find, so I drove the four-banger first. It was so disappointing (for me, anyway), that I figured it was absolutely worth the extra $2k for the V6.
My wife gets by with 4 cylinders in her commuter Malibu, but her foot is much lighter than mine.
I quite regret having the base 2.5 I4 in my Fusion. I didn’t buy it new, but I should have held out for one with the 2.0 Ecoboost. 175 lb-ft of torque just isn’t enough beans to motivate 3600 lbs. around with any alacrity. The 1.6 Ecoboost puts out the same power with better fuel economy, and the 2.0 Ecoboost makes something like 65 more horsepower with a penalty of only 1 or 2 MPG if I recall. I think both engines are available on all trims except the base/fleet ‘S’ though.
Then there is the 3.7 V6 which is exclusive to the Sport, which is a whole ‘nother thing entirely.
My wife had an Equinox for a company car for about a year. She didn’t mind it but I found the seats to be horrible. There was also no CD player. It wasn’t even available. I wasn’t sorry to see it go when the time came.
Good timing for this feature. An Equinox was parked in the realtor’s lot next to our neighbourhood shopping centre a few days ago. The styling appealed to me and the interior layout looked good but of course I wondered if this is a potential future buy for me and my good wife.
Someone I know at work bought a 2016 Equinox and has had no problems at this point. His is an LT model with the 4 cylinder engine. He and his wife don’t do much highway travel and FWD gets them by in winter. A car guy he is not. I’d prefer a V6 for that extra punch on the highway and when traveling at higher elevations.
Certainly a popular GM model with styling that is not polarizing.
My darling wife INSISTS on AWD on any SUV/CUV we get, even though it rarely snows here and the AWD almost never comes into play, even in snowy conditions. It’s some sort of mental safety net for her I guess. To me, it’s just extra weight, complexity, and worse fuel economy. For a leased car a transverse V6 is fine, but for a long term keeper that I might have to change spark plugs, a 4 cylinder would be a lot easier to work on.
I do like that nubbly cloth in the Equinox pics…I wish manufacturers offered more upmarket cloth interiors, it seems like they punish cloth seat buyers with lower trim levels only.
Much credit to you for being willing to share your car experiences with the world. Never feel you have to be apologetic for your choices for the sake of the readership, if you enjoy your purchase. 🙂
My GM rental choices in the last few years have been satisfactory. No rental was especially memorable, but they all functioned as expected, and never didn’t do as asked.
Midsized SUV for $200/mo… what’s not to like? I totally get there’s two types of car ownership. One for the practical commuter slog, one to put a grin on your face.
I saw those fliers a couple of years ago when I was at my local GM dealer (Win Kelly) for an oil change on my Colorado. They offered a lot of cars for a good lease rate. The ones that caught my attention was the $99/month for the Sonic and the $105/month for the Trax. I actually qualified for those rates but I really did not want a car payment (my job situation and frugalness at not needing so much “stuff” means I can buy most of the cars I like(new or used) with no car payments. Making a lease payment each month was not something i wanted to do.
There’s two ways to look at that. Buying and paying cash implies no car payment, but also decrees depreciation as a realistic, if unbilled expense. And it’s a substantial expense on any newer car. It really comes down to pencilling out the options and seeing which makes the most sense.
Had 7 if these in my Fleet for sales people here in NJ. Compared to the Escapes and first generation Equinox’s we had before they were an vast improvement, but boy did they ride like a buckboard after about 75k. The AWD 4 cylinder drive train only returned about 22 mpg and rev’d like a banshee getting on the GSP. Never a mechanical issue though…
My daughter bought a 2010 Equinox (the first year they came out.) It was a horrid vehicle. Headliner started sagging not long after purchase. High pressure fuel pump leaked raw fuel into the crankcase and diluted the oil, which tore up the timing chain and gears (and who knows what else.) After those parts were replaced, both cam positioning actuator solenoids replaced. Per GM, the ECM was reprogrammed to cut the oil life monitor mileage between oil changes. Then it started burning oil, but a quart every 1500 miles was “within specs” according to GM. Engine started making a rattling noise so the timing chain & gears were replaced again. Shortly after that an axle seal started leaking. Oil burning got worse so a quart every 800 miles satisfied GM, so and rings and pistons were replaced. At 108,000 the transmission took a dump. Out of warranty so a Jasper reman was installed for $3700. 115,000 the windshield wiper drive assembly replaced. At 130,000 the A/C compressor died and my daughter had had enough and traded it in.
My 82 year old father drives one of these and considers it the best car he’s ever owned as it’s made it to 60,000 miles without needing anything but maintenance. He’s not a religious man but has always been faithful to GM. He wants to buy a new car and jokes that will mean he has outlived three “last cars”.
My oldest had a 2014 Equinox “lease special” model that she just had to have after one of the more snowy winters here in recent memory. The street she lived on was in the shape of a “b” or a “d” depending upon your perspective. Unfortunately for her, the city didn’t plow it soon enough in the morning (to her liking), so she gave up a perfectly good Saturn Aura XR (so nice and fast, too) for one of these. Best of all, it was FWD…
The reality was, it was an absolutely good car, like others noted, it did whatever it was asked, during the two years she had it, had absolutely no issues. I liked the nubby cloth interior, as I find them easier to deal with in the extremes of heat and cold. While she still owned her house here in MIchigan, she used it like a pack mule to drag stuff home from the Home Depot, the Re-Store and other salvage places.
So, it was a total shock to me when she came to my house two years later with her current Malibu, claiming the lease payment was too high on the ‘Nox. Ugh. Since then, she’s gotten a promotion and can easily afford the ‘Bu. But I think that the Equinox was a better all around vehicle for her lifestyle right now.
I’ve rented a bunch of vehicles over the last five years, most of them were Chrysler 200’s or Dodge Darts. Boring, and uncomfortable, but tolerable for a week. Among the others was a Grand Caravan, a Camry, an Altima, a Chevy Cruze, and an Equinox. The two I liked best were the Cruze and the Equinox. Both were white, and the Cruze was too small, I’m built like a gorilla with giant shoulders, but the Equinox was ok. It was the 4 cyl one, and it was borderline for sure. I don’t know how people can buy cars with the base engines, they all have a false claim of fuel economy that in reality ends up being about 1 MPG or so, making the optional engine a no brainer. A friend of mine always buys base model cars, and complains endlessly about it afterwards. He’s looking at Dodge Challengers now, and I would bet he winds up with an SXT, and will spend the next 5 years or so complaining, and saying, “I should have bought the 5.7!” He’s too penny wise and pound foolish to get what will make him happy. There are used 5.7 Challengers all over the area, 3 right down the street, a 2010, a 2012, and a really nice 2015. I predict he will buy a new one, and it will be grey, silver, or white, nothing but boring colors for him. If there was a beige available, he would want it.
Boring ‘crossover’, boring color, boring interior, boring style. Just boring all around. Like a Camry, this one just blends into the background.
At least it wasn’t a Captiva. That really would have been a rental special.
My mom bought a 2015 Equinox LT (with fog lights!), pretty much just like your’s last April. I really like it after about 6,000 miles we’ve put on it. I find the front seats to be very comfy, the power to be good enough (our other cars are a 2007 Impala 3.5 and a 2000 Grand Caravan 3.3, not exactly hot rods, but I did own a 1995 Aurora for 12 years).
So far, no problems. I can get an easy 32mpg out of it and have seen 39 at times. The front and rear doors are very large making it easy to get just about anything in or out of it. And we love the power tailgate.
The 2.4 is a willing engine, though at high rpms it does get thrashy. (A friend has an older Malibu 2.4, and it’s just as loud but less powerful.) It will spin right to 6700rpm, happier up to about 5000 so I try to not go beyond that. I have tried the “manual” mode on the 6 speed trans, I find the computer is better at picking gears than I am these days.
Rear view camera is a plus as the rear side windows are about useless. One thing I miss from the Grand Caravan, I can see out of it.
Wouldn’t mind if the ride was just a little softer. It does tend toward the harsh side. And the electric power steering did take a bit of getting used to since it pulls to the wheel back to center. Felt weird at first, but one less thing to power by a belt.
And do like the Pioneer stereo, our’s has the CD player but no need to use since there’s a USB port in the center console for MP3’s on a flash drive.
My 6 year old nephew loves to point out when sees another one! “There’s Peanut’s brother!” he exclaims. Mom named it, NOT me! Since Chevy made 277,000 just in 2015, it’s pretty common where I live. I should get a bright tape strip just to tell our’s from everyone else’s.
Overall, I think it’s much more interesting to drive than the other SUVs and vans we tried: Grand Caravan, Transit Connect, Escape.
I hope we have our’s for many years and miles to come.
We have rented a lot of these. Also Rav4 LE’s, Escape SE’s and Nissan Rogues. We prefer the Equinox LT and Escape’s SE”S with the 1.5T to those others. The Rav 4 feels cheap inside lacks several of the features the others have like a leather wheel, automatic headlamps, remote start and several other things, rides more noisily and the steering and handling are numb. The Rogue is okay but very unexciting and the styling is blah. None gave us any trouble during the rentals weeks we had them though.
Several co-workers have the 2010-2017 Equinoxes as daily drivers and generally have god things to say about them. Even my partner has a 2010, which is the first year, and has put 125K miles on it with the only problem being the factory timing chain which was replaced for free under the 5/100K powertrain warranty. No other issues to report and reliability with these seems very good.
We like our 2011 LTZ. A lot.
It’s my wife’s ride and March 2018 marks four years and 100,000 miles with it. Yeah, the 4-cylinder gets buzzy at higher RPMs, “adequate” is a great descriptor for it, but she’s the primary driver and has no issue. Besides, everything we’ve heard about the 3.0 V6 in these early years points to it being a waste of money.
That said, we’ve also heard the 3.6 used in the later models is a great engine and turns the ‘Nox into a minor hot rod without much of a penalty in fuel consumption.
The leather interior makes up for the hard plastics and the Pioneer stereo is the best factory stereo we’ve owned. It has a CD player, and even has active noise cancellation which makes the ride very quiet.
Being an early 2011, we had the fuel pump issue, along with a catalytic converter that died before its time. A friend alerted me to watch the oil consumption, which is related to the fuel pump since the direct injection in these early models would wash the oil off the cylinder walls. In each case, we received a letter from Chevrolet with conditions and instructions. Repairs were made to our satisfaction. We had the cam sensors replaced while it was apart, and were charged only for the parts. It’s been trouble-free since.
Neighbors owned a 2013 Escape Titanium…it had some nicer features but the difference in the ride is night and day. My wife’s actually received multiple compliments from friends and co-workers about the ride and room when she drives. We’ve ridden in their new Lincoln MKX, its ride is about the same as the ‘Nox.
Worst component with these is if you need to replace one tire, you REALLY need to replace ALL four. Unless the damaged tire is within a couple thousand miles of new, just. buy. all. four. Then again, the Subaru we owned before the Nox, while not as sensitive, was still happiest when you replaced all four tires at once.
I think the key with these crossovers is to get them loaded and in an interesting color. Ours is Charcoal Metallic and with the extra bling like fog lamps and shiny accents, it looks sharp.
An LS in white, especially with those wheels…comes off more like a blandtastic appliance.