While the Buick last year had the in that case optional 1.3liter 3-cylinder turbocharged engine, that engine is here as well, being standard equipment with the AWD versions. The FWD versions (like the Buick was) are equipped with a CVT and while I didn’t find it in the least objectionable then, with the AWD version comes a 9-speed smooth-shifting conventional automatic, not unimpressive for such a small vehicle on the lower side of the budget scale. As I mentioned earlier there is a button for the AWD that stays on once selected even through stop/start cycles, i.e. one could put it in AWD the day of purchase and never touch it again.
I believe Chevy does this for fuel economy reasons, as I understand it the tests are done in the default state (FWD), not the AWD which must be user selected. It was a very useful button to help figure out how much AWD really helps in a modern vehicle, and in this case it really does.
With current construction zones near my home came traffic diversions and lane closures, meaning a heavy and decisive throttle was needed when merging out of the side street, when in FWD the car struggled for grip and displayed torque steer but when the AWD was selected it just pulled out powerfully without any drama. Similar was observed in the rain/sleet later in the week. AWD isn’t only useful in snow or dirt.
The engine produces 155hp at 5,600rpm and 174lb-ft of torque at a low 1,600rpm, ensuring that there is plenty of power at all times, especially at sub speed-level speeds. The engine has a lusty little snarl to it when prodded and just wants to run, making for a happy drive(r). Even at higher speeds there is still plenty of shove, only tailing off at speeds in excess of the higher speed limits on the freeway. With one or two people aboard it’s nippy and perky, eager to please, and frankly enjoyable to drive. It’s even rated to tow, albeit a somewhat paltry 1,000 pounds; at least there’s an effort made.
Steering isn’t any more communicative than you’d expect but it doesn’t wander around or need constant correction either. In fact in higher speed turns it tracks very well and encourages you to give it a little more throttle which then settles the car even move. There’s a particular banked overpass off a highway I regularly drive and I remembered how enjoyable the Buick was on that section, this was no different, driving like less of an SUV and more like a well-developed hatchback with decent tires and suspension.
The brakes are an electronic brake-by-wire setup here and it’s pretty transparent except towards the end of a braking event where it’s harder to be as smooth when coming fully to a stop, seeming to be more grabby right before the end than earlier. It’s not overly different though from a fully hydraulic system, and if not known that it was electronic the slightly errant behavior would just be blamed on the pads themselves (which could in fact still be to blame).
The car doesn’t have a very long wheelbase so bumps are felt. Along with what I suspect is slightly stiffer suspension in the Activ trim it can sometimes be a little bumpy/bouncy depending on the surface. However it’s not advertising an overly smooth ride either. Bumps are felt once, dealt with, and then off we continue on our way (to the next set).
Being the Activ trim level, it received different tires (even if FWD), in this case a set of Hankook DynaPro AT2 tires in 225/60-17 sizing on, obviously, 17″ alloy wheels. While the DynaPro series is usually more of an All-Terrain tire, in this case it’s sort of a street oriented All-Terrain which is exactly the oxymoron it sounds.
They work well on the road in dry conditions, are fine on sandy or dirt surfaces with AWD engaged, in cold snowy/sleety conditions mixed with heavy rain they were less good than a decent winter tire. They are fairly quiet in all conditions (and quieter than a full A/T tire would be) but that’s relative, in a smaller car such as this there is still tire noise as well as wind noise at higher speeds, thankfully the good Bose audio system could be called on to drown that all out.
I didn’t have the opportunity to take it on any serious off-roading and of course it isn’t meant for that. It should be perfectly capable of traversing unpaved graded roads, some forest trails, and anything resembling a temporary parking lot in a field somewhere. Blazing trails across the desert or rocky terrain? No, and neither can the vast majority of the competition without locking differentials or anything semi-serious.
It’s for the most part a look with some incremental bit of extra capability due to somewhat better tires and more ground clearance, which is all the market demands without saddling it with extra costs or other compromises that people really aren’t looking for.
Around town though where it’ll undoubtedly be used for most of its life? It’s a little rockstar. Easy to get in and out of, simple to park in any sort of semi-spot, a large load hatch, comfortable, and quick. Visibility out the front is good with front pillars that aren’t as massive as some, although the ginormous rear pillar areas do make backing out of a diagonal spot the traditional way (via use of head, neck and eyes only) trickier than it needs to be.
Not incorporating windows behind the rear doors does mean using the wide-angle backup camera more than usual, thankfully it’s good and quick to display when shifted into reverse and this car had the ability to alert of any approaching traffic from the side as well. Over the shoulder glances while cruising and wanting to change lanes however are not negatively affected to any great degree by this, but the Blind Spot system is helpful and appreciated anyway.
Like its Buick sibling, this little Chevy also hails from Korea, and again it’s a truly international affair with the engine and transmission being built in Mexico, and thus crossing an ocean twice before being sold here. Korean content amounts to 44% of the total, Mexico contributes 29%, the US/Canada 3% and the remaining 34% from somewhere unspecified in the tradewinds.
I managed to add 341 miles to the little guy’s odometer in my week with it. I took a short highway trip to the plains east of me for about 75 miles, a lot of in town as well as some lake road drives and a couple of short freeway trips for another 126 in total. Then towards the end on a day with miserable weather I had to head up to Laramie, Wyoming and back via Highway 287, which was a fast trip despite the poor weather conditions and added another 140 miles to the tally.
Officially rated at 26mpg City, 30 Highway with a 28 Average, I clocked in at 27.5mpg overall which is right in there and better than I was expecting given the weather and the encouraging nature of the car around town. Just needing regular gasoline is the icing on the cake. I’d estimate I had it in AWD about 2/3rds of the time. It also includes a stop/start system that ranks as one of the least noticeable ones out there, the little triple just doesn’t shake very much at all during the process, I never bothered turning that function off this time.
There are multiple trim levels available in the Trailblazer from mild to, well, not exactly wild, but less mild RS trim at the top. The Activ slots in right below and to the side of that one with a starting price of $27,000 (nice, these round numbers!) and a $995 Destination Charge.
That includes the AWD drivetrain, Keyless Open and Start, OnStar with 4G LTE WiFi capability, the Power stuff I mentioned along with windows and locks of course, Flat folding passenger seat, LED head and tail lamps, Roof rack side rails, Tinted glass, Heated mirrors, Activ Skid Plate, Chevy Safety Assist (Active Emergency Braking, Front Pedestrian Braking, Lane Keep Assist/Departure Warning, Farward Collision Alert, Automatic High Beams, and Following Distance Indicator, as well as Teen Driver mode settings.
The options list runs surprisingly deep for a model built overseas. Starting with $150 All-Weather Floor Mats (useful), it then ramps up with the $345 Driver Confidence Package (Rear Park Assist, Rear Cross Traffic Alert, Lane Change Alert with Blind Spot Zone Alert (where do I sign?); then the $620 Convenience Package (Single Zone HVAC, Auto-dimming Inside Rearview Mirror, Lit Vanity Mirrors in the Visors, 120V Power Outlet in the rear seat area, SiriusXM capability and Rear USB ports (decent value); and the Iridescent Pearl Tricoat at $645, nice but a big chunk of the price, at least the Bronze roof and mirrors add a lot of visual interest and for perhaps one of the few times in my opinion the gold badge actually complements it.
And last but not least the most expensive option at $1,620 is the Chevrolet Technology Package which provides the Chevrolet Infotainment 3 Plus 8″ Diagonal Color Touchscreen upgrade, Wireless Charging, Adaptive Cruise Control, Memory Card Receptacle, Bluetooth Audio Streaming, LED Headlamps, HD Radio, Color 4.2″ Driver Information Center, Bose Premium 7-speaker Audio, and HD Rear Vision Camera. Seeing as how I used almost all of that I suppose I’d sign for that as well. That all makes for a grand total of $31,375, which is quite a bit lower than the average vehicle transaction price nowadays but with much of the same capabilities as anything else.
Overall the Trailblazer is the type of product that Chevrolet needs to build more of. Capable, fashionable, and competitive from a power standpoint while being fun to drive. Not to mention likely to be reliable with low ongoing maintenance costs while being economical in terms of resources both ecological as well as monetary, there’s a lot to like here. Combine all that with a large spread of models ranging from inexpensive to only slightly less inexpensive, this is the type of car that deserves to do as well in the marketplace as it did for me this week.
Thank you to Chevrolet for providing us their new Trailblazer along with a full tank of fuel!
Pages: 1 2
Not one picture of the underhood or a mention of engine size. Nice report……
Seriously Dude?!?! – Both of those things were right there at the top of page 2 of the review.
Perhaps you missed the entire Page 2?
The brake-by-wire has me intrigued. Does this system do away with hydraulics altogether? Or is it some kind of hybrid with hydraulics at the wheels and electronics replacing the master cylinder’s function? It would be interesting to know what was the driving force behind the feature- cost, weight (for CAFE) or that it is really better than what it replaces.
And don’t think it wasn’t apparent how you are priming Riley’s expectations for a car when he’s 16 – a handed-down car that is inexpensive and practical. I didn’t notice that question being posed about any of the pricey and powerful stuff you get to test. 😀
I believe it’s still hydraulic but without the vacuum booster. GM also uses it on the Encore(s), various Cadillacs and the Corvette.
Yes you busted me re Riley! 😃
I drive past a Chevy dealer on my commute and see very few of these on the lot and have only seen a few on the road which leads me to think it’s supply-limited. The Buick doesn’t seem to be, it comes across as being a slow seller as is the Trax but I wonder whether that’s because GM has been all but giving away the “old” Encore.
The Trailblazer sold just over 25k until in Q1 of 2021 for second place in the segment, barely behind the Honda HR-V. Both Encores combined sold about 24.6k and the Trax did 17k. Year over year the entire segment is up about 30% to about 275k sales total in Q1 vs 2020.
https://gmauthority.com/blog/2021/04/chevrolet-trailblazer-sales-numbers-figures-results-first-quarter-2021-q1/
Note that the factory has been affected by the current chip shortage starting this quarter (Q2) so those numbers may fall. My local Chevy dealers lot looks like a ghost town too currently.
Great to see Riley’s real world impressions!
This seems like a competent, well priced vehicle in a competitive segment. What if Chevy offered this level of competence in every vehicle they built? I may be old fashioned, but that actually sounds like a winning business plan. Good for them on getting this one right. We all benefit when manufacturers up their game.
Thanks for the great review!
Agreed. GM seems to be upping their game here, with solid results. Of special note is that fold-flat passenger seat. It’s the sort of small detail that can make a big difference and a complete turnaround from the hoary old days when the rear seat of the first generations of Equinox wouldn’t fold flat (unlike all the competition).
Combined with the inevitable rebates and incentives that makes the street-price lower than the more popular models from other makes, the new Trailblazer would be hard to pass by in this market segment.
Thanks for this, I was behind one the other day and I wasn’t sure were it fell in the Chevy lineup. It sure looked good in the flesh, I thought. Pricing seems very competitive too.
Those of us who are at a certain age have deep trauma with regard to ‘leatherette’ (a.k.a. vinyl) seats. Good times with no A/C in the summertime.
I don’t think I could bring myself to owning a vehicle with them.
This smaller model should’ve been called Blazer, and the mid-size CUV Trailblazer. Other than that, no complaints.
Thank you for your review.
This is a good looking vehicle, but overall it just doesn’t float my boat. Some of my own thoughts, listed in bullet point format, are below:
*I just find it plain weird why subcompact, bite-sized SUVs are so popular to begin with. I would think that part of the appeal of an SUV would be to own a large vehicle.
*Another thing I just don’t understand is why anybody would pay a premium for a vinyl interior. (The marketing people have come up with alternative names–GM uses the term “Leatherette” and Ford uses the term “ActiveX,” to give two examples–but all these names refer to are vinyl car seats.) I grew up in an era where consumers paid more for cloth seats than for vinyl and where the cloth offered was high-quality velour, so that might be why I’m puzzled as to people’s current preferences.
*Despite the Trailblazer’s overall exterior attractiveness, I find the lower half of its grille to be quite ugly.
*IMO, the center armrest in the front row is way too small. (Some vehicles offered for sale today are much better in this regard.)
*It’s very odd to learn that the Trailblazer lacks a GMC sibling (and doubly odd to know that it nevertheless has a Buick sibling). Are there any other Chevrolet truck or SUV models in the recent past that lacked a GMC sibling?
*Their opinions are hardly gospel, but Consumer Reports gives the Trailblazer only a so-so rating. For those curious, CR rated–out of a possible score of 100–and ranked the following 2021 subcompact SUVs as follows:
1. Subaru Crosstrek – Score of 84 (was “Recommended” by the magazine)
2. Hyundai Kona – Score of 76 (Recommended)
3. Mazda CX-30 – Score of 75 (Recommended)
4. Mazda CX-3 – Score of 73 (Recommended)
5. Honda HR-V – Score of 71 (Recommended)
6. Kia Seltos – Score of 63
7. Nissan Rogue Sport – Score of 59
8. Chevrolet Trailblazer – Score of 55
9. Chevrolet Trax – Score of 48
10. Ford EcoSport – Score of 45
11. Jeep Renegade – Score of 37
12. Fiat 500X – Score of 31
Note that the Mitsubishi Outlander Sport and the 2022 Volkswagen Taos–which goes on sale in June–have not yet been tested by Consumer Reports. Also note that the Buick Encore GX doesn’t appear in the above list because CR had a separate category for luxury entry-level SUVs; the Encore GX ranked # 7 of 11 in this category with a score of 64 out of 100 and was not “Recommended.”
Before I conclude, I was shocked to see how poorly the EcoSport rated. With SUVs being such a huge part of Ford’s business, does that company have a refreshed model on the horizon?
>I would think that part of the appeal of an SUV would be to own a large vehicle.
Yes and no. Most “SUVs” on the market are CUVs, and the most popular models of that segment are compact and 2-row mid-size. Most of the appeal lies in having an upright seating position and in having similar cargo volume to the next-size-up sedan/wagon.
I’m a compact CUV fan myself, but I don’t see the appeal of the subcompact, at least the “first-generation” models made from 2010-20. Most of them had significantly less cargo space than their compact siblings, and while their engines had better fuel economy on paper, it wasn’t enough of a difference to warrant their lack of power. And many of them had questionable styling as well (looking at you, Nissan Juke). These newer models are mostly an improvement in all those respects.
>It’s very odd to learn that the Trailblazer lacks a GMC sibling (and doubly odd to know that it nevertheless has a Buick sibling). Are there any other Chevrolet truck or SUV models in the recent past that lacked a GMC sibling?
The only one that comes to mind is the Avalanche pickup; it had a Cadillac Escalade variant (EXT) but no GMC equivalent. As for the subcompacts, there have been rumblings now and again that GMC is getting their own model called the Granite, but nothing concrete (no pun intended).
>I was shocked to see how poorly the EcoSport rated. With SUVs being such a huge part of Ford’s business, does that company have a refreshed model on the horizon?
The EcoSport is a pretty lamentable vehicle by American standards; it was made specifically for the BRIC market and only came to the US so Ford would have something smaller and more fuel-efficient than the Escape. I have to assume that Ford does have a newer model in the works. Apparently the Fiesta-based Puma will not be coming here.
I really really want people to review bomb Ford for not bringing the Puma here because of the fact that vehicles that are more car-like are easier to drive and more appealing to people with certain types of disabilities
Well yes, you do seem to be a (the) Full-Size Sedan Fan, I can see the potential issue 🙂
Some people don’t want to spend a lot of money on the purchase and care and feeding of a larger SUV, don’t have the space to house it or simply believe in not buying more than they actually need.
Vinyl (and leather) do very well in long term durability and ease of maintenance as opposed to almost any cloth. It’s rare to see a used car with cloth seats and 100k miles (or much less) that are in non-soiled condition. Especially if kids are involved or dirty-ish outdoor pursuits such as the types of activities that SUVs in theory promote doing. Show me an SUV with a tan or light gray cloth interior and I’ll show you an owner that never takes it off a paved road.
Interesting re: CR, thanks for that. It’s curious they haven’t purchased and tested the Outlander Sport, it’s been on sale for literally a decade now.
As far as the others go, I found I liked the Crosstrek but only with the new, larger engine, the Kona is likely good while polarizing in the looks dept, CX-3 is TINY in the back, more of a two-seater, haven’t looked at the CX-30, HR-V seems alright though I haven’t driven it and leads the segment (barely), I really liked the Seltos last year, the Rogue Sport (smaller one) feels slow, plasticky and decidedly non premium (the Kicks should be in this comparo too, btw), Trax looks boring and cheap, esp. compared to this and Encore, EcoSport is an Indian import and seems compromised for US tastes, the Renegade is good offroad but more than a little cartoonish, and I liked the 500X with the current engine offering (not sure which engine the CR one had) except for the front headrest.
Of all of these though I would term the Trailblazer, Honda, and Nissan as the three that most closely resemble what people think of when they picture the small SUV segment and I’d say the TB is the best-looking which is of course subjective although I have no particular affinity towards Chevy historically.
Vinyl interiors have come a very long way, and I’d credit Mercedes-Benz for that. For years, they had M-B Tex or ‘Mercedes leather’. Yeah, it was vinyl, but it was treated in such a way that it was quite durable and long-lasting to the point of being as good (if not better) then genuine leather.
Other manufacturers (finally) picked up on being able to treat and process vinyl in the same manner so today’s vinyl in virtually any new car is a far cry from the thin, quickly degrading stuff it used to be.
Hitting the sweet spot in the market for entry level cars. And looks much better than the Trax, as does the Encore GX compared to the Encore.
I fully appreciate all the practical attributes of this vehicle, along with the solid build quality, the fact that it takes regular gas, and the cost and ease of finding parts and service. Chevrolet seems to finally be in sync with market preferences and is fielding a credible alternative, the CR ratings noted above notwithstanding.
While the Chevy’s exterior styling is of the moment, I personally find it cliche-ridden and unattractive, and the bunker-like greenhouse seriously impedes rear visibility, as noted here. Oddly enough, I found the Buick version somewhat enticing, particularly the interior, which really does feel Lexus-like (or at least higher-end Toyota-like). Perhaps it was the color combination?
Within the next year or so, we will probably be in the market for a car in this class or one step above it. I will do my best to get my wife to at least test drive the Trailblazer or Encore GX, but my guess is she will be far more interested in the new VW Taos (an email from VW about the new Taos has already piqued her interest) than the GM products, particularly if it is available as a hybrid or EV.
My personal experience with a turbocharged motor is that while it runs okay on regular gas, it runs waaaay better on premium.
Thus, I use premium. I have no problem with the extra $10 a tank.
Now it’s $15 per tank! Not quite so easy to disregard. I do see some benefits when I put 89 E10 in my Trax over the usual 87 E10, like maybe a bit more power and 1 to 1.5 more mpg. Running straight gas – no ethanol – seems to be about the same improvement as 89.
I need to put only one of those in my car for a couple of months, and then the same with the others and keep notes on each and every fill to see if there’s any real world difference. The only difficulty would be finding E0 on a trip when the gas gauge dictates when the next fill happens.
My gut tells me the cheapest option is E10 87 as the improvements I’ve seen are on the order of 5%. If you can find midgrade for 18-25 cents or less over regular, the math favors midgrade. Currently, it’s about 35 cents more, so nope.
Nice review as always, Jim. I especially likes Riley’s comments and real world review. He could be on a new segment of Motor Week called the “Kids Perspective” or whatever…
…and I still say you sound a little like John Davis, speaking of Motor Week.
Something to consider here if I could talk my wife down from the CR-V class to the HR-V class CUV. This seems like a decent competitor to the Honda. We’re still in the thinking-about-it stage when it comes to replacing her Lancer.
I like that it doesn’t have the ipad glued to the dash look but has the screen well integrated
This is the form of the modern “car”. The CUV combines the compact size of old models like the Civic and Corolla and combines them with a hatchback. It makes for a very user friendly vehicle. The off road styling is just that, the style. Just like the original Mustang’s looks were sporty looking and what the market wanted. My only surprise is the fuel mileage, my ’90 Civic SI with five speed, averaged 36 miles combined and on freeway trips could return 42 mpg. True, it didn’t have a/c or an automatic, or all the power accessories but I thought the Chevy could do better. I’v driven late model minivans and big CUVs that return 22-24 mpg.
I’ll bet the extra 1,000 pounds of weight have a lot to do with the difference (3,300 vs 2,300). And a tall but short (in length) shape with 8″ of ground clearance and sort of chunky tires will never do that well on the freeway either. There’s more room in the Trailblazer too, I spent a lot of time in a friend’s 1990 Civic Si as well in high school. Roomy inside for a small car but still….small, it won’t take a family of four and their luggage, this will.
I’m wondering if the new Bolt EUV (the new, larger one with more ground clearance) will get some people looking at it that originally went to look at the Trailblazer.
I saw the Trailblazer on the GM website and I like the styling a lot. The three cylinder motor is very interesting and shows how turbocharging can make a small motor very flexible and pleasant to drive.
Alas, I have not seen one on the street here since GM cars aren’t all that popular in my neck of the woods.
I will be so happy when black exterior cladding and black interiors fall out of fashion. Of course, I’ll probably be dead. I’ve owned 3 black-painted cars for 24 years, so don’t cancel me.
I have a mid-sized crossover booked for our vacation this summer. After reading your interesting and well-written article, I could certainly do a lot worse than a Trailblazer.