Trailblazer SS review.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Followup/articleId=108306?tid=edmunds.h..insideline.promo.1 g.*#14

i want that drivetrain ...

... in a sky

:)

Great review but I hate the looks of the Trailblazer. It's just so 1980s, IMO. :( I prefer the clean looks that characterise many of today's trucks.

Each to their own, hey? ;)

Nice review. Not my cup of tea, but I am definitely encouraged by yet another positive product review for the bow tie. Good work guys and gals!!

Price as tested.......$37,995. :eek:


That's alotta dough for a 2wd truck....if you ask me.

Price as tested.......$37,995. :eek:


That's alotta dough for a 2wd truck....if you ask me.


As someone that is pretty close to the north pole I wish this were the case in Canada.

If you live near the North Pole order the all-wheel drive, otherwise save the $2 grand and go for a rear-wheel-drive example

Base MSRP in Canadian dollars:

2WD - $44,185
AWD - $53,345

That's just shy of a $10K upcharge and translates to over $45K U.S. for the AWD. That's getting too close to C6 territory for my tastes. :eek:

Dual Exhaust could not be packaged into the vehicle and pass high speed rear end crash tests........remember....those pipes have to go somewhere......

(believe me.......we tried.........)

I guess the choice is single exhaust........or dual exhaust and pictures on the internet of one bursting into flames.........when hit at high speed. (remember the crown vic debacle???)

You reallllllllly need to drive one.............

You reallllllllly need to drive one.............

I'm looking forward to it.

Our TrailBlazer, which stickered for $37,955, accelerated to 60 mph in 6.3 seconds and ran the quarter-mile in 14.4 seconds at 96.3 mph

WEAK. I look forward to smoking one

"We were going to do it right, or we weren't going to do it at all," says Tom Wallace, the vehicle line executive of small and midsize truck at GM. "At first they wanted to use the 5.3-liter V8 and do nothing to the suspension. I said forget it."


This Wallace seems like a sensible fellow.

I wonder what impact he might have on "our" car?

WEAK. I look forward to smoking onePlus, the TrailBlazer offers 81 cubic feet of cargo room and can tow 6,700 pounds.Against its peers, it kicks ass... as intended.

WEAK. I look forward to smoking one

Yeah, Edmuds can drive a car. I bet that the guy who track tested it just stepped out of a "fantasticly fast" 4 cyl Camary right before testing the TB SS.
Ill wait for the real results.

I still feel pretty confident that either a TB SS AWD or a Avalanche Z71 will be my next vehicle...

Kind of like the best of most worlds vs the ultimate in functionality.

That is one sharp ride....LOVE the wheels!

Against its peers, it kicks ass... as intended.

The thing is, it hardly has any peers at this point. Grand Cherokee SRT8 will, I'm afraid, eat this for lunch. I don't know if Ford has anything in the pipeline.

I am very positive about the vehicle (TB SS) and I think it's a great product. I don't understand the low quarter mile time, though. I expected the truck to be mid 13's...

When my girl's lease is up on her TB, looks like lease pull ahead will be bringing home the TB SS :D

0-60 in 6.3 seconds? I'm guessing the more mainstream magazines will be getting 0-60 times in the 5.4-5.8 range.

Car and Driver got a 5.5 out of an LS2 SSR, albeit with a six speed manual. 1/4 mile was 14.1 @ 100 mph. The SSR curb weight was 4746 lbs in that test; Chevy lists it as 470x lbs. The Chevy website lists 4417 and 4594 for 2wd and 4wd Trailblazers (I'd imagine the SS 20" wheels will add a little to that). So the TB is slightly lighter than the SSR, especially in 2wd trim. 6.3/14.4 seems a little slow.

Anyone able to find the TB SS "Build your own" on a GM/Chevy website? I can do the Canadian version ... $56,480 .... the way I'd want it. If I could factor the US "red tag" adjustment into it ... about 15% off ... it's got me thinking again. :)

Anyone able to find the TB SS "Build your own" on a GM/Chevy website?

It WAS there for a while a few weeks ago, now it is gone.

The option price was the $5195 quoted in that article.

One difference I noticed, though, is that the article says it is avaiable only in Black, Silver, White, and Blue... but the website allowed one of the two Dark Red colors as well... don't know which is correct.

I REALLY REALLY REALLY liked that dark, metallic carbon grey color they offer on regular TB's, I thought it'd look EXCELLENT on the TB SS, but it's not offered! :mad: Talk about pet peeves.... I can't stand it when you pay more for the premium version of a vehicle, and then they limit your color choice. Another example is not being able to order Monterrey Marron Metallic or White on a Z06.

The thing is, it hardly has any peers at this point. Grand Cherokee SRT8 will, I'm afraid, eat this for lunch. I don't know if Ford has anything in the pipeline.

I am very positive about the vehicle (TB SS) and I think it's a great product. I don't understand the low quarter mile time, though. I expected the truck to be mid 13's...

Edmunds isn't exactly known for their spectacular performance results. I say we wait to make that determination until other rags do some testing (as well as real-world numbers).

I am very positive about the vehicle (TB SS) and I think it's a great product. I don't understand the low quarter mile time, though. I expected the truck to be mid 13's...

The 3800lbs of the GTO with 400 HP seems to run an average of mid 13's. The TB SS with 391HP and 4550lbs to tote around running low 14's seems to be inline with expectations.

Darth,

I agree with you about the grey color..........buuuuuuuuuuuut....should the Malibu SS be available with rental-car-beige or the Impy SS come in Grandma's-baby-blue?

PS: it's nice to have you back on the board

I uploaded this to the Videos section not too long ago....

http://thumbs.streetfire.net/992A577F-9750-43B6-B185-B39507904EDA.jpg (http://videos.camaroz28.com/Player.aspx?fileid=992A577F-9750-43B6-B185-B39507904EDA)Click here to see Video (http://videos.camaroz28.com/Player.aspx?fileid=992A577F-9750-43B6-B185-B39507904EDA)

The 3800lbs of the GTO with 400 HP seems to run an average of mid 13's. The TB SS with 391HP and 4550lbs to tote around running low 14's seems to be inline with expectations.I think the GTO is SEVERELY traction limited with the stock all season 245s. It has a better power to weight ratio than the CTS-V and SRT-8 Charger, yet both the CTS-V and Charger seem to put down better times (very low 13s) in most magazine tests. Hell, Motor Trend did a 3 way test of those three cars, and the GTO (having the best power to weight ratio of the three) was slightly behind the other two, with the CTS-V being quickest. If the GTO had some 275s and/or a sticker compound, I'm convinced it would be closer to 13.0 @ 109-110 mph.

I don't think the TB SS will be so traction limited, even as a 2wd. The rear tires are much bigger than those on the GTO, and it is heavier.

Just what I'm thinking. :)

Just wondering what everyone thinks and if the AWD is worth it....

Would anyone in "snow country" consider the 2wd version?

Darth,

I agree with you about the grey color..........buuuuuuuuuuuut....should the Malibu SS be available with rental-car-beige or the Impy SS come in Grandma's-baby-blue?

You have a legitimate point... no doubt. And I guess I could accept that if they were particularly "wimpy" colors, but in the end... if someone is shelling out all that money, and the paint color is already available at the factory, and on the lower line cars.... I think the buyer should be able to choose that.

ESPECIALLY on the Z06... not like they are going to put a Grandma color on the regular Vette anyway, so I REALLY don't see thier logic there.

Maybe it should be the opposite way, and you should get additional exclusive color choices if you order up the top-of-the-line model... !!! :D


PS: it's nice to have you back on the board


:) Thank you. It helps keep my mind off things..........

Just wondering what everyone thinks and if the AWD is worth it....

Would anyone in "snow country" consider the 2wd version?

NE Ohio here.

If I am dropping the cash for the TB SS, I am certainly going to drop the realitively little bit more for the AWD. :)

NE Ohio here.

If I am dropping the cash for the TB SS, I am certainly going to drop the realitively little bit more for the AWD. :)
Yeah Darth , I know what you mean. Just wondering what the performance and real world gas mileage difference would be with 2wd vs AWD. And for those handful of times per year that you really could use the benefits of AWD...is it worth having to lug it along the other 360 days per year.

The thing is, it hardly has any peers at this point. Grand Cherokee SRT8 will, I'm afraid, eat this for lunch. I don't know if Ford has anything in the pipeline.

I am very positive about the vehicle (TB SS) and I think it's a great product. I don't understand the low quarter mile time, though. I expected the truck to be mid 13's...

Maybe the forth coming Explorer Sport trac on steroids...................

Yeah, Edmuds can drive a car. I bet that the guy who track tested it just stepped out of a "fantasticly fast" 4 cyl Camary right before testing the TB SS.
Ill wait for the real results.

Actually, the writer of that article, Scott Oldham, drives a near mint black '76 TA and a very clean 2 door Chevy ('56 Bel Air I think?) He's a fan of the American Iron, and I think that's apparent by the fair shake he gave the TB in the article. Not that any of that makes him a great 1/4 miler. Actually, I'm not sure if the editors do the driving or if they have a "designated driver" for testing duties.



One difference I noticed, though, is that the article says it is avaiable only in Black, Silver, White, and Blue... but the website allowed one of the two Dark Red colors as well... don't know which is correct.

Red Jewel Tintcoat was just added this month to the TB and is available on the SS (extra cost).

Yeah Darth , I know what you mean. Just wondering what the performance and real world gas mileage difference would be with 2wd vs AWD. And for those handful of times per year that you really could use the benefits of AWD...is it worth having to lug it along the other 360 days per year.

Worthwhile points...

I think I remember reading that AWD got 1 MPG less than 2WD in highway driving...

Another counterpoint is, if I am dropping that much cash on the vehicle, especially this perfomance version of this vehicle (one that isn't an Echo, Cobalt, or even Malibu type of vehicle, fuel economy-wise, to begin with), a 1 MPG difference is unlikely to affect my choice.

Red Jewel Tintcoat was just added this month to the TB and is available on the SS (extra cost).

Ah! That explains that!

Hopefully they will add a few more too.

GRRRRRR ....:mad: :mad: :mad:

I can't "build your own" SS on the US website so I built an LT 1SC with the equipment I want, stickers at $37,255 and red tags at $31,754.57.

Then I built basically the same on the GMCanada "build your own: site, it stickers at $51,970. A 40% premium ... when the dollar is at 1.1687???

Stuff like that makes me want to say "s###w you, GM, and buy a Toyota.

:mad: :mad: :mad:

GRRRRRR ....:mad: :mad: :mad:

I can't "build your own" SS on the US website so I built an LT 1SC with the equipment I want, stickers at $37,255 and red tags at $31,754.57.

Then I built basically the same on the GMCanada "build your own: site, it stickers at $51,970. A 40% premium ... when the dollar is at 1.1687???

Stuff like that makes me want to say "s###w you, GM, and buy a Toyota.

:mad: :mad: :mad:




Why such a HUGE price difference, I wonder???

I am thinking about trading in my 03 Silverado SS for a TBSS. You can't beat a 400 horse suv.
Brandon

I built a LT 1SE to $32,880 with sunroof, heated seats and the sound package. Can you get NAV on it? Add $5,000 for SS and its $37,000 but I get GMS so I'd assume it'll fall back around $33,000? Either this or pay $25,000 for a used 2004 Lightning...

Why such a HUGE price difference, I wonder???

More to make you go hmmmm

Base number before doing any actual building CAN : USA : CAN/USA

2WD: 31,595 : 27,410 : 1.153

4WD: 40,730 : 29,660 : 1.37

I guess if I were interested in a TB SS a year from now, I'd be looking at the USA used market. Vehicles need to be in service for 6 months before we can import.

Just wondering what everyone thinks and if the AWD is worth it....

Would anyone in "snow country" consider the 2wd version?
I'm 95% sure I'm picking one of these up in Jan-February. I'm using it to pull a boat. I spent enough time spinning rear tires pulling the boat out on wet ramps this year. AWD for me, please.

Also, having driven an AWD vehicle during the last two winters, I wouldn't want it anyother way. Its soo much fun to tear around after a big snow with AWD.

Just wondering what everyone thinks and if the AWD is worth it....

Would anyone in "snow country" consider the 2wd version?

I'd rather poke my own eyes out with a pick axe.

I actually have a leg to stand on with this opinion, too. In '03, I ordered for a customer (doing it for stock would have gotten me fired IMMEDIATELY, for good reason) an '03 2WD Bravada. He traded in an old Electra wagon, and INSISTED he didn't need AWD. His RWD wagon had served him well, and he was an old guy...no talking sense into him.

When I saw him later that winter, I thought he was going to take a swing at me, telling me how awful this thing was in snow. I told him the traction control wasn't enough to help him when he ordered it!!!! He then calmed down, as he remembered the conversation. A 2WD SUV is like a 2WD pickup, not like a RWD car. There's a lot of open, empty space over those back wheels, and not a lotta weight. Without snow tires, that thing was suicide.

391hp with 20s will only be a little worse :rolleyes:

If that drivetrain was available in the Bravada, I'd go for one. I always thought the last Bravadas was the best looking of GMs mid-size SUVs, it a shame its gone.

Growing up our family always had a Caprice Wagon in the driveway, those things were awesome in the snow. I figured any type of SUV with 2wd would do the same with extra body weight over the rear wheels like a wagon, but maybe the wheel base is to short and the weight distrubution is more 50/50

Well, after some research, it looks like the Jeep will absolutly own the SS, both in acceleration and handling. Anyone know the tow rating on the Jeep?

Darth,

I agree with you...get AWD. I know Charlie mentions what the hell do you lug it around for when you consider in some areas, it probably will only benefit you 5 days a year. For me? I could have used it a couple days last week, and it wasn't even December yet!

slt,
Back when I used to work full time at the dealership, during bad snow storms I would take a used '02 Bravada home, even though my '02 GA GT had snows on it. Those 360s can do great drifts in snow :D I think you'll enjoy it...I know a 270hp I6 Bravada was fun!

30th,
Everything Olds made was better :( Its sad, because for as much as I crow about Olds, I will likely never own one. By the time Ash and I are ready for our next cars, they'll all be too old. We were thinking of getting her an '04 Alero GL2 coupe (the ones with the FE3 suspension and V6 standard) back in the spring before her Grand Am showed up on trade...and the deal on that was too good to say no to. I'm selling '02 Bravadas with Bose, moonroof, heated leather, polished wheels, 6 CD and more for friggen $15,500 with 37k :rolleyes: These were $37k MSRP cars in '02...no one wants an Olds because "how can I get them fixed? How good can they be if they don't make them anymore?"

Keep your Intrigue for a long, long time. A GLS is a gorgeous car, and you won't get crap for it. I almost bought an '02 GLS the day I bought my GP GT, but I really wanted a coupe. The sad thing was, the Intrigue was a nicer car with more stuff for less $$$!

What color is yours? Ruby Red with Neutral Leather was always my favorite GLS combo...we sold a ton that color. Navy with grey was a hot car too, but they killed navy after '00 IIRC.

Well, after some research, it looks like the Jeep will absolutly own the SS, both in acceleration and handling. Anyone know the tow rating on the Jeep?

Why do people keep saying that? HP is similar, weights are similar...I don't get it...

Yeah Darth , I know what you mean. Just wondering what the performance and real world gas mileage difference would be with 2wd vs AWD. And for those handful of times per year that you really could use the benefits of AWD...is it worth having to lug it along the other 360 days per year.

I don't do 2wd SUV's because 4wd/AWD would be the only reason i'd even consider an SUV to begin with. With the TB SS AWD, i could get year round performance/traction. I'm sure it'll launch harder when it nice and dry out and i want to have fun, and i'm sure it'll feel more secure on the snow/ice when things do get ugly. It'll keep me very satisfied either way year round.

What's that saying?? i'm sure i'm not saying it right but it's something along the lines of ....I'd rather have somthing and not need it much vs needing it on occassion and not having it at all.

Jason E, probably because Jeep is advertising 4.Xsec 0-60 times for the SRT GC. That's fast.

Why do people keep saying that? HP is similar, weights are similar...I don't get it...
I think the Jeep is underated. It looks like the SS runs mid 14's and around a 6 sec 0-60. The Jeep runs high 13's and around a 5 sec 0-60. If it can't tow, though, then it useless to me

Maybe the forth coming Explorer Sport trac on steroids...................

Yup. 390hp S/c'd 4.6 (same one as 03/04 Cobra??) with AWD.

Slt, tow rating for the SRT8 is 3,500lbs. Nothing impressive, but it should be fine for most tasks. Kinda dissapointed cause i believe Ford is promising a 6,000+lbs tow-rating for the upcoming SVT sporttrac and the tow rating for the TB SS is 6,700lbs with Rwd and 6,500lbs with AWD. Towing is one area the Jeep falls behind.

Darth,

I agree with you...get AWD. I know Charlie mentions what the hell do you lug it around for when you consider in some areas, it probably will only benefit you 5 days a year. For me? I could have used it a couple days last week, and it wasn't even December yet!

slt,
Back when I used to work full time at the dealership, during bad snow storms I would take a used '02 Bravada home, even though my '02 GA GT had snows on it. Those 360s can do great drifts in snow :D I think you'll enjoy it...I know a 270hp I6 Bravada was fun!

30th,
Everything Olds made was better :( Its sad, because for as much as I crow about Olds, I will likely never own one. By the time Ash and I are ready for our next cars, they'll all be too old. We were thinking of getting her an '04 Alero GL2 coupe (the ones with the FE3 suspension and V6 standard) back in the spring before her Grand Am showed up on trade...and the deal on that was too good to say no to. I'm selling '02 Bravadas with Bose, moonroof, heated leather, polished wheels, 6 CD and more for friggen $15,500 with 37k :rolleyes: These were $37k MSRP cars in '02...no one wants an Olds because "how can I get them fixed? How good can they be if they don't make them anymore?"

Keep your Intrigue for a long, long time. A GLS is a gorgeous car, and you won't get crap for it. I almost bought an '02 GLS the day I bought my GP GT, but I really wanted a coupe. The sad thing was, the Intrigue was a nicer car with more stuff for less $$$!

What color is yours? Ruby Red with Neutral Leather was always my favorite GLS combo...we sold a ton that color. Navy with grey was a hot car too, but they killed navy after '00 IIRC.

Well the Intrigue is the wife's car and its been a great car so far. Ours is NBM with Neutral/Tan Leather interior combo. Its loaded with everything except the rear spoiler. For the $$ I don't think you can find a nicer car. I'd like to keep the miles off of it, but we drive it everywhere. I have a take home Crown Vic that I can drive off duty, but the wife hates riding in it even though the gas is free:confused: . I am going to try and keep the Z in the garage this winter, so that leaves the Intrigue.
I saw a '01 Intrigue in the local auto trader in a dealer ad for $3,500. It did have slightly over 100K miles on it, but still resale really sucks. In the long run miles probably don't matter, by the time were ready to trade it in we won't get anything for it anyway.
Now I wish we would have held out for an Aurora, at the time we couldn't afford one, but now they are dirt cheap, even with the 4.0.

I wouldn't mind having another Olds later on, but like you I think they will be too old when the time comes, unless we come across one of those final 500 cars that is in excellent shape.

I think the Jeep is underated. It looks like the SS runs mid 14's and around a 6 sec 0-60. The Jeep runs high 13's and around a 5 sec 0-60. If it can't tow, though, then it useless to me
I thought we weren't trusting Edmunds for times?
With AWD, that TB SS could probably hit 5.something 0-60 and get a 13 as well. They are both around the same performance wise, like Jason said.

Slt, tow rating for the SRT8 is 3,500lbs. Nothing impressive, but it should be fine for most tasks. Kinda dissapointed cause i believe Ford is promising a 6,000+lbs tow-rating for the upcoming SVT sporttrac and the tow rating for the TB SS is 6,700lbs with Rwd and 6,500lbs with AWD. Towing is one area the Jeep falls behind.
The tow rating is what attracts me to the TB SS. Of course AWD + LS2 doesn't hurt either ;) The only thing that would make me feel any better about them is if they get the 6L80E like the 06 Vette has behind it's LS2.

I thought we weren't trusting Edmunds for times?
With AWD, that TB SS could probably hit 5.something 0-60 and get a 13 as well. They are both around the same performance wise, like Jason said.


Why do you keep saying that? The SRT8 puts out a good 30 more horsepower then the LS2 SS.

I hope to pick one up as well.

Why do you keep saying that? The SRT8 puts out a good 30 more horsepower then the LS2 SS.
I don't doubt the GC might be slightly quicker, but it seems everybody is thinking it's gonna destroy the SS. I see them being very close competitors with the GC edging it slightly.

Slt, tow rating for the SRT8 is 3,500lbs.
:rolleyes: Thats what I suspected. Hard to pull .9g+ and still be able to pull a load. If it cant tow, then whats the point? I'd rather have a car that owns them all. A black SS pulling my boat is going to look so sweet next year:cool: 4 more months till summer:D

I don't doubt the GC might be slightly quicker, but it seems everybody is thinking it's gonna destroy the SS. I see them being very close competitors with the GC edging it slightly.

x2...makes sense to me. I don't doubt the SS might lose some of the hairy edge, but like every other SS sibling...what it gives up in that max performance, it makes up for in usability. Consider the Silverado SS (arguably the weakest comparison) to the Lightning, the Cobalt SS Supercharged to the SRT-4, the TB SS to the GC SRT-8, and the Impala SS to the Charger R/T (at least up here, FWD gives it an edge for usability)...

I like the TB SS a lot...not even close to being able to afford one though. And to be honest, the whole "performance SUV" thing isn't my cup of tea, anyway. But for those who want one, they're cool.

Just got the new MT and it had a little booklet in it with all the SRT cars (loved all except the SRT6 crossfire). In it, Chrysler is promising 4.X 0-60 and 13.Xsec 1/4 miles.

I don't see why the Ls2 TB SS wouldn't be capable of atleast low 5's and flat 14's by comparison. I expect the SRT GC to put up high 4's for 0-60 and high 13's for the 1/4 mile. As far as handling/braking, I have no idea, but i kinda expect the GC to have a slight edge.

Btw: In the booklet they mentioned how the SRT8 charger starts off at 35k. I thought it was more than that:confused:. That's actually a pretty good price.

Why do you keep saying that? The SRT8 puts out a good 30 more horsepower then the LS2 SS.

Well, the Trailblazer SS is around 4550lbs. The Grand Cherokee SRT-8 weights in at 4788lbs if my google search can be trusted. Weight is on the Trailblazers side. Jeep Hemi = 415Hp. Trailblazer LS2 = 391HP. 24Hp difference, 238lb weight difference. From the numbers it looks like both of these vehicles will have very similar performance to one another. That is not even taking into account how much power is actually making it to the wheels, in which case the Jeep could very well make the same power as the Chevy (or lower). It would be nice to see some dynographs, but considering that probably won't be possible for some time, I don't think they can be counted on.

I would like to add that a lot of the reason the SRT pulls better times than the TB SS is gearing. It is geared pretty low and so get horrible gas mileage.

I remember hearing about the srt8 getting mid 13's and the TBSS getting something like 13.9. My brother drove one of the pre-production vehicles of the SS since he works for eaton and was working on the posi-unit in it's nice 14 bolt rear end. He said that he was keeping up with/beating a bunch of mustangs on the highway and enjoyed watching their shocked faces. It's nice having an insider so I can learn which vehicles will soon get superchargers and the other supercharger advancement :D .

You have a legitimate point... no doubt. And I guess I could accept that if they were particularly "wimpy" colors, but in the end... if someone is shelling out all that money, and the paint color is already available at the factory, and on the lower line cars.... I think the buyer should be able to choose that.

ESPECIALLY on the Z06... not like they are going to put a Grandma color on the regular Vette anyway, so I REALLY don't see thier logic there.

Maybe it should be the opposite way, and you should get additional exclusive color choices if you order up the top-of-the-line model... !!! :D




:) Thank you. It helps keep my mind off things..........

while the paint may be available in the factory, not all the parts on the car (I believe) are painted in the factory. I don't know exactly how we're producing the TrailBlazer SS......I know the Camaro and Firebird were sent to SLP and ASC respectively. The Suburban LTZ and Z71 and Tahoe Z71 (800 series) are sent out to (I can't remember the supplier) to get the conversion.

The bottom line is that the TB-SS has unique panels (such as fascias and such) and as a result, matching colors is a very expensive proposition....so colors are selected (in limited numbers) .....not what you want to hear, but that's just reality.

(you could not get an SS or a Firehawk or Z71/LTZ in every color either)

If GM is smart, they will price the TB SS 10K below the GC SRT. This way it will not directly compete with it.

0-60 in 6.3 seconds? I'm guessing the more mainstream magazines will be getting 0-60 times in the 5.4-5.8 range.

Car and Driver got a 5.5 out of an LS2 SSR, albeit with a six speed manual. 1/4 mile was 14.1 @ 100 mph. The SSR curb weight was 4746 lbs in that test; Chevy lists it as 470x lbs. The Chevy website lists 4417 and 4594 for 2wd and 4wd Trailblazers (I'd imagine the SS 20" wheels will add a little to that). So the TB is slightly lighter than the SSR, especially in 2wd trim. 6.3/14.4 seems a little slow.

Yes, that time does seem slow. The Jeep SRT8 supposedly gets to 60 in under 5 seconds. The SRT8 has a 415 hp engine, while the TB SS has a 390 HP engine. However, the SRT8 is almost 300 lbs. heavier than the SS...so the power-to-weight ratio makes these two almost dead even. Therefore, how do they get 6.3 seconds in one car, and under 5 in the other?

Something isn't right.

Why do you keep saying that? The SRT8 puts out a good 30 more horsepower then the LS2 SS.

Actually, it puts out 25 more horsepower. But the SRT8 is also more than three hundred pounds heavier. That puts the two dead even in performance.

The rule of thumb is that 10 pounds shed is equivalent to 1 horsepower gained. 300+ pounds is equivalent to a 30+ horsepower gain for the Trailblazer.

That's why mustangs with a 40 hp advantage get stomped by Corvettes.

The Trailblazer and the Jeep oughtta be a good match up.

Yes, that time does seem slow. The Jeep SRT8 supposedly gets to 60 in under 5 seconds. The SRT8 has a 415 hp engine, while the TB SS has a 390 HP engine. However, the SRT8 is almost 300 lbs. heavier than the SS...so the power-to-weight ratio makes these two almost dead even. Therefore, how do they get 6.3 seconds in one car, and under 5 in the other?

Something isn't right.

If the 420 horses (latest figure) in the GC are as healthy as the 425 horses in the Magnum/Charger/300, then I'd expect it to be quicker than the TB SS. Does anyone know which transmission they're using in the GC SRT8? If it's the Mercedes-designed one, then I would expect low times relative to hp/weight.

Regarding Edmunds acceleration times, I believe they do not correct for weather conditions, and that the track they often use (in Fontana I think) is a little slow. Remember that standard weather corrections almost always result in a faster time, since testing is usually done in conditions worse than 59 degrees at sea level. Fontana will be warmer than 59 degree except in winter or late night/early morning. And it's a few hundred feet above sea level.

Anyone know why you still can't price a TB SS on Chevy's website?

Anyone know why you still can't price a TB SS on Chevy's website?


I've been wondering the same thing.

I was there a few weeks ago, after being missing for quite some time after the 06 site launched.

I don't understand why they removed it, unless it was by accident or something. Maybe they had server issues, a nd restored to a backup which was before they added the info, and don't realize it's missing, or something like that. :confused:

Yeah, you can't even search for one on GM Buypower or build one on Edmunds.

Anyone know why you still can't price a TB SS on Chevy's website?
Hmmm....:think:

They're already on the ground too...

Interesting.

Hmmm....:think:

They're already on the ground too...

Interesting.

Yeah, interesting.

Wonder what's up.

Yeah, you can't even search for one on GM Buypower or build one on Edmunds.

You can build it on Edmunds. The SS option is a package (B4U) That is available on any of the 4 styles. So pick a style and then select the (B4U) SS package on the option page.

You can build it on Edmunds. The SS option is a package (B4U) That is available on any of the 4 styles. So pick a style and then select the (B4U) SS package on the option page.

The RPO code for the SS always put a grin on my face!! :D

You know whoever selected that code was doing it with the subliminal message "Before You!" as in "I won the race!" ;)

The RPO code for the SS always put a grin on my face!! :D

You know whoever selected that code was doing it with the subliminal message "Before You!" as in "I won the race!" ;)

Heh, I never thought about that.

The RPO code for the SS always put a grin on my face!! :D

You know whoever selected that code was doing it with the subliminal message "Before You!" as in "I won the race!" ;)

You know, its funny I always liked that RPO too but never thought about why. Nice catch. :thumb:

FWIW, Chevy.com will let you select the SS package right now... but I can only see it on the higher level LS option group (1SB) right now...

For real world stuff you guys might find what I'm working on right now interesting :)

http://forums.trailvoy.com/showthread.php?t=3049

Actually, it puts out 25 more horsepower. But the SRT8 is also more than three hundred pounds heavier. That puts the two dead even in performance.

The rule of thumb is that 10 pounds shed is equivalent to 1 horsepower gained. 300+ pounds is equivalent to a 30+ horsepower gain for the Trailblazer.

That's why mustangs with a 40 hp advantage get stomped by Corvettes.

The Trailblazer and the Jeep oughtta be a good match up.

I don't know if things are that simple. You've still got other factors like gearing, etc...

And FYI: 03/04 Cobra's where not getting stomped by Ls1 c5's...atleast not in straightline acceleration and 1/4 mile.

But i do agree that that the TB SS and SRTGC should be a good matchup. I think the Jeep will be slightly faster, but the two should be close.

For real world stuff you guys might find what I'm working on right now interesting :)

http://forums.trailvoy.com/showthread.php?t=3049

Thanks! What an interesting thread. Sounds like the AWD TB SS could be awesome with a 6L80E.

I was just going thru the site that GTPprix linked us to, and am kinda getting excited about the AWD TB SS. Which is weird, because I'm not a truck guy, I usually won't consider a car with auto trans, and I'm very sensitive about the weight/complexity/cost penalty of AWD.

I was just going thru the site that GTPprix linked us to, and am kinda getting excited about the AWD TB SS. Which is weird, because I'm not a truck guy, I usually won't consider a car with auto trans, and I'm very sensitive about the weight/complexity/cost penalty of AWD.


Yup...you aren't a truck guy.....but your wife drives a Sport Ute as I recall!!!

Yup...you aren't a truck guy.....but your wife drives a Sport Ute as I recall!!!

Yeah, but she has a new car.....and I'm needing one soon. :)

I don't know why I can't find any TB SS's to check out.

Here's the first one I've seen in blue.....looks sharp, I think.


http://forums.trailvoy.com/showthread.php?t=3138

I was just going thru the site that GTPprix linked us to, and am kinda getting excited about the AWD TB SS. Which is weird, because I'm not a truck guy, I usually won't consider a car with auto trans, and I'm very sensitive about the weight/complexity/cost penalty of AWD.

Hmm. But you are an IRS guy. Check out Carroll Shelby's comments in the Jan 06 R/T on IRS on his namesake Mustang. I do take his comments with a grain of salt, since he'd be trying to sell what he's got. :)

Btw, I don't mean to restart that debate again. I had just read the article in the previous hour, and then I read your message, and the irony struck me.

I'm confident (hopeful?) that the Chevy team found a better way to do it :)

Here's the first one I've seen in blue.....looks sharp, I think.


http://forums.trailvoy.com/showthread.php?t=3138


:bow:

That does look sharp in blue!

I really want to see one on that Jewel Red color too... and I read somewhere that in addition to Jewel Red, the Dark Grey Metallic was added (I hope so, that is what I wanted above all others)

Black and Blue look great, IMO... Problem is, I've had balck, and while it looks awesome, it's such a PITA to keep nice lookingon a daily driver... and the blue, while it's my favorite color overall... I just had it on the GTO....Silver and White, I don't like so much on the TBSS... need to see the other(s) color(s) still.

I keep having this ping pong match in my head... TBSS... Av Z71... TBSS... AvZ71.... sigh. I'm going to drive myself nuts.

And by the time the Lease Pullahead catches up to me, I'll probably have more choices to contend with... sigh.

Hmm. But you are an IRS guy. Check out Carroll Shelby's comments in the Jan 06 R/T on IRS on his namesake Mustang. I do take his comments with a grain of salt, since he'd be trying to sell what he's got. :)

Btw, I don't mean to restart that debate again. I had just read the article in the previous hour, and then I read your message, and the irony struck me.

I'm confident (hopeful?) that the Chevy team found a better way to do it :)

I'll try to catch that story, I haven't read it yet. But I do have different expectations for different vehicles. The TB is...after all a truck. I'd expect a reasonable trade off between it's overall utility and it's handling. Sure, I 'd want some level of satisfying chassis dynamics - but I wouldn't expect it to be a road leech in the way I'd want a Z/28 to be.

This truck is a helluvalot of fun ;) It should run mid 13's or so after we get done tuning it; not bad for a 4800 lbs truck!

Those TB guys crack me up. I loved the huge thread about the SRT8 where they tried to prove the SS was better.

Isn't the TB getting ground-up revamped soon? I hope so. That's a cool drivetrain and chassis but that interior has GOT to go. Please see the GMT-900 trucks... GM got the right idea on those for the most part.:)

I hope they keep the SS model when they do the redesign and don't take several years to add it to the lineup like they did with this one.

That 0-60 time is pretty bad, though. Most other non-performance marketed V8 SUVs in that class are not too far behind if behind at all. Heck... sounds like the Jeep SRT8 would eat its lunch without a doubt, and the new V6 Rav4, though not intended to be in the same class, would be neck'n'neck with it, unless somebody can improve on that time.

Anybody catch the STS-V comparison in MT this past month? The CLS AMG model absolutely destroyed it performance-wise. GM has always been known for its class-leading powertrains in terms of performance/power output but recently it seems some others have been giving them a hard time.

That 0-60 time is pretty bad, though.

Eh my SS hit 60 in 5.3 seconds bone stock. How is that bad for a 4800lbs truck? hehe

That 0-60 time is pretty bad, though. Most other non-performance marketed V8 SUVs in that class are not too far behind if behind at all. Heck... sounds like the Jeep SRT8 would eat its lunch without a doubt, and the new V6 Rav4, though not intended to be in the same class, would be neck'n'neck with it, unless somebody can improve on that time.

Anybody catch the STS-V comparison in MT this past month? The CLS AMG model absolutely destroyed it performance-wise. GM has always been known for its class-leading powertrains in terms of performance/power output but recently it seems some others have been giving them a hard time.No way most mags will see a 6.2 0-60 for the TB SS. Edmunds must really suck. I'm guessing ~5.3-5.6 seconds will be normal.

As for the STS-V, I didn't see a MT article. But Car and Driver tested against the M5 and the CLS55 AMG. The two Germans were quicker, but also at least $15k more expensive. They actually ranked the STS-V ahead of the Benz. Even though the Benz was faster, they liked the overall ride/handling/performance balance of the STS better, as well as its interior.

I actually wonder about the test unit they got. The 0-60 time was 4.6 seconds, which sounds about right (the other two were a couple of tenths quicker IIRC). But the 1/4 mile time was something like 13.3 @ 107, which is slower than the CTS-V they tested, which is down about 60-70 hp from the STS-V. I would expect something closer to 13.0 @ 110, at least (a CTS-V can do that, and I'd expect that 70 hp at the upper rpm to come in handy for a good trap speed). 107 mph sounds suspiciously slow for some reason.

I figured the Benz might be a tick or two quicker (it is running a supercharged 5.5L, vs. the supercharged 4.4L in the STS - similar peak power, but the Benz has a significant torque advantage), and obviously the more extreme (and less comfy) M5 would be quicker, but I didn't expect such a low trap speed in the 1/4 mile. Something doesn't add up there.

:shrug:

But I do have different expectations for different vehicles. The TB is...after all a truck. I'd expect a reasonable trade off between it's overall utility and it's handling. Sure, I 'd want some level of satisfying chassis dynamics .....

Ditto. And it needs to be able to tow a trailer with some authority. I expect to have mine within a month. :)

As for the STS-V, I didn't see a MT article. But Car and Driver tested against the M5 and the CLS55 AMG. The two Germans were quicker, but also at least $15k more expensive. They actually ranked the STS-V ahead of the Benz. Even though the Benz was faster, they liked the overall ride/handling/performance balance of the STS better, as well as its interior.

It's in this month's issue (the one with Civic as COTR)

The article is titled:
Cadillac STS-v meets Mercedes-Benz CLS55 AMG
Blown Away

It's in this month's issue (the one with Civic as COTR)

The article is titled:
Cadillac STS-v meets Mercedes-Benz CLS55 AMG
Blown AwayThanks. I don't subscribe anymore, so I have to wait until it is published online. It didn't come up yet when I searched for it just now.

Hmm. But you are an IRS guy. Check out Carroll Shelby's comments in the Jan 06 R/T on IRS on his namesake Mustang. I do take his comments with a grain of salt, since he'd be trying to sell what he's got. :)



Got a chance to read it earlier. Well, just my opinion, but Shelby's comments sound like a crock 'o crappolla. IRS would add $5,000 to the GT500???? IRS benefits are as he says ..."BS"? Why didn't he insist that the Ford GT get a live rear axle then?
He then goes on to imply- no actually say - that the 150 lbs that the convertible top adds to the GT500 ,(bringing this porky pig Mustang to over 4,000 lbs :eek: ), is a good thing because it improves the car's weight balance. OMG!

Also in the story, SVT chief engineer, Jay O'neill (I think), says it would be impossible to get ideal suspension geometry with an IRS on the GT500 because of the way the Mustang is currently packaged.....hope they get it figured out by '09, when Mustang gets IRS.

He then goes on to imply- no actually say - that the 150 lbs that the convertible top adds to the GT500 ,(bringing this porky pig Mustang to over 4,000 lbs :eek: ), is a good thing because it improves the car's weight balance. OMG

Weight gain notwithstanding, my convertible does have slightly better weight balance, 0.6% more on the rear than my hardtop. Putting the top down moves 15 lbs, or 0.4%, to the rear axle .... so there is some truth to what he says.

I was never able to get my previous hardtop to autoX as well as the convertible, I'm hoping I'll be able to get the 1LE to step it up a notch.

Ditto. And it needs to be able to tow a trailer with some authority. I expect to have mine within a month. :)


Cool! What color?

BTW, I think in one of your posts you said that you drove one in BG. What did it drive like?

Got a chance to read it earlier. Well, just my opinion, but Shelby's comments sound like a crock 'o crappolla. IRS would add $5,000 to the GT500???? IRS benefits are as he says ..."BS"? Why didn't he insist that the Ford GT get a live rear axle then?
He then goes on to imply- no actually say - that the 150 lbs that the convertible top adds to the GT500 ,(bringing this porky pig Mustang to over 4,000 lbs :eek: ), is a good thing because it improves the car's weight balance. OMG!


I figured you might have that reaction :D

I'm happy to see a new Camaro, with or without IRS. If the pictures of the chassis and body have anything in common with the actual car, it looks like a winner.

Cool! What color?

BTW, I think in one of your posts you said that you drove one in BG. What did it drive like?

Black. Is there any other color? :D

I only drove it around the NCM, but the sound of the V8 was "right" and it did feel tighter than our Envoy. I'm putting a lot of trust into Scott's comments about how well it handled at Spring Mountain.

I really like what they did with the look too. I was looking for a picture of our Envoy sans mouldings, badging and roof rack so show, but I don't have any good ones. The cleaned up front and rear fascias work for me too.

To keep everyone happy my wife will be getting an AWD Vibe. We should be set then until the 5th gen convertible is available.

Red Jewel Tintcoat

http://forums.trailvoy.com/showthread.php?t=2950&page=5

Red Jewel Tintcoat

http://forums.trailvoy.com/showthread.php?t=2950&page=5


That looks really, really good!

Thanks for posting.

Only down side to it is that I hate paying an upcharge for a paint color... :blah:

Anybody catch the STS-V comparison in MT this past month? The CLS AMG model absolutely destroyed it performance-wise. GM has always been known for its class-leading powertrains in terms of performance/power output but recently it seems some others have been giving them a hard time.

AMG has been producing some of the fastest and meanest machines on the planet! I think they nailed the formula for making exciting family vehicles. The trouble is, it costs an arm, a leg, and a house.

I still remember vividly the day I went to the track with my LT1 Z28. I ran 14.6 - 14.9 that day since the clutch started slipping. One time I ran against a stock C32 AMG (C-Class with 3.2 litre supercharged V6, delivering 349 HP). That sucker, with 5-speed auto transmission, ran 13.2 at 107 mph. I was blown away. Of course, it also cost twice the price of a brand new Z28.

AMG has been producing some of the fastest and meanest machines on the planet! I think they nailed the formula for making exciting family vehicles. The trouble is, it costs an arm, a leg, and a house.

I still remember vividly the day I went to the track with my LT1 Z28. I ran 14.6 - 14.9 that day since the clutch started slipping. One time I ran against a stock C32 AMG (C-Class with 3.2 litre supercharged V6, delivering 349 HP). That sucker, with 5-speed auto transmission, ran 13.2 at 107 mph. I was blown away. Of course, it also cost twice the price of a brand new Z28.

Yeah they are expensive but consider that not only are you getting performance, but you are getting luxury features, ride, quality, etc along with that.

For IE you have Lexus who delivers top-notch comfort, service, and quality without the performance (Their V8s can run stock in the low 14s and the IS350 will run in the high 13s which is better than most people might assume of them but that still doesn't even begin to touch AMG). So I guess you can get luxury//performance seperately a reasonable price, but altogether it's $$$.:D

So is the TB SS capable of pulling say a third generation Camaro?

So is the TB SS capable of pulling say a third generation Camaro?:think: I'm going to go with 'yes.' It won't be too far off an LT1 Camaro in terms of acceleration.

The heavier (but six speed) SSR has done a 0-60 in ~5.6 seconds and run the 1/4 mile in 14.0@100 mph in Car and Driver.

I'd say just about any stock 3rd gen will lose to a TB SS. :)

Red Jewel Tintcoat

http://forums.trailvoy.com/showthread.php?t=2950&page=5

Whoa!:shock:

I'm not a fan of red but that just put it in the running.

:think: I'm going to go with 'yes.' It won't be too far off an LT1 Camaro in terms of acceleration.

The heavier (but six speed) SSR has done a 0-60 in ~5.6 seconds and run the 1/4 mile in 14.0@100 mph in Car and Driver.

I'd say just about any stock 3rd gen will lose to a TB SS. :)

I sorta think he meant "towing".:think:

I sorta think he meant "towing".:think::o :lol: Ah, yes, upon reading it again, I think you are correct. We had been talking about AMG acceleration and all that, plus the TB SS is a "high performance" SUV, and sometimes we say "pulling" or "walking" to mean "outaccelerating", so you see...

*sigh*

I am ashamed. :cry:

So is the TB SS capable of pulling say a third generation Camaro?

Our I6 Envoy did a fine job towing our 4th gen so I'm sure our soon to arrive TB/SS will tow even better.

Red Jewel Tintcoat

http://forums.trailvoy.com/showthread.php?t=2950&page=5

Great looking truck. I can see what threxx meant about the interior/dash/steering though:o. Boy, has GM come a long ways with the newer crop of interiors. I hope they seriously adress that with the redesign cause that's just horrible. I'd like to see something inline with the new GMT900 trucks.

Not a fan of the engine cover either. What happened to good looking/dressed up engines? Now we pop the hood and all we see is plastic. This goes for all new vehicles.

But man, that color is stunnning. I like the wheels too....18's or 20's? i can't really tell.

You could tell they didn't give the SS a slammed look like DCX did with the SRT8 GC. Guessing the suspension tuning is more for towing/payload and comfort rather than all-out performance. That would explain why the SRT8 tow rating is only 3,500. I beleive the SS's tow rating is nearly double that. 6,500lbs for the AWD and 6,700lbs for the Rwd. Definitly the more useful/livable of the two sport trucks.

Great looking truck. I can see what threxx meant about the interior/dash/steering though:o. Boy, has GM come a long ways with the newer crop of interiors. I hope they seriously adress that with the redesign cause that's just horrible. I'd like to see something inline with the new GMT900 trucks.I actually don't think it looks so horrible in SS duds, but my overall feeling of the Trailblazer interior is that it sucks. I actually like the Envoy interior, though. Same basic layout (which is not the problem in the TB), but much nicer looking materials and a cleaner, more upscale dash design.Not a fan of the engine cover either. What happened to good looking/dressed up engines? Now we pop the hood and all we see is plastic. This goes for all new vehicles. Yeah, we can thank the Euro and luxo marques for that stuff. M-B, BMW, Lexus, VW, etc.But man, that color is stunnning. I like the wheels too....18's or 20's? i can't really tell.They are 20s, and I agree that is looks awesome in that color.
You could tell they didn't give the SS a slammed look like DCX did with the SRT8 GC. Guessing the suspension tuning is more for towing/payload and comfort rather than all-out performance. That would explain why the SRT8 tow rating is only 3,500. I beleive the SS's tow rating is nearly double that. 6,500lbs for the AWD and 6,700lbs for the Rwd. Definitly the more useful/livable of the two sport trucks.Yes, definitely will be more daily driver friendly, but it is no sloppy handling SUV. I believe it had some development time at the Nurburging, just like the new Caddys and the Ion RL/Cobalt SS. It is no slouch, probably damn near if not = to the SRT8 but I'm betting with a much better ride. And I doubt that very many owners will be taking their trucks to the Streets of Willow or Laguna Seca. :)

I actually don't think it looks so horrible in SS duds, but my overall feeling of the Trailblazer interior is that it sucks. I actually like the Envoy interior, though. Same basic layout (which is not the problem in the TB), but much nicer looking materials and a cleaner, more upscale dash

Pic from that link. I think it looks horrible. Especially that steering wheel. I'm not huge on interiors either, but it just comes off as bad and cheap. Again, my largest gripe is with the steering wheel.
http://www.pnrcomputersystems.com/SRT/7.jpg

Envoy's dash does look alot better...even with the fake wood (which doesn't look bad itself)
http://static.worldnow.com/nctd/images/cars/03-envoy-interior-02.jpg

Yeah, we can thank the Euro and luxo marques for that stuff. M-B, BMW, Lexus, VW, etc.

Yup.

They are 20s, and I agree that is looks awesome in that color.

Thanks. They do look nice.

Yes, definitely will be more daily driver friendly, but it is no sloppy handling SUV. I believe it had some development time at the Nurburging, just like the new Caddys and the Ion RL/Cobalt SS. It is no slouch, probably damn near if not = to the SRT8 but I'm betting with a much better ride. And I doubt that very many owners will be taking their trucks to the Streets of Willow or Laguna Seca. :)

I bet. I remember reading about it being tuned at the ring and even saw the spy shots of it undergoing testing there. It should handle well.

I hope handling is close. In looking at the pics, i just noticed how higher off the ground it looks vs the SRT8 GC. Probably just the pic, but i'm assuming the SRT8 sits lower. Definitly won't be no slouch, that i'm sure of.

For everyday uses, the TB SS looks like the better/practical performance SUV. Close to SRT8 in performane, but more practical/livable from the looks with a cheaper pricetag. Sounds like a winning package.

IMO, TB dash looks positively horrible and cheap. The Envoy dash looks a bit better, but still cheap (for the price, especially)... Saab's version looks marginally better than the Envoy at an even higher price.

None of Caddy's SUV interiors look worth the price either. The SRX is the closest it gets and I'd say their interior, for the price is "OK"... at least it's not "amazingly bad".

Looks like the GMT-900 Escalade may be the first GM SUV to change my opinion.

IMO, TB dash looks positively horrible and cheap. The Envoy dash looks a bit better, but still cheap (for the price, especially)... Saab's version looks marginally better than the Envoy at an even higher price.


I agree and i'm not the interior-nazi threxx is:lol:.

It just looks dated, cheap, and old.

No doubt the new interior on the upcoming TB will change my opinion seeing as how GM's newer interiors are all good and headed in the right direction.

geez people, it's a freakin TRUCK! Who says a truck needs a fancy interior? Compare it to the interiors of trucks 10 years ago. Actually the SS' interior is a big step up from the 01 Trailblazer interior!

geez people, it's a freakin TRUCK! Who says a truck needs a fancy interior? Compare it to the interiors of trucks 10 years ago. Actually the SS' interior is a big step up from the 01 Trailblazer interior!

I guess that's why GM has put so much effort into coming out with a halfway decent interior on the GMT-900s? Because nobody cares?:think:

Think what you want but the numbers speak for themselves and GM is starting to listen.

Edmunds has now reported on the Grand Cherokee SRT-8.
They got a 13.5@102 in their 1/4 mile. Not to reduce the review down to two numbers or anything, but, well, I guess I reduced it down to two numbers :). This probably wasn't at their usual track, since the elevation isn't listed. Still, 420hp and 4700 pounds? Awfully strong horses!

Yup, TB's interior...... especially the dash, it a huge weak point.

Been saying it's "Dash by Rubbermaid" for a while........ the outgoing fullsize SUV/Trucks are in the same catagory (ironically, TBSS and Av are the two vehicles I'm most likely to get next, and this after the GTO, which is by far the best interior I've had, I've really moved interiors up my list of important items.... which makes me want to hold out for an 07 Avalanche, but I'm one of those who actually likes the cladding on this vehicle, and I dont think we are going to see it on the 07 Av........... but I digress........)

I think the Envoy interior is 100x better than TB... to the point where, while it might not be the best interior in the world, I don't think it is a negative on the vehicle.

Edmunds has now reported on the Grand Cherokee SRT-8.
They got a 13.5@102 in their 1/4 mile. Not to reduce the review down to two numbers or anything, but, well, I guess I reduced it down to two numbers :). This probably wasn't at their usual track, since the elevation isn't listed. Still, 420hp and 4700 pounds? Awfully strong horses!Well, at 4700 lbs and 415 hp (what they are listing as the power rating), it has a weight to power ratio of 11.33 lb/hp. An LT1 Z28, say at 3500 lbs and a generous 300 hp, has a power to weight ratio of 11.67 lb/hp, so the GC actually has an advantage there. Plus with awd and automatic to get an easy, strong launch, I'd say those numbers are about right. Just for comparison, a TB SS, if it is about 4450 lbs (2wd) or 4600 lbs (awd) with the rated 390 hp, would have a ratio of 11.41 or 11.79. A little higher than the Jeep, but still in LT1 Z28 territory. For kicks, a new Z06 is at 3130 lbs/505 hp, for a ratio of 6.2 lb/hp!

Anyway, how nuts is it that these are SUVs? :)

geez people, it's a freakin TRUCK! Who says a truck needs a fancy interior? Compare it to the interiors of trucks 10 years ago. Actually the SS' interior is a big step up from the 01 Trailblazer interior!

Even today's trucks have pretty decent interiors. Contrary to some believes, a truck can be made with a functional and attractive interior:p. Even for 10 years ago, the interior (my gripe is with the dash and steering wheels) still look very dated. The Envoy's actually manages to look much more modern.

I can't believe some would actually use the "it's a truck" line to justify an overly cheap interior. It's still a vehicle, something you have to be in and drive everyday right? what makes its interior any less important than any other vehicle?

Again, Ford and GM ARE realizing that interiors are important....even on a TRUCK. One look at the GMT-900 and F-series trucks is all you need.

Again, i'm not a huge interior guy, but that's just something that jumped out at me in looking at the pics. The interior alone would not deter me from looking at a TB SS if i were in the market (still an excellent truck overall), but it is one of the areas i seriously hope (and know) they'll address with the next gen.

Anyway, how nuts is it that these are SUVs? :)

VERY nuts. In a good way.

VERY nuts. In a good way.

Yup.

There are some that still oppose to the idea of performance trucks and think the only things with performance should be small 2 door vehicles. I see them on other boards. Guess they don't like both performance and utility in one package:shrug:.

Vehicles like these are the best things to come out in the last decade.

Well, at 4700 lbs and 415 hp (what they are listing as the power rating), it has a weight to power ratio of 11.33 lb/hp. An LT1 Z28, say at 3500 lbs and a generous 300 hp, has a power to weight ratio of 11.67 lb/hp, so the GC actually has an advantage there. Plus with awd and automatic to get an easy, strong launch, I'd say those numbers are about right. Just for comparison, a TB SS, if it is about 4450 lbs (2wd) or 4600 lbs (awd) with the rated 390 hp, would have a ratio of 11.41 or 11.79. A little higher than the Jeep, but still in LT1 Z28 territory. For kicks, a new Z06 is at 3130 lbs/505 hp, for a ratio of 6.2 lb/hp!

Anyway, how nuts is it that these are SUVs? :)

What matters is horsepower at the wheels versus weight. Crank hp doesn't matter. An LT1 Z in manual form is likely right near an automatic Jeep SRT-8 in power to weight when measured at the ground, not the crank. I have never heard of a stock LT1 running a 13.5. Maybe the Jeep has really good gearing?

What matters is horsepower at the wheels versus weight. Crank hp doesn't matter. An LT1 Z in manual form is likely right near an automatic Jeep SRT-8 in power to weight when measured at the ground, not the crank. I have never heard of a stock LT1 running a 13.5. Maybe the Jeep has really good gearing?

Could be the AWD. The 102mph trap posted doesn't sound all that fast (in the region of stock Lt1's), but i'm guessing the added traction of the AWD is what propeled it to mid 13's. 6.1L Hemi also has a buttload of tq. Probably a billion variables really.

Could be the AWD. The 102mph trap posted doesn't sound all that fast (in the region of stock Lt1's), but i'm guessing the added traction of the AWD is what propeled it to mid 13's. 6.1L Hemi also has a buttload of tq. Probably a billion variables really.

Go back and look at tests of LT1 Camaros. They were lucky to hit 100mph. Also, the 4wd drivetrain and especially the aerodynamics of the GC are going to limit trap speed compared with a Camaro. I still say those 420 horses are exceptionally healthy.

Well, at 4700 lbs and 415 hp (what they are listing as the power rating)

Correction: what they were listing . . .

Even today's trucks have pretty decent interiors. Contrary to some believes, a truck can be made with a functional and attractive interior:p. Even for 10 years ago, the interior (my gripe is with the dash and steering wheels) still look very dated. The Envoy's actually manages to look much more modern.

I can't believe some would actually use the "it's a truck" line to justify an overly cheap interior. It's still a vehicle, something you have to be in and drive everyday right? what makes its interior any less important than any other vehicle?

Again, Ford and GM ARE realizing that interiors are important....even on a TRUCK. One look at the GMT-900 and F-series trucks is all you need.

Again, i'm not a huge interior guy, but that's just something that jumped out at me in looking at the pics. The interior alone would not deter me from looking at a TB SS if i were in the market (still an excellent truck overall), but it is one of the areas i seriously hope (and know) they'll address with the next gen.
The interior of the Trailblazer SS that I sat in reminded me of my dad's 2005 Corvette and the 2006 impala SS, but a step down from my grandmother's 2006 DTS. It is very much better than my 96 impala SS interior, my 2004 impala LS interior, my wife's 96 Olds LSS, my dad's 2001 LT Suburban, my grandfather's 99 GMC Z71, my youngest sister's 2002 base Trailblazer, and my other sister's 99 Sebring convert.

Everything inside fit my big frame fine. I can fit in the back seat. The cargo room is plenty big for almost anything I'd use it for (with the rear seats folded down, an assembled BBC should fit fine.) It has the towing capacity high enough to tow a 20ft bass boat, my 96 impala SS, and just about anything that I can think of needing to tow.

If they do change to the 6L80E then it'll be hard to not get one. If it get's the L92 from the Escalade, then it's going to be even more difficult.