Outlook/Acadia Review Roundup - a list of all Outlook and Acadia Reviews

[ffballid]

I thought it might be nice to have a single thread with all media-published current reviews/road tests of the Lambdas (and I guess I mean only based on drives of the vehicle and not the “previews” that came out earlier).

Here are the ones I have found posted in this forum (or otherwise):

AutoWeek-Outlook [nice review & does include road impressions, but not super detailed]
http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dl...73266665785442

Businessweek.com-Outlook [nice review & does include road impressions, but not super detailed]
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/co...130_082606.htm

Car and Driver-Acadia [a “First Drive” test]
http://www.caranddriver.com/previews...mc-acadia.html

Car Connection-Outlook [again, not super-detailed, but nice]
http://www.thecarconnection.com/Vehi...81.A11593.html

Cars.com-Outlook [a December, 2006 review of the Outlook]
http://research.cars.com/go/crp/rese...=&aff=national

Edmunds.Com-Outlook [a “Road Test:Full Test”]
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...3/pageNumber=1

Edmunds.Com-Outlook [a “Vehicle Overview”]
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2007/satu...70/review.html

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel Online-Outlook [relatively short review – link is to a cars.com reprint]
http://research.cars.com/go/crp/rese...=&aff=national


The Truth About Cars-Outlook [not super long, but positive]
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=2670

Washington Post.com –Outlook [discusses the Outlook and Jill Lajdziak]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...112201228.html

Apparently, there was an embargo for a while, but it seems that it has been lifted. I hope more reviews are coming.

At this point, I have not seen reviews from some of the big hitters:
Automobile Magazine
Motor Trend
Car & Driver (for a detailed test/comparison)
Consumer Reports
Popular Mechanics

If anyone has seen other reviews, please feel free to update!

I hope one of the big hitters publishes a detailed comparison against the Highlander/Pilot and Odyssey/Sienna soon.

[MitchMich]

San Jose Mercury News

CUVs look like SUVs, drive more like cars

By Matt Nauman
Mercury News
12/22/2006

I've driven both the 2007 GMC Acadia (for a day) and the 2007 Saturn Outlook (for a week) this month.

Piloting the Acadia through twisting roads in the Santa Cruz Mountains convinced me it had a better ride than I expected. Living with the Outlook persuaded me this new family hauler might be a better idea than I had thought.

The size of these new crossover-utility vehicles from General Motors gave me pause. That people are moving out of big, truck-based sport-utility vehicles into smaller, car-based CUVs is the new reality. Yet, the Acadia, Outlook (and the mechanically similar Buick Enclave coming in the spring) are quite large.

But they manage to feel like much smaller vehicles on the road. And that's a very good thing.

The powertrain pairs a 3.6-liter V-6 engine with variable-valve timing with a six-speed automatic transmission. That's a sophisticated, contemporary set-up, and it results in a solid driving experience.

The vehicle's construction -- GM calls it body-frame integral, while others call it uni-body to differentiate it from a truck's ladder-frame chassis -- does a great job of assuring flat cornering and a steady ride.

Mileage, as GM executives frequently point out, is quite good at 18 mpg city/26 mpg highway in front-drive models and 17/24 in all-wheel-drive versions, according to government fuel-economy ratings. That tops rivals such as the Honda Pilot in highway driving.

Inside, these new crossovers are very functional, with second-row seats that move up easily (if in a loud, frenetic way) to allow better third-row access. That third row is built to seat three, but works better for two full-size adults. Folding down the third-row seat backs was easy, and pulling them back up -- thanks to a strap -- was easy, for me. My driving partner, at just a few inches over five-feet tall, found it a long, awkward reach.

I drove an eight-passenger Outlook as well as front- and all-wheel-drive versions of the Acadia. Prices start in the high $20,000s and climb quickly through the mid-$40,000s. Saturn says a typically equipped Outlook XR will cost about $33,500. I did drive a loaded Acadia with a $43,000-plus sticker that felt too expensive.

These vehicles seemed well-suited to families with cargo-hauling and people-carrying needs who don't want either a minivan or a truckish SUV. Those remain good choices for some, but perhaps enough will see the wisdom in GM's attempt to fill the crossover gap to make these vehicle a success.

[ffballid]

Also, for those who read this forum, mkaresh (a frequent poster here) has posted a review at http://www.epinions.com/content_286658760324

[ffballid]

New Car Test Drive.com has posted a detailed review of the Acadia:

http://www.nctd.com/review-final.cfm...&ReviewID=2001

By the way, can I somehow edit my initial post so that I can include later-found reviews into the first post in this thread? (there is no "edit" button at the bottom of that post)

[ffballid]

The Toronto Star now has a review of the Acadia:

http://www.thestar.com/AutoReviews/article/150755

[David 93 SL2m]

http://money.cnn.com/2006/12/08/auto...tune/index.htm

Filling the minivan gap

Ugly and unloved, theses people movers are an endangered species. What is going to replace them?

FORTUNE Magazine

By Alex Taylor III, Fortune senior editor
December 13 2006: 1:08 PM EST

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- All the research says the functional, easy-to-drive minivan is unloved. Despite its utility and practicality, it can't shake its image as a suburban people mover.

Drivers want to look as if they've just been crossing the Sahara, not the parking lot at Wal-Mart, and minivans don't fill the bill. Both General Motors and Ford have decided to let their minivan lines expire without renewing them, leaving the market to Chrysler, which invented the minivan, and the Asian imports, who made it better.

But eliminating a model line disappoints a big chunk of customers who may really need to carry seven or eight people on occasion and don't want a stretch limo or a Hummer to do it in. Here's how one automaker, GM, is closing the minivan gap at its Saturn brand.

Saturn has been selling an unsuccessful minivan, the often-ignored Relay. It's a nearly identical cousin to the truly forgettable Chevrolet Uplander, Buick Terraza and Pontiac Montana .

All of GM's minivans are based on a fundemental design that was intended for use in Europe as well as the U.S. For that reason, GMs minivans suffered from being too narrow. Good for squeezing through tiny European streets, bad for squeezing in Little Leaguers.

GM had tried to disguise the design's minivan genes by lengthening the front engine compartment to give it a nose, but it couldn't do anything about the sliding rear doors that scream "soccer mom." So the Relay, along with the rest of them, is going away.

In its place, Saturn is launching a new vehicle in 2007 that looks like a hairy-chested SUV - aggressive front end, flared wheel arches, no sliding doors -but retains much of the functionality of a minivan. Called Outlook, it is part of an emerging product segment known as crossovers - vehicles that resemble SUVs but are engineered for the way most people really use their cars, crossing speed bumps and not the Zambezi.

Saturn is a couple of years late to the mid-size crossover party. Already arrived are Ford's Freestyle and Chrysler's Pacifica, the Honda Pilot and Toyota Highlander.

The Outlook is the first vehicle to be built off GM's new Lamda platform. It is also one of the first new models to receive the full attention of GM's current management, notably vice chairman and product boss Bob Lutz, and, as such, will be an important test of whether GM can build vehicles that people actually want to buy.

Success of the Outlook will also signal whether GM can revive the moribund Saturn franchise, which has strayed from its original manufacturing home in Spring Hill, Tenn. and original features, like plastic body panels.

An improvement on the minivan?

What distinguishes the Saturn Outlook from its competitors is that it's newer and arguably handsomer; it's big and beefy like an NFL linebacker.

All Outlooks come with three rows of seats. The usually inaccessible third row is made easier to reach with a nifty feature that allows you to slide the second row further forward than usual because the seat cushion flips up at the same time. Still, you wouldn't want to send your arthritic grandmother back there.

Compared to the old Relay, the Outlook is voluminous. Although it is four inches shorter, it claims to contain 153.6 cubic feet of space vs. 147 cubic feet for the van. The engine is smaller - 3.6 liter vs. 3.9 - but newer, and so is the transmission: a six-speed automatic that provides smoother shifts.

All of these improvements, though, are strategically designed to drive up the Outlook's weight - 4955 pounds with all-wheel drive, nearly 600 pounds more than the front-wheel-drive Relay.

The avoirdupois takes just a slight toll on fuel economy. With all-wheel-drive, the Outlook gets 17 miles per gallon in town, 24 mpg on the highway vs. 18/25 for the Relay. A front-wheel-drive Outlook gets 18/26, just slightly better than the Relay in highway driving.

But on the road, those pounds seem to melt away. The Outlook drives smaller than it looks. Acceleration is brisk (no numbers are available yet), the steering is well-balanced and the handling is surprisingly responsive. You don't feel like you're in a sport sedan, but you won't get that lumbering minivan sensation either. The view from the driver's seat is enhanced by one of GM's new-look instrument panels that is both handsome and informative.

According to Saturn, the price of a nicely equipped Outlook will run you $35,695. Since Saturn dealers still observe the brand's no haggle policy, you won't have much room to negotiate. If it's any consolation, similar versions from GMC and Buick that are coming later in the year will probably cost more.

So if you need to haul a lot of people and gear around, and can't stand being seen in a minivan, the Outlook may be the car for you. But don't forget - this is a big vehicle, as the fuel economy numbers indicate.

Americans tend to buy cars based on their peak usage - family vacations - and forget about all those trips to the CVS the rest of the year with only one or two people on board. It is something to think about when you're moving two and a half tons of automobile into your garage. It's also something for GM to think about as it works to make Outlook and its Lamda siblings a success.

[ffballid]

Detroit News reviews the Acacia:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...612230303/1149

[ffballid]

"First Drive" of GMC Acadia at Edmunds.com - includes photo of brick color leather interior (most others I have seen have been black).

http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpconta...cleId=118833#3

[mkaresh]

I'm the 2nd most read author over at Epinions, and the most read in autos by a wide margin. My comparison of the Outlook, Freestyle, and Pacifica is here:

http://www.epinions.com/content_286658760324

[saturncanuck]

Thanks they are great

[ffballid]

Motor Trend has printed a review of the Acadia in the new issue. I don't see it on line yet. Due to copyright laws, I can't just reprint it here, but I thought the article was good.

[SKYGUY10066]

Originally Posted by mkaresh

I'm the 2nd most read author over at Epinions, and the most read in autos by a wide margin. My comparison of the Outlook, Freestyle, and Pacifica is here:

http://www.epinions.com/content_286658760324

Oh what a bragger!!!
Just kidding Michael! Thanks for all of the unbaised reviews, either way they go you do provide a unique service. I just wish they were all light twords Saturn

[ffballid]

AutoWeb first Drive:

http://www.autoweb.lycos.com/content...le_id_int/2426

Kiplinger Financial blurb on the Acadia:
http://www.kiplinger.com/features/ar...rossovers.html

[ffballid]

Car and Driver's latest issue has a review of the Acadia. It was generally good review of the vehicle, and praised GM, but it did seem to say that it could use a little more horsepower.

[mkaresh]

Originally Posted by ffballid

Car and Driver's latest issue has a review of the Acadia. It was generally good review of the vehicle, and praised GM, but it did seem to say that it could use a little more horsepower.

Overall, not a thorough article. There's very little about the interior. And too much space is taken up by an info-free intro.

What they do say is that it needs more power (how quick does a people mover need to be?) and the handling and braking are excellent for such a large vehicle.

[hortaja]

The two things that really impressed me about the article was the Braking but more important the 67db road noise at 70mph... That is luxuery car quiet. Also the braking was sport car short, very big time impressive for this class of CUV.

Jerry

[mkaresh]

First off, the Lambdas are quiet inside.

That said, sound meters are crude instruments for measuring sound levels. Doesn't make sense, I know, but picking up a couple of other recent C&Ds I find the following readings:

BMW M5: 65
MB E63: 65
Audi S6: 66
Toyota Camry LE 66
Cadillac XLR: 67
Audi S8: 68
Buick Lucerne: 68
Chevrolet TrailBlazer SS 68 ??? with that boomy 6.0 V8?
Saturn Aura XE: 68
Kia Optima: 68
Toyota Camry SE: 69
Honda Civic Si: 69 ????
Acura MDX: 69
Honda Accord SE: 69
Jeep GC SRT8: 70
VW GTI: 70
Porsche Cayman S: 72
Lotus Exige: 78

What am I getting at?

Well, first that just about anything these days is quiet enough to fall in the mid to high 60s.

Second, the tests aren't very precise. Is the Audi S6 truly quieter than the larger, more expensive S8? I haven't driven either car, but I have driven the A6 and A8, and the A8 seemed considerably quieter inside. Also note the difference between the Camry LE and Camry SE. This may be due to the different tires used, but it also show how large a difference tires alone can make.

Third, the human ear does not hear all 67db sounds as equally loud. Some sounds seem louder and more annoying than others, even when the sound meter says they're all equally loud. I remember reading that Lexus tunes its cars using subjective methods, not just a sound meter. They've learned which sounds to let through so that the ones the ear doesn't like aren't only low, but they're covered up.

GM may know these tricks as well by now.

[mmcccarroll]

mkaresh is correct that these have to be considered carefully. I simply want to point out and remind that decibel ratings are a base 10 log scale, so the difference between 65 and 68 is much more than one might think (60% in fact). Even the difference between 67 and 68 is may be perceptively significant (14%), though I don't know the precision in the actual measurements. Only one digit in the listed numbers is significance. (Sorry, I am an analytical chemist and I couldn't help)

He is also spot on with the importance of the nature of the sound. What we really need is the frequency distribution for comparison. Consider a 75 db output of your favorite song vs 75 bd of squeaky brakes. I guess an annoyance/fatigue factor is what we really need.

by the way, I am in the process of looking at the outlook and deciding on a purchase, so this thread has been very helpful. Thanks. Qualitatively I found the road noise very acceptable during our test drive.

Originally Posted by mkaresh

First off, the Lambdas are quiet inside.

That said, sound meters are crude instruments for measuring sound levels. Doesn't make sense, I know, but picking up a couple of other recent C&Ds I find the following readings:

BMW M5: 65
MB E63: 65
Audi S6: 66
Toyota Camry LE 66
Cadillac XLR: 67
Audi S8: 68
Buick Lucerne: 68
Chevrolet TrailBlazer SS 68 ??? with that boomy 6.0 V8?
Saturn Aura XE: 68
Kia Optima: 68
Toyota Camry SE: 69
Honda Civic Si: 69 ????
Acura MDX: 69
Honda Accord SE: 69
Jeep GC SRT8: 70
VW GTI: 70
Porsche Cayman S: 72
Lotus Exige: 78

What am I getting at?

Well, first that just about anything these days is quiet enough to fall in the mid to high 60s.

Second, the tests aren't very precise. Is the Audi S6 truly quieter than the larger, more expensive S8? I haven't driven either car, but I have driven the A6 and A8, and the A8 seemed considerably quieter inside. Also note the difference between the Camry LE and Camry SE. This may be due to the different tires used, but it also show how large a difference tires alone can make.

Third, the human ear does not hear all 67db sounds as equally loud. Some sounds seem louder and more annoying than others, even when the sound meter says they're all equally loud. I remember reading that Lexus tunes its cars using subjective methods, not just a sound meter. They've learned which sounds to let through so that the ones the ear doesn't like aren't only low, but they're covered up.

GM may know these tricks as well by now.

[David 93 SL2m]

Here is the transcript of the review at Motorweek on PBS TV:

http://www.mpt.org/motorweek/reviews/rt2622b.shtml

[ffballid]

USA Today's James Healey BRIEFLY compares the Outlook/Acadia with the CX-9. Comment is pretty far down the page.

http://transcripts.usatoday.com/Chat...pt.aspx?c=1112