2010 Chevrolet Traverse
Why did the front-wheel-drive Traverse use more dino-juice per fathom? Well, the EPA numbers differ by only 1 mpg in both city and highway tests (17/24 for the FWD model versus 16/23 for AWD), so any real-world fuel-economy advantage likely would be negligible anyway. The two weren’t driven on identical loops, which was a factor, and conditions often were wet during our test, making takeoff tricky with 281 hp and 266 lb-ft of torque coursing through just two wheels. We basically stayed in the throttle until we were moving at a satisfactory pace, so your mileage may vary—scratch that, will vary and surely improve with a more measured driving style.
During a dry day at the test track, the FWD Traverse posted a 7.3-second 0-to-60-mph time, 0.3 second quicker than the all-wheel-driver. It also won in the quarter-mile, but just barely: a 15.8-second jog at 91 mph versus 15.9 seconds at 88 mph for the all-wheel-driven crossover. Despite the weight disparity, braking performance from 70 mph was spot-on equal—which is to say dismal—at 194 feet. Skidpad grip was another repeatable experiment, measuring 0.79 g for both iterations.
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment