It’s been a long time since General Motors has offered a competitive mid-sized SUV. The 2001 Blazer was just a moderately upgraded version of the SUV Chevrolet started selling in 1983. So the basic design, especially of the chassis, was very old. This was evident in how the vehicle rode and handled. It was also evident in its size. The GM SUVs were substantially smaller than the market leader, the Ford Explorer, especially in width. This resulted in a relatively cramped interior.

GM knew of the original vehicle’s shortcomings. Unfortunately, in the early 㣾s it lacked the financial resources to do a full redesign. In the years since, GM’s financial situation has improved markedly. For the 2002 model year it was finally able to go all-out after the lucrative mid-sized SUV market. Unlike the Blazer, the TrailBlazer is not based on a pick-up chassis. This frees it from the compromises forced by a shared platform: a compact size, poor chassis rigidity, and a certain cheapness of construction (compact pick-ups to be competitive must be quite cheap). The change in size is especially noticeable. Length has increased by 8.5 inches, width by 4.2 inches, and height by 5.2 inches. We’re talking major growth here. Next to the new vehicle, the old one looks quite small.

Ford also redesigned the Explorer for 2002. In my reviews of the Envoy and Explorer I have extensively compared those two vehicles. In this briefer (yet still lengthy) review I will focus on the TrailBlazer. I will also comment a little on the upcoming extended 7-seat “EXT” model, which I was able to sit in at the Detroit auto show.

Note August 2005: This is an old review, written when my expectations of SUVs were much lower than they were for cars. In the years since the state-of-the-art has advanced a great deal, and GM's SUVs don't perform as well as many others.

Chevrolet TrailBlazer Reliability

Want better reliability information? Want to more clearly know what difference it will make if you buy a TrailBlazer rather than something else? My website, truedelta.com, will be providing this information in the form of "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats.

From these stats you might learn that your first choice, compared to your second choice, is likely to make 2.3 extra trips to the shop in its first five years. You might decide its advantages compensate for this, or you might not. Either way, you'll be able to make a much better informed decision than you can today.

I aim to provide the highest quality information to as many people as possible. Unfortunately, these goals conflict. If I simply give the information away, few will help provide it. So I'm doing the next best thing: those who have been active participants for at least six months will receive free access to this site's reliability information; otherwise this access will cost $24.95. The average time commitment for someone reporting on two cars will be (at most) 15 minutes a year, so you'll essentially receive $100 an hour for doing your share to help everyone make better decisions.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

Styling

Even if the size had not changed, the new styling would tip most people off. The TrailBlazer is very brawny looking, from the bulged fenders to the thick bar that crosses the front end, dividing the large headlamps vertically. Unlike in the past, the GMC and Oldsmobile models use different metal. The new Oldsmobile looks like a sleek, refined luxury car that has been morphed to SUV proportions. It’s only fault may be that it looks a bit too much like an Isuzu Trooper. The new GMC combines the ruggedness of the Chevrolet with the upscale appearance of the Oldsmobile. One simple yet effective differentiating touch involves which pillars are painted: A, B, and C on the Chevrolet; A, C, and D on the Olds; and A and D on the GMC. (For the record, A and C are painted on the Explorer: there are so many potential variants here.) At first I thought the Enjoy was the most attractive, but over time the more aggressive styling of the Chevrolet has won me over. It never fails to catch my eye. It helps that the most common colors suit the TrailBlazer’s styling very well.

Though the three GM SUVs share a bit more inside, the interiors are similarly differentiated. I initially preferred the round vents, metallic trim, chrome-ringed gauges, and two-tone leather of the Envoy. The major problem with the Envoy interior is that the materials used could be richer. Given their mediocre quality, the more conventional interior styling of the TrailBlazer works better. As for the Olds, I dislike the large amount of black plastic on the dash and the use of cloth on the vertical surfaces of the leather seat cushions. Few American brand leather vehicle seats are all-leather; usually only the seating surfaces are, while the rest is cloth or vinyl. The TrailBlazer uses vinyl, which blends better aesthetically with the leather seating surfaces.

Accommodations and amenities

The TrailBlazer’s driving position if fairly good, but could be better. The header is nice and high, but the dash is also high. I’d personally prefer the dash a couple inches lower. The TrailBlazer’s A-pillars (those flanking the windshield) are also quite thick, or are at least turned so that an unusually wide pillar is presented to the driver. The upshot is you feel a bit like you are gazing through a tunnel.

The front seats in the LTZ model I drove come so close to perfection that their one major weakness is a huge shame. They offer great support fore-and-aft. I especially like the four-way power lumbar. With two-way (or non-adjustable) lumbar, the support often hits you either too high or too low in the back. With four-way, you can adjust the lumbar support so the perfect amount hits you exactly where you want it to. Four-way adjustable head restraints are also nice to have, especially for the front passenger. An option included on the vehicle I drove allowed the seat cushion, the seatback, or both to be heated. Very nice.

Sadly, these otherwise awesome seats possess a fatal flaw: They provide virtually no lateral support. This was my largest problem with the vehicle, period. Add some bolsters, please! The Envoy and Bravada are similarly afflicted.

Rear seat passengers are treated very well. The rear seat also offers good support, though again side bolstering is nonexistent. The cushion is just a tad too low to provide proper thigh support to someone of my height (5ֽ”), which makes it a bit better than that in the average vehicle. Rear seat passengers get their own vents and heating ducts, their own fan speed control, and their own radio (which outputs to a pair of headphone jacks). A DVD-based rear entertainment system is a $995 option (and was not on the truck I drove). A shoulder belt is provided for the center passenger in the rear seat, a rare feature in an American-brand vehicle.

Sadly, GM skimped on some of the interior materials. Many of the pieces on the dash, doors, and console are the sort of plastic that has a hard surface and makes a loud, hollow sound when tapped with your nails. As I’ve already mentioned, I found this more of a problem in the Envoy.

Without its optional third row seat, the Explorer has a larger cargo area than the TrailBlazer. The stats put the difference at about 10%, but the difference is noticeable. Also noticeable is the lower floor in the Explorer. Then there is the matter of the liftglass. It is nice to be able to open the rear glass without opening the entire tailgate if all you have to do is throw in a shopping bag or two. The problem is that SUVs tend to be so high off the ground that it’s not always easy to throw something in through the glass. With the new Explorer, Ford has addressed this problem by having some of the door open with the glass, so that it is like a door within a door. This reduces the liftover to a very manageable height. The TrailBlazer has a conventional liftglass, so throwing things in through it will be difficult for shorter people. Overall, the Explorer has an edge for cargo capacity and ease of loading. But the TrailBlazer still does very well here. It does provide ten cubic feet more cargo volume than the old model, a very significant increase.

On the road

As much as I like the styling and interior features of the TrailBlazer, the big surprises came on the road. The old V6 is gone. At the same time, GM decided not to offer a V8. This might seem to put the GM vehicles at a disadvantage relative to Ford, Jeep, and Dodge. But a quick look at the new six’s spec sheet suggests otherwise. The new six is an inline design, not a V. Though less compact than a V6, an inline six is inherently smoother and more durable. Theoretically it is even superior to a V8 in these areas. Add in the performance benefits of four valves per cylinder and variable valve timing, and the new GM six is also more powerful than the eights offered by the competition—and not just by a few horsepower. With 270 horsepower, the new six is not only far and away the most powerful base engine offered in a mid-size SUV. It even has thirty more horses than the Explorer’s optional eight-cylinder engine.

The new six is a great engine, pure and simple. Though not quiet, the noises it makes sound quite sophisticated. I suspect that if I owned this vehicle I’d push it harder than I had to from time to time just to hear this engine sing. Which brings up the major point: unlike in the Explorer, there’s always quite a bit extra left in this engine. In normal driving the transmission shifts at about 2800 RPM. So real-world fuel economy should be quite a bit better than in the Explorer, which shifted much higher. Full throttle acceleration is quite good, I’d guess somewhere between eight and nine seconds to sixty.

Performance would be even better if GM added a gear to its transmission, so that the gear ratios could be closer together. As it stands, when the transmission shifts engine revolutions fall almost in half. The torque band of this engine is wide enough to deal with this, but performance would be even better with an extra gear. It also would not hurt if first gear were a bit steeper, to get the engine up into its powerband quicker. I have had similar issues with the four-speed automatic in the Cadillacs with the Northstar system. For those into such details, the truck I drove had a 3.73:1 rear end. The TrailBlazer is available with two other rear ends, one of which is a 4.10:1, so stronger performance is possible, at the expense of fuel economy.

Aside from having only four speeds, the automatic does a very good job. I never felt it hunt back and forth. It always shifted very smoothly, and seemed to shift very close to the points at which I would if I were shifting for myself. For casual driving, the new engine pairs with GM’s proven transmission to provide outstanding performance. Under moderate acceleration, they simply shine. The engines makes its nice sounds, engine revolutions stay fairly low, and you just have the sense that if you needed more, its just a tip of the throttle away.

The same basic conclusions apply to the suspension. Despite the solid rear axle, the TrailBlazer rode and handled far better than the Explorer. The standard Bilstein monotube shocks probably deserve a good portion of the credit. While you can feel some road imperfections, especially at low speeds, the shimmying and shuddering that was so disappointing in the Explorer is absent here. This truck feels rock solid.

What’s more, even without the rear air springs optional in the Envoy and standard in the Bravada the TrailBlazer has the fluid, precisely controlled motions of a luxury sedan. Aside from some humming from the roof rack in strong cross-winds, the ride is also quite quiet for an SUV. It simply feels like a much more refined, much more expensive vehicle than its competition. It actually does better in this regard than the full-size GM SUVs. The only other SUV I've driven that left me with the same impressions was the larger, less nimble, considerably more expensive Toyota Sequoia. Makes you wonder what GM’s engineers could have done with an independent rear suspension like that on the Explorer.

Handling, aided by large 17" tires and those Bilsteins, is quite good for an SUV. Sure, it has its faults. The steering is too light. The vehicle leans a bit more than others in turns. The rear shimmies a little in aggressive maneuvers (though it never felt uncontrollable). And the limits of the chassis remain well below those of the average sport sedan. But I actually enjoyed driving the TrailBlazer. It helps that understeer is much less prominent than in the Explorer, so that the chassis remains well balanced in moderately aggressive turns. I’d say it’s even superior in this respect to the Acura MDX, which understeers much like the front-wheel-drive minivan on which it is based. I should also note that though the TrailBlazer is now a fairly large vehicle, at about 4600 lbs., it never felt unwieldy. It certainly felt much more nimble than a full-size SUV like a Tahoe, Expedition, or Sequoia. A very tight turning circle, six feet tighter than that of the old Blazer, certainly helps. Overall, the TrailBlazer’s suspension is much like its engine. In regular driving, or even a notch or two up, it just feels really good for an SUV. For me, it was more important that the TrailBlazer was enjoyable to drive than that it have higher limits. Its inherent balance and nimble quality more than compensate for the numb steering and amount of lean.

The brakes are quite large and powerful. That said, I found one characteristic disconcerting. When I stomped on the pedal, engaging the excellent ABS, the pedal kept sinking and sinking until it reached the floor, or came very close to it. I do not think this affected braking performance, but it did take the pedal beyond the reach of my leg. This forced me to move the seat a touch closer to the wheel than I otherwise would have. And it just doesn’t feel right. The large rotors the TrailBlazer has been gifted with deserve a firmer pedal.

I did not take the TrailBlazer off-road. Though the push button 4WD includes a button for 4-Low, I suspect this vehicle is a bit large and softly sprung for serious off-roading. Still, I would not be surprised if Chevrolet eventually offered a version tuned for off-roading, since they have done this in the past. The truck I test drove, on the other hand, was clearly intended and tuned for maximum on-road comfort. The four-wheel-drive, which also has an automatic setting, is there for snow and unpaved roads. On these surfaces I suspect it would perform well.

Quality appears to be about equal to other GM vehicles, which is to say average or a bit below. The major fault I noted was that the fit of the hood to the fender could have been quite a bit better. Other GM vehicles have had quality problems in their first year, and their is no reason to suspect this one will be different.

The EXT

The Ford Explorer’s major advantage over the TrailBlazer is its optional third seat. Because the TrailBlazer uses a conventional “live” rear axle, which requires a high rear floor, a third seat of reasonable size cannot fit. To respond to the Ford, an extended version of the TrailBlazer, the “TrailBlazer EXT,” will go on sale this summer. To fit a third-row seat, GM has stretched the Trailblazer’s wheelbase by a whopping sixteen inches (length increases by the same amount) and bumped the rear portion of the roof up a couple of inches. I was able to look at and sit in this vehicle at the Detroit Auto Show.

While the third-row seat in the EXT is considerably roomier than those in the Explorer and Durango, it’s still too tight for even this 5ֽ” adult. It’s also not easy to get into, since you have to fold the right half of the second-row seat forward and then bend over uncomfortably as you walk back.

Still, my major beef with the EXT concerns its appearance. With the wheelbase stretched by such a large amount and the rear overhang and styling unchanged the resulting proportions are just plain awful. People buy SUVs for how they look, and how they look is largely a function of proportions that suggest agility. The standard TrailBlazer looks great. Perhaps enabled by the clean-sheet design, its proportions are perfect. In sharp contrast, the EXT looks awkward, even clumsy. The “stretch” look might work for a limo, which involves similar modifications, but it clashes with the very essence of an SUV. With styling out the window, you might as well get a minivan.

Update

The weird proportions of the EXT are growing on me. They're just so unusual, much like a limo's, that the long truck never fails to catch my eye. Thus while it still makes little sense to have a truck-based SUV with such a long wheelbase, I no longer hold its looks so much against it. The same is not true for the long version of the GMC Envoy. It has a totally different third window treatment, with a smaller third window visually separated from the others, that makes the whole vehicle just look wrong. If I had to pick between the two long GM SUVs, I'd definitely go with the Chevy.

Pricing

For quick, up-to-date pricing, and especially user-specified price comparisons, check out the website I created: www.truedelta.com. Why yet another vehicle pricing website? Well, I personally lacked the patience to keep using the others. They were too slow and required too much effort, especially when trying to compare prices. So I taught myself some programming and created a site where there is no need to dig through option packages, prerequisites, and the like one by one -- the TrueDelta algorithm figures these out for you in one swift pass.

Last words

I liked the TrailBlazer much more than I expected to. The new engine is excellent, superior even to the V8 in the Explorer. The body structure of the TrailBlazer is far more solid than the old Blazer and even the new Explorer, combining with the suspension to yield a surprisingly refined ride. The truck’s handling is balanced, and can even be called fun as long as you’re not expecting a sport sedan. Finally, the exterior styling is both distinctive and tasteful. I’m not an SUV person, but I really liked driving this one. If you’re in the market for a mid-sized SUV, I strongly encourage you to look at the TrailBlazer. Unless you really want a third-row seat, in which case you should get either a full-size SUV or a minivan.

To learn more about my reliability research and sign up to participate in it, or to perform thorough, up-to-date new car price comparisons, visit www.truedelta.com. A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.
Amount Paid (US$): 32000
Model and Options: LTZ 4WD