2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT

2011 Chevrolet Equinox Competitors

$23-31k mid-size SUV, designed in U.S.A., built in Canada 20-22 city / 29-32 hwy 376-601 mile range, gas engine
182 hp 146 cu. in. 4-cylinder 4 stars stability control, ABS, child door locks

As well as being compared against other minivan and SUVs, the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT is also often compared to cars. The 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT's top rivals come from Chevrolet (such as the Traverse LS and the Tahoe LTZ) and Nissan (such as the Rogue SV and the Murano LE)

compared to minivan and SUV competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Equinox LT compared to other minivan and SUV competitors include: it safer in head-on collisions for the driver (5 stars vs 4 stars), is slightly more fuel efficient in the city (22 mpg vs 17 mpg), is significantly more fuel efficient on the highway (32 mpg vs 24 mpg), costs less ($24,970 vs $37,890) and gets slightly more from a tank of gas in the city (414 miles vs 350 miles).

However, on average it has slightly less cargo space (63.7 ft3 vs 108.9 ft3), has 2 rows of seats (2 vs 3), lacks continously-variable transmission (traditional vs continuously variable), has significantly fewer seats (5 vs 8) and is slightly more sluggish (20.8 lb/hp vs 16.9 lb/hp).

2012 Chevrolet Traverse LS

2012 Chevrolet Traverse LS
$30,240

Significant advantages of the Traverse LS (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much more cargo room: 116.4 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • More seats: 8 vs 5
  • Much faster 0-60 mph time: 7.9 seconds vs 10.7 seconds

Significant disadvantages of the Traverse LS (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much worse highway mileage: 24 mpg vs 32 mpg
  • Power outlets not available
  • Significantly worse city mileage: 17 mpg vs 22 mpg

common strengths of the Traverse LS and Equinox LT

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Good highway range: 528 miles vs 602 miles
arrow Compare the Traverse LS vs the Equinox LT

2012 GMC Acadia SLE

2012 GMC Acadia SLE
$37,890

Significant advantages of the Acadia SLE (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much more cargo room: 116.9 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • More seats: 8 vs 5
  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 4 stars

Significant disadvantages of the Acadia SLE (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Folding rear seats not available
  • More cramped back seats: 42.6 ft3 vs 50.1 ft3
  • Navigation system not available

common strengths of the Acadia SLE and Equinox LT

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Both come standard with roof rails
  • Both have power seats
arrow Compare the 2012 GMC Acadia SLE vs the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT

2011 Nissan Rogue SV

2011 Nissan Rogue SV
$25,950

Significant advantages of the Rogue SV (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Has continuously variable transmission: Continuously variable vs Traditional
  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 4 stars
  • Significantly faster 0-60 mph time: 8.9 seconds vs 10.7 seconds

Significant disadvantages of the Rogue SV (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the driver: 4 stars vs 5 stars
  • Many more trips to the pumps when driving on the highway: 413 miles vs 602 miles
  • Significantly worse highway mileage: 26 mpg vs 32 mpg

common strengths of the Rogue SV and Equinox LT

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Both very efficient on the highway: 26 mpg vs 32 mpg
  • Both very efficient in the city: 22 mpg vs 22 mpg
arrow Compare the 2011 Nissan Rogue SV vs the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT

2011 Ford Explorer Limited

2011 Ford Explorer Limited
$38,360

Significant advantages of the Explorer Limited (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • Much faster 0-60 mph time: 7.9 seconds vs 10.7 seconds
  • Paddle shifters comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Explorer Limited (vs the Equinox LT)

  • CD player not available
  • Significantly worse highway mileage: 25 mpg vs 32 mpg
  • Lacks auxiliary audio input jack

common strengths of the Explorer Limited and Equinox LT

  • Both very efficient on the highway: 25 mpg vs 32 mpg
  • Both have electronic stability control
  • Both come standard with roof rails
arrow Compare the 2011 Ford Explorer Limited vs the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT

2011 Toyota RAV4 Limited

2011 Toyota RAV4 Limited
$26,275

Significant advantages of the RAV4 Limited (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • Much tighter turning radius: 34.8 ft vs 40.0 ft
  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 4 stars

Significant disadvantages of the RAV4 Limited (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the driver: 4 stars vs 5 stars
  • Less safe in side crashes for passengers in the rear: 3 stars vs 5 stars
  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the front passenger: 2 stars vs 4 stars

common strengths of the RAV4 Limited and Equinox LT

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Both very efficient on the highway: 28 mpg vs 32 mpg
  • Both very efficient in the city: 22 mpg vs 22 mpg
arrow Compare the 2011 Toyota RAV4 Limited vs the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT

2011 Chevrolet Tahoe LTZ

2011 Chevrolet Tahoe LTZ
$55,520

Significant advantages of the Tahoe LTZ (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • Significantly more cargo room: 108.9 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • Much roomier front seats: 64.1 ft3 vs 54.4 ft3

Significant disadvantages of the Tahoe LTZ (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Higher risk of rolling over during emergency lane change: 3 stars vs 4 stars
  • Much worse highway mileage: 21 mpg vs 32 mpg
  • Significantly worse city mileage: 15 mpg vs 22 mpg

common strengths of the Tahoe LTZ and Equinox LT

  • Both have electronic stability control
  • Good highway range: 546 miles vs 602 miles
  • Good city range: 390 miles vs 414 miles
arrow Compare the Tahoe LTZ vs the Equinox LT

compared to car competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Equinox LT compared to car competitors include: it gets slightly more from a tank of gas in the city (414 miles vs 323 miles), gets significantly more from a tank of gas on the highway (602 miles vs 493 miles), has much more cargo space (63.7 ft3 vs 18.6 ft3), has slightly more spacious back seats (50.1 ft3 vs 43.6 ft3) and has slightly more gears (6 vs continuously variable).

However, on average it lacks continously-variable transmission (traditional vs continuously variable), is slightly more sluggish (20.8 lb/hp vs 15.2 lb/hp), has worse traction (front-wheel drive vs all-wheel drive), less safe in side collisions for the driver (4 stars vs 5 stars) and much wider turning radius (40.0 ft vs 17.1 ft).

2011 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited

2011 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited
$29,220

Significant advantages of the Outback 2.5i Limited (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Has continuously variable transmission: Continuously variable vs Traditional
  • Better road traction: all-wheel drive vs front-wheel drive
  • Paddle shifters comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Outback 2.5i Limited (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Many fewer gears: Continuously variable vs 6
  • Power locks not available
  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the driver: 4 stars vs 5 stars

common strengths of the Outback 2.5i Limited and Equinox LT

  • Lots of cargo room: 71.3 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • Good highway range: 536 miles vs 602 miles
  • Both vehicles have above average towing capacity: 1,021 lb vs 1,190 lb
arrow Compare the 2011 Subaru Outback 2.5i Limited vs the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT

2012 Chevrolet Malibu LT

2012 Chevrolet Malibu LT
$24,115

Significant advantages of the Malibu LT (vs the Equinox LT)

  • : Semi-automatic transmission vs Automatic transmission

Significant disadvantages of the Malibu LT (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 15.1 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • Roof rails not available
  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the front passenger: 3 stars vs 4 stars

common strengths of the Malibu LT and Equinox LT

  • Good highway range: 528 miles vs 602 miles
  • Good protection, only 5% chance of serious chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Good protection, only 10% chance of serious head or chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
arrow Compare the Malibu LT vs the Equinox LT

2012 Chevrolet Cruze LT

2012 Chevrolet Cruze LT
$19,225

Significant advantages of the Cruze LT (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Cruze LT's Turbocharger increases power output: Turbocharger vs None
  • Significantly faster 0-60 mph time: 7.8 seconds vs 10.7 seconds
  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 4 stars

Significant disadvantages of the Cruze LT (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 15.4 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • Worse brakes
  • Roof rails not available

common strengths of the Cruze LT and Equinox LT

  • Good protection, only 5% chance of serious chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Good protection, only 10% chance of serious head or chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
arrow Compare the Cruze LT vs the Equinox LT

2012 Chevrolet Impala LT

2012 Chevrolet Impala LT
$27,995

Significant advantages of the Impala LT (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Sportier performance: 11.8 lb/hp vs 20.8 lb/hp
  • More seats: 6 vs 5
  • More powerful: 300 HP @ 6,500 RPM vs 182 HP @ 6,700 RPM

Significant disadvantages of the Impala LT (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 18.6 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • Roof rails not available
  • Power outlets not available

common strengths of the Impala LT and Equinox LT

  • Both have spacious back seats: 48.2 ft3 vs 50.1 ft3
  • Both have power seats
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
arrow Compare the Impala LT vs the Equinox LT

2012 Ford Fusion SEL

2012 Ford Fusion SEL
$29,555

Significant advantages of the Fusion SEL (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Better road traction: all-wheel drive vs front-wheel drive
  • Less chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 5 stars vs 4 stars
  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 4 stars

Significant disadvantages of the Fusion SEL (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 16.5 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • Less safe in side crashes for passengers in the rear: 3 stars vs 5 stars
  • Many more trips to the pumps when driving on the highway: 429 miles vs 602 miles

common strengths of the Fusion SEL and Equinox LT

  • Both have spacious back seats: 45.9 ft3 vs 50.1 ft3
  • Both can be upgraded to include an entertainment system
  • Both have power seats
arrow Compare the 2012 Ford Fusion SEL vs the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT

2011 Mazda 3 i Touring

2011 Mazda 3 i Touring
$19,745

Significant advantages of the 3 i Touring (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much tighter turning radius: 17.1 ft vs 40.0 ft
  • Safer in side crashes for the driver: 5 stars vs 4 stars
  • Optional premium radio

Significant disadvantages of the 3 i Touring (vs the Equinox LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 11.8 ft3 vs 63.7 ft3
  • Less safe in side crashes for passengers in the rear: 2 stars vs 5 stars
  • Roof rails not available

common strengths of the 3 i Touring and Equinox LT

  • Good protection, only 10% chance of serious head or chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Child door locks come standard
arrow Compare the 2011 Mazda 3 i Touring vs the 2011 Chevrolet Equinox LT