2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT Competitors

$33-35k full-size SUV, designed & built in U.S.A. 16-17 city / 23-24 hwy 352-528 mile range, gas engine
281 hp 219 cu. in. V6 4 stars ABS, child door locks

As well as being compared against other full-size SUVs, minivan and SUVs and truck and SUVs, the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT is also often compared to cars. The 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT's top rivals come from Chevrolet (such as the Tahoe LTZ and the Traverse LTZ) and GMC (such as the Acadia SLE and the Acadia SLT)

compared to full-size SUV competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Traverse LT compared to other full-size SUV competitors include: it is slightly more fuel efficient in the city (17 mpg vs 15 mpg), is slightly more fuel efficient on the highway (24 mpg vs 21 mpg), costs less ($33,340 vs $55,520), is slightly sportier (16.6 lb/hp vs 26.2 lb/hp) and less chance of rolling over during emergency lane change (4 stars vs 3 stars).

However, on average it slightly less ground clearance (7.2" vs 8.4"), has a slightly shorter-lasting basic warranty (3 year vs 4 year), has a slightly shorter basic warranty (36,000 mile vs 50,000 mile), has worse traction (two-wheel drive vs all-wheel drive) and only has a naturally-aspirated engine (none vs turbocharger).

2011 Chevrolet Tahoe LTZ

2011 Chevrolet Tahoe LTZ
$55,520

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

  • Much more ground clearance for rough terrain: 9.1" vs 7.2"
  • Better road traction: four-wheel drive vs two-wheel drive
  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2

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

  • Higher risk of rolling over during emergency lane change: 3 stars vs 4 stars
  • Worse highway mileage: 21 mpg vs 24 mpg
  • Significantly more expensive: $55,520 vs $33,340

common strengths of the Tahoe LTZ and Traverse LT

  • People mover: 8 vs 8
  • Both can control front A/C separately from rear A/C
arrow Compare the Tahoe LTZ vs the Traverse LT

2012 Chevrolet Traverse LTZ

2012 Chevrolet Traverse LTZ
$41,615

Significant advantages of the Traverse LTZ (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Better road traction: all-wheel drive vs two-wheel drive

Significant disadvantages of the Traverse LTZ (vs the Traverse LT)

  • None found

common strengths of the Traverse LTZ and Traverse LT

  • Both have lots of cargo room: 116.4 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Both very efficient on the highway: 23 mpg vs 24 mpg
  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
arrow Compare the Traverse LTZ vs the Traverse LT

2012 GMC Acadia SLE

2012 GMC Acadia SLE
$37,890

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

  • Better road traction: all-wheel drive vs two-wheel drive

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

  • Folding rear seats not available
  • Navigation system not available
  • Leather not available

common strengths of the Acadia SLE and Traverse LT

  • Both have lots of cargo room: 116.9 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Inexpensive: $37,890 vs $33,340
arrow Compare the 2012 GMC Acadia SLE vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Lincoln Navigator

2011 Lincoln Navigator
$58,625

Significant advantages of the Navigator (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much more ground clearance for rough terrain: 9.8" vs 7.2"
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 4 year vs 3 year
  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile

Significant disadvantages of the Navigator (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Significantly worse highway mileage: 20 mpg vs 24 mpg
  • Significantly worse city mileage: 14 mpg vs 17 mpg
  • Higher risk of rolling over during emergency lane change: 3 stars vs 4 stars

common strengths of the Navigator and Traverse LT

  • People mover: 8 vs 8
  • Both can control front A/C separately from rear A/C
arrow Compare the 2011 Lincoln Navigator vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Mercedes-Benz GL350 BlueTEC

2011 Mercedes-Benz GL350 BlueTEC
$61,825

Significant advantages of the GL350 BlueTEC (vs the Traverse LT)

  • GL350 BlueTEC's Turbocharger increases power output: Turbocharger vs None
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 4 year vs 3 year
  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile

Significant disadvantages of the GL350 BlueTEC (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Significantly less powerful: 210 HP @ 3,800 RPM vs 281 HP @ 6,300 RPM
  • Significantly less cargo room: 83.3 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Sluggish performance: 26.2 lb/hp vs 16.6 lb/hp

common strengths of the GL350 BlueTEC and Traverse LT

  • Both very efficient in the city: 17 mpg vs 17 mpg
arrow Compare the 2011 Mercedes-Benz GL350 BlueTEC vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Buick Enclave CXL

2011 Buick Enclave CXL
$41,790

Significant advantages of the Enclave CXL (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Significantly more ground clearance for rough terrain: 8.4" vs 7.2"
  • Much longer-lasting basic warranty: 4 year vs 3 year
  • Much longer basic warranty: 50,000 mile vs 36,000 mile

Significant disadvantages of the Enclave CXL (vs the Traverse LT)

  • : Automatic transmission vs Semi-automatic transmission

common strengths of the Enclave CXL and Traverse LT

  • Both have lots of cargo room: 115.0 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • People mover: 8 vs 8
arrow Compare the 2011 Buick Enclave CXL vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

compared to minivan and SUV competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Traverse LT compared to other minivan and SUV competitors include: it has much more cargo space (116.4 ft3 vs 72.6 ft3), has significantly more seats (8 vs 5), is slightly sportier (16.6 lb/hp vs 20.1 lb/hp), gets slightly more from a tank of gas on the highway (528 miles vs 483 miles) and is slightly more powerful (281 HP @ 6,300 RPM vs 187 HP @ 5,800 RPM).

However, on average it has 2 rows of seats (2 vs 3), is slightly less fuel efficient in the city (17 mpg vs 20 mpg), lacks continously-variable transmission (traditional vs continuously variable), has a slightly shorter-lasting basic warranty (3 year vs 4 year) and has a slightly shorter basic warranty (36,000 mile vs 50,000 mile).

2011 Honda Pilot EX

2011 Honda Pilot EX
$31,980

Significant advantages of the Pilot EX (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • Power outlets comes standard
  • CD changer comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Pilot EX (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 87.0 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Less safe in side crashes for the driver: 4 stars vs 5 stars
  • Navigation system not available

common strengths of the Pilot EX and Traverse LT

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Crowd pleaser: 8 vs 8
  • Both have spacious front seats: 58.9 ft3 vs 59.9 ft3
arrow Compare the 2011 Honda Pilot EX vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Toyota Highlander

2011 Toyota Highlander
$28,900

Significant advantages of the Highlander (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • Significantly more airbags: 6 vs 5
  • Power outlets comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Highlander (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Significantly less cargo room: 95.4 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Less safe in head-on crashes for the driver: 4 stars vs 5 stars
  • Sluggish performance: 21.1 lb/hp vs 16.6 lb/hp

common strengths of the Highlander and Traverse LT

  • Both have lots of cargo room: 95.4 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • People mover: 7 vs 8
arrow Compare the 2011 Toyota Highlander vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Chevrolet Equinox LS

2011 Chevrolet Equinox LS
$23,805

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

  • Much better highway mileage: 32 mpg vs 24 mpg
  • Significantly better city mileage: 22 mpg vs 17 mpg
  • Significantly roomier back seats: 50.1 ft3 vs 41.8 ft3

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

  • Much less cargo room: 63.7 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Fewer seats: 5 vs 8
  • Much more cramped front seats: 54.4 ft3 vs 59.9 ft3

common strengths of the Equinox LS and Traverse LT

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

2011 Mitsubishi Outlander ES

2011 Mitsubishi Outlander ES
$22,790

Significant advantages of the Outlander ES (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Has continuously variable transmission: Continuously variable vs Traditional
  • Much tighter turning radius: 34.8 ft vs 40.4 ft
  • Significantly better city mileage: 23 mpg vs 17 mpg

Significant disadvantages of the Outlander ES (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 72.6 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Fewer seats: 5 vs 8
  • Much more cramped front seats: 54.7 ft3 vs 59.9 ft3

common strengths of the Outlander ES and Traverse LT

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Power steering availability
arrow Compare the 2011 Mitsubishi Outlander ES vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Mercedes-Benz ML350

2011 Mercedes-Benz ML350
$47,365

Significant advantages of the ML350 (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Significantly more airbags: 6 vs 5
  • Much roomier back seats: 53.7 ft3 vs 41.8 ft3
  • Significantly tighter turning radius: 37.9 ft vs 40.4 ft

Significant disadvantages of the ML350 (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 72.4 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Fewer seats: 5 vs 8
  • Worse highway mileage: 20 mpg vs 24 mpg

common strengths of the ML350 and Traverse LT

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Good highway range: 502 miles vs 528 miles
  • Power steering availability
arrow Compare the 2011 Mercedes-Benz ML350 vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Acura MDX

2011 Acura MDX
$55,340

Significant advantages of the MDX (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Number of rows of seating: 3 vs 2
  • Significantly tighter turning radius: 37.6 ft vs 40.4 ft
  • Better road traction: all-wheel drive vs two-wheel drive

Significant disadvantages of the MDX (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 83.5 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Significantly more expensive: $55,340 vs $33,340
  • Significantly more trips to the pumps when driving on the highway: 441 miles vs 528 miles

common strengths of the MDX and Traverse LT

  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • People mover: 7 vs 8
  • Power steering availability
arrow Compare the 2011 Acura MDX vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

compared to truck and SUV competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Traverse LT compared to other truck and SUV competitors include: it is slightly more fuel efficient in the city (17 mpg vs 14 mpg), is significantly more fuel efficient on the highway (24 mpg vs 19 mpg), has significantly more seats (8 vs 6), gets slightly more from a tank of gas on the highway (528 miles vs 475 miles) and has much more cargo space (116.4 ft3 vs 37.6 ft3).

However, on average it significantly less ground clearance (7.2" vs 12.3"), has slightly less spacious front seats (59.9 ft3 vs 64.2 ft3), has slightly less spacious back seats (41.8 ft3 vs 59.0 ft3), has worse traction (two-wheel drive vs four-wheel drive) and doesn't have power outlets (optional vs standard).

2011 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Crew Cab LT

2011 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Crew Cab LT
$32,845

Significant advantages of the Silverado 1500 Crew Cab LT (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much more ground clearance for rough terrain: 12.3" vs 7.2"
  • Power outlets comes standard
  • Significantly roomier back seats: 59.0 ft3 vs 41.8 ft3

Significant disadvantages of the Silverado 1500 Crew Cab LT (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Rear air conditioning not available
  • Much less cargo room: 52.6 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Much worse highway mileage: 19 mpg vs 24 mpg

common strengths of the Silverado 1500 Crew Cab LT and Traverse LT

  • Great protection, only 5% chance of serious chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Power steering availability
arrow Compare the Silverado 1500 Crew Cab LT vs the Traverse LT

2011 GMC Sierra 1500 Crew Cab

2011 GMC Sierra 1500 Crew Cab
$30,755

Significant advantages of the Sierra 1500 Crew Cab (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much more ground clearance for rough terrain: 12.3" vs 7.2"
  • Power outlets comes standard
  • Significantly roomier back seats: 59.0 ft3 vs 41.8 ft3

Significant disadvantages of the Sierra 1500 Crew Cab (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Rear air conditioning not available
  • Much less cargo room: 52.6 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Much worse highway mileage: 19 mpg vs 24 mpg

common strengths of the Sierra 1500 Crew Cab and Traverse LT

  • Great protection, only 5% chance of serious chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Power steering availability
arrow Compare the 2011 GMC Sierra 1500 Crew Cab vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Ram 1500 Crew Cab ST

2011 Ram 1500 Crew Cab ST
$33,780

Significant advantages of the 1500 Crew Cab ST (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Power outlets comes standard
  • Better road traction: four-wheel drive vs two-wheel drive
  • Significantly roomier back seats: 61.1 ft3 vs 41.8 ft3

Significant disadvantages of the 1500 Crew Cab ST (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Rear air conditioning not available
  • Much worse highway mileage: 18 mpg vs 24 mpg
  • Much worse city mileage: 13 mpg vs 17 mpg

common strengths of the 1500 Crew Cab ST and Traverse LT

  • Great protection, only 5% chance of serious chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
  • Power steering availability
arrow Compare the 2011 Ram 1500 Crew Cab ST vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Chevrolet Colorado Crew Cab LT

2011 Chevrolet Colorado Crew Cab LT
$24,755

Significant advantages of the Colorado Crew Cab LT (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Power outlets comes standard
  • Cheaper: $24,755 vs $33,340

Significant disadvantages of the Colorado Crew Cab LT (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Significantly less powerful: 185 HP @ 5,600 RPM vs 281 HP @ 6,300 RPM
  • Rear air conditioning not available
  • Much less cargo room: 37.6 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3

common strengths of the Colorado Crew Cab LT and Traverse LT

  • Both very efficient on the highway: 25 mpg vs 24 mpg
  • Good protection, only 10% to 20% chance of rolling over during emergency lane change: 4 stars vs 4 stars
  • Power steering availability
arrow Compare the Colorado Crew Cab LT vs the Traverse LT

compared to car competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Traverse LT compared to car competitors include: it has much more seats (8 vs 5), gets slightly more from a tank of gas in the city (374 miles vs 286 miles), gets significantly more from a tank of gas on the highway (528 miles vs 350 miles), has much more cargo space (116.4 ft3 vs 30.7 ft3) and is slightly more powerful (281 HP @ 6,300 RPM vs 138 HP @ 6,300 RPM).

However, on average it is slightly less fuel efficient in the city (17 mpg vs 27 mpg), is slightly less fuel efficient on the highway (24 mpg vs 33 mpg), has worse traction (two-wheel drive vs all-wheel drive), slightly wider turning radius (40.4 ft vs 34.4 ft) and slightly longer braking distance from 60mph (141 ft vs 131 ft).

2012 Chevrolet Sonic LTZ

2012 Chevrolet Sonic LTZ
$17,995

Significant advantages of the Sonic LTZ (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Many more airbags: 7 vs 5
  • Tighter turning radius: 36.1 ft vs 40.4 ft
  • Power outlets comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Sonic LTZ (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 30.7 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Fewer seats: 5 vs 8
  • Much more cramped front seats: 50.0 ft3 vs 59.9 ft3

common strengths of the Sonic LTZ and Traverse LT

  • Both have lots of cargo room: 30.7 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Child door locks come standard
arrow Compare the Sonic LTZ vs the Traverse LT

2011 Subaru Outback 3.6R Limited

2011 Subaru Outback 3.6R Limited
$32,220

Significant advantages of the Outback 3.6R Limited (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Better road traction: all-wheel drive vs two-wheel drive
  • Roof rails comes standard
  • CD changer comes standard

Significant disadvantages of the Outback 3.6R Limited (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Fewer seats: 5 vs 8
  • Much less cargo room: 71.3 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Power locks not available

common strengths of the Outback 3.6R Limited and Traverse LT

  • Lots of cargo room: 71.3 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Both have spacious front seats: 57.2 ft3 vs 59.9 ft3
  • Good protection, only 5% chance of serious chest injuries in a crash: 5 stars vs 5 stars
arrow Compare the 2011 Subaru Outback 3.6R Limited vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT

2011 Honda Fit

2011 Honda Fit
$15,870

Significant advantages of the Fit (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Significantly better city mileage: 27 mpg vs 17 mpg
  • Significantly better highway mileage: 33 mpg vs 24 mpg
  • Significantly tighter turning radius: 34.4 ft vs 40.4 ft

Significant disadvantages of the Fit (vs the Traverse LT)

  • Much less cargo room: 20.6 ft3 vs 116.4 ft3
  • Fewer seats: 5 vs 8
  • Much more cramped front seats: 50.9 ft3 vs 59.9 ft3

common strengths of the Fit and Traverse LT

  • Both have a rear seat that folds down for extra storage space
  • Child door locks come standard
arrow Compare the 2011 Honda Fit vs the 2012 Chevrolet Traverse LT