Test Drove a 2014 4-cylinder AWD Equinox

[Max_Powers]

Hi,

Test drove this car on Friday: 2014 4 cyl AWD with a little over 5000 miles.

I've been researching and looking for a 4-cylinder AWD Equinox for some time now. On Friday I went to look at one about an hour and a half from my place, hoping to pick it up right away. My wife and I had driven a 2010 FWD 4-cylinder and really liked it for its smooth power delivery and mpg claims, but because of all the engine problems with 2010s decided to look for a newer one.

But unfortunately we were really disappointed. This car felt really sluggish especially compared to the 2010 FWD. I would press on the gas pedal, the RPMs would kick up but the car didn't accelerate much. Some parts of the road were uphill and it just struggled to climb, let alone accelerate. The test drive was noisy and very sluggish.

So I guess my question is this how the 4cyl AWD is? Or do you think there was something wrong with this specific car. The car had 5000 miles on it. The only explanation I got from the dealer was that it needed to be broken in AND that the car had been sitting there in the cold so may have developed dead spots. We warmed the car up and drove it for a good 10 mins.

This is the first AWD 4cyl we drove and we were expecting the same performance from it compared to a FWD, but it wasn't even close.

I would appreciate it if folks who own or have driven 4cyl AWD could chime in.

 

[dietz4ibanez]

You'd be better off in the V6 with AWD. Obviously the AWD 4cyl is going to be more sluggish and worse mileage over the front we drive 4 cyl.

Sent from my XT1254

 

[TheDarkKnightKnox]

Totally agree with Brian. If you absolutely must have AWD get the V6. I have the FWD V6 last winter we had record snow fall in central ohio however had no problems in the snow even with the factory Michelin all season tires.

AWD and the 4 will feel sluggish since the engine is powering 4 wheels instead of two. A few friends of mine have the AWD 4cyl and seem to be okay with it. However in Central Ohio we don't deal with many hills.

 

[Max_Powers]

Thanks guys for the reply. Ok so there is a difference between the two in terms of performance and its not just me. I never knew that AWD would make a car more sluggish, infact I thought it would provide better traction on launches and hence "feel" quicker. But that thinking might be more appropriate for a sporty sedan/coupe.

Now I understand why people were getting worse mpgs on the 4cylinder because atleast with AWD, it really feels held back and many drivers would stomp on the gas pedal to get it to accelerate.

Good to know. I'll explain this to my wife so hopefully she can reset her expectations

 

[TheDarkKnightKnox]

Just as a follow up

the 3.6L AWD does have a better 0-60 time compared to the 3.6L FWD. But yes either way you go (4 or 6 cyl) you will suffer on fuel Economy with AWD compared to FWD.