Review: 2010 GMC Terrain SLE-1 V6 -- which engine is best for this excellent compact SUV?

The new 2010 GMC Terrain, like the related 2010 Chevrolet Equinox, is pricier than many of its closest competitors but offers a higher level of refinement. See more photos of the Terrain in today's slideshow.  (photos by Brady Holt)

Advertising for the new 2010 GMC Terrain has been focused on one number: 32 – this compact car-based SUV’s EPA highway miles-per-gallon fuel economy rating, when equipped with the standard 4-cylinder engine and front-wheel-drive. 

It’s easy to see why General Motors is boasting about this number. The 32-mpg rating on the Terrain and the fundamentally identical Chevrolet Equinox beats that of many compact economy cars and trumps any other SUV cheaper than a hybrid Lexus RX. And unlike the 37-mpg Chevrolet Cobalt GM is also advertising, this front-drive four-cylinder version of the Equinox and Terrain is actually widely available. 

When the Equinox went on sale earlier this year, a test drive revealed that this 2.4-liter 182-horsepower 4-cylinder engine offered acceptable acceleration and excellent refinement. However, there are other versions of these SUVs beyond that 4-cylinder front-wheel-drive Equinox.

For consumers seeking extra acceleration punch, the Equinox and Terrain also offer a 264-horsepower V6, a 3.0-liter also used in several Buicks and Cadillacs. This engine adds $1,500 to the Terrain’s purchase price and knocks the EPA mileage ratings from 22 city / 32 highway to 17 city / 25 highway. Are those sacrifices worth it?

The salesman at Fox GMC didn’t think so, he said as we pulled off the lot in the first six-cylinder Terrain his dealership had gotten in: a front-wheel-drive nearly-loaded SLT-1 model with leather seats, 19-inch wheels, and a power-operated liftgate with a sticker price of $31,090. He didn’t think there was enough extra power to make up for the mileage loss.

It’s certainly true that the V6 doesn’t make the Terrain into a speed demon, despite its strong specs. Stomping your foot down wouldn’t send a six-cylinder Terrain flying that much quicker than the standard four-cylinder version. And because the 4-cylinder is already quiet, there isn’t much room for improvement there either. 

However, other reviewers have noted that an aggressive driving style or driving in hilly areas quickly kills the 4-cylinder’s gas mileage, as it needs to work harder to accelerate or maintain speed in more demanding conditions. Examiner.com’s John Matras averaged just 20.1 miles per gallon in a 4-cylinder Terrain he tested – driving aggressively on hills, no doubt. If that’s your style, the six-cylinder might be a better choice for you. The V6 models also have a revised steering system, which offers better weight and feel than the 4-cylinder versions. 

That’s not to say that there aren’t other excellent SUV choices, of course. But entering this particular test review after effusively praising most characteristics of the Equinox in July left the question of which vehicle to select from the GM line as the first thing to answer. As the only compact SUV to master refinement – most are much noisier and don’t ride as smoothly – while also offering excellent passenger space and comfort, it’s definitely a top choice. And its quiet, solid demeanor also makes it a legitimate choice for any SUV buyer who doesn’t need a third-row seat. 

That’s certainly not to say that everything is perfect about these SUVs. Like the tested base-model Equinox, both this tested Terrain SLT-1 and an even pricier SLT-2 this reviewer sat in at another dealership suffered from some cheap interior plastics and some unfortunate fit and finish issues on the lower dash and center console. (The SLT-2’s misalignments were the worst of the three.) The interior is stylish and both the cloth and leather seat trim are high quality, so the interior avoids feeling outright cheap, but it isn’t a strong point in these SUVs. 

See today’s slideshow for more photos and details of the Terrain’s interior

Another issue the two SUVs share is visibility; a high beltline and thick roof pillars impede the outward view. A small rearview camera mounted on the rearview mirror (standard on the Terrain and also available on upper-level Equinoxes, or mounted on the dash on models with the optional navigation system) helps in parking but not in traffic. 

But the bigger concern for many shoppers will be the price. Although the Equinox and Terrain are GM’s entry-level SUVs, they’re a half-size above the compact norm and priced accordingly on the high end. For someone who favors value over refinement, a Subaru Forester or Ford Escape would be the better choice. 

Price will also be a factor if you choose between the Equinox and Terrain, as pricing site TrueDelta.com pegs the Chevrolet as nearly $1,000 cheaper than a comparably-equipped version of its GMC twin. There is also a base LS version of the Equinox that has no equivalent on the Terrain, whose least expensive model is priced alongside the Equinox LT. 

There are a few other differences: the Terrain is slightly smaller than the Equinox on the outside yet slightly roomier on the inside, and the two SUVs look entirely different from the outside, but the only changes are cosmetic. Even the interiors are nearly identical, the lone discernable exceptions being the badge and the shape of the passenger side of the dash. The salesman said styling will sway many buyers one way or the other; just know the cost of that difference.

And consumers who are cross-shopping one of these two SUVs with the competition will very likely find themselves swayed by the impressively smooth and quiet ride, the very comfortable seating, and the overall competence. And there, too, they should be aware of the extra cost that comes with that level of refinement. 

Vehicle tested: 2010 GMC Terrain
Vehicle base price (MSRP): $24,250
Version tested: SLT-1
Version base price (MSRP): $27,450
Vehicle price as tested (MSRP): $31,090
Estimated transaction price as tested: $29,690
Test vehicle provided by: Fox GMC of Laurel, Md.

Key specifications: 
Length: 185.3 inches
Width: 72.8 inches
Height: 66.3 inches
Wheelbase: 112.5 inches
Weight: 3,867 pounds
Cargo volume behind rear seat: 31.6 cubic feet
Maximum cargo volume: 63.9 cubic feet
Turning radius: 20.0 feet
Engine (as tested): 3.0-liter V6 with 264 horsepower
Transmission: 6-speed automatic
EPA city mileage: 17 miles per gallon
EPA highway mileage: 25 miles per gallon
EPA mixed driving: 20 miles per gallon