2010 GMC Terrain: Good Stuff, but What's With the Cargo Area?

Besides flip-up bottom cushions, fold-flat back cushions can also be accomplished by the bottom cushions automatically sliding forward on tracks--the Mazda6 used this method. Or just making the cushions flat instead of contoured, like 30 years ago. At least the Terrain has a smooth ramp transition instead of a bi-level cargo area that hangs things as you slide them. The actual lost volume is negligible so it's really only important if your cargo has to lie flat and level. Nonetheless, I prefer flat to not.

My wife and I looked at a number of small CUVs. She loved the new Tucson. I thought it was just OK, but far preferred the new Equinox. However, after seeing that the rear seats didn't fold flat, I think I have to give her the win. Big failure on GM's part. Then again, given that most CUVs can barely match the utility and efficiency, if even that, of our old wagon, I give most modern CUVs a fail. Why can't we just get decent wagons?

How dare you say something negative about this car! Dont you know that it outsold used Dodge Darts in a dealership in Yuba City California last weekend????? There IL goes again being biased! If it outsells used Darts then it must be an awesome vehicle! When will you guys wake up and see that GM really did not go bankrupt ...it was all some sort of bad publicity caused by articles like this. I mean GM has a sterling rep for quality and...um ....er....well nevermind.

(Just trying to help out 1487 because he is still drained after defending a helpless corporate giant in the Terrain intro article.)

I think it is funny that Josh seems scared of offending somebody( "Let's start this off on the right foot: I like our 2010 GMC Terrain.") by saying something negative about this car. Dont start being gutless....say what you think and dont let the nattering nabobs of negativity affect how you post.

"(Just trying to help out 1487 because he is still drained after defending a helpless corporate giant in the Terrain intro article.)"

do you have anything to say that's not based on my presence here? Why not put out your own ideas (if you have any) and try to contribute something? I know its hard.

The explanation given for the seats is the amount of padding in the bench prevents the seats from folding completely flat. Obviously if you make seats thin enough (think stow and go) you can make them fold in a compact manner. I was just looking at the pics of the 550 GT and its seats dont fold flat either.

"Dont start being gutless....say what you think and dont let the nattering nabobs of negativity affect how you post."

I say stop being gutless and establish your own identity and stop bringing me up in every blog entry. Why are you afraid to be original? There has to be something you can add other than "I hate 1487"- at least I'm hoping thats the case. In your quest to turn public sentiment against me and go on tirades about GM going bankrupt you only make yourself look childish and inept and ignorant. Not sure what kind of brownie points you are trying to score but I assure you its not working. You often appear to be the least informed and most immature person that posts here. If your insults were clever or the least bit amusing maybe you would be tolerable but thats not the case.

I agree that fold flat seats would be nice. My wife's Xterra (she owned it before we met) doesn't have them and it can be annoying. The Xterra's seats don't even fold down as much as the Terrain's though. The other downside is I don't even really fit up front. I can't wait to look for a replacement in a couple years.

To me the seats not folding flat isn't a deal breaker. They don't in most "Utility" vehicles.

I am pulling for the Terrain to be a big sales hit because like many others who live in Detroit, I need for GM to do well so that I can do my job and make a living.

I am still doubting the 32mpg highway mileage but I hope to be proved wrong.

I think 32mpg is only possible going 60mph on flat roads. Add cargo, more speed or a full cabin and you arent going to get 32mpg.

I've found the latest EPA highway figures to be fairly easily achievable and beatable on most cars doing straight highway.

32 is impressive for a vehicle with this my frontal area. I'll be curious to see how it does on one of edmunds long road trips.

Tee Hee.....it is so easy to get you going 1487....as to me being uninformed that is hilarios! I hardley ever mention you except when you are being your obtuse self. I could care less what you or anybody else thinks of my posts, but you need to get over yourself....I think this blog is getting to you.

The seat could fold flat if the designers took the time to make the seat bottom fold foward (duh) but you will find any reason to point out that negative things dont matter on any GM car because the whole world is conspiring against you and poor tiny General Motors. The world weeps not for the smouldering hulk that was once a great company.

So seats not folding flat take away what...a few inches at best of cargo room. How much stuff is really stored that far into the cargo bay? As long as you have enough room behind the seats when they are up, and the extra room when they are down, it should be fine. Yes flat seats may be nice, but they aren't always that comfortable either...

Don't forget that the seats in the Equinox have the sliding mechanism for increased legroom. I know the argument could be made that they could have dropped the base part of the seat to accommodate the thicker padding, and therefore offer fold-flat cargo capacity, but then you'd lose this legroom advantage.

The Terrain and Equinox, of course, are very nice if you're a touch larger than average and are not piloting or co-piloting. While the picture doesn't do it much justice, look at how far back the passenger seat is relative to the drivers seat, and then look how much legroom is - even then - still available. There's tons of room. Now look at behind the driver. Expansive, and very comfortable for long drives.

Further, the large cushions definitely help make the back seat a nice place to be. I guess it depends on what you prioritize - good passenger carrying abilities with slightly diminished cargo versatility or slight diminished passenger versatility but good cargo abilities.

@bodyblue- Please use some form of spell check. Thanks.

canadien:

I didnt even think about the sliding rear seat. That is probably one reason why the seat bottom doesn't fold forward like in the CR-V. If I understand the CR-Vs rear seats correctly you dont get a flat load surface if you fold the seatbacks forward without folding up the seat cushions. Even if you do that you don't really have a flat load floor if you check out the pics on Autoblog's review today.

If only the seatback is going to folk forward then you need a very slim seat in order for that seat to fold completely flat. I think most people would rather have a thoroughly padded rear backrest as opposed to a completely flat load floor.

"@bodyblue- Please use some form of spell check. Thanks"

I was at work and in a hurry....but just worry about you, thanks.

he certainly got your straight Audisport. When you know everything, correct spelling isn't required. Take note.

RAV4 seats don't fold completely flat. The seats in the Rogue and Forester do fold flat. Bottom line is some crossovers have this feature and some don't. I don't think any vehicle with sliding rear seats has a bench that folds completely flat.

another boring suv.

wow Bodyblue became insufferable real quick. Dude, you might not want to criticize 1487 so much. You're the other side of the same exact coin.