| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2018 GMC Terrain and 2016 Subaru Forester Specifications
| Model Year | 2018 | 2016 | |
| Model | GMC Terrain | Subaru Forester | |
| Engine | turbocharged 2.0L I4 DOHC-4v 252 hp@5500 260 lb-ft@2500 |
turbocharged 2.0L H4 DOHC-4v 250 hp@5600 258 lb-ft@2000 |
|
| Transmission | 9-speed shiftable automatic | 8-speed shiftable CVT | |
| Drivetrain | FWD | AWD | |
| Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
| Difference | |||
| Wheelbase | 107.3 in | 103.9 in | 3.4 in |
| Length | 182.3 in | 180.9 in | 1.4 in |
| Width | 72.4 in | 70.7 in | 1.7 in |
| Height | 65.4 in | 66.4 in | -1 in |
| Curb Weight | 3563 lb. | 3624 lb. | -61 lb. |
| Fuel Capacity | 14.9 gal. | 15.9 gal. | -1 gal. |
| Headroom, Row 1 | 40.0 in | 41.4 in | -1.4 in |
| Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 57.2 in | 57.0 in | 0.2 in |
| Hip Room, Row 1 | 54.4 in | 0.0 in | 54.4 in |
| Legroom, Row 1 | 40.9 in | 43.0 in | -2.1 in |
| Headroom, Row 2 | 38.5 in | 39.8 in | -1.3 in |
| Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 55.6 in | 56.5 in | -0.9 in |
| Hip Room, Row 2 | 51.8 in | 0.0 in | 51.8 in |
| Legroom, Row 2 | 39.7 in | 38.0 in | 1.7 in |
| Total Legroom | 80.6 in (over 2 rows) | 81 in (over 2 rows) | -0.4 in |
| Cargo Volume, Minimum | 29.6 ft3 | 34.4 ft3 | -4.8 ft3 |
| Cargo Volume, Maximum | 63.3 ft3 | 74.7 ft3 | -11.4 ft3 |
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2018 GMC Terrain
| 2018 GMC Terrain Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| 2018 | The first-generation GMC Terrain took advantage of a long, 112.5-inch wheelbase to offer exceptional rear legroom--nearly 40 inches of it. On paper, the 2018 Terrain has only a half-inch less combined legroom despite a wheelbase shrink of 5.2 inches (to better align the vehicle with competitors and open up space for the downsized Acadia). In reality, rear legroom seems ample but no longer outstanding. The rear seats in the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4 are similarly roomy. But the Terrain does pull ahead when evaluating rear seat comfort. Its high-mounted rear seat cushion provides better leg support than others. The Compass's rear seat is lower and firmer. The Terrain's rear seat can even recline a little. Based on their specs, the Jeep is nearly as roomy inside as the GMC. Headroom, shoulder room, and combined legroom specs all differ by less than an inch. In reality, the Jeep's interior feels significantly narrower. And the Jeep Cherokee? All of its interior specs are also within an inch of the Terrain's, though often in the other direction. Why does Jeep offer two crossovers so close in size? This isn't clear. In terms of specs, they differ most in combined legroom and cargo volume. The Cherokee has 1.3 inches more of the former--good to have, but hardly justification for an additional model--and about ten percent LESS of the latter. How can the larger Jeep have less cargo volume? I suspect that the Compass was measured more creatively, and cannot actually hold as much cargo. Based on their specs--and I always take cargo volume specs with more than a little salt--the new Terrain can swallow a few more cubic feet of cargo than the Compass (63.3 vs. 59.8) but falls well short of the RAV4 (70.6 in hybrid form, 73.4 otherwise). A Honda CR-V can fit a couple more cubes than the RAV4. The GMC Terrain and the Jeeps compensate for not having the most spacious cargo areas with front passenger seats that fold forward. If your cargo is long but not wide, one of these is the way to go. Though closely related to the GMC, the Chevrolet Equinox does not offer this feature. see full GMC Terrain review | |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2018 GMC Terrain
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2018 GMC Terrain.
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2016 Subaru Forester
| 2016 Subaru Forester Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2015 | 4dr SUV 170-horsepower 2.5L H4 CVT AWD |
I'm 6'3" and often don't fit comfortable in vehicles. I found this had a very nice amount of front seat room. The center console tends to stay out of the way as well, some newer designs have the center stack moving into where my right knee would be. It's a very noticeable improvement over my previous 2009 Escape. I actually found the Forester more comfortable for me than the Outback. I was expecting the opposite. see full Subaru Forester review |
| 2015 | 4dr SUV 170-horsepower 2.5L H4 CVT AWD |
After looking at Explorer's, I was surprised how much more room the Forester had in the back seat. Granted it doesn't have a third row, but if you don't need a 3rd row, the Forester is hard to beat in this segment for rear seat room. We can put a forward facing child seat in the back, move the front seat up a about 2 inches from all the way back and there's still plenty of front passenger room and my 1.5 year old son can't kick the back of the seat. see full Subaru Forester review |
| 2016 Subaru Forester Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2017 | 4dr SUV turbocharged 250hp 2.0L H4 8-speed shiftable CVT AWD |
- Terrible front seat support - The cushions are too short - It's not noticeable on a test drive right away. I would not have bought the car! Test drive extensively! - Surfaces where your elbows would lay are too hard - I purchased foam pads to make it feel better. - Tall drivers like myself will struggle with the telescoping wheel's short extension range. - It is hard to get into a fully comfortable driving position. The memory seats in the XT help somewhat by retaining your seat settings if moved. - Front seat cushions are too short - Yes I said this twice - Front seat cushions are too short - Yes I said this THREE times! Subaru are you listening? The front seat cushions are WAY TOO SHORT! see full Subaru Forester review |
See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs
See TrueDelta's information for all GMC models.
