Model Year | 2015 | 2017 | |
Model | Subaru Legacy | GMC Terrain | |
Engine | 3.6L H6 DOHC-4v 256 hp@6000 247 lb-ft@4400 |
3.6L V6 DOHC-4v 301 hp@6500 272 lb-ft@4800 |
|
Transmission | 6-speed shiftable CVT | 6-speed shiftable automatic | |
Drivetrain | AWD | AWD | |
Body | 4dr Sedan | 4dr SUV | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 2,751 mm | 2,858 mm | 0 mm |
Length | 4,796 mm | 4,712 mm | 0 mm |
Width | 1,839 mm | 1,849 mm | 0 mm |
Height | 1,499 mm | 1,684 mm | 0 mm |
Curb Weight | 1,661 kg | 1,883 kg | 0 kg |
Fuel Capacity | 70 L | 71 L | -1 L |
Headroom, Row 1 | 1,016 mm | 1,011 mm | 0 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,476 mm | 1,415 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,410 mm | 1,400 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 1 | 1,090 mm | 1,046 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 2 | 940 mm | 996 mm | -56 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,455 mm | 1,405 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,397 mm | 1,303 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 2 | 968 mm | 1,013 mm | 967 mm |
Total Legroom | 2,057 mm (over 2 rows) | 2,060 mm (over 2 rows) | 0 mm |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 425 L | 895 L | -470 L |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 15.0 | 1,809 L | 14 |
2015 Subaru Legacy Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2015 | Along with the Honda Accord, Hyundai Sonata, and Volkswagen Passat, the Subaru Legacy has one of the roomiest rear seats in the segment. Rear seat passengers have a couple inches less knee room in the Ford Fusion. The rear seats in the Chrysler and Buick are tighter still. This said, especially with the optional sunroof rear seat headroom is somewhat limited. People taller than six feet might come into contact with the headliner. The top trim level includes rear air vents. see full Subaru Legacy review |
2015 Subaru Legacy Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
The front seats have an unusually high bulge just below my shoulder blades. This feels more odd than uncomfortable, at least to me. Partly depending on your height your experience might vary. These seats also provide very little lateral support, which admittedly isn't much of an issue given the limited grippiness of the tires. I had no such qualms with the armrest on the door. It's wide and cushy. In the front seats' favor, for 2015 Subaru has added fore-aft adjustability to the headrests, a rarity in recent moderately priced cars. see full Subaru Legacy review |
2015 Subaru Legacy Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2014 | 4dr Sedan 173-horsepower 2.5L H4 6-speed shiftable CVT AWD |
Both front and rear seat room are very good. see full Subaru Legacy review |
2017 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 |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2017 GMC Terrain.