Suburban Dad: 2011 Chevy Traverse vs. 2010 Ford Flex

2011 Chevy Traverse vs. 2010 Ford Flex
If you’re a family on a budget (and mine certainly is), you might think a turbocharged, all-wheel-drive Ford Flex is too much three-row crossover for you. As you might have read, I drove a fully loaded Flex Limited from Los Angeles to Chicago earlier this summer, but I recently got the chance to take the Traverse for a long drive to Lansing, Mich., and back (passing the plant where the Traverse was built as well). Turns out the EcoBoost Flex may not cost much of a premium at all.

It’s always tricky to compare apples to apples with cars we test, as the trim levels often vary, as is the case here. But if you were out on dealer lots cross-shopping the two models, the Ford turbo is only a few hundred dollars more than a comparably equipped Traverse. And in my road-trip testing, an all-wheel-drive Flex returned better mileage than a front-wheel-drive Traverse. Below is what I thought of the two trims I took on the road. To see how the comparably equipped models stack up, you can check out their specs head-to-head here.

MSRP as tested (without destination):

  • 2010 Ford Flex Limited: $45,245
  • 2011 Chevrolet Traverse FWD 2LT: $36,970

2011 Chevy Traverse vs. 2010 Ford Flex interior
The long-haul ride: Both crossovers are comfortable and roomy. Right off the bat, though, you’ll notice the Flex is a lot quieter, with less road and engine noise. Neither suffers badly from body roll, though, which is great in a car as heavy and long as these two are. Seat comfort was fine for both, and both had really great headroom in the front row. There’s a little more in the Flex, but it’s overkill. One interesting note: The A-pillar in the Traverse was a little harder to see around because of the sloping windshield than the A-pillar in the Flex.

Handling: While the Flex has the clear advantage in acceleration, the Traverse was no laggard with its V-6 engine. Still, there was never a time when I felt pushed back into my seat like the Flex made me feel. Both crossovers held well to the road, and the steering was very responsive. The Traverse seemed to have a smaller turning radius than the Flex (20.2 feet for the Traverse compared with 20.4 feet for the Flex, but the difference seemed greater).
 
Mileage: The 2010 Flex Limited is rated at 16/22, while the 2011 Chevy Traverse is rated at 17/24. We drove the Flex for just about 2,000 miles, and the Traverse for 520-odd miles. The winner? The lighter (4,790 pounds  vs. 4,643 pounds curb weight), shorter, but more powerful (281 horsepower at 6,300 rpm versus 355 hp at 5,700 rpm) Flex.

The numbers:

  • Flex: 22.7 mpg over 2,000 miles, both urban and rural, with two adults and fully loaded with cargo.
  • Traverse: 22.5 mpg over 520 miles — mostly highway but including one stretch outside Battle Creek, Mich., where we went three miles in 30 minutes — with two adults and no cargo.

Rear seating, access and cargo: Both crossovers offer a lot of space to second-row passengers. The Flex came with captain’s chairs, which made third-row access easy, and the Traverse offered a split second-row bench with an accordion-style sliding seat. With the third row down, both offer great cargo space. It’s when the third row is up (like on a family vacation) that these crossovers are really put to the test. The Flex has passed every time I’ve needed it to, but not with much space left over. The Traverse’s cargo space seems pretty close, though the Flex clearly has more vertical space inside.

2011 Chevy Traverse vs. 2010 Ford Flex cargo
Gadgets: The Limited Flex was definitely more decked out as you’d expect from a top trim level, with its Sync system, Sirius satellite weather and in-dash navigation system. The Traverse still had a few tricks up its sleeves, though, like the backup camera in the rearview mirror, which I find a much more natural location for it than an in-dash LCD screen. The screen quality was very high, and the picture very clear. On the downside, while the Sync system gives you full control over your iPod, the Traverse only offered a lame auxiliary jack for an MP3 player. Of course, on the plus side, the Traverse is $8,500 cheaper. That’s not nothing.
 
Back in front of the computer, staring at Cars.com’s handy compare tool, though, the meager difference between similarly equipped models makes the decision a no-brainer. I’d pick up the Flex. Its polarizing style is one I’m actually quite fond of. While others may not like the Flex’s looks, I’d find it hard for them to argue on the performance or the mileage fronts. 

2011|Chevrolet|Traverse

2010|Ford|Flex

Comments 

Chevy is much more better for me...And ofcourse ir looks amazing.

Paul

I always thought the Flex looked very unique and not like any other type of crossover.Sorta like a Crossover BMW MINI.....
Wondering what phoney woodgraining on the side would look like..
GM? Well,GM will be GM...

C3B

I have both vehicles @ home. Flex is smoother & cooler. Flex/SEL and Traverse 1LT are comprable but for the median trim level, Ford out does GM, hands down.

Zack

Too much money for a modified Taurus.

Peter

Active Park Assist is optional on Flex models powered by the available 3.5L EcoBoost V6 engine. With active Park Assist the system look for the parking space and parallel park itself using ultrasonic sensors.

Cutter

Can GM build a more bland interior? The Flex wins hands-down.

I thought the chevrolet would have been the most expensive as it looks better but I'm surprised that there is not much difference in price at all and if anything the chevrolet is actually the most expensive.

I drove both and found the Flex to be better for families with kids going in and out of the 3rd row. The lower profile of the Flex also makes it easier for kids to climb in and out on their own. And I, too, liked the quirky looks of the Flex after driving it.

Flexinator

Haven't driven the Traverse, nice looking, a little bland overall. Have had the flex a little over a year and a half, and have put two long distance road trips on it. Wouldn't trade it for anything. Great style, incredibly comfortable, all the bells and whistles that you'd need. Kids love it, especially the fridge in the middle row.

atd

Just drove the Traverse over 1000 mile as a rental. Feel sad that I have to return. I agree that the interior is bland but I loved the AWD and while camping the extra height came in very handy. I jumped rocks and curbs with ease. I feel the Flex is a "paved road only" car. In fact, although I like the Flex my wife hates it. She says, and I have to sadly agree, that the flex is an station wagon masquerading as a CUV/SUV. It really does look like a station wagon from the side. We just don't want to use those words any more. For greater utility, cargo room, and seating capacity for similar mpg, Traverse wins hands down in my book. If the goal is to not drive the "minivan" then why settle for a "station wagon" on steroids.

Post a Comment 

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • If you don't want people to see your email address, simply type in the URL of your favorite website or leave the field empty.
  • Do not mention specific car dealers by name. Feel free to mention your city, state and brand.
  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers. This blog is not a fan or enthusiast forum, it is meant to help people during the car-buying process and during the time between purchases, so shoppers can keep a pulse on the market.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
view posting rules

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Search Results

KickingTires Search Results for

Search Kicking Tires

KickingTires iPhone App
Ask.cars.com