Why the needless violence? Can't we all just get along?

The thing is, we pretty much do the same thing to each vehicle that passes through our clammy little hands. We poke and prod, we pull and shove, we even bang and yoink; we pretty much do anything that any bored pair of hands would do while their owner sits in traffic, or that a curious, small hand would do whenever a toddler spies a small amount of space and is intrigued by what lies beneath. Mind you, we don't pry anything off with force or even get any tools out -- we merely succumb to the human instinct of seeing if everything fits tight and is sturdy, as it should be.

The other thing is that the gaps and tolerances on our TrailBlazer were so cavernous and mismatched that we couldn't help but stick our fingers in there. The exterior panels, with their dated lines severely in need of freshening, were so misaligned that they were even able to accommodate the fingers of one of our more ham-handed editors.

Why all the hubbub? Wouldn't an easy-assemble hood be more convenient should the truck require underhood service? If a wire goes bonkers, isn't it better to be able to pull the panel off to fix it rather than to have to go through a dealer, or to get the dreaded screwdriver out?

Well, then how come the other cars aren't like this? Why are the interiors of the other cars so composed, so nicely fitted and finished, some with seamless panels and tightly matched tolerances that don't even entice the wandering hand? Probably because that's how it's supposed to be! Think of this -- our test model was practically brand-spankin'-new and had 1,100 miles on it when we received it, and it was already besought with minor rattles and squeaks coming from the door panel, the cargo area and the console. Lest you chastise us for haranguing this particular vehicle, let us say that in our experience, we can fairly make a sweeping statement that all GM cars have build-quality issues.

The sloppy execution sealed the fate of the seventh-place TrailBlazer, which already had askew eyes fixed on it for its flaccid on-road performance. Throttle response from the 4.3-liter V6, which creates 190 horses at 4,400 rpm, is satisfying, and 250 foot-pounds of grunt is reached at 2,800 revs, accounting for its higher-than-average towing capacity of 5,600 pounds; 0-60 acceleration required an acceptable time of 9.2 seconds. Power wasn't taxed even with the truck fully loaded with five full-sized adults. Accolades were doled out to the crisp tranny that promptly chose the correct gear in both up- and downshifts.

However, an unacceptable amount of noise and harshness shake the cabin when you rev the engine to anywhere near the sweet spot of 4,400 rpm to make use of peak horsepower. The obtrusive environment is further exacerbated by abundant wind and road racket. A vibration in the accelerator pedal massages your fatigued foot, whether you want it to or not. Why might it be tired? Well, the two pedals are seriously misaligned, so that it becomes necessary to shift your whole foot to go from gas to brake, rather than rotating from the ball of your heel.

Handling was also contentious; stopping the car from 60-0 mph required 144 feet, the greatest distance amongst the gaggle. Braking is accompanied by a hiss and squeal from the pedal, and modulation took a bit of getting used to, as it unnervingly sank at the slightest tap. Most of the group felt that steering was numb and slow, with lots of play before catching. Thankfully, the TrailBlazer goes into innocuously progressive front-end plow when driven hard.

The independent front suspension with a dated two-stage multi-leaf rear spring setup turned out to be one of the harshest in the group, transmitting every bump in the road to the cabin. The system was severely taxed when loaded, bottoming out over speed bumps at low speeds. A tremendous amount of body roll and wallow upset the chassis a-plenty; there was no joy in Blazerville when driving around canyon corners. However, its off-road performance was surprisingly stable, as smaller and medium-sized bumps failed to faze the truck, even with its low ground clearance of 7.5 inches. Once it hits a big bump, though, the suspension apprises you of its displeasure with a teeth-jarring THUD! The AutoTrac push-button electronic transfer case, an automatic wheel-slippage sensing system, further aided its better-than-most behavior.

Front comfort was rated as pleasant, with a firmly padded seat cushion and a perfectly placed lumbar support. Most of the controls are logically laid-out, but it made us further bemoan the poor execution of the assembly; if they can design it well, why can't they pull it together well? The TrailBlazer was one of the most standoffish in terms of passenger-friendliness, however. Maximum cargo capacity is a puny 74 cubic feet, the center console is consumed by the six-CD changer, the door bins are narrow and the glovebox will barely hold a pair of gloves.

Rear-seat accommodations were described as "a sardine can on wheels." Shoulder room was extremely tight with three abreast, and one passenger stated that he "needed Vaseline to get (his) feet under the seat." Cushioning was deemed as hard as a park bench, and a lack of bottom-cushion thigh-bolstering had our backseat testers counting the seconds until the ride-and-drive was over. However, the rear-seat folding system was praised as the easiest to use, with ingenious folding headrests.

The Chevy Blazer is certainly a progenitor of the SUV craze, debuting way back in 1969 near the start of the 4WD off-road vehicle debacle. The current iteration is 6 years old, with nothing but cosmetic changes to aid the ailing brand; it still sports the dull, corporate Chevy front end. However, merely slapping some embroidery on the leather seats and putrid exterior colors, such as the Meadow Green Metallic with gold accents featured on our "upscale" TrailBlazer-trim test model, are no longer sufficient to satisfy SUV owners. The Blazer is badly in need of a complete overhaul, and the 2002 model-year will thankfully see a comprehensive redesign.

Keep up with the times, old man.

Second Opinion:

The Blazer is a cross between a Snap-Tite model kit and Lego building blocks. I've never seen such a cheaply constructed vehicle. The interior suffered from a poor selection of interior colors and plastic pieces that were mismatched at best. The capper was the poor steering that was numb in feel and had nearly 2 inches of play before the rack responded. Yuck-O-Rama! -- Scott Mead

After disassembling the Blazer's front clip without the use of tools, I started wondering where the "security in an insecure world" was that this vehicle was supposed to offer. It certainly wasn't in the massive wind noise at highway speeds or the highly rubberized interior. Rear-seat comfort was lacking due to a low seat bottom height, though the second seat's fold-down system was probably the best in the test. Chevy needs to provide better storage space up front and increased feel from the over-boosted power steering. They also need to fix the bulbous exterior that is neither sporty nor utilitarian in appearance. -- Karl Brauer

This Blazer is the final sucking in of air of a fallen Anglo-aristocratic prop that has undone itself -- and continues to do so through its atrocious build quality. The engine is the most indignant fragment of a deconstructed Chevy Blazer -- it whawls and whoops raggedly whenever it is running and thus surpasses all of its peers in the engine-complaints department. -- Erin Riches

Small inside, poorly constructed outside, and saddled with an aging, creaking structure, the Blazer makes little to no sense. If I recommended it to a friend, I wouldn't be a friend. -- Christian Wardlaw

Specification and Performance - 2000 Chevrolet TrailBlazer
Off-road Evaluation - 2000 Chevrolet TrailBlazer