2018 GMC Acadia V6 vs. V8

I am wanting to buy my first brand new car. I have narrowed it down to the GMC Acadia. The issue is they are offered with a 6 cylinder and with a 4 cylinder. The 6 cylinder is around $7,000 more then the 4 cylinder but the 4 cylinder offers much better gas mileage naturally. My questions is, is spending the extra $7,000 up front and extra on gas worth the longer life potential of the V6?

Why do you think the V6 will have a longer life? That is not necessarily true. Either engine should easily exceed 150,000 miles with the proper maintenance.

1 Like

I have a feeling you are not comparing the same trim levels. I show the V6 as an option for about 1100.00.
Go to the build it yourself web site .

1 Like

I have a 2017 V6 Acadia All-Terrain and not very impressed with it. Mileage is @ 18 city and 24 highway, Don’t like the tranny. Have had it back to dlr 3 times for a chatter at 1500 rpm’s and can’t be fixed. Very annoying. Was told it is a common problem. Look at Toyota Highlander.

I’m not sure where you got the assumption that a larger engine will always last longer. If a 4 cylinder does what you need it to do, I would go with it; your wallet will be happier. If you have to tow or do other heavy-duty driving frequently, then the 6 may be worth the additional expense.

1 Like

The difference is fuel economy isn’t earth-shattering

The FWD model 4 cylinder is rated for 2 MPG more than the 6 cylinder and the AWD 4 cylinder is rated for 3 MPG more, noticeable. but not a big enough difference to really hinge your selection on IMHO. Also the largest delta is in city driving, the highway MPG is almost the identical between the two engines

Also I’m not sure where you’re getting this $7k figure from. on the GMC.com configurator, Assuming you keep the options the same, the price difference between the I4 and V6 is less than $1k (SLT-1). It’s not exactly a fair comparison if you comparing the I4 Base SL trim, and the V6 in a higher end trim level, nor is a fair comparison if you’re comparing an I4 FWD model with a V6 AWD model. Since in either case the extra money includes more than just the engine.

Anyway, if it were me I’d opt for the V6 model.

1 Like

There is no reason to believe a V6 will last longer than an I4.

There is a reason to believe fuel prices will fluctuate in the future, and are likely to exceed $4/gallon in the next decade, so the questions are:

  1. How long do you plan to keep the car?

  2. Which version of the Acadia do you like driving better?

Only you can answer those questions.

When I bought my last car in January 1999, I boasted about its fuel economy. With gasoline being cheap at the time, my friends scoffed at the benefits of getting 30-34 MPG. They weren’t scoffing when fuel prices spiked during the decade that followed, but even when gas was cheap, it was nice to be able to have a car I could afford to drive where and when I wanted to.

If you enjoy driving the four-cylinder version and don’t miss the extra power of the V6, that’s the one I’d buy. If you’re disappointed with the performance of the I4 when you accelerate on an entrance ramp during a test drive, you shouldn’t buy it, because you’d have a love/hate relationship with it.


My experience with smaller engines in larger vehicles is that they do not fare as well as the larger engine version. The reason being, people expect a certain amount of performance and will tend to push the smaller engine harder to achieve the desired result. Also, the smaller engine is working harder to do the same amount of work. I’ve seen this a number of times. People buying larger vehicles with dinky engines in order to (theoretically) save on fuel costs. Instead, using a heavier foot, most of the savings were never realized and the smaller engine was sweating bullets trying to do the job of moving a heavier vehicle with more drag as if it had the larger engine…YMMV

1 Like

From what I can see online, the 4 is not turbocharged. If it were, I’d go with the V6.

I have had no problem with always buying the smallest engine for any car I purchase. Americans are too obsessed with high power cars…

As a point of reference, I have heard that, for most cars, the smallest engine offered in the US is usually larger than the largest engine offered for the same model in the UK. Don’t know if that is always true, but in general UK cars have much smaller engines than in the US. Why? they have highways same as we do.

Taxes .
Hey, stupid software monster here are your other 5 characters :frowning::frowning::frowning::frowning::frowning:

1 Like

My point is that they get around just fine with the smaller engines. They have highways of all speeds and sizes as does the US. If suddenly all US cars had half the HP, life would go on just as it had in the past (exception, cars hauling large trailers) with less pollution, less COâ‚‚ production.

They also tend to be turbo Diesel engines in Europe, don’t they? It’s not like they’re all naturally aspirated 70 hp engines.

As @VOLVO_V70 mentioned it’s largely taxes. There are other factors ( ridiculous insurance rates for anything displacing more than two liters, less distance traveled, narrower roads with more bends) But overall people in the UK have largely been legislated into driving smaller, slower cars. If fuel was taxed similarly how it is in the U.S., then you’d see vehicles with larger engines. It’s not necessarily the will of the people, it has more to do with keeping the welfare state solvent.

The vehicles I see over there are also not the same behemoth sized ones we have here. It takes more power to move the greater mass and push that larger profile through the air…

I can’t speak for GMC engines…but just because it’s a 4 cylinder doesn’t mean it won’t last long. My wifes 87 Accord 4-cylinder - we sold it with over 300k miles…and last I heard it had over 400k miles. Just oil changes and valve adjustments. Is that reliable enough for you.

Most of the diesels you see over there are turbo diesels, but that doesn’t mean they have a ton of power The Fiesta for example can with had a 1.5L TD with 85 HP

Car and Drive tested a Citroen C4 Cactus (sort of a high-riding compact car) with a 1.6L TD (98 HP), performance was not particularly impressive

A typical city/Supermini turbodiesel will have around 70-110 HP, and 140-170 lb/ft of torque, but the catch is that the boost comes on early, but diminishes rapidly over 2500 RPM or in in the interest of fuel economy.

4 cyl vs 6 cly aside, do you have a firm understanding of vehicle depreciation and how it will immediately affect your new car purchase? ie: your new vehicle will immediately be worth much less than you owe on it as soon as you drive off in it.

I always recommend a 2-3 year old car to someone looking to upgrade. Much of the massive depreciation is already gone by that point, and it is a much better financial decision- and many times you can find vehicles that still have a factory warranty intact.

If you understand this, and can afford it- I’d go with the 6 cyl. insert Tim Taylor man grunt here

But Mike, that’s an appropriate sized/spec’d vehicle for a 4cyl engine. Look at the OP’s question. Are you familiar with the physical difference between an Accord and Acadia? Something like 1000lbs weight and the Acadia is rated to tow up to 4k lbs. Not to mention aerodynamics differences…

Doesn’t the size (displacement) of the engine matter more than the number of cylinders?

Yes, by and large it follows suit.
But even more important is torque and HP and that reflects the work it can do.
The Acadia 4 is 193hp and the 6 is 310hp IIRC