Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Toyota Sequoia vs Chevy Suburban, Chevy Tahoe, GMC Yukon XL



  • I find it hard to believe that your dealer, or one of their mechanics, can't tell you the size of the nut. Any good garage mechanic should have a "Thread Gauge"(Sears sells them and they aren't expensive. I keep one in my tool box). A thread gauge will tell you the type of thread on the bolt whether it be standard or metric. Once you know the thread size then measure the diameter of the bolt. Together it should tell you the size of the nut plus the thread size, ie: 1/4-20, as an example of a common type nut. Talk to a good auto mechanic they should be able to tell you the exact size. Hope this helps.
  • tomk4tomk4 Posts: 1
    Chevy/GMC have the muscle in terms of towing capacity, but in terms of the 5000-6000 pound load, how does the Sequoia, rated at a 6200 pound capacity, handle it? OR, should someone not even REALLY think about towing this kind of load with a Sequoia and just go with the Chevy/GMC?
  • I am trying to get the most for my $$$. I have a family of 5 boys ( one of them I'm married to ) and we already have 2 trucks. The latest being a Chevy Silverado HD Duramax etc. I am currently in a KIA mini van and want to trade for an SUV. Have been looking at the SEQ but kind of pricey. Don't do any towing but do live in the mountains of Montana and boys in family do a lot of hunting so for me to go where they are I need a4x4. Husband tends to think trailblazers and such are to small, but I like the 6 cyl for the gas economy.

    Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    Just a couple of things for you to consider:

    2006 Tahoe is a brand new model with new exterior/interior styling; more engine configurations with a hybrid coming out soon.
    2006 Tundra was just introduced at I believe the Chicago auto show so the "new" model Sequoia would be following not too long after the Tundra starts rolling off the assembly line. Of course, the Tundra/Sequoia is completely redesigned with a new engine as well. Toyota is talking about a hybrid for the Tundra/Sequoia.
    I guess the relevant question would be; what is your time frame for purchasing/leasing?
    Additionally, Toyota will have a higher resale value even though it is more "pricey."

    BTW, just for reference, I owned a Tahoe (2000) before buying an 04' Sequoia. Gotta love the power in the Chevy but after 60k miles and it starting to have problems I got rid of it quick and bought the Toyota. Got about 30k on the Toyo and so far it is flawless.
    Hope this helps. ;)
  • :mad: In August of 2005 I traded a 2003 Suburban LT on a 2005 Toyota Sequoia Limited. BIG MISTAKE!!! I have been having many problems with the Sequoia and have had it back to the dealer twice. Now it will be going back a third time for problems not solved in the first two trips and all this in only 4,100 miles. My Burb only had 11,000 care free miles on it and I only had to take it back to the dealer for a recall on the second row seat belt. They fixed the problem in less than an hour and I was on my way. The #1 and only reason I went with the Sequoia was because of the so called Toyota Reliability Factor! I can assure you my Sequoia certainly does not live up to Toyota's so called RELIABILITY????. RELIABILITY???? give me a break!!
    The new 2007 Suburbans are coming to the dealers around April or May and I can tell you I WILL be going back to the SUBURBAN. My take on the Sequoia is that it is HIGHLY OVERRATED AND HIGHLY OVER PRICED. No wonder the Sequoia is said to have a higher trade in value. It's OVER PRICED to begin with. My 03 Burb had many,many, more bells and whistles for much less money($3000 less MSRP) than my Sequoia has. My advice is go for the all new 2007 Suburban as that is exactly what I am going to do. I have owned my first and last Toyota guaranteed! For me its Suburban all the way. After all the Suburban was the first and is the Granddaddy of all the SUVs, as we know them, today. Take notice as to what the U.S. Government is using....Suburbans!!
  • tdohtdoh Posts: 298
    If "2006 Tahoe is a brand new model...", as you put it...what does that make the '07 Tahoe--a brand-newer model? ;)
  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    Oops, looks like I misspoke. Yes, you are correct, I meant the 07 as being a brand new model. ;)
  • jck1jck1 Posts: 3
    I tried the Expedition, Sequoia, Armada, Tahoe & Suburban. In truth, the Sienna had more passenger room than all but the Suburban. My wife and I have 4 boys, a girl and 115 yellow lab. The Suburban was the clear choice. It also makes me feel better knowing that my most presious cargo is in such a safe vehicle.
  • dietrichdietrich Posts: 3
    Just got done towing a 5000# dry (probably 5800# loaded) travel trailer from Denver to Steamboat Lake with a 93 SR5 Sequoia. Handled great over Eisenhower tunnel and Rabbit Ears pass (did get down to 35 mph over Rabbit Ears). Gas mileage did drop as low as 4 mph for a time, but made it all the way back on one tank and 3 hours drive time! I was very concerned about towing that kind of weight but did clear it with the TRD guru at a local dealer. Guarantee I was over the GVWR of 11,800 ( I'd have to pull the seats and drive naked not to).
    The key is to get a good hitch set up and dial in the trailer breaks (recommend cam anti-sway control and load equalizer bars). Temps were in the 90's pulling extended grades of 6% at altitude and never had the temp budge. I know alot of people will argue to NEVER exceed weight limits. I am very conservative and never felt overloaded, unsafe or white knuckled. I guess I don't necessarily buy into attorney and lawsuit driven national paranoia of guard rails everywhere and coffee labeled hot.
  • ggesqggesq Posts: 701
    "My take on the Sequoia is that it is HIGHLY OVERRATED AND HIGHLY OVER PRICED. No wonder the Sequoia is said to have a higher trade in value. It's OVER PRICED to begin with."

    Having owned a Tahoe and now a Sequoia I thought you might be interested to know that according to Edmunds TMV pricing-

    2007 Burb LT 1500 4WD w/ LTZ package & Navigation is $48,267.

    2006 Sequoia Limited 4WD w/ Navi is $40,700.

    And you were saying? Almost 8K more and in a couple of years the Sequoia will still have a higher resale than the Chevy. Heck, it will most likely outlast it too.

    "Take notice as to what the U.S. Government is using....Suburbans!!"
    Yes, they are cheap and expendable. :P
  • I now have a 2000 Yukon. It has given me generally good service, but I’m about ready to replace it. The choice is between another Yukon (or Tahoe) and a Sequoia. (I'm looking at the 2011 models.) I drive 90-95% on highways, with the rest on dirt roads that are often washboarded, full of rocks, or with rough wash crossings. Both vehicles would do fine, I know, but does either one cushion the ride on bad roads? Any other reasons for choosing one over the other? Thanks.
  • 774774 Posts: 101
    When you say your Yukon gave you generally good service what do you mean?
    I owned a 2001 Sequoia until Sept of 2009 and it had 98,000 when I sold it to a private party.The vehicle gave me excellent service with only two problems during this 8 year period.

    The front rotars were replaced at Toyotas expense including new brake pads around 22,000 miles.(Free Brake Job)

    The rear window motor was replaced by Toyota as it stopped working.

    I now own a 2010 Sequoia SR5 4 wheel drive model that has 12,000 miles on it. The vehicle has been perfect and is just a pleasure to drive.

    I have owned several GM vehicles over the years and they dont come close to the quality of Toyota.

    General Motors can not be trusted. Goverment Motors literally STOLE money from secured bond holders. I know people who had these secured bonds which are now almost worthless. How can you trust a company that is invloved in this kind of theft??
  • Thank you Steve. You make a good point about GM, and your experience with the Sequoia pushes me strongly in that direction.
  • 774774 Posts: 101
    edited August 2011
    First it was the secured bondholders who lost most if not all of thier investment.
    Now the owners of gm vehicles may lose thier warranties in a new move by Government Motors

    My Sequoia has been perfect not one problem in 18,000 miles. - o-honor-pre-bankruptcy-warranties-in-court-case-states
  • kyfdx@Edmundskyfdx@Edmunds Posts: 25,881
    Actually, it doesn't say they will lose their warranties..

    GM states that they have no other obligations, than the expressed written warranty..

    In other words, if after the warranty ends, workmanship or product failure is discovered, they have no obligation.. Legally, they are probably smart to make that claim.

    However, the "new" GM has continued to extend warranties and make goodwill repairs, just as they have in the past... they just aren't going to assume a legal liability to do so. I believe that isn't any different from what the "old" GM would have done.


    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • 774774 Posts: 101
    edited August 2011
    Does this mean GM will fix the 400,000 2007 and 2008 Chevolets with the suspension problem listed in the article. Why is this in court if GM is fixing the the problem?
    If GM is refusing to fix the 400,000 vehicles as it appears to be in the article
    how is this honoring the warranty

    It appears the idea to fix a problem does not have the same meaning as repair a problem to gm. The problem will not be fixed just repaired so the problem most likely will continue in the future.

    This is why I stay with Toyota they fix a problem that does not continue into the future

    Why has there not been a recall on these vehicles?

    If Toyota had this suspension problem on 400,000 vehicles do you think the Federal Government would do nothing.
  • kyfdx@Edmundskyfdx@Edmunds Posts: 25,881
    If GM is refusing to fix the 400,000 vehicles as it appears to be in the article
    how is this honoring the warranty

    I'm assuming that those cars all had a 3yr/36K warranty.. If any of them are still under warranty, then I would also assume that GM will fix them.

    It is now August, 2011

    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • 774774 Posts: 101
    I am assuming the cars in question are under waranty and have standing in court as the matter is being litigated.

    I would not assume that gm will fix the vehicles unless they are forced to do so by court order that they may very well appeal to stall fixing the vehicles.

    I have no confidence in gm based opon past actions with the secured bond holders who should of been paid first before the union or the new gm.
  • kyfdx@Edmundskyfdx@Edmunds Posts: 25,881
    They are not under warranty....

    I don't have any special knowledge of this case. I only read the link you provided. Your initial post stated GM wasn't honoring the warranties, and the story does not support that assertion.

    Here is one quote from the article: "New GM's warranty obligations for vehicles sold by Old GM are limited to the express terms and conditions in the Old GM written warranties on a going-forward basis," wrote Benjamin Jeffers, a lawyer for GM.


    Moderator - Prices Paid, Lease Questions, SUVs

  • 774774 Posts: 101
    Not to split hairs but my intial post was owners ( may ) lose thier warranties not that they have lost thier warranties

    The matter is being litigated over this very issue. The new gm does not want to be resposible for the warranties of the old gm.

    In any event you have been a good host

    Best Reguards 774
Sign In or Register to comment.