Howdy, Stranger!

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





2007 and newer Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon

11011131516101

Comments

  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,233
    Let's wait and see where the price lands before getting too excited about the hybrids. The current selections will take forever to recoup the upfront cost and most aren't selling all that well. Real-world mileage is questionable (as is for the DOD/VCM/MDS systems currently touting high EPA sticker numbers). I think if 55mph is your "highway" driving, than you can expect the mpg you see on the EPA stickers for the current hybrid/multiple displacement engines. Otherwise, they're just very minimally better.

    I've had a vehile with a multi-displacement engine for almost a year now and the EPA numbers are not attainable unless I drive significanly slower than normal human beings. My previous vehicles all have gotten their EPA numbers, sometimes better. This one gets good mpg, no doubt, but it's not as great as the sticker would have you believe. No reason the Tahoe DOD/Hybrid will be any different IMHO.
  • I'll second that notion on the sticker price. The real question is will GM be able to make it affordable. Imagine having to pay $45-$50K for a base hybrid Tahoe. Hard to imagine? It's probably not that far off the mark in GM's thinking.

    If Toyotas are any indication, GM's price premium for hybrid tech will be ~$3K more for a similarly equiped Tahoe. At $3 a gallon, that will buy you slightly more than a years worth of around town driving in fuel. Yikes!
  • jntjnt Posts: 316
    Actually GM will offer the 6 speed AT on the new 07 Cadillac Escalade. I do not understand why they withhold it on Chevy new SUV models: typical GM. They have the technology but only give it to Cadillac vehicles. They should have done things like Asian competitors: offering their high volume vehicles with the latest technology. In the case of Chevy, it deserves the best from GM since it carries the whole corporation on its shoulder.

    On the transmission laziness: some Toyota, Chrysler models behave like that. It is their software calibration and they should know better.

    jt
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,650
    I can't say that I've driven many Toyota's, but my MIL's 05 Camry XLE v6 is relatively quick to downshift. I've only noticed an extreme unwillingness to downshift in GM vehicles. I have noticed this in my dad's Park Ave, an '01 Impala my wife used have as a company car, and my current Suburban.

    In my Suburban, once it's in o/d, you almost have to have it completely floored to kick out if your much above 50mph. It's very annoying and very abrupt once you've actually made it downshift.

    Ford will have a 6speed as the only trans in the 07 Expedition. Since I tow my boat a lot, I will seriously consider the Expedition over the Tahoe for that reason. The only reason I have an SUV is to be able to tow my boat and have 4-6 people along in comfort, so towing performance is most important (a pickup is just not practical for us even with the a quad cab). The Expedition will weigh about the same as the Tahoe, offer a little more room, and will have more torque at a lower rpm with more gears. That appears to be a winning combination to me.

    I won't argue with those who bring up many reasons why the Tahoe may be better for daily driving etc. I think the Tahoe is really nice, but I will not by another GM SUV with the 5.3 and 4speed auto. It's just geared to tall for heavy towing and finding one with a 4.10 diff. will be nearly impossible.
  • jay_24jay_24 Posts: 536
    That wouldn't be how I describe our Tahoe. As it is if the roads are wet or any bit slippery from ice/snow/frost/rain we have a hard time not spinning the wheels. It easily gets to speed fully loaded with 5 people and a camper.

    Towing with a six speed tranny worries me. A shifting tranny causes heat and heat kills a tranny fast. It seems to me that a six speed would be spending too much time shifting.

    If you put the six-sped inthe Chevy and the Cady. Why would anyone by the Cady?

    My Dad's Silverado tows a trailer with ATV and gear while getting better MPG than my buddy's Tundra. On our hunting trips he needs to stop for gas way before we do.

    I really wonder how anyone could have pulled a boat or camper in the 70's. I mean 200hp or less and only 3 speed trannys.
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,233
    I believe most folks (myself included) are talking about the transmission shifting down while moving. Getting started really has nothing to do with this, and I agree off the line the Tahoe/Silverdos are fine on power. It's a matter of how the transmission shifts while moving. Mine is very slow to downshift at highway speeds and requires a lot of pedal before you can coax it into kicking out of OD. IMHO the transmissions have bad fuzzy logic. Most newer vehicles will NOT upshift while climbing a hill. My Tahoe would do it every time if I wasn't accelerating with WOT.

    In addition, most vehicles will downshift more easily if climbing a hill. If I leave the cruise set on my Silverado, it will lose about 5mph on a hill and then violently slam down to 3rd then race back up to speed, and upshift. Repeats this constantly. I quit using the cruise in the hills because it's so annoying. I can usually keep it in OD myself while climbing many hills, but it will usually lose speed if you don't peg the pedal and demand a downshift. Our 5-speed Odyssey is almost opposite. I CAN'T make it upshift while climbing a hill even by letting off the throttle entirely.

    Most of the final drives are the same with the five/six speeds. The extra gears are generally in the 1-3 range so there shouldn't be extra shifting at highway speeds anyway. That's where heat would become a problem. But for general driving, the 5/6 speeds have been selections. Of course if they load them up with the same fuzzy logic it won't make any difference, they'll still be sloppy.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,650
    The main advantage of having extra gears is for acceleration at cruising speeds and pulling up hills, which is exactly where the current setup in my Suburban is poor.

    My suburban (3.73 gears) has a hard time pulling my boat up hills (flat land is fine). The main issue is the ratio change from 2nd to 3rd. Even when going 65, any moderate grade requires a downshift to 2nd, not something I like doing when it's 95 degrees out and you have a 2 mile grade to pull. 60mph in 2nd equates to about 4500rpm (can't remember exactly). 3rd drops to about 2500rpm or so. A 6speed could have one maybe, two ratios between 2 and 3 in the current setup, which would drastically improve towing performance.

    So, I either have to go 85mph downhill to make it up the other side, or end up going 45 mph to keep from revving the engine over 4000rpm for extended periods. In tow haul mode, (which works well) you want to limit the shifts between second and third because the increased hydraulic pressure definitely makes firm/harsh shifts which are even worse if you have to let off the gas before the trans upshifts to 3rd.

    Back in the 70's most campers/boats were smaller than what you see today. A 21' boat is avg. to small today, where it would have been considered large back in the '70s. Also, HP don't mean a whole lot when towing, torque is what you need. The v8's back in the 70's didn't have much HP, but they had a decent amount of torque at low rpm. I'd bet most v8's from that era made their peak HP at an RPM similar to where GM's current 5.3s torque peak is.
  • sdronsdron Posts: 29
    The new Denali's will have the 6 speed tranny and when you consider what's included with the price, its a real good deal IMO. $47,xxx with all wheel drive, 6 liter engine, 6 speed transmission. The biggest difference is the gas mileage and I'm guessing it will require premium fuel.
  • stakeoutstakeout Posts: 173
    went to check out the '07 Tahoe this morning at my local dealer.. .. since '99 we've had four 4x4 Suburbans and currently have an '04 Subn and wife has '04 T-B that is ending lease in a few months...

    .. what a disappointment this was today... I asked for the keys to the '07 Tahoe LT sitting outside the showroom in the lot from the sales manager who I've dealt with on all our leases before..

    are they kidding me or what.. the rear looks like an Expedition.. the sides look like an Explorer and the front looks like a TrailBlazer.. what originality on GM's part..

    the interior was supposed to be new.. it's terrible.. they made it 'convex' pulling in toward the passengers rather than leave it away from them giving a more roomy feel... they can keep their cheap wood too.. the dials, buttons and steering wheel controls are for hunger and not user friendly...

    I was not happy when they 'ruined' the look of the old style Suburban after my '99 boxy look ..they rounded it off in 2000 chopping the overall roominess out of it.. and now this...

    and for those who want the tranny shifter on the floor..why.. for what reason.. all it does is get in the way like in my wife's Trailblazer..no purpose there..this isn't a sports car.... I'd like to see them do away with that 'hump floor console'and just leave the center console between the seats..like the old models had it.. more room... can't have enuff room..

    and the kicker and what I feel is the worst design is the second row bucket seats.. when they supposedly fold flat that are 8-10" higher than my '04 Subn as they are 'one-piece'...not 'flat' by any stretch... the only way to flip them forward is the entire seat flips including the seatback.... which then takes up most of that middle seat area.. are they nuts or what... we're only a two person family.. so I leave my second row seats flat.. and get rid of that third row seat.. never used it yet..

    saw the 'electronic' rear hatch... give me a break.. it's an accident waiting to happen...

    after seeing this travesty of pseudo-new design.. I decided I didn't even want to take a test drive.. now I have to figure out what am I going to replace my big boat Suburban with come the end of this year when my lease is up..sad... I can guarantee I won't be getting one of the new ones if it mirrors the Tahoe like I know it will.. then again maybe they'll be into the $7-8K rebates plus 0% financing below Employee discount pricing by then as these will sit on the lots...

    what a mess.. I can see why GM is where they are ..they hurried this new design to get the new motor onto the market just for better mileage.. that'll fail big time.. and their non-original upgrades and design will make a lot of die hard Suburban-Tahoe Yukonites go in other directions... I know I will.. unbelievable is all I can say.. sad :( :( :(
  • stakeoutstakeout Posts: 173
    after our disappointment with the new '07 Tahoe yesterday might have an alternative to replace my 'burban after my lease expires the end of the year...

    the new Expedition EL... at least the seats fold flat! ... to us Chevy..Ford.. same same... we've had Explorers.. Expeditions in the past... whoever 'sharpens the pencil' plus has the right layout for our needs gets our bizness..

    . scroll down the page about two thirds of the way for the pics.. they say it should hit the market the fall of this year..
    http://www.autospies.com/article/index.asp?articleId=6495&offSite=rss
  • jay_24jay_24 Posts: 536
    Fold flat? Hmm that plywood covered up something and looks like a ski ramp. Its a good 10 inches higher in the front.

    Shift on the floor. I thought you wanted it on the column?The center consol is huge, and the dash looks like a flat piece of plastic. At least the Tahoe has a storage area an not that goofy shift lever.

    What's with the hood design? There is a big wart (bump) on the nose/hood.
  • ahightowerahightower TXPosts: 477
    Looks like the Expedition EL has an under-floor storage compartment in the very back. I'm sure it's quite shallow, but I found that very convenient in my prior car, a Mitsubishi Outlander. It kept the air compressor, flash light, tarp, bungee cords, and of course duct tape out of the way. The back of my Yukon XL has a cubby in the rear side area, but it doesn't quite hold it all.

    And, it may be an optical illusion, but the new GMs' rear area looks deeper than the Exp. EL's. That is nice. I have filled up every square inch of the rear of my Yukon XL on camping trips. It's great to be able to fit large ice chests and rubbermaid tubs of gear in long ways.

    Can't quite tell which will have the most third row leg room and head room. They say the third row of the EL should accommodate adults 6'2". I can get into the third row of my 2005 YXL, but it's not comfy. However, it's usually just kids back there, I'll take cargo space over back seat leg room if I had to choose.

    Looking forward to a comparison test!...
  • ahightowerahightower TXPosts: 477
    You know what else would be cool in a large SUV is an outside accesible side cubby, like on the Nissan Titan pickup. I bet the long wheelbase SUVS (Suburban, Exp EL) could accommodate that. It would be a great place to keep some tools and stuff.
  • Has anybody seen the MSRPs on these vehicles? The Tahoe and Yukon just hit our local dealers. The Tahoe and Yukon with leather and 3rd row seats with nothing else special were stickered at $44,000. The Tahoe with nav system and some other extras was $49,000. This ain't an Escalade or Denali. Am I crazy or are they pricing themselves out of the market for this type of vehicle?
  • davids1davids1 Posts: 411
    Yes, and Yes!!! ;-)
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,650
    My local dealer had an 07 Tahoe LTZ that was $50k. I can't speak for the market, but I can speak for myself. I won't spend that much on an SUV. My Suburban only has 62k on it so I'll wait until the new models show up on the used lots for a significant savings. I don't need to be the first on block to have one.
  • 06lly06lly Posts: 21
    You must have some strange criteria for SUVs. The experts are giving it rave reviews and sales so far are double what they expected so it is obviously getting a good reception by the public.

    Are you sure you were at a Chevy dealership?
  • 100% yes. I have been buying imports for a long time and was thinking of giving GM a chance with the Yukon. I got stiker shock as well; they are pricing themselves out of the market, and this is going to help Sequoia and Armanda. A Yukon Denali for $58K(ouch); you are in the luxury SUV territory with much better players like the LX470, QX56
  • navigator89navigator89 Posts: 1,080
    "A Yukon Denali for $58K(ouch); you are in the luxury SUV territory with much better players like the LX470, QX56 "

    I'm not sure the LX470 and QX56 are better players. Sure the LX470 is high tech and all, but it is mostly unchanged since 1998. The towing rating is pretty low and the horsepower is too. The third row is nothing compared to what you'll find in other competitors. It's also pretty expensive, with prices between $65-$70K.

    And the QX56? Apart from it just being a rebadged Armada, I read somewhere that is one of the most, if not the most unreliable vehicle on the market now. Now who wants that?

    If anyone wants a good luxury SUV, I'd say to go with the new Escalade or the upcoming Navigator. If you've got even more money to throw, get a Range Rover or Cayenne. If you're on a budget, the Chrysler Aspen is a good choice. I dont think it will be much higher than the Durango.
  • stakeoutstakeout Posts: 173
    yop.. Chevy dealer it was.. supposedly GM lowered their prices on these SUV's by 2500 MSRP.. I don't think so... $50K for the LT and LTZ...and still a Tahoe.. outta sight...

    and yes it has a console shifter in the EL.. horrible.. but may be the lesser of two evils ...all I want explained to me is why did they mess with that second row seat... craziness.. and useless.. for my needs and not everyone's so I just may move on .. beauty I guess is in the eye of the beholder.. and after owning four Suburbans since '99..two at the same time for wife and I in '01.. I think they screwed them up big time this go round..

    as far as high first sales figures on these new ones.... hmmmm??? whatever they say.. but I kinda doubt them...wait until the real world mpg figures start to come back..like what's happening on the smaller hybrids...not the marketing hype that GM's trying to put out there with that 4-8 engine.. those sales figures will level off pretty quick..and drop like a rock.. especially with higher gas prices here to stay...

    time will tell.. :)
  • nargnarg Posts: 113
    slightbo,

    We know all about that first to market stuff. I purchased my wife an HHR last summer. I know a lot of HHR owners who have submitted their HHR to shops for testing of new equipment. Usually ends up a good thing as they get the equipment free of charge. You might start e-mailing/calling 3rd party vendors to see if you can get in the "test" :)
  • nargnarg Posts: 113
    I'd prefer they do away with any shift lever at all. Buttons or something else. But, that's just me. Otherwize I like it on the column as it's out of the way.
  • nargnarg Posts: 113
    I expect the Hybrid to add about $5K to the sticker. Good thing is you'll get most of that back via tax credits.

    Hybrids have notoriously been expensive. I still can't see paying $25K for a sub mini Prius, silly. And owners of that piece of work often complain about getting nowhere near the 50+ MPG their supposed to get. Toyota loves lying about their vehicles (like their recent truck commercials, meteor proof? gees, pathetic!)

    I'd love to own a Tahoe hybrid, more for the technology than anything (me a geek? yep!) But, not sure I'd get enough out of it to warrant the extra $$$$.
  • nargnarg Posts: 113
    Jay_24, first thing I recommend is getting new tires. I replaced the Goodyears on my Silverado with an off-brand and have noticed a TOTALLY different truck. Much more stable on the road, much more power response when I need it.

    But then again, I've never noticed the "lazy" description posted here. I do drive a bit aggressive, but usually don't have to put more than a couple inches in the throttle to get the result I need, and downshifts every time I need it to. Maybe I got an odd build?
  • nargnarg Posts: 113
    Stakeout, the '07 Tahoe is definatley not for you. Go look at a Ford or something. Ford's are supposed to be redisgned in '08. I personally found all the new features a knotch above the past. Just because they moved a piece of material here or there doesn't warrent a travisty.
  • nargnarg Posts: 113
    vincekeller, the Denali IS in the luxury SUV market. And for the imports (not really as they are built here.) being cheaper? Try again!

    Pricing Tahoe Durango Expedition Armada Sequoia
    MSRP $37,665 $37,310 $37,370 $42,800 $45,310

    Looks like the 2 [non-permissible content removed] are WAY over priced. THIS IS WITHOUT OPTIONS! And, Toyota rarely has good rebates. Though the '07 Tahoe doesn't have them yet, it will. Anyone with any buying knowledge usually gets around $10K off the sticker of a Tahoe or Suburban. The '07 will be in that category within the next year.

    As far as Lexus and similar having better? Again, very arguable that you are dead wrong on that. Just because you pay more doesn't mean you get a better vehicle. Lexus has been advertising their tail off, but not building a better vehicle. Those with brains know that advertizing is too often wrong and over-powering to the average person. Do they get more awards than others? NOPE. Do they do better at their job? Unless your job is to look over priced and under worked, well then, yes. Otherwize, buying a Lexus just shows 1. You hate America and 2. You don't know how to spend money wizely.

    But, hey, that's just my opinion. And I personally love my country and the products it produces.
  • QX56 isn't as good as the current Escalade. Poor quality, hard ride and the steering wheel is always jittery. LX470 is a nice ride but even more $$$ and a 8 year old design and doesn't handle very well.
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,233
    Pricing Tahoe Durango Expedition Armada Sequoia
    MSRP $37,665 $37,310 $37,370 $42,800 $45,310

    Looks like the 2 [non-permissible content removed] are WAY over priced.


    They're not as expensive as your "research" shows. Just comparing the worst case scenario, the Tahoe vs Sequoia MSRP:

    LT Tahoe is lacking quite a few options that are standard on the Ltd. Sequoia price. Sunroof, Leather, power liftgate, airbags, auto climate, 3rd row. If you add those features to the Tahoe, the MSRP is $43,430. Less than $2,000 between them. I'm sure the difference will be larger when GM has to push these with rebates, but they're in the ballpark anyway.

    My wife has a lexus and she doesn't hate america. I'm not sure anyone is spending money wisely when buying these types of vehicles, wheter $37,000 or $60,000. If there was a luxury vehicle built by Cadilac or whomever that she liked better than her GX470, she would have bought it. But GM/Ford have nothing even close in that class of vehicle. I agree the LX is out-gunned by the Denali/Escalade, but it's still pretty nice for being what, 10 years old?? IMHO, the current Escalade and Denali are a bit crude to be very expensive luxury vehicles. They still reak of their cheaper Tahoe/Yukon siblings. Perhaps the next generation will be a better variance.
  • jay_24jay_24 Posts: 536
    I agree with you. Its not lazy or slow. It downshifts rather predictable and easy. 19mpg hwy consistantly.

    It was some of the others that were complaining.

    Besides how many days of the year does somebody tow a heavy load (~5000lbs)? I thought about it and I probably tow 15 days out of the year. (7 or 8 camping trips).
    If you tow a lot with heavy loads try the 2500 Burban and the 4.1(?) rear gear.
  • 06lly06lly Posts: 21
    supposedly GM lowered their prices on these SUV's by 2500 MSRP.. I don't think so...

    Ever heard of a website called Edmunds.com?? A simple compare between an '06 and '07 4WD Tahoe shows $39,415 for the '06 and $36,915 for the '07. Now if I subtract the small number from the big number..... Surprise!! $2500 smackaroos. :) :) :) :)
Sign In or Register to comment.