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

cats_echocats_echo Member Posts: 6
edited October 2014 in Chevrolet
My family is looking into buying either a Suburban or a Sequoia. As of right now, we are leaning towards the Sequoia. We own and Echo, and we love it. We think that Toyota makes a good car. We don't have any experience with Chevy. Can you help us out???


  • thirdsuvthirdsuv Member Posts: 209
    This almost sounds like a Toyota rep pumping the forums, but I'll bite anyway.

    Before our Expedition got totalled my wife was complaining that only a burb/yuck-xl would do for the next car. After the wreck we were just about ready to get a yuck-xl (down to choosing colors and such) when we caught a little newspaper blurb about SEQ. The usability and fit/finish of the SEQ is so good compared to GM that as long as the the demo car didn't blow a head gasket on the test drive we decided that we were probably going to buy it. If you are a family of 5-6 or less and you think you need a burb, you mostly will discover that the SEQ will meet 99.9% of your daily needs without the extra fat and troubles of the GM. If your family is 7 or bigger then you need a Burb and a box of Trojans or your next vehicle will only be available in the color orange and seat 50 ;-)

  • gpm5gpm5 Member Posts: 785
    I looked at both yesterday. Supposedly the Sequoia is as large as the Suburban, but the rear cargo space behind the 3rd row is virtually non-existent in the Sequoia. I don't think you could get a couple of large suitcases back there. Even less than my Windstar van. But the cargo space is huge behind the 3rd seat on the suburban. I looked at both an SR5 and a limited. Neither has enough cargo space for me, unless it comes in an extended version.
  • rruck1rruck1 Member Posts: 91
    The Suburban and Sequoia are not the same size. The Sequoia is roughly the same size as an Expedition. I purchased one just before Christmas and have been very happy with the amount of room. I would not have considered a Suburban though, because I just don't need that much room. I also would not have purchased any GM product due to a bad experience with my 1994 Jimmy. Toyota reputation for quality is what finally pushed me into the full size SUV market, I had been looking for the past couple of years, but didn't want to shell out the dough for a Ford or GM. I love the Sequoia.
  • gpm5gpm5 Member Posts: 785
    Too bad they don't make an extended version of that truck.
  • vasylvasyl Member Posts: 9
    It was down to the Sep, Suburban, or BMW X5. I drove the X5 and was impressed with the ride and especially the safety features- but even with only 2 children I think it is too small. When mom shows up or an extra kid or 2 to the beach we're undersized.

    Last week I went the auto show and must have jumped in and out of every SUV a dozen times. I especially was comparing the Seq to the Burb. I was more impressed with the Seq. The third row seat was adequate for adults and I liked the access via the "tumbling" 2nd row seat. Fit and finish was typical Toyota although the Ltd interior console in metal trim was not very pleasing. Cargo room behind the 3rd row was of course much smaller than the Burb. But realistically for a family of 4 or 5 the Seq seems to make more sense. In a pinch I always carry a few bunjee cords and can put a suitcase or something on the roof rack. But for most driving, being a couple feet shorter is more convenient in our garage as well as parking.

    We have a Jeep Grand Cherokee which is a total piece of junk. Since we will keep this vehicle for at least 7 years or more we have put a lot more emphasis on realiability. The Suburban we felt had to have the extended warranty to compete with the Toyota and even then, the inconvenience of having to go to the dealer and be without a ride for even 1 day is a factor.

    I was concerned that the Seq. did not have enough power for it's weight. Even though the Burb had about 40 more horsepower, the Seq actually had more torque. 315 lb-ft vs. the Burb's 290 (I may be corrected on the Seq but it is still more than the Burb) and it is torque that will make this vehicle feel good accelerating under normal and semi aggresive driving. Plus the Seq has several hundred pounds less weight to carry around.

    Of course the Toyota dealer I visited here told me they were getting "over" invoice (about 2 months ago ) so I said "SEE YA!" So like everyone else we have a budget (mid 30's) and finally it will depend on the selling price. If anyone has any Houston area experience , would like to hear.
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    I too would select the SQ over the Sub. However, SQs are not perfect and you can't count on it never being in the shop for "even 1 day." If being "without a ride for even 1 day is a factor" (your quote) I would be at a loss to even come up with a vehicle so perfect. Of course the SQ probably will have a better reliabilty record than the Subs, but it is a first year model.

    I live in Katy and have not seen any significant discounting of SQs yet. Have you considered an Acura MDX? It should be plenty adequate for a family of four. Of course there are no discounts on it either, but a fully loaded SQ 4WD Ltd (with dealer/port ad-ons) MSRPs at close to $43,000. One such add-on in the Houston area is the $795 window etching!! Acura does not do this, and in fact a fully loaded MDX w/ Navigation MSRPs at $39,450.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    I think I'd choose the burb just for the looks factor alone! (IMO, the sequoia got hit one too many times with the ugly stick!) Toyota makes top-notch vehicles, but I wish they'd work on the appearance a bit.
  • firsttimesuvfirsttimesuv Member Posts: 1
    We researched this one for almost four months, focusing primarily on the Sequoia/Suburban debate. Ultimately, went with the Toyota, coming out of a Chrysler mini van (into which we'd put a transmission after 40,000 miles - - a wholly separate story). The big factors in our choice were: (i) Reputed Toyota build-quality, as compared to known reliability issues with every Suburban any of our friends have ever owned - - admittedly a gamble with a new model, but we needed to buy something, and the Suburban was a known evil; (ii) eight passenger three-point seat belts, side air curtains, more sophisticated four-wheel drive and traction control, and better braking systems in the Sequoia all meant higher marks for safety in this kid die carrier for a mom in the suburbs; (iii) the ride in the Toyota impressed us hugely; more nimble than the Suburban in most conditions that we need; (iv) it was from a style standpoint a little different in an area (Washington, DC suburbs) chock full of Suburbans, and a fully dressed SR5 had everything we wanted at a slightly lower price than the Suburban LT. After about a month, the kids (4, 6 and 11) are happy and the wife is ecstatic. Worked for me. Pricing was $1850 under MSRP for the fully-dressed SR5, with $2500 in after-markets (Audio-Vox DVD player and some other goodies) thrown in at dealer cost. I had to sweat to get to that level.

    Toyota is bound to add fog lights for the SR5 next year, but until then, you have to order them as parts and then have them installed elsewhere.
  • ravvie4meravvie4me Member Posts: 110
    Why? Because:

    1) It's a Toyota. Which means it's reliable, durable, and built of the highest quality materials for the interior and exterior. Fit and finish are also superior.

    2) It's got the same engine used in the Land Cruiser and Tundra (i-force V8), which is Lexus-derived!

    3) Typical Toyota resale value (very high)

    4) The Toyota will barely be broken in after all of the domestics hit the scrap heaps. Plus you won't be paying out the [non-permissible content removed] for repairs after the warranty expires like you would with the American brands, 'nuff said.

    I'm sure there are more reasons, but I'll leave it at this for now!
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    responding to your point #4: are you really going to keep this vehicle for more the 3 or 4 years? be honest.
    also, what you won't have to pay in repair bills later, you already paid up front in a high sticker price.
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    ravvie4me your userid betrays your Toyota/Lexus bias. They are very good vehicles, but they are not perfect. I've owned Toyotas (four different vehicles) continuosly since 1975 and they do have to go to the repair shop every once in a while!

    And as previously noted they are more (sometimes much more) expensive than the competition. Thus total costs throught the years may not be that much different from some of that competition.
  • vasylvasyl Member Posts: 9
    In response to # 7.
    Yes I agree that even Toyotas wind up in the shop. We still think the odds are that the SQ will have fewer problems than the Burb.

    As far as the Acura MDX, without having any figures to support me, I felt a lot more confined -especially in the 3rd row. The SQ felt a lot roomier. Aesthetically, the MDX just doesn't do it for me (too minivan like). I'd also like to say that design wise the SQ is no big deal. I agree with eagle63 (#8) that the Burb is better looking. And as outlined in #'s 9 and 10 it's easier to swallow "the look" when overall the vehicle is so competent mechanically and safety wise.

    The $795 window etching "add on" you refered to is something I never saw. Ultimately we have a budget and if the dealers play their typical games we'll look elsewhere.

    By the way, I did check out Tuscaloosa Toyota's web site ( from a link at the other SQ forum. Several days ago they listed 18 SQ's with Invoice,MSRP, and Selling Price. For instance they had a 2001 SQ 4WD SR-5 w/leather : MSRP $41,749.00 Selling Price $37,146.00 or just $100.00 over Invoice. Of course I'm suspicious (those "add ons") - but who knows. Of course for $37k you can easily find a Suburban LT loaded although in 2WD. Last time I checked Tuscaloosa's site their was no more mention of Invoice or Selling price - just MSRP's. I'm seeing a lot of Suburbans for $5k less than MSRP so I'm still curious what the real bottom line is on both of these vehicles.
  • wesyangwesyang Member Posts: 32
    One big reason people buy a full size truck is to tow a trailer or boat. SEA only can handle 6200 bbs. That is too little to compare with bur. To carry 7 person around, it doesn't need a 40k full size truck. It only needs a 25K mini van.
  • eagle63eagle63 Member Posts: 599
    Isn't the Tahoe more of an apples to apples comparison with the Sequoia? seems to me the burb is in a different class of vehicle. (extra large suv)
  • kreykrey Member Posts: 41
    You took the words right out of my mouth. The Suburban/YukonXL/Excursion are different tools altogether than the Tahoe/Yukon/Sequoia/Expedition class.

    If anyone doubts this, check out the room behind the third seats in each. In the full-sized SUVS, it's 6-7 people AND luggage; in the Tahoe/Yukon/Sequoia/Expedition, it's 6-7 people OR luggage.
  • mgonzalezmgonzalez Member Posts: 1
    STOP!. All of you about to buy a Sequoia, STOP! If nobody buys a Sequoia for 60 days you will see the prices DROP like a brick. Guaranteed to work.
  • chwolfmanchwolfman Member Posts: 7
    I looked at the Accura DX, Mercedes ML (I had a -98) Sequoia, Tahoe and the Suburban. The Suburban has the best ride, is the biggest and can be purchased for less than any of the others except the Tahoe. I am not a GM fan- a swore I would never buy another one after I had a Mid 80's lemon from GM. The fit and finish appear to be fine. I bought one on 2-2-01. I paid invoice and am buying it over 4 years for less than the three year lease payment on a Sequoia.
  • haight1haight1 Member Posts: 2
    AS the owner of 2 Suburbans in the past and the owner of a new Landcruiser, their is no comparison in build quality. Unless you have to haul mega weight or people, go with Toyota. You be much happier in the long run. both my Suburbans fell apart at 40K
  • camper77camper77 Member Posts: 3
    I have a '91 GMC Suburban and am looking around for a replacement. In the discussion of the Suburban vs. the Sequoia, a central issue is the build quality of the Toyota vs. the lack of build quality for the Suburban. I have no experience with the new Suburban, but my '91 with 147,000 miles on it would indicate the following:

    1. The overall build quality of the Toyota is significantly better. I think Toyota uses their perceived quality as a central marketing issue and they pursue it relentlessly.But things are more complex than that simple statement. The small block V-8 and the Turbo-hydramatic transmission are noted for their reliability. After all these miles, my 350 V-8 uses less than a quart of oil in 3,000 miles and the transmission has never been touched other than changing the fluid and filter. The other components of the Suburban - the body hardware tend to have problems while I think Toyota simply has higher quality components. To me the build quality concerns for the Suburban are not of a cataclysmic nature, but more of an occasional annoyance.

    2. Even a high quality Japanese vehicle has problems. It is just that the Suburban is more likely to have more of these relatively minor problems which take a trip to the service department.

    3. Overall, if Toyota built something with as much space as the Suburban and priced it competively, I think there would be no question which to buy. But the Sequoia is priced significantly higher on a real world basis.

    I think the decision as to which to buys falls to one's set of values. For me the Sequoia does not represent that much of better value, given the price difference and I will be buying a Suburban/Yukon XL in the not too distant future. On the other hand, if my '91 Suburban keeps chugging along, I just might keep it for a few more years. That it has held up as well as it has for as long as it has amazes me.
  • dw93vettedw93vette Member Posts: 2
    Suburbans have been around for along time. The first was built in 1935, of which 3 are still known to exist. Where was Toyota in 1935? A Happy Suburban Owner
  • msu79gt82msu79gt82 Member Posts: 541
    Where was Toyota in 1935? In Japan building cars and trucks!! Toyota was founded in 1933 and was the country's primary builder on military trucks beginning in 1939. The Land Cruiser, by the way, has been built continuously for over 50 years.

    I'm afraid your arguement for Suburbans based on longevity does not carry much weight. Not saying don't buy a Sub (vrs Toyota), but if you do I would find another reason for doing so.
  • thirdsuvthirdsuv Member Posts: 209
    65 straight years of building junk. At least they're consistent. Face it, GM was the very last car company to see the light about quality. They're still playing catchup and most of their competitors run faster.
  • kreykrey Member Posts: 41
    You know, sometimes these "comparison topics" really bring out the worst in people. Listening to some of you (the vocal minority) pat your own backs about your "smart" purchase reminds me of a particular quote by a former Secretary of Interior (James Gaius Watt), who had the arrogance to publicly announce, "Anyone who disagrees with me is stupid." He actually said that.

    They're just trucks folks, and it ultimately makes no difference whether it's a Toyota or GM SUV product. They both cost way too much money and are arguable over-kill for their intended use. How "smart" is that, huh?

    So, let's tone done the invective and backhanded comments, and get back to the topic. As I see it, we just might help someone make a decision involving a lot of money. And there ARE reasons why both of these vehicles make sense, irrespective of what anybody says to the contrary.
  • warrenw48warrenw48 Member Posts: 21
    For those considering a Suburban or Yukon XL vs the Toyota Seq. here are some sites that might interest you for a better and a more accurate price comparison.,, and I do not have any stake in these sites, I just like to use these boards to help, just as I was helped to save literally 1000's by other posters.
  • 00tahoels00tahoels Member Posts: 13
    I'm here because the topic caught my eye... Why on earth are we comparing Suburbans and Sequoias? Someone mentioned earlier that the Expedition is in the same class, thus the Tahoe is as well. As my screenname would suggest, I own a Tahoe, one that came out before the Sequoia. I made my desicion because of the excellent reviews given to it by Motortrend and I visited another forum dedicated to this SUV. The Sequoia claims to have more room than the Expedition and when Ford caugth wind of it, they checked. It turns out that the Sequoia is not as big as Toyota boasted because of an outdated system used. Anyway, if you're looking into a Sequoia, check out the Expedition and Tahoe first. (Just my two cents worth)
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    1)IF you want a truck buy the suburban, if you want a car buy the Toyota, the suburban is made to be used if it is not you will be one of the many people on this forum complaining about Chevy's. The Suburban has bigger engines available, a 3/4 ton available, has much higher tow ratings, has much more room, rides much more like a truck. The Sequoia is the car SUV, in typical toyota style everything looks the same from corolla to Sequoia, lots and lots of plastic, tons of insulation, weak undercarriage components and in typical japanese style they copied the Ford F-Serieas and qoute/unqoute "imporved it". The toyota put a car engine in these things, that may sound all find and dandy but the bearings won't be nearly as big and beefy as the suburbans truck-designed engines would be.

    2)You cannot get a toyota to fit your needs nearly as well as a Suburban, sequoia lacks options, on a suburban you can get locking differential, 5 differnt suspension choices, Engine Block Heater, trailering package, Z71, three differnt trim levels, 7 differnt seating options.

    You will not be unhappy with the Suburban, but you will be if you buy it thinking you are getting a car because you are getting a truck. The suburban is one of the best selling SUV's, and probably the best selling of all times.
    It is also one of the autos with the highest return buyers, if you buy a suburban you will be buying a suburban again so get ready to do some financial planning for that lol.
  • oac3oac3 Member Posts: 373
    chevytruck_fan: it beats me to actually read from you that the Toyota is a car-like SUV ? Incredible !!! Have you ever driven the vehicle ? nope... FYI, the Sequoia is based on a modified Tundra platform, and is built right next to the Tundra at the same Princeton, Indiana plant. i own the Sequoia and, if anything, it drives like a TRUCK which it is. The Sequoia, for the uninitiated, is the biggest SUV ever made by a Japanese car maker. That should tell you something, shouldn't it ?

    Let us write with facts and not emotions. If you want car-like trucks built by Toyota, then you should check out the RAV4 and The Highlander. The 4Runner, Sequoia and LC are all TRUCKS...

    For someone considering the purchase of either a Tahoe or the Sequoia, the person should figure out what they want the vehicle to do and if cost, reliability, quality, handling, towing, resale, comfort, safety, etc.. are all factors that would tilt the decision one way or another, then they should weigh these facts from a careful personal evaluation of the two vehicles. Afterall, if you are going to plunk down $30K+ of your hard-earned money, you'd better know what you are getting...

    But, pls chevytruck_fan, do not make statements you cannot back up...
  • chevytruck_fanchevytruck_fan Member Posts: 432
    1)IF you want a truck buy the suburban, if you want a car buy the Toyota, the suburban is made to be used if it is not you will be one of the many people on this forum complaining about Chevy's. The Suburban has bigger engines available, a 3/4 ton available, has much higher tow ratings, has much more room, rides much more like a truck. The Sequoia is the car SUV, in typical toyota style everything looks the same from corolla to Sequoia, lots and lots of plastic, tons of insulation, weak undercarriage components and in typical japanese style they copied the Ford F-Serieas and qoute/unqoute "imporved it". The toyota put a car engine in these things, that may sound all find and dandy but the bearings won't be nearly as big and beefy as the suburbans truck-designed engines would be.

    2)You cannot get a toyota to fit your needs nearly as well as a Suburban, sequoia lacks options, on a suburban you can get locking differential, 5 differnt suspension choices, Engine Block Heater, trailering package, Z71, three differnt trim levels, 7 differnt seating options.

    You will not be unhappy with the Suburban, but you will be if you buy it thinking you are getting a car because you are getting a truck. The suburban is one of the best selling SUV's, and probably the best selling of all times.
    It is also one of the autos with the highest return buyers, if you buy a suburban you will be buying a suburban again so get ready to do some financial planning for that lol.
  • btenbten Member Posts: 28
    I noticed the Sequoia weighs 157 pounds more that the Suburban and has 45 less horsepower. Has anyone driven both to compare?
  • mulligan2mulligan2 Member Posts: 59
    The Sequoia engine is used in the legendary Land Cruiser as well as the LX470 and the Tundra. Why does that make it a car engine? As to Bten's question, I test drove the Sub and the Seq and found the braking, pickup and handling better in the Seq. I know style is a matter of personal preference, but I also find the dashboard and instrument panel of the Chevy SUV's to be extremely square and clunky.
  • cmuehlenbcmuehlenb Member Posts: 1
    If you have to tow 7600 lbs thru mountains, which would be better?

    I am a stickler for quality and think Toyota has the best made high production vehicles in the world. However, I wasn't considering the Sequoia because I thought it would be too whimpy. Anyone know what a Sequoia 4x4 will tow? Anyone know what the K1500 Yukon XL will tow to compare?
  • nboylenboyle Member Posts: 3
    The decision to buy one vs. another, in the end, comes down to personal preferences. I've got a good basis to compare the two. I've got a Yukon XL (4WD, 1500, SLE) and my brother-in-law and co-worker have a Sequoia.

    I bought the Yukon because i've got 6 kids and need the interior room. The third seat in the Yukon has foot wells vs. the Toyota being a bench without a well for feet. there's no question that the Yukon has more room for a growing family, including the ability to get 9 passenger seating, more room behind the third seat.

    My brother-in-law/coworker bought the Sequoia because he perceived there to be a quality difference. I encouraged him to look at the Yukon/Tahoe (not Yukon XL/Suburban), but he didn't even test drive it. He owned a GM product 15 years ago and will never own another. He uses the Toyota to tow a horse trailer and is somewhat disappointed that his Toyota didn't come with adequate trailer wiring (and the Toyota dealer wouldn't install it), and the truck doesn't have the towing capacity that the Yukon XL 1500 has.

    I've driven both trucks and frankly prefer the Yukon XL ... it has much more room at the drivers seat (I'm 6'6") and the seats seem to adjust more. The Toyota seems smoother accelerating and braking and you can see better out the back window from the drivers seat.

    The bottom line is that if i had it to do over gain i'd still buy the Yukon XL/Suburban and he'd buy another Sequoia. Personal preference.
  • spartanman2spartanman2 Member Posts: 61
    My wife is pregnant with our third child and I haven't room for a third child seat in our current vehicle. We'll need to upgrade this fall. I owned a Mini-Van once, but prefer a full size SUV. I have been looking at the Sequoia, Yukon and now '03 Expedition. They are approximately the same price with similar options.

    Anyone want to factor the newest Ford Expedition into this debate?
  • pschreckpschreck Member Posts: 524
    As far as size, if you need the room, the Sequoia is not as large as the Sub/XL. These vehicles really shouldn't be compared for this reason. I own a Sequoia and absolutely love it. But if your main criteria is size, then it can't compete. However if you want a highly reliable SUV with a Full Time 4WD system (can be run in any conditions including dry pavement), Vehicle Stability Control, plenty of second and third row leg room, great safety ratings and a smooth as butter engine, then be sure to check out the Sequoia.
  • fanman8fanman8 Member Posts: 65
    Thank you Therube for that articulate synopsis of these SUV's.
  • raddboy41raddboy41 Member Posts: 249
    He'll go away. He's shown up in a couple other forums baiting people into responding to his inarticulate postings.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Sometimes it takes us a few hours to get to the trolls. Best not to feed them in the meantime.

    SUVs, Vans and Aftermarket & Accessories Message Boards
  • dratnoldratnol Member Posts: 2
    I purchased a Toyota Sequoia and it was a huge mistake. This is the biggest piece of crap ever made. I have taken this vechile back to the dealer five times now and it still runs like crap. It also doesn't handle worth a dang in the snow. The Suburban is by far a much better ride and is actually built. Don't buy this tinny piece of junk called a Sequoia. I wish I hadn't!!
  • 2heeldrive2heeldrive Member Posts: 87
    It's ok, everyone screws up now and then. Your mistake is trying to trash an excellent vehicle that has a well documented history of reliability. Are you getting paid by the post? You have posted the same worthless message on every board that discusses the Sequoia.
  • nodefectnodefect Member Posts: 26
    Latest customer satifaction ranking from JD Powers.

    1. Toyota
    2. Honda
    3. GM

    Enough said !!!!!!!!!!!!
    Ford, Chysler ? a bit farther down the list.

    It's said isn't it ? A country as big and powerful as ours cannot build the best and safest cars in the world ! It is joke !!!!!!
  • jaw2000jaw2000 Member Posts: 133
    WHere do you think the Toyotas and Hondas are assembled?

    ANd was this for all vehicles or just SUVs?

    By the way, many GMs are assembled in Mexico too, as are Fords.

    Just wanted to add those small details.

    One more thing, if memory serves, Mitsubishis are assembled in Illinois, Hondas in South Carolina, Toyotas in California (?).

    Customer satisfaction also has much to do with brand loyalty.

    On that note, I say I cannot imagine ever owning another 'American' car, but I also cannot imagine ever owning another 'Japanese' truck.
  • nodefectnodefect Member Posts: 26
    Boy! I did not know my Sequoia was built in Indiana, and my Accord in Ohio and the Tacoma in California and the MDX in Canada. C'mon tell something I don't know. I also did not know my 94 Grand Cherokee had a Mitsubishi transmittion. Cars are made all over, from plants all over the world. Please ! everybody knows that.

    It all has to do with the company and their company standards. It is not the workers fault American cars stink ! The American workers are great ! It is the company heads who skimp on their vehicles to increase their profits

    Here's the ultimate difference ! GM takes Chevy parts and puts them into their Cadilac. Toyota takes Lexus parts and puts them in to Toytota.

    GM trickles junk up, Toyota trickles quality down.

    Sorry I cannot agree with you because I would like to. The Big 3 have earned their crappy reputation. I refuse to spend my money with a company that refuses to build a better vehicle. They flat out REFUSE ! They have taken advantage of the American consumer long enough.

    I am sorry I refuse to spend $40,000 on a vehicle that has no road feel, poor workmanship, poor reliability, poor customer service, poor paint job, poor fitting panels etc. etc. etc.

    They are in fact more powerful, I give you that! but that's as far as it goes.

    Buy a Chevy buy the best, drive a mile walk the rest!

    Now I know why thery equip their vehicles with OnStar. You need it to be located when your vehicle quits.
  • jaw2000jaw2000 Member Posts: 133
    What makes you think that parts are parts. In other words why would Toyota desire to reduce profits by making a part that for a Lexus now fit a Toyota?

    I suspect that a part is a part, if it happens to work in multiple autos then glory be to the mfr who just saved money in design by making one thing work in more than one place.

    I further suspect that all makers have % of lemons, my sister owned a 80 something Celica, it was of all the cars in my lifetime the absolute worst vehicle any of us can remember.

    Conversely, I owned a thrice used 78 Olds Cutlass Supreme, I got it a 87,000, and I rolled it over to a new total of 217,00 before I got rid of it, I did get the tranny overhauled/rebuilt that was it.

    So I maintain that owner loyalty has more to do with 'who is best' in today's environment than anything else.

    In fact (if my economics classes were at all correct), now all the auto makers employ a design through to manufacture and sale philosophy that is very similar to the Japanese model that resulted in savings to design and build.

    Anyway, enjoy what you have, as I know I will, but I doubt seriously that you (or I) would come back and admit that what we have is crap -- even it proves to be so.

    That is not human nature.
  • ashift30ashift30 Member Posts: 4
    I just bought my '02 Suburban, and I love it!. I drove, compared like models, and priced them all. I got 0% for 60 months at a price below dealer invoice (and well below Edmunds TMV). Loaded LS Leather, towing, ect., for under 35K....did I mention 0% for 60 months?

    We family road trip every weekend for soccer tournaments, second row buckets are a must. We definitely got the dark gray carpet because of mud.

    I loved my Tahoe, even with the minor problems you get with any car and the price was right for the upgrade. The burb actually priced lower than the new Tahoe. My wife LOVES it AND that means much more sex for me! (I really really like that part of the deal)

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I have a 99 Suburban that is 4 years old and not one trouble.. I have a 94 Toyota PU that is a total piece of crap... Clutch at 12K miles not covered by warranty, engine at 90K while up in the Sierras, cost me a fortune.. I'll never consider another Toyota... Oh and I bought a new Toyota Landcrusier in 1964 it had lots of engine troubles...I thought after 30 years they would learn how to build an engine, wrong... Toyota is over rated...
  • tidestertidester Member Posts: 10,059
    You really should learn to express your true feelings and not repress them! ;-)

    SUVs; Aftermarket & Accessories
  • thibberthibber Member Posts: 1
    People who think the garbage pumped out by american automakers in the 80s is indicitative of todays GM vehicles are living in some kind of blind Japanese manufacturing worship myopia. GM is bumping on toyotas door in the latest JD power surveys, and the differences in the top ten automakers makers is marginal. Toyota quality is still the best, but the gap is becoming statistically insignificant marketing hype. It is no longer a primary differentiator in vehicle selection except for the ignorant, those who can't let go of old scars from the 70's and 80's, and those who just like to bash American manufacturing for the fun of it. Get the facts straight about current GM quality before going off half-cocked about some god forsaken oil buring Chevette you owned in 1976...
  • nodefectnodefect Member Posts: 26
    I just drove my friends 2001 Tahoe with 20,000 miles on it to his home from the airport. WHAT A RATTLE TRAP !!!!!!!!!!!!! The steering was extremely loose. Sorry! the gap has not closed as much as you think ! Typical Big 3 shotty workmanship.

    The Big 3 has the technology and work force to build the best cars in the world, they just flat out refuse to do it.

    The only reason they are now TRYING to build a better car is because the Japanese (mainly Toyota) has kicked our butts as far as design, workmanship and production.

    I hate to feel this way believe me ! But I will spend my hard earned money on a vehilce that will be traded in when I want to trade it, not because I have to trade it.

    The Big 3 has gone out of their way to earn their reputation, now they will have to go out of their way to earn my business again. At this point they are nowhere near that level of quality.

    Cars are too expensive to have it breaking down at 36,000 miles. I will buy Toyota until the Big 3 can prove to me they will build cars at that level of quality.

    Today's drive just reinforced my opinion of the Big 3.
  • carbittencarbitten Member Posts: 9
    My problem with Ford & GM right now, is that they claim they will be able to return to or sustain profitability through.... cost cutting. Any time you embark on a cost cutting mission, quality suffers. To maintain profitability, Ford and GM need to endure some short term losses, truly get the quality of their interior components (I think their drive trains are okay by and large), raise prices, and make money.

    Ford, GM, and Chrysler all underprice their products compared to foreign competitors, and the demand for Toyota and Honda products continues to increase. Instead of worrying about quarterly profits, spend some money on developing higher quality components, and people will be willing to pay for it.
  • pschreckpschreck Member Posts: 524
    Interesting. I know it's JUST his tranny, but I find it hard to believe that he's still "proud".

    #2545 of 2552  New Owner w/Question by tom213  Aug 18, 2002 (08:50 pm)

    Friday night I became the proud new owner of a Tahoe (Redfire Metalic)LT, 4WD, with a lot of other goodies and now have a grand total of 101 miles on the odometer. I couldn't pass up the end of model year deals and 0% financing deal going on. Anyway, I noticed a, for lack of a better term, a jerking motion when I was on the turnpike today. The engine was running smooth (RPM steady) and tow/haul mode was off, transmission seems to shift fine, and autotrac was not on (2HI light ON). I also took it on a highway that was recently paved to rule out it being caused by road flaws. When I got home, with the engine still running, I checked the transmission fluid and it was right at the very bottom of the cross-hash marks, so maybe this is the cause?? So I'm stopping by the dealer after work tomorrow to get some fluid added to see if this does the trick. Has anyone else experienced anything similar? It's not a severe jerking motion, but it is noticeable as speed increases.
This discussion has been closed.