Not a Tahoe/Suburban owner (900 Avalanche instead, but same chassis as Suburban as well as most of the interior). And I've only got just over 3000 miles at this point, but no squeaks and rattles either. So I disagree that you should've expected this from a new GM product. I'd see what your service manager can do for you.
Every car line has individual cars that have issues, GM or no. (Ask the folks whose new Tundras have had front ball joint problems)
We got 3,020 miles on our LT. MPG has gone from 13.4 to 13.9 but still WAYYYY off from EPA's "estimate". I guess that's why it's an estimate they just dood there and looked at it and guessed what it would get certainly didn't drive it in the real world
I purchased the same guards from my dealer. The back ones fit, but have been unable to get the fronts to fit. The vehicle in Dave's post #1056 is a Caddy.
do you have 3rd row seats? We have it and only an outline. Nothing in the rear but cupholders on the left. Why not on the right. if I had it to do over (and my wife wasn't around) I'd bought the Suburban.
About 8000 miles. Have taken the vehicle off road into the mountains, no unusual interior noise. Only issue is have had to replace windshield twice. 2nd time was aftermarket, have a littl wind noise now.
Yeah, I looked at the running boards on the new caddy, and it appears to be slightly shorter and away from the front well, so I guess that's how it fits.
Another writer on this forum pointed out that the left side is occupied by the rear hatch power mechanism and the right side is taken up by the rear A/C unit. I should have figured it out but just wasn't thinking. PS: I do have third row seats for three.
Just as my 07 Yukon hit the 4500 mile mark this weekend on the interstate, I hit road debris and got my first tire blowout. It happened on the drivers side rear. It was a major inconvenience. I tell you all this because I discovered a disparity that botherd me for a $49,000 SUV. The Yukon has Goodyear Wrangler AT/S tires all around. The spare was a wrangler ST!! How cheap can GM be to state that the SUV has a full size spare, yet they use is a less expensive tire that can't be mounted on the alloy wheel to replace the flat.So I had to buy new tire. This is unfortunate. I have been very happy to date. No rattles, fair MPG for the size (16mpg ave.),very comfotable cruising etc. Just thought you ought to know in case you ever got a flat. Or is my Yukon the only GMT900 vehicle with a different spare tire ?.
stormin800 - Your not the only one that has a different spare. I went with the Goodyear Wrangler HP raised whites on my Tahoe LT3 and noticed that I also have a Wrangler ST for a spare. Apparently, this has become a fairly common practice with the auto companies as when I talked to two of my friends (on with a Dodge Ram, another with a Ford Excursion) - both said they had run into the same issue, with the spare not being upgraded to the same level as the other 4 tires on the vehicle (spare was the same size - but different flavor) So apparently it isn't just GM that is doing this... :-\
Count yourself lucky with the Wrangler AT/S. Imagine buying a Tahoe (or any of the other GMT900's) with 4 wheel drive option and getting garbage Bridgestone Dueler H/T's (highway tires) and the garbage Goodyear Wrangler ST (highway tire) for a spare. Now go into your owners manual and lookup in the off-road section (the part that says w/4 wheel drive, 17" wheels, and removing the front air dam the vehicle is able to go off road) Then call Bridgestone and ask if its safe and if the tires are designed to go off the pavement. Ask if the Dueler H/T's were designed for light trucks. P-metric tires are designed for passenger cars, LT-metric tires are designed for light trucks.
With out coming right out and saying the tires suck you will hear something like this as the response: (and I've gotten just about the same response from more than 4 Bridgestone reps and/or dealers)
The Dueler H/T 684II is a highway pattern which would not be ideal for off-road use. For On/Off highway use, would suggest that you consider an A/T pattern such as the Dueler A/T Revo. Compared to the 684 II, the A/T Revo should be the better choice for winter conditions, particularly in deep snow.
Everyone go to tirerack.com and look at the ratings and reviews on the tires GM is OE'ing on the GMT900's its not good thing, and come winter its going to be even worse for customers. If you haven't bought a GMT900 yet make sure to tell your dealer which tires you will accept and which tires you wont accept. Its sad but buyer beware, even when it comes to OE tires, or you'll be buying new tires for your brand new truck.
I have the OE Bridgestone Dueler H/T's and like the ratings and reviews (found everywhere) the tires hydroplane, have terrible wet traction, are unstable, and steering response is terrible. They wont be on long enough for me to see what they do in snow or ice, and they are the loudest tire I have ever had. So much for GM's excuse of "NVH qualities".
My response to Bridgestone and Goodyear for pushing unsafe garbage as OE... Even after the small discount offered to change the tires, I will not buy tires from either company. There is history of customers buying same brand, same tire when the OE's are decent like some Michelin's and the OE's need replacement. I will within the next few weeks go out and get 5 proper tires, which are designed and safe to handle the capabilities of the vehicle.
My responses to GM will continue, and when anyone of my friends or family are buying vehicles the dealers will be getting a list of things which unacceptable and need to be changed or there will be NO SALE. Putting garbage, unsafe tires on full size trucks is not acceptable, dont care how cheap they were.
Also when putting on a different tire make, and tread pattern, you have to think about things now you didn't have to think about before computers helped us drive our vehicles.
ABS, Stablitrack, 4 wheel drive, and the lockin diff, do not like different tire makes, and tread patterns. Handling will be compromised.
"How cheap can GM be to state that the SUV has a full size spare, yet they use is a less expensive tire that can't be mounted on the alloy wheel to replace the flat.So I had to buy new tire. This is unfortunate."
Who cares? Are you saying that you wish you could have had the spare mounted on the original rim, thrown away the flat, and driven around without any spare at all? The idea, folks, is to put on the spare, go to the tire store ASAP, get the flat repaired or replaced, and then put the spare back underneath. That's why it's called a "spare". Seriously. This (non)issue came up on the older Suburban/Tahoe board. They even wanted a matching wheel for the spare! I still can't understand why this bothers people.
I know the only reason I looked, was because I am coming up on my first tire rotation and wanted to see (although I had doubted it) if I was going to be able to rotate all 5 like I do on my truck. My truck has the steel wheels, so the spare matches the 4 primary wheels and I rotate all 5 wheels/tires. It adds additional life to the 4 tires that are on the road and makes use of the spare. But in talking with most folks, I think I may be the exception to the rule instead of the norm. (Maybe too many years of people dealing with space saver spares to even think about 5 tire rotation?) :confuse:
Also, its one other thing GM claimed to have and didn't live up to. Just like the fuel managment. Why should I care if it goes into v4 mode when I let off the gas. I'm not concerned about gas mileage when I'm not giving it gas. I'm never buying GM again unless it's too good a deal to pass up.
Too bad you feel that way. The real reason you're not seeing anything close to their "estimate" is that you drive differently. If you really want them to publish numbers you have to deal with the fact that no two people drive the same way or even in the same conditions. Even when one person is doing the driving different days can yield different results (not usually as big an effect as driving style and conditions). Then there's the fact that most people would say that with just over 3000 miles it isn't even broken in and will probably pick up at least 1 additional mpg somewhere after 10k is on the clock.
All the complaining when our numbers don't match up with EPA estimates bugs me. I'd guess most people don't get what the EPA estimates say- some better, some worse, but rately the same (and most times not too close).
I'm sorry if I am offending you with this post. This just happens to be one of my pet peeves. I personally nearly always exceed the EPA ratings for any vehicle I drive. Should I whine because every vehicle I've ever bought was underrated on the sticker? I mean, I used those numbers when purchasing, so isn't it likely that some other car I marked off of my list for being too low would also do better? (Hint: That's the key- use the numbers for comparison when shopping, but not as absolute values for each vehicle. Instead use them as relative values between different vehicles you might be considering. )
I'm concerned about it going into v4 mode when I let off the gas. It's still burning less fuel than if it is in v8 mode and my foot isn't on the throttle. It may be a tiny amount of fuel savings, but every bit of tiny improvement can add up, especially over time. (You realize that with vehicles that only get 20 mpg at best that a 1 mpg increase is a 5% improvement, right? Both in dollar savings and efficiency.)
You still haven't replaced those tires yet? Odd, considering how long they've been bothering you.
As far as the full sized spare thing goes, I was also disappointed that it can't be included in the rotation pattern any longer. I ran into this the first time on the 2004 Trailblazer. It seems as though the manufacturers do in fact think most of us have grown used to a four tire rotation pattern from all of our cars having the mini spares, so it's a place they can save money. (Same reason for the bad OEM tire choices I'm sure.)
I can't speak for the eastern states, but here in the western states the Navigation system is totally useless. I plugged in Payson, AZ, to Telluride, CO, and got two paths. The quickest was totally wrong! 150 miles out of my way. Shortest was only 100 miles out of my way. So I put in a way point using what I knew was the shortest AND fastest way. Aha. That's better, I thought. Wrong! It had me turning into vacant areas where no road has ever been - and 20 miles from civilization. Into mountain sides. Etc. 80% of the time it was correct. Wonderful. The other 20% created sheer disaster. Should I trust it? No way! Which makes it worthless. So I consulted with another owner. She was trying to get from Payson, AZ, to Mesa, AZ. The Nav system tried to take her into a mountain! Again, no road was ever there.
OK. So maybe I needed an update (mine was 1.1). 2 hours of phone time later I got a real answer (this was NOT easy). Useless, but real. It seems in order to get the new upgraded DVD I need to join a subscription service. The problem is, the subscription service doesn't exist yet (August 9, 2007). The new DVD does, but it is not available without the subscription service - which doesn't exist yet! A $2,000 option which is basically useless. Hey, the car has been out for 8 months.
Ok, after three more calls to the dealership they are aware of the problem. They can't solve it, of course. I would suggest a massive letter writing campaign to Chevrolet - and maybe a magazine or two. GMC picked the wrong people for their Navigation System.
By the way, the currently available version 4.1 is for the Tahoe 2006, a whole different system. Yikes. How big a screw up is this!
Explain to me this HUGE waste. So you rotate all 5 and you don't have to replace them as soon. And then, what? - You have to buy 5 new tires instead of 4. More money, less often. Same difference.
I understand you feel you are carrying around a tire that you can't "use". But once it's used up, then you have to buy a replacement at your own expense.
I bet the savings you might realize by getting to "use up" the spare tire once ($100 maybe?) are offset by the extra cost it would be for a 5th matching higher quality tire and alloy wheel in the spare compartment.
Besides that, there's the tire pressure monitoring system. You'd either have to remount the tires on the same 4 wheels with the sensors (remounting would cost more for labor), or have a 5th sensor, which would again add to the purchase price of the vehicle.
I do think it would be nice to have a sensor on the spare, since I so rarely take it down to check on it. I'd like to know it'll be in good shape when I need it. But I have a portable air compressor in the car, so I can fill it up a little if needed. All else fails, call OnStar.
All this reminds me, I never reset the TPMS positions since the last time I had the tires rotated.
I disagree with your assessment, I've had a great experience w/our nav system getting us from Tampa, FL to Annapolis, MD and back. It also found shopping malls in Annapolis and restaurants as well. Compared to the nav system on our VW Passat, the Tahoe's is vastly superior. For instance:
Tahoe has touch screen, Passat doesn't (you don't know how nice it is until you've had to use a knob to spell out street names). I searched for an Office Depot that I knew to be 2 miles up the road. The Tahoe's system found it, the Passat's didn't and wanted to send me to West Palm, about 4 hours away. Nicer graphics on the screen (subjective, I know).
Granted I'm in the south east so we have different experiences and it is frustrating. I haven't experienced any other automaker's nav system personally, but I'll take the Tahoe's system any day and be perfectly happy.
Tires have a shelf life, and just like anything else they need to be replaced. By the time those 4 running tires wear out that full sized spare should also probably be replaced.
Rotating in 5 tires will make the whole set last longer. You can get safe running use from the "spare" if it were a matching 5th wheel and tire. With the "spare" being a running tire, and the set running longer, because of a 5 wheel rotate there is no waste, all tires will be used and worn when its time to replace them. Now when replacing tires the spare is usually brand new, with no miles, but still needs replacement because of its age. (A HUGE waste) This is a full size truck, and the spare is not a donut, there is no need to think that way.
Since we are in explaining moods, explain how the vehicles ABS, stabilitrak, 4 wheel Drive and rear locker systems will perform with a different make and different tread pattern. Its NOT a good idea, and for the cost of having a 5 running wheel its worth it.
As for the tire PMS any computer can keep track of 5 tires and where they are mounted on the vehicle that shouldn't be a problem.
As for the OE garbage Bridgestone Dueler H/T's the sooner those are replaced the better. For the cost of one more tire there is no reason to leave that garbage Goodyear Wrangler ST as the spare, which would hardly work backing up four premium tires.
I usually do my own tire rotations and I've found it an easier chore just to do a 4 tire rotation and keep the tires on the same side of the vehicle. This seems to have worked pretty well on my minivan where front tires seem to wear quite a bit faster than the rears. Plus both my cars have non-matching spares (I don't think I can put my studded spare into rotation and keep the cops happy in the summer).
I've seen various comments on the Tires, tires, tires about when a tire becomes stale. Six to ten year replacement interval recommendations seems to be the range.
Just curious. You say the EPA figures are not absolute and that you have had vehicles that do better and some that do worse. How then can you use them as relative values? Relative to what? :confuse:
I can see that my FYI at least generated some comments. I do not want to beat a dead horse on this subject but I will at least respond as to why I CARE and why I hope others care.
Yes, I would have liked to have mounted the full size spare on the alloy wheel and patch the flat and put it on the steel wheel to use as a spare until such time as I FELT like buying a replacement instead of being forced to buy a new tire now. Therefore, I was forced to spend $200. instead of $20. It is not so much the cost as it is the newest letdown in my desire to support GM and the USA by buying one of their vehicles.
Furthermore, I have been someone who rotated 5 like tires in the past and I always managed to milk an extra 20-40K miles out of my tires. I guess I was spoiled over the last 12 years by owning Toyota 4Runners and Toyota Tundras that had full size spares that were the same tires as the 4 tires mounted. This was the case on all 4 trucks.
As I touched on above, I also care because I finally decided to break away from 12 years of Toyota Truck dependability to go for what was suppose to be one of the new bright offerings from GM with their new 07 GMT900s.
I went with GM because I have had 6 years of very satisfied ownership with a corvette and felt I could help in a small way by buying one these new SUVS to help keep GM going. Yeah !!
Finally, as you may see from this lengthy post, I do care and I hope more people begin to care or the US auto industry will continue to slide downhill and the Japanese, Koreans etc will continue to take more of our money to the other side of the pacific ocean because people like me get ticked off about a spare tire or something else that causes an inconvenience to me that helps me make the decision to return to buying a Japanese or German vehicle.
You say the EPA figures are not absolute and that you have had vehicles that do better and some that do worse. How then can you use them as relative values? Relative to what?
The average American man is 5'10" tall while the average American woman is 5'5".
Some women are taller than some men. Relatively speaking, however, American men are taller than American women.
We bought a 07 Tahoe with the Nav system also, and it works great. My daughter uses it, and it has been a lifesaver for her. At least for Texas, it has not missed a street. The touch screen, and display is great, it works very similar to the Nav system in my Lincoln Town Car, which has been flawless for 2 years.
We bought the Tahoe in June 2006, and it was made in May 2006, so maybe it uses a newer DVD.
Navtech makes the Navigation DVD for Lincoln, I am not sure who makes the DVD for Tahoe, in operation it appears to be the same, so maybe Navtech. Mercedes, and a few others use Navtech also.
I have always found the EPA mileage estimates to be close. I have a Lincoln Town Car with EPA 18 city, and 25 hwy. Every few tanks of gas I track mileage, and also compare it to the dash computer. My city average is 19.3 city, and 27.1 hwy. I do not accelerate like a rocket, and cruise about 70 to 75 on the hwy, so I consider it to be average. I also have a 3/4 ton 4X4 Suburban and the EPA is 12 city, and 17 hwy, and I get right at those numbers. So 2 estimates right on.
I noticed your comment about windshield noise. My brother has a Jeep suv, not sure which model, but he had windshield noise also, and it turned out to be caused by his hood wind deflector. Got a different model windshield hood deflector, and the noise went away. Dealer told him about this, and he figured the dealer was blowing him off, but sure enough, dealer was right.
For all that have second row captain's chairs. I purchased custom made mats from Premier Motoring that give you a T-shaped carpet that covers the space between the seats. They work great if you have the cashmere colored carpet and want that space free from stains. Good luck!
I've seen the other emblems of the 07 tahoe addressed.
Of course my dealer told me that the black and yellow ethanol emblem on the lower right of the tailgate was a clip on. Not just a stick on. Is that true?
It would suck to remove it and have two little holes left in place.
I have the LT '07 with 4wd. I was getting 18.5 MPG on the highway when I first got it. Today, with 6200 miles on it, no AC (didn't need it), 2 wheel high, 3.73 gears, and cursing at 65 MPH for 125 miles, I got 20.7 MPG! I coudlnt' believe it. Either the engine is finnaly broken in or maybe the AC makes a big difference or maybe I had a tail wind. Who knows. But I am very happy with 20.7!!
Joe, That is awesome! I'm planning on making a trip with mine again this next week, and I am curious to see how it is going to do as I have 5800 on the clock and the last long trip I made I thought I would have hit 19+ had it not been for the head wind. Should be interesting to see how I make out this time!
jocatch said: Today, with 6200 miles on it, no AC (didn't need it), 2 wheel high, 3.73 gears, and cursing at 65 MPH for 125 miles, I got 20.7 MPG! ___________________________________________________________ I have an '06 Suburban 4x4 with 14K miles, 3.43 gears, and at 65mph, 2x4, and no a/c running it consistently delivers 22mpg. I have checked the mileage with both the onboard computer and by the conventional method of number of gallons put in tank versus miles driven. They are the same.
Stopped at the dealer where I purchased my '07 LTZ and the parts department quoted a price of $110 for a smoked color. Then he said the body shop could spray paint the color I needed for another $70. Funny thing is that I have scene pictures of the Gold Mist metallic paint in GM advertisements for part but GM does not yet carry the part???
Got back from my trip to houston. Had A/C on low. 60 MPH got 24, 70 MPH got 20 or so, 80 MPH got 17.5 after playin with my cruise control on the way there and using 89 gas. Then bought shell gas on way back w/ 87 10% ethanol mix and got 22mph @ 60 & 18.8 @ 70. Ethanol burns faster but dont now if octane number makes difference. Also thought I had 3.73 axle ratio but have 3.42 and just turned 3000 miles.
Can anyone help me. My 07 is very new (less than 500 miles) and I am not even getting 14mpg?????? I notice that the only time it goes into V4 mode is when going downhill. With cruise set at different speeds from 60-80 it will always go into V8 mode unless I am basically coasting. I thought that when you were cruising and not putting a pull on the V8 that it was supposed to run in V4 mode? Does anyone have any experience with the dealers being able to adjust the conversion settings? I spoke with my dealer and they informed me that they could take it in and 'play' with it. I am a little uncomfortable with them 'playing' with a 47,000.00 truck that does not belong to them. Any ideas, comments?????
Comments
Every car line has individual cars that have issues, GM or no.
1. All 4 door panels
2. Seatbelt tensioners (both sides)
3. Seatbelt fastener
4. Center console
Sounds like they put my car together with glue. Not what I expect from a $48K car.
PS: I do have third row seats for three.
The spare was a wrangler ST!! How cheap can GM be to state that the SUV has a full size spare, yet they use is a less expensive tire that can't be mounted on the alloy wheel to replace the flat.So I had to buy new tire. This is unfortunate. I have been very happy to date. No rattles, fair MPG for the size (16mpg ave.),very comfotable cruising etc. Just thought you ought to know in case you ever got a flat. Or is my Yukon the only GMT900 vehicle with a different spare tire ?.
Your not the only one that has a different spare. I went with the Goodyear Wrangler HP raised whites on my Tahoe LT3 and noticed that I also have a Wrangler ST for a spare. Apparently, this has become a fairly common practice with the auto companies as when I talked to two of my friends (on with a Dodge Ram, another with a Ford Excursion) - both said they had run into the same issue, with the spare not being upgraded to the same level as the other 4 tires on the vehicle (spare was the same size - but different flavor)
So apparently it isn't just GM that is doing this... :-\
Count yourself lucky with the Wrangler AT/S. Imagine buying a Tahoe (or any of the other GMT900's) with 4 wheel drive option and getting garbage Bridgestone Dueler H/T's (highway tires) and the garbage Goodyear Wrangler ST (highway tire) for a spare. Now go into your owners manual and lookup in the off-road section (the part that says w/4 wheel drive, 17" wheels, and removing the front air dam the vehicle is able to go off road) Then call Bridgestone and ask if its safe and if the tires are designed to go off the pavement. Ask if the Dueler H/T's were designed for light trucks. P-metric tires are designed for passenger cars, LT-metric tires are designed for light trucks.
With out coming right out and saying the tires suck you will hear something like this as the response: (and I've gotten just about the same response from more than 4 Bridgestone reps and/or dealers)
The Dueler H/T 684II is a highway pattern which would not be ideal for
off-road use. For On/Off highway use, would suggest that you consider
an A/T pattern such as the Dueler A/T Revo. Compared to the 684 II, the
A/T Revo should be the better choice for winter conditions, particularly
in deep snow.
Everyone go to tirerack.com and look at the ratings and reviews on the tires GM is OE'ing on the GMT900's its not good thing, and come winter its going to be even worse for customers. If you haven't bought a GMT900 yet make sure to tell your dealer which tires you will accept and which tires you wont accept. Its sad but buyer beware, even when it comes to OE tires, or you'll be buying new tires for your brand new truck.
I have the OE Bridgestone Dueler H/T's and like the ratings and reviews (found everywhere) the tires hydroplane, have terrible wet traction, are unstable, and steering response is terrible. They wont be on long enough for me to see what they do in snow or ice, and they are the loudest tire I have ever had. So much for GM's excuse of "NVH qualities".
My response to Bridgestone and Goodyear for pushing unsafe garbage as OE... Even after the small discount offered to change the tires, I will not buy tires from either company. There is history of customers buying same brand, same tire when the OE's are decent like some Michelin's and the OE's need replacement. I will within the next few weeks go out and get 5 proper tires, which are designed and safe to handle the capabilities of the vehicle.
My responses to GM will continue, and when anyone of my friends or family are buying vehicles the dealers will be getting a list of things which unacceptable and need to be changed or there will be NO SALE. Putting garbage, unsafe tires on full size trucks is not acceptable, dont care how cheap they were.
ABS, Stablitrack, 4 wheel drive, and the lockin diff, do not like different tire makes, and tread patterns. Handling will be compromised.
Who cares? Are you saying that you wish you could have had the spare mounted on the original rim, thrown away the flat, and driven around without any spare at all? The idea, folks, is to put on the spare, go to the tire store ASAP, get the flat repaired or replaced, and then put the spare back underneath. That's why it's called a "spare". Seriously. This (non)issue came up on the older Suburban/Tahoe board. They even wanted a matching wheel for the spare! I still can't understand why this bothers people.
My truck has the steel wheels, so the spare matches the 4 primary wheels and I rotate all 5 wheels/tires. It adds additional life to the 4 tires that are on the road and makes use of the spare.
But in talking with most folks, I think I may be the exception to the rule instead of the norm. (Maybe too many years of people dealing with space saver spares to even think about 5 tire rotation?) :confuse:
All the complaining when our numbers don't match up with EPA estimates bugs me. I'd guess most people don't get what the EPA estimates say- some better, some worse, but rately the same (and most times not too close).
I'm sorry if I am offending you with this post. This just happens to be one of my pet peeves. I personally nearly always exceed the EPA ratings for any vehicle I drive. Should I whine because every vehicle I've ever bought was underrated on the sticker? I mean, I used those numbers when purchasing, so isn't it likely that some other car I marked off of my list for being too low would also do better? (Hint: That's the key- use the numbers for comparison when shopping, but not as absolute values for each vehicle. Instead use them as relative values between different vehicles you might be considering.
As far as the full sized spare thing goes, I was also disappointed that it can't be included in the rotation pattern any longer. I ran into this the first time on the 2004 Trailblazer. It seems as though the manufacturers do in fact think most of us have grown used to a four tire rotation pattern from all of our cars having the mini spares, so it's a place they can save money. (Same reason for the bad OEM tire choices I'm sure.)
Toyo Open Country A/T's, LT285/70R17/D's
Those should keep me and the 2007 Tahoe happy, and safe.
OK. So maybe I needed an update (mine was 1.1). 2 hours of phone time later I got a real answer (this was NOT easy). Useless, but real. It seems in order to get the new upgraded DVD I need to join a subscription service. The problem is, the subscription service doesn't exist yet (August 9, 2007). The new DVD does, but it is not available without the subscription service - which doesn't exist yet! A $2,000 option which is basically useless. Hey, the car has been out for 8 months.
Ok, after three more calls to the dealership they are aware of the problem. They can't solve it, of course. I would suggest a massive letter writing campaign to Chevrolet - and maybe a magazine or two. GMC picked the wrong people for their Navigation System.
By the way, the currently available version 4.1 is for the Tahoe 2006, a whole different system. Yikes. How big a screw up is this!
I understand you feel you are carrying around a tire that you can't "use". But once it's used up, then you have to buy a replacement at your own expense.
I bet the savings you might realize by getting to "use up" the spare tire once ($100 maybe?) are offset by the extra cost it would be for a 5th matching higher quality tire and alloy wheel in the spare compartment.
Besides that, there's the tire pressure monitoring system. You'd either have to remount the tires on the same 4 wheels with the sensors (remounting would cost more for labor), or have a 5th sensor, which would again add to the purchase price of the vehicle.
I do think it would be nice to have a sensor on the spare, since I so rarely take it down to check on it. I'd like to know it'll be in good shape when I need it. But I have a portable air compressor in the car, so I can fill it up a little if needed. All else fails, call OnStar.
All this reminds me, I never reset the TPMS positions since the last time I had the tires rotated.
Tahoe has touch screen, Passat doesn't (you don't know how nice it is until you've had to use a knob to spell out street names).
I searched for an Office Depot that I knew to be 2 miles up the road. The Tahoe's system found it, the Passat's didn't and wanted to send me to West Palm, about 4 hours away.
Nicer graphics on the screen (subjective, I know).
Granted I'm in the south east so we have different experiences and it is frustrating. I haven't experienced any other automaker's nav system personally, but I'll take the Tahoe's system any day and be perfectly happy.
Rotating in 5 tires will make the whole set last longer. You can get safe running use from the "spare" if it were a matching 5th wheel and tire. With the "spare" being a running tire, and the set running longer, because of a 5 wheel rotate there is no waste, all tires will be used and worn when its time to replace them. Now when replacing tires the spare is usually brand new, with no miles, but still needs replacement because of its age. (A HUGE waste) This is a full size truck, and the spare is not a donut, there is no need to think that way.
Since we are in explaining moods, explain how the vehicles ABS, stabilitrak, 4 wheel Drive and rear locker systems will perform with a different make and different tread pattern. Its NOT a good idea, and for the cost of having a 5 running wheel its worth it.
As for the tire PMS any computer can keep track of 5 tires and where they are mounted on the vehicle that shouldn't be a problem.
As for the OE garbage Bridgestone Dueler H/T's the sooner those are replaced the better. For the cost of one more tire there is no reason to leave that garbage Goodyear Wrangler ST as the spare, which would hardly work backing up four premium tires.
tidester, host
I've seen various comments on the Tires, tires, tires about when a tire becomes stale. Six to ten year replacement interval recommendations seems to be the range.
Yes, I would have liked to have mounted the full size spare on the alloy wheel and patch the flat and put it on the steel wheel to use as a spare until such time as I FELT like buying a replacement instead of being forced to buy a new tire now. Therefore, I was forced to spend $200. instead of $20. It is not so much the cost as it is the newest letdown in my desire to support GM and the USA by buying one of their vehicles.
Furthermore, I have been someone who rotated 5 like tires in the past and I always managed to milk an extra 20-40K miles out of my tires. I guess I was spoiled over the last 12 years by owning Toyota 4Runners and Toyota Tundras that had full size spares that were the same tires as the 4 tires mounted. This was the case on all 4 trucks.
As I touched on above, I also care because I finally decided to break away from 12 years of Toyota Truck dependability to go for what was suppose to be one of the new bright offerings from GM with their new 07 GMT900s.
I went with GM because I have had 6 years of very satisfied ownership with a corvette and felt I could help in a small way by buying one these new SUVS to help keep GM going. Yeah !!
Finally, as you may see from this lengthy post, I do care and I hope more people begin to care or the US auto industry will continue to slide downhill and the Japanese, Koreans etc will continue to take more of our money to the other side of the pacific ocean because people like me get ticked off about a spare tire or something else that causes an inconvenience to me that helps me make the decision to return to buying a Japanese or German vehicle.
I CARE ! Go USA !!
The average American man is 5'10" tall while the average American woman is 5'5".
Some women are taller than some men. Relatively speaking, however, American men are taller than American women.
tidester, host
works great. My daughter uses it, and it has been a
lifesaver for her. At least for Texas, it has not
missed a street. The touch screen, and display is
great, it works very similar to the Nav system in
my Lincoln Town Car, which has been flawless for 2 years.
We bought the Tahoe in June 2006, and it was made in
May 2006, so maybe it uses a newer DVD.
Navtech makes the Navigation DVD for Lincoln, I am not
sure who makes the DVD for Tahoe, in operation it appears
to be the same, so maybe Navtech. Mercedes, and
a few others use Navtech also.
I have a Lincoln Town Car with EPA 18 city, and 25 hwy. Every few tanks of gas I track mileage, and also compare
it to the dash computer. My city average is 19.3 city,
and 27.1 hwy. I do not accelerate like a rocket, and
cruise about 70 to 75 on the hwy, so I consider it to
be average. I also have a 3/4 ton 4X4 Suburban and
the EPA is 12 city, and 17 hwy, and I get right at
those numbers. So 2 estimates right on.
has a Jeep suv, not sure which model, but he had windshield
noise also, and it turned out to be caused by his hood
wind deflector. Got a different model windshield hood
deflector, and the noise went away. Dealer told him
about this, and he figured the dealer was blowing him
off, but sure enough, dealer was right.
Different deflector, no wind noise.
You can get them embroidered too. Thats where I got mine.
Of course my dealer told me that the black and yellow ethanol emblem on the lower right of the tailgate was a clip on. Not just a stick on. Is that true?
It would suck to remove it and have two little holes left in place.
Joe C.
That is awesome! I'm planning on making a trip with mine again this next week, and I am curious to see how it is going to do as I have 5800 on the clock and the last long trip I made I thought I would have hit 19+ had it not been for the head wind. Should be interesting to see how I make out this time!
___________________________________________________________
I have an '06 Suburban 4x4 with 14K miles, 3.43 gears, and at 65mph, 2x4, and no a/c running it consistently delivers 22mpg. I have checked the mileage with both the onboard computer and by the conventional method of number of gallons put in tank versus miles driven. They are the same.