By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Certainly you jest. As a person who tows a boat, I'm sure you know the consequences of exceeding the manufacturers recommended capacities. Something that appears to be in denial on this topic. Surely, you wouldn't want anything to happen to a Sequoia owner when knowingly, you could have had made a difference. Or do you really care?
If you're just transporting some kids to soccer, I doubt you'll have a problem. If you're planning to regularly transport 5-8 adults with lots of gear, the payload of the Sequoia should be an important consideration for purchasing this vehicle.
I carry my entire six person family that weighs a total of about 550 pounds. That leaves almost 800 pounds of extra payload for our gear. Even when my kids are full grown (assuming the boys weigh what I do and the girls weigh what my wife does) I would be carrying 930 pounds of people. That leaves room for almost 400 pounds of gear.
This conversation is getting circular. I think we are actually all in agreement. The payload is what it is. The vehicle is not intended to be a huge workhorse. If it doesn't suit your intended use then move on to another vehicle (maybe a Dodge Ram Van would work the best for regularly carrying 8 large adults). If it does fit your intended use its a much higher quality vehicle than many of the alternatives that may have a couple hundred pounds of additional payload.
It just seems that Toyota left the average family exposed from a safety standpoint or at least a liability standpoint, in the Sequoia. It hardly seems to make any sense that the owner of a Sequoia might not want to carry more gear than a Toyota Highlander with two more seats and a whole lot more interior space than a Highlander.
If they so poorly designed the load design of the Sequoia it makes you wonder what else they did not take into account long term in converting the Tundra into an SUV.
But if you want, and use an SUV for what 90% of the folks want and use them for, towing and payload is not a factor once you get out of the mini-suv (Rav type) class....
I doubt the Sequoia was designed for heavy duty towing and carrying 8 people. Come on. It's here to satisfy the US market of "who has the biggest toy in the neighborhood". For the exact same reason my significant other drives a Lexus LX 470. You don't haul 8 people in it. You don't tow a boat. You just have it for the sake of havin' the damn thing. These luxury SUVs were never designed as workhorses. They're here to pamper you in leather and wood and to show the world "yeah I got money".
And to that.... pay somebody to tow your boat.
Gil.
Should I make my buying decision based on the possibility of such circumstance happening many years in the future? Or, should I make my buying decision on what I need to accomplish in 99.999% of my driving?
Believe me, if my family was full grown and my kids wanted to bring two friends camping with us after going to the Home Depot, there would likely be another vehicle involved other than, or in addition to, my Sequoia (which would be about 14 years old by the time my kids are full grown). Besides when my kids are all teenagers they probably wouldn't want to be caught dead driving with 8 people in Dad's vehicle, and I am pretty confident that my wife at that age likely wouldn't be caught dead wanting to go camping at all, let alone with a bunch of teenagers. :-) That said, if I did need to carry such a load right now I would use my Acura MDX to carry some of the payload and passengers, rather than purchase a mammoth truck/van for such a rare circumstance as I agree that the Sequoia alone would not be enough to do it in comfort.
You seem to have a bit of a chip on your shoulder about this vehicle. You have posted 10 messages since August 10 complaining about the payload of a vehicle that you do not own and do not intend to buy. What's up? I agree with you that it is not the vehicle for you. I think everyone agrees with your point that a person should not buy a Sequoia if they intend to use it to regularly drive around with more than 1,305 pounds of payload. Why beat a dead horse? Such a situation is far from the norm for the average family or even for very large families. 'Nuff said.
Based on these needs, we chose the 2001 Denali XL, which gave us the space we needed, luxury we wanted and towing capacity to accomodate our boat. The DXL has substantially more space, power, torque and luxury features than a Sequoia for a few more grand more (and maybe about the same price as a fully loaded Sequoia after negotiating). For our family, this was the best choice and there are absolutely no regrets after 7500 miles and multiple towing trips.
gillygan: I agree with your assessment on the use of most luxury SUVs and I understand your loyalty to the vehicle you purchased, however the Sequoia's payload is low by almost every standard. The LX470 payload is 1459lbs which isn't great for an 8 passenger vehicle, however the Sequoia was supposedly a new SUV designed to meet the needs of F/S SUV owners.
For a newly designed vehicle to miss the mark on something as basic as payload seems very shortsighted on the engineers part at Toyota or they know something more about the handling or suspension capabilities of the original Tundra design that reflects the need for limiting load below what might be considered the normal limits.
Normal payload limits being defined as the average payload per seat for just about every other F/S SUV, most minivans and most mid-size SUVs. My guess is this average payload per seat is somewhere around 190-210lbs as compared to the 163lbs in the Sequoia.
No Luxury SUV limits its owners to such a low payload. If it were a GM vehicle, I suppose everyone would be looking to the government to have it designated as unsafe. I guess its OK if its Toyota.
heatwave - I have to agree, if my family were any bigger I would have gone with a Yukon XL. The Sequoia is great, but the GM big rigs are a lot roomier.
Granted, the Suburban/Denali vehicles fits their target audience to a tee, that is... a family of American fatso's whose only criteria for SUV selection is the biggest HP rating and the widest seats for their behinds. They need a BIG 8-seats because they are not cognizant of birth control or understated design. Lastly, for some reason are always dragging around a bass boat that is filled with coolers full of $10 cases of beer, Slim Jims, and 1000-piece barrels of KFC.
In contrast, the Sequoia is designed for the polar opposites and therefore they only need to make 60K a year.
God Bless America.....YeeeeeHaaaaaa
"The Sequoia 4wd has a payload of 1305 libs. 8 passengers would need to average 163 lbs. including their belongings, throw 6 bags of fertilizer in the back and your average passenger would need to be less than 125 lbs. per person."
That's it, pick up 7 of your closest friends then load 6 bags of fertilizer, pick up a rack of Billy Beer, go down to the swamp, divide up the fertilizer and....if it only had a larger capacity we could each have our own bag of fertilizer...then we could really have some fun, let's buy a Denali instead!
Heatwave3 must either sell GMC's or is very unhappy he owns one. If you have any question about it go check out the problems on the Chevy SUV board.
I'm about to buy a Sequoia via the inter net, said to my salesman I wanted a vehicle I wouldn't have problems with, could buy a Tahoe for quite a few dollars less but didn't want the problems. He said and I quote: "We also have a GMC dealership, I know what you mean. At 100K a Toyota is nicely broken in and has another 150-200K to go. At a 100K with a domestic and your looking for your next vehicle." I think Heatwave3 is already looking for his next vehicle.
rruck1: OK, granted. I guess when you live in an area of heavy snowfall, you can't avoid getting the SUV dirty. I'd have to wash my car twice a day, though... although, thank god Philly doesn't get much snow. I've had it with snow!!!!
thirdsuv (on polkadot sunroof): I think that's the solar-tint application. If you get a dispersion lens, you can see the polkadots *really really good*. (Certain brown-tinted sunglasses can do the trick, too, don't ask me why only the brown ones work...) The last time I did this trick, all modern vehicles have these, especially on the rear windshield. Some are more visible than others. Usually on the highway, if the sunlight hits just right, you can see all kinds of polkadots.
... and on lighter topics of conversation... I managed to get a Red Pearl Sequoia with much pain and effort. I saw on the Photo Board that "slickrock" has one. I also saw one with a Florida license plate on the road. That's it. Were they produced in a limited amount? I mean, come on... there has got to be more Red ones out there? Cliffy, aren't you a Toyota dealer/owner? Does Toyota divulge the number of Red Pearl Sequoias produced in 2001?
Gil.
And here goes, from the database of NHTSA:
TSB = Technical Service Bulletins
2001 Suburban: 2 recalls, 29 TSBs
2001 Tahoe: 2 recalls, 28 TSBs
2001 Yukon: 2 recalls, 29 TSBs
2001 Sequoia: 0 recall, 4 TSBs
2001 Lexus LX470: 0 recall, 2 TSBs
... and you still want me to buy a Suburban/Tahoe to carry 8 people?! Those 8 people are probably better off buying a Toyota Echo for each and every one of them. Gas mileage is great on those babies. (and yes, they're better with 0 recall and 0 TSB, compared to Ford Focus 2 recalls and 29 TSBs). These domestics seem to favor the number 28 and 29 a lot....
Gil.
I want to read the article.
Thanks,
2HD.
You guys are something else. The guy (heatwave) makes some valid, specific, indisputable points that shed a better light on a competitor vehicle and you immediately twist it any way you can to try to make it sound ridiculous.
How about this; every one of you is ridiculous because nobody needs a F/S SUV (that sucks gas like there's no tomorrow and endangers the lives of other drivers of common-sense passenger vehicles) in the first place since (according to Sequoia owners), the "average" family is made up of four persons of slim stature and low weight, nobody ever goes to HomeDepot with all of those people in the car anyway, and you are not limo drivers!
Here's the hot tip of the day: Get a mini SUV or better yet a good ol' Taurus/Sable station wagon (or any import wagon for that matter, although they are smaller) that won't flip over, can seat six (more with the third row jump seat), and provide utility as well!! Remember those?? Have a boat to tow and realize that your own advice to "have someone else tow it" is stupid and childish?...check into a large V8 powered sedan with a nice big trunk and good towing capacity.
Or, are you too "cool" to drive one of those?
Think about it. How the hell did we Americans get around up through the early '80's without all these SUVs? These car companies have re-wrapped pickup trucks and put bows on them by giving them a new name (SUVs) for DIRT CHEAP and are selling them to you for a fortune and huge profits and laughing all the way to the bank at your expense!
Drivers of common-sense passenger vehicles? My Sequoia got rear-ended last month, and the guy claimed, "I didn't see your truck". That's cute.
OK, so they're laughing to the bank, making huge profits. At least I'm laughing to the bank, too, with just over $200K household income.
Is it my fault that GM owners present their arguments on a Toyota newsgroup? Sure, it's valid. Yeah, they tow more, they have bigger payload capacity. Granted, it shed a better light on competitor's vehicle.
On that principle, I'm sure the Toyota owners would get stomped and ridiculed in GM newsgroup for presenting and boasting our Sequoias.
And no, to have somebody tow your boat isn't stupid and childish. If you can afford to have a huge boat, you should also afford writing a check for a few hundred dollars and have them tow your boat. Plus, if they as much scratch my boat, it's on them! I'm already spending some $300 on gas for the Sequoia and the LX470... what's another $300-or-so to have your boat towed?
Gil.
For the record, the boat I tow is worth a whole lot more than the tow vehicle, I'm a VP with a Fortune 50 company, and I was trying to share some factual data with only minor commentary that I thought would be of interest to Sequoia owners.
You're all welcome to resume your regularly scheduled programming and "drinking your own bath water" to avoid the reality of published data. If slamming the guy sharing the data somehow makes you feel better about the vehicle you purchased, its probably something you might want to consider sharing with your therapist!
And like I said.... what are you GM owners doing in a Sequoia's newsgroup?
Gil.
Maybe our host would like to comment on your question about who's allowed to participate in this forum's discussion? Or were you somehow appointed by the rest of your peers to keep "intruders" out that might have facts that aren't to your liking?
I've been posting to multiple Edmund's forums (including multiple GM forums and this one) for almost 2 years and its rare that someone responds to a post that shares data or opinions based on reasonable facts in the immature way that was posted earlier.
Slamming is of course a matter of routine for some, however it rarely results in learning more about the vehicles we are discussing.
Heatwave3: Fortune 500 and you have a Toyota Avalon? Must be for your nanny to drive right?
Reality...I used to haul my 3800 pound big block, jet boat behind my 83 Ford van half ton and never had a problem. Still have the van, just hauled a ton and a half worth of building materials to the dump with it, no problem, happens all the time. The van has 180,000 miles on it and other than a couple starters that 6 banger still starts every time. That's what I use to go to Home Depot.
The Sequoia..Safe for the family, will tow the new 4200 pound boat just fine and I'm expecting reliability. Have a 94 Camry that I've done zippo to except brakes and service. Also have a 94 Jeep Grand Cherokee with 90,000 miles on it and it too has been a good vehicle, a few minor problems. It pulls the boat fine but the boat pushes it around a lot, makes me nervous.
The Denali..a little too much added stuff to the body for me, really like the looks of the Tahoe but it truely is a reliability issue...that's the only reason I'm not buying one.
BTW do you still have the Jet boat? I have a 25ft speed boat with a 525hp Supercharged big block. Goes like stink (just breaks 80mph). A real blast on the lake or off the Jersey Shore.
I agree with your views on the Denali ("a little too much added stuff to the body"). Even though I own it, I would have liked it better without the body cladding, although I do think it has one of the nicest looking grill and focussed beam headlight arrangements of all the f/s SUVs.
New boat is an MB Sport V-drive...48 mph top speed is pretty boring but great ski/wakeboard boat and much safer for the 7 & 8 year old boys.
Take a look at the Trailer Boats March 2001 issue, they compared a Sequoia with a Chevy Tahoe and a Ford Expedition for towing.
Good comparison. Tahoe came in 2nd and Ford 3rd overall.
I've kept the Stingray and now my 16 year operates it up to about 60. His friends get a kick out of it (and mine too), but with 525hp he doesn't run it without me. We pull tubes, skis, wakeboards and kneeboards which are a blast, although its a hell of a loud ride back there with my straight exhaust.
I'll take a look at the article, I won't be surprised by the rankings as I think the Sequoia is a fine vehicle. It'll be even better if the ever load the 4.3 with 300hp and 325ft lbs of torque from the Lexus Sedan.
BTW, do you subscribe to Hot Boat magazine? My boat was featured twice several years back under the "Reader's Rides" section. Not surprising, its a fire red Stingray with yellow lettering down the sides........"HEATWAVE":)
If GM would have followed the path that Toyota has with respect to quality then nothing could have stopped them.
My Camry just turned 70,000 and I haven't even had to put a battery in it yet. The antenna just stopped going down and that's it! I'm tired of it and would like to buy something new but I have a hard time selling a car that has had NO problems from day one.
I've read every post here and other than ticking, smelling, some air conditioning problems, plastic pieces coming off and booming bass this vehicle looks good to me. My salesman has stated in writing that if any of the above problems occur during the warranty period they'll be taken care of.
I'm about to give him the OK on an order for a 2002, Black limited for $500 over invoice. I'd do the SR5 with leather but am not a fan of 2 tone paint.
We've spent the last couple days discussing how many pounds we can haul, not problems, this to me is a good vehicle. I buy them new and keep them for many years. I think I'll be happy with the Sequoia. I'll post a photo of the Sequoia with the boat when the vehicle comes in.
The three experiences I had were with 2 - 3/4 ton 4wd Silverado Subs and the new DXL. All were very positive experiences over long periods of ownership. As I posted once before, the earlier Subs were standout vehicles with little difficulty for over 130K miles. I do not consider radiator, torque converter, rotors and alternators unusual failures for a vehicle serving regular tow duty for over 100K miles.
The latest experience at 7500 miles on the DXL has been flawless with only the need for two stops to the dealer for oil changes.
Maybe I'm lucky, maybe I had Wednesday vehicles, maybe GM's quality has improved, maybe I take better care of my vehicles than the average guy. Whatever the case, my quality experience has been positive with these three GM vehicles with a resulting trade-in that I was very surprised about. Money wasn't a significant factor in deciding and I certainly wouldn't have bought my third Sub if I had been burned by the previous ones.
Feel free to slam me for posting my GM experience on a Sequoia forum, however I thought you might be interested in a first hand experience that was different from the stereotypes and other first hand experiences shared on this forum regarding the quality of GM products.
Well, obviously the manager has not been informed that that has already been done. In fact, after the test drive and comparison, a service rep. acknowledge that my AC was not working properly.
The service manager also recommended taking my Seq. to another service shop.
Other than the recommendations given, the service manage said they've done all they could.
I am going to take the truck to another dealer service dept for a checkup. Can anyone recommend a shop in Northern VA area that has a good AC technician? Also, if anyone has any advice on the next step to take in term of filing a formal complaint and a lemon law claim, I would greatly appreciate their help.
Cliffy, do you have any Seq. on the lot and would you be able to help me make some comparisons? Do you have any suggestions besides the ones given above?
Thank you all in advance for your help.
Gillygan - disclosing your gross household income in a bragging manner to a bunch of people who you don't know, is pretty repulsive and low class (btw, I make more than double what you and your wife make put together (nana nana nana, as my kids would say) ;-)
Heatwave - Your initial posts about the Seq payload were interesting and informative. Your 10th post on the same subject got a little old. WE know you need the vehicle with the most power and the most everything. Do you get your inspiration from Tim on Home Improvement? BTW, I invest a lot in energy stocks (both long and short). Your use of fossil fuels is my dream come true!!!! For some reason you also find some satisfaction about bragging about your position. Interesting. Is it therapeutic for you to impress people who don't know you with unverifiable information?? (I'm Bill Gates)
Robh3 - Who are you to say nobody needs a full sized SUV? It always amuses me that so many people think that the needs of other people are identical to their needs. Heatwave has the same problem in the opposite direction. I have 6 people in my family that I tote around regularly, including going away almost every weekend. I do need, and want, a full sized SUV. The Sequoia fits everyone very comfortably and holds a heck of a lot more "stuff" than a station wagon. I also own a smaller SUV (an Acura MDX) and a mini van (piece of crap American van that will soon be taken out and shot, and it's only a 1996), and use whichever vehicle is appropriate for the task at hand. I agree with you that there is a tendency for people who do not need a vehicle of this size to buy it anyway, but some truly do need a full sized SUV.
Now, can we calm down and stop tooting our own horns a little? Maybe we can all learn something from listening to what others have to say on this board.
You might have considered providing a few lessons in hospitality and even a modest amount politeness in your desire to share wisdom in your post # 3397. If anyone could use a little advise in "growing up" as you so eloquently put it, it would have been thirdsuv and his immature post #3377. I assume even though thats the post that kicked up the dust abit, you found it OK since it didn't attack a Sequoia or its owner.
With the recent "Heatwave3" on this board, I am sure getting back to real "cool" technical issues is a welcome break for everyone ;-)
I see nothing in your reply posts but CONFIRMATIONS of my assertions.
My postulate is that 70% of Denanli sales are to men that care only about having a vehicle with the highest rated HP, a big wide driver seat to match their own big wide seat, and the garish GM design elements that somehow increases their sense of manhood.
However we shouldn't CRITICIZE these Denali purchasers, we should just PITY them.
cheers
And yes, I agree that we all buy whatever vehicle that fits our needs (or in my case, which vehicle I can fit into comfortably
And in the heat of debate, stupid things were said, things got compared and analyzed to death, and we plucked each other's nerves.
At any rate, I do apologize for some of the crazier things that I posted.
Gil.
For those who may not recall, heatwave's original post was in direct response to a nice lady who posed a comparison question between the Sequoia and Tahoe/Yukon. Seems to me that that was probably the EXACT original intent that Edmund's had for this forum when they put it on the Web; people discussing their car experiences and sharing information to help others.
On another note, now that I know that a Sequoia is the only vehicle that a 6'9" 300 lb. gentleman or a family of 6 can fit in, I am going to spend the rest of the evening pondering how my former boss of 6'8" liked to drive my '87 Mustang GT, and how the family of 12 (that's right, Two parents and TEN kids) who lived down the street from me during my childhood ('70's-early '80's) could possibly get by with only a station wagon and a sedan as their modes of transportation. (both 100% true).
When I was car shopping, I had a list of vehicles that I'd like to have, and I simply went from one to another until I found one that I could fit into comfortably, i.e., ample room for my knees not to hit the steering wheel or those fancy center consoles with a million buttons.
Surprisingly though, some of the smaller (and cheaper cars) can fit me just fine, lacking the huge center console, and I could lean my right knee away from the steering wheel. I could fit into the Toyota Echo and Ford Focus - they designed the interior surprisingly roomy - yet I couldn't fit into the Avalon (or Lexus or BMW), because my right knee hit the center console, that in turn created a pretty tight clearance between my right knee and the steering wheel, etc etc etc, so it wasn't comfortable.
And somewhere down along "the list", I sat inside a Sequoia, test drove one, and lo and behold, it gave my knees ample room. Sold.
*shrug* Maybe I'll look into those sporty cars next time. Never owned one, so I never got interested in one. But if I could fit in it... then maybe I'll change my mind.
Gil.
Try sharing some data that supports any of your opinions otherwise they are weak attempts to elevate yourself and your own purchasing decisions by slamming others. If it works in your own mind, so be it, however its certainly not based on any facts in the real world.
2. They ACTUALLY recommended anotther dealer service department? That's incredible. Maybe you should take that up with the GM of the dealership (or the owner). Or better yet, maybe THEY can take it to another service department. After all, THEY sold you the vehicle and THEY should be the experts on the vehicle. I would encourage you to make them do all the legwork. Why not get a regional Customer Service Tech / Rep. involved. The local service guys should be batting FOR you not throwing in the towel!
3. I think I would at least investigate the possibility of using the "lemon law". IMHO, you do have a legitimate complaint on a legitimate problem that has remained unresolved after several visits. Also, it is a problem which is not considered "normal" for this model. At least get yourself informed as to the time limits and restrictions of the law's applications where you live. Don't forget to get everything documented. Additionally, I would advise Toyota national that you have this problem that continues to remain unresolved.
Just my thoughts on how I would handle it were it me and our Highlander. Good luck and don't give up.
Funny you should mention that. I can help you a little with your pondering.
I grew up in a family of nine kids (seven large boys and two girls) and two parents. Like your former neighbor we had a station wagon and a sedan as our modes of transportation. Let me tell you from experience, while it is certainly possible to transport the family like this, it is far, far from convenient or comfortable. While it worked OK for getting around town (as we would rarely all be going to the same place, except to church on Sunday), we had to take two cars on every vacation or family trip. Since we had to bring lots of luggage and other stuff several kids had to lay on top of the luggage in the rear of the station wagon as their official "seat"(which although it was legal to travel this way 30 years ago, it was far from safe).
Would I like to transport my family in such a manner when I could opt for the Sequoia? You make the call (I've already made my choice).
So, to address your implied point, the world would not end if full sized SUVs disappeared. But why do you care? They meet a real need for some. You're world must be pretty small if you cannot comprehend that some people have different requirements and desires for a vehicle than you do.
People are safer and I like that- but it took some charm out of motoring.
http://www.auto.com/industry/cowger10_20010810.htm
You won't buy a GM product yet you own Found on the Road Dead vehicles....hmmmmmm
schweggy: my reference to third grade opinions was not directed at you or others that have a dislike for GM products because of rumor, data or any other reasons.
My view of third grade opinions is when those of you Sequoia owners feel compelled to berate others that find some other vehicle is better suited to their needs than a Sequoia.
For example the childish remark just posted: "My postulate is that 70% of Denanli sales are to men that care only about having a vehicle with the highest rated HP, a big wide driver seat to match their own big wide seat, and the garish GM design elements that somehow increases their sense of manhood."
You're welcome to any opinion or reason for why you made the purchasing decision you did with or without data. On the other hand, trying to degrade others for the decisions they have made (which in the case of GM F/S SUVs represents the vast majority of the market) is both immature and IMO a measure that that individual feels inadequate about their own decision.
Please try and share any data that suggests 70% of Denali owners have anything in common and maybe we could have a discussion. Otherwise the anti-GM tirades that denigrate the owners of Subs/Denalis/Tahoes are nothing more than emotional releases for people that must need them.
Its also interesting that none of your data was a specific reference to the issue under attack which was the GM F/S SUVs and instead was against GM more generally. I side with you on quality issues with many GM auto products I have driven, however my comments on quality were specific to the vehicles that are relevant in a discussion comparing them to Sequoias.
Feel free to flame away since its apparent that a reasonable and balanced dialogue about the strengths/weaknesses of the Sequoia vs. other F/S SUVs based on data was abandoned long ago.