That's an awfully good price, out of the door! I paid 34.5K out of the door for my SR5 in April (2WD,AC,AH,CQ,RL, DR, M5,CN, WL). I am picking up my sister's similarly configured 2002 Seq on Saturday from the same dealer(with leather and some other goodies) for 37.5K (also out of the door). These were both the best prices within a 250-mile radius.
Surely, the internet has leveled the playing field. Unfortunately, a lot of consumers still have not availed of the wealth of information. On the other hand, it's amazing how many internet sales people who still don't get it and continue to treat internet customers like crap. Fortunately for us, we don't have to sweat to get a good deal.
The answer to your question to me in your post 3506 can be found in post number 3514.
Do I think that my experience with Jeep is grounds for labeling all domestics as unreliable? No, I think that the domestics speak for themselves. I think the knowledge I have from owning domestics and being aware of problems my friends and relatives have had with domestics is grounds for labeling all domestics as unreliable.
I think the work ethic in the United States is somewhat lacking. I think that GM could put out a great product it they put their mind to it but it was to easy for them for too many years and I think they now have a long way to go.
Norwesterner, you are right, the domestic car companies for many years had no reason to make good vehicles...they had no competition until the Japanese started out. The auto workers themselves are OK, just look at the difference between Camrys and Accords made here against vehicles like the Taurus, Grand Prix, etc...there is no competition. The Camrys and Accords are consistently at the top in terms of build quality, ride, handling, resale value, etc. The same can't be said of the domestics. My wife's Camry and my Tundra were both built here. We tested the domestics and they don't match up. The domestics used cheaper parts, didn't fit them right, etc. The domestics have the attitude that they know what's best for us and we should just buy what they make.
My family and friends have owned both and the imports come out on top. They're more reliable and perform better. Of course, the imports are not perfect, no company is but the chances of having problems with them is much less. My previous vehicle was a 94 Jeep Cherokee. In the first 3 months of ownership, the transmission seal cracked, the AC made groaning sounds, the clutch was stiff & squeaky, etc...
dodger44: no wonder you view the import designs as better, you owned one of the worst designed (and built) vehicles in the last decade...the 94 Cherokee. I know because I owned a 93. You need to compare current models of the same model year for a fair comparison.
The current GM model I am familiar with (GMC Denali XL) has greater performance in every category when compared to the Sequoia. Substantially more interior space, more towing, more luxury features, more payload, AWD, nearly the same fuel economy, more hp, more torque, better sound system and all for about the same price (after negotiating). The quality, fit and finish is excellent with nothing to report in the first 8000 miles other than 2 oil changes.
I'm no GM freak as I own a Toyota Avalon (which is also an excellent vehicle) and a BMW 740il (which speaks for itself).
Please, can't we discuss the Yukon XL when there is a Sequoia XL to compare it with? Most of this group is looking at a Sequoia or a Yukon/Tahoe or Expedition because of the size. If we wanted something as big as a Yukon XL/Suburban or Excursion then that's what we would be comparing. Thanks .
Sounds like the kids have been let out of school early on this forum. Why not try a few facts to support your view instead of just throwing opinions around.
Please share any metric on the Sequoia that makes my following statement wrong "The current GM model I am familiar with (GMC Denali XL) has greater performance in every category when compared to the Sequoia".
Actually on several other forums calculations have been shown using data from multiple sites that between 30 and 50% of SUV owners tow today or are planning to based on the number of registered boats, jet skis, campers, horse trailers, snowmobiles and other recreational trailers. Those figures take into account towing done by PU Trucks.
Even if you look at all the performance criteria of a Yukon vs a Sequoia the GMC wins out in almost every category. Please share any data that supports a different view. If you compare to a regular Denali the comparison is even more in favor of the GMC.
Your welcome to a difference of opinion when discussing esthetics however the vast majority of those interested in a F/S SUV find the GM models more attractive based on sales.
Why did the Sequoia rank below the Tahoe in the JD Powers quality ratings?
There's no questioning that the GM model's provide more power, payload and towing capacity than the sequoia.
And isn't it interested that the much more "gigantic" Yukon XL gets the same gas mileage with much more power and space than a Sequoia.
Pete, in your write-up above, you state the following: "Why did the Sequoia rank below the Tahoe in the JD Powers quality ratings?"
Now, can you please provide a link that proves this statement to be true ?
As regards to the comparisons between the Seq and the Yukon XL or Denali, we've had these before. In the final analysis, it comes down to what the buyer wants in a vehicle. Is it more towing or more umphhh... Is it more refinement or more luxury features ? Is it more cargo and people space ? Is it all about the out-the-door $$$, etc.. etc.. In all of these categories, both the Yukon XL, Denali XL, and the Sequoia would more than hold their own for a would-be buyer.
To everyone their choice !
BUT, I hope you can answer my question on a link to the JD Power survey which showed that the Sequoia ranked below the Tahoe is initial quality survey....
As a longtime lurker, I recall this discussion from a while ago. Here is a link to the press release on the JD Power web page. At the bottom of the release it lists the top three full size SUV's in initial quality as the Expedition, Suburban, and the Tahoe. People here argued that the Sequoia was too new to be included in the survey. I assumed it was included in the survey since it was available in the fall when the 2001's were coming out. Without it actually being listed below the Tahoe we may never know.
yes you are correct, we've had this argument before without a clear answer. Even your link below proves it.
Notice the title to the article ? I guess that speaks for itself, doesn't it ? If you scroll to the bottom of the page, notice how many 2001 Assembly Plant awards went to Toyota ? Notice who won the overall Platinum Award for best assembly plant in the world ?
Well your guess is as good as mine :-)
Now, contrast all of the above with the F/S SUV survey for initial quality which the Expy won and which others will purport to INCLUDE the Toyota Sequoia. Without seeing it in print form, it cannot be believed that the Toyota Sequoia will rank BELOW the Chevy Tahoe in initial quality !!! Remember that the award was released May 17, 2001, and would include survey done as of summer of 2000. The Sequoia started appearing in dealer showrooms in mid-late October, 2000.
Sooooo ? With the above FACTS, think the Sequoia was surveyed in the May 2001 JDP initial Q press release ?
Maybe heatwave3 knows this for a FACT, since he is a stickler for FACTS over opinions. So, I am still waiting for him to post the link that actually prints the statement that "THE TAHOE WAS RANKED AHEAD OF THE SEQUOIA IN INITIAL QUALITY"
Here's another link that has some more details for both the Sequoia and the Yukon XL. No entry for the Denali. Pick your manufacturer then the model selection appears. It looks like same rating for both except
for style where the Sequoia had 4 circles vs the 3 for the Yukon XL.
If you place your mouse on each category it will show where the ratings was taken.
Since I own neither a Tahoe nor a Sequoia I am not going to dive into this debate since I have no vested interest.
Maybe you can expand on one of your comments for me however. You stated that the award would include surveys done as of summer 2000. That sounds reasonable given how long it would probably take to compile the data. Yet they call it 2001 initial quality. Are they referrring to 2001 MY vehicles or the 2001 publish date? Any idea?
aix91's message got in before mine. Very informative link. Leads me to believe that they may have actually gotten feedback on the 2001 model year vehicles.
you asked: "Maybe you can expand on one of your comments for me however. You stated that the award would include surveys done as of summer 2000. That sounds reasonable given how long it would probably take to compile the data. Yet they call it 2001 initial quality. Are they referrring to 2001 MY vehicles or the 2001 publish date? Any idea?"
methinks the answer is the former ! i.e., the data refer to MY 2001 vehicles as of end of summer 2000 survey period. That does not preclude JDP adding to their database as consumers become familiar with a new car entry into the market (e.g. the Seq).
But, more to the point as provided by aix91. A quick "survey" (no pun intended) of the point-and-click on the link showed the following:
If you go by the star rankings ONLY, shouldn't the Yukon be ahead of the Sub and the Tahoe ? In fact, going by the star rankings alone you'd be hard pressed to deduce first-to-last amongst the above F/S SUV's. Hence, there has to be more to the star rankings than meets the eye here....
Here is another survey example to consider:
In the Luxury SUV section: Acura MDX: 2 star * 1 category; 3 star * 2 categories; 4 stars * 3 categories
Can you deduce why the MDX did not make the top 3 in this survey ? Yet, the MDX has won a few awards since it came out (Motor Trend, for example)... Consider also that the MDX came out about the same time as the Sequoia ! That is why one has to be careful in suggesting that the May 2001 press release included results of the Seq (and the MDX in the luxury SUV category) in the summer 2000 survey.
In my opinion, initial quality does not mean very much. I expect my vehicles NOT to break down during the first three years, and if they do, they are covered by the warranty anyway. Indeed, in all of my 8 Toyota vehicles so far, NOT one broke down within the first three years, except for a "vacuum hose or vacuum valve" that was replaced in my van in 1988. My daughter's almost 5-year old Corolla (90,000 miles)has never had anything done except for oil change. My 14 year old van (180,000 miles) only recently lost its alternator, starter and much more recently the AC. For most new vehicles, the owners are happy during the first 90 days. My Sequoia has 10,000 miles so far and I did not expect to complain about anything this soon.
There are lemons, of course, for ANY model of a vehicle. It's a hassle to take them back to the dealer for warranty work.
I value "Quality" down the road: three years and beyond. This is when the boys are separated from the men, so to speak. If one is leasing, the long term quality is almost not an issue. There are many good vehicles out there, and I just happen to believe in Toyota for the long haul, and none of my vehicles had failed me so far.
I'm sure there are many happy stories about car ownership too, domestic or imports.
heatwave, the steering wheel offcenter (poor workmanship) was present in the 2001 I looked at and is the same as far as I know in all the GM trucks of that type (unless you get a bench seat because then you can slide to the right). Its shown in this link for the Yukon.
I see what you mean by the off center steering wheel. While I agree that it could be an issue for some people, it is not poor workmanship as you stated. The vehicle was designed that way, for whatever reason. I would guess that it was some type of component packaging issue. Now if you want to call it poor engineering, I could not argue with that....
In my opinion, Toyota will gouge the consumers for their perceive "quality".
I'll take $7K off the MSRP from GM SUVs anyday. That's $7K instantly in my pocket. While some of you prefer Seq to look "cool", good luck in making those monthly payments.
As for resale value of GM vs Seq, there are MANY more Yukons/Tahoes on the rode than there is Seq. Therefore, a simple supply and demand will dictate the market price.
Whether or not GM SUVs maintain their resale, at least I instantly saved $7K off my purchase price. Right now, a brand new loaded Tahoe can be had for $31K. That's $10K cheaper than the Seq.
In this slowing economy, a penny save is a penny earn. Some prefer to spend LOT more just to look "cool".
I think we have a different price structure in Canada. I got my Sequoia for about $48000 cdn. I looked at a 2001 Tahoe LT and the sticker was $53000. Now I know we don't pay sticker but I still think you'd net out similar to the Sequoia for a similar vehicle (I have a well-optioned SR5). This makes the Sequoia a better value if the Toyota resale value model applies to the Sequoia.
Also, another problem not listed there is the cold air blowing through at the passenger side seat in the winter. I'm not sure if they have a fix for that yet.
If you get both the yukon and the sequoia with a 100,000 mile/7 yr warranty you will likely (i'm guessing here but may not be far off) end up paying the same price. For GM that warranty is much higher.
I would like to find out something. I am very curious as to the differences in gas mileage on the 4WD when it is engaged versus when it is not. First, let me remind you all that the Sequoia can be left in 4WD all the time with no damage or negative consequences in ride, handling or performance. In fact, there are dry pavement conditions that the 4WD will help.
If any of you are taking a long trip this weekend, drive one leg in 4WD and the next in 2WD as long as the driving conditions are similar. Check your mileage, but not on the trip computer. Do it long hand.
There are a couple of reasons I am curious about this. The primary one is that I have a customer of mine who actually claims a slight *increase* in fuel economy when in 4WD. I would like to confirm this. If this is correct, it would remove any reason for taking it out of 4WD ever.
I need some help from owners of SUVs, please. Owners only!
Here's my situation: My wife and I are having our first children, twins, in about 2 weeks. We currently own 2 cars: a '93 Buick LeSabre and a '96 Toyota Camry.
I have vowed to never own a minivan, and so the next obvious choice is an SUV. The cars will be too small, especially going on trips. I have looked at the Sequoia and the Yukon, and briefly at the Suburban. In fact, this weekend, I'll be spending a lot of time at the dealerships driving, inspecting, talking, etc.
We will use it mainly for hauling the family around, along with friends from time to time, and for vacations which we take 2-3 times a year. We live in Florida, and visit family in Alabama, spend time in the mountains in Tennessee, and are planning on going out west within the next 1-2 years. Our travel time will probably increase over the next 2-3 years, and I plan on keeping whatever I choose for at least 3-5 years. We probably won't tow anything since we have nothing to tow. However, that may change in the next 2 years, but that is not my primary concern.
I would like to hear from owners of ALL full size SUVs, but what I want to hear is strictly their personal experiences with their own SUV; no bashing of the competition!!
How have you used your SUV?
How many people do you usually carry around?
How much luggage space do you have?
How much room is there in the 3rd row of seats?
How much trouble is it to get into the 3rd row of seats?
How does the vehicle perform in bad weather conditions? (rain, snow, ice, etc.)
What do you NOT like about your SUV?
I would also like to know approx. how much you paid for yours and what model it is along with the options you purchased. That way, I can better compare apples to apples.
Any comments would be much appreciated. As I stated earlier, I will be doing some investigating this weekend, and will check back on Monday to see what responses I get.
Also, I'd like to know of some good websites for good vehicle reviews besides this one and Consumer Reports.
Are you sure you're not a professional researcher? Are you posting these same questions on other forums? I think you would find severe bias if you just direct your questions only to the Sequoia forum. Moreover, as you seem to be interested in any SUV, it may be problematic for you because most discussions here are related to the Sequoia.
I went through much of the same research you did and had narrowed the choice down to the Seq and Yukon XL. I have 5 children and so needed the space. The final decision came when I put the Seq and XL side by side and had my kids get into and out of the 3rd seat. The hands down choice was the Seq. They felt they had more room and the seats were more comfortable. I was also very concerned about the rail on the floor for the folding seat. I was afraid that one of my kids would catch a toe on the rail while getting out and end up face down on the pavement. I ended up with a Seq LTD with all the bells and whistles for $1k over invoice. I do wish the Seq had a little more cargo space, but I ended up getting a Thule carrier for the roof and that works really well.
I've been in several Subs and knew that I didn't want one. When I realized the Seq. was available we went and bought it. I've had 7 adults comfortably in it. My brother commented that he'd happily spend 10-12 hours back there on a roadtrip. We bought a 4x4 LMTD at a little under 2k over invoice. The cargo space is less than some over FS SUV but it fits in the garage! Big plus for us in the snow. We plan on getting a carrier for the hitch as the roof is too high. I love how easily the seats come out. We usually just take out the last row for luggage since it's just the two of us. Good luck.
Just picked up 2002 SR5 loaded. I was under the impression that the convenience package included the keyless remote as in 2001, but found out the hard way that it does not!!! Dealer is looking into my options but it was too late to find out before I left the lot. the car is beautiful, finish and feel is great. Too bad Toyota left a sour feeling with this change of options package which the dealer I believe honestly was unaware. How can you sell a 40K car and not have keyless remote as part of the upgrade package. On this point I feel deceived. What should I do?
"The final decision came when I put the Seq and XL side by side and had my kids get into and out of the 3rd seat. The hands down choice was the Seq. They felt they had more room and the seats were more comfortable."
"I've had 7 adults comfortably in it. My brother commented that he'd happily spend 10-12 hours back there on a roadtrip. "
That sounds very strange that the keyless entry system is no longer in the option package. How did you buy the truck? Special order? Did you test drive one with the remote available. I like to test drive the vehicle I purchase if at all possible. That's what I did with our loaded SR5. Even got to take it home and look it over for a couple hours.
Dealers have known from some time now that keyless is not part of the convenience package for 2002. KEAT is the factory code and it is also an option from the port facility in the southeast. I do not believe the factory keyless entry can be installed by the dealer at this time but you may want to check after market. I strongly believe that who you buy from is just as important as what you buy when you are dealing with high ticket items. I suggest buyers seek out sales people with a proven track record with knowledge of the vehicle and its options to make the transaction a pleasant experience. You wouldn't invest your money with a stock broker that didn't have the proper knowledge so why torture yourself with the pain of dealing with a sales person that is nice but can't get the job done for you. It is their job to know what is going on with these vehicles.
Thinking of upgrading my dash to wood. Has anyone used the kit from Toyotaguys, it's a genuine Toyota up grade.If anyone has used this how does it fit,and how's the quality. Also is there any better ones on the market,and if so from whom? Thanks for any information.
I'm a rookie at this so, I'm looking for input. I checked out a '02 SR5 yesterday with an msrp of $36,636, dealer dropped price to, $33,493 Options include: roof rack, curtain/side air bags, captain chairs, alloy wheel pkg., convenience pkg., dual a/c, premium stereo system, keyless entry, front fog/driving lamp, & 5 piece mat set. 1)does this sound like an ok deal? 2)extended warranty, yes/no? I will soon be a daddy of 3, need the room but, don't want a van.
I just got off the phone with Ryan @ TuscaloosaToyota.Com and he gave me a price of 39,900 Plus 119.50 Clerical Fee, Tax, & Title for a 4x4 Limited Sequoia (Silver) Fully Loaded. It was a Demo and only has 6,700 Miles. He said that this vehicle would probabley not be arround long so I would appreciate any input I can get. Thanks.
Forget the worrying about the remote - - it is only a $245 option. It is the best quality product out there and you get what you pay for. I have a 2000 SR5 4Runner which is the best car I have ever owned. My wife needed an 8 seater for carpool and we shopped the market. From head to toe, the Toyota product is the best on the market. I looked at the Suburban and was appalled at how difficult and dangerous it was to flip up the second row to get to the back. Plus, the doors on it didn't line up!!! I am trading a Windstar minivan that has been in the shop 9 times in 2 years - - - I WILL NEVER BUY A FORD AGAIN - I lost 50% value in 2 years..... I got $3000 off list on the Sequoia and have the piece of mind that it will hold its value, be trouble free, and I will never have to worry about my wife breaking down on the highway. You get what you pay for - - - at the end of the day the piece of mind you pay for a Toyota is worth it....
From trading the Ford Windstar van, to looking at the Sub, to buying the SR5 for the piece of mind in having a lasting vehicle, you sound like me. I can't agree more. ANd BTW, I won't buy another Ford product either (at least not any time soon).
We've put just over 4K on our SR5, and thought we'd share some views. So far, we really love it. It has stayed quiet, comfortable, powerful and trouble-free. We've hauled seven adults around comfortably (with lots of compliments).
One of the biggest debates has seemed to be about towing capacity/ability. We just completed a week-long vacation in the Florida Keys, and towed our boat both ways. We took four adults with luggage. The boat, trailer and equipment weigh about 6,000 lbs., and the boat has a hardtop, so we figured it would be a good test for the Sequoia. Since all of the driving was in Florida, it stayed flat except for overpasses. It was exceptionally stable and comfortable, even with the heavy load. We stayed on interstates most of the way, and were able to run 70-75 mph without problems. At 70mph, we got around 10mpg, and at 75 it dropped to about 8.5mpg (we averaged 9mpg for the towing part of the trip). This was both indicated and calculated, so the gauge seems reasonably accurate, at least on ours. I left it in O/D the whole trip. It would stay in 4th most of the time, except climbing the overpasses, and when trying to hold 75mph. Overall, 70mph worked the best, even though it was still working pretty hard. A little more torque could have helped at speed, but I've said that about every vehicle we've owned (about 750 ft. lbs. would be nice!). No problem with accelerating from stops, though, or even just increasing speed. The trailer had surge brakes, but the Sequoia felt as if it would have stopped it without problems (I would always have trailer brakes at this weight, even if just for emergencies).
Overall, the Sequoia has done nothing to give us any regrets about the purchase. Based on our research and testing, the only "weak" spot we had concerns with was towing ability (compared to Expy and Yukon), and that now seems unfounded. Sure, we'd like a little more power if we towed the boat long distances regularly (we don't), but it is a far superior vehicle overall.
Regarding towing, that is not in my league as i do not tow much. I focus on number of passengers, inside comfort, and quality. By the way, my 85 year old father just bought a Camry (he was an Oldsmobile fan) and said he wished he bought Toyotas years ago!!!! He said it was the best car he had in 65 years of driving - - just change the oil and add gas. I am a toyota fan for piece of mind for my family...
oac3: The comments on the JD Powers ratings were from a post on another forum in which one of the posters had inquired directly to Mike Greywitt, the contact for the JD Powers automotive survey (which was cited earlier) to determine if the Sequoia was included.
The response he received was that the Sequoia was included. Its actual ranking is information only available to the manufacturer since it was not one of the top three. The Expy #1, Suburban #2 and Tahoe #3 were in the same survey. The first three award winners are the only models where the rankings are provided to the public (unless the manufacturer decides to make the ranking below the top three public).
As stated before, the Sequoia is a very nice vehicle and Toyota is a great manufacturer (I think my Avalon is one of the best made mid-size passenger cars available). IMO, having driven large SUVs for 15 years the Sequoia has not yet hit the mark.
JD Powers came to the same conclusion on quality. None of the specs of the Sequoia standup to a Yukon XL, let alone the Denali XL. The Sequoia has a slight advantage in cargo space volume over a Yukon, however if volume matters the XL has a very clear advantage over the Sequoia.
Aesthetics are different for everyone and the Sequoia could easily be more appealing to some consumers than the GM models, however by every quantifiable measure the Denali models excel.
I know some will want to throw flames, however your energies might be better spent on research if you think I am wrong about where the Sequoia is superior to a Denali (XL) which was my first comparison.
thanks for the response. i did read a post where someone was requesting the same info from jd power's contact person. that poster was yet to receive a response from jdp. reading yours above, it appears i may have missed something, can you please pprovide the link to the post on that other forum with mike greywith's response on the jd power survey ? i'd like us to put this debate to rest, for good.
btw, i totally agree with toyotatoys on the whole concept of quality. to me, it simply appears that the logistics of a 3-month initial quality survey for MY 2001 f/s suv's versus the mid-october release of the sequoia, just does not add up to the latter being included in the survey. just me, i can be wrong though. i guess we'll see if heatwave3 can provide us the link to the response from mike greywith of jd power's.
Went into one of the local Toyo dealerships today and offered $500 over invoice for a 2002 limited. I was laughed out of the showroom. The salesman said they are no where near dealing the Sequoia's that low and offered me a 2001 with 800 miles for a great deal of $2300 off sticker. I told him I would wait for the deal to come, but he said it would be 3 to 5 years before they would accept an offer of $500 over invoice. I guess I have a wait in front of me.....They had 5 or 6 on the lot
I bought and installed the Toyota wood dash kit from toyotaguys and my wife and I both love it. The fit and finish is perfect. the pieces fit over the old flawlessly and really classes up the interior. It's not too much wood, just enough. Just wipe the areas with some alcohol and snap the parts on, the install could not have been easier!!! great kit. You should also try out their door sill guards, I installed them and they look great!!!
Towing My family and I just returned to Philly from our vacation in nags head, north carolina (about 300 miles each way). I had five adults, two children, baggage, and towed a 4500 lb, 22 foot center console fishing boat down. The truck performed flawlessly and everyone raved about how comfortable it was to ride in for 7 hours straight.
The JD Power initial quality report is absolutely meaningless. Their numbers come from customer surveys of people who owned the trucks for 3 months. They are not long term capability, reliabilty, or quality tests based on any known engineering standards other than customer opinion, which may be perfect as long as they got the color they wanted. You get great information from the general public like, I like it because it's black, or gee it's fast. Wait for consumer reports to put about 25000 miles on them and then check for build quality. Not to mention the fact that the GM's have had decades to work bugs out on their SUVs ( like the right glue for their stick on ground effects), the toyota is a brand new truck and you must understand that when you purchase a brand new vehicle model it will take some time for refinement. Give toyota a couple of years in the full size market and this truck will make the GMs look like the flintstones car.
Comments
Surely, the internet has leveled the playing field. Unfortunately, a lot of consumers still have not availed of the wealth of information. On the other hand, it's amazing how many internet sales people who still don't get it and continue to treat internet customers like crap. Fortunately for us, we don't have to sweat to get a good deal.
Congratulations on an excellent buy.
Do I think that my experience with Jeep is grounds for labeling all domestics as unreliable? No, I think that the domestics speak for themselves. I think the knowledge I have from owning domestics and being aware of problems my friends and relatives have had with domestics is grounds for labeling all domestics as unreliable.
I think the work ethic in the United States is somewhat lacking. I think that GM could put out a great product it they put their mind to it but it was to easy for them for too many years and I think they now have a long way to go.
My family and friends have owned both and the imports come out on top. They're more reliable and perform better. Of course, the imports are not perfect, no company is but the chances of having problems with them is much less. My previous vehicle was a 94 Jeep Cherokee. In the first 3 months of ownership, the transmission seal cracked, the AC made groaning sounds, the clutch was stiff & squeaky, etc...
The current GM model I am familiar with (GMC Denali XL) has greater performance in every category when compared to the Sequoia. Substantially more interior space, more towing, more luxury features, more payload, AWD, nearly the same fuel economy, more hp, more torque, better sound system and all for about the same price (after negotiating). The quality, fit and finish is excellent with nothing to report in the first 8000 miles other than 2 oil changes.
I'm no GM freak as I own a Toyota Avalon (which is also an excellent vehicle) and a BMW 740il (which speaks for itself).
1999 LC with 18,000 miles for 41k or a new Limited?
No off roading here...wife's truck to haul the 3 kids around...no minivan here either!
Wrong
"Substantially more interior space"
So does a school bus which is about as well finished as a Yukon XL
"more towing"
For the 1% of owners that will NEED that.
"more luxury features"
Which other people would call gaudy
"more hp, more torque"
The rattles and clanging comes free
"The quality, fit and finish is excellent"
Compared to other GM POS's.
Please share any metric on the Sequoia that makes my following statement wrong "The current GM model I am familiar with (GMC Denali XL) has greater performance in every category when compared to the Sequoia".
Actually on several other forums calculations have been shown using data from multiple sites that between 30 and 50% of SUV owners tow today or are planning to based on the number of registered boats, jet skis, campers, horse trailers, snowmobiles and other recreational trailers. Those figures take into account towing done by PU Trucks.
Even if you look at all the performance criteria of a Yukon vs a Sequoia the GMC wins out in almost every category. Please share any data that supports a different view. If you compare to a regular Denali the comparison is even more in favor of the GMC.
Your welcome to a difference of opinion when discussing esthetics however the vast majority of those interested in a F/S SUV find the GM models more attractive based on sales.
Why did the Sequoia rank below the Tahoe in the JD Powers quality ratings?
There's no questioning that the GM model's provide more power, payload and towing capacity than the sequoia.
And isn't it interested that the much more "gigantic" Yukon XL gets the same gas mileage with much more power and space than a Sequoia.
Now, can you please provide a link that proves this statement to be true ?
As regards to the comparisons between the Seq and the Yukon XL or Denali, we've had these before. In the final analysis, it comes down to what the buyer wants in a vehicle. Is it more towing or more umphhh... Is it more refinement or more luxury features ? Is it more cargo and people space ? Is it all about the out-the-door $$$, etc.. etc.. In all of these categories, both the Yukon XL, Denali XL, and the Sequoia would more than hold their own for a would-be buyer.
To everyone their choice !
BUT, I hope you can answer my question on a link to the JD Power survey which showed that the Sequoia ranked below the Tahoe is initial quality survey....
Here is the link.
http://www.jdpa.com/studies/pressrelease.asp?StudyID=517&CatID=1
Notice the title to the article ? I guess that speaks for itself, doesn't it ? If you scroll to the bottom of the page, notice how many 2001 Assembly Plant awards went to Toyota ? Notice who won the overall Platinum Award for best assembly plant in the world ?
Well your guess is as good as mine :-)
Now, contrast all of the above with the F/S SUV survey for initial quality which the Expy won and which others will purport to INCLUDE the Toyota Sequoia. Without seeing it in print form, it cannot be believed that the Toyota Sequoia will rank BELOW the Chevy Tahoe in initial quality !!! Remember that the award was released May 17, 2001, and would include survey done as of summer of 2000. The Sequoia started appearing in dealer showrooms in mid-late October, 2000.
Sooooo ? With the above FACTS, think the Sequoia was surveyed in the May 2001 JDP initial Q press release ?
Maybe heatwave3 knows this for a FACT, since he is a stickler for FACTS over opinions. So, I am still waiting for him to post the link that actually prints the statement that "THE TAHOE WAS RANKED AHEAD OF THE SEQUOIA IN INITIAL QUALITY"
It's not too much to ask, is it ?
for style where the Sequoia had 4 circles vs the 3 for the Yukon XL.
If you place your mouse on each category it will show where the ratings was taken.
http://www.jdpower.com/auto/jdpa_ratings/FindJdAwards.asp
Maybe you can expand on one of your comments for me however. You stated that the award would include surveys done as of summer 2000. That sounds reasonable given how long it would probably take to compile the data. Yet they call it 2001 initial quality. Are they referrring to 2001 MY vehicles or the 2001 publish date? Any idea?
aix91's message got in before mine. Very informative link. Leads me to believe that they may have actually gotten feedback on the 2001 model year vehicles.
Quality? 4 for the Yukon vs 3 for the Sequoia.
methinks the answer is the former ! i.e., the data refer to MY 2001 vehicles as of end of summer 2000 survey period. That does not preclude JDP adding to their database as consumers become familiar with a new car entry into the market (e.g. the Seq).
But, more to the point as provided by aix91. A quick "survey" (no pun intended) of the point-and-click on the link showed the following:
Expedition (winner): 3 stars * 5 categories; 5 star * 1 category
Suburban (2nd place): 3 stars * 5 categories; 4 star * 1 category
Tahoe (3rd place): 3 stars *5 categories; 4 star * 1 category
Sequoia: 3 stars * 5 categories; 4 star * 1 category
Yukon: 3 stars * 4 categories; 4 stars * 2 categories
Yukon XL: 3 stars * 6 categories
If you go by the star rankings ONLY, shouldn't the Yukon be ahead of the Sub and the Tahoe ? In fact, going by the star rankings alone you'd be hard pressed to deduce first-to-last amongst the above F/S SUV's. Hence, there has to be more to the star rankings than meets the eye here....
Here is another survey example to consider:
In the Luxury SUV section:
Acura MDX: 2 star * 1 category; 3 star * 2 categories; 4 stars * 3 categories
versus
RX300 (winner): 5 stars * 2 categories; 4 stars * 3 categories; 3 stars * 1 category
LX470 (2nd place): 5 stars * 1 category; 4 stars * 3 categories; 3 stars * 2 categories
QX4 (3rd place): 4 stars * 2 categories; 3 stars * 4 categories
Can you deduce why the MDX did not make the top 3 in this survey ? Yet, the MDX has won a few awards since it came out (Motor Trend, for example)... Consider also that the MDX came out about the same time as the Sequoia ! That is why one has to be careful in suggesting that the May 2001 press release included results of the Seq (and the MDX in the luxury SUV category) in the summer 2000 survey.
There are lemons, of course, for ANY model of a vehicle. It's a hassle to take them back to the dealer for warranty work.
I value "Quality" down the road: three years and beyond. This is when the boys are separated from the men, so to speak. If one is leasing, the long term quality is almost not an issue. There are many good vehicles out there, and I just happen to believe in Toyota for the long haul, and none of my vehicles had failed me so far.
I'm sure there are many happy stories about car ownership too, domestic or imports.
http://www.mindspring.com/~clifford/defect.htm
I didn't like that (i.e., sitting to the left looking at the pillar).
I'll take $7K off the MSRP from GM SUVs anyday. That's $7K instantly in my pocket. While some of you prefer Seq to look "cool", good luck in making those monthly payments.
As for resale value of GM vs Seq, there are MANY more Yukons/Tahoes on the rode than there is Seq. Therefore, a simple supply and demand will dictate the market price.
Whether or not GM SUVs maintain their resale, at least I instantly saved $7K off my purchase price. Right now, a brand new loaded Tahoe can be had for $31K. That's $10K cheaper than the Seq.
In this slowing economy, a penny save is a penny earn. Some prefer to spend LOT more just to look "cool".
This makes the Sequoia a better value if the Toyota resale value model applies to the Sequoia.
If any of you are taking a long trip this weekend, drive one leg in 4WD and the next in 2WD as long as the driving conditions are similar. Check your mileage, but not on the trip computer. Do it long hand.
There are a couple of reasons I am curious about this. The primary one is that I have a customer of mine who actually claims a slight *increase* in fuel economy when in 4WD. I would like to confirm this. If this is correct, it would remove any reason for taking it out of 4WD ever.
Let me know how this works out. Thanks.
Here's my situation: My wife and I are having our first children, twins, in about 2 weeks. We currently own 2 cars: a '93 Buick LeSabre and a '96 Toyota Camry.
I have vowed to never own a minivan, and so the next obvious choice is an SUV. The cars will be too small, especially going on trips. I have looked at the Sequoia and the Yukon, and briefly at the Suburban. In fact, this weekend, I'll be spending a lot of time at the dealerships driving, inspecting, talking, etc.
We will use it mainly for hauling the family around, along with friends from time to time, and for vacations which we take 2-3 times a year. We live in Florida, and visit family in Alabama, spend time in the mountains in Tennessee, and are planning on going out west within the next 1-2 years. Our travel time will probably increase over the next 2-3 years, and I plan on keeping whatever I choose for at least 3-5 years. We probably won't tow anything since we have nothing to tow. However, that may change in the next 2 years, but that is not my primary concern.
I would like to hear from owners of ALL full size SUVs, but what I want to hear is strictly their personal experiences with their own SUV; no bashing of the competition!!
How have you used your SUV?
How many people do you usually carry around?
How much luggage space do you have?
How much room is there in the 3rd row of seats?
How much trouble is it to get into the 3rd row of seats?
How does the vehicle perform in bad weather conditions? (rain, snow, ice, etc.)
What do you NOT like about your SUV?
I would also like to know approx. how much you paid for yours and what model it is along with the options you purchased. That way, I can better compare apples to apples.
Any comments would be much appreciated. As I stated earlier, I will be doing some investigating this weekend, and will check back on Monday to see what responses I get.
Also, I'd like to know of some good websites for good vehicle reviews besides this one and Consumer Reports.
Thanks!
Good luck with your research.
Good luck on your search.
"The final decision came when I put the Seq and XL side by side and had my kids get into and out of the 3rd seat. The hands down choice was the Seq. They felt they had more room and the seats were more comfortable."
"I've had 7 adults comfortably in it. My brother commented that he'd happily spend 10-12 hours back there on a roadtrip. "
a genuine Toyota up grade.If anyone has used this how does it fit,and how's the quality.
Also is there any better ones on the market,and if so from whom? Thanks for any information.
roof rack, curtain/side air bags, captain chairs, alloy wheel pkg., convenience pkg., dual a/c, premium stereo system, keyless entry, front fog/driving lamp, & 5 piece mat set. 1)does this sound like an ok deal? 2)extended warranty, yes/no? I will soon be a daddy of 3, need the room but, don't want a van.
One of the biggest debates has seemed to be about towing capacity/ability. We just completed a week-long vacation in the Florida Keys, and towed our boat both ways. We took four adults with luggage. The boat, trailer and equipment weigh about 6,000 lbs., and the boat has a hardtop, so we figured it would be a good test for the Sequoia. Since all of the driving was in Florida, it stayed flat except for overpasses. It was exceptionally stable and comfortable, even with the heavy load. We stayed on interstates most of the way, and were able to run 70-75 mph without problems. At 70mph, we got around 10mpg, and at 75 it dropped to about 8.5mpg (we averaged 9mpg for the towing part of the trip). This was both indicated and calculated, so the gauge seems reasonably accurate, at least on ours. I left it in O/D the whole trip. It would stay in 4th most of the time, except climbing the overpasses, and when trying to hold 75mph. Overall, 70mph worked the best, even though it was still working pretty hard. A little more torque could have helped at speed, but I've said that about every vehicle we've owned (about 750 ft. lbs. would be nice!). No problem with accelerating from stops, though, or even just increasing speed. The trailer had surge brakes, but the Sequoia felt as if it would have stopped it without problems (I would always have trailer brakes at this weight, even if just for emergencies).
Overall, the Sequoia has done nothing to give us any regrets about the purchase. Based on our research and testing, the only "weak" spot we had concerns with was towing ability (compared to Expy and Yukon), and that now seems unfounded. Sure, we'd like a little more power if we towed the boat long distances regularly (we don't), but it is a far superior vehicle overall.
Hope this info helps potential shoppers!
The response he received was that the Sequoia was included. Its actual ranking is information only available to the manufacturer since it was not one of the top three. The Expy #1, Suburban #2 and Tahoe #3 were in the same survey. The first three award winners are the only models where the rankings are provided to the public (unless the manufacturer decides to make the ranking below the top three public).
As stated before, the Sequoia is a very nice vehicle and Toyota is a great manufacturer (I think my Avalon is one of the best made mid-size passenger cars available). IMO, having driven large SUVs for 15 years the Sequoia has not yet hit the mark.
JD Powers came to the same conclusion on quality. None of the specs of the Sequoia standup to a Yukon XL, let alone the Denali XL. The Sequoia has a slight advantage in cargo space volume over a Yukon, however if volume matters the XL has a very clear advantage over the Sequoia.
Aesthetics are different for everyone and the Sequoia could easily be more appealing to some consumers than the GM models, however by every quantifiable measure the Denali models excel.
I know some will want to throw flames, however your energies might be better spent on research if you think I am wrong about where the Sequoia is superior to a Denali (XL) which was my first comparison.
btw, i totally agree with toyotatoys on the whole concept of quality. to me, it simply appears that the logistics of a 3-month initial quality survey for MY 2001 f/s suv's versus the mid-october release of the sequoia, just does not add up to the latter being included in the survey. just me, i can be wrong though. i guess we'll see if heatwave3 can provide us the link to the response from mike greywith of jd power's.
hope you all had a great labor day (US) !
I told him I would wait for the deal to come, but he said it would be 3 to 5 years before they would accept an offer of $500 over invoice. I guess I have a wait in front of me.....They had 5 or 6 on the lot
Towing
My family and I just returned to Philly from our vacation in nags head, north carolina (about 300 miles each way). I had five adults, two children, baggage, and towed a 4500 lb, 22 foot center console fishing boat down. The truck performed flawlessly and everyone raved about how comfortable it was to ride in for 7 hours straight.