Last post on Sep 19, 2008 at 12:04 PM
You are in the Ford Excursion
What is this discussion about?
Ford Excursion, Chevrolet Suburban, GMC Yukon XL, SUV
#20 of 423 Response to Joe
Jan 31, 2000 (8:38 pm)
I don't buy the claim of better REAL LIFE towing; 1st of all, there isn't a whole lot of data anywhere to support your claim, and 2nd, from an engineering perspective, the Excursion has "make me tow" written all over it. From what most of the people here and elsewhere say, the weight of the towing vehicle is critical to a safe REAL LIFE tow, so how can a 5000-5500lb Sub hold up to an 8000+ lb Ex? That extra weight (while it may act to reduce the total, hence "only" a 10,000 lb rating), acts, according to the majority of towers, to stabilize the object being towed. Less sway, better control during manuevers and braking. Think about it, the 5500-lb Sub is wrestling with twice its weight, while the Ex is a lot closer to 1 or 1.25:1. That's got to show up in a drivers ability to control the mass under a variety of conditions.
Yes, you are right, I did not compare to the 1500 Sub. And rightly so. In fact, not even the 2500 is really a fair comparison. Both Subs are light duty rated trucks. Suburban really doesn't make a model that matches up to the Excursion. And by the way, they do make a 2500; go to GMC's web site, you'll see em there....1500 4x2, 1500 4x4, 2500 4x2 and 2500 4x4 (they call it the Yukon XL now, GMC will not sell a Sub in 2000). I don't see the diesel option there, but I think you can get that too. You'll also notice that the standard towing is 8100 lbs, not 10,000 like the Ex. They can pump the Sub up by modifying it and squeeze out 10,100. I would guess (I really don't know) that similar mods to the Ex could push its limit up also.
I know you still believe the Sub is a better vehicle, and you probably also know I like the Ex better. I want a solid, rugged looking, huge vehicle that still has its truck roots intact; that's the Ex.
#21 of 423 j2smell - gas mileage - important
Jan 31, 2000 (8:59 pm)
Either your engine is not broken in yet to see better numbers than 13.5, or the Suburban is that much heavier than an extended cab Z71 Silverado?
I'm getting 16 average in my 99 Silverado. I've got a 2000 Suburban on order right now. If I knew that it would only get 13 I would not have ordered it.
Do you see it getting any better or not? Thanks
Jan 31, 2000 (9:12 pm)
Regarding Towing - I am going by what was reported in both MotorTrend and Car&Driver a few months ago where they compared the two vehicles. They loaded up a trailer with the same weight and ran side by side comparisons. The Suburban pulled away from the Ford in each test. This was also on the C&D tv show a few months ago.
Obviously I have not tried it for myself. I have test driven an Excursion, but it felt too much like a SuperDuty F250 ride to me. I actually do not mind the looks of it, I just don't want to spend $40k to get bounced around in a truck. I am looking for comfort first.
What is the gas milage like on it? I would guess in reality about 11
Feb 01, 2000 (6:30 am)
The gas mileage seems to cover a large range depending on driving habits. Like I said before, I have read all of the posts here and at Ford-diesel.com, and here's what to expect from an Excursion:
Stop & Go City Driving: 9-10
Highway Driving at 55-65: 13-14
Highway Driving at 70-80: 11-12
I haven't read much worse than 9-10 without a load, but I have seen some high numbers that I can't explain. One guy in Ford-diesel.com (I think his screen name is wawwi or something like that) claims 15-16 ON AVERAGE with his V-10 (NOT the diesel), and has a link to his web page with all the data. All in all, I think the average guy out there is gonna get about 12-13 (unless you really have a heavy foot).
As far as the towing goes, I didn't read the article you mention, but it makes sense, i.e., both motors have roughly 300hp (if they tested the gas versions), but the Excursion is heavier to start, so it is at a disadvantage. Be interesting to see how the diesels would match up. Anyway, if speed/acceleration is the key factor, the Burb might be better. I was focusing more on the safety factor. I think a lot of guys here that have towed heavy loads will say that safety is more important than bolting out of the gate.
Yes, you are right about the ride; the Excursion is stiffer. If ride smoothness is high on your list, then the Burb is probably a better choice (unless you have to tow a 10,000 pound trailer regularly....in that case, the Burb's ride will be noticeably influenced by the load whereas the Ex's won't be as badly affected). Hope that helps,
#24 of 423 Comparison
Feb 01, 2000 (6:48 am)
I test drove both and decided on the Ford. While the Suburban was more car-like in its ride quality, the Excursion offered the heavy-duty, truck-like ruggedness I was looking for.
In addition, I really don't like the looks - inside or out - of the new Suburban. I remember laughing out loud when I first saw the front grille on a late-model Silverado and must say it doesn't look any better on Chevy's full-size SUV. Add to that one of GM's cheesy-looking interiors and the new Suburban has zero appeal to me. (This is a subjective POV, of course.)
#25 of 423 Seen Dodge's?
Feb 01, 2000 (12:18 pm)
When ya think of big SUV's, you start with the pickup truck platforms. The big Chevy/GM Silverado's/Sierra's led to the Suburban (much modified), the Ford F150 led to the Expedition and the SD's to the Excursion. What about the Dodge Ram? No model in the US, BUT, I saw one in Mexico! it's here:
Reminds me a lot of the Durango. One thing noticably missing: no back doors! Thoughts?
Feb 01, 2000 (5:02 pm)
I agree with you on the fact the each truck has its use. If you are doing a lot of heavy hauling (ie. 5th wheel or big cabin cruiser) then the Excursion will be the vehicle of choice because you will have more control of the load - who cares about 0 to 60 times in those situations anyway.
If you are using it as a daily commuter with the 'occasional' towing need, then I prefer the Suburban on the better 'empty' ride and pickup.
I guess this post is useful after all...
#27 of 423 full size dodge
Feb 01, 2000 (8:16 pm)
Crysler has been working on the big SUV thing latley. For a while they were going to give Jeep the honor, simply because they would be able to make more cash off the Jeep name. However, Jeep is big on maintaining its image of "great off-roader" and we all know how difficult it would be to make these big SUV's an actuall off-roader. They're deseigned as work horses ( very nice ones!), not off-roaders. ( they high center very easily, so Jeep's biggy would have to have a HUGE lift.) After a while, where they were seriously thinking about it, they decided to scrap the idea. So I would imagine that they will go back to Dodge in a while and figure it out. That is unless Jeep decides to do it. Jeep is pretty good about hiding its new deseigns. ( the new cherokee was going to be released next year but the current cherokee is doing so well they are going to keep it for a while. Anyhow, they've managed to hide this thing incredibly well! So who knows.)
#28 of 423 Ford and reliability
Feb 02, 2000 (4:02 am)
Read the Chevy post's on the Yukon,Suburban
and find all the guys in the shop with tranny
problems at 1,500 miles. And how BAD the dealers are treating them. 250,000 miles on my aerostar
plus survived a head on collision. Thank you I'll
stick with Ford.
#29 of 423 protravel
Feb 02, 2000 (5:18 pm)
Get your facts straight. There has been no problem with Transmissions. Some are coming off the line with a harmonic vibration which is quickly fixed with a tweak in the rear suspension. No big deal.
I bought over 30 vehicles from dealers in my lifetime, and have had more problems with service from Ford dealers than from GM. That is the main reason why I prefer GM these days.
It really doesn't matter who the Manufacturer is, it is all based on if you get a good service dealership or not.
By the way, one of those vehicles I have owned in the past was a 88 Aerostar, which gave me many problems in the two years I had it.