Ask the Car People.SM


Ford Excursion vs Chevy Suburban/GMC Yukon XL - The battle of the titans

423 messages,  Last post on Sep 19, 2008 at 1:04 PM

You are in the Ford Excursion Forum.

What is this discussion about? Ford Excursion, Chevrolet Suburban, GMC Yukon XL, SUV

Messages Page 6 of 43

#47 of 423 Just plain FAT by ladyblue

Feb 24, 2000 (2:24 am)

 I am shopping for a new suburban because I did my research. The Excursion weights almost #2000 more than the Sub. That is 40%! That is almost like hauling around my 1942 Ford GPW (Jeep) everywhere I go! They both have the same size tires so you can just imagine the beating their taking. And if you do any off road work anyone will tell you that lots more weight means lots more shoveling. I know I'm comparing a 1/2 ton to the Ford but still that is a lot of fat.
 On the other hand I will miss the 40 gal.tank on my 93 sub. They also did away with the under hood trouble light on its neat wind up spool but I never did use it.
  

#48 of 423 FAT can help! by ralphinnj

Feb 24, 2000 (7:44 am)

Probably where the Excursion's "fat" will make a difference is in towing. If you are not towing, then the extra weight might be wasteful to some extent. On the other hand, the extra weight does go along with extra space. So, even if you are not towing, if you have 6 or more people and lots of gear, it will still be more comfortable in the Excursion. The reason its better for towing has to do with the weight ratio of the tower to the towie. The higher that ratio, the more stable the tow will be (5000 lb Sub with 10000 lb trailer is not as happy as an 8000 lb Excursion pulling the same trailer when a little sway from shear winds or other disturbance comes along).

#49 of 423 Towing "Fat" by jdeal

Feb 25, 2000 (4:12 pm)

The jury may be out on the ability of the Excursion to tow well. A post I saw here pointed out a forum at www.ford-diesel.com where some real horror stories about Excursion towing stability problems have been described.


Personally I have no opinion on the matter, since I'll never have an Excursion nor do I intend to tow the max amount of weight that these beasts are rated at. Just thought I'd point it out.

#50 of 423 FAT issues #49 by tspathos

Feb 27, 2000 (6:10 pm)

Was seriously considering a Excursion until I did some research-- http://www.ford-diesel.com/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000137.html

#51 of 423 big suv from dodge HA HA by kq6ee55

Feb 27, 2000 (7:41 pm)

Did anybody know Dodge will come out with BIG BIG Suv in 2004 Check the www.car-truck.com. And GM will put the D!!!! diesel in 2002 Suburban which they claim 300+ hp and 500+ troque. I would wait to compare the Ford and Suburban with DIESEL. I can even wait for the DODGE BIG DIESEL HA HA. I don't know which one to buy. But the Powerstrokes have been used for long time. I think I like Ford better. Presently I have Ford Explorer. I like very much. I like to wait for DODGE, GM and Ford all have big SUV. Then I can test drive All HA HA.

#52 of 423 Towing by ralphinnj

Feb 28, 2000 (9:12 am)

I visited the ford-diesel site regarding towing problems (stability at higher speeds) with the Excursion. The 1st few posts make things look bad, but there is some conflicting info, even in them. For starters, the Excursion should not tow very much different than the 250/350SD's since it is essentially the same. There is a lot of good history behind those vehicles already. After the 1st couple posts, one person writes that a huge improvement was obtained by increasing the air pressure in the tires. Another item that will definitely cause trouble is the tongue weight. If you've got more than the recommended 200 lbs, your trailer will be effectively lifting the truck chassis (front wheels will not have the full load on them), and this is known to lead to handling problems. Proper load balancing on the trailer is very important in this respect. A lot of experienced towers (that know all that stuff) have posted excellent results here with the Excursion. I would hesitate to give it a bad mark in this area yet.

#53 of 423 Ford by siglo

Feb 29, 2000 (1:08 am)

You know, both Chevy and Ford have lots of problems. They are simply inferior to the relaibility of a Landcruiser or Land Rover. Deal with it! But, when push comes to shove, I think Chevy is built better. Its close though, but I've seen majore problems with both lines, and sometimes its simply a matter of getting one of production with all the right parts. Anyway, you can't tell me excursion built better than sub, and sub built better than excursion. They both can rock, and both can suck eggs!

#54 of 423 Towing ability by mmullen

Mar 02, 2000 (12:17 am)

Much of a vehicles towing ability (or lack of it) can be attributed to the distance between the rear axle and the trailer ball. The shorter the better. If the tow point is too far behind the axle it can allow the trailer to achieve too mmuch leverage on the tow vehicle which reduces the amount of permissible tongue weight and also transfers swaying forces from the trailer to the truck much more effectively because of the increased leverage.


Does anyone know if this distance is published anywhere so purchasers can compare different models with this in mind?

#55 of 423 My '00 Excursion vs '96 Suburban by vwoo

Mar 02, 2000 (6:02 am)

We purchased an Excursion and took delivery in Austin, TX on 12/20/99. Paid $200 over invoice. We have an XLT with the V-10, 3.73 rear-end, 40/20/40 bench seat in the front and the bigger tires and AL wheels. It currently has about 1900 miles on it. I changed the oil to Mobile 1 at about 1000 miles and have attempted to change the ATF to synthetic through the drain plug but only can get about 6.5 quarts out at a time. My only highway driving was driving back from Austin to Tulsa and got about 14 mpg the first time and 15 mpg the second time (could have got back on one tank but the calibration of the fuel gauge was not very good). We have since filled up 3 times almost all city driving and get about 9.7 mpg.


I have not driven the 2000 Suburban because we were not going to buy another GM product due to the experience of our '96 GMC Suburban. The Suburban was a 3/4 ton with a 454 engine and 4.10 limited slip rear-end. We got 12 mpg on the highway and 10 mpg in the city. We had problems with the brakes wearing out initially at 30K, then 10K, now at about 25K. This is not too big of a deal, but it would have been nice to know that these brakes wear that fast and I never heard the squeaker to warn me so the rotors were scored the first two times. Had to replace a water pump, two blown tires two batteries, distributor and rebuild a transmission. I didn't have too much out of pocket expense because I got an extended warranty but one time we were on vacation and it broke down and had to spend vacation in the Wal-Mart parking lot from Thursday until Monday when they got a new distributor then I had to turn right around and go home. Other times, it seems that to repair a problem requires at least two trips to the dealer to get it fixed and one time it took three trips. Our only other car has a Honda and we had to cram all 6 on us into it (there were 2 baby seats as well). So our patients ran out on the Suburban and GM. Of course Ford is not without it problem. When I drove the Excursion home I found out that the heater was not blowing hot air (too late to turn around). It was a cold drive home. Finally when I got home and was filling up, I decided to wiggle the vacuum hose to the heater control valve and magically there was heat (one mile from home). The heat continued to be intermitant and so finally had to take to the Ford dealer. Turns out they had to replace the heater control valve and did not have one in stock so it took another four days to get it back (didn't want to pick it up since we still had the Suburban).
     I do not think that it is necessarily fair to compare a 1/2 ton Suburban to an Excursion which is build on a 3/4 ton chassis. The ride in the 1/2 ton Suburban will be significantly better. And if that you are looking for a smooth ride, the 1/2 ton Suburban is the way to go. I do think that it is fair to compare to the Excursion to a 3/4 ton Suburban. I understand that the 3/4 ton Suburban still utilize the same suspension as the previous year so I assume that the ride will still be similar to our '96 3/4 ton Suburban. In my opinion the ride quality is similar, that is STIFF. There seems to be more power with the 454 engine, but it had a 4.10 rear-end, and they don't offer it anymore and I suspect the 6.0l will be anemic for towing purposes because the torque is lower and is up higher in rpm's.
     The Excursion is quieter and has more interior room. My wife can actually sit in the 3 seat with two childeren's booster seats in them. This does come at some price in that the Excursion feels alot bigger than the Suburban. It will fit in any regular parking space since it is only a few inches wider, but it just feels bigger. Everytime I park, I look to see if I fit in the space and it does. It also fits in our garage. The turn radius is bigger in the Excursion, but have not found this to be a problem. We originally got the tow mirrors, but my wife did not like them and actually ran them into the garage as she was backing out (unfortunitly they do not retract in that direction and broke the plastic off on the mirror). They were $200 to replace the mirror, so we opted to buy the regular mirrors (both sides for $200) instead. I glued the plastic back together on the tow mirrors and plan to use them when we tow (4 nuts to unscrew).
     Overall, if your looking for ride quality, the 1/2 ton Suburban is the way to go. Power and room go to the Excursion (vs 2000 Suburban). Had bad experience with the GMC so it has tainted our feelings for GM, although I can remember a Mercury Station Wagon my parents had as a kid and it was a piece of junk. I guess time blurs the memory. I hope our Excursion doesn't run into as many problems as we had with the Suburban. I wish Toyota had an SUV that would hold 9 and pull our 30' trailer.


Van

#56 of 423 Decided on 4X2 Excursion by tjf2000

Mar 04, 2000 (12:47 am)

After months of debate and reading everything on
the Excursion and Yukon XL, finally decided on a
White Limited 4X2 with V-10, 6 CD Player, heated
seats,standard--not limited slip 3:73 rear end, bug
shield and molded mud flaps (paid $124 for the
molded Ford flaps and that price included
installation). Picked it up out of state while on
business and drove 850 miles (mostly highway) and
used 54.304 gallons of gas, that works out to a
little over 15.6mpg, not bad for being brand new,
and that is almost the exact same as our '91
Suburban got on the highway. A few notes, yes the
Excursion is a little stiffer than the 1500 Yukon
XL. The Excursion is less than 1/2 inch wider and
only a couple of inches longer than our '91
Suburban 4X2. The Excursion interior is the closest
to our '91 Suburbans, it does not give you that
enclosed feeling like the '00 Yukon XL when ordered
with bucket seats and a console, plus the wood
trim really makes it look sharp (same as it did in
our '91 Suburban). Also like all the storage areas
in the doors and the large center console with a
door that opens to the rear rather than to the side
(just like our '91 had). Our '91 Suburban gave us
no problems and after 9 1/2 years, we were able to
sell it for 10K. Hope the Excursion is as trouble
free. If not for some of the quirks, as mentioned
above with the Yukon XL interior, this decision may
have been in GM's favor.
Good luck it's a tough decision and drive safe.

Messages Page 6 of 43

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement