Last post on Aug 28, 2011 at 3:00 PM
You are in the Toyota Sequoia
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Sequoia, Chevrolet Suburban, GMC Yukon XL, SUV
#157 of 173 Re: A little confused [mm1923]
Feb 22, 2006 (12:51 pm)
In August of 2005 I traded a 2003 Suburban LT on a 2005 Toyota Sequoia Limited. BIG MISTAKE!!! I have been having many problems with the Sequoia and have had it back to the dealer twice. Now it will be going back a third time for problems not solved in the first two trips and all this in only 4,100 miles. My Burb only had 11,000 care free miles on it and I only had to take it back to the dealer for a recall on the second row seat belt. They fixed the problem in less than an hour and I was on my way. The #1 and only reason I went with the Sequoia was because of the so called Toyota Reliability Factor! I can assure you my Sequoia certainly does not live up to Toyota's so called RELIABILITY????. RELIABILITY???? give me a break!!
The new 2007 Suburbans are coming to the dealers around April or May and I can tell you I WILL be going back to the SUBURBAN. My take on the Sequoia is that it is HIGHLY OVERRATED AND HIGHLY OVER PRICED. No wonder the Sequoia is said to have a higher trade in value. It's OVER PRICED to begin with. My 03 Burb had many,many, more bells and whistles for much less money($3000 less MSRP) than my Sequoia has. My advice is go for the all new 2007 Suburban as that is exactly what I am going to do. I have owned my first and last Toyota guaranteed! For me its Suburban all the way. After all the Suburban was the first and is the Granddaddy of all the SUVs, as we know them, today. Take notice as to what the U.S. Government is using....Suburbans!!
#158 of 173 Re: what to choose?? [ggesq]
Feb 23, 2006 (4:32 pm)
If "2006 Tahoe is a brand new model...", as you put it...what does that make the '07 Tahoe--a brand-newer model?
#159 of 173 Re: what to choose?? [tdoh]
Feb 24, 2006 (4:13 am)
Oops, looks like I misspoke. Yes, you are correct, I meant the 07 as being a brand new model.
#160 of 173 Suburban's Rule
Jun 12, 2006 (11:46 am)
I tried the Expedition, Sequoia, Armada, Tahoe & Suburban. In truth, the Sienna had more passenger room than all but the Suburban. My wife and I have 4 boys, a girl and 115 yellow lab. The Suburban was the clear choice. It also makes me feel better knowing that my most presious cargo is in such a safe vehicle.
#161 of 173 Re: Towing: Can the Sequoia handle it? [tomk4]
Jun 20, 2006 (9:03 pm)
Just got done towing a 5000# dry (probably 5800# loaded) travel trailer from Denver to Steamboat Lake with a 93 SR5 Sequoia. Handled great over Eisenhower tunnel and Rabbit Ears pass (did get down to 35 mph over Rabbit Ears). Gas mileage did drop as low as 4 mph for a time, but made it all the way back on one tank and 3 hours drive time! I was very concerned about towing that kind of weight but did clear it with the TRD guru at a local dealer. Guarantee I was over the GVWR of 11,800 ( I'd have to pull the seats and drive naked not to).
The key is to get a good hitch set up and dial in the trailer breaks (recommend cam anti-sway control and load equalizer bars). Temps were in the 90's pulling extended grades of 6% at altitude and never had the temp budge. I know alot of people will argue to NEVER exceed weight limits. I am very conservative and never felt overloaded, unsafe or white knuckled. I guess I don't necessarily buy into attorney and lawsuit driven national paranoia of guard rails everywhere and coffee labeled hot.
#162 of 173 Re: A little confused [jsnoopy]
Jun 23, 2006 (4:50 pm)
"My take on the Sequoia is that it is HIGHLY OVERRATED AND HIGHLY OVER PRICED. No wonder the Sequoia is said to have a higher trade in value. It's OVER PRICED to begin with."
Having owned a Tahoe and now a Sequoia I thought you might be interested to know that according to Edmunds TMV pricing-
2007 Burb LT 1500 4WD w/ LTZ package & Navigation is $48,267.
2006 Sequoia Limited 4WD w/ Navi is $40,700.
And you were saying? Almost 8K more and in a couple of years the Sequoia will still have a higher resale than the Chevy. Heck, it will most likely outlast it too.
"Take notice as to what the U.S. Government is using....Suburbans!!"
Yes, they are cheap and expendable.
#164 of 173 Sequoia versus Yukon/Tahoe
Nov 28, 2010 (9:14 am)
I now have a 2000 Yukon. It has given me generally good service, but Iím about ready to replace it. The choice is between another Yukon (or Tahoe) and a Sequoia. (I'm looking at the 2011 models.) I drive 90-95% on highways, with the rest on dirt roads that are often washboarded, full of rocks, or with rough wash crossings. Both vehicles would do fine, I know, but does either one cushion the ride on bad roads? Any other reasons for choosing one over the other? Thanks.
#165 of 173 Re: Sequoia versus Yukon/Tahoe [gilbey]
Dec 01, 2010 (6:17 am)
When you say your Yukon gave you generally good service what do you mean?
I owned a 2001 Sequoia until Sept of 2009 and it had 98,000 when I sold it to a private party.The vehicle gave me excellent service with only two problems during this 8 year period.
The front rotars were replaced at Toyotas expense including new brake pads around 22,000 miles.(Free Brake Job)
The rear window motor was replaced by Toyota as it stopped working.
I now own a 2010 Sequoia SR5 4 wheel drive model that has 12,000 miles on it. The vehicle has been perfect and is just a pleasure to drive.
I have owned several GM vehicles over the years and they dont come close to the quality of Toyota.
General Motors can not be trusted. Goverment Motors literally STOLE money from secured bond holders. I know people who had these secured bonds which are now almost worthless. How can you trust a company that is invloved in this kind of theft??
#166 of 173 Re: Sequoia versus Yukon/Tahoe 
Dec 04, 2010 (6:52 pm)
Thank you Steve. You make a good point about GM, and your experience with the Sequoia pushes me strongly in that direction.