You are here: Forums SUVs Chevrolet Suburban & Tahoe 2007 and newer Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon

2007 and newer Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon

3125 messages,  Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 6:32 PM

You are in the Chevrolet Suburban & Tahoe Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Chevrolet Tahoe, GMC Yukon, SUV

Messages Page 12 of 313 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 313 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#106 of 3125 Re: 07 Denali - Is it me.... [truckbuff] by 4rider Oct 21, 2005 (1:38 pm)
Replying to: truckbuff (Oct 21, 2005 7:07 am) "I will not consider another suv/truck with only a 4 speed auto either, just doesn't cut when towing.    How did we ever survive with 3 speed trannys? "   I never had any power/performance problem years ago with my 3-speed cars when they had 403 or 427 cid in them. More gears provide better fuel econmy for sure but at the expsense of more complexed trans which requires more services. Most older 3-speed cars never needed to change trans fluid during normal life span whereas a lot of newer cars now require perioidic change of trans fluid.   I personally dont mind having 5 or 6 speed in a new car. I just dont want to pay for any additional maintaince costs due to having more gears. Replies to this message: dieselone (Oct 21, 2005 3:30 pm)
#107 of 3125 Re: It's alright, but glad I got an '05 [ahightower] by 4rider Oct 21, 2005 (2:01 pm)
Replying to: ahightower (Oct 19, 2005 10:16 am) "I'm not crazy about the new Tahoe/Yukon exterior. It looks too "modern" I guess, plastic bumpers are not as "trucky" as the chrome on the current versions."   Absoultely.   Also, I dont know what others think. But I feel the front bumper is really extending too low which not only reduces the ground clearance but also blurs the line betten a SUV and a van. To me this is a very serious product image mistake. GM is making big buck on full size suvs. The last thing they should do is to make their suvs look like a van and kill the cash cow.
#108 of 3125 Re: 07 Denali - Is it me.... [4rider] by dieselone Oct 21, 2005 (3:30 pm)
Replying to: 4rider (Oct 21, 2005 1:38 pm) Most older 3-speed cars never needed to change trans fluid during normal life span whereas a lot of newer cars now require periodic change of trans fluid.   Modern transmissions are made of lighter materials than they were 20+ years ago, but that isn't the biggest reason modern transmissions need frequent fluid changes.    2 reasons modern cars need frequent fluid changes, but mainly one. The trans. fluids today aren't as good as the fluids used 25+ years ago and today's engines run hotter allowing hotter trans temps as well.   Don't laugh, but up until 20-25 years ago trans fluids used whale oil, which is one of the best natural lubricant as far natural ability to not break down under heat. Once international bans/limits on whaling were implemented whale oil could no longer be used for trans fluid and other lubricants.   I'm sure many may be falling of their chairs but look it up, it's well documented.
#109 of 3125 Once again GM settles for evolution, not revolution by quikkash Oct 23, 2005 (7:55 am)
Now that I've seen the 2007 Tahoe with the wrappers off, I must say that I'm dissappointed. Back in 1997 when Ford introduced it's new line of F-150's, both the styling and choice of engines was revolutionary for a full-size domestic pickup. Result: Ford continues to dominate this market. Back in 1994 when Dodge updated is hopelessly long-in-tooth Ram, the styling was a revolution, and while still solidly in third place Dodge took a huge bite out of the market share of both GM and Ford. The new GM's will maintain the status quo, nothing more. GM is the undisputed master of pushrod technology, but most other manufacturers have moved on. The new styling while not offensive will not win many new converts. GM has checked their bet when they should have moved all in and done something truly special. Replies to this message: ahightower (Oct 23, 2005 12:28 pm) navigator89 (Oct 23, 2005 8:42 pm) alston28 (Oct 24, 2005 6:55 am)
#110 of 3125 Well said by callmedrfill Oct 23, 2005 (12:14 pm)
This reiterates my point earlier that this new vehicle is now competitive, and it is much ado about not much.       Judging from such recent introductions as the Malibu, Impala, the Colorado, and now the Tahoe, something "truly special" maybe beyond their collective abilities.       GM is not Toyota, their public image is rock-bottom, and a decent car is not nearly good enough right now.       They need to put as much effort and money into their vehicle's designs as they do their incentives.       It's like watching a football team use a "Prevent" defense. Trying not to lose hastens your demise considerably.       GM doesn't have the luxury of producing another mediocre new model.       DrFill
#111 of 3125 Re: Once again GM settles for evolution, not revolution [quikkash] by ahightower Oct 23, 2005 (12:28 pm)
Replying to: quikkash (Oct 23, 2005 7:55 am) "Back in 1997 when Ford introduced it's new line of F-150's, both the styling and choice of engines was revolutionary for a full-size domestic pickup. Result: Ford continues to dominate this market."   The combined sales of the Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra are a bit higher than the Ford F-series. Data is from a competing website, through May of 2005:   1. Ford F-Series pickup — 335,269 2. Chevy Silverado C/K pickup — 274,869 14. GMC Sierra pickup — 87,210   GM's advantage is 26,810 units. Maybe GM ought to do away with the GMC division and take over bragging rights for best seller.   Plus, you might say the Avalanche and even Escalade EXT are bought to be used as "trucks", and share pretty much the same mechanicals. GM is clearly preferred by consumers.   I don't have the numbers, but I'm pretty certain the GM full-size SUVS far outsell the Fords as well. Chalk one up for old school engineering. Replies to this message: navigator89 (Oct 23, 2005 8:42 pm) alston28 (Oct 24, 2005 6:55 am)
#112 of 3125 Re: Once again GM settles for evolution, not revolution [ahightower] by navigator89 Oct 23, 2005 (8:42 pm)
Replying to: ahightower (Oct 23, 2005 12:28 pm) You don't need numbers. An Edmunds story said they own 65% of the full size truck market. That's basically because they have so many variants, the Suburban, Escalade, Tahoe, Yukon, Sierra, Silverado, Avalanche.   Ford only has the Expedition and Navigator. Excursion never sold well and has been dropped.
#113 of 3125 Re: Once again GM settles for evolution, not revolution [ahightower] by alston28 Oct 24, 2005 (6:55 am)
Replying to: ahightower (Oct 23, 2005 12:28 pm) What is the website where you can get sales numbers for different models? Thanks.
#114 of 3125 You can use autochannel by callmedrfill Oct 24, 2005 (4:51 pm)
You used to be able to go to autosite, but it has changed a lot, so I don't know if they do that anymore.      DrFill
#115 of 3125 Just about there... by brjohnson Oct 26, 2005 (9:50 am)
As have many of you, I have been pouring over the photos of the new Yukon/Denali. As many have so correctly put it, this is a catch up, not a blockbuster. As stupid as some would call it, the interior matters as it is where we spend our time. A wood steering wheel is nice, but not if it is done as an insert that presents "bumps" in the roundness of the wheel. Solid is the way to go here GMC. The Infinity has the same style inserts in the QX56 like it appears the new Denali will have. If you have not felt it, it is very annoying.   On the fold flat rear seats, I continue to be surprised that GMC was not able to come up with a design that worked here. Any of us that want to load larger items needing support from underneath are still left having to remove them. I am wondering if the setup will be any different on the new XL versions.   Also, with the captains chairs in the second row, where is the option for a removable console for those? Nissan and Infinity offer this and Lincoln has one as well although I am not sure if it is removable. Why would this not make perfect sense for them? I even thought it may make sense for a platform that would accomodate an additional seat in that location interchangeable with a console. Is that impossible? That would fit in the Professional Grade Category.   Someone commented on the bumpers not looking as "trucky" without any chrome. Not only do I agree, but for many of us that will use these vehicles to tow with and for other utilitarian functions, having plastic covered and painted bumpers is really not what we would choose for durability either.   Although I am probably going to wait on our next purchase of a larger towing capable SUV until I can see and touch the new Yukons, I am dissapointed that they could not get closer to the mark than this. I am really struggling to figure out if it will be worth waiting to see.

Messages Page 12 of 313 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 313 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums SUVs Chevrolet Suburban & Tahoe 2007 and newer Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon