Last post on May 15, 2013 at 3:48 PM
You are in the Toyota Sequoia
What is this discussion about?
Toyota Sequoia, SUV
#1044 of 1954 Re: No Head Room [blaker1]
Jan 25, 2008 (8:16 am)
"Toyota seems to be forgetting about head room across the board."
I posted these headroom #s before. Its also interesting to note that they reduced the headroom from the 07 Sequoia by 2". Not sure what the thinking could have been or the engineering issue they couldn't resolve. I know its not because they think Americans are getting shorter.
2007 Sequoia 40.4"
2008 Sequoia 38.3"
#1045 of 1954 Re: Tahoe vs Sequoia [buyer4suv]
Jan 25, 2008 (8:30 am)
"Anybody have input on one vs the other...I thought the Toyota felt smoother to drive and my wife thought the Tahoe was quieter. I hate onstar and like bluetooth so that gives Toyota the edge. Flat folding 3rd row in toyota, terrible 3rd row design in chevy.
Toyota financing is better but a similar toyota vehicle is about 7% more expensive than the tahoe. I'd like remote start which is only a dealer option with Toyota."
I think you've captured the major differences. The Sequoia is larger inside than the Tahoe but smaller than the Suburban. You might also want to check out the 2nd row in the Tahoe as well since they don't fold flat while the 2nd row in the Sequoia does fold flat.
Sequoia has a higher tow rating. Tahoe has a higher Payload rating.
You can see all of the specs and pricing side-by-side for a 4wd SR5 08 Sequoia against a 4wd LT Tahoe at this link http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison?basestyleid=100891763&- styleid=100962663&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=specs
#1046 of 1954 Re: No Head Room [gvasudevan]
Jan 25, 2008 (9:25 am)
For the same money I would rather have a fully-loaded 07 than a stripped 08 SR5. I did not need the larger engine.
#1047 of 1954 Re: No Head Room [blaker1]
Jan 25, 2008 (9:30 am)
I paid $8500 below MSRP that included Toyota's rebate. Somebody else on this board mentioned getting $10k below MSRP. I also did not need the larger tow capacity of the 08 so that might have helped make my decision.
Jan 25, 2008 (11:42 am)
Is it just me, or does the sequoia look totally bland when viewed from the side?
It seems to have vast expanses of metal without any real design...in contrast, the armada has nice angles...does color choice affect the look? I was looking at the slate grey which I didn't really like...
Jan 25, 2008 (1:31 pm)
I can not get a clear answer from any dealers re: the removal of the 3rd row seats on SR5 or Limited. Basically, 2 say "no" and 1 seems to think "yes". Have any of you taken them out. They do take up about 8". I can not imagine loading for example
"mulch" or fertilizer (bags) and having 1 rip open-all over that nice 3 row.
#1050 of 1954 Re: 3 row seats [gldwing]
Jan 25, 2008 (1:45 pm)
#1051 of 1954 Re: 3 row seats [gldwing]
Jan 25, 2008 (2:25 pm)
I am thinking about the same issues. I plan to keep a movers rug that I can put on top of the seats.
#1052 of 1954 Re: Toyota Sequoia Versus 2008 Land Cruiser Vs 2008 Highlander [mackabee]
Jan 25, 2008 (5:36 pm)
The hard drive nav unit, memory card slot, keyless "go" and HID lights are not something that Toyota owners want.
I stand corrected on the "luxury comment", but the above quote is from your post 931.
My point is just this....why do several Toyota cars/SUVs costing thousands less than the Sequoia (some half the cost of the Platinum) have keyless "go" while the Sequoia does not? You can't say "b/c Toyota owners don't want them" b/c that makes no sense. Guess only the Toyota owners buying a 25K Camry/Prius want it, not a Toyota owner buying a 60K Sequoia.... I could understand it if the Camry/Prius were brand new designs while the Sequoia was not. But that is not the case. Toyota obviously made a concious decision to not put this (and several other nice or "luxury" features) on the Sequoia. Yet Toyota chose to put a MSRP on the Platinum Sequoia that clearly puts it up among the luxury SUVs. I suppose that Toyota feels that the Sequoia will sell based upon the powertrain, flexible interior, and the perceived reputation of Toyota quality.
Comments like this (your post 962):
Here's the Armada..uh I mean the QX similar to Sequoia but still lacking.
are just childish. I don't see the vast majority of folks here making comments like, "my base Tundra dash....er Sequoia Platinum dash is beautiful". Are there critiques of all vehicles being made on these boards? Absolutely! I just don't see the need for juvenile and immature comments to get made here and then expect to have much respect for your opinions. Those are the comments that would irk the heck out of my wife and I when shopping for a new vehicle and just further the public perception of the greasy plaid sportcoat-wearing salesperson who will say anything to close a deal.
#1053 of 1954 Re: The qx [gvasudevan]
Jan 25, 2008 (5:49 pm)
Good points. It has been said but the the first two years of the QX/Armada were rougher than normal for a Japanese builder. I think that you'll find significantly less issues with the '06/'07 builds. Several previous owners who upgraded to the '08 have noted how much better built the new ones are.
Let's also be honest....Toyota is not bulletproof anymore. We all know that Consumer Reports did not wholly endorse all of the Toyota/Lexus products this year. My parents bought a new '07 Camry and while mechanically they have not had any problems, there are some definite fit/finish issues that one would not usually find in a Toyota. Add to that, the Sequoia is a first year model and I would not lean one way or the other with the QX v Sequoia on reliability.
Also, I read on another board that there will be a new QX, likely in 2010/11. It will be built in Japan and will be based upon the Nissan Patrol, instead of the Titan.