Article Comments - 2008 Toyota Sequoia First Drive and Full Test

40 messages, Last post on May 28, 2008 at 8:49 AM

You are in the Toyota Sequoia Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Toyota Sequoia, SUV

First Drive: 2008 Toyota Sequoia 4WD - Arguably the most useful, most refined and easiest-to-drive full-size SUV ever built, the 2008 Toyota Sequoia will keep a large family from being forced to adapt to a fleet of Priuses. (more)

Full Test: 2008 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4x4 - You would expect a sport-utility that measures 17 feet long, stands 6 feet tall, carries eight passengers and is hooked up to a 5.7-liter V8, four-wheel drive and 20-inch wheels to be called Sequoia. Talk about full-size! Talk about lumbering! (more)

Outline

Messages Page 3 of 4: 1; 2; 3; 4; Prev; Next; Last

#21 of 40 Re: The Tone of this Review Suprises me [hdfatboy] by mbukukanyau Jan 20, 2008 (7:12 am)
Replying to: hdfatboy (Jan 19, 2008 11:27 pm) aybe you should drop $50+K on the Yukon Hybrid and tell us how you like replacing all those batteries in 50,000miles after the warranty expires. Fatboy, All GM Vehicles now come with a 100,000 mile warranty Replies to this message: hdfatboy (Jan 20, 2008 9:54 am)
#22 of 40 Re: The Tone of this Review Suprises me [mbukukanyau] by hdfatboy Jan 20, 2008 (9:54 am)
Replying to: mbukukanyau (Jan 20, 2008 7:12 am) According to Edmunds, here's the GM warranty on the Tahoe/Yukon hybrid: Basic: 3 yr. / 36,000 mi. Drivetrain: 5 yr. / 100,000 mi. Hybrid Component: 8 yr. / 100,000 mi. Roadside: 5 yr. / 100,000 mi. Rust: 6 yr. / 100,000 mi. It'll be curious to see if GM categorizes the batteries as part of the Basic, Drivetrain or Hybrid coverage. The normal starting battery is covered as part of the Basic warranty and even then you only get a pro-rated value for the remaining life of the battery. My guess is that the batteries themselves will be under the Basic coverage while the actual electric "booster" motor on the tranny is covered under the drivetrain or hybrid warranty. I can just the hear conversation with the dealership at 50K miles now..."Hybrid owner: my fuel economy is down and I think the batteries aren't holding their full charge...I want my batteries replaced under the warranty....Dealer: I'm sorry sir, but the batteries are operating properly...it must be the way you're operating the vehicle...you're accelerating too hard". Either way, what do you think the resale value is going to be based on the second owner having to pony up thousands of $ for the replacement batteries? I see GM (and other car makers) making as much off replacement battery sales as they do off the original sale of a hybrid vehicle. Of course the primary owners of hybrid vehicles are going to be left holding the bag as the resale value plummets to a number that reflects the used value of the vehicle minus the replacement cost of a new set of batteries.
#23 of 40 VSC OFF by golfgti4789 Jan 21, 2008 (7:31 am)
I have a 2007 Tundra, and although there isnt a specific VSC off button, you can still shut it down completely. You first, push the traction control button off, then right after that, hold it again for about 5 seconds. The VSC off light should appear right next to the traction control light. This procedure must be done when when the car is stopped. Replies to this message: hdfatboy (May 27, 2008 12:07 pm)
#24 of 40 Re: The Tone of this Review Suprises me [hdfatboy] by fshi Jan 21, 2008 (8:33 am)
Replying to: hdfatboy (Jan 19, 2008 11:27 pm) it is a joke that you mention prius and tahoe in the same post, does anyone cross shop these two? I care green, but not to the extreme to sacrifice capability. Tahoe is the best compromise as I see it. As you mention MB, did we talk in tahoe's forum before? hehe, old friend. Replies to this message: hdfatboy (Jan 21, 2008 2:10 pm) dudelyfoo (May 27, 2008 7:36 am) hdfatboy (May 27, 2008 8:27 am)
#25 of 40 Re: The Tone of this Review Suprises me [fshi] by hdfatboy Jan 21, 2008 (2:10 pm)
Replying to: fshi (Jan 21, 2008 8:33 am) The referemce to the Prius was definitely a joke.... just making the point that buying a vehicle primarily because it has the right image is a little ridiculous IMO. However I recognize that many people buy their vehicles to give their neighbors the right "image" and in fact the car companies sell their products based on image. Just not my approach to buying a vehicle, but I guess it works for others. Image is alot less important to me than it seems to be for others (or then it was to me when I was younger). I'm more interested in the features and benefits and do they meet my needs or wants. I don't think I've ever been on the Tahoe forum, although it is possible. Replies to this message: dudelyfoo (May 27, 2008 7:36 am) hdfatboy (May 27, 2008 8:27 am)
#27 of 40 Toyota Sequoia vs. LandCruiser - third row seat by kjshan Jan 21, 2008 (6:37 pm)
Which model has the better use of the third row? For that matter, what full size SUVs have a good third row seat option? I have a Volvo XC90, and we have quickly outgrown the use of the third row. Why do these kids keep growing? Replies to this message: rtribble (Jan 21, 2008 7:53 pm) hdfatboy (Jan 21, 2008 8:07 pm)
#28 of 40 Re: Toyota Sequoia vs. LandCruiser - third row seat [kjshan] by rtribble Jan 21, 2008 (7:53 pm)
Replying to: kjshan (Jan 21, 2008 6:37 pm) Sequoia has due to the change to independent rear suspension. If money is not a concern you might check out the new Lexus 570 as it now also has an independent rear suspension. LandCruiser may follow suit. Replies to this message: hdfatboy (Jan 21, 2008 8:07 pm)
#29 of 40 Re: Toyota Sequoia vs. LandCruiser - third row seat [rtribble] by hdfatboy Jan 21, 2008 (8:07 pm)
Replying to: rtribble (Jan 21, 2008 7:53 pm) "If money is not a concern you might check out the new Lexus 570 as it now also has an independent rear suspension. LandCruiser may follow suit. " Actually, the LX570 retains a solid axle in the rear. It also does not have a 3rd row seat that folds flat into the floor. Of the large Toyota SUVs, only the Sequoia has an independent rear suspension with fold flat 3rd row seats. Given that the LX570 is a newly redesigned vehicle and that the LC is the same design, its not very likely that either will get an independent rear suspension anytime soon (if ever). "The four-link trailing-arm rear suspension retains the solid-axle configuration for strength and durability. Camber rigidity is increased, as is bearing rigidity, and all bushings are enlarged" http://www.toyoland.com/news/?p=95
#30 of 40 some errors ? by jabc Jan 22, 2008 (10:43 am)
I think Edmund's spec information on the passenger and cargo space may be mistaken. From Toyota's e-brochure : Legroom (F/2nd/3rd) : 38/35.4/34.5 Cargo Space (2nd&3rd down/3rd down/3rd up) : 120.8/79.4/28.4 From Edmund : Legroom (F/2nd/3rd) : 42.5/36.4/35.3 Cargo Space (2nd&3rd down/3rd down/3rd up) : 120.1/66.6/18.9 Some major discrepancy on the cargo space ........... Replies to this message: steve_ (Jan 22, 2008 10:55 am)