Last post on Aug 06, 2009 at 9:28 AM
You are in the SUVs
What is this discussion about?
Infiniti QX56, Toyota Sequoia, Lincoln Navigator, Ford Expedition, Car Buying, Car Comparisons, SUV
#48 of 63 Sequoia vrs Expedition
Jan 30, 2009 (3:39 pm)
I've had two of each. I have heard that the Nissan / Infiniti will go away too. However as for warranty and service work on the Infiniti, the dealer here (100+ miles away) came and picked up my FX45 and left me a loaner, even on oil changes. I'd still shy away from the Q though if it's not going to be around.
I probably would have bought a Sequoia but when I got the Expedition last Nov 07 they told me it would be spring before the Sequoia came out. Then they showed up in December just after I made my decision.
I'm glad though I didn't buy a Sequoia since you can now get $10,000 off. I would owe more in a year than what I could have bought a new one now for.
One feature I really like with the Expedition is the fold flat rear seats. That may not mean as much if you always have the third row up.
Calculating depreciation is tricky. Many people cite the used price as compared to the MSRP. Until recently when they have started steep discounts for the Sequoia, the Sequoia actually lost as much in value as the Expedition. In addition to that you had more money tied up.
I don't like the FE in either. Opinions vary but I actually prefer the interior of the Expedition a lot more then the Sequoia. As for exteriors, my wife loved her Sequoia's but she does not like the new look.
I will say though either has enormous room. If I had it to do over I would have gotten the extended version of the Expedition. When taking the whole family the extra foot on the back would hold a lot more stuff with the third seat up.
I do not like the handling of the Expedition. I have not driven the new Sequoia but my older ones reminded me more of my 4Runner as far as handling. The ford is a soft ride that is comfortable but it wallows around curves. I don't feel comfortable driving briskly on curvy roads. I didn't find that an issue on the Sequoia.
I can see that money is probably no problem for you since you're looking at the Platinum. I leased my Expedition for two years hoping that by 2010 there would be a diesel or hybrid option for something in this size. I'd love something like this at 19-20mpg, but 14 mpg sucks. If I don't purchase my Expedition off lease (pretty cheap) I don't know that I would ever buy a new large SUV again. They all depreciate way too much and even if you can afford it, it is a waste of money that could be used for some better use (perhaps a Prius to drive when you don't need the room).
However if I could get a Sequoia for $10,000 off AND 0 percent that would make me think hard.
#49 of 63 Re: Price for 2007 new Expedition EL!! Any thoughts? [mae7]
Jan 30, 2009 (3:56 pm)
Doesn't seem like there's a way to figure that out on Kelley Blue Book as the vehicles are used. I put 2007 in to the Kelley Blue Book and random 1000 miles just to see what I'd get, but apparently that implies it's used, and it came up with 20.5K approx. They wanted to charge me 28K, stating since they didn't have rebates, they were giving a sale price of 7000 less than msrp (I think). THANKS!
You're thinking right. The value when you drive it off will be no more than Private party value in kbb.com Even that is more than they will give you on trade. I'm assuming that is this is only $7000 less than msrp that it is striped. That does not sound like a good deal.
I ended up leasing, not sure if I wanted to own long term and then have to figure out how to dump it if gas stayed up. My first lease and I was surprised. Since the money factor on the lease was almost at 0 percent, I leased for two years and the residual, or the price I can buy it for is cheaper than what I would have owed on the SUV had I bought it up front. I ended up leasing and now I can walk away if it is not what I want or I can buy it. Cheap.
It was a $47,000 msrp. I got the Xplan pricing and rebates and had a capital (buy) price of about $38,000. (They got even cheaper later). My purchase price in 2 years is $23,000.
I think that is a great price if I'm still in the mood to own it, but I have the option to walk away.
I have been looking on ebay and other sites at the 07 prices which should be what my 08 will be worth in another year (probably). The 07's can be had for under $20K
The biggest problem I see buying used is dealing with a dealer. It seems that if a vehicle has a trade value of $15K (which is all they will pay for a trade) then the private party value is around $18 and then "Retail" will run arounf $21K to $23K. The trick is to purchase a good one from someone you know and trust. If you buy one still on warranty then I see no reason to pay a dealer a premium. Their "certified" used vehicles are preced even higher. Hey, it's still on warranty!
I belive dealers will be focussing on used vehicles more and more to survive the next year so I'm sure they will want to gouge people.
If you want to know though the maximum a dealer has in a vehicle it will be the used "fair" condition kbb trade value. I don't care what papers they show you they just don't pay a premium for nice cars. They don't want to put more in them than what they can go to the auction and get them for but they will go high trade if you're dealing on a new one and they want to sell. If they show you a higher trade, there is a good chance they have made up on it with the discount on the pricing of the new vehicle.
#50 of 63 Re: We thought we picked out an SUV....but we are having doubts [warwickmon]
Jan 30, 2009 (4:08 pm)
I traded in my 1999 4runner with 152K miles on it
I tried downsizing to a 4Runner when the kids left. However they would ride places with us often and since my son is 6'4" my wife would ride in the back. She has a bum knee so I ignored her complaints. Finally I got tired of hearing her gripe and I said you drive, I'll ride back there. It was aweful. No foot room, the seats were low and my knees were up high.
I also have a 4Runner for a company vehicle. I think it is head and shoulders the best mid size SUV out there. BUT if you have larger teen aged kids the 4Runner should be considerd child cruelity,
You'll love the Sequoia for the family as they grow.
I have found now though that the Highlander (I have the Hybrid) is also pretty spacious and has a great second row seat for 2 people. I'll get 23 to 26 mpg so over the years this will be a whole lot cheaper to operate and meets the needs of a smaller family
#51 of 63 Re: Sequoia vrs Expedition [wvgasguy]
Jan 31, 2009 (4:11 pm)
"One feature I really like with the Expedition is the fold flat rear seats. That may not mean as much if you always have the third row up. "
FYI, the seats fold flat in the Sequoia both the 2nd and 3rd rows. The 3rd row folds electrically in the Platinum and is an option on the Ltd.
#52 of 63 Re: Sequoia vrs Expedition [hdfatboy]
Feb 03, 2009 (2:18 pm)
If you have a Platinum with captains chairs in the 2nd row, you have a sizable console in the center. But this too can be opened from back to front to lay flush with the the two folded down captains chairs. I bought a custom cover from Canvasback of Idaho that covers the console and protects the back from dog (St Bernard). If anybody is interested, I'll post a picture of it (cover, not dog).
#53 of 63 Re: Sequoia vrs Expedition [warwickmon]
Feb 03, 2009 (3:16 pm)
Would love to see your pic. I have a Ltd with Captains chairs and I added console. I have 3 boxers that I carry around and would have preferred to have had second row bench, but could not find one with the Nav and DVD + 20" wheels. Dealers just told me it wasn't possible to get it.
After having it 30 days so far I would have much preferred the bench.
#54 of 63 Fuel Computer readings
Feb 03, 2009 (3:20 pm)
I have had my Limited for about 30 days so far and I just noticed that the "range" reading had changed from when I first bought the truck.
I remember the first few fill ups showing that I could go roughly 380 miles on a full tank. Now when I fill up it says 285 miles on a full tank. That is only 10mpg......I commute to work about 25 miles each way and my trip computer says I'm averaging around 14.
Why does the range not match up with the avg fuel economy?
Has anyone else noticed this?
#55 of 63 Re: Fuel Computer readings [mikey13170]
Feb 03, 2009 (5:22 pm)
"I remember the first few fill ups showing that I could go roughly 380 miles on a full tank. Now when I fill up it says 285 miles on a full tank. That is only 10mpg......I commute to work about 25 miles each way and my trip computer says I'm averaging around 14.
Why does the range not match up with the avg fuel economy?
Has anyone else noticed this? "
How are you measuring your range? One of the things you need to get used to is that the Sequoia shows E with 5-6 gallons still left in the tank. You probably have 80-100 miles still left in the tank when it reads Empty. Next time you fill up you'll see that it rarely takes much more than 20 gals when the guage first reads E.
Next time you fill up, subtract the amount of gals you buy from 26.4. Now take the difference and multiply the remaining gallons times the MPG on the trip computer...you just found your remaining fuel mileage range.
#56 of 63 Re: Fuel Computer readings [hdfatboy]
Feb 08, 2009 (8:21 am)
Yeah I had noticed the difference in filling the tank. Last night I filled up when it said I had 13 miles left to go. It took around 21.5 gallons to fill it meaning I had 5 gallons in reserve (roughly). If I'm getting 13.5 which has been the average, then I had another 65 miles to go on that tank. Add that 65 to my already 285 and I get 350, which is still off the original 385 the computer was telling me I'd get.
I guess it comes down to the computer re-calibrating itself based upon the driving style or average fuel economy.
Just wish I could get the posted 14 mpg it says I should get........not seeing it at all even driving conservatively.
#57 of 63 Re: Fuel Computer readings [mikey13170]
Feb 09, 2009 (5:25 pm)
I get 14 mpg now however for the first 10K miles it was under 13mpg. The fuel economy has gone up by 10% over time as the engine breaks in.