*Potential Owner* What do you love about your Tahoe?

[RED TAHOE LS]

I know for sure when I open the garage, it's always ready, plenty of room/cold frt & rear ac/and so smooth and quite. JMHO @ 199k.
David g..........

 

[JayceeP]

I purchased a Suburban because the Tahoe was too small to accommodate cargo if all three rows of seating are in use. I have found the Suburban to be a capable hauler -- whether it be for bringing kids back from college or making landfill runs. As you can see, I replaced my Silverado PU in 08 with a Suburban. The reason was that the Suburban was a better road vehicle for annual drives to Houston from Washington DC than the pick up since the bed was exposed. Additionally, with 3 very tall boys (all around 6 foot +) and their friends, additional seating was also required so that we would not have to take two vehicles on errands around town.

As far as features and comfort go, I have the base LS and am very happy. Even though it does not have leather or any of the options from the higher trim levels (it does have the advanced safety system), it has as standard equipment all of the options that my 08 1LT Suburban had.

The bottom line for your decision is (a) which vehicle will best meet your needs -- an SUV or Pickup? The second question -- and perhaps less important is which do you prefer, a Tahoe/Suburban or a Ford Pick Up? Both vehicles are quite capable and both Ford and GM have significantly stepped up their game.

I do not envy your position. I was there in 2008 and traded in a 3 month old pickup for a Suburban because I realized that the Silverado would not meet my needs as a people hauler for long trips like the Suburban would. Good luck!!

How are the quality of the cloth seats both comfort, material quality, and durability?

I am realizing that, maybe not in the case of the Tahoe, the Yukon SLE is very well equipped and you can add on luxury/convenience package that has nicer wheels, grille insert, power liftgate etc and save still like $7500 from the SLT trim. Only thing I don't like about Tahoe/Suburban is the lack of fog lights on lower trims. I think it was you in another thread who said the base model is basically the price difference of a Denali/Premier/LTZ and base model and that is a very good point.

 

[Batterycap]

There is no way to compare. If I could only have one, and had a Family, I would choose Tahoe. If it were just me, I would chose truck.

 

[WillCO]

I live at 6400 feet altitude, and all else constant I'd prefer the Ecoboost motor. The 5.3 in the Tahoe is beyond fine, but we do lose some power the higher we go. It wouldn't surprise me if the Ford were 1.5-2 seconds faster to 60 around here. Not that I go around drag-racing. My indie mechanic swears that the Tahoe motor will be far better down the stretch.

Ford seems to have a slight edge with the infotainment; the new Sync system is absolutely top notch. Although MyLink is not bad at all, IMO it works better than either of the systems in the 2013 BMW and 2016 Mercedes we have.

I like the interior design of the GM products a little better than the F150, especially the dash design on the Tahoe. I'd probably stop seeing the difference either way once I made a choice though.

Given how big the Tahoe is overall, the cargo area seems like it would be larger than it is. It's actually only 3 cubic feet larger than an Explorer.

Reliability is about a wash?

Net, net - both pretty awesome vehicles right now. I think for you the decision is SUV or truck, really.

 

[Rdr854]

That would be me. In looking on line at my local dealer's Chevy Suburbans, the price difference (with discount and normal incentives) is $45K for the LS and $76K for the Premier. Like the GMC Yukon/Yukon XL SLE, the Suburban/Tahoe LS are equipped with cloth seats. Both the 16 and 17 Suburbans are very comfortable and I am able to drive straight through from Washington DC to VA Beach, VA without having to stop to stretch. Having only put 11K miles on the 16, I can say that there were no signs of wear (the 17 only has 800 miles). The upholstery seems to be durable and did not appear to have any wear.

I note that the GMC Yukon/Yukon XL SLE has additional standard equipment that the Suburban/Tahoe does not. First and foremost, the Yukon/Yukon XL SLE has front park assist, fog lamps and the Bose Premium audio system as standard. Neither are available on the Suburban/Tahoe LS from the factory (and my dealer's parts department has indicated that they are not available as a GM after-market accessory). The starting MSRP for Yukon XL SLE (4x4) with metallic paint is $55,920.00 as compared to the starting MSRP for the Suburban LS (4x4) with metallic paint, which is $54,210.00. That said, you can get a Suburban/Tahoe LS with upgraded 20" or 22" wheels and chrome inserts in the grill from the factory or as GM installed aftermarket accessories. The luxury/convenience package that is associated with the Yukon/Yukon SLE is not available on the Suburban/Tahoe LS.

One thing that surprised me is that GMC charges $395 for the tungsten metallic paint while Chevrolet did not.

Having rented a fully loaded Suburban LTZ for three weekends in one school year (moving my son into and out of college), I fully understand the differences and what I am missing. However, I cannot justify the additional expenditure for myself. I recognize that others may want the additional equipment, but for me the Suburban is a truck and a people hauler. It comes down to what you are looking for and if you feel that you will get the value that you are looking for. That said, I am fastidious about maintaining its condition and take pride in trying to keep it looking as new as possible.

 

[rjrdomer]

I'm torn between a White Tahoe and a White Ford F150 Lariat.

There are different things I like about each truck but am truly undecided. What the Tahoe offers, the F150 doesn't and vice versa.

I'd love to hear some reasons why you chose your Tahoe!

Tough to compare the two since in my opinion, they serve different functions. It also depends on the trim level of each truck as well. You can get a Silverado pretty stripped in the "work truck" trim or go all the way up to the High Country. Tahoe you can go from LS to Premier. So are you looking for a work truck or something more plush? I have a 17 Tahoe Premier and while I was originally looking at an LT, my better half wanted some of the bells and whistles on the Premier (formerly LTZ trim). We looked at the Yukon as well and the SLT is similarly equipped to the Tahoe Premier at a lower price point. The biggest difference between the Yukon SLT and the Tahoe Premier is the Premier has magnetic ride control. I found the magnetic ride control to be great and noticed a difference. My wife was also coming out of an Audi Q5, so the magnetic ride control makes it feel a little less trucky.

So I guess you need to ask yourself what you're using it for and what best suits your needs. My wife drives the Tahoe Premier and loves it so far after a couple of weeks. I have a 2002 GMC Yukon SLT that I bought used a few years ago. I drive it to the train station for my commute and use it to haul junk around. I'd prefer a pickup, but I'm hesitant to drop big money on a new one to park it at the train station all day. And many of the used ones have 200k miles and are beat to crap. My parents had a 1995 Tahoe and a 1999 Tahoe. My dad still drives a 1997 K-5 Blazer 2 door. So my point is, we've been driving these for years. If longevity is your goal, I see many more 20 year old Chevys on the road than F150s.

In terms of what I like about the new Tahoe - pretty much everything. There are a few things I do not like and think GM could improve upon...the parking sensor system is one. I think for the price even at $60-70k+ you get a luxury vehicle with hauling capacity, large size, safety, comfortable ride, etc. I'd drive across the country in it and not think twice. Parts are cheap. Service is easy and cheap too.

If you compare a loaded Tahoe Premier at $70k+ to other large SUVs at similar price points: a Mercedes GLS450, you get easier egress from the Tahoe, much more hauling capacity and I'd argue a similar ride. You may get a more luxurious interior with the MB, but the Tahoe is still very nice and well-equipped. The controls are also functional and sensible. Looking at something like an Audi Q7 which falls in the same price point. It will ride more like a car, but you do not have the passenger or cargo room. Also you need a masters in engineering to work their infotainment. While people say "how could you spend $60k on a Chevy?" they then spend a little while driving one and they say "oh this is nice. I get it now." I like that you can put regular fuel in the Tahoe, you can put regular washer fluid in it and not screw up sensors. I look at it as a great combination of luxury and practicality. My wife also likes the captains chairs in the second row which makes access to the third row easy for even an adult and there's no moving seats around. It works well for us since we have two small children still in car seats.

More than you needed to know, but I just thought I'd throw that all out there. In short, if you're looking for a very nice family hauler, get the Tahoe. If you're looking for a cargo hauler to occasionally take passengers, get the truck. And I'd get a Silverado over an F150. Ford can go take their ecoboost and shove it.

 

[chicagofan00]

If longevity is your goal, I see many more 20 year old Chevys on the road than F150s.

Regardless of manufacturer, I don't think we'll be seeing many vehicles of today going 15-20 years in use. There is so much technology packed into vehicles today that I don't see them lasting as long any more. Eventually down the road there will be issues and the cost to maintain will be higher than most people want to bother with and due to all the technology less and less is becoming maintainable by the average person in their garage. I love all the tech in today's vehicles but I don't see it being conducive to keeping them long term (10+ years). Take for example the newer Mercs and BMWs now coming with an all digital cluster and infotainment console. Those won't be cheap to replace and I would be hesitant to say they have been built to last the long term.

 

[rjrdomer]

Regardless of manufacturer, I don't think we'll be seeing many vehicles of today going 15-20 years in use. There is so much technology packed into vehicles today that I don't see them lasting as long any more. Eventually down the road there will be issues and the cost to maintain will be higher than most people want to bother with and due to all the technology less and less is becoming maintainable by the average person in their garage. I love all the tech in today's vehicles but I don't see it being conducive to keeping them long term (10+ years). Take for example the newer Mercs and BMWs now coming with an all digital cluster and infotainment console. Those won't be cheap to replace and I would be hesitant to say they have been built to last the long term.

That is a fair point and you are probably right. That is why my dad sticks with his 97 2-Door.

 

[Surfingbuddhist]

I traded in my 2010 Ford F150 Raptor for a 2015 CPO Tahoe LS. We just had our first baby and have 2 large dogs. We needed a car that could carry everyone on road trips without the dogs climbing on the baby. I pondered the idea of putting a topper on the Raptor, but didn't want my dogs to be in the non a/c bed when we go the desert or anywhere hot. I have a boat also, so any smaller SUV with less towing capacity wouldn't have worked. Over all we're super happy with the Tahoe. It's comfy, holds the family and tows the boat.

 

[schaffer05]

I love that mice don't get in it, like they did my Tundra.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk