Tahoe/Yukon vs. Expedition vs. Sequoia

They told me the main shaft broke, but I'm not sure I believe the story.

I own a 2007 Tahoe LT 4x4..... Great towing, comfort, ride except for one thing.........

Transmission has been replaced twice ( under warranty ). Transfer Case went out last summer on my way back from Lake Pillsbury with 3 kids, dog and wife 2 hours from home. Got stranded in Ukiah and had to leave my truck and boat at the dealer for 2 weeks to get it replaced. had 90k miles, but failed after 5 year warranty, so GM would not cover it ( I did file a claim and it took them 3 months to say no ). $2,100.00 out of my pocket for a part that GM has TSB's out to fix.

I'm over it now..... haha

Yeah, the area behind the 3rd row on the Sequoia is pretty much useless.

Tim D wrote: No, No, it's total bullspit. I made it up. Here's a video showing the problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj5ZS8wOmNk

Uh Huh. Don't think I said your claim was not true. I said avoiding GMs because of this potential issue, is Bull.

Toyota has experienced many well documented issues including accellerators that stick, airbag issues, and steering cable issues.    Those apparently did not keep you from buying Toyota, and would not prevent me from doing so either.

Neighbor has a Sequoia with over 150K, which has been relatively trouble free. Has less room than my Yukon XL, and gets worse gas mileage. He knows that and will probably buy another Toyota anyway.
Whatever works.

BKH

No, No, it's total bullspit. I made it up. Here's a video showing the problem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nj5ZS8wOmNk

When I saw Tim D's post, and never hearing about that problem before, I looked for info on it. There's tons of info, but I couldn't tell if it ended in 2007 or not, seemed like most of the problems were before that. It's documented as a plastic retainer clip breaking and causing the pump to rotate slightly and eat a hole in the case. The fix is a metal clip installed in the case to keep the pump from moving.

Not that I plan to stay away from GM, just thought I'd mention the problem really exists.

Tim D wrote: Stay away from the 4WD Yukon/Tahoe.

Agree the above statement is total BS, Guy's a tool

Tim D wrote: I'm a Toyota guy

And that proves it, LOL

Suburban. It holds everything and can pull it all too!

Suburban LE #1 was a 2003 and had 205,000 miles on it when I sold it. I only changed the oil (+ normal fluids) , Mass Ox Sensor and a front wheel bearing.

Suburban Z71 #2 is a 2012 with 102,00 miles (yes, that is correct) and the only problem has been the Throttle Body sensor on the way to the family for Thanksgiving. Only pisser for me is the warranty is up already b/c of mileage.

I'm a Toyota guy, 3 4Runners and a Sequoia. I would recommend the Sequoia, never had any problems with it. Great pulling power, it weights 5,200 lbs and will get up and go, and it's more American made than the others. Stay away from the 4WD Yukon/Tahoe. The pump in the transfer case eats a hole in the transfer case, slowly looses fluid and then locks up. I know three people this has happened to.

M3Fan wrote: As I'm mulling this over I'm now, in a "fairly rare" bout of rational thought, thinking about option E. which is just keeping the nearly-perfect, long-paid-for, single owner, totally pampered and over-maintained existing car. Sure it has no 3rd row and sure it's a bit tight on road trips but when I was a kid my family got by just fine in the 80's with 3 kids and a station wagon for crying out loud. Drove across the country like that and we did just fine. Do I really need a new SUV or do I need a change of perspective?

I vote E, rock that 4 runner till the wheels fall off and retire 2 years earlier! After that... I find that the tahoe drives like a much smaller vehicle than either the expedition for the sequoia... but havent had to deal with any of the latest models for more than a day or two of rental car usage. However in terms of feel not much difference between the last gen tahoe and expedition and the various ones I have owned. The reality is the expedition is a three row seat vehicle, and the tahoe is a nice, big, capable two row seat vehicle that you can put a third row into but a lot of time you will wish you had left it home.

The next generation of tahoe is due out in a bit, if you rocked the current vehicle for 2-3 more years you would have the choice of upgrading to a lightly used next gen if you like it and the early reports of reliablity are favorable, or getting into one of the last years of the current gen which will likely be depreciating fast due to the release of the new model. - BTW, We had 5 kids in my family and none of our station wagons ever had a third row seat.

Joel, that's one you'll have to answer yourself! The question is how much the added room and newer vehicle is worth to you vs. saving the money. If you are skiing behind a 2001, do you need to spend the money to buy a 196 or a new boat? The wake is so much better, but then again you CAN ski just fine behind the 2001.

I was making a similar decision, was driving a very nice 2003 Durango and having a hard time deciding to spend the money on a newer SUV. It took probably a year of off and on thinking about it until I felt like I really wanted the upgrade, and I've had no regrets at all about spending the money.

As I'm mulling this over I'm now, in a "fairly rare" bout of rational thought, thinking about option E. which is just keeping the nearly-perfect, long-paid-for, single owner, totally pampered and over-maintained existing car. Sure it has no 3rd row and sure it's a bit tight on road trips but when I was a kid my family got by just fine in the 80's with 3 kids and a station wagon for crying out loud. Drove across the country like that and we did just fine. Do I really need a new SUV or do I need a change of perspective?

Not sure about the interior of the Sequoia but it is built on the same platform as the Tundra. I have had zero issues with my Tundra and the power plant has tons of power and tows like a dream. Think the Sequoia is rated around 7.5K towing with the 5.7 I-Force. Toyota reliability is what sold me on Toyota over Ford and Dodge. Have not owned the Tahoe ore Expedition so can't comment on those. Our next vehicle the wife wants the Sequoia cause she loves the Tundra but I never let her drive it.   

Oh, sounds like my bad on that one, I've never seen that setup. Mine are a 2-part bench that has 3 sets of seat belts.

quinner wrote: The seating can vary quite a bit, middle row captains chairs makes access to third row much easier but you do give up a seat. My Tahoe has 2 rows of captains chairs (sim) so only seats 6. The space behind the third row is of course much bigger in the Burbans/XL's, if the 3rd row seat is removed it's huge back there. If you go with the GM think about your seating, bench in the 2nd row still leaves you 5 seats with the 3rd row removed, cargo space behind the 3rd row gets tight with the Tahoe.

Quinner, take a closer look at that 3rd row seat, it seats 3, belts and all. So, with 2nd row captains you seat 7 total, with 2nd row bench like I have you seat 8.

I had to search a bit to find a used LTZ with the rear bench, most have captains chairs. I like the bench for exactly what you mention, can seat 3 kids and still have the 3rd row folded or removed.