Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You will find 2 cons to remove........ A V6 Toyota is thirsty, you won't be burning more fuel on a new V8.
More to break, the GM stuff is pretty reliable. I've got 140,000 miles between a Tahoe and a Yukon. Total repairs so far: $0..........wear items only: 1 set of rear brakes, 3 sets of tires and a couple of batteries. Oil changes every 7-8K miles.
Why not rent one for a week? Go to your neighborhood enterprise and rent one for the week. If you like it then buy one but if you don't you just saved yourself a lot of hassle.
Thank you but my Highlander gives me 20 mpg and the Yukon & Tahoe give about 13-14 mpg city so not sure about that. This is a great suggestion about renting one out.
Thank you but my Highlander gives me 20 mpg and the Yukon & Tahoe give about 13-14 mpg city so not sure about that. This is a great suggestion about renting one out.
I figured you had a 4runner which has dismal mileage for what it is.
If a difference of 30% in fuel economy is going to break the bank, keep your "crossover Camry."
Keep in mind the bigger tires will cost more too.
Kids are growing and we are planning to make more trips by road rather than flight so thinking to upgrade to a full size SUV. Has anyone gone from a mid-size SUV to a full-size SUV? What has your experience been like going the larger GMC SUV route? How has it improved or has not improved your lifestyle?
Pros
- More room for family
- Good for long drives
- More luxury
Cons
- Higher MSRP
- v6 vs v8 - more gasoline
- large SUV to maneuver
- more break fix cost as I'm planning to shift from Toyota to GMC
Get a Traverse
We love ours
Better mpg than our Tahoe—rear in city driving
Easier to see over fenders than Tahoe or Suburban
Better comfort on road because of body design
And great storage inside—can pull a smaller trailer w/towing package
And ours has been dependable car
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
45,015 posts, read 82,217,154 times
Reputation: 58626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deuce88
Really? A Toyota Highlander does not compete in this space.....
This sounds to me more like a choice between Chevrolet Tahoe/Jeep Grand Cherokee class vehicles. A friend and neighbor has a Ford Expedition which seats up to 8, but gets 17/23 mpg with the 400 hp 3.5 turbo V6. We have had several Jeeps over the years and had bad experiences for service at all of the various Chrysler-Jeep dealers in the area (4). I would stay away from Buick, they may be headed the way of Oldsmobile and Pontiac soon. The Cadillac Escalade would be great but costs more. The full size Toyota is the Sequoya, and may be the best choice if you want reliability and is actually a few inches shorter than the Tahoe.
A full size SUV is a good choice if it fits your need and image. I love to drive long distances and it is easier on my body to drive the SUV over my Luxury sedan.
Brand reliability is key. Go Japan, others are more reliable than they use to be because Japan vehicles forced them to be. Go with the leader not the followers.
Brand reliability is key. Go Japan, others are more reliable than they use to be because Japan vehicles forced them to be. Go with the leader not the followers.
Which is why so many of us suggest the GM Tahoe/Suburban. They've been doing them so long, they are the class of the field. Strong, usually reliable and from the looks of all the 25+ year old ones running around, durable. So useful, as well, with HUGE cargo capacity OR passenger capacity (If you choose the 3 row models). Comfortable to drive (well, not the 2500 (3/4 ton) series, unless it's towing to offset the firmer spring rates).
I recently sold my 2002 Suburban 2500 with the 8.1 liter V8, as I went from a travel trailer to a Class A motorhome, but regret it as I wasn't planning on moving at the time and now a full size SUV would have been EXTREMELY useful.
Yeah, fuel mileage wasn't great (about 10 mpg whether empty or pulling that trailer), but such a workhorse.
This sounds to me more like a choice between Chevrolet Tahoe/Jeep Grand Cherokee class vehicles. A friend and neighbor has a Ford Expedition which seats up to 8, but gets 17/23 mpg with the 400 hp 3.5 turbo V6. We have had several Jeeps over the years and had bad experiences for service at all of the various Chrysler-Jeep dealers in the area (4). I would stay away from Buick, they may be headed the way of Oldsmobile and Pontiac soon. The Cadillac Escalade would be great but costs more. The full size Toyota is the Sequoya, and may be the best choice if you want reliability and is actually a few inches shorter than the Tahoe.
Toyota has a giant problem when they eliminated the V8 for a turbo 6 in the new Tundra and Sequoia. Tons of problems with it with no fixes from Toyota. It’s bad enough that dealers will not take them as trade-in’s because there is no fix yet. Imagine buying a $70k Tundra and finding out the engines grenade themselves and no fix. You try and trade it in for a new different brand truck and nope, zero dealer will take it…fun times.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
