Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Well this is probably the best new Big 3 product that is coming out right now...

http://www.familycar.com/RoadTests/FordFusion/Photos.htm

I would say that is a nice car for the price. It is the first car from Ford or GM for that matter that will compete against the Accord or Camry. In fact, even the press (who hates domestic and would love to see Ford and GM go under to make big headlines) have given this new car rave reviews.

As for the new Super-Sized GM SUV's? I have a 2005 Ford Explorer with a V6. Why anyone would ever want an SUV bigger then a midsized is beyond me. I guess if you need to tow very heavy loads you might need one. I see A lot of the Ford Expedition in the rear of these new GM SUV's. Interior design? Yes, an improvement over the normal GM "tacky plastic" dashboard, but even Ford already has beat the new GM design. Attached is the interior of the 2006 Explorer.

Ok, now for this comment...

masterapple04 said:
EJBasile, I know that some minivans and most pickups get similar mileage, but look at the ratio of each to the other. There are many times more Suburbans, Expeditions, Escalades, Land Rovers, Highlanders, Xterras, etc. than there are Rams, F-150s, and Caravans (this list not anywhere nearly inclusive). If you were to cut out every SUV right now, I would expect a noticable drop in fuel usage.

What are you talking about? Have you ever looked at the sales figures for the last 20 years or more? Do you have any idea how many F-Series, Silverado/Sierras, and RAM trucks are sold? F-Series is number one in the world of all vehicles built. Around 900,000 were sold last year. Many companies can only dream of sales figures like that. Add in another almost 900,000 from GM and 350,000 or so from Dodge. I would say your many more times the SUV's then Pickups and Mini-vans is a very flawed idea.
 

Attachments

  • 06.ford.explorer.int.500.jpg
    06.ford.explorer.int.500.jpg
    39.4 KB · Views: 248
maxterpiece said:
It seems to me that you think a free market will lead us down the right path. Labor laws, meat quality laws, Anti-monopoly laws are here for a reason. 100% free market doesn't work! Corporations will abuse in any way they can to make money and they need government to guide them down a slightly more moral path. Oil is destroying our environment and without a doubt has played a large part in much of america's foreign policy over the last 15 years. A lot of people with a lot of money are invested in the oil business and they will use their influence to keep the US dependent on their product. The only reason we don't have these laws is because of this influence and the only thing that's going to change things is if people stop being passive about things and fight for the future of our planet and our nation and for what is good sound sense.

Yes, I do believe that a free market is one thing that will lead us in the right direction. And yes, corporations will do anything they can to make money -- that's why they exist, not primarily for the good of the community or anything like that. Their number one objective is to make money. I will agree with you though that a free market is not a 100% solution for everything -- the problem is where is the balance? For example, is it the government mandating that half the cars they sell in 2007 be hybrids? Probably not, but I do support government issuing mild guidelines or minimums. I do think it's realistic to put a 5-year plan in place that raises minimum corporate standards maybe one mpg per year. Maybe more, I don't know. What I'm trying to say is that I support the government putting frameworks around things BUT I want the market to figure out the solution, not the goverment.

And as far as the government (regardless of party) leading ANYONE down a moral path? Please take no offense, I that's a pretty good oxymoron. :D
 
vixapphire said:
people who buy less fuel-efficient cars already pay a "gas-guzzler tax", which is calculated as some percentage of the sticker on the vehicle. $10 to 15k per year is ridiculous: if that's to be the case, people could go out, buy a couple-years-old corolla or escort, beat the tar out of it for a year, throw it away on one of those eco-unfriendly dumps/landfills, and buy another, all for less money. that's the best you can do?

hint: avoid beginning from the position that someone must be punished. it makes you sound small and envious, even though you're not. all that jabberwocky about politics being perception has a grain of truth to it, after all. :)

To be honest, those vehicles that would be subject to such a tax would in the end being a small part of the "problem". My thoughts are that the $10-25K "tax" would pay for development of better fuel economy vehicles. And a good portion would go to developing mass transit.

I have little sympathy for those quoted in the news bout the pain they feel in buying gas. While they drive the Expeditions and such. I bought my Baja when gas was $1.30 to $1.60 a gallon. I felt that gas could go to $3 a gallon. I did the math, and it was worth the "pain" at the pump.

I love telling those people that tell me that it just cost them $40+ to fill up, that I feel their "pain". I paid the same amount, but it lasted me 18 days or better.

I would rather deal in trying to find proper disposal of old beat up cars that gave better milage, than to have the "wealthy" think that they can have their way on the future generations.
 
SharksFan22 said:
Yes, I do believe that a free market is one thing that will lead us in the right direction. And yes, corporations will do anything they can to make money -- that's why they exist, not primarily for the good of the community or anything like that. Their number one objective is to make money. I will agree with you though that a free market is not a 100% solution for everything -- the problem is where is the balance? For example, is it the government mandating that half the cars they sell in 2007 be hybrids? Probably not, but I do support government issuing mild guidelines or minimums. I do think it's realistic to put a 5-year plan in place that raises minimum corporate standards maybe one mpg per year. Maybe more, I don't know. What I'm trying to say is that I support the government putting frameworks around things BUT I want the market to figure out the solution, not the goverment.

And as far as the government (regardless of party) leading ANYONE down a moral path? Please take no offense, I that's a pretty good oxymoron. :D

I pretty much agree with everything you say here. I probably should have used the word sensible instead of moral. However, I don't expect any unusually sensible acts from US politicians as long as there's no serious... well let's stay away from politics...
 
maxterpiece said:
The popular pick-ups are MUCH cheaper than the popular SUVs and are only popular in rural areas where they are much more likely to be useful... dirt roads, more snow and less plows, etc. They also are real trucks built on a much more solid truck frame.

Have you priced a new pickup lately? They are NOT MUCH cheaper unless you are talking a small 2wd stripper compact pickup.

I have a Ford Explorer V6 and I use the 4x4 all the time living in a rural area with little snowplowing and some muddy gravel roads. I also have a small trailer that I have to pull once in awhile. I could have bought a pickup to do the same thing, but why have the empty box following me around all the time?

Pickups are popular everywhere. It is funny to see someone slam SUV's and then give a free pass to pickups. Full sized V8 pickups are hardly fuel efficient. It's not just GM or Ford either, the Nissan Titan and Toyota Tundra are hard on fuel. Even compact trucks (well only the Ford Ranger is still truly a compact) are not that easy on gas.

If you ever checked the sales figures, like I just posted, the most popular vehicle sales wise in the entire world is the Ford F-Series with the GM Silverado/Sierra twins right behind it. Combined sales of Ford/GM/Dodge/Toyota and Nissan is almost 2 million units!!! You can go on all the time about how many more SUV's are out there, but it is not true.

I could have purchased an F150, which you would consider an "Acceptable" vehicle because it is a pickup and not an SUV. However, for my needs the Explorer is smaller, can haul more people, pull my trailer and get better fuel economy with a V6 engine then the V8 in the F150.
 
"I think it's funny, american cars and their horsepower - six litre engine to produce 300 odd brake, when my 2.5 litre V6 produces 355bhp OH YEAH!"

slap a 6 horse trailer on that V6 and take it up a mountain. You will be buying a new engine and transmission less than one quarter up the hill.

I also think it's funny all the people who are slamming SUV's only... I mean really. Pilot VS F150 V8 or a Cadillac V8 (car)... come one.. you guys are suffering from what is called displacement. I agree the LARGE SUV market is overpopular right now for sure with college students and housemoms and small penis business men, but the platform altogether DOES have its place.

A funny story (and this is very typical of many of the people i run into slamming SUVs). I have these two REALLY left friends (i'm a bit of a moderate, maybe a little left), who were slamming me for buying my dream car, which is an isuzu vehicross. "how could you buy an SUV like that, they are soo horrible for the environment and get such horrible gas mileage." -

My vehicross gets about 23 miles to the gallon, and i drive about 3 miles to work everyday.

they own an old 8 cylinder thunderbird and late 70's early 80's volvo station wagon (V6). and they drive about 50 miles a day each round trip everyday.

This is the same hypcrisy i see from many of the people preaching to the SUV drivers. You do realize there are ALOT of cars and trucks that get just as bad and WORSE gas mileage than many suvs...
 
Abercrombieboy said:
Have you priced a new pickup lately? They are NOT MUCH cheaper unless you are talking a small 2wd stripper compact pickup.

I have a Ford Explorer V6 and I use the 4x4 all the time living in a rural area with little snowplowing and some muddy gravel roads. I also have a small trailer that I have to pull once in awhile. I could have bought a pickup to do the same thing, but why have the empty box following me around all the time?

Pickups are popular everywhere. It is funny to see someone slam SUV's and then give a free pass to pickups. Full sized V8 pickups are hardly fuel efficient. It's not just GM or Ford either, the Nissan Titan and Toyota Tundra are hard on fuel. Even compact trucks (well only the Ford Ranger is still truly a compact) are not that easy on gas.

If you ever checked the sales figures, like I just posted, the most popular vehicle sales wise in the entire world is the Ford F-Series with the GM Silverado/Sierra twins right behind it. Combined sales of Ford/GM/Dodge/Toyota and Nissan is almost 2 million units!!! You can go on all the time about how many more SUV's are out there, but it is not true.

I could have purchased an F150, which you would consider an "Acceptable" vehicle because it is a pickup and not an SUV. However, for my needs the Explorer is smaller, can haul more people, pull my trailer and get better fuel economy with a V6 engine then the V8 in the F150.

Pickups are not glamourous and overdone and marketed towards people who don't need them. As you say, you use your pickup to plow, etc. Most people who buy SUVs buy them because they buy into the whole marketing thing - that SUVs are gangsta or that they are chic, or whatever word you want to use. Can you imagine these same people ever even consider a pickup??? That would probably be the last car that they would ever pick. You bought a car that served your needs. Most SUV buyers buy an SUV because it's cool and it's the in thing. All they are doing is driving around paved roads. They could buy a safer (for other people), more fuel efficient vehicle and get most all the same luxuries.

You are one of the few people who still uses his SUV for what it was originally created for.
 
2007 Chevy Tahoe Unvieled

maxterpiece said:
Pickups are not glamourous and overdone and marketed towards people who don't need them. As you say, you use your pickup to plow, etc. Most people who buy SUVs buy them because they buy into the whole marketing thing - that SUVs are gangsta or that they are chic, or whatever word you want to use. Can you imagine these same people ever even consider a pickup??? That would probably be the last car that they would ever pick. You bought a car that served your needs. Most SUV buyers buy an SUV because it's cool and it's the in thing. All they are doing is driving around paved roads. They could buy a safer (for other people), more fuel efficient vehicle and get most all the same luxuries.

You are one of the few people who still uses his SUV for what it was originally created for.

Maxterpiece, I am amazed at the generalizations and stereotyping in a good many of the responses here. First off, this is America, and folks can and will buy what they want to buy. Secondly, the issue of using any fossil-fuels, whether diesel or gas or propane or methane has an inherent issue to it--the supply is dwindling and finite, period. Do you realize, that a good many of pickup trucks sold in America have leather interiors, navigation systems, and every conceivable option that a Caddy, Mercedes, or Audi might have? That they are marketed just like any other vehicle to buyers who may or may not need them. Does anyone need a $50 Ford F-150 King Ranch 4 door pickup truck with King Ranch leather and that jeweled interior? My Dodge Ram 2500 diesel has just about every luxury option in it. Even has an armrest that will swallow my 17 inch G4 PowerBook and more. It is a "work-truck", has a usable 5.9 L V-6 Cummins Turbodiesel and a 6 speed manual transmission. It cost a lot of money and is worth every dime. It gets good gas mileage for a 3/4 ton diesel truck. Yet, Lincoln makes a luxury pickup truck, so does Caddy. Have you seen a dolled up Nissan Titan lately? Or even a midsize Dodge Dakota, tricked up? Have you seen the prices on these lately, some approaching $50K?
I have owned 3 suvs, a 1997 Explorer with V-6, a 1998 Dodge Durango with 5.9L V-8, and my current one for weekend getaways, a 2002 GMC Denali XL that has a 6.0L V-8. It is everything I want it to be, just not a commuter car. It gets excellent gas mileage for its size and class, often 19-20 highway at 60-65 mph.
My point is, making sterotypical statements and gross over-generalizations is counterproductive and makes the casual observer here like me think that the flow of information here is suspect. Yeah, it would be nice to have a 90 mpg 6500 lb vehicle for towing or hauling people, but it is not going to happen with the internal combustion engine as we know it. I just think a lot of opinion has been thrown out here, without fact and without understanding of all the cultural issues at play in the US regarding what type of vehicle we all drive.

BTW, I purchased my Denali XL(i.e. Suburban clone) in 2001 as a 2002 model. It has been amazingly reliable, efficient, and despite its size, with 2 large dogs, 2 children, a wife and a husband along with all our weekend gear,it routinely delivers 16-19 combined mpg on those long weekends. I personally, would not buy any other class of vehicle for these needs. And I could care less about the "gansta" culture, or "suburban" culture.
 
I agree with you Stevie. I have a 2002 Chevy Suburban( also bought in 2001). It has gotten amazing fuel economy for that size of the vehicle. GM is right on saying they got the most fuel efficient full sizers in their class with V8's. I went on a road trip to New York and it got 18 MPG highway. That is right on the EPA estimate. I can't say about City driving since I mainly use it for highway and long trips( it is very comfartable). I also use it to tow horse trailers. I also had a 1996 Chevy Suburban which got traded in for my current one. The '96 had no problems what so ever to warranty the trade in. I just decided to take advantage of the good deals post-9/11. It is the same story with the current Suburban. No problems at all.
 
I'm confident we can stop the "I get this many mpg. I don't drive far. I'm not a bad person. I'm not a bad person. Look at this guy.. he is evil!" posts.

We make ourselves feel better but pointing out some one else's flaw. Trying our best to raise the low end.

I saw a commercial for the new hybrid civic yesterday.

"50 mpg" the commercial boasted. My girlfriend's 2001 non-hybrid civic gets 40mpg. I'm sorry. That's not much of an improvement. At all.

A company we hold up and point out and say... these guys got it right.

And they get only 10mpg more.

It's a joke. Hybrids are not the answer... we're all doing what we've always done and batteries are not solving the problem for us.

And in the end, they're completelly unrelated fields. The folks who buy a ford f250, aren't going to buy a civic hybrid. So we haven't changed anything, much. Why, with the anti-SUV, 20-something, american mindset... isn't there a solution for 12mpg vehicles?
 
anyone remember the 1970s?
fuel shortages, rising fuel prices, large behemoth muscle cars and huge v8 family cars.
didn't learn anything the first time?
sad to see huge flagging/failing organizations like chev and ford spending money releasing new inefficient vehicles. do you really need a 400 hp V8 motor to pick the kids up after school? i'm guessing not.
 
technocoy said:
I also think it's funny all the people who are slamming SUV's only... I mean really. Pilot VS F150 V8 or a Cadillac V8 (car)... come one.. you guys are suffering from what is called displacement. I agree the LARGE SUV market is overpopular right now for sure with college students and housemoms and small penis business men, but the platform altogether DOES have its place.

Looking at Cadillac, your example is a bit off perhaps. Comparing the Escalade to the DeVille, the DeVille delivers 6mpg better highway (although only 2mpg better city), both with V8's.

Thanks to the wonderful regulatory process, these SUV's do not have to meet the same standards as regular passenger cars. Add to that we are delayed at red lights, because some big SUV's drivers decided to have an "edge" on the change of the light - blocking our view, so we can't safely make a right-on-red turn.

The issue that some of have with the larger SUV's are beyond the the MPG ratings. We suffer door dings from these that think their Expeditions are compact vehicles and park in spaces clearly marked for compacts. The safety concerns on the growing number of "outsized" vehicles sharing the road with the rest of us.

My vehicross gets about 23 miles to the gallon, and i drive about 3 miles to work everyday.

they own an old 8 cylinder thunderbird and late 70's early 80's volvo station wagon (V6). and they drive about 50 miles a day each round trip everyday.

This is the same hypcrisy i see from many of the people preaching to the SUV drivers. You do realize there are ALOT of cars and trucks that get just as bad and WORSE gas mileage than many suvs...

Yes, but those number I think dwarf the numbers of the newer SUV's. I think you are pointing out the greater divide in this nation of those that have, and those that have been left behind. We have become a nation of excess. Just look at our desire for bigger and faster cars. Look at desire for not the 1,500 to 2,00 sq. foot homes; but 2,500 to 5,000 sq. foot monsters.
 
maxterpiece said:
Pickups are not glamourous and overdone and marketed towards people who don't need them. As you say, you use your pickup to plow, etc. Most people who buy SUVs buy them because they buy into the whole marketing thing - that SUVs are gangsta or that they are chic, or whatever word you want to use. Can you imagine these same people ever even consider a pickup??? That would probably be the last car that they would ever pick. You bought a car that served your needs. Most SUV buyers buy an SUV because it's cool and it's the in thing. All they are doing is driving around paved roads. They could buy a safer (for other people), more fuel efficient vehicle and get most all the same luxuries.

You are one of the few people who still uses his SUV for what it was originally created for.

Amen, but even if they wanted the utility of a pick-up truck, there is the likes of my Subaru Baja.
 
Ohhh Really

superfunkomatic said:
anyone remember the 1970s?
fuel shortages, rising fuel prices, large behemoth muscle cars and huge v8 family cars.
didn't learn anything the first time?
sad to see huge flagging/failing organizations like chev and ford spending money releasing new inefficient vehicles. do you really need a 400 hp V8 motor to pick the kids up after school? i'm guessing not.

So Toyota, Nissan, Audi, BMW, and Mercedes don't make huge gas guzzling vehicles with hulking V-8s? Where have you been burying your head in the sand? Really, Toyota's Tundra pickup with the commonly-ordered I-Force 4.7L V-8 is one of the most inefficient of the full sized pickups. Ditto the big engined Titan V-8. Look at the Lexus, Infiniti, Toyota, and Nissan SUVs and compare them to Chevy, Ford, GMC, and Dodge.
I think the arguments here are sterotypical, arrogant, and not well-researched opinion. That is about it. As for Ford and Chevy and their making big gas guzzling vehicles, we as American consumers and materialistic individuals are just as responsible for the state of affairs as any manufacturer. You don't like what they offer, don't buy it. You don't like the fact that someone of your neighbors drives a 10 mpg suv or pickup, tooi bad. It is their money and their choice. With the logic here, we should all ride bicycles everyday, or mopeds, or nuclear powered skate-boards to work and disregard all other forms of transportation, including airplanes, buses, the ubiquitous 18 wheelers on the road, and the like. You sound like a lot of the talking heads on TV, the celebrities with the look-at-me-I-drive-a-hybrid-Prius set. Essentially, the waste more fossil fuel traveling from venue to venue in their limos and private jets in one weekend, than you and I will driving a 10 mpg suv over a lifetime of ownership. Go figure
 
StevieG said:
I think the arguments here are sterotypical, arrogant, and not well-researched opinion.
read the post, it's a chevy vehicle. and yes, other manufacturers do make fuel-inefficient vehicles - you are correct. but even the nissan titan gets better gas mileage than the american SUVs and pickups - those figures are available from the sites.

and i, like many others, have chosen to not buy them for many reasons outside of fuel efficiency - including lack of style, modern features, design flaws and safety.

my comments are about consumer behavior. north americans consume, that's what we are good at. we use copious amounts of resources, often when we don't need to - example large vehicles. i was simply making a point that maybe people should reevaluate their behavior when resources are expensive or scarce. frankly, i'd rather spend money on other things than gasoline - movie tickets, beer, food, etc. but you're free to drive what you like and make that choice for yourself. be informed.

edit: also thanx for the nod to fame, i wish i was so lucky. and yes, i do drive fuel efficient vehicles - a toyota echo (50 MPG in the city), and a l'il mazda truck for weekend work (30 MPG)
 
Chip NoVaMac said:
Thanks to the wonderful regulatory process, these SUV's do not have to meet the same standards as regular passenger cars. Add to that we are delayed at red lights, because some big SUV's drivers decided to have an "edge" on the change of the light - blocking our view, so we can't safely make a right-on-red turn.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that. They don't conform to the same passenger safety laws. But, wrt to "edge" well, from my perspective in a low, sports car, just about every car on the market does this, including Subarus. :)

Chip NoVaMac said:
The issue that some of have with the larger SUV's are beyond the the MPG ratings. We suffer door dings from these that think their Expeditions are compact vehicles and park in spaces clearly marked for compacts. The safety concerns on the growing number of "outsized" vehicles sharing the road with the rest of us.

I have to say, I'm a little on the fence on this one. On one hand, I get very annoyed when I'm in a parking lot where all the spots are marked as compact so I can understand a large SUV owner giving up and jamming their car in a compact spot. On the other hand, I'll agree that it's a major pain to try to squeeze into the car when a non-compact vehicle is parked next to me into a compact spot. My solution -- I'm a nut about keeping my cars in excellent condition and I park at the far end of the lot. And no, I don't advocate taking up two spaces. Ever. And, I've seen compact cars deliver door dings just as nasty as SUVs. :) Be careful with your generalizations.

I'm more concerned about 18-wheelers running me over than I am a Chevy Tahoe.

Chip NoVaMac said:
Yes, but those number I think dwarf the numbers of the newer SUV's. I think you are pointing out the greater divide in this nation of those that have, and those that have been left behind. We have become a nation of excess. Just look at our desire for bigger and faster cars. Look at desire for not the 1,500 to 2,00 sq. foot homes; but 2,500 to 5,000 sq. foot monsters.

Huh? While I'm not a fan of the giant homes (I've owned homes in both those categories and am now in a smaller one) who ever said that there's a guaranteed equal outcome in life? Is that what this is *really* about? Class envy? So someone has had enough financial success in life that they can purchase a $60K SUV that gets poor mileage. So what? They pay through the nose at the pump so it's not like they're not continuing to spend money for their purchase. Plus, if we take a two-year view of it, what do you think the resale market for these vehicles will be? My suspiscion (sp?) is that the person buying that vehicle today will get absolutely bloodied in depreciation. There are also people who will never afford anything newer or nicer than a four-year-old used car.

Respectfully, I support a person's right to choose their own vehicle, house, partner, etc. -- that's part of what makes our country great! The absolute LAST thing I want is the same result for everyone. Chip - You're a self-professed Subaru fan and that's great for you as I'm sure their vehicles fit your criteria. I have nothing against Subarus but they're not on my shopping list as I think they're some of the oddest, strangest cars on the market and they don't fit my needs. But, just cause they're not for me doesn't mean I'm against them.....
 
SharksFan22 said:
Oh yeah, I forgot about that. They don't conform to the same passenger safety laws. But, wrt to "edge" well, from my perspective in a low, sports car, just about every car on the market does this, including Subarus. :)

As to the "edge", it much easier to see oncoming traffice if it were a passenger vehicle, than an SUV. Even I hope, with something like my Baja.

I have to say, I'm a little on the fence on this one. On one hand, I get very annoyed when I'm in a parking lot where all the spots are marked as compact so I can understand a large SUV owner giving up and jamming their car in a compact spot. On the other hand, I'll agree that it's a major pain to try to squeeze into the car when a non-compact vehicle is parked next to me into a compact spot. My solution -- I'm a nut about keeping my cars in excellent condition and I park at the far end of the lot. And no, I don't advocate taking up two spaces. Ever. And, I've seen compact cars deliver door dings just as nasty as SUVs. :) Be careful with your generalizations.[/quote}

First, it should not be about "giving up". It is about respect. And dare I say say there is less respect among those that have , than those that have not in some cases. Even when I was given a "full-size" car, never did I think twice about parking in a compact space.

I will be honest my opinions are driven by living in the DC area (a great anomaly, as far as the rest of the nation goes). The King of the "I've got mine, so WTF about you". I had a woman with an Expedition park in a compact space next to mine, and when she opened her door - it was with a good thud. Her comment? "well, I am in a hurry, but it is not like that that ding really matters to you".

Yes. compact cars can deliver good dings. But in the end it is about respect for your fellow human being. More and more in areas like mine, we are seeing those with the money, look down upon those with out the money (FYI, I live in Fairfax County Virginia, one of the highest cost, highest disposable income areas in the US).

As an example, look at those that have died. I was taught i my early years that one would either stand at the curb, or get out of their car and stand tat the curb, as the procession went by. Now we have to have police at each light, in order to have safe passage.

So the questions begs, why should I as a compact vehicle owner go out of my way to accommodate those that have little regard for the laws and rules of this land?

I'm more concerned about 18-wheelers running me over than I am a Chevy Tahoe.

So am I. But that is a post for the PF here.

Huh? While I'm not a fan of the giant homes (I've owned homes in both those categories and am now in a smaller one) who ever said that there's a guaranteed equal outcome in life? Is that what this is *really* about? Class envy? So someone has had enough financial success in life that they can purchase a $60K SUV that gets poor mileage. So what? They pay through the nose at the pump so it's not like they're not continuing to spend money for their purchase. Plus, if we take a two-year view of it, what do you think the resale market for these vehicles will be? My suspiscion (sp?) is that the person buying that vehicle today will get absolutely bloodied in depreciation. There are also people who will never afford anything newer or nicer than a four-year-old used car.

Respectfully, I support a person's right to choose their own vehicle, house, partner, etc. -- that's part of what makes our country great! The absolute LAST thing I want is the same result for everyone. Chip - You're a self-professed Subaru fan and that's great for you as I'm sure their vehicles fit your criteria. I have nothing against Subarus but they're not on my shopping list as I think they're some of the oddest, strangest cars on the market and they don't fit my needs. But, just cause they're not for me doesn't mean I'm against them.....

It has some to do with class envy. Again looking at the DC area. But when you have those building McMansions (2,500+ sf) in neighborhoods of homes that are under 2,000 sf. You have to look at the historical perspective also. Many, even the "rich" folk, were happy with their under 2.5000 sf homes. But as we have changed as a nation, the quality of life and expectations has changed

I even fell prey to that thinking when moving from my 1.200 sf TH to my 800 sf apartment *(one bedroom). In a few years if I move, I am now better able to maybe consider a 600 sf apartment.

Not to take this to the PF here, but I know that I have been left behind under Reagan and Bush I, and I was lifted up during Clinton, and now have fallen behind under Bush II.

It is not class envy on my part. I have accepted my lot in life (it may not be a lot, but is a life - thanks to the "Bug's Life" for that quote). I am not looking to get a 2,000+ sf house or a car that I can afford at half of the median income here. What I am looking for is acceptance like in my parents home town in my youth, that each person and contribution had value.

It meant a lot to me when an owner and customer mine that just purchased a Hummer congratulated me on my purchase of my Baja. Or when a customer of mine that knew I owned a TH, and then found out that I had to sell, and heard about my new apartment gave me words of encouragement and and support.

In the DC area, these positives are far and few between. Hell, some of these folks don't want the teachers, policemen, and firefighters to live amongst them in "affordable" housing set asides. Never mind those that "serve" them in retail. I guess we can afford to live in WV and pay $3 to get to work.

Before you get the idea that I want a "handout". No I don't. I just remember a time that has long past that rich and poor had a respect of each other. I remember when my Dad bought his Oldsmobile at about the same time as a neighbor bought their Cadillac. It was a great time for both .

But never did we see people buying "regular" homes, only to building something that might be twice the size and out out of character for the community.
 
superfunkomatic said:
read the post, it's a chevy vehicle. and yes, other manufacturers do make fuel-inefficient vehicles - you are correct. but even the nissan titan gets better gas mileage than the american SUVs and pickups - those figures are available from the sites.

and i, like many others, have chosen to not buy them for many reasons outside of fuel efficiency - including lack of style, modern features, design flaws and safety.

my comments are about consumer behavior. north americans consume, that's what we are good at. we use copious amounts of resources, often when we don't need to - example large vehicles. i was simply making a point that maybe people should reevaluate their behavior when resources are expensive or scarce. frankly, i'd rather spend money on other things than gasoline - movie tickets, beer, food, etc. but you're free to drive what you like and make that choice for yourself. be informed.

edit: also thanx for the nod to fame, i wish i was so lucky. and yes, i do drive fuel efficient vehicles - a toyota echo (50 MPG in the city), and a l'il mazda truck for weekend work (30 MPG)

Chevy Tahoe Vortec 5300 V8 4x4 : 15/19
Nissan Armada V8 4x4: 13/18
Toyota Sequoia V8: 15/17

Toyota Tacoma 4 banger: 21/26
Toyota Tacoma V6: N/A( that is right from the site)
Nissan Frontier: 15/20
Chevy Colorado 4 banger: 20/27
Chevy Colorado 5 banger: 17/22

Nissan Titan:14/18
Chevy Silverado Vortec 5300 V8: 15/18
Toyota Tundra V8: 16/18

Right from the sites. There pretty much close with each other in fuel economy. GM and Ford are very reliable in their trucks/SUV's( and their cars). So end it with that arguement.
 
I like it,I like it a lot.Its looked The same for over 15 years and you guys are complaining that it looks like the old one?I think GM did a great job on this.It looks bold and mean.Its better looking than that of many foreign SUV's that look alike.We'll just have to wait til the first quarter of 2006 when it comes out to see how it drives,handles,and the power.with an top offering of a 6.3l with 400 horsepower,we should be impressed.Back to styleing,I love what they did with the interior.These trucks were in desperate need of a new interior and it looks like it was worth the wait,they look great.Foreign interiors have way to many buttons and controls,all which can become confusing and,well,an all around pain in the ass.Thats something that I wouldnt want to deal with.Being a big guy(6'5",260) I like the huge armrest and wide seats.It looks like there plenty of head and leg space too.
You complain about fuel economy.Im willing to bet that this line of GM SUV's will be better in fuel economy than the foreigners in there class.Have you guys ever heard of Displacement of Demand(DOD) or the 8-6-4 system?These engines feature DOD.The engines are designed to shut down cylinders,as much as 4,when the power is not needed.For example,this is great for city driving.This greatly improves fuel economy.I am not worried about fuel economy with these.
 
KillerV said:
Its better looking than that of many foreign SUV's that look alike.. ..Foreign interiors have way to many buttons and controls,all which can become confusing and,well,an all around pain in the ass.... ...Im willing to bet that this line of GM SUV's will be better in fuel economy than the foreigners in there class...

Just because something is foreign doesn't make it bad :)

Unless you pay for satellite navigation/in dash televisions etc then there is a limit to how many buttons can serve a purpose on a dashboard. I'm pretty sure if you did a comparison the number of buttons on US and "Foreign" SUV's and cars would be very similar.

This Tahoe has on the drivers door alone, 9 buttons, with 16 different ways to press them..talk about confusing and being a pain in the ass! :p

Chances are this model will be slightly more fuel efficient than models from other manufacturers developed several years ago. That wouldn't really be unexpected. Overall though it'll still be less fuel efficient than most other cars on the road - especially when compared to those "foreign" ones.

(The 5.3L V-8s boast Displacement On Demand cylinder-deactivation technology, giving the 320-hp engines the ability to achieve a 20.5 mpg combined EPA rating, based on preliminary tests. The 6.0L heavy-duty engines boast 350- and 355-hp, with the top aluminum-block 6.2L touting variable-valve timing ranging from 380 to 400 horsepower, dependent on application. http://motortrend.com/roadtests/suv/112_0509_chevy_tahoe/index1.html)
 
Nice numbers but...

quagmire said:
Chevy Tahoe Vortec 5300 V8 4x4 : 15/19
Nissan Armada V8 4x4: 13/18
Toyota Sequoia V8: 15/17

Toyota Tacoma 4 banger: 21/26
Toyota Tacoma V6: N/A( that is right from the site)
Nissan Frontier: 15/20
Chevy Colorado 4 banger: 20/27
Chevy Colorado 5 banger: 17/22

Nissan Titan:14/18
Chevy Silverado Vortec 5300 V8: 15/18
Toyota Tundra V8: 16/18

Right from the sites. There pretty much close with each other in fuel economy. GM and Ford are very reliable in their trucks/SUV's( and their cars). So end it with that arguement.

Hate to rain on anyones parade, but while these mpg numbers are about the same for import vs domestic, try towing with the Tundra or Titan and see what you get. I have REAL WORLD experience towing with a lot of different pickups and suvs, and it ain't close. The I-Force V-8 in the Tundra runs completely out of steam towing and consumes gas like Oprah consumes calories when she ain't dieting. Ditto the Titan. BTW, the Titan and Armada share the same drivetrain. The Armada and its Infiniti QX56 cousin are considered major gashogs. Don't believe me, drive one. Seems to me, GM, Ford and the domestics in general take a beating on the gas mileage and environmentally friendly image. This is largely a misperception more than anything. Yet, when you crunch numbers, there is a reason the Japanese are diving into the large, full size pickup truck and suv fray. It is called profit, and WE CONSUMERS and our as yet unquenched thirst for the larger, bigger, more powerful cars and trucks are driving this. Don't therefore blame the manufacturer, and please, don't blame the single mom or dad driving their kids to school in a 'Burban or Excursion. Blame if anything, all the social and cultural factors that have given Americans and "America" in general, its worldwide stigma of excesses, waste, materialism, and yes, Hollywood elitism. Factor those into the equation. Why else would the Hummer H1, then H2 be huge sales successes despite their outdated appearances and lack of any new technology.
 
StevieG said:
Hate to rain on anyones parade, but while these mpg numbers are about the same for import vs domestic, try towing with the Tundra or Titan and see what you get. I have REAL WORLD experience towing with a lot of different pickups and suvs, and it ain't close. The I-Force V-8 in the Tundra runs completely out of steam towing and consumes gas like Oprah consumes calories when she ain't dieting. Ditto the Titan. BTW, the Titan and Armada share the same drivetrain. The Armada and its Infiniti QX56 cousin are considered major gashogs. Don't believe me, drive one. Seems to me, GM, Ford and the domestics in general take a beating on the gas mileage and environmentally friendly image. This is largely a misperception more than anything. Yet, when you crunch numbers, there is a reason the Japanese are diving into the large, full size pickup truck and suv fray. It is called profit, and WE CONSUMERS and our as yet unquenched thirst for the larger, bigger, more powerful cars and trucks are driving this. Don't therefore blame the manufacturer, and please, don't blame the single mom or dad driving their kids to school in a 'Burban or Excursion. Blame if anything, all the social and cultural factors that have given Americans and "America" in general, its worldwide stigma of excesses, waste, materialism, and yes, Hollywood elitism. Factor those into the equation. Why else would the Hummer H1, then H2 be huge sales successes despite their outdated appearances and lack of any new technology.

Well actually you could look at it the other way around. Companies want to sell more expensive and bigger things so they push the mentality that more and bigger is better and that the only way to be happy is to have more.

It's a very complex issue, but the main thing that is keeping it the way it is is greed and the fact that it is just easier to make something that is wilder and more extreme than what has been done before, but it's not easy to innovate and be original. So SUVs are popular because they are big? Well God-damn we better make a bigger one: and thus the H2 is born... Instead of: SUVs are popular because the make people feel safe and comfortable? Well let's figure out a way to make people feel safe and comfortable without making such a huge oil-devouring beast of a vehicle. The second is a little more abstract. It's harder to figure out whether it will be successful and it's harder to market because you have to convince people to try something new.

The same bull applies to hollywood movies: why give money to someone trying to make a creative and original movie when we don't know how succcesful it will be. Better to just make the same BS and drop a couple of million into newer and more realistic special effects, or into buying that actor that is in every other movie.

And as a result, american people act out these extremes by killing each other all the time then going home and watching "reality" TV.

America is the heart of the capitalism and thus it is the heart of all the BS and the good that goes along with it.
 
Just because something is foreign doesn't make it bad.Unless you pay for satellite navigation/in dash televisions etc then there is a limit to how many buttons can serve a purpose on a dashboard. I'm pretty sure if you did a comparison the number of buttons on US and "Foreign" SUV's and cars would be very similar.

This Tahoe has on the drivers door alone, 9 buttons, with 16 different ways to press them..talk about confusing and being a pain in the ass!

Chances are this model will be slightly more fuel efficient than models from other manufacturers developed several years ago. That wouldn't really be unexpected. Overall though it'll still be less fuel efficient than most other cars on the road - especially when compared to those "foreign" ones.

(The 5.3L V-8s boast Displacement On Demand cylinder-deactivation technology, giving the 320-hp engines the ability to achieve a 20.5 mpg combined EPA rating, based on preliminary tests. The 6.0L heavy-duty engines boast 350- and 355-hp, with the top aluminum-block 6.2L touting variable-valve timing ranging from 380 to 400 horsepower, dependent on application.

I never said foreign cars were bad,infact,I like many foreign vehicles.Im just comparing.But Im talking about the Land Rover and X5 on the first page.Especially the Land Rover.Being in one of those you'd feel like you were in a airplane cockpit.Too many buttons and controls,even the steering wheel is over crowded.Now a real nice interior to comment about is that of the Subaru B9 Trebeca.Thats a sharp interior that wraps around you.And the dash isn't overcrowded.The exterior though is a different story.And the Tahoe has the basics on the door that a Cadillac had 15 years ago,power windows,door locks,window locks,mirrors,and memory seat.Simple stuff.

We'll just have to wait and see the fuel economy.I'd imagine that shutting down 4 cylinders in town is going to save a lot of gas.But like other people have said, full size SUV's are terrible on gas.And foreign full size's aren't any better enough to comment about.I can say that along with them because I travel and rent.While no 6,000 pound SUV is going to get the fuel economy of a family sedan,this GM line will be better on gas then their foreign competitors.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.