2007 Chevy Tahoe unveiled!

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,894
31
Northern Virginia
quagmire said:
Today is now October 5th. The new GMC Yukon and Yukon Denali have been unveiled.

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/...ed=1#post365173

Enjoy!

Info

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/...?threadid=20704
In the end it is sad that "Detroit" has fought serious efforts to raise the CAFE milage over the last 20+ years. They have only recently reacted to demands due to the rise in public anger. Most other industrialized nations have made greater strides in raising MPG figures; while we have allowed lobbyist's here in the US to have their way.
 

alex_ant

macrumors 68020
Feb 5, 2002
2,473
0
All up in your bidness
Couldn't thet get better mileage out of these things if they just converted the engine to run directly on the blood of dead Iraqis? Laws of thermodynamics and all, why not cut out the petroleum middleman.
 

quagmire

macrumors 603
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
6,314
1,117
alex_ant said:
Couldn't thet get better mileage out of these things if they just converted the engine to run directly on the blood of dead Iraqis? Laws of thermodynamics and all, why not cut out the petroleum middleman.
Dude, that isn't funny.
 

maxterpiece

macrumors 6502a
Mar 5, 2003
729
0
Wow, thought this thread was dead. Since it has resurfaced I feel obliged to respond.

StevieG said:
Maxterpiece, I am amazed at the generalizations and stereotyping in a good many of the responses here.
Is it not the job of a sociologist to make generalizations? You look at a population and study the trends in that populations. Every individual is different, there is no denying that, but trends are trends, and whether or not your vehicle fits into a category of which I am noting a trend in does not necessarily reflect on who you are and on what your intentions are with that vehicle. Don't take it personally!

First off, this is America, and folks can and will buy what they want to buy.
TRUE!!! No one can argue this. Buy what you want! Use your money however your heart desires! The fact remains that the divide between rich and poor grows larger every day. The fact remains that I have a right to express my concern over dwindling resources. The fact remains that the government has an obligation to be proactive about the future of our country, our people and our planet. The government has an obligation to be proactive and to tax the s*** out of these vehicles to cover the costs they will eventually leave our children to pay for the AVOIDABLE environmental damage that their popularity causes and for the danger these vehicles pose to those who choose not to buy them!

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?
I have searched for over an hour trying to find a website that gives sales statistics of all vehicles sold in the US. I was unable to find one, but I think I can confidently say that these luxury pickups are 1) not sold in nearly the quantity that the all these big SUVs are selling for. Why else would it be that I see about 100 advertisements for big SUVs to every advertisement for a luxury pick-up... Why else is it that over the last 5 or so years, every car company has released and expanded it's SUV lineup? It's because that's where the money is!

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.
If you paid 20k more for your gas guzzler and we all paid 50% more taxes on our gas to cover the costs of researching new fuel sources and transforming, I think you might be willing to sacrifice the luxury of your SUV for something more economical. Then again, you're right - 19-20mpg on the highway is decent. Maybe this tax wouldn't apply to your car. I'm not concerned with you though - I'm concerned with the general trend in our country changing. Adding 20k to the cost of gas guzzlers and making fuel cost an additional $2k/year will makea lot more people reconsider before investing in a status symbol. Money talks louder to people than ethics and logic. Look at europe - gas costs about 50% more there and, although there are still SUVs there on the scale of a pathfinder, there are no monster Expeditions or Escalades, and most of the commuter cars get 20%+ better gas mileage. People drive diesel and hybrid cars. People sacrifice the glamor, even though it is still available to them (I'm not advocating taking people's choice away!), and go with what is truly more practical.
And finally, i don't consider it a gas guzzler just because it is below a certain threshold in gas mileage. I consider it a gas guzzler if it is below that threshold and is clearly marketed as a personal use/luxury car and not a work vehicle that requires a more powerful engine.
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.
The main cultural issue at play here is that US citizens think we are invincible. We think we can get away with whatever we want. There has never been a war on our soil (not counting rev. war and civil war). We have always been safely isolated by two huge oceans. Well, with technology today, oceans don't protect us so much anymore and that isolation isn't real. We think that the more wasteful we are, the cooler we are. Well that's not gonna cut it. Energy crisis is looming and it's gonna smack us down to earth really quickly if we don't start weening ourselves. I think if you look at a lot of the US foreign policy today you see it is similar to that of someone falling from a dreamworld and scratching with all its power to maintain that illusion.
It would be wonderful to have a 90mpg 6500lb vehicle. That is true. With the tax money we could be charging that vehicle may be possible.

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'm glad you have a car that is reliable and fits your needs. I wasn't trying to put you in a box or classify you as a bad person. I hope your Denali lasts you a long time and serves your family well.
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,894
31
Northern Virginia
maxterpiece said:
I'm glad you have a car that is reliable and fits your needs. I wasn't trying to put you in a box or classify you as a bad person. I hope your Denali lasts you a long time and serves your family well.
In the end that poster could have served their family needs, and been a better friend to the growing use of fuel and the environment, if they would have gone to one of the mini-vans. Even more so if Detroit did not have their hands in the pockets of Congress, and mini-vans were exempt from many rules that would have made them liable for car CAFE requirements.

Over the last five to ten years we have allowed the "greed" of the US to rule over over National and World interests. Bigger and faster seem to have over ruled common sense.

Car manufactures have the ability to play with gear ratios in order to get better MPG. But that comes at a price of performance. Add to that we re growing even more in to a nation of the haves and haves not's. For if we mandate that seat belts and airbags be in every vehicle - then pray tell why don't we mandate maximum engine and vehicle size? As well as MPG/CAFE ratings?
 

skoker

macrumors 68000
Aug 6, 2005
1,839
0
Hey! Let's put a DVD player right where the driver can see it!










Oh geez, wonder why he crashed?
 

hookahco

macrumors regular
i was born in the USA and ive lived all my life here and in my short (18 year old) life ive spent time in europe and the middle east (the good part) and i have to say.. american culture makes me sick. no offense to any pure blooded americans, its your life. this is a free country built on the notion that every man can live the way he wants to and as long as you dont harm others, do whatever you want. but honestly, does a 5'5" mom need a chevy suburban to drop her 2 or 3 kids off at school? why cant americans seem to design something nice? look at american designed clothing then go look at italian or french designs. theres no comparing. its quite sad.. all the resources we have and we cant do anything decent. by the way.. i live in the capital of gluttony.. Los Angeles, California. i can promise you that i see at least 50 new suburbans and tahoes every day and theyre mostly driven by short woman.. when i see them next to me i get the hell away for fear of my life. its not that im sexist.. its just common sense.. im tall (6'2") and a very very good driver and when i drive an suv i can barely see normally so how can they see anything??? its really amazing.
</rant> im so sick of the trash around me its really really sad and disturbing.. nobody appreciates anything anymore.
 

Jon'sLightBulbs

macrumors 6502a
Jan 31, 2005
524
0
Chicago
hookahco said:
<rant>
</rant>
I'm no SUV apologist, but what's wrong with an under 6 ft. mother driving her kids to school in a Sequoia or an Explorer? The visibility in an SUV is better than in a passenger car. Your higher line of sight enables you to see further down the road, and the pillars usually aren't as encumbering.

Would you like that family to travel in a little Citroen or Fiat? I mean, let's be objective here. When you saw those familes of 5 and 6 in Europe traveling around in little 2 door Seats or Renaults, did they look comfortable?

No.
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,894
31
Northern Virginia
Jon'sLightBulbs said:
I'm no SUV apologist, but what's wrong with an under 6 ft. mother driving her kids to school in a Sequoia or an Explorer? The visibility in an SUV is better than in a passenger car. Your higher line of sight enables you to see further down the road, and the pillars usually aren't as encumbering.

Would you like that family to travel in a little Citroen or Fiat? I mean, let's be objective here. When you saw those familes of 5 and 6 in Europe traveling around in little 2 door Seats or Renaults, did they look comfortable?

No.
Yes, visibility is better for her - but what about the rest of us? I think that LA is much like the DC area with a much greater portion of the vehicles on the road blocking the view for others that can not afford the hit on MPG ratings.

Comfort is relative. These same folks could find comfort as I did as a child in a Ford Country Squire Wagon, and get better MPG to boot. What you are missing from hookahco's post is the concept of greed is good that we now have here in the US.

As long as we can justify our motives, then all is good. I have kids and I need the hauling and safety of an oversized SUV. I have a four person household, and need a 4,00o sq ft home for us. Never mind that for 20 to 40 years in that same neighborhood, families were able to live well in 2,000 sq ft with the same number of children or more. Never mind higher density housing in order for "moderate" income people to afford a place to live, "I just don't want them living close to me". The rallying against day worker sites - people want cheap labor to build their McMansions, and to clean these same homes. I guess as long as they can afford filling up their Hummers then all is good. Forget the rest of us that are the backbone for their good life.
 

Jon'sLightBulbs

macrumors 6502a
Jan 31, 2005
524
0
Chicago
Chip NoVaMac said:
As long as we can justify our motives, then all is good.... Forget the rest of us that are the backbone for their good life.
I assume that every statement in that last paragraph was in jest. Which is good.

But I think the greed aspect is fine. Every family has its own rational motivations. Each should do what benefits its own interests. Are you suggesting that there should be only one class in the US - a huge middle class - with nobody wealthier, and that we should all share our resources? So everyone should be equal, right.
 

maxvamp

macrumors 6502a
Sep 26, 2002
600
0
Somewhere out there
Wrong Demon...

Folks,

It does not help when the US has a President so far in the Oil company's pockets that when he sticks his finger in the air to see which way the wind blows, he also can check their rectal temperature.

It doesn't help when he is lowering the CAFE standards, and the EPA standards either.

There are technologies that are far simpler and less expensive than hybrid what would reduce America's consumption of oil. Killing the SUV is not the answer. I personally think there are too many on the road, but the dollars spent on them are not mine.

We should be promoting E-89, the 89% ethanol blend of gasoline, and BioDiesel more. The car manufacturers should be making vehicles optimized to run on these fuels in their purest forms. Only minor tweaks are needed to an engine to run these. No electric engines, no batteries, etc.
Second, the government should be giving noticeable tax breaks to the consumer for using this stuff ( no corporate welfare here Mr. Bush ).

I have been using BioDiesel for a long time now, and I was surprised to see that last time I filled up my TDi Jetta, that Bio was cheaper than Petroleum. Problem is, Bio doesn't like to run as well in more than a 20% blend in standard Diesel engines. The fuel is thicker. and more likely to cloud in cold weather. This is a minor fix for the car companies.
E-89 will not run in most regular gasoline engines, although most Chryslers made in the last few years will run it fine. Maybe they should advertise this feature.

Long and short of this rant is that bashing the SUVs will not deter their purchase. The problem is oil consumption. These are real solutions that would clean up the air and reduce America's oil consumption. Cost of ownership ( fuel ) is the only thing that will sway the purchases of SUVs.

Myself? I own a SUV ( Chevy S-10 Blazer ) and a TDi Jetta

My 2 cents.

Max.

P.S. My personal experience is that the quality of a Chevy truck is far superior than that of an Audi/Volkswagon.

Max.
 

groovebuster

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,215
39
3rd rock from the sun...
Jon'sLightBulbs said:
Are you suggesting that there should be only one class in the US - a huge middle class - with nobody wealthier, and that we should all share our resources? So everyone should be equal, right.
That's communism!

Ooops! I said the bad word! :D ;)

The basic concept of (modern) communism is atually pretty good. Just the greed of the people doesn't allow it to work...

You can't run a perfect system with imperfect people. ... the same old story! :rolleyes:

groovebuster
 

EJBasile

macrumors 65816
Apr 20, 2004
1,304
2
There should be more diesel cars in the US.

The only three sedans available are the VW Passat TDi, VW Jetta TDi and the Mercedes E320 CDI. VW discontinued the Touareg V10 TDI (which got the same gas mileage as the V8 and V6 versions).

I have the E320 CDI and it is one of the best cars in my opinion. I get 37mpg highway, around 28mpg city. Yes diesel is a little more than gas, it does not get as good mileage as something like a corolla, and it costs significantly more than the corolla, it has great quality and does not feel light and cheep.

Cars I would recommend for diesel off the top of my head:
Touareg V6 and V8
Mercedes C-Class and M-Class
Audi A4 and possibly A6
BMW 3, 5, and X3/X5 series
 

groovebuster

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,215
39
3rd rock from the sun...
hookahco said:
i agree 100%. The most reliable engines in the world are diesel. i don't know why the us govt is so against them.
I always thought they just don't care!?!? As well as most of the US population. Not long ago gasoline was still pretty cheap in the US compared to other regions of the world (e.g. Europe). Why bothering to drive a diesel then, when it costs you only a few dollars less at the gas station? Especially since the car is more expensive because of the Diesel engine?

The same reason why you can't buy little or fuel efficient cars in North America.

Jon'sLightBulbs said:
I'm no SUV apologist, but what's wrong with an under 6 ft. mother driving her kids to school in a Sequoia or an Explorer? The visibility in an SUV is better than in a passenger car. Your higher line of sight enables you to see further down the road, and the pillars usually aren't as encumbering.
What is wrong with it is very easy... It is a waste of resources. Three people driving around in a few tons of metal? For what reason? Especially the impact on other people's safety by these vehicles is a big issue. Other people already said it... they are blocking the view for other people and the high mass causes more severe damages to ther vehicles in an accident. On top a heavy vehicle like a SUV is harder to control in difficult road conditions due to its high mass and high center of gravity.

So maybe it nice to sit that high and to make up for the inability to properly drive... but that's on the back of the other people participating in public traffic. BTW, I never heard a sports car driver complaining that he doesn't see enough and cuasing more accidents because of that.

Here in Germany they were thinking about forbidding SUVs for the public and only allowing them with special permissions for people who really need them... but since that would be against EU law it probably won't happen...

Jon'sLightBulbs said:
Would you like that family to travel in a little Citroen or Fiat? I mean, let's be objective here. When you saw those familes of 5 and 6 in Europe traveling around in little 2 door Seats or Renaults, did they look comfortable?
Sorry dude... but most families are not 5 or 6 people, they are 4! Also in the US. On top you probably never sat in a small car for longer so how do you know what is comfortable? A mom bringing her two kids to school definitely doesn't need a huge SUV for it.

Until our second daughter was born we were having only this as a car:



It was absolutely enough. We even went on vacation with it: 2 adults and a baby!

There might be people who really need a SUV. What was discussed was the fact that a high percentage of the people who are driving one don't need one and that usage of a SUV is a waste of resources on the back of the rest of the population.

Isn't it weird that all the european car makers don't sell their small models in North America and only the mid-size and big engine configurations, but never the small efficient ones? Here in Europe the companies make most of their money with small and fuel efficient cars. 40% of all cars sold are Diesels meanwhile. No wonder since our gas prices are at around 1.30€/l. Maybe you guys should have more realistc gas prices in the future (a big part of the tax we are paying on gas here in Germany is for the pollution/damage it is causing) and then you guys will start to realize that big isn't always beautiful...

But what do I expect from a country that bombards me with dozens of penis enlargement and Viagra SPAM e-mails every day...? :rolleyes:

groovebuster

EDIT: Meanwhile we are driving this as a car. And it is absolutely enough for a family of four! And yes, we are very comfortable in it, getting 35-40mpg in the city and more than 50mpg (Diesel) on the highway...
 

Jon'sLightBulbs

macrumors 6502a
Jan 31, 2005
524
0
Chicago
Please read the post that precedes a response before replying to that response. The guy was complaining about a five foot five inch tall mother driving an SUV because he percieved that she would have bad visibility out the windshield. His perception is that SUVs somehow yield worse visibility than normal cars. Note that he says that at 6 feet tall himself, he could barely see out of an SUV - how could the shorter mother? I pointed out a simple misconception.

Further, I don't agree that even a family of four will ever be more comfortable in any of the subcompacts you see roaming European cities. "Enough," is of course relative. They're less comfortable than in a full sized sedan. That much is certain.

Finally, the European perception that their fuel prices are "realistic" and that U.S. prices are artificially low is laughable. Excise taxes constitute a huge part of your gas prices. How are excise taxes a "natural" market driver? They drive up prices to reduce consumption for policy reasons.

You claim that our fuel prices are artificially low. Just the opposite. My friend, your fuel prices are artificially high.
 

groovebuster

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,215
39
3rd rock from the sun...
When you are selling something only at the the price point of production costs even though using or disposing the product is causing damage to the environment (which causes a high amount of costs, often more than just the production costs), the price is kept artificially low, because the aftermath is paid not by the polluter himself but by the rest of the people living on this planet. This applies to every consumption of resources or energy. Here in Germany a big part of the tax on gasoline is also going into infrastructure. The maintenance of the streets therefore is mainly paid by those who use them.

I don't claim that the system we have in the EU is perfect by now, especially since some countries (including Germany) are struggling ecomonically at the moment and the changing process is slowed down. But the high gasoline prizes are forcing the majority of the people to use gas a little bit more responsible. Therefore pollution per car is way less than compared to the US, which is a good thing. And I don't think that you wouldn't agree on that... right?

And maybe you can explain to me the concept of "the outside size of a car equals comfort to drive it"? Maybe I am just an ignorant European, but so far I didn't get it... :confused:

I find it convenient to always find a parking in a big city like Berlin due to the small size of my car. I also like it that I don't have to pay a fortune for gas every month in order to keep my car running. Insurance is also way cheaper than for a big vehicle. Let's not even start about the monthly rates... The seating position is just as comfortable as in a big SUV and I am am 6'1" guy weighing more than 200lbs. I am pretty sure that even though gas prizes are that high here in Germany, I am paying way less overall for our 2 cars than you do for one SUV. I just don't see why I should spend a fortune every month just to drive a car that is totally oversized in every possible aspect. I am making good money and I could afford a big car, but our priorities are different ones. But what I definitely don't want is to be forced to pay for the willful waste of other people...

Just my 0.02€

groovebuster
 

Santaduck

macrumors 6502a
Oct 21, 2003
627
0
Honolulu
SharksFan22 said:
As far as environment is concerned, I live in California and strongly believe that air quality here is much better than is was in the 80s. Admittedly, I have no scientific basis for that statement, but it seems cleaner than it used to -- and this is with many more cars on the road than 20 years ago.
I grew up in San Jose, and remember the air in the 80s. When I go back to San Jose to visit the air is unimaginably worse today-- the average day's clarity today is the same as an especially bad smog day in the 80s.

Maybe SoCal air is better than the 80s?

Gotta say you would never expect this thread to become so long by looking at that first post :)
 

Chip NoVaMac

macrumors G3
Dec 25, 2003
8,894
31
Northern Virginia
EJBasile said:
There should be more diesel cars in the US.

<snip>

I have the E320 CDI and it is one of the best cars in my opinion. I get 37mpg highway, around 28mpg city. Yes diesel is a little more than gas, it does not get as good mileage as something like a corolla, and it costs significantly more than the corolla, it has great quality and does not feel light and cheep.
And the diesel Corolla would get way better than the gas version
 

quagmire

macrumors 603
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
6,314
1,117
Chip NoVaMac said:
And the diesel Corolla would get way better than the gas version
When Epilson II comes out, we might be seeing a Diesel Malibu/G6.
 

darkwing

macrumors 65816
Jan 6, 2004
1,210
0
evilernie said:
Bah. I have been a lifelong GM and Mopar man but they both have let me down. GTO? Please. Charger? Not quite. They should both learn something from what Ford did with the Mustang.

That's why I just crossed over and bought a 2006 Mustang GT on Saturday. :cool:
I'll look for you in my WS6 trans am. It truly is the batmobile.