Jump to content
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    2018 Chevrolet Tahoe Custom Makes the Tahoe Somewhat Affordable

      Begins at $44,995, arrives at dealers next month


    Chevrolet will be introducing a new base model of the 2018 Tahoe called the Custom. The Custom sets itself apart from other Tahoes as it will not have a third-row seat, increasing cargo space to 54 cubic feet. Standard equipment includes 18-inch wheels, 8-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto compatibility, OnStar 4G LTE with Wi-Fi, backup camera, and remote start.

    Like most Tahoes, the Custom features the 5.3L V8 with 355 horsepower. Out of the box, the Tahoe Custom can tow up to 6,600 pounds. An optional max trailering package boosts that to 8,600 pounds.

    “The Tahoe Custom is a response to strong customer demand for Tahoe, as well as the full-size SUV segment moving upmarket. In the past five years, the average transaction price for the segment has climbed fueled by customer appetite for features like heated and cooled seats, adaptive cruise control and a head-up display. This created an unmet need in the marketplace for customers who want the cargo and towing capability of a full-size SUV to go camping, boating or off-roading but don’t necessarily want all of the option content offered on a Tahoe Premier,” said Sandor Piszar, Chevrolet Trucks marketing director in a statement.

    The 2018 Tahoe Custom arrives at dealers next month with a base price of $44,995.

    Source: Chevrolet
    Press Release is on Page 2


    CHEVROLET INTRODUCES THE TAHOE CUSTOM

    • New model offers Tahoe’s legendary capability starting at $44,995

    DETROIT — Today Chevrolet announced the new Tahoe Custom special edition for the 2018 model year. Like other Custom models, the Tahoe Custom is intended for buyers who want the uncompromised capability of Chevrolet trucks and SUVs in a great looking package at an outstanding value.

    “The Tahoe Custom is a response to strong customer demand for Tahoe, as well as the full-size SUV segment moving upmarket,” said Sandor Piszar, Chevrolet Trucks marketing director. “In the past five years, the average transaction price for the segment has climbed fueled by customer appetite for features like heated and cooled seats, adaptive cruise control and a head-up display. This created an unmet need in the marketplace for customers who want the cargo and towing capability of a full-size SUV to go camping, boating or off-roading but don’t necessarily want all of the option content offered on a Tahoe Premier.”

    For $44,995, the 2018 Tahoe Custom comes standard with 6,600 pounds of towing capacity (up to 8,600 pounds of towing with max trailering package), a maximum of 112 cubic feet of cargo space and a 355-hp, 5.3L V-8 engine that delivers an expected segment-leading 23 mpg highway based on EPA estimates.

    The Tahoe Custom is based on the LS trim and adds 18-inch painted aluminum wheels, all-season tires and a chrome-accented grille. Plus, Tahoe Custom features a third-row seat that has been removed, increasing cargo space behind the second row to a substantial 54 cubic feet for added utility.

    Tahoe Custom also features a suite of connectivity technologies including:

    • Apple CarPlay & Android Auto compatibility
    • 4G LTE connectivity with Wi-Fi hotspot (includes three-month/3G data trial)
    • 8-inch color touchscreen radio
    • Standard rear-vision camera
    • Standard remote start
    • Standard teen driver mode
    • Available Enhanced Driver Alert Package that features Forward Collision Alert, Safety Alert Driver Seat, IntelliBeam headlamps with automatic high-beam control, Lane Keep Assist and Low Speed Forward Automatic Braking
    • Up to five USB ports and five power outlets — including a 110-volt three-prong outlet —  to support electronic devices of all kinds (up to 11 charging locations)

    Tahoe Custom will be available at Chevy dealers in September 2017.

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    WOW, about time, not everyone wants a loaded Tahoe. They should have had this from the start.

    This also makes me think that GM is finally realizing that they have hit a top end in pricing and are going to lose customers like everyone if they do not offer lower priced options.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    21 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    So 3rd row seats are standard on Tahoes?  Would have thought they would have been optional, a waste of space for those that don't need them..

    Correct.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Someone is worried about the forthcoming Bronco.  I feel like Ford can price the Bronco at $35k and clean up.  Good move though to drop the price and have a more basic version if you want a luxury Tahoe that is why they have Denali Yukons.    Chevys should be cheap.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I like this idea.  I think the Silverado Custom is too narrowly focused though, with only a few color options and too few body configs.  Maybe the cheaper Camaro V8 could be called Camaro Custom.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 hours ago, dfelt said:

    WOW, about time, not everyone wants a loaded Tahoe. They should have had this from the start.

    This also makes me think that GM is finally realizing that they have hit a top end in pricing and are going to lose customers like everyone if they do not offer lower priced options.

    People like me....just want more meat, less toys......

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Interesting with the 3rd row delete. 

    Not surprising to me as most people don't seem to even use it. 

    17 hours ago, smk4565 said:

    Someone is worried about the forthcoming Bronco.  I feel like Ford can price the Bronco at $35k and clean up.  Good move though to drop the price and have a more basic version if you want a luxury Tahoe that is why they have Denali Yukons.    Chevys should be cheap.

    And Mercedes should not be under $30K yet we will soon have the A Class. See how that can get turned around?

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    44 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

    Not surprising to me as most people don't seem to even use it. 

    And Mercedes should not be under $30K yet we will soon have the A Class. See how that can get turned around?

    Which is what Chevy should do.  Have a Tahoe V6 at $39,995 because if you want a nicer truck there is the Yukon/Denali, and if you want nicer than that there is the Escalade.  Mercedes has a nice stepping stone product spread.  GM's brands compete with each other half the time.  Chevy needs to be always about value, especially if they are trying to push Buick and GMC as premium or luxury brands.  

    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    52 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

    Which is what Chevy should do.  Have a Tahoe V6 at $39,995 because if you want a nicer truck there is the Yukon/Denali, and if you want nicer than that there is the Escalade.  Mercedes has a nice stepping stone product spread.  GM's brands compete with each other half the time.  Chevy needs to be always about value, especially if they are trying to push Buick and GMC as premium or luxury brands.  

    Mercedes models overlap and compete with each other all the time. This is a fact that you seem to forget while criticizing GM yet again for the same thing. 

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    25 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

    Mercedes models overlap and compete with each other all the time. This is a fact that you seem to forget while criticizing GM yet again for the same thing. 

    It's a little different in that with M-B it's models within the same brand...while GM's approach has long been overlapping models in multiple brands competing with each other...like Chevy and GMC trucks...extreme examples would be like when they had Chevy, Saturn, Pontiac, Olds and Buick ----most with similar versions of the same model like the minivans, GMT360 SUVs, A-bodies, J-bodies, etc...  for the most part, those days are behind GM, but there is still some of it..

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    It's a little different in that with M-B it's models within the same brand...while GM's approach has long been overlapping models in multiple brands competing with each other...like Chevy and GMC trucks...extreme examples would be like when they had Chevy, Saturn, Pontiac, Olds and Buick ----most with similar versions of the same model like the minivans, GMT360 SUVs, A-bodies, J-bodies, etc...  for the most part, those days are behind GM, but there is still some of it..

    Oh, I'm not denying the overlap but SMK criticizes GM freely on it while ignoring the fact that Benz does the same thing if not worse. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    47 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

    Oh, I'm not denying the overlap but SMK criticizes GM freely on it while ignoring the fact that Benz does the same thing if not worse. 

    But in this case the Tahoe is positioned as a luxury SUV, while the GMC is positioned the same way.  The Tahoe, and ever Chevy truck for that matter should be cheaper than the GMC.  I have long said the base model GMC anything should be priced the same as the Chevy LTZ trim.  The Yukon starts at $48,500, a Tahoe should be $43,500 base, so I like that they dropped the Tahoe price, I think it could drop another grand, or maybe up the Yukon base model to $49,950 and make more standard, then you have a $5k gap at least.

    Mercedes doesn't sell 2 of the same of anything like GM does.  Even GLE and GLS which are the closest 2 products they have don't share any body panels.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

    But in this case the Tahoe is positioned as a luxury SUV, while the GMC is positioned the same way.  The Tahoe, and ever Chevy truck for that matter should be cheaper than the GMC.  I have long said the base model GMC anything should be priced the same as the Chevy LTZ trim.  The Yukon starts at $48,500, a Tahoe should be $43,500 base, so I like that they dropped the Tahoe price, I think it could drop another grand, or maybe up the Yukon base model to $49,950 and make more standard, then you have a $5k gap at least.

    Mercedes doesn't sell 2 of the same of anything like GM does.  Even GLE and GLS which are the closest 2 products they have don't share any body panels.

    Wrong on literally all counts. You don't have to share body panels to have sales overlap. I'm not even going to comment on the rest because you have a habit of using imaginary numbers to suit your argument like saying that the current Tahoes price positions itself as luxury when it doesn't. Clearly the luxury position is occupied by the Escalade and to a lesser extent the Yukon Denali. 

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    It's a little different in that with M-B it's models within the same brand...while GM's approach has long been overlapping models in multiple brands competing with each other...like Chevy and GMC trucks...extreme examples would be like when they had Chevy, Saturn, Pontiac, Olds and Buick ----most with similar versions of the same model like the minivans, GMT360 SUVs, A-bodies, J-bodies, etc...  for the most part, those days are behind GM, but there is still some of it..

    So what if there is overlap among brands? For years, my preference in GM truck styling has alternated between GMC and Chevrolet as each generation comes out.  If I don't like the looks of the Ford... say if I was in the Super Duty market around 2008....what other Ford product could I buy?

    The current generation of GM trucks is the only one in the last few generations where I actually like both the Chevy (Only in Z71 trim, I don't like the non-Z71 grille) and GMC.

    Same goes for Equinox / Terrain / Envision.  These three can overlap substantially on price, yet only 1 of them really has any chance with me.  Can't do that at Ford, Toyota, or Honda.

     

    • Like 1
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • At 2.12 and 0.95 cu.ft for the Audi and Jag's frunk respectfully is a non-issue for the Lyriq not having a frunk. Maximizing the back trunk space as what the GM guys are saying for the Lyriq and the reason why they did it that way by-passing the need for a frunk sounds like marketing BS, until you realize that Audi and Jag's frunk space is nonexistent...   To which GM's words then kinda make sense as the Lyriq does in fact offer more room back there.   Frunk space is kinda expected though, for EVs, so there is that... Tesla Model X for a comparison as Tesla is the benchmark....   https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/modelx/en_us/GUID-91E5877F-3CD2-4B3B-B2B8-B5DB4A6C0A05.html     Cargo Volume Table 1. 5-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row folded flat 2,410 85.1 Behind second row 1,050 37.1 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,593 91.6 Maximum total cargo volume with 5 passengers 1,233 43.5 Table 2. 6-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row in max cargo position, third row folded flat 2,431 85.8 Behind second row, third row folded flat 935 33 Behind third row 425 15 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,614 92.3 Maximum total cargo volume with 6 passengers 608 21.5 Table 3. 7-Seater Cargo Volumes Area Volume (liters) Volume (cubic ft) Front trunk 183 6.5 Behind first row, second row folded flat 2,314 81.7 Behind second row, third row folded flat 957 33.8 Behind third row 425 15 Maximum total cargo volume with driver and front passenger 2,497 88.2 Maximum total cargo volume with 7 passengers 608 21.5       The Lyriq's cargo space is plentiful and it would seem like an engineering choice to favour rear space over the use of a frunk.  Is it a sound engineering choice? Possibly yes as the powertrain bits need not be crammed.   Is it a sound MARKETING choice? Time will tell as many folk really dont understand engineering choices all to well...   Nor do they seem to care.  If they want a frunk, they WANT a phoquing frunk... 
    • Lyriq Chief Engineer, Jamie Brewer, recently explained to GM Authority that the team decided to prioritize rear cargo space over two separate cargo areas. Thus, the 2023 Cadillac Lyriq will have a larger traditional rear storage area. In fact, according to Brewer, that enables the Lyriq to boast the “largest cargo volume in its competitive set.” That made us wonder what, exactly, is the Lyriq’s competitive set. According to Cadillac spokesperson, Katie Minter, it consists of the Audi e-tron and Jaguar I-Pace. “Lyriq is aimed at customers that are looking for a luxury SUV with outstanding styling, ride and handling and seamlessly integrated technology. In this instance, we’re looking at vehicles such as the Audi e-tron and Jaguar I-Pace,” Minter told GM Authority in an emailed statement. So then, Lyriq has a maximum cargo volume of 60.8 cubic feet behind the first row seats and 28.0 cubic feet behind the second row. When compared to the Audi e-tron and the Jaguar I-Pace, the Lyriq does offer more space in the back. 2023 Cadillac Lyriq Cargo vs. e-tron I-Pace   Cadillac Lyriq Audi e-tron Jaguar I-Pace Rear cargo volume behind second row (cu. ft.) 28.0 28.5 25.3 Rear cargo volume behind first row (cu. ft.) 60.8 56.5 51.0 Frunk cargo volume (cu. ft.) N/A 2.12 0.95 Total front & rear cargo volume (cu. ft.)* 28.0 30.62 26.25 * With second row seats upright However, both the e-tron and the I-Pace feature frunks (2.12 cubic feet in the e-tron, 0.95 cubic feet in the I-Pace respectively), allowing the e-tron to have slightly more total cargo volume (combined frunk and rear cargo area). https://gmauthority.com/blog/2021/05/heres-why-the-2023-cadillac-lyriq-doesnt-have-a-frunk/  
    • That's probably a better worded way to put it. It's a missed opportunity.  They're all liquid cooled at this point and I can't imagine Ford and Tesla are having battery cooling issues, at least I haven't heard of any yet and I've watched a fair amount on the Mach-E and know somebody with a pair of Teslas in Nevada.  I don't believe lack of cooling has ever been a factor in an EV catching fire. It's always something shorting and sparking with poor connection(s) somewhere.  I'd also like to learn why. They have to have a good justification, I know they're not a bunch of idiots who "didn't think of it".  I just don't want the press release answer of "we needed the space for packaging". 
    • Hummer EV (and Silverado EV) are much bigger and truckular...so they have a lot more space underneath for the dirty bits.   The Lyriq isn't a high riding 4x4, so it has to use space for the electric motor(s), power brake system, HVAC, radiator, etc under the hood...
    • Ive read that the Lyriq has a 5 link suspension system front and back.  Maybe that suspension set-up limits the space for the Lyriq?
  • Social Stream

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. bobo
      bobo
      (54 years old)
    2. loki
      loki
      (39 years old)
  • Who's Online (See full list)

About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We  Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...