2007 Chevrolet Tahoe Pics and Information

[Croc]

I'm a bit concerned about the power liftgate for failures. I remember back in the old old forums, I put power trunk in my concept it was bashed.

The look, I don't see why people that it shapes the same as the old one. OK, it's an SUV. It's supposed to be shaped like an SUV.

[post="17978"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

There is a slight difference with a power trunk and a power liftgate. The trunklids are generally lightweight and required someone to push down for the latch to "catch" and finish pulling the trunklid down. This meant that people's fingers were often at the edge of the trunklid and pinching was not uncommon. With a power liftgate, it motors up and down without anyone's hands needing to be near it. Also, liftgates are a bit heavier and more awkward to open/close than a trunklid.

[Croc]

No one was "Blown out of the water"...., All Chevrolet did was join the competition with this interior(The one presented, Which I think will be Chevy's top of the line model...).

[post="17985"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well I will implore you to look at the competition's interiors as Chevrolet most definitely did not join the competition. Go to autodeadline and look at pictures of the Sequoia, the Armada, the Durango and the Expedition. Honestly, people are NOT going to be comparing the F-150 to the Tahoe. They are very different vehicles. The valid comparison will be between the Silverado and the F-150. If you compare the Expedition to the Tahoe, the Tahoe clearly wins.

I'll create another post of the interiors of the other vehicles soon.

[Croc]

TAHOE:


vs.

EXPEDITION:


DURANGO:


SEQUOIA:


ARMADA:


So...which is the best? The pictures speak for themselves...

[turbo200]

Croc brings up a good point, ultimately the Expedition is the interior we should be comparing the Tahoe to, and it fails. However, I don't doubt the Expedition will be redesigned with an even better interior. KaliRover, the interior is best in class. Yes, it doesn't make design revolution, but the quality and inclusion of new, better features make it tops in class. Why? Well, just looking at the materials, I am sure it will be near the top or at the top for material quality. Aside from quality, the design is great, even if it's not revolutionary, it's great, and highly functional. It is reminiscent of VW interiors, not a shabby comparison at all. The interior was the last piece to make the Tahoe a very competitive vehicle. For this redesign GM chose also to improve on the chassis and engines, resulting in a vehicle that will once again reign as class leader, and for some time to come (20mpg!!!). Edited September 21, 2005 by turbo200

[Matt276]

How can you say that the materials are high quality? To me it looks like the Impala interior, the design is nice but it's only hard plastic. I can't wait for someone to sit in one and tell us the quality of the materials. I'm afraid it will be the same than all other vehicles released by GM lately. Check the reaction of the members toward the Impala's interior. And this is the picture of the current Toyota, not the new one... And if the Sequoia is better...What's gonna be left to GM?

[Croc]

And this is the picture of the current Toyota, not the new one...

[post="18042"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

This is true, and intentional. The original comment was that GM was just meeting the competition. Hence I used all current vehicles. I do not have knowledge of a new Sequoia, if anyone has any info, bring it out. Even with a terrible interior, though, the 2000-2005 Tahoe was one of the best SUVs in its class, if not the best.

[caddycruiser]

This is true, and intentional.  The original comment was that GM was just meeting the competition.  Hence I used all current vehicles.  I do not have knowledge of a new Sequoia, if anyone has any info, bring it out.  Even with a terrible interior, though, the 2000-2005 Tahoe was one of the best SUVs in its class, if not the best.

[post="18072"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Very true, and up until recent times, the core characteristics of the truck were still making it do well in comparisons. As of late, it had been shot down a few notches because of the cheap and old interior, somewhat imprecise steering and brakes, and lack of newer features the competitor's have like side curtain airbags and more adaptable seats....ALL things that have now been heavily worked over.

Actually, as I first read through the specs sheets yesterday, it seemed like the General finally took into consideration nearly EVERYTHING the current ones got downgraded for, except for the 3rd seat issue. They should do very well, even in the top auto mag's once again, like they did a few years ago.

[Croc]

Exactly! Remember, very few vehicles are at the top of their class and consistently winning comparos throughout the entire lifecycle.

[KaliRover]

I don't think the Chevrolet stand's out that much farther then the rest, if it does at all. The center console look's tacky sticking out like that. And that plastic that wraps around it and the wood does not belong there. The Expedition doesn't look as good as this (opinion), matter of fact, even with all that leather cover up, it still look's horrible, but if the durrango came in these colors, it would look just as good. The Armada doesn't have a bad looking interior either, it look's smart and sophisticated.(opinion).










and yes, again, I do recognize that there's more to the Tahoe to love, as I've said countless times in my post's before, the reason why my dad's going to buy a suburban is because of the average fuel economy of 20.5, however I do not feel that it's the best that it could have been. Either that, or it's just the colors they choose, or the layout of the dash and the console or the wood or that black plastic crap beneith the aluminem accented A/C covers, or something. The Steering wheel and the interior tan color is the only thing I would consider highlighting about this interior.





plus, ... do you people think that this will be the interior standard on all the models...? Or just the LT 1, 2, 3, and LTZ....

[Northstar]

I don't understand what you want them to do... This is a VERY high volume vehicle and a VERY high volume platform... the highest volume of any platform by far. Do you want them to totally revolutionize it? What happens if they try to be super different and design something really cool and futuristic like say, the Quest, and it flops because no one wants that look right now? GM would be F'd. As for the interior compared to the other ones: It's not all about the layout and whatnot, the fit and finish and tight panel gaps are important. Little details like the chrome rings around the knobs and between the buttons add a touch of class that the others don't have. The Tahoe has by far the best fit and finish. The Armada has big gaps everywhere, the Durango is a brick with an ugly radio and climate control, the Expedition has the cheezy inset Ford radio and climate control, and the Sequoia looks like something Ford put out in '97.

[Croc]

that black plastic crap beneith the aluminem accented A/C covers, or something.

[post="18115"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Uhhhh...that doesn't look like plastic. It looks like the soft, spongy, padded dash material. It has a different tecture than the plastic.

[Satty]

In this day of gigantic emblems, I'm surprised he bowtie on the steering wheel isn't three feet wide.

[bobo]

For a Chevrolet, the Tahoe interior will exceed expectations. Neither Ford, Dodge, or Toyota currently have impressive interiors in either design or materials. Granted, Fords are probably currently the most attractive, but material quality leaves a lot to be desired. The real test for GM interiors will come with the Escalade, and there's no reason for it not to match the Range Rover's.

[turbo200]

Completely agree, bobo. The Nissan Armada isn't my favorite SUV, mainly because of styling and quality inside. I just, in my opinion, don't see anything very special, and the materials are particularly lowgrade. The Expedition doesn't come close in terms of design or materials [to the new Tahoe, presumably]. The Sequoia has nice materials for the most part, as with most Toyotas, but it's design is not as luxurious as this new Tahoe's design. Granted, arguing about the Tahoe's materials is semantics because no one here has touched them. I know I started that argument, and I was really basing it on experience with recent GMs. I haven't yet been in the Impala so I can't speak for it, but from what I've seen of it, it does look to be very impressive, and if Edmunds can like it, I'm not sure if thier would be anything i would complain about. Others here have mentioned an opionion of it not being up to par, I will just have to reserve judgment until I sit in it. However, both the Impala and the Tahoe at least look a very quality part, much more so than the F-series thanks to those awful corporate units. HAve you sat in an F-series, or any new Ford for the matter? To me, they aren't really that impressive.

[turbo200]

Oh, and one more thing, I have it on very good word that the Tahoe doesn't compare to what GM has in store for the next couple of years. As Josh has been saying for some days already (grrrrr...) we are in for a wild ride.

[KaliRover]

I don't understand what you want them to do...

This is a VERY high volume vehicle and a VERY high volume platform... the highest volume of any platform by far. Do you want them to totally revolutionize it? What happens if they try to be super different and design something really cool and futuristic like say, the Quest, and it flops because no one wants that look right now? GM would be F'd.

As for the interior compared to the other ones: It's not all about the layout and whatnot, the fit and finish and tight panel gaps are important. Little details like the chrome rings around the knobs and between the buttons add a touch of class that the others don't have. The Tahoe has by far the best fit and finish. The Armada has big gaps everywhere, the Durango is a brick with an ugly radio and climate control, the Expedition has the cheezy inset Ford radio and climate control, and the Sequoia looks like something Ford put out in '97.

[post="18139"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

What I want from GM is damm good looking vehicle for once. Inside and out. I'm tired of this half-ass bull that they pump out every year just for the competition to leave them in the dust the following year...

No, the Quest is not a good example, rather look at what most consider to be good looking interiors today, from luxery car's/SUV's to Ford's F-series interior's, and build upon that, taking styling cues from there. There is a smooth flow in the design of the interior of the F150, the Durrango, the Titan/Armada, all the peices seem to "fit" together in harmony with another, no, not this Tahoe. Re-examine the Armada/Durrango pictures or look at the F-150 King Ranch to see my point. Makes the Chevy look Cheeasy and tacky. It's an Okay interior, nothing groundbreaking, I've seen worst. However, it's not something to give praise to, and comparing it to just pure "shit" (the old interiors) shouldn't be used as an excuse anymore, (not that you did, for anyone else who's reading this post).

I'll give the interior of this Tahoe an overall: C+
Same as I gave it before.
Sadly, for such a huge redesign, it is not the standard, and probably never will be until a mid-life refreshment. I will wait for the debut of the Yukon.

Until then, I have nothing more to say.



ps, .... my opinion.

[Derek77]

Have you even been in an F-150? Can you honestly say the plastic in their interior is soft and of high quality? I for one cannot see hard plastic, but I can feel it. The front seats have to be the most unconfortable seat I've ever sat on. I don't understand this "smooth flow in the design" and "all the peices seem to "fit" together in harmony with another". To me, the other dashboard layout seem so cluddered to me with million buttons to control the hvac and the navigation system. The others also have the boxy, truck like dash you would expect to see, but GM has put a more car simple, car like dash.

[Mule Bakersdozen LS]

TAHOE:


vs.

EXPEDITION:


DURANGO:


SEQUOIA:


ARMADA:


So...which is the best?  The pictures speak for themselves...

[post="18003"][/post]

Yes the pictures do speak for themselves-as far as dashboards go, Armada wins! That sea of gray in Durango needs to go now.

[cmattson]

I'll disagree with your opinion on the Armada. While the design looks nice; if you sit in one, you'll notice a couple of things right away: 1) The controls don't seem solid. Move a temp control nob and it has flex to it. It just feels flimsy. It doesn't inspire a feeling of quality or durability. 2) The plastic in the Armada isn't rock-hard; but it isn't luxurious by any means. 3) The ergonomics of the vehicle is horrible. Nothing "feels comfortable". The interior is just quirky. It's little things that make a big difference. Take the rear doors on the Armada: they flare out on the top, so if you are outside, opening the rear door, you need to take a step backwards when opening the rear door so you don't hit yourself in the melon with the top of the door. The door may look asthetically nice when closed, but functionally it just sucks. The interior has this in spades.

[ToniCipriani]

SEQUOIA:

[post="18003"][/post]

Am I the only one, or do I see a bit of Oldsmobile in the design?

[The O.C.]

Yes the pictures do speak for themselves-as far as dashboards go, Armada wins! That sea of gray in Durango needs to go now.

[post="18371"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

As far as visual appeal, I'd rank them......

1) Tahoe
2) Expedition
3) Durango
4) Armada
5) Sequoia

BUT, for material quality and quality of knobs/switches/levers and fit-and-finish, I'd rank them as this (without sitting inside Tahoe yet but guessing it will be close to '06 Impala quality)......

1) Sequoia - ugly interior, but by far best hard-plastic-grain/sheen, and knobs and switches that feel substantial.
2) Tahoe - Impala-like hard plastic will let it down, but everything else will be first-class including HVAC and radio controls.
3) Expedition - hard plastics but better grain and sheen than Durango.
4) Durango - Nasty hard, shiny plastics but top-quality new radio, HVAC, and other controls.
5) Armada - Bad all around....

[caddycruiser]

I'll disagree with your opinion on the Armada.  While the design looks nice; if you sit in one, you'll notice a couple of things right away:
1) The controls don't seem solid.  Move a temp control nob and it has flex to it.  It just feels flimsy.  It doesn't inspire a feeling of quality or durability.
2) The plastic in the Armada isn't rock-hard; but it isn't luxurious by any means.
3) The ergonomics of the vehicle is horrible.  Nothing "feels comfortable".  The interior is just quirky.  It's little things that make a big difference.  Take the rear doors on the Armada: they flare out on the top, so if you are outside, opening the rear door, you need to take a step backwards when opening the rear door so you don't hit yourself in the melon with the top of the door.  The door may look asthetically nice when closed, but functionally it just sucks.  The interior has this in spades.

[post="18388"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

The WHOLE everything of the Armada feels cheap and junky. To this day, they're still having problems with massive rattling, clunking, squeaking, etc. from almost every part of the vehicle, the interior materials are more back yard shed than anything else, and the same goes toward the overall feel. The Nissan/Infiniti big ute's have TONS of interior room, cool looks, and great power, but they're virtually absent of real refinement and quality.

[sciguy_0504]

I'm guessing you can expect the next-gen Sequoia to come out after the next-gen Tundra is out since they're on the same platform, use the same engines and pretty much have the same interior.

[Croc]

I'm guessing you can expect the next-gen Sequoia to come out after the next-gen Tundra is out since they're on the same platform, use the same engines and pretty much have the same interior.

[post="18546"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

What's the time frame on that, though? I don't really follow Toyota too closely since I don't see myself buying one...ever.

[turbo200]

I just went back and alayzed all this pictures for a good two minutes. I still don't see why the Tahoe is all that much of a letdown in terms of design. If you don't like the way the center stack protrudes and think it is tacky [KaliRover], then by all means that's just your preference. I guess some of the ones you mentioned "flow" better, but that doesn't excuse thier glaring quality deficiencies, and also design deficiencies. The Armada's center stack is cheap-looking and is alluminum done wrong, I always prefer alluminum that looks like titanium, or has a really good finish to it like in the S40, this does not match those standards, and for that it goes down in my book. Further, there's the issues of materials quality in the Armada, and the atrocious door panel design. It's all one big block, not that much invention there too me at least. The Durango is at least ten steps behind in the materials department, and, okay it flows well, but you can't tell me the vast expanses of alluminum between the head units and the black plastic where the seat heaters are are cleverly designed. When I look at the Durango to measure quality it screams rough and unfinished, the Tahoe says quality job. This is really not the greatest argument to have, we're talking about Chevy here, they are everyman, they don't necessarily have to have breakthrough designs for interiors, especially in a grocery-getter, let's wait for the Cadillac and Yukon to have those discussions.

[milleramerican]

What I want from GM is damm good looking vehicle for once. Inside and out. I'm tired of this half-ass bull that they pump out every year just for the competition to leave them in the dust the following year...

No, the Quest is not a good example, rather look at what most consider to be good looking interiors today, from luxery car's/SUV's to Ford's F-series interior's, and build upon that, taking styling cues from there. There is a smooth flow in the design of the interior of the F150, the Durrango, the Titan/Armada, all the peices seem to "fit" together in harmony with another, no, not this Tahoe. Re-examine the Armada/Durrango pictures or look at the F-150 King Ranch to see my point. Makes the Chevy look Cheeasy and tacky. It's an Okay interior, nothing groundbreaking, I've seen worst. However, it's not something to give praise to, and comparing it to just pure "shit" (the old interiors) shouldn't be used as an excuse anymore, (not that you did, for anyone else who's reading this post).

I'll give the interior of this Tahoe an overall: C+
Same as I gave it before.
Sadly, for such a huge redesign, it is not the standard, and probably never will be until a mid-life refreshment. I will wait for the debut of the Yukon.

Until then, I have nothing more to say.
ps, .... my opinion.

[post="18316"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Good lord man, you are utterly delirious. How can you say the Tahoe interior is not the best? You speak of a dash having some 'flow' and the Tahoe has the best 'flow' by far. Look from the left to the right of the dash, notice how essentially there is a horizontal line that the dash follows from the far left air vent to the far right. The wood panel on the passenger side looks sweet, it basically goes from the steering wheel all the way over to the left air vent, which creates a very nice 'flow'. Things look very continuous and proper in the Tahoe's interior; it is very good looking to me.

Compare that to the Durango, for example. It looks tacky to begin with, and way too square. Also, the center stack disrupts the horizontal line I was talking about that the Tahoe has. It looks discontinuous in that respect, yet has a sort of more continuous center stack (vertically).


In my opinion, the Tahoe looks better.

I love saying that: The Tahoe LOOKS BETTER! This GM product has a BETTER INTERIOR! Man, thats fun to say. :) Edited September 22, 2005 by milleramerican

[milleramerican]

Also, has anyone gone to the new tahoe website mentioned earlier? There is a small movie, and what catches my attention is the rims. They show motion really well (in the movie at least), and look outstanding!

[BlkHhr104]

The Tahoes interior is really nice but who thinks the steering wheel was borrowed from the Fusion? Edited September 22, 2005 by BlkHhr104

[regfootball]

I just went back and alayzed all this pictures for a good two minutes. I still don't see why the Tahoe is all that much of a letdown in terms of design. If you don't like the way the center stack protrudes  and think it is tacky [KaliRover], then by all means that's just your preference. I guess some of the ones you mentioned "flow" better, but that doesn't excuse thier glaring quality deficiencies, and also design deficiencies. The Armada's center stack is cheap-looking and is alluminum done wrong, I always prefer alluminum that looks like titanium, or has a really good finish to it like in the S40, this does not match those standards, and for that it goes down in my book. Further, there's the issues of materials quality in the Armada, and the atrocious door panel design. It's all one big block, not that much invention there too me at least. The Durango is at least ten steps behind in the materials department, and, okay it flows well, but you can't tell me the vast expanses of alluminum between the head units and the black plastic where the seat heaters are are cleverly designed. When I look at the Durango to measure quality it screams rough and unfinished, the Tahoe says quality job. This is really not the greatest argument to have, we're talking about Chevy here, they are everyman, they don't necessarily have to have breakthrough designs for interiors, especially in a grocery-getter, let's wait for the Cadillac and Yukon to have those discussions.

[post="18556"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

tHE tAHOE BY FAR IS THE BEST OF THAT BUNCH

[caddycruiser]

GOOD NEWS! "...will ultimately as we build capacities on those transmissions, it will migrate to the whole line" -Lutz explaining, in a podcast from today, how a few speculated here, that once production of the 6-spd gets up to speed, it WILL be put in every model. Good, but too bad once again, GM powertrain wasn't ready at the same speed of the rest of the car.

[Flybrian]

GOOD NEWS!

"...will ultimately as we build capacities on those transmissions, it will migrate to the whole line"

-Lutz explaining, in a podcast from today, how a few speculated here, that once production of the 6-spd gets up to speed, it WILL be put in every model.

Good, but too bad once again, GM powertrain wasn't ready at the same speed of the rest of the car.

[post="18801"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well, keep in mind they rushed the production of these vehicles up about a whole year. Personally, I'd rather them debut with 4-speeds and 6-speeds than a full line of rush-built 6-speeds that could potentially lead to quality issues.

The only thing 4-speeds lack in this sort of application are ad-copy.

[Clownzilla]

Well, keep in mind they rushed the production of these vehicles up about a whole year. Personally, I'd rather them debut with 4-speeds and 6-speeds than a full line of rush-built 6-speeds that could potentially lead to quality issues.

The only thing 4-speeds lack in this sort of application are ad-copy.

[post="18804"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

True.........GM needs to get these SUV's out but needs to do it right. As long as GM has some 6 speed tech to show that they need business, then they will be fine easing into 6 speeds for all of these SUV's. AS LONG AS THEY DON'T TAKE SEVERAL YEARS TO DO IT! Personally, I think 6 speeds should be across the whole GM line.............................if money were not an issue......but it is. It's an easy way to gain MPG. Oh, and the Sequoia only has a 5 speed auto, so GM is already ahead of that game.

[mikef]

Kind of bland...

Then again, at least it's not ugly like the Uplander!

[post="17181"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

[FUTURE_OF_GM]

Yes the pictures do speak for themselves-as far as dashboards go, Armada wins! That sea of gray in Durango needs to go now.

SAY WHAT????

You're kidding right?

Another VERY GOOD looking pic.

[Clownzilla]

Yes the pictures do speak for themselves-as far as dashboards go, Armada wins! That sea of gray in Durango needs to go now.

[post="18371"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Nissan-Infiniti interiors are #$%^. They are WAY too plastic like, and look like somthing off of Judge Dread. We even had an 04 (I think) Infiniti Q45 traded into our dealership recently, and I sat in the thing and let me tell you..................it is ALL cheap plastic. The bottons don't even feel solid. This is a $40,000-$50,000 "luxury" car. I have seen many other Nissan products, new and old, and they are all the same. Even though I don't like Japanese cars, I can see the quality of Toyota and Honda, and can see why people buy them, but people are buying Nissans just becasue they are made in the magic land we like to call Japan. I will give Nissan some credit for their pretty good exteriors on their vehicles though.

[Northstar]

The Tahoe has been added to the future vehicles section on Chevy.com The pics are pretty small, but you can see the 8-passenger seating (middle bench seat), and there are a couple interior pics without NAV. The wood also appears to be of a different color.

[milleramerican]

SAY WHAT????

You're kidding right?

Another VERY GOOD looking pic.

[post="19110"][/post]

Lutz: what a pimp!

[Variance]

Nissan-Infiniti interiors are #$%^. They are WAY too plastic like, and look like somthing off of Judge Dread. We even had an 04 (I think) Infiniti Q45 traded into our dealership recently, and I sat in the thing and let me tell you..................it is ALL cheap plastic. The bottons don't even feel solid. This is a $40,000-$50,000 "luxury" car. I have seen many other Nissan products, new and old, and they are all the same. Even though I don't like Japanese cars, I can see the quality of Toyota and Honda, and can see why people buy them, but people are buying Nissans just becasue they are made in the magic land we like to call Japan. I will give Nissan some credit for their pretty good exteriors on their vehicles though.

[post="19116"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Go sit in a new M35 or M45.

[Northstar]

The M35 and M45 do have nice interiors, but the rest of Nissan/Infiniti interiors are generally shoddy. The leather is paper thin in the FX and QX, when I went to the auto show both had rips in the leather, and were the only vehicles that had rips in the leather.

[pontiac1]

GO TAHOE. i think the interior looks great. this suv will sell.

[Paolino]

Yay... I like! :)

[Flybrian]

Lutz: what a pimp!

[post="19174"][/post]

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Mmmhmmm whats the EPA on this, like i dont care about the combined.... and i cant find the individuals Also... my car is a 4spd auto w/ overdrive, now whats the different between that and a 5spd? it has 5 gears... so why isnt it a 5spd? so wouldnt GMs trannys be 5spds too? Edited September 24, 2005 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Morrinn]

It does look smaller as many have said. I also see a lot of resemblance to the Trailblazer, which isn't a bad thing since that is 1) One of Chevrolet's more handsome designs and 2) a VERY good seller.

Now, if GM will just put out hot Z71 and SS versions for us enthusiasts :)

I hope 20's are optional... These wheels look like 17's and I think they could've done better with them.

[post="17167"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Ugh, can somebody tell me what the big deal is with large wheels on SUV? I personally HATE them. Now big rubber is a completely different deal. 38, 44 or even 49 inch tires look good on a large SUV like this, but 20's?? Maybe on the Crysler 300 but if I never see them again on an SUV, it'l be too soon....

Just my two cents.

[caddycruiser]

Ugh, can somebody tell me what the big deal is with large wheels on SUV? I personally HATE them. Now big rubber is a completely different deal. 38, 44 or even 49 inch tires look good on a large SUV like this, but 20's?? Maybe on the Crysler 300 but if I never see them again on an SUV, it'l be too soon....

Just my two cents.

[post="19411"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Well, because most people use trucks and SUV's as "cars" today, very few have a need or desire to get the off-road/redneck look that big treads and small wheels give, IMO, and would much rather just have larger and often shinier wheels to match the large size of their big truck. To most people, myself included, when the wheels are too small, they can make the truck look really top heavy or like it's riding around on donut spares.

Don't fret too much, if you're not big on the whole large, flashy wheels thing--17's are standard on most of the models, so the overall look won't be that different from today's trucks. Edited September 24, 2005 by caddycruiser

[Derek77]

Mmmhmmm whats the EPA on this, like i dont care about the combined.... and i cant find the individuals

Also... my car is a 4spd auto w/ overdrive, now whats the different between that and a 5spd? it has 5 gears... so why isnt it a 5spd? so wouldnt GMs trannys be 5spds too?

[post="19364"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

I too can't wait to see some EPA proof to the MPG.

Regarding the 4-speed with overdrive, it is just that, a 4-speed. Overdirve is 4th gear. On almost all transmissions, they have a lock-up converter, which makes it seem like there is an extra gear.

[91z4me]

Regarding the 4-speed with overdrive, it is just that, a 4-speed. Overdirve is 4th gear. On almost all transmissions, they have a lock-up converter, which makes it seem like there is an extra gear.

[post="19569"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

Yes it has 4 total speeds with the 4th being overdrive.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

I too can't wait to see some EPA proof to the MPG.

Regarding the 4-speed with overdrive, it is just that, a 4-speed. Overdirve is 4th gear. On almost all transmissions, they have a lock-up converter, which makes it seem like there is an extra gear.

[post="19569"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

and does this lock-up converter also cause the revvs to drop?

[Derek77]

and does this lock-up converter also cause the revvs to drop?

[post="19923"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]

10-4

[TKR]

Any news about RHD and Diesel?? Thhis would give the rest of the GM world the vehicle (finally!!) to take on Toyota Landcruiser.