caddycruiser

Much better overall, and even nicer than the Cobalt in many aspects, but that rear end is worrying me. Looks like the roofline is cut too quickly and low, which looks good, but really cramps the back seat even more. That, and the trunk/rear fender profile looks like it might resemble the Cobalt sedan's worst feature a little too much. Also hope it doesn't end up with the same jacked-up, off-roader height of the Cobalt sedan. Otherwise, cool car, and GREAT for Saturn.

Yeah, that actually seems like it will be more of the problem. It has the fuel economy issue aced, but might be too much of a dud powerwise for such a relatively large, new luxury sedan. Then again, the lower models ARE replacing the LeSabre, in effect, and they've done fine for years with the 3.8L, albeit unimpressive as they were.

Gee....let's see--because they are the ONLY ones to already offer 2 wheelbase lengths for each model to begin with!? People who like the short ones like them because they ARE short, but still have room for 5, and can squeeze in a couple more if need be. Plus, on a daily driving basis, they're just easier to move around. On the other hand, people like us, who typically have lots of stuff and the people & dogs to go with it MOST of the time, the lack of having both cargo AND people room turned us off from the Tahoe/Yukon immediately, hence the Suburban. I could see maybe another inch or so in the shorties, just to free up a bit more leg and cargo room, but overall more important was that maybe the engineers could have done a little better packaging in making a more adaptable 3rd row, like they did with the middle row.

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.

Not too bad, I guess, but get used to seeing 90% Gold and Silver painted ones wearing the most hideous Buick hubcaps and a front bench seat on a dealer lot coming to you soon.....just hope the Lucerne looks better as a "base" than the LeSabre does. Comparison to the 300/300C and it's $24-34k base, RWD, and bolder looks is inevitable, but it should still do strongly. Similarly, it better have as good of driving characteristics, refinement, and materials like the Avalon.

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.

While I love most everything about this new truck so far, I still keep thinking, in the back of my mind, that Toyota is just grinning silently at the moment, thinking to themselves "Oh yeah....you just wait!" And regardless of how much some here hate Toyota, it's almost a GUARANTEE they have something big, and something special waiting behind closed doors with the new Seqouia and Tundra. It will probably be ugly or have something weird or TOO car-like about it again, but fuel mileage and features will probably be at the very top....I just hope it isn't true.... :unsure: Then again, even if it has some of the most innovative features and best MPG's of any truck ever, the oddball/boring looks and/or "delicate" little car feel might still keep it behind the GM's.

Why? It gives it a more rugged, less wimpified look, which is quite fitting, IMHO, on a truck. Then again, being an ex-owner of one of the ORIGINAL Avalanche's before they got stripped naked of everything and forced to use the uglified Silverado nose bits, I was and still am a HUGE fan of that trucks look, and after owning it, the functionality of it all.

For a good, but INSANE comparison, here's the pricing breakdown of a fully loaded '06 Suburban 4wd LTZ: MSRP: $56,840 :o :o Invoice: $49,612 I never knew they had gotten this high, especially for a CHEVY.... :blink: ...some nice wheels and Denali leather or not.... :o

Agreed. I also don't see the point of the LTZ on the Tahoe, or any of the other Chevy models they introduced it on lately like the Cobalt, Impala, and Malibu, because it's just a fully loaded LT with a few unique trim pieces. Plus here, like you said, it kind of steps on the Denali's tail. Looking at what I posted again, I'd agree the prices should be even lower, just to give buyer's that "wow...in a good way" kind of reaction when they see the trucks and then the sticker on them, especially when compared to the competitor's.

The current ones were getting ancient compared to modern standards, and are notoriously OVERpriced from an MSRP standpoint, so no fake sales went down...BUT, overall, while not expanding leaps and bounds, the same people who were buying them before still continued to buy them and the market stayed quite steady. Anyone know people who are on their 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, etc. Tahoe? I know several and we ourselves are already on #2 in the big GM 'ute stable of choices. As far as pricing, here's what I think would work, considering just the Tahoe/Suburban: *Tahoe LS 2wd--$30,595 base, with more standard features than anyone else *Suburban LS 2wd--$31,595 base *Tahoe LS 4wd--$31,595 base .... *Tahoe LTZ 4wd--$43,595 with EVERYTHING *Suburban LTZ 4wd--$44,595 with EVERYTHING Edited my "pricing outline" above.... No more stripped base models starting at $37k and above, no more Chevy's with $53k price tags, and MOST important, no more $5k rebates or other insane blue light specials. Such a pricing strategy can't hurt margins too much, especially considering 95% of the GMT-800's sold to date were discounted to levels below those above anyway.

Actually, it is, as it has always been, ALL Suburban, with the rearmost glass and roof panel chopped and replaced by the cool bed system. The Tahoe is too short for it, but body panels, interiors, wheels, etc. should be identical between the 3 Chevy's.

Anyone notice the image of the Yukon, shown inadvertently in one of the acoustics pics? Looks like it really is a carbon copy of the Envoy look, just larger.

I think you got that backwards....the 6.2L is the only one WITH the 6-spd standard. All the others have the 4-spd.

No, not at all. Not only is the 2nd seat back a little bit farther in the Suburban, but so is the 3rd seat, pushed back further into the cargo hold and because the wheel base is also longer, the floor steps down where your feet go in the Suburban's 3rd row and is actually just as comfortable as sitting in any of the other 2 rows. Now the Tahoe, that's a different story. It's simply a case of having a flat cargo floor, from the second row back, and latching a set of seats right down to that floor--your butt sits right at floor level, knees in the air, and forward leg room lacking. Not as bad as something like a Toyota Highlander with it's joke of a 3rd seat, but the smaller Explorer is more comfortable and more naturally positioned to sit in. No wonder we went for the Suburban....cargo AND passenger room.

Well, at least they've taken a more realistic view of things, rather than thinking they're going to revolutionize the world and have everyone buying one.

It's the second row http://www.cheersandgears.com/public/style_emoticons//AH-HA_wink.gif....as shown in the cool video on GM TV today: GM TV 9-20-05

Here you go: GM TV 9-20-05

Um, with the dimensions being so close to those of the current-gen Tahoe, there's no way it will have more passenger and cargo room than the Durango--it's always been the most "cramped" full-sizer, but that's actually a good thing for most buyers.

Notice how it's all about the 6-spd, with the 4-spd's just ran over quickly? Even as awesome as the 4-spd is right now, this is NOT going to go over well with those in the "know". Similarly, I see no reason why ALL of the engines used couldn't make the jump to the 6-spd right from the get go, unless GM is pulling a "typical" and waiting until the second model year, '08, to already make a significant powertrain change.

That's VERY true, as being current-gen Suburban owners, there was no way we could even fathom buying a Tahoe because it has very little room--but is a great size overall that works for most people. On that same note, to anyone like us who has ever had to wrangle the HUGE back bench out of it's latches, drag it out the back, and then take 2 people to put it somewhere--there has to be a better solution. Hopefully the new longer models will have a better idea. Either way, the second row looks GREAT! Yet again knowing first hand how hard it can be to squeeze yourself through the tiny opening to the 3rd seat, I've wondered for years why they never had a fold n' tumble design. Now they not only have this, but it is optionally POWERED, which just adds a cool factor second to none.

Good points....so, as expected I guess, what's the reason for not doing the 6-spd across the board? Similarly, things like airbags, regardless of where they shoot from NEED to be STANDARD on every model and at every price point. I'm also disappointed with the 3rd seat. Keeping the solid rear axle, I understand being very limited as to what could be done with it, but why not something like the Durango--also a solid axle vehicle, but with a flat folding rear bench that is, actually, a LOT more comfortable than what is currently in the Tahoe/Yukon. On that same note, while the seats do look quite improved, seems like sitting in the very back will AGAIN be only for the smallest of kids/people who enjoy chewing on their knees. Other than that--AWESOME! Hate the atrocious gold paint and boring wheels on this one (gee, did I ever call that one!), but everything else, especially mechanically, is head and shoulders above the current trucks. Can't wait until trade-in time comes for our '04..... :chevy:

Just a little longer....

Yep, pretty much what he said--here's the full list from the ordering guide: Deletions Exterior color (12U) Sterling Silver Metallic Exterior color (15U) Cashmere Metallic Exterior color (88U) Steelmist Metallic New Features Exterior Color (46U) Slatestone Metallic Exterior Color (53U) Sandstone Metallic Exterior Color (67U) Platinum Metallic Changes (AY1) Air bags, side head curtain are now standard on all models (AK5) Air bags, frontal now require a fleet or government type order (PEB) Silver Convenience Package, is now (PDD) Comfort and Convenience Package (PEC) Gold Convenience Package is now (PCI) Driver Confidence Package (JL9) Brakes, 4-wheel antilock, 4-wheel disc and Traction control, Enhanced Traction System are Standard on CX and CXL

Hmm....not much info, but an early jump start.