Anyone have a Chevy Tahoe?

[catfan98]

I took the Tahoe home yesterday afternoon and drove it around last night and then this morning. I think it drives better than the 4Runner, actually. I think the big difference is in the fact that the 4Runner is all time 4-wheel drive. There is even a difference in the way it drives compared to my husband's Sierra truck. The 4Runner is built on a truck chassis and I think that combined with the constant 4-wheel drive makes it handle different. Don't get me wrong, it is a great vehicle...I feel like I can go anywhere in it, but it does not turn sharp at all and sometimes having to swing out to turn into a road or a parking space gets annoying, lol. As far as gas mileage, after cruising the country roads and in town yesterday afternoon and last night, the Tahoe was averaging 18.6 miles a gallon. It should do good on the interstate also, as it has the engine that turns off half the cylinders when the full V8 isn't needed to save on fuel economy. My husband's truck does this and it's pretty awesome. Another plus for the Tahoe is the fact that it will pull our boat easily whereas the 4Runner struggles to. We tried once, and then decided it just didn't have enough power to do it frequently and sometimes, we need an SUV to go to the lake because of people/things. Having said all of this, I am still undecided on what I want to do. The Tahoe is extremely comfortable and has more cabin space than the 4R. But...I still do love my 4R. And....Toyotas go FOREVER. I guess I've got some thinking to do.

 

[wmmoorejr]

I traded my 2007 Tahoe last June with 122K miles on it, for a 2017 Silverado 1500 Crew Cab. I loved my Tahoe, but needed more space for hauling stuff. The only issue I had with the Tahoe was the oil consumption. When GM switched to the active fuel management something wasn't quite right and the 2007-2014 had the potential to burn a LOT of oil. more than a quart in ~2200 miles. GM basically said if you got over 2000 miles and didn't burn a quart then it was within specs. I personally do not find that acceptable and kept on the dealership to watch it even when it was many years out of warranty. For whatever reason this DOES NOT happen with every vehicle, but I know personally I have spoken to at least 3 others that had the same issue and read anecdotal info on various GM Forums. The apparent fix to this problem on both the Tahoe and the Silverado was to increase the oil tank size by a few quarts. All of the new generations hold at least 2 more quarts than the old ones. My Tahoe was 4WD and mileage in town was closer to 12/13 and maybe 20 on highway. I had the bench seat for the second row and very rarely used the 3rd row. Not sure exactly what you are looking for, but my wife just got a 2018 Traverse. They increased the size with the 2018 so that it actually has more interior storage space than the Tahoe. The traverse still has good power even though it is a V6, and it has excellent fuel economy. ~24 city ~34 Hwy. She also got the captains chairs for the 2nd row and it is a breeze to get into the 3rd row. As far as storage behind the 3rd row I know I was able to put a 45 Yeti in and have room to spare. There is also under floor storage in the Traverse similar to what some minivans have.

 

[GreatLakes]

No offense, but he’s 100% correct. The two are nothing alike. One is based on a unibody front wheel drive car chassis, the other based on a body on frame full-size pickup truck. Apples & oranges. A Journey is more like an Equinox or Traverse (somewhat splitting the difference size-wise).

This. A Journey and Tahoe are not alike at all. A Subaru Sedan is closer to a Tahoe than a Journey is.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

I traded my 2007 Tahoe last June with 122K miles on it, for a 2017 Silverado 1500 Crew Cab. I loved my Tahoe, but needed more space for hauling stuff. The only issue I had with the Tahoe was the oil consumption. When GM switched to the active fuel management something wasn't quite right and the 2007-2014 had the potential to burn a LOT of oil. more than a quart in ~2200 miles. GM basically said if you got over 2000 miles and didn't burn a quart then it was within specs. I personally do not find that acceptable and kept on the dealership to watch it even when it was many years out of warranty. For whatever reason this DOES NOT happen with every vehicle, but I know personally I have spoken to at least 3 others that had the same issue and read anecdotal info on various GM Forums. The apparent fix to this problem on both the Tahoe and the Silverado was to increase the oil tank size by a few quarts. All of the new generations hold at least 2 more quarts than the old ones. My Tahoe was 4WD and mileage in town was closer to 12/13 and maybe 20 on highway. I had the bench seat for the second row and very rarely used the 3rd row. Not sure exactly what you are looking for, but my wife just got a 2018 Traverse. They increased the size with the 2018 so that it actually has more interior storage space than the Tahoe. The traverse still has good power even though it is a V6, and it has excellent fuel economy. ~24 city ~34 Hwy. She also got the captains chairs for the 2nd row and it is a breeze to get into the 3rd row. As far as storage behind the 3rd row I know I was able to put a 45 Yeti in and have room to spare. There is also under floor storage in the Traverse similar to what some minivans have.

I think your mileage numbers are WAY off for the Traverse. IIRC, they’re rated more like 17/24 (ish), not 24/34. Our Acadia does 16-17 “around town” and 21-22 on the interstate. We did manage a legitimate 24 round trip to WI & back, but 95% of that was perfectly flat and a big chunk of it 55 MPH speed limit due to construction. The current gen is lighter than the early ones, so I believe you could pick up 2-3 MPG on the highway - but definitely not another 10-12 MPG.

 

[Klayfish]

Never owned one, but I can say that when I was involved in a 3 car wreck that left 2 cars completely demolished, the Tahoe that started the whole thing barely had a dent. It was hit in the side while turning left, then spun around and landed on the hood of my car and bounced off. I was impressed by how little damage it had.

The fact that it had little damage does not necessarily equal safe. Crumple zones are designed to absorb the energy from an impact, which means they don't transfer it into the passenger compartment. When the vehicle has no damage, energy goes right into where you're sitting. Not good. The Tahoe is just a very heavy beast, so simple physics come into play. But if you were to run a Tahoe into a wall, you WANT the front end (prior to the cabin) to collapse, it's a good thing. Volvo has a great safety reputation, and it's well earned. If you look at a Volvo that's been hit, you'd be shocked at how the front or rear fold...but that's what they were designed to do.

I took the Tahoe home yesterday afternoon and drove it around last night and then this morning. I think it drives better than the 4Runner, actually. I think the big difference is in the fact that the 4Runner is all time 4-wheel drive. There is even a difference in the way it drives compared to my husband's Sierra truck. The 4Runner is built on a truck chassis and I think that combined with the constant 4-wheel drive makes it handle different. Don't get me wrong, it is a great vehicle...I feel like I can go anywhere in it, but it does not turn sharp at all and sometimes having to swing out to turn into a road or a parking space gets annoying, lol.

Driving feel is definitely subjective, no wrong answer. No full frame truck really handle particularly well, but how it feels to you is what matters most. Yes, the 4Runner is an a truck chassis, but so is the Tahoe...which shares a chassis with the behemoth Suburban and Escalade. Turning ratio has a lot to do with steering gear, suspension set up, and if it is full time 4WD, not necessarily if it's a "truck". Not sure which one has a tighter turning radius, I'm sure you can look that up. Really, what it comes down to is the Tahoe is more heavy duty than the 4Runner. If you want that and need that, and like the Tahoe, then go for it. It's a solid and reliable truck. Sort of like a 12/10th scale 4Runner. The Tahoe, with proper maintenance, will run forever. It's likely to have more nickel and dime stuff than the 4Runner, GM quality simply isn't close to Toyota, but it'll get you where you need to go time and time again.

 

[nkereina]

Hi! It has 48k.

People might have varying opinions on this, but I would find 48K miles to be a touch high for 2015. Since you'd be buying from someone you know, my only advice might be to pay a mechanic to take a look at it before you take the leap just to confirm everything is sound. This will protect you and the seller. Good luck with your purchase!

 

[bethy]

The fact that it had little damage does not necessarily equal safe. Crumple zones are designed to absorb the energy from an impact, which means they don't transfer it into the passenger compartment. When the vehicle has no damage, energy goes right into where you're sitting. Not good. The Tahoe is just a very heavy beast, so simple physics come into play. But if you were to run a Tahoe into a wall, you WANT the front end (prior to the cabin) to collapse, it's a good thing. Volvo has a great safety reputation, and it's well earned. If you look at a Volvo that's been hit, you'd be shocked at how the front or rear fold...but that's what they were designed to do.



Driving feel is definitely subjective, no wrong answer. No full frame truck really handle particularly well, but how it feels to you is what matters most. Yes, the 4Runner is an a truck chassis, but so is the Tahoe...which shares a chassis with the behemoth Suburban and Escalade. Turning ratio has a lot to do with steering gear, suspension set up, and if it is full time 4WD, not necessarily if it's a "truck". Not sure which one has a tighter turning radius, I'm sure you can look that up. Really, what it comes down to is the Tahoe is more heavy duty than the 4Runner. If you want that and need that, and like the Tahoe, then go for it. It's a solid and reliable truck. Sort of like a 12/10th scale 4Runner. The Tahoe, with proper maintenance, will run forever. It's likely to have more nickel and dime stuff than the 4Runner, GM quality simply isn't close to Toyota, but it'll get you where you need to go time and time again.

Couldn't agree more about the crumple zones!

 

[wmmoorejr]

I think your mileage numbers are WAY off for the Traverse. IIRC, they’re rated more like 17/24 (ish), not 24/34. Our Acadia does 16-17 “around town” and 21-22 on the interstate. We did manage a legitimate 24 round trip to WI & back, but 95% of that was perfectly flat and a big chunk of it 55 MPH speed limit due to construction. The current gen is lighter than the early ones, so I believe you could pick up 2-3 MPG on the highway - but definitely not another 10-12 MPG.

The new traverse is completely different from the new Acadia, and the new Acadia is completely different from 2016 and older. I think what helps the 2018 Traverse get the better fuel economy is the auto stop function and the 9 speed transmission

 

[Klayfish]

The new traverse is completely different from the new Acadia, and the new Acadia is completely different from 2016 and older. I think what helps the 2018 Traverse get the better fuel economy is the auto stop function and the 9 speed transmission

Now we're getting into the weeds and splitting hairs, but I love car talk, so it's all good. The Traverse and Acadia are very closely related, nearly identical twins. The Acadia made the switch to the new platform first, so for one year, yes they were different (the Acadia was new platform, the Traverse on the old). The 2018 Traverse is now on the same chassis.

Not only does the auto stop function help, but the new Acadia/Traverse is also smaller and lighter than the old one. Less weight to carry around = better fuel economy.

 

[catfan98]

.

 

[catfan98]

Thank you to everyone that has replied so far. I am still pondering my decision but leaning towards the Tahoe based on comfort and size (roomier inside than the 4R).

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Now we're getting into the weeds and splitting hairs, but I love car talk, so it's all good. The Traverse and Acadia are very closely related, nearly identical twins. The Acadia made the switch to the new platform first, so for one year, yes they were different (the Acadia was new platform, the Traverse on the old). The 2018 Traverse is now on the same chassis.

Not only does the auto stop function help, but the new Acadia/Traverse is also smaller and lighter than the old one. Less weight to carry around = better fuel economy.

Corrrct

 

[Gumbo4x4]

The new traverse is completely different from the new Acadia, and the new Acadia is completely different from 2016 and older. I think what helps the 2018 Traverse get the better fuel economy is the auto stop function and the 9 speed transmission

Different from the old, but no the new Acadia & new Traverse are not different from each other. BTW, I looked up the numbers and the 2018 AWD Traverse is rated 17/25, so I was pretty close with my 17/24 guess. The FWD is rated 18/27, so again nowhere near 34.

FWIW, I doubt that new 9-speed will have any real-world impact on mileage. The old 6-speed is already geared way too tall, but like the current 9-speed provided optimum numbers for the EPA testing while spending little actual time in top gear out in the real world.

The 700lb weight reduction & injection improvements are where most of the 2-3 MPG rating improvement is likely to actually originate and what will matter most in real world driving.