caddycruiser

That's so WEIRD! When the Ion came out, I always thought the general proportions of the body and styling were actually not bad. But, the build quality and general refinement were (and still kinda are) at old tractor levels...and in the professional reviews, the general consensus seemed to be that they didn't like the styling. NOW, we have the new Honda Civic that looks like a plastic Ion someone stuck in the microwave by accident and warped it just a tad, and the new Sentra which looks like an Ion that was in the dryer a little too long and shrunk. Both of the latter cars (the Honda and the Nissan) will probably continue (or start) getting more glowing reviews that just mention "unique" or "interesting" styling. Which makes me wonder: -If the Ion had come out looking pretty much the same but had the same high level of qualitiy and driving refinement as the Civic, do you think it would have garnered as much praise? Something to think about...

A couple quick notes: -I have a feeling, that, whenever these new trucks get a little more widespread on the lots and are parked next to current -800 Tahoes, Suburbans, etc., the differences will SHOCK people. Even from pictures alone, there's not even a remote comparison to our '04...especially when it comes to the woven vs. cheap fleece headliner, beautiful dash design and materials vs. the current rectangular sub-tupperware junk, and the VW-esque door panels vs. the creaky, crunchy sounding and el-cheapo ones now. The differences are HUGE. -Strangely, today when I was out on my typical Sunday cruise/dealership pitstop, there were more people than I usually see also roaming...and looking at current gen '05 and '06 Tahoes. Usually, there's no one looking at those--maybe the super huge blowout rebates on the "antiques" are attracting a few more people looking for a last minute deal. I'd rather spend an extra few thousand to get the much improved '07, but I guess the blue light special deal still gets some people looking, even if it is on old, out of date machinery...

Despite the so-so rear interior packaging and old 4-speed, I'm LOVING everything about these trucks. :AH-HA_wink: Bad part? The more and more pics of the new ones I see, the less and less I like our '04...and am even starting to dislike it. It's like a clunky old dinosaur compared to the new ones, which is really saying something... Oh well, mother dearest should be in the mood to trade right about the time the '09s are rolling out...or maybe even a little sooner if they price them properly and she likes them in person.

Yep, just saw that one last night too. As for the base model, go to Chevy's site for that. As compared to the current "base" LS's with black plastic plague (see the truck in my sig... ...), the new '07s only real differences are black door handles (but no accompanying plastic surround like now) and black mirror caps. No extra black bumper or side moldings, so even the bases appear to look pretty good. That, and as far as cloth choices, they seem to have gone with a thicker, softer variety, like in the Impala/Lucerne, so that's also a good sign.

If you actually read it, they said that was their best ESTIMATE, largely based on the pricing of the current models. BUT, as is being discussed somewhat in another thread right now, there's supposed to be a "dramatic" price reduction for the new GMT-900's, starting with the Tahoe in a day or so, so that there need not be anymore $10k+ discounts. If they're smart, I'm going to say $28,995 for a 2wd LS with no options, maxing out right at $45k for a loaded to the gills LTZ. Anymore, and they'll for sure have another issue with massive discounts. Guess we'll soon see...

He's an idiot when it comes to this business...what more can I say? :rolleyes: Flame me, as you wish :AH-HA_wink:

I don't even want to know what you're smoking... :o

Uh, number one, there's no reason whatsoever for a $4k difference in price between a Tahoe and Suburban. At MOST, I could see around $1k like now, but it should be even less than that. Well, that, and $32.5k would still be too high, PERIOD. A base Expedition (that has more room and much better space usage overall than a Tahoe) starts right around there, as does an Armada at just a bit more. BUT, then you also have the Durango that TOO has a better usage of interior space, but starts in the $20k's. They better get REALLY agressive with the Tahoe pricing as a start, aggressive enough that a GM dealer might finally be able to emulate their Honda friends across the street and give discounts in the HUNDREDS and not in the mutiple THOUSANDS like now. It'd be great if, for once in their horrible history of MSRP inflating, that they kept a continual tight lip on the invoice/MSRP line, to the point that the dealer can still make a profit and they don't even have to ever use a rebate, EVER, except for maybe at the very end of a model year, and even then at max maybe just a $1k clear out deal. I'm sorry to harp on it again, but they just better get this one right, and do it right from day one. If they want to emulate anyone, just go look at Honda and see how it works over there for the most part (leaving aside the one or two slower sellers). Getting a $10k+ discount never leaves that good of a taste in your mouth, at least when it comes to wondering about the quality/worth of the vehicle you just purchased. Simply put? Tahoe at $28,995 and Suburban at $29,795. Like I said before, NO one ever walks out of a dealer paying anymore than $27-28k for a base Tahoe, and at levels like this, it'd be very easy just to "pull a Honda" and cut only 500 bucks or a little closer to $1k off, call it a day, and not have someone worrying about combining 7 of the 11 latest offers, like they're at the supermarket with a wallet of coupons... A little overlap with the craptacular base Trailblazers for the time being? Yep, but that trucklet will always have a big rebate on the hood for the near future and should still be selling in the lower 20k's at its lower points. Actually, the HHR is one good example of them doing it right, so just copy that idea...

Huh? You do KNOW that this vehicle really has nothing to do with the Grand Cherokee, other than a few bolts and a couple electronic pieces, right? The Durango and GC are quite a bit different, and this is Durango-based. As for the rest of you, especially those that said something about the grille--look closer. Think, maybe, that the pic uploaded here also shows a couple accessories from Chrysler? Just a theory, but it looks a bit like there's a black mesh bug cover over the grille...either that, or it's just a weird pic. I like it, but then again, I've always liked Durangos--slightly odd current gen front end, included. Compared to a Tahoe, they have better packaging, including a 3rd row that's actually fit for humans AND fold-flat, not to mention they're about the most tightly constructed, tank-solid truck-based SUV's on the road. Just very, very nice, composed, and refined. Definately better in this aspect than both our last and current GM full-sizers.

Looks really cool, but WOW does it ever look strange (that last pic) when it has the run of the mill 17" wheels on it like most will. The 16's look like small enough "dummy wheels" on our '04 Suburban, and something about the new trucks just makes the wheels look ever smaller... They show so many LTZ's with the 20's that it really will make the typical LS/LT look a bit funny B) Kinda like how, for the most part, it's odd to see an '02 or newer Dodge Ram WITHOUT the 20's, and when you do, the smaller wheels look really out of place.

I kinda agree. Too bad they couldn't put that kind of effort and time into revamping the mushy and sloppy entire line of GMT-360's, from fixing their 70's Caddy ride and handling, to pumping up the Cavalier-grade interiors, exterior fit & finish, etc. The TB SS is really cool, no doubt, and from what I've read, a major step up in driving quality over the typical TB, but I think they would have done better overall just to spend the time and money and focus more on getting the entire GMT-360 line up to date and into this decade, so they had more of a potential "across the board" success and not just one nice model out of a bunch of mediocre.

They look great, but I trully hope someone inside GM in charge of pricing has come to their senses and a "base" 2wd LS model starts at no more than $30k. Even if that means a little overlap with the Trailblazer for the time being, that floaty piece of crap will likely have to carry large rebates on the hood for the rest of its life, so it won't be that much of a concern. This, I say, because with an INSANE base of around $36k right now for a stripper model, after you factor in the pretty much standard incentives, no one ever actually buys one of those models for anymore than $27-28k out the door. With the new ones, there should only be about a $2k margin they can cut into for discount, therefore eliminating the possibility of $5,6, or even 7k rebates in ADDITION to further dealer discounting. Our '04 Suburban is nice and well worth the $30k we paid in the end after the no questions asked $10k discount, but wouldn't even get a second look had we been forced to pay anywhere near the $41k sticker. Expeditions start in the very low 30's, Armada's the same, Durango's in the high 20's, and with the Tahoe still lacking things like a comfortable or fold-flat 3rd row, it needs to have at least some kind of MSRP advantage right from the get go. Well, that, and no more $59k+ Chevy Suburban LTZ's like at the local dealer now...YIKES...

What a waste of money and PR that was... :huh: A brief intro that barely showed the new Tahoe when the performer got out of it, then just the occasional visible Chevy emblem or dumb jester hat in the audience with a Chevy emblem. I guess if you were actually in Times Square you saw the truck, at least, a little more, but still not all that much. Even the commercial (I thought there would be more than just the one?) wasn't much to write home about. Matter of fact, the new one I saw just for the Tahoe, showing a lot of its new features on Fox News earlier in the evening was the best thing I saw. So, enough of a pointless rant, but good lord was that ever a waste of PR and $$$...but what else would you expect from GM :rolleyes: Actually, I think even those "Revolution" commercials they played New Year's Eve last year were better...

I agree. Many, many years of parking in different lots and other places over the years, and we've NEVER gotten a ding or any other damage. Guess it pays to typically park on the end or out away from everyone else most of the time. That said, I also think that anyone who thinks the G6 sedan is better looking than the Aura is in the small minority. Sorry, but the odd mixture of bland/aggressive and odd proportions just doesn't do it for me. I do agree on the powertrain, though--just don't expect it to ever happen, except when the car gets a full redesign *maybe*. The 3.5L and 3.9L are still very fresh powertrains for GM and even though they seem somewhat pathetic compared to things like Nissan's DOHC VQ 3.5L they use in everything, GM has to use them in SOMETHING, so they'll probably be under the hoods of G6's, Impalas, etc. for quite a while. The only real possibility might be a new 6-speed transmission that might FINALLY allow the engines to have a much better powerband than the widely spaced 4-speeds that have been around for eons, but again, that's just a possibility.

I LOVE the 300, the Charger, and the Magnum...but this thing is gross. Looks like a Korean attempt to "make a cheap Bentley/Rolls". You know, about a 95% carbon copy as far as looks, but the missing 5% just being enough to make it awkward. I could see them doing an Imperial, but not like this--too much of a blatant, ugly ripoff. Copy a lot of an ACTUAL old Imperial, and then you might have something...

As an owner of a current-gen '04 Suburban, definately does sound like they fixed most of what is "not so good" in these trucks: -Awful, spongey to the floor brake pedal feel -Sloppy steering with way too much messy slack on center -Basic and horrid quality interior -Body/frame solidity, which isn't so bad, but definately is not in the same league as some newer competitors like the Expedition or Durango...ours tends to shutter a bit over some bumps, and has been in for rattle repair a couple times And what they didn't (yet, at least): -Not so great 4L60E with its sometimes sloppy shifts and lack of another 1 or 2 gears...which REALLY kills the power down, and is the main reason why the new engine power probably wasn't noticeable... So, the steering, braking, solidity, and interior improvements definately should make these trucks more attractive once again, but things like the pathetic 4-speed and "lug-out" 3rd rows will still keep some away. Regardless, sounds nice, and the newfound solidity and refinement would still get us back to a Chevy/GMC dealer for a look at least.

Though I'll admit that naming the Hemi-equipped models "C" and the others just 300 with either "base", "Touring", or "Limited" trim levels is a bit confusing to some, the real reason the Chrysler people gave when they launched the car was this: -Because it was such a MASSIVE change from the FWD 300M, they didn't want anyone thinking it was just the "next version" in the line from that car. It'll certainly be interesting when a redesign comes to see what they do with the names, but right now, I think it works.

Compared to WHAT? The old ones were great cars in their time, but right now today, the 300 (and its sister cars) represent one of the most beautifully styled (or, at least, damned distinctive), highest performing, highest quality, AND affordable lineups of cars ever. As such, I don't think I'd be the only one to say that the comment "If America owned a car, it would be the 300." would still be true, right this minute. Sorry, but no bland-city Lucerne (despite the good points it does have) or Ford 500 really stand out as being all american...the big, bold, and proud 300 certainly does.

Well, thinking of it, I kind of am now...particularly considering GM's general tendency to complete something to 85-90% and stop... :lol: Not that the cranes they're using will be GM's, but, well, you never know... :rolleyes: EDIT:Don't anyone hate me, I'm just joking...I think...

Looked good to me, except for the hideous rear end--fix that mess up, and it should be a hell of a hot car.

Yeah, so? Times change and sometimes that means it might also be a good idea to update and improve your equipment to match those times. The Buick of TODAY would be very well suited to again have the latest and greatest in terms of powertrains, with DOD, 6-spds, and much more refined, higher performing OHC V6's.

Never meant to say that. Just giving some personal observations. The CV's are antique and not the best to drive, but they still serve a great purpose. But, when you come right down to it, you'd be hard pressed to find a newer Impala that did a 100k stint in police use, then went on to be a taxi for another 300k with very little mechanical work...that's one area where the Ford panther cars (and the last GM B&D bodies) still excel.

That's true, but I only meant to phrase that as one example. It just seems that the general consensus is that they're generally nicer to drive, but just not as simple, beat it to the death tough as something like a Crown Vic. Where we live in DE, Crown Vics are the ONLY thing they use, but when we went back to our hometown in western PA over Thanksgiving, I noticed they now had a pretty even split of Impalas and Crown Vics. Actually, strange as it might be, several years ago when we still lived in PA, the town cops had just bought a couple new '98 Lumina 9C1's, one of the cops was driving one around and stopped at Burger King for lunch. While he was sitting in the car eating, with it idling, something spontaneously caught on fire, lightly burning the dash and part of the hood. I don't remember what it was, but it was an interesting story nonetheless, especially since the cars were only a few days old.

Well, it's definately a fairly dopey looking ride, but that's not very important when it comes to the purpose it serves. On the other hand, one issue that remains is the FWD. Regardless of the amount of beefing up and toughening they do, I've read different accounts of police departments trying a newer Impala out, only to jump one too many curbs or drive a little too aggressively and have something go wrong with the FWD parts while their old Crown Vics are still going strong without a flinch. The last few years of Caprice 9C1 cars are still one of the most coveted used car buys to this day because they were both extremely tough and awesome road performers. These newer Impalas are definately more efficient and crisper to drive, but still missing that "something" that can be necessary for true success as a patrol car.

I know...sad, but funny at the same time... :lol: They'd cheap out, and you'd never have to worry about it revving much and actually getting the power down to the ground, because it only has 4 widely spaced slushbox gears to choose from... ^_^