Who is driving a Suburban?

[JHZR2]

Seating for 8/9, tons of cargo space, not that great of economy, but it meets a need...

Who is driving one regularly?

Pros/cons?

I'm only talking the BIG ones, not the Tahoe/expedition size with less/no cargo room with third row up.

How is a 2wd in the snow?

 

[FirstNissan]

My uncle in Rhode Island had one a few years ago. He loved it for taking all the kids/cousins out in one go, we did a few roadtrips in it. Great for the seating, drank gas like it was going out of style, and a nightmare to park anytime he took it anywhere urban. He replaced it with a Toyota Sienna.
As for the snow, never asked him, but it lasted him 5+ years of use in the Northeast.

 

[bullwinkle]

Still have the '94 C1500 one in the family (brother has it), it is nice to have on long trips & vacations, I actually wrung 17 MPG out of it on a vacation trip to Virginia Beach & back fully loaded, 6 people & luggage, but it is a thirsty beast if you drive it in town, short trips, etc. It was decent in light snow, narrow 15" A/Ts helped, with studs it would have been better (mostly due to all the weight on the rear axle).

 

[01rangerxl]

The C/K Suburbans (1992-1999) are tough trucks. You get all of the same benefits of the C/K pickups...reliable engines, decent transmissions, and a well thought out design. 1996-1999 had Vortec engines with slightly improved fuel economy and power over the TBI engines. 1995 brought a greatly improved interior. The engine options are the 350, 454 (2500), and I think the 6.5 diesel (2500). Big openings in the front bumper should mean it has a diesel.

Problems with the C/K trucks: electronics and switchgear. I have seen plenty of these with HVAC, radio, and power feature issues. You could get this generation of Suburban with crank windows, manual locks, and a "W/T" interior. Being in NJ, rust would be a major consideration but that's going to apply to any SUV up there.

I'm less familiar with the GMT800 ones (2000-2006). The engines (5.3, 6.0, and 8.1) are pretty reliable. They have the same cold start knock issues as the pickups, but there's no evidence that CSK shortens the life of the engine. The last 6.0 2500 GMT800 Suburban I was in was SLOW. I don't know if it just came with a bad gear ratio or if something was wrong with it, but it did not have a lot of go. An 8.1 would have a lot more grunt, but the fuel economy is going to be awful. Again, electronics and switchgear are the weak point. IIRC, smoking inside can damage the electronic 4WD controls.

I think either the C/K Burbans or GMT800 Burbans can last a long time with decent care. They should be capable of 250K-300K miles without much work.

 

[MNgopher]

Used to drive a 3/4 ton 2wd with the 350 regularly. We kept ours loaded down with a lot of surveying equipment in the back, thus the 3/4 option. Overall was pretty reliable and like driving any other full size truck. Thirsty as all get out and I shudder to think of the price tag to fill the 42 gallon tank it had with todays prices. We managed with 2wd (set up with better tires in the rear for traction), but always wanted 4wd. Lasted the usual 150,000 miles before it went to auction, and was replaced by an extended cab superduty.

 

[JHZR2]

I see the thirsty comment a lot. Thing is, a sienna is 24 MPG highway, 2wd suburban is 21. Seems like a little penalty for a LOT more space. Same thing compared to a traverse/acadia/highlander/pilot, which are all 23-24ish.

Highlander hybrid will give 28 MPG for $10k, and still less volume than suburban, likely substantially less third row space, though that is likely only a consideration in a pinch.

Not sure what it practically means...

 

[crw]

I have a 2000 Suburban, 4x4, 1500. It just turned over 150,000 this week. I've had it since 50,000 miles, and this vehicle has been outstanding. We replaced the rear rotors, and that's about it! Literally, nothing has gone wrong on it. It goes through snow like nothing is there.

I guess there are some nits to pick with things in the interior. In the second row seating, there is one seat that is supposed to slide forward to give access to the rear. It no longer slides. My kids have worked out a formula to fold it all the way down and that's what they do. But to be honest I don't care much what they do back there, as long as they don't complain too loudly. On the whole it's been a phenomenal vehicle.

It has the 5.3. It uses about a quart during a typical OCI. But it's not a problem. Like I say, it just goes and goes, with power.

 

[surfstar]

My dad and brother both had issues with these Chevy's: '95 PU and '95 Tahoe. Engine, trans, front end, entire dash, door handles.
Good luck.

 

[JHZR2]

I love the concept of buying a 4 cyl sienna to sit eight, versus a v6 or v8 vehicle. But the economy (acquisition cost aside) isnt compelling.

Where is the best purchase point?

 

[crw]

I think it comes down to towing. When we got the Suburban, I thought we'd do a lot of towing, and we have done some. With the Suburban, I could load my family of seven, with all their stuff, and if we still wanted to tow a trailer, we could do that.

Then once when on vacation we rented a Sienna. I was surprised at the room. Consider, in the Suburban the load floor in back is higher off the ground. In the van it was much lower. So, essentially the van had about the same room for cargo, it was just shaped differently.

My family is starting to downsize, two are in college already. Eventually we'll move away from the Suburban and into a people mover that gets better mileage and is more fun to drive. If I need towing or real grunt work I have my very old pickup for that.

 

[MNgopher]

Food for thought: Yes, suburbans are thirsty. I'd suggest the EPA estimated fuel mileage is a bit optimistic compared to how a suburban actually gets used when put to its intended purposes (people and cargo hauling, and trailer towing). How that compares to the minivans of the world, I really don't know. Just saying 21 mpg may not be a realistic MPG for a loaded up Suburban.

FWIW, our Suburban averaged around 11 mpg (3/4 ton, 2wd 350V*).

 

[crw]

My half-ton is not so bad. I hit 20mpg in it at times. The 3/4 ton is a lot heavier of course.

 

[OVERKILL]

Considered an Excursion with the 7.3L PSD?

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I see the thirsty comment a lot. Thing is, a sienna is 24 MPG highway, 2wd suburban is 21. Seems like a little penalty for a LOT more space. Same thing compared to a traverse/acadia/highlander/pilot, which are all 23-24ish.

Highlander hybrid will give 28 MPG for $10k, and still less volume than suburban, likely substantially less third row space, though that is likely only a consideration in a pinch.

Not sure what it practically means...



I'm sure you're aware of this, but if shopping new, you're looking at a little over $25K for a base Sienna and a little over $41K for a Suburban, sticker.

The Suburban's advantage is heavy duty truck attributes. A base Suburban can tow 8100 lbs, which clearly wouldn't be a good idea with a 2.7 Sienna.

The Sienna actually has more maximum cargo space than the Suburban. The Sienna has 150 cubic ft behind the front seats compared to 137.4 in the Suburban. The Suburban's rear axle and driveshaft need space. Leg room and head room are pretty close between the two.

If you just need a people hauler, I'd look at minivans. If you want to tow things, get a Suburban.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Considered an Excursion with the 7.3L PSD?


I dont buy used if I can avoid it.

 

[JHZR2]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I'm sure you're aware of this, but if shopping new, you're looking at a little over $25K for a base Sienna and a little over $41K for a Suburban, sticker.

The Suburban's advantage is heavy duty truck attributes. A base Suburban can tow 8100 lbs, which clearly wouldn't be a good idea with a 2.7 Sienna.

The Sienna actually has more maximum cargo space than the Suburban. The Sienna has 150 cubic ft behind the front seats compared to 137.4 in the Suburban. The Suburban's rear axle and driveshaft need space. Leg room and head room are pretty close between the two.

If you just need a people hauler, I'd look at minivans. If you want to tow things, get a Suburban.


http://blog.iseecars.com/2010/02/15/best-3rd-row-suvs-with-most-cargo-room/
"cargo volume is where the Suburban really excels…behind the third row is 45.8 cubic feet of flat-floored storage space.”

http://www.ford.com/suvs/expedition/specifications/capacities/
Cargo volume behind third seat 42.6 cu. ft.

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Toyota_Sienna/Interior/
39.1 cubic feet behind the third-row seat

Utility is the key, less acquisition cost.

Especially if talking 3 MPG.

Love the idea of a 4 cyl full size minivan though...

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Considered an Excursion with the 7.3L PSD?


I dont buy used if I can avoid it.


That sucks, as it was the "king" of SUV's, being based on the Super Duty.

It had:
146.4 cubic feet of maximum cargo space
48.0 cubic feet of space behind the third row seat
payload capacity of up to 1,906 pounds - 1,750 pounds with the 4x4 drivetrain option.
Plus 11,000lb towing capacity in diesel and V10 trim.

One of my favourite SUV's.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2


Utility is the key, less acquisition cost.


If utility is key, that's been the Suburban's selling point since the 1930s. It's definitely very capable and you will be getting your money's worth if this vehicle is going to be used at full capacity a lot of the time.

It's too bad they never put the 4.2L I6 in the Suburban. I bet it would move a 2WD 1500 reasonably well. The Trailblazer EXT can't weigh much less.

 

[JHZR2]

A sienna isn't that compact either... Far less cargo space with seats up too, right?

 

[01rangerxl]

The Sienna has definitely grown in size. The Suburban is a bit longer though:

Sienna width: 78.1"
Suburban width: 79.1"

Sienna height: 69.5"
Suburban height: 76.8"

Sienna length: 200.2"
Suburban length: 222.4"

Sienna ground clearance: 6.7"
Suburban ground clearance: 9.1"

Dimensions from Edmunds.com

Like you said, with seats up you get more than 5 additional cubic feet in the back of the Suburban. That could make a difference with a lot of gear/luggage and a full load of passengers.

The Suburban's length isn't terrible either. It's shorter than an extended cab short bed Silverado, which is 230.2".