Subaru Outback vs Chevy Tahoe vs Toyota Highlander

[pacem]

These 3 SUV have little in common but am considering all 3.

Circa 2008-2009 years

I am most familiar with the Outback, have had a number of them. Specifically looking for a H6 as I don't trust the 2.5L in these years.

OTOH, the Tahoe seems like a better deal. For about the same price, you get a V8, more space, cheaper parts.

The Highlander is neat. maybe the highest quality of all 3, not sure. Any known issues with the Toyota SUV? How easy to fix? Transmission issues? I am concerned the 3.6L V6 sidewinder engine might be difficult to work on, like spark plugs or the belts. The Tahoe is a "normal" engine facing forward with the water pump and the belts easier to get to.

I would throw in Volve XC70 Crossover wagon in the mix but it seems to have an unusually high number of mechanical problems - scanning the volvo forums, timing belt can jump a tooth, transmission problems constantly advertised, etc.

OTOH with the Tahoe, it should handle the worst with the weight and bulk. Doubtful it will even get to 20mpg even with 5.3L.

 

[Danno]

For the record the Highlander has a 3.5L V6 and 1 accessory belt. I have the 2009 Venza which is built on similar platform.
If you are not towing more than 5,000 lbs (which would exclude the Outback), my choice would be the Toyota.
Bullet proof V6, roomy and better on gas than the Tahoe.

 

[pacem]

One of my key criteria is how easy it is to fix, I like to DIY.

How does the sidewinder 3.5L of Toyota compare to the Tahoe without a transversely mounted engine?

 

[ARCOgraphite]

You daont care about fuel mileage?

Chev v8 easier to fix. but late 200 chevy= junk.

Subaru Tribeca would be the best choice if you don't need a super giant tailgate area.

I would get a vintage K5 or suburban or similar and put your own trans and engine in it.

No smog, no computer, cheap insurance cheap parts

Tribeca:

 

[PolarisX]

Nice dash, hideous front end. Looks like a dust buster.

 

[TmanP]

Of those, I'd pick either the Highlander or the Tahoe. Very different vehicles but I think that you'd be happy with either of them. The Tahoe should get 20-22 mpg highway, and it's going to (obviously) be the biggest of all these. The Highlander is rated 2 or 3 mpg higher city/hwy. Not too big of a difference.

 

[glock19]

It's anecdotal, but my wife had a 2010 Highlander that went 220,000 miles with the only repair being a driver's side window that fell out of the track. Then when we went to trade it in on a 2016 Highlander the dealer gave us $10k for it. Can't beat that in my book.

 

[379KITTY]

Not sure where the "late 200(0) Chevy is junk" comment comes from. If even somewhat maintained 300-400K from a GM smallblock is commonplace. Plenty of fleet vehicles have achieved that which doesn't include idle either. Another import kool-aid drinker apparently. I'm sure any of the three will do well, but you asked about ease of repair. Tahoe wins there hands down.

 

[Leo99]

You shouldn't need to do much DIY on a Highlander of that vintage.

 

[pacem]

Originally Posted By: 379KITTY
Not sure where the "late 200(0) Chevy is junk" comment comes from. If even somewhat maintained 300-400K from a GM smallblock is commonplace. Plenty of fleet vehicles have achieved that which doesn't include idle either. Another import kool-aid drinker apparently. I'm sure any of the three will do well, but you asked about ease of repair. Tahoe wins there hands down.


I am certain the GM small block can make it thus far, it's the rest of the truck I am concerned about. Things like transmission, the front end, and misc items that fall apart on you like the fuel pump and other stuff that leaves you stranded.

Do late models still use the 4L60E transmission? It's really not that good and falls apart way before 200K miles.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted By: 379KITTY
Not sure where the "late 200(0) Chevy is junk" comment comes from. If even somewhat maintained 300-400K from a GM smallblock is commonplace. Plenty of fleet vehicles have achieved that which doesn't include idle either. Another import kool-aid drinker apparently. I'm sure any of the three will do well, but you asked about ease of repair. Tahoe wins there hands down.


Chevy Owner and NIASE master mechanic, builds and tunes chev street race engines on the side in the 70's and early 80s.

67 Chevelle SS 396 owner.

You Keep your kool aid and drink it yourself, buddy boy.

 

[Bronco1]

I would vote Highlander, too. My older sister has had owned 2 vehicles over the past 25 years, both toyotas. She got 350k plus on the first one and 200k on her current one which is still running strong. If they had more head room, i might get one when i replace our Fit this fall.

 

[Rolla07]

Originally Posted By: Leo99
You shouldn't need to do much DIY on a Highlander of that vintage.


+1

 

[sifan]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
You daont care about fuel mileage?

Chev v8 easier to fix. but late 200 chevy= junk.

Subaru Tribeca would be the best choice if you don't need a super giant tailgate area.

I would get a vintage K5 or suburban or similar and put your own trans and engine in it.

No smog, no computer, cheap insurance cheap parts

Tribeca:

I would skip the 2006-2007 Tribeca in photos due to high octane gas requirement, weak low beam head lights and weak 3.0L flat six engine. The 2008-up addresses these issues with 87 octane gas, redesigned front end (look more conventional), and 3.6L engine.

I have read many owner reviews on 2008 Tribeca. Some complains range from high oil consumption (1 qt. per 1000 miles when new) to various electrical issues. Gas mileage is another issue ranging from 14 mpg to 25 mpg (highway). Tribeca does not seem be as reliable as Outback.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: TmanP
Of those, I'd pick either the Highlander or the Tahoe. Very different vehicles but I think that you'd be happy with either of them. The Tahoe should get 20-22 mpg highway, and it's going to (obviously) be the biggest of all these. The Highlander is rated 2 or 3 mpg higher city/hwy. Not too big of a difference.


It may get 20mpg at moderate speeds. 22mpg is a tail wind going downhill with the motor off.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Tahoe.

 

[nthach]

Totally different cars - the Outback is more of a wagon, a lifted Legacy. If you see yourself venturing to the snow a lot, my pick is the Subaru.

I personally wouldn't fear the 2008-2011 EJ engines, I have a friend with a 2009 Forester and hers is the 3rd generation model before the FB25 made it's debut and it's been trouble-free according to her. I've driven a friend's 2005 Outback with the EZ30D boxer 6, that motor has plenty of go. No timing belt, spark plugs on a Subaru aren't terribly bad to do, you might need to pull the battery or airbox to get access to the coil packs but the right tools make it easier. I think the water pump on the EZ engines is driven off the timing chain, but accessing the cam drive in a Subie is like any other RWD car.

Between the Tahoe and Highlander - the Tahoe can haul more, marginally carry more but it will drink more fuel. The Highlander is more or less either a big Camry wagon or a less soccer mommy Sienna depending on how you see it. Toyota switched over to the 2GR-FE V6 in the 2008-up era from the previous 1MZ/3MZ-FE. No timing belt - but do make sure the oil lines have been replaced. Of course spark plugs on a Toyota FWD V6 will be a job to dread.

The Tahoe is based off a proven GM truck platform, the 4.8/5.3L LS1-based truck V8s had less issues than their 350 Vortec predecessor. Decently easy to work on and a good aftermarket to boot.

 

[Nick1994]

How many cars are you going to buy? This is the 8th post you've had in 2-1/2 weeks about buying certain cars.

What happened to the Suburban?

 

[wemay]

Highlander.

 

[pacem]

Originally Posted By: sifan
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
You daont care about fuel mileage?

Chev v8 easier to fix. but late 200 chevy= junk.

Subaru Tribeca would be the best choice if you don't need a super giant tailgate area.

I would get a vintage K5 or suburban or similar and put your own trans and engine in it.

No smog, no computer, cheap insurance cheap parts

Tribeca:

I would skip the 2006-2007 Tribeca in photos due to high octane gas requirement, weak low beam head lights and weak 3.0L flat six engine. The 2008-up addresses these issues with 87 octane gas, redesigned front end (look more conventional), and 3.6L engine.

I have read many owner reviews on 2008 Tribeca. Some complains range from high oil consumption (1 qt. per 1000 miles when new) to various electrical issues. Gas mileage is another issue ranging from 14 mpg to 25 mpg (highway). Tribeca does not seem be as reliable as Outback.


There is no way to check for high oil consumption when test driving a car. I suspect I will hit upon one such sample with my luck.

And I've never heard of it. Which must be significant. Good luck getting a part out of a junk yard.