: Anybody else a hater of the GMT 900 SUV's . . . .



Aron9000
08-05-11, 06:50 AM
Just saying that I cannot stand the standard wheelbase Tahoe, Escalade, and Yukon. Its a simply dumb design IMO, the rear seat passengers totally get the shaft IMO. Second row leg room is very skimpy for a vehicle this big. Getting into the back seat is a challenge because of the back door opening being so tiny, especially at the footwell. Folding the 2nd row seat for access to the 3rd row requires you to pull twice on a very flimsy plastic handle. I'm the only one who can make it work, guests never figure out how the thing works. Getting the 2nd row seat back into position requires a fairly good slam that will take off the toes of 3rd row passengers.

Third seat room is laughable, it might be comfortable for those under 5', otherwise its knees up at your eyeballs to squeeze back there. Putting the 3rd row seat up is a major PITA. I'm 5'6" tall, and honestly I can barely manage to pull the 3rd row back into position without climbing into the back of the truck. For any smaller woman, it would be an impossible task to fold the 3rd row of seats back into place without crawling up over the bumper into the back of the truck.

I say all of this because my company uses the GMC Yukon Denali Hybrid as a chauffeured vehicle. We had a 2004 or 2005 Navigator before our last two Yukon Hybrids, and it was a much superior vehicle IMO for 2nd and 3rd row passengers. Lots more space in both rows of seats, 2nd row seat folded a lot easier, and the 3rd row seat folded into a flat load floor at the push of a button. WTF GM??????? Ford had this shit figured out years before your redesign, and you still ****ed it up!!!


Sorry for the rant, but IMO other than nicer interiors and better driving dynamics, the GMT900 SUV has the same damn fatal flaws as the old GMT 800 SUVS. They're horribly space inefficient, the 3rd row has to be manhandled by a decent size man to get it to unfold or removed, and back seat passengers get a total shaft on space.

EDIT: I also forgot to mention that our "hybrid" Yukon gets 13 mpg city. I drove it at 75mph on a 30 mile run and managed a best of 18mpg. A far cry from the 20 city/20 highway EPA rating.

The Raven
08-05-11, 07:18 AM
EDIT: I also forgot to mention that our "hybrid" Yukon gets 13 mpg city. I drove it at 75mph on a 30 mile run and managed a best of 18mpg. A far cry from the 20 city/20 highway EPA rating.

One of my closest friends gets 18-19mpg average with his (60/40 city/highway driving split) and has seen as high as 24mpg on highway tanks. Sounds like you need to re-learn your driving habits.

Hell, my father's '06 (non-hybrid, non-AFM) Tahoe gets 16mpg no matter what he's doing...highway, city, towing, etc...16mpg. You do need to be smart about your use of power, but it's not hard.

brandondeleo
08-05-11, 07:56 AM
I have always liked the Yukon XL/ Escalade ESV/ Suburban variants a lot more than the standard Tahoe, Yukon and Escalade. The smaller ones look misproportioned, in my opinion. My aunt had an '09 Tahoe, and the 3rd row seats only worked for her daughter... As for the gas mileage, the EPA rating is an optimistic way to look at the economy, because it almost never achieves that mark. It all depends on your driving habits. I normally average 20mpg in my '99 DeVille, but when I drive while angry, it drops to about 14mpg. Lol.

Jesda
08-05-11, 08:17 AM
The interiors got cheaper even though the designs got nicer. It costs GM a lot less to built GMT900 than GMT800.

T900 Escalades have nasty wind noise and hard plastics.

maeng9981
08-05-11, 09:33 AM
I like Escalades but the third row is a joke. I just can't fit in it. If I would get an Escalade it would be an ESV or EXT.

hueterm
08-05-11, 10:00 AM
If I had a short wheelbase, the rear seat would come out, and stay out, and I would want a 2nd row bench.

Stingroo
08-05-11, 10:02 AM
If I had a short wheelbase, the rear seat would come out, and stay out, and I would want a 2nd row bench.

This.

The Raven
08-05-11, 10:26 AM
If I had a short wheelbase, the rear seat would come out, and stay out, and I would want a 2nd row bench.

Agreed completely.

There is a reason that GM offers both short wheelbase with third row, and long wheelbase. If you have a family of six, you NEED to go big...that's why the Suburban exists...the three-row Tahoe is not for you. The Tahoe with third row seating is for the family of four who would like to take friends along every now and then. Those seats are intended for occasional use, not for a family that needs them all the time.

hueterm
08-05-11, 01:25 PM
While the Ford method is far superior...

My understanding on the issue w/the Expedition/Navigator's folding seat arrangement, is that you lose volumetric space. Those seats folded down are say a foot higher off the floor than are the flipped forward 2nd row and removed 3rd row on a GM. And also, I'm sure they were being cheap, and didn't want to engineer something else. My big peeve is that to fold up the 2nd row, you have to move the front seats up, like in my EXT and Avalanches. THAT is inexcusable...

Jesda
08-05-11, 03:25 PM
I dont remember having to do that in the Navigator. Thanks to IRS, the third row could fold down flat while retaining a spacious cargo area, and the second row was pretty simple. You pulled two latches on the back of the captains chairs and it flipped forward to create a flat floor.

http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/2761/4261/31902130007_large.jpg
http://www.automotiveaddicts.com/magazine/images/2007lincolnnavigator/2007LincolnNavigatorRearCargoThirdRowDown01FixedSm all.jpg

I really miss that truck.

hueterm
08-05-11, 04:28 PM
All I'm saying is that I think the "floor" of the GM is lower, thereby creating more theoretical space as you're not using the seat backs as the load floor.

The Ford setup is much better...although, did your console just poke up there, or did it collapse as well?

Jesda
08-05-11, 05:26 PM
I dont think that one had a second-row console.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
08-05-11, 05:50 PM
I still prefer the GMT400's overall. Such a clean, handsome design inside and out and very durable/easy to own.

ryannel2003
08-05-11, 09:01 PM
My mom has a '08 Denali XL because we just couldn't fit our family of 5 in a short wheelbase model. It's been one of the most trouble free trucks she has ever owned.

Stingroo
08-05-11, 09:03 PM
The XL Denali is quite the bargain when placed next to the Escalade....

ryannel2003
08-05-11, 09:40 PM
She wanted an Escalade but the $76k pricetag is just out of the question. We got the Denali when the big discounts were going on back in '08 and the Denali stickered for $60k but we ended up getting it for a little under $50k out the door.

Aron9000
08-05-11, 11:46 PM
I'll agree that the Suburban length trucks are a lot more spacious in the back seat and are a lot better people haulers. Problem is you can't get they hybrid in the Suburban length chassis. My company is trying to promote a "green" image, so it would rather fold people like pretezels into a poorly designed SUV than buy something with more space that gets better gas mileage.

I do think that they drive/handle nicely, steering is a lot sharper in this truck than our old Navigator. Of course the Navigator had air suspension, that was the smoothest riding vehicle I've ever been in. Throttle response in the hybrid is laughable. There is about a 1 second delay from pushing the gas from a stop to something actually happening, its like it has to think for a second before it finally gets the message that you want to leave with some haste.

The Tony Show
08-06-11, 02:47 PM
The electric motors in the transmission should actually give you MORE torque than the gas engine, since electric motors are instant 100% torque.

Your description above explains why you aren't getting good mileage- you're flogging the thing and never giving it a chance to use the motors for torque assist or go into 4cyl mode, but instead forcing it straight into V8 mode. I'd be willing to bet you wait to slow down for lights until you're right on top of them, too, which prevents it from using Auto Stop to save gas on coast down. Sounds to me like you should've saved the money and bought the all gas version.

How you drive is more important than what you drive. I could get 13mpg in a Prius if I manhandled it away from every light and didn't use gradual deceleration to recharge the batteries.

Aron9000
08-06-11, 06:34 PM
I drive it what I consider "reasonable", ie within the speed limit, not flooring it from light to light. That auto-stop feature is kind of useless IMO, half the time its idling at red lights, and if you don't want to tie up traffic pulling away from a light, you're going to turn the engine on.

Its driven by mutliple meatheads though, our one guy who is a native New Yorker I know drives like he's in Manhattan at 5:00pm when nobody is in the car with him. I've driven the thing being the only driver for one shift, driving reasonable, I bumped the mileage up from 12.5 to 14.

The Raven
08-07-11, 11:16 AM
I drive it what I consider "reasonable", ie within the speed limit, not flooring it from light to light. That auto-stop feature is kind of useless IMO, half the time its idling at red lights, and if you don't want to tie up traffic pulling away from a light, you're going to turn the engine on.

Its driven by mutliple meatheads though, our one guy who is a native New Yorker I know drives like he's in Manhattan at 5:00pm when nobody is in the car with him. I've driven the thing being the only driver for one shift, driving reasonable, I bumped the mileage up from 12.5 to 14.

It is pointless for a company to invest in a Hybrid. I don't think i've ever encountered a person who treats their company car with even a shred of respect. Hybrids have to be driven properly to actually offer any benefit...and in fact, when driven like a company vehicle, they are actually far worse because maintenance costs will be significantly higher. You end up gaining nothing in gas mileage, and losing money on the maintenance end. Best route to take with company vehicles is to buy the smallest engine you can possibly get for the model in question.

brandondeleo
08-07-11, 11:34 AM
It is pointless for a company to invest in a Hybrid. I don't think i've ever encountered a person who treats their company car with even a shred of respect. Hybrids have to be driven properly to actually offer any benefit...and in fact, when driven like a company vehicle, they are actually far worse because maintenance costs will be significantly higher. You end up gaining nothing in gas mileage, and losing money on the maintenance end. Best route to take with company vehicles is to buy the smallest engine you can possibly get for the model in question.Hoonage.

cadillac kevin
08-07-11, 11:38 AM
why dont they just buy a suburban and slap hybrid emblems on it? win win for everybody.

brandondeleo
08-07-11, 11:39 AM
Political correctness is for spineless douchebags. :bouncy:

cadillac kevin
08-07-11, 11:46 AM
Political correctness is for spineless douchebags. :bouncy:
you're just jealous that you dont have the worlds lamest most gas guzzling hybrid. :P

The Raven
08-07-11, 01:13 PM
you're just jealous that you dont have the worlds lamest most gas guzzling hybrid. :P

Actually, I believe that honor goes to this fella:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bown/2007/images/sps/images/img_130.jpg

A 100 ton, 4400hp Hybrid burning 200gph. But it is by far the most efficient road locomotive ever built, and the ingenious technology that powers it is already changing the standard for locomotive design.

Jesda
08-07-11, 02:54 PM
It looks like a 70s Cadillac with green paint.

Aron9000
08-07-11, 07:40 PM
^Horns probably sound about the same too.

Reason we have the hybrid is to ferry around hotel guests. Its part of our green initiative at the hotel, aka the cop out to save more $$$. Your bed isn't changed every day unless you specifically request it. Not sure if they change your towels out every day, but they're trying to cut back on that to be "green", or more like to save green. I know they started recycling cans and plastic as part of the initiative, they were already recycling paper. Kind of interesting that changing out 25 year old HVAC equipment was nowhere to be found in the green initiative, costs too much $$$$, even though it could save $$$$ on the electric bill.

Anyways, the hybrid is on a 2 or 3 year lease, we just turned in our 2008 and got the 2011. I was hoping they ironed out some of the bugs, but it still has the same quirks as the old one.

Playdrv4me
08-09-11, 02:11 AM
GMT900 has been a real disappointment. It's even more a disappointment when you consider the INSANE amount of value the Escalades hold. Exhibit A. The AutoTrader Instant Trade-In Valuation at Autotrader.com. A little background: This is a service that provides you with a guaranteed cash offer (or trade offer at some dealers) upon presenting your vehicle to a dealer participating in the program, so long as the details you gave during the online appraisal were accurate. It's a way to bring more traffic into dealers, and bring them the occasional bargain to buy for resale. If for any reason they don't WANT to keep a vehicle appraised by Autotrader, they send it to an auction where Autotrader essentially cuts them a check for whatever was initially offered to the customer.

Anyway, on a 2007 Jaguar XK Convertible, which you simply can not find for less than 30k in anywhere approaching reasonable condition (or in coupe only), their offer is a laughable 16000.00 (I use their service as my own personal black book and they hate it, send me emails all the time lol).

Meanwhile, on my Escalade, they are still valuing it somewhere around $29000.00. This is insane considering you can buy 2007 Escalades at RETAIL now for that much or even less WELL equipped! But somwhere, somehow in their back room calculations, GMT900 Escalades are worth that to them. When I've shopped it around to dealers that don't participate in Instant Trade-In, my highest offer has routinely been 27k, if that. Some have even offered me 24.

This is even more ridiculous when you view Kelley Blue Book's projected resale value calculation on a 2007 Escalade, which states that by now, they should have been worth a lot less already. Yet these stupid trucks drop panties and break necks like there's no tomorrow. Pull up in a black Tahoe with 22s and you'll barely get noticed, but in the Escalade it's a universal p**sy wagon and I simply don't understand it. A Range Rover is far better built (reliability aside), and far more prestigious, and even THOSE don't get that kind of attention.

In almost every conceivable way, I enjoyed my Navigator and my GMT800 Escalade more than the GMT900. But *especially* in the driving characteristics. The GM Torque Management and drive by wire throttle mapping is horrible, so I get to read about my 403hp, but I certainly can't find any of them when I need them. The interior is pretty, but the materials don't really feel any more substantial than they did in the 2006. Even the leather quality just seemed altogether more plush in my 2006, and it had a much nicer smell. The '07 doesn't smell like anything. Yet another case, much like the DTS, where the Platinum interior should *ALWAYS HAVE BEEN THE STANDARD*, rather than getting stingy. A Range Rover HSE comes with a fully leather wrapped interior with no upcharge. There is horrendous wind noise which PLAGUED all 2007 and even some 2008 trucks. Really, how does a company have such awful build tolerances that wind noise is a problem this late in the car manufacturing game. Meanwhile, you can get a *DECKED OUT* 2006 Navigator (last year of the pretty body style) with those fold down seats mentioned above for around 12-15k and have almost all of the Escalade's available luxury for half the price. The main drawback to the Navigator is the anemic 5.4L V8, but when you can't even really USE the power in the Escalade, that almost becomes a non issue.

Also, my understanding of the reason GM doesn't use the power fold down seats has less to do with the elevation of the load floor and more to do with the IRS versus live axle (also directly responsible for the bumpy ride in the short body GMTs). If GM were to do the power fold arrangement in the GMTs, the load floor would be even higher than it already is on the Ford's, so as to be unpractical.

If you must have one of these things, the Denali is definitely the one to get. Though on the used market you can really take your pick as to whichever one you want for similar prices.

Aron9000
08-09-11, 03:45 AM
In almost every conceivable way, I enjoyed my Navigator and my GMT800 Escalade more than the GMT900. But *especially* in the driving characteristics. The GM Torque Management and drive by wire throttle mapping is horrible, so I get to read about my 403hp, but I certainly can't find any of them when I need them

I've "HEARD" from various people that a simple PCM reflash on any late model GM truck or SUV totally changes the way they drive. People have told me that they couldn't even spin the tires from a stop in their 5.3 v8 trucks, after the PCM reflash they said they'd lay a patch of rubber all the way through 1st gear. Basically GM dulled the throttle responses so far back to prevent crap from breaking that they end up driving like slugs. Which makes sense in my experiences, seeing as how I've driven 5.3 v8 trucks that won't spin the tires, yet my old LT1 with less power(and before GM had electronic throttle and torque managment) and more weight in the back will spin them till next sunday.

Playdrv4me
08-09-11, 04:18 AM
Hmm, I'll ask the dealer about this. Something, anything has to make it better than it is. There's literally an entire dead spot in the pedal where it just doesn't do a damn thing sometimes. It's awful. This is really the single biggest issue I have with it, the wind noise and cheap bits would be tolerable if it felt like the performance I expected was there.

hueterm
08-09-11, 09:39 AM
Ian has made me glad I still have my '04....

ryannel2003
08-09-11, 07:18 PM
Hmm, I'll ask the dealer about this. Something, anything has to make it better than it is. There's literally an entire dead spot in the pedal where it just doesn't do a damn thing sometimes. It's awful. This is really the single biggest issue I have with it, the wind noise and cheap bits would be tolerable if it felt like the performance I expected was there.

I don't know what kind of gas you use, but my mom was suffering from terrible performance and laggy throttle response when she was using regular gas. After she started using premium the truck definitely felt livelier.