What should be my next vehicle?

[shovenose]

I am trying to decide what my next vehicle should be. I'm not buying until 2018 so I have plenty of time, but just trying to get an initial concept of what I should do. If I end up with my old 02 Envoy again, this would be replacing my 99 Crown Vic. If I don't get my Envoy back, then I would keep both.

I've settled on one of the following vehicles. All would be 2WD because honestly I don't like 4x4. It reduces fuel economy and increases complexity for something that I never need. Here's the pros and cons of each one.

07-09 Trailblazer: We all know these are good (hey, the Envoy has 200K and runs fine). My biggest gripes with the platform are how hard it is to work on when something goes wrong, and I much prefer column shifters over console shifters, but much easier to park and better turning radius than a full-size.

09+ Tahoe: I could pick from a 4.8 non-AFM with a 4L60E or a 5.3 with the 6-speed auto. My perfect Tahoe would be a 4.8 non-AFM with the 6-speed but that doesn't exist. Oh well :/ If I end up with a 5.3 the first thing I'd do is tune out the AFM. And, there are supercharger kits available for these. That would be epic to do after it's paid off. I like the newer body style but I'm avoiding 07/08 because they had some issues that they seem to have worked out by 09.

05-06 Escalade: I'm not in love with how it looks but that 6.0L Downside to this I think they still use a gearbox vs rack-and-pinion so handling isn't nearly as good as the other vehicles listed here which all have rack-and-pinion steering. And fuel economy is the worst.

09-12 Colorado: I owned an 07 Colorado ext cab 4cyl base model for about a year, and I didn't really like it. So, I'm a little crazy wanting to buy a similar vehicle. But, I'd get a crew cab with the 5cyl of an upper trim level. I would imagine that my major complaints of poor ride quality and underpowered engine in my 07 wouldn't really affect that. Benefits of this one are that crew cab short bed trucks look awesome, and it gets good MPG compared to everything else.

So, yeah, that's my thoughts on these four vehicles. Curious what y'all think!

 

[Mooseman]

I would go with the TB because I am more familiar with them and have a bunch of spare parts. Tahoe would be second. I am very surprised that MPG are the same between the two.

The Escalade would be more expensive just because it's a Caddi and would suck gas like there's no tomorrow. But slap a blower on that and watch the heads turn!

The Colorado you had a bad experience before and you don't sound like you want to go that way.

 

[shovenose]

Escalades aren't as common but the price difference is minimal (keep in mind I'm comparing older Escalades to newer Tahoes by an entire platform/generation).

The Tahoe has an MPG advantage because it's a 6-speed transmission vs the 4-speed in the Trailblazer, and the years of Tahoe I'm considering are a far newer Tahoe than even an 09 Trailblazers. AFM doesn't really help in the real world I've heard from people that tuned it out that their MPG barely changed while driveability was better and oil consumption went away or got reduced.

Having owned an Envoy I know the Trailblazer is a good vehicle but it does seem like the full-size trucks and SUVs are generally a bit more reliable, parts tend to be cheaper and more available, and they tend to be easier to work on. I know those are all total generalizations and if the Envoy is a good example to go by it's still reliable at 200K. But if you look at a site like carcomplaints.com or just research it in general, the full-size GMs are generally less troublesome with all sorts of issues than the TB/Envoys. On the other side, owning two similar vehicles is nice from a parts and service standpoint - though an 02 Envoy and an 09 TB aren't really the same. The other benefit is the newer Tahoes do have a nicer interior look and feel.

You're probably right in that it's probably going to end up being a Tahoe or TB. Crew cab mid-size trucks like the Colorado are overpriced around here.

 

[Sparky]

Real world experience with AFM on and off - turn it off. I saw no MPG difference worth mentioning either way.

My Silverado stock got not much worse MPG than my lifted Trailblazer did. It gets a little worse now that it is leveled with beastly heavy tires... I also have an 07.5 so still the same 4L60E, I know the 6 speed helped mpg.

 

[Mooseman]

Yeah, AFM was "supposed" to give an extra 5% fuel economy. That's not even worth all the extra hardware over its lifetime. Maybe over time it got better but then it was stupid.

 

[Sparky]

Part of me wonders how it doesn't net more, because if you're just cruising, turning off half the cylinders should help. But, it just seems to do pretty much nothing. The instant mpg reading on the DIC might make you think otherwise - according to it I'd jump to upper 20s mpg when it would kick in, and I could cruise in 4 cyl mode for miles on flatter terrain - but filling the tank, well, the numbers at the pump don't lie.

 

[northcreek]

I have to agree that the AFM is a lot of smoke and mirrors. I deleted mine and the MPG difference was nil, (while doing mostly secondary road driving).
Perhaps with a steady diet of interstate driving AFM might have some value but, for me..not so much.

 

[shovenose]

Alright so I've thought about all this some more. If I'm willing to live with a 4L60E and forgo rack and pinion steering for a gearbox (which I'd be doing if I get the pre-07 Escalade) I may as well just save my money and get an older Tahoe. Much cheaper and leave more money for a supercharger kit. Yes, a 5.3 with a supercharger slapped on isn't going to do wonders for a tired 4L60E but I can get one with a three year unlimited mileage warranty for $1300. And it's not a Vortec 6.0 HO like in the Escalade but 295hp/335tq vs 345hp/380tq isn't a huge difference, and if you look at the charts for a supercharger kit similar to what I would consider getting, the 5.3 and 6.0 once supercharged get literally the same power, and considering the vortec 6.0 hp is only 10hp better than the regular 6.0 the difference is not worth the extra money to get the cadillac. besides, tbh i think the tahoes look better... https://www.summitracing.com/parts/edl-1577/applications/year/2003/make/chevrolet

So... older Tahoe it is. Except for one thing that's driving me crazy. STEERING. I'll make a seperate thread for that though because it's largely irrelevant to this discussion...

 

[littleblazer]

Would have never known the 03 escalade didn't have rack and pinion until you told me. That truck was very tight until about 180k there's some play right at straight but it doesn't wander and it goes around corners... you'll also have awd so that's something to think about.

 

[shovenose]

Would have never known the 03 escalade didn't have rack and pinion until you told me. That truck was very tight until about 180k there's some play right at straight but it doesn't wander and it goes around corners... you'll also have awd so that's something to think about.

Hmm... I'd much rather have RWD not AWD for sure! Though it seems most Escalades are AWD :'(

I just checked on RockAuto and an 05 Tahoe and 05 Escalade use the same steering gearbox (same part numbers/options listed) so I guess these trucks handle fine if everything is correct, though knowing how sloppy gearbox systems get down the road perhaps I should get an 07+ body style Tahoe to be sure I'm happy with the steering. Or, I should go test drive both to make the decision.

 

[littleblazer]

Nah, the awd on that works fine. 200k and no real issues with it. Stock for stock the 6.0 escalade is a more fun than the Tahoe my aunt had. (And it went through a couple of head gaskets unlike the 6.0 but that's probably not a common issue.) You'll be starting with 4.10s, a seemingly more controlled suspension and more power. At a higher price. Interior is the same. It's all dependent on what you plan to do with it.

 

[SnowBlazer]

My response will be shorter than the rest but...you know they make 5.3 Colorados, right?

 

[TollKeeper]

What about a Tahoe or Escalade hybrid? Allot more of them came in 2wd, and usually come fully loaded. I've been looking for a fully loaded Sierra myself.

 

[Reprise]

I'll go with the Tahoe. Cheaper to run, to mod, parts plentiful, interiors / features similar in the higher trims, will last as long as the Slade, if not longer, and insurance should be way cheaper (Escalades have very high theft rates, relative to the # of units sold - which would be especially true for an older one).

Sounds like you're looking for size & capability, so I'd start looking for a lower mileage Tahoe in the MY of choice.

As for the others...
Envoy / TB - we love 'em, but good ones are getting hard to find (and parts will start being a concern in a few years.) A major plus is that you're very familiar w/ the platform, having owned one.

Colorado - way too pricey for what it is, especially when you option it up. I personally don't like the styling (especially in crew cab), but that's me.
If you want a pickup, get a Silverado / Sierra. You'll pay more for the half-ton, but it will retain value better than anything else on your list.

If / when I replace my Voy - it'll be with an ext. cab GM 1500 or 2500 - with a 6.5 ft bed. To me, that's the best scenario of room, power, and capability. And they're fairly bulletproof.

 

[littleblazer]

@Reprise the escalade isn't really anymore than my truck to insure. And it still has collision. (It's the only one at the house that has it actually) I mean it's not the 130$ a year the vette is though. The newer body style ones are much more to insure though. I think it's based on msrp which back then was about 55k...

 

[Reprise]

I know the Escalades *used* to cost $$$ to insure - but I'll defer to the man who *owns* one. Of course, if you're able to insure a Vette for $130 / yr (?!?) you have some sweet rates. Does that car see the street?

 

[Sparky]

If / when I replace my Voy - it'll be with an ext. cab GM 1500 or 2500 - with a 6.5 ft bed. To me, that's the best scenario of room, power, and capability. And they're fairly bulletproof.

Sounds exactly like what I did.

 

[littleblazer]

I know the Escalades *used* to cost $$$ to insure - but I'll defer to the man who *owns* one. Of course, if you're able to insure a Vette for $130 / yr (?!?) you have some sweet rates. Does that car see the street?

It's my dad's and he has it under the "classic" insurance so it can only go like 3k miles a year. You're allowed 1 cruise a week and to go back and forth to shows and such. It only gets driven a hand full of times a year but the insurance covers everything. Its half the cost of like hagarty or those others too. They're good. I'd rather not derail the discussion any further but the difference between isn't much. We also got the truck in late 2007 so it was already 4 years old. If I were a betting man I would say without collision on the escalade it would be the same price as the tb.

Back on topic the only expensive parts are the vehicle specific ones. Otherwise it's a Tahoe or any other full-size. The headlights with the sealed hids are really expensive to replace since I believe the ballast is built in. So if the lenses are hazed it's pretty expensive to replace. Same with body panels and hub caps. Multiply normal price by 5 lol.

 

[Mooseman]

I'd stay away from the hybrids. Lots more stuff to break and ONLY the dealer can diagnose. And on older ones, they are breaking.