I was up in Tacoma today for a Chevrolet sponsored SUV ride and drive. Cadillac was at the same meeting, so we shared track time but not behind the wheel driving.

The participants: numerous Tahoes, an Eddie Bauer Expedition, a Nissan Armada, and a Toyota Sequoia.

The Venue: short track starting with 1/8 mile acceleration, full-on stopping test, slalom course, special "rough ride" section. After that, a 45 minute on the road, police escorted ride and drive with 4 driver/passenger changes, so everyone could ride a section in the various vehicles.

Observations/at the track:
Tahoe LT/LTZ. Nicely buttoned down, highly improved model. Mid-pack acceleration, strong brakes. Chassis really shined in the slalom- best handling of the group. LTZ's tire and Autoride combination superior to the LT.

Expedition: Acceleration on par with the Tahoe, but it took a stopwatch to prove it ("felt" slower, but actually wasn't). Best brakes in the group- straight, true stopping, no noticiable fade as it was repeatedly flogged. Lots of body roll in the slalom, but again held on better than one would expect. Overall, good-natured handling and faster, by the stopwatch, than it felt.

Armada. Strongest acceleration, weakest brakes. Actually had to be parked a couple of times because of smoke pouring out from the front brakes. Easy to control, but seemed overly heavy and ponderous in the curvy sections. Excessive axle hop on the bumps.

Sequoia: Slowest acceleration, mid-pack brakes, soft tires, soft suspension. You can make it hurry, but only under protest, and no one will have any fun trying. Obviously set up for interstate straight-line cruising.

on the road:

Tahoe. "Smooth" and "Quiet" best describes this truck. Other than the exhaust, hardly a whisper passes through it. Nice controlled ride, very uncomfortable third seat. Impressive build quality.

Expedition: More of a "truck" feel to it, but a comfortable ride with the best third seat of the group. Body lean could get uncomfortable on winding secondary roads (shock upgrade?). Most comfortable seats of the group.

Armada: Much nicer driving in a more "normal" situation. Stilll feels overly large and heavy, limited visibility. Roughest ride of the group. Cold, industrial feeling interior design.

Sequoia. Put five or six big guys in one, and the cabins very cramped. Third seat worse than the Tahoe (!). Otherwise, smooth, quiet. Build quality didn't seem to be up to Toyota standards though.

My own impressions- yours may vary.

 

Valuable info! Thanks.

 

Was wondering was the Tahoe the new design or was it the previous one. Since it should like to was just a little better then the Expedition.

 

New design- that was the purpose of the elaborate show 'n tell. I don't like to use the words "better" or "worse" in Tahoe/Expedition comparisons. They're very different vehicles, and the designs are focused at different market segments.

 

Do you think this will be done again when the new expedition comes out?

Probably not since it was GM sponsored, but I'd like to see what you have to say when the new expy is released.

 

Was the "Rough Ride" section held at the local mall driving over parking curbs?

Sorry, I couldn't help but wondering if they were "mall rated".

 

Care to elaborate? I always thought of them as just about direct competitors.

 

I am guessing the Expy is more of a "quasi-truck", where the Tahoe is more of your "Soccer mum SUV".
Haven't driven either - but thats what I understand from what I read on here.

 

Aw crud, I got derailed today. F350's right, though. If you wanted to be really sexist, you'd call the Expy the boys SUV, and the Tahoe the girls SUV. The Tahoe sits lower to the ground, is generally easier to use and see out of, rides (and looks) much more like a luxury car than a truck. Not enough ground clearance? Who cares- it just needs to clear speed bumps at the mall. Can't tow 9,000 pounds? That's what the Suburban's for. The whole vehicle, from styling to interior design to fingernail-saving doorhandles to low seat-entry height, is designed with the soccer mom first and foremost in mind. And why not- according to Chevy's own research, over 75% of those big SUV's are driven by those very moms.

 

I just can't understand why Chevy can't make the 3rd row useable for adults. The suburban's not that much better either. If you buy an SUV that size, it should have an adult size third row.

 

The Suburban's OK for that, isn't it? The third seat isn't bad, once you get into it. honestly, if moving 7-8 people is a priority, a Van is a better shot. A Club Wagon or an Express do a much better job of moving people, and the Express can be had with all-wheel-drive.

 

The third seat is for children (to keep them separated when they fight) and for infrequent emergency use. I can't recall the last time I saw any vehicle with a third seat full (except for full size vans) of people. How many remember the 3 seat station wagons of the late 60s and 70s that had 3 seats? Most of them seated the passengers backwards, were very uncomfortable and you needed help opening the tailgate because that was the only way to get in. I had one of those "wonderful" 72 Gran Torino wagons. Didn't want the fake wood Country Squires that was as big and heavier as today's SUVs.

 

I have. My lady has 3 brothers (2 are, shall we say, in possession of slow metabolisms) and the "larger" ones are relegated to the 3rd row in their 03 Expedition when they road trip. I have sat back there myself. I thought it was rather roomy, especially considering the fact that I'm 6'4" and 240 lbs.

I can barely squeeze in the 3rd row of my friend's 2000 Tahoe, my other friend's 98 Expedition, or my aunt's 99 LX470.

 

The Expy has a much roomier 3rd seat than a Tahoe- but the Suburban is roomier yet- and has cargo room behind the 3rd seat.

 

Thus along comes the Expedition XL. Too bad it won't have an engine option.