Tahoe/Yukon or Suburban?

I have been "Grandpa" truck shopping for my father-in-law. He needs something with room for grandkids and the adventures they will have with Grandy. We almost bought a 2001 Silverado quad cab regular bed, but that fell through. He's only got about $8k to spend, so I decided to check out SUVs as well. He will be retiring this month, so he doesn't really need a truck bed for work anymore (slogging stuff around a swamp) but he does need room for retired guy projects. He's always doing some projects that requires hauling stuff or driving down forestry-type roads, so he definitely needs a truck based SUV.

I noticed that I can get a Suburban for a good bit cheaper than a same year quad cab pickup. Stranger, the Suburban is cheaper than the same year Tahoe or Yukon. Towing is not important, but space is. He really wanted a quad cab pickup, but since his current single cab is almost always sporting a bed cap, I figured a Suburban would be perfect.

So, GRM, tell me what you know about post year 2000 sub $8k used Tahoes/Yukons/Suburbans.

2000 or 2001 brought about the LS, Vortec before that. Mileage is hit or miss regarding condition.

Check government auctions. You can find former Fire Service, Border Patrol and other government agencies Suburbans and GMC Yukon XLT at good rates. My favorite is this year with the simple grille and single headlights. This particular example is former Secret Service with the armored package which would be awesome!

Those armored trucks are mad heavy, the mileage hit and increased wear aren't worth it if your grandpa doesn't get into shootouts.

Does it have to be one of those trucks? There are plenty of twin-cab/quad-cab pickups from other brands...

GameboyRMH wrote: Those armored trucks are mad heavy, the mileage hit and increased wear aren't worth it if your grandpa doesn't get into shootouts. Does it have to be one of those trucks? There are plenty of twin-cab/quad-cab pickups from other brands...

Well, Grandpa was in the Army...

I've looked at all of the 4-door truck options and nothing really falls in his price range for the size, price and miles. He drives a '91 Dakota now and doesn't want to go any smaller. A Dakota quad cab would cost about the same as a full size and deliver about the same MPG. But the overall problem is that the trucks in general are more expensive, when I can get pretty much the exact vehicle for cheaper if we look at the SUV version.

Avalanche? The modern day soccer mom's equivalent to the El Camino????

I have to get another 4x4 for winter and as that looks like it's going to coincide with a house move I'm looking at both extended/quad cabs and SUVs.

I'm almost beginning to think that a Suburban gives you more bang for the buck unless you have to transport something that would require cutting a hole in the roof of the 'burb.

If Grandpa needs the three seat rows to transport the grandkids I'd ignore the Tahoes as you get a lot more luggage or dog space in a Suburban.

Depending on how much time you have for searching I'd keep an eye out for the 6.5TD version of the Suburban. They're not that easy to find but they give you great mileage for something that big.

the extra length of the burb is totally worth it. my 94 is about 8'6" from the folded down rear seat to the doors. for the same basic truck and mpg, i'd go burb every time over a tahoe.

If MPG is no object, then a 2500 series 'burban with the 8.1L is a cool prospect.

I'd go Tahoe, but that is because I've begun to despise driving long vehicles. I'm thinking shorter = better for driving. How often will he actually be using the extra length?

Ranger50 wrote: 2000 or 2001 brought about the LS, Vortec before that. Mileage is hit or miss regarding condition.

If I was to buy one, 1999 is the year to go. Last year IIRC of the 5.7L vortec head Vortec motor.

They (at the time) made MORE torque than the 5.3L (330lbft vs 315lbft) 1000rpm sooner (3000rpm vs 4000rpm). Night and day difference towing with a 5.7L than a 5.3L, and at that time the gas mileage between the two was the same.

HiTempguy wrote:

Ranger50 wrote: 2000 or 2001 brought about the LS, Vortec before that. Mileage is hit or miss regarding condition.

If I was to buy one, 1999 is the year to go. Last year IIRC of the 5.7L vortec head Vortec motor. They (at the time) made MORE torque than the 5.3L (330lbft vs 315lbft) 1000rpm sooner (3000rpm vs 4000rpm). Night and day difference towing with a 5.7L than a 5.3L, and at that time the gas mileage between the two was the same.

+1

A buddy of mine had a Suburban with the Vortec 5.7 and it was an extremely nice truck to tow with, or on road trips. It was much, more comfortable, and pleasant to drive (and more reliable) than the Excursion he has now, but he needed the extra towing capability of the Ford.

IMHO, Suburbans don't feel that large from behind the wheel once you get used to them.

Only issue with the OBS tahoe/burbs is their driving dynamics for me. The brakes are always spongy. The steering is number than it should be. Engine made great power, but the intake leaks because of stupid design and driving feel kill them. After driving/owning the newer GMT800 (99-06 trucks, 01-06 tahoe/burb) it's night and day.

If you can tune out the TM on the newer LS engines, it feels stronger than the GMT400 Vortec 5.7's. The TM tuning is what kills the LS engine.

On the OBS Tahoe/Burb the 5.7 will also eventually need to have the manifold come off for the spider injector.

I've had OBS Silverados and now a GMT800 (2005 Tahoe) and they are a night and day difference in how they feel.

You can find quite a few ex gov't suburbans/tahoes comming out of fleets these days.