I'm not a big Chevy fan at all but I am afraid my next vehicle might be a Suburban. With three kids we have just about outgrown our Highlander. The Highlander is a wonderful vehicle it is comfy and has an incredible ride but when we go on trips and vacationss we are starting to run out of room. I got a hitch basket thing to add storage space and while it helps it is a pain.

I had planned on upgrading to a Sequoia around this time but my wife ABSOLUTELY loves the space behind the third row on a Suburban. She does have a point, while the Sequoia is big it suffers in regards to storage when the third row is used compared to a Suburban.

My main concern is reliability and longevity. I have had excellent luck with Toyotas and feel like a Sequoia would be a better overall SUV even though it would be slightly smaller. How good are the 2012 and newer Suburbans?

Would you buy a Suburban over a Sequoia?

I like Suburbans. I drove a friend's to Florida last Winter and it was a great ride. I ran around 80 most of the way and averaged 19mpg.

I would go with the Sequoia, its going to outlast the Chevy more than likely. Plus, GM has just left a sour taste in my mouth since the bailout.

I would buy the suburban.
Disclamier: I worked at GM for almost 43 yrs although I lost my loyalty to them when they screwed my 401k stock with the phoney bankruptcy.
I just don't like giving my dollars to foreign based corporations.

Suburban would get my vote between the 2.

There was also a recent thread about current reliability of current gen Tahoes & it seemed mostly positive.

Are you only wanting large, with 3 row seating & storage space? Or do you need tow power too? Good deals to be had on 2017 Expeditions, as the redesigned 2018s start hitting lots.

Alternatively, if you don't need the tow power, our Flex is really roomy, with a 3rd row that an adult (I'm 6'0" 155#) can sit in with reasonable comfort.
Available with the 3.5EcoBoost & AWD.

I'd go with the Sequoia. My 2005 is still running strong. I expect to keep it for 20 years, or the wheels fall off...which will probably be more than 20 years. Zero major mechanical issues in all the time I've owned it - engine and drive train have been absolutely solid - I expect to get 200k+ out of this vehicle. I did have to replace the rear hatch latch once since we wore it out.

Yes - room was an issue. If Toyota made a suburban sized vehicle, I would probably have bought that. I got around that with bike racks and a Thule roof box.

The sacrifice in space was more than made up for in the reliability that I realized over the past 15 years.

Rob

quote:

My main concern is reliability and longevity. I have had excellent luck with Toyotas and feel like a Sequoia would be a better overall SUV even though it would be slightly smaller.

That's the deal right there. I would always go with the toyota based on personal experience with both brands

I recently drove my sister's new suburban and I was less than impressed. Sure, it was much "nicer" than I'm used to, but what I'm used to is a 2002 F150 and a base model 2007 Malibu. Not exactly high standards.

Overall the Suburban felt very anemic and underpowered. If that's important to you it's worth considering.

I just made this decision a few weeks ago replacing my 4Runner for the same reasons you state. We went with the Sequoia. This was our reasoning:

We have two kids, ages 11 5'2" and 13 5'11", on long trips the 3rd row is folded down and there is plenty of cargo space.

When we need the 3rd row for carpool it's local and we need to put people over 4' tall back there. The Suburban 3rd row has crap for leg/hip room and the middle row seats are fixed in position. The Sequoia middle row adjust forward and back like the front seats so you can give more leg room to the 3rd row if needed. Why hasn't Chevy figured this out? I am 6' and over 200lbs and could ride comfortably all day in the 3rd row of the Sequoia. I wouldn't last 5 minutes in the 3rd row of a Suburban.

Even the 2nd row of the Suburban was not terribly comfortable for my almost 6' tall 13 year old. The new Suburban/Tahoe 2nd row seats seemed narrow and low. We went with the Platinum Sequoia with middle row buckets with their own center console. It's plush compared to the Suburban 2nd row and the kids love the storage, plugs, etc... Chevy needs to take a hard look at ergonomics, they have been behind the other manufacturers on this for a long time.

On the day we made the decision we went to both dealers with the whole family in tow. We had the kids sit in all seats, we folded stuff down, we adjusted, we drove, we parked in tight spaces with other cars around. The Sequoia was hands down more comfortable and easier to drive in everyday places like the grocery store parking lot. The only advantage the Suburban had was that extra room in the back with the 3rd row up and when we really thought it through it wasn't that important for how we use a vehicle.

All of this said by a guy who has owned 2 Tahoe, a Yukon and a Suburban in the past so no Chevy hater.

quote:

Originally posted by David W:
I would go with the Sequoia, its going to outlast the Chevy more than likely. Plus, GM has just left a sour taste in my mouth since the bailout.

I would go with the Sequoia myself for those same reasons.

We looked at the Sequoia a few months ago. It had excellent build quality and the interior felt nice. We have not looked at new GM cars, though.

quote:

Originally posted by David W:
I would go with the Sequoia, its going to outlast the Chevy more than likely.

Based on what? I think the full size SUV is a segment of the market where GM has really excelled. I'd like to see a comparison of current models, not just a general sense of the brands or past history.

TXJIM,

Excellent post. I'm leaning towards the Sequoia but my wife wants a Suburban. The leg room will quickly become a issue since my son is growing VERY FAST and would always ride in the 3rd row.

I am hoping my wife warms up to the Sequoia when she sees how much wider and bigger they are compared to our Highlander.

I'm not excited about possibly owning a Suburban especially when you consider their price tag.

If you actually plan on using the 3rd row seats regularly then you have 3 options based upon my experience - a minivan, a Suburban, or a Ford Expedition XL. A Sequoia or a Tahoe sized vehicle simply doesn't have enough room behind the 3rd row seats for enough stuff for people who are actually going anywhere. In practical terms the Sequoia and other vehicles that size offer the option of a 3rd row seat for occasional passenger transport only. It can carry those extra people to dinner in a pinch or something similar but there's not enough room left for "stuff" for those people. If you want to actually go anywhere (picnics, overnight trips, sporting events, shopping, etc) with 3 rows of people you need a Suburban or Expedition XL if you want an SUV instead of a minivan.

As far as build quality and reliability goes you will have no problem with a Chevy suburban. They are just as reliable, if not moreso, as a Sequoia. Full sized trucks are what American car manufacturers do best, and they are as reliable as any vehicle on the road. My current take home GOV is a Tahoe with 155,000 miles. It runs like a top, good as new, and has not ever needed anything beyond routine maintenance. And that's for a police vehicle that is often driven near 100 mph with lights and siren getting me someplace in a hurry. Similarly there are tons of Tahoes in police service all around me that go 200,000 hard miles. There aren't as many suburbans in police service but they are mechanically almost identical, just variations on a theme. When it comes to these kind of vehicles GM and Ford really are the king. They are without peer and their quality and reliability is excellent.

if you're going used what about a land cruiser?

quote:

Originally posted by stickman428:
TXJIM,

Excellent post. I'm leaning towards the Sequoia but my wife wants a Suburban. The leg room will quickly become a issue since my son is growing VERY FAST and would always ride in the 3rd row.

I am hoping my wife warms up to the Sequoia when she sees how much wider and bigger they are compared to our Highlander.

I'm not excited about possibly owning a Suburban especially when you consider their price tag.

One thing to look at is that the Sequoia 3rd row has split fold flat seats. It may be a workable option to have one seat in the 3rd row folded down for expanded cargo room. I would put the family in one and play with all of the seat configuration options to see if that would work for you.

i have an older Sub (1999) She has been a good rig. I bought it with 140k+ on it. She is now over 190k. I paid about $5k for it. Put another $5k in it over about six years or so. She was not perfect when I got her. And still isn't. Lots of little things. Door handles, brakes, fuel pump, exhaust (cats), etc.
She has done virtually everything I have ever asked of her. The ride is the best of any rig I have ever owned, other than a 1962 oldsmobile maybe.

It is been a true utility rig for me. More of crummie for those of you familiar with the term than anything else.

With all of that said I am not sure I would buy a newer Sub. Of course more folks are looking for a
luxurious kid hauler than what I needed. So a sub might fit the bill. I believe the more the bells and whistles and technology involved the more headaches and higher the cost of ownership there is. But that is where we have come. I am not sure I would spend $35 or $40k for a used one when you could get a great van for about half of that. But I am more about function than what others might think of me for driving a van. I have two and love them.

Suburbans are probably one of Chevy's most reliable vehicles and they're built like a tank.

I would also look at the new 2018 Expedition EL (the longer suburban sized one) when the new model comes out. Or if you want to get an exceptional price on a new 2017 Expedition EL, Ford has tremendous rebates on these right now and that would be my choice over the Suburban. Also the 3rd row seating folds completely flat into the floor for even more cargo carrying capability.

That being said, I don't know of any foreign SUV that would have nearly the rear cargo space and 3 rows that either the Suburban or Expedition EL have.

(Dammit. This is the second time that I've clicked on this thread thinking I'd see a Suburban losing a game of physics or gravity to a very large tree.)

quote:

Originally posted by nasig:

quote:

My main concern is reliability and longevity. I have had excellent luck with Toyotas and feel like a Sequoia would be a better overall SUV even though it would be slightly smaller.

That's the deal right there. I would always go with the toyota based on personal experience with both brands

Toyota gets my vote too. I have heard the same thing re storage in the Sequoia, but IMO the benefits of a Toyota far outweigh the negatives.

For example, we have a 2012 Highlander with about 110,000 miles. It still runs great and looks great. The build quality and quality of materials is outstanding.

On the other hand, I was recently in a friend's Suburban. I confess that I don't know what year it is or how many miles it has on it, but it is falling apart both inside and out.

I have a '99 'burb right now with a touch over 190k on it. Its been a good vehicle. My parents bought it w/ about 25k on it. Mom now has an '02 'burb. We started out with an '83 6.2 diesel 'burb w/ a Gale Banks turbo kit on it.
They are hard to beat out on the open road for family trips. Mine has pulled a 14' cattle trailer from time to time as well.
I do like my old 5.7/350 better than Mom's 5.3, it just seems to have more low end grunt.