Lots of room. omfortable on long trips.

Before I bought it the dealer replaced the intake gaskets, the a/c did not work so they replaced a line and recharged a/c. Trans was leaking at the pan so they serviced trans. Heater control valve was leaking and they replaced that. After I bought it I had to replace the fuel pump, replaced the high pressure power steering hose, replaced the starter, replaced the rh rear wheel cylinder, replaced fan/blower switch and repair melted harness in dash, disassemble rear axle differential and replace pinion bearings and seal. Now it's in the transmission shop getting the trans replaced at the cost of $1200 - $1400 dollars. This vehicle is a wretched piece of GM crap!! Dealer says oh well it's used. By the way, it was a one owner and I know the previous owner. Apparantly he knew just when to get rid of it. Dont ever buy one of these mid to late 90's pieces of junk - you will be sorry!! I'm looking for a Honda Pilot to replace this worthless piece of scrap iron!!!

Bought Suburban to take a Long trip and need extra space. Have been working on it ever since!!!!

Similar Products Used:

1995 Jeep Grand Cherokee

Room, Reliable, Separate climate control for rear. Smooth comfortable ride. Tight turn radius.

Gas mileage, Fuel Pump Assemble

We purchase this vehicle new as an alternative to flying. Our family has taken many long trips and no one ever complains about their comfort. We can comfortable seat 8 passengers plus their luggage. The third seat is not just for small kids.

We love the separate back climate controls and lots of vents thoughout the vehicle. There are plenty of cupholders (8), storage compartments and a tray that accommodates most kid's meal packages.

With the exception of a fuel pump assembly, we've never had any major work done to this vehicle. At 140K miles, the car runs great. We've only changed the fuels, filters, brake pads and tires. The gas mileage (15/17) is not great, but it beats our previous '97 Tohoe (10/13).

Similar Products Used:

'97 Chevy Tahoe

Horrible transmission, brakes, tail lights, etc. I will never buy another GM again.

It's a shame GM will not fix a flawed product that is really a huge EPA problem.

Burns a quart of oil every 400 miles and GM claims its normal. NOw it is fouling a spark plug at 37000 miles

I bought a new suburban a year ago. IT's been bad since the beginning. In summary, the vehicle is suffering from an oil consumption problem, which is well documented, to have been in existence for quite some time. The attached support this claim. I will attempt to chronologically summarize the events over the last couple years, which relate to this issue. First, the vehicle was purchased new by the undersigned. Has been owned and operated by the undersigned for the entire period of time since new. Early on in the vehicles life I noticed what I considered excessive oil consumption. I attributed this to the fact that the vehicle was new, and perhaps the rings had not “seated”. While concerned, I was not alarmed, but I did try to informally track it to a small degree. Those results are below. I had planned on tracking this further to determine if “seating” was improving. Mileage Added Mileage between adds 6250 0.5 6829 2 579 7613 2 784 8151 1 538 8421 1 270 8973 1 552 9390 1 417 Qts used Avg miles/Qt. 3140 8.5 369.4118 9474 10482 1 1008 11735 2 1253 12200 2 465 Qts used Avg miles/Qt. 2726 5 545.2 Table I, oil consumption as monitored by owner. I seemingly confirmed a problem and my suspicions, and I am a busy quy, so the next documented data I have is from the dealership which I selected to perform the maintenance under warrantee. On 11/24/04 With 19618 miles on the vehicle I had it returned for service for excessive oil consumption. (It had been in previous to this at 19028 miles, but I have no records on hand which relate to this visit.) At 19618, the dealer noted that the vehicle consumed 1.1 Qt’s in 590 miles. The vehicle was thoroughly inspected, and “No external leaks were noted”. This basically confirmed my findings above (that the vehicle was burning oil to an excessive degree) to my satisfaction. A baseline is formed. I continued to monitor the consumption and have the following results: At 20059 miles the vehicle was returned to the dealer, which added 1.5 Qts. The dealer position: “It is stated that no-published info can be found relating to this concern”. (Please keep this in mind, as mysteriously published info appears later) Further to the problem: “TAC assistance was contacted and informed about #02-06-01-035” “Replaced intake manifold bolts and re-torqued.” Note 10 bolts replaced. (In essence, the problem was acknowledged and the intake manifold seal was claimed to be the problem. I thought it silly but played along) The technical advice was that oil was making its way into the intake ports/passages and eventually being burned with the fuel charge. At 20666 I added 2 Qts of oil. 600 miles or so and 2 Qts. At 21121 I added 1 Qt. At 21566 I added 1 Qt. At 22232 I returned to the dealer. The next item was to replace the intake manifold gaskets. This was performed as the next step, I worked with them and it was suggested I try this and monitor oil consumption. (Again, in essence, the problem was acknowledged and the intake manifold seal was claimed to be the problem.) At 22960 the vehicle was returned to the dealer again for oil consumption. The dealer noted it was 1 Qt low, I measured more but didn’t argue. Further diagnostics were preformed. A compression check was performed to check the quality of the ring seating. The compression test seemed to indicate good compression. But “oil was noted on all spark plugs”. All spark plugs were replaced. (Please note that I later document a much more extensive test, which is a better indicator of cylinder sealing: A leak-down compression test) Critical to note, the dealer Removed and reinstalled “valve seals”. Quite a bit more extensive effort involved than intake gaskets. (Again, the problem was acknowledged and the problem was addressed on the intake manifold as well as the valve stem seal replacement.) The next documented testing occurs at 29216 miles. At this point the dealer placed dye in the oil to trace the path to the intake manifold. The dealer documented dye in the intake ports for cylinders 2,4&1. The intake manifold was replaced (warpage concern); the intake bolts were replaced, as was the intake gasket. A rather extensive exercise as well. (Again, the problem was acknowledged and the intake manifold was replaced.) All along I doubt the effectiveness of any of this rework. At 34573 miles I return to the dealer. I expressed my concern that I am nearing the expiration of my warrantee and we still have not resolved the problem. I was assured by the service manager that the “problem is well documented and that IT WAS OBVIOUS IT WAS A EARLY ON DETECTED PROBLEM, and that GM would make good on the problem. At 34573 the dealer wanted to restart an oil-monitoring program to again qualify the consumption amount and suggested I ret

Loads of room - very comfortable. Great 6 disk sound system with Bose speakers. Plenty of amenities. Does everything you could ask of a vehicle.

Gas mileage - duh! Soft shifting transmission.

We bought our first Suburban in March of 03. It's pretty much loaded with all the options. It was a demo with 12K on it. To date we've been very happy. The A/C compressor was replaced last summer and a buzzing valve in the HVAC was replaced. Other than that just a few squeaky bushings.

Similar Products Used:

1993 GMC Safari Van

Safe. Rugged. Big. Cavernous with big seats- just like ones in First Class Jets. Comfortable. Honest. This is an established vehicle- proven brand - with more features for the dollar than most any on the market. It's safe. It's a truck.

It's a truck. I'd rather be driving a smaller sexier more stylish SUV- Acura MDX, a Sequoia, a Honda Pilot, a Tourag- what a ride. The Sub's dash and interior while cavernous, should have improved and been updated by now. I'm tired of the interior look, and they absolutely should have had factory GPS navigation rolled out by 2004 - it would have been soooooo easy. That was a costly mistake in my opinion. A modest improvement in gas mileage would have been in order.

This is my second Sub. First was a '96. Had two alternators go out within the first 50k, and the transmission went out at 76k. Other than that I loved that truck. Solid, handled well, loaded. Oh, the air worked great for the passenger, but not so great for the driver. This Sub? Even better. No mechanical issues in 27k. Split air- freezes driver equally. Handles even better. Seats are much more comfortable- especially passengers seat. Truly spacious, truly comfortable, handles beautifully. And I'm someone who uses that truck full of folks AND gear. But it's gone. Totalled. I had it completely full of equipment and 4 passengers. At 74mph on a highway we collided with another car hard, we spun 180left into the retainer wall- full on flat hit to the passenger side- kept spinning doing another 180 and stopped just dead of hitting the same car again, which has spun and rolled. Major full on collision. The results? I had around 1500 lbs of equipment in the back and 4 passengers. Out of all of that, there was nearly complete structural integrity to the passenger cabin. Out of 4 passengers, there were only minor injuries, mostly related to the seatbelts- blunt chest trauma, back trauma. We are all around and about because the Suburban didn't roll. 74mph and it could have rolled. It didn't. And after hitting the other vehicle and slamming into the concrete retainer wall, a window was smashed on the passenger side, but the truck kept us alive. That's a big deal. Thank God, the other passengers in the vehicle that rolled were able to get out of their vehicle and walk around. After several weeks of getting my nerve back, I just put a deposit on a 2004 yesterday. There are other vehicles I'd like to own, but for the size I need, the fact that I often carry 3 or 4 folks with me, with tons of gear, this vehicle is my safest option. The manufacturer incentives on this next 2004 will save me nearly 7k. Amazing.

Similar Products Used:

Just Suburbans.

plenty of room and very comfortable to drive. very versatile and can be used for almost any type of work from hauling to pulling or evcen getting away from the pavement for a while

Other than a little to much room for my everyday driving i can think of none.

An excellent vehicle. I have driven this truck since 1999 and have put 122000 miles on it in that time without any major mechanical problems. This vehicle has been all around michigan, out to wyoming and back and many trips to vermont and has been the most reliable vehicle i have ever driven. once in the past four years has it not started and that turned out only to be a loose ground cable on the starter. the interior has held up remarkably and the exterior still looks bran new. gas milage is good for a large truck and handling in all weather conditions is excellent. I have never lost controll in snow or ever been stuck with this vehicle even though it is only two wheel drive. I defiantly plan to purchase another one if this on ever quits.

Similar Products Used:

1991 Ford F-150, F-250, 2001 full size chevy van

Great to travel in. Good gas mileage for its size. Good towing capability. Just a good all around family truck.

Shifting from park.

I bought this truck new. It now has over 130,000 miles on it and is still running strong. The only major problem was the trans. and that was at 100,000 miles. The shop said that it is a common problem with computer controlled transmissions. A minor problem is it will not shift from park when it is cold. I found the problem is the mechanism on the stearing column and have fixed it by keeping it lubed with silicon spray. I have towed everything from a 26ft travel trailer to cars with this truck. All it really gets is its scheduled maint. I have had to have the frontend aligned but I now live in Utah where the roads can destroy the best of frontends. Its fuel economy is good for the size it is. I get between 16 and 18 mpg. With its 42 gallon tank I can drive from Utah to Texas on about 3 tanks of gas. I can drive from Utah to Bakersfield, CA on 1 tank. I am very happy with this truck and my wife loves it. We were thinking about replacing it but she decided if it went then so did I. This truck will probably be in the family for a long time.

Similar Products Used:

Dodge Ram Van, Chevy Trucks, Dodge Ram Trucks, VW Vans

plenty of power very confortible ride

the truck burns over 1 qt of oil for every 100 gallons of gas. GM will not except that there is a problem and they just keep running the same test even though it fails every time

I have had the truck for about 2 years and for the last 14 mounths I have been fighting with GM and Len Stoler the dealer were I purchasd the truck. The truck now burns over 1 1/4 qts. of oil with every 100 gallons of gas used. According to GM it is normal for the truck to burn up to 1 qt. of oil for evry 100 gllons of gas used( B S ). GM just keeps having me run the same oil consumption test over and over and over again the truck has failed every one so far and GM keeps having the dealer just tighten the head bolts. After 6 failed test GM finally had Len Stoler rebuild the engine but now I even burn even more oil. The rest of the aspects of the truck are great but I will have to say I will never buy a nother GM again based off of their response to my oil consumption problem. I am still going though yet agian anothe oil comsumption test I guess the last 6 failed test are not good enough for GM to admit that here is a problem. I regret that do to GM's lack of responce I am forced to file for an arbitration here with the better business burrow.

Similar Products Used:

ford. gm based engine in boat

Passenger and Cargo Capacity. Unbeleivable amount of room behind the third row of seats. Decent power - not going to win any drag races but you will not be fearful entering traffic. Decent ride - Z71 package has stiffer ride due to gas-filled shocks, more truck like than the other trims available - Looks, nice looking full sized SUV, especially with the Z71 trim.

- Fuel economy (no kidding) - Suspect quality (although nothing major yet, I just have this feeling......) - Cheap interior (seats, plastic, dash) - Brakes, but everything is relative. This is a 7000 pound vehicle that is not designed to outbrake a Porche. I don't think people truly grasp that concept.

Purchased this 04 Z71 in November of 03 and have put 50,000 miles on it in a year (even split hwy/city driving). This vehicle "is what it is", an effecient people mover capable of towing decent loads and more than average cargo. Have had some troubles of note - needed two front-end alignments, balky transmission transitions, but nothing to qualify this car as having sub-standard quality. Front captains chairs are very comfortable, mid row is adequate for adults, rear row is suitable for only children or midgets. Dashboard is functional (albeit a little bland) and controls are functional, but not superb. The Bose stereo is a plus, with the acoustically matched speakers and sub woofer. Leather is not what you'd expect in a 40,000 + car. Wife is the primary driver, she loves the safety and the "road profile" of the car - it's hard to miss. I'd recommend this vehicle to anyone with 3 or more children or a need to transport more than 5 people on a regular basis (I'd particularly recommend the Z71 package if you live in a colder climate). The 'burban can haul this load with luggage comfortably over long distances without the occupants committing suicide or homicide. If you don't have a need for this type of size - avoid this truck. Buy a Tahoe or an Expedition.