2009 up burb in lt trim....that way u get the limited slip and
6 speed.

You got a 6 speed in the 6.2L starting in 2007

The locking rear diff (not exactly limited slip, but that's splitting hairs) has ALWAYS been an option, in any trim level

2001 Sequoia Limited 4x4
- Blown Transmission at 120k (overdrive)
- Needs a timing belt ever 90k - $1500+
- Undersized brakes warp rotors and work poorly - need upgrade to later model
- Rear door handle breaks every 2 years
- Stock CD changer broken
- Blinker / headlight switch broken
- Radiator leak
- Utter gas hog, never over 15 mpg - about 10-12 in town

I realize it is over 10 years old now and others may do worse, but there are some $$$ on my list above that I experienced with that great Toyota quality.

G

I agree based on my experience using my parents QX56.

In Eric I trust...trust me.

I'll pile on some of the previous points made.

The Armada is down a few MPG from the competition, in our 2wd model the best I ever saw was 20 on the highway, normal was more like 18. Realistically the best you'll probably see in any full sized SUV is 20 MPG, so I was fine with it.

The new bodystyle Suburban is surprisingly nice to drive, other than being somewhat underpowered (as Eric addressed) it really feels like a smaller SUV. I had a rental for over a week and got 20 MPG on the highway. Conversely I agree with Paul on the limitations as the interior ergonomics are just ok, materials are just ok (but far improved from previous models), interior styling is lacking, and it is missing some of the thoughtful touches of other models. For example, the 2nd row seat flip mechanism for 3rd row access is clunky and difficult, my Armada was a single lever and easy enough for my 5 year old to do alone. It also does not have a fold flat 3rd row seat, less of a problem because it's so big back there.

The Expedition with a 5.4 is terrible, the lack of power borders on unsafe. They also have a spongy ride and LOTS of body roll. I would rate the interior as worse than the GM products. We drove multiple years and examples of the Expedition, I wanted to like it because they are one of the cheaper options. We didn't test drive the Navigator because my wife and I hated the bling styling, if you're interested in them do some research on the air suspension, in the older models it was a common and expensive failure.

I did quite a few miles in a rental Durango (new bodystyle) and found it to be generally pleasant. Good ride quality, hugely improved interior, and overall nice to drive. The 3rd row seats are pretty small, definitely not adult sized.

I have 2004 Sequoia and love it. Have used the 4wheel drive in the snow when the only car on the road. Take many trips fully loaded with dogs, kids and gear. My fiance had a 2006 Tahoe bought new. It had many problems but was a comfortable ride. Electrical issues include doors locks. Metal chunks in oil during changes. Steering column knocking for which GM made a silicon fix kit but did not warranty. Leather worn in two years. Keep a watch at GM trucks/SUVS and see how many have a front running light out. We replaced three in two years same side. And was out again when we sold it.

True....I was thinking of the 5.3 for better mpg and when the 6 speed became standard in 09.

OMG u r kidding! How dare a $4 filament bulb (that's how much the exact AC Delco 4114 bulb costs through a GM dealer, and they come with a one year warranty) in use anytime the headlights aren't on burn out so often. That's shoddy quality right there! You mean you went through $16 in bulbs in two years!!???

In my experience, the 6.2L does about the same as the 5.3L in most real-world conditions.....unless you use that power with a heavy right foot

Wow you sir are a mathematician! Never in the toyota. watch every GM.. 1/3 of them will have a light out..Why? My non-mathematician view is cheap parts from low bid components put bad parts in electrical system... bulb just end result of low quality gm stuff.. take it as you like. shouldnt happen no excuse for it...

It happens frequently in just about any vehicle that runs DRLs

Here's a 2004 Sequoia owner complaining that he blows bulbs all the time:
Headlamps Keep Blowing.. Want To Install Hid Kit Soon..

Toyota's not infallible. GM is not infallible. They both build complex machines. Both have built good ones. Both have built bad ones. YMMV

We've narrowed our search to the burb or the LR3. The only thing that sways me more towards the burb is the issue with some LR3s having a differential failure. Seems some had a coating that would delaminate and destoy bearings. Other than that I REALLY want the LR3. If I found one that has already had the update we'll end up with it.

No, I agree. The full Size GMC trucks have some kind of issue with the running lights. They almost always have one out, it's weird. Is it a big deal? N0, but it is an interesting and correct observation.

[rant]

Well, from working with GM during that era (the GMT800 platform) I can tell you that a LOT of the problem stems from incorrect replacement bulbs.

Note the AC Delco 4114 bulb I referenced earlier? It is a glass-base bulb. It is exactly the same style and wattage as a clear 3157 turn signal bulb (plastic base). MANY early afermarket parts guides spec'd the 3157 as the replacement bulb because it was the correct connection-style, size, and wattage. In other words, it plugged in and lit up.

Trouble is, a turn signal bulb is used infrequently and intermittently. It doesn't have the chance to get hot. When used as a DRL, it gets so hot that the plastic partially melts and the bulb fails. Not the filament, the base. So using the incorrect 3157 bulb may cause a much shorter life span than the "correct" 4114 bulb.

Still to this day you can walk into some Wal-Mart, NAPA, or Autozone and look at their bulb guide and see the 3157 listed.

GM's thought here stemmed from what had been common practice to run DRLs as a lower-current run through the high-beams of the headlights. That was causing premature headlight failure and GM thought by switching to a dedicated light it would be safer than risking running with no headlight. And since headlight bulbs are $10-20 versus $4 for the correct DRL bulb, it would be a benefit to their customers.

So shame on GM for adding the cost of having a separate DRL. And shame on them for allowing it to be confused with the wrong bulb by the aftermarket, by clueless morons who will later blame the truck itself.

Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, and VW have all had similar issues with "almost-right" bulbs being used in the aftemarket and making problems for the manufacturer.

But it's GM's fault....

[/rant]

I think you're taking the comment a bit wrong, at least from me. I would not point to that as a quality concern with GM, just an interesting observation.

This is not to say GM doesn't have serious quality and design issues... :)

It was not your specific comment, you were just the last post on it. Yazhound took it to be a GM quality issue and evidence of being "cheaper" than Toyota.

And we know how you feel about GM....

To be fair (to me) I've owned dozens of GM vehicles and several were just fine. I also manufactured components for domestic and import vehicles for 20+years...yes there IS a difference and it's not insignificant.

Past tense? What year did that stop?