GM Two-Mode Hybrid SUVs to start at about $40,000
The GMC Yukon and Chevrolet Tahoe hybrid SUVs will be starting full production next week and rolling into showrooms across the countries in the following weeks. We know the EPA mileage ratings (21/22 mpg city/hwy) and the towing capacity (6,000 lbs). The last really big question that has gone unanswered so far is the price tag. Although GM hasn't made any announcements yet, a GM spokesman said the price would be coming in at about the same price as the conventional 5.3L model with similar equipment. For a rear wheel drive model that should put the price at about $40-45,000 depending on exactly what equipment is included. That means there will be virtually no price premium for the hybrid.
[Source: General Motors]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
mike 11:47PM (10/29/2007)
I guess the rich are going to have to buy us out of global warming.
Reply
why not the LS2/LS7? 2:43AM (10/30/2007)
Nice.
Reply
armmat 4:08AM (10/30/2007)
This is just plain retarded....no wonder GM is going down hill. Let's hope it puts itself out of its own misery sooner than later.
Reply
Domenick 5:26AM (10/30/2007)
Let's see, $45,000 up front plus a few grand every year for gas and oil. Those Phoenix vehicles are looking more and more reasonable.
Reply
Furion 6:51AM (10/30/2007)
What is retarded? That they're not charging premium, or that they made it in the first place? I think GM is doing a great thing by reducing emissions in a popular class of vehicles, and that they've found a way to make them for not much more than the price of regular Tahoe/Yukon. Prius is not a "one vehicle fits all" solution, and sooner people can accept that, real progress can be made. Like having gasoline saving options whatever your personal vehicle tastes / needs are.
BTW, on a global scale, $40k dollars is not much for a vehicle of that caliber. That's about 27 thousand euros, and that doesn't buy much of vehicle in europe. Maybe cheapest Audi A3, depending on country. So I wouldn't think it's only for the rich people, but then again a lot of treehuggers are saving the planet by the virtue of not being able to afford much anyway.
Reply
Phil L. 7:57AM (10/30/2007)
...but note that you really can't compare vehicle prices between the US and Europe just using currency conversion. Take a look at any car model that's sold both in the US and Europe; the price in euros won't make any sense when converted to dollars.
I understand why many in the green community would rather SUVs not be used for typical family transportation. That said, I've got 3 kids in car seats. I'm not sure how many LATCH positions are available in a Prius (quick Googling didn't find it), but I doubt it can handle 3 car seats.
Meanwhile, I'm still waiting to see a hybrid minivan...
Reply
Throwback 8:33AM (10/30/2007)
I am amazed at the hatred this vehicle generates. Does it not make sense to make the least fuel efficient vehicles more efficient? The fact is people like SUVS, even in Europe. Shocking I know but even Citroen and Peugeot sell suvs now (rebadged Mitsu Outlanders). SUVs will still be made as long as people buy them. Kudos to GM for offering a vehicle that a lot of people want and improving the MPG without increasing the cost. If Toyota did this with the Sequoia most people would be heralding their genius. This truck is not for everyone, but neither is a Prius.
Reply
K 8:40AM (10/30/2007)
$40,000 is a LOT of money in America, maybe not to everybody, but both my wife and I work in IT and have college degrees, we would NEVER consider spending more than $18,000 on a car.
The point is that GM is trying to make this vehicle appear "green", even look at the wind farm in the background. Truth is this vehicle is an excessive pile of ego-boosting junk!
Reply
mannisto.ilkka 8:54AM (10/30/2007)
"The point is that GM is trying to make this vehicle appear "green", even look at the wind farm in the background. Truth is this vehicle is an excessive pile of ego-boosting junk!"
No vehicle is good for the environment. Not Prius, not Tesla. All vehicles are a strain on the environment. Usually vehicles that are advertised as green are less of a strain on the environment than other vehicles. For example, Prius consumes less gas than, say, a VW Golf. Thus, it's advertised as green. Tahoe Hybrid consumes less gas than a Ford Expedition, thus it's advertised as green.
Now, some might argue that it's not green since HTahoe consumes more gas than a Prius. Well, then I'd argue that a Prius is not green since it consumes more gas than a Tesla. The point is that HTahoe is greener than comparable vehicles, and that makes it ok to be advertised as green* As long as people need/think they need/want a Tahoe, that's a good thing.
BTW, people who need an ego boost usually buy a Merc, BMW or Lexus. Not a Chevrolet (well, except for a vette).
* In Norway no car can be advertised as green, for exmaple, because none really are.
Reply
cade 9:12AM (10/30/2007)
$18,000 for a new car will get you a sub compact entry level nothing of a car. A cobalt with a/c, power locks, windows and a stereo is almost $18k. Large cars and suv's are not for ego's but for moving people, try to shove a family of four with teen children and a friend into a sub-compact econo box and you will end up hating life even more than you do now.
Reply
Throwback 9:31AM (10/30/2007)
#10cade, I could not have said it better.
Reply
richardtoh 9:48AM (10/30/2007)
We should be grateful that we have plenty of choices in the market. The decision to purchase is personal and cannot be easily influenced.
For example, a friend bought one of those full-size SUV. His reason was that he needed the space and capacity to haul stuff and carry many people. I asked how often and his answer was perhaps once per year.
Now, would it not be smarter to rent one when needed instead of spending more than $40K (his was much higher)? I think he just wants to own one of those big trucks. Nothing wrong. But buying a truck like that is really not an investment.
Reply
rj 10:00AM (10/30/2007)
The suburban has seating for 8. At 20 mpg is is no worse than those same 8 people traveling in two vehicles getting 40 mpg each.
In aircraft terms it gets 160 seat miles per gallon.
"... a 737-800 gets 80 seat miles per gallon of jet fuel, compared to 55 seat miles per gallon for an MD-80.”
quote from link
http://forums.avsim.net/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=120&topic_id=31872&mode=full
Driving still uses less fuel than flying when transporting enough people.
Efficient aircraft 80 seat miles per gallon / 8 seats = 10 mpg equivalent if those same 8 people drove in a vehicle.
Reply
Luke 10:05AM (10/30/2007)
@10 cade,
If you actually do use the SUV for moving people, that's great. If you take 10mpg and multiply it by 5 people, that's 50 person-miles-per-gallon, which is about the same as a Prius being driven well. Cargo-ton-miles-per-gallon would also be a fair measure for such a vehicle. I have no objection to that!
However, I spend a lot of time on the highway (in my 40mpg VW Jetta TDI and in my girlfriend's 50mpg Prius) and I rarely see those behemoths hauling people, stuff, or trailers. Mostly, it's people driving alone. On the Interstate, I see a passenger maybe 50% of the time when I'm traveling after-hours. At best, this seems like using the wrong tool for the job.
Even though I drive a high-milage car, I'm trying to arrange my life so that the car could sit around most of the time. If I do this right, it will be better for my health, my sanity, and my pocket-book.
Reply
Furion 9:58AM (10/30/2007)
"Now, would it not be smarter to rent one when needed instead of spending more than $40K (his was much higher)? I think he just wants to own one of those big trucks. Nothing wrong. But buying a truck like that is really not an investment."
A good point, I agree completely. Nothing wrong with that, even though it's a bad investment.
When people say that "nobody needs those big SUVs", it's beside the point. In a free market economy "I feel I need" and "I need" and "I want" are pretty much the same thing.
Even the "real" needs are relative. Do you really need the boat that you need the Tahoe to tow?
Heh, getting a Hummer is more eco-friendly than getting kids, if you think about it. Nobody _needs_ a Hummer, but then again, nobody _needs_ kids .. just joking :-)
Reply
Phil L. 10:04AM (10/30/2007)
True.
But I rarely see a Suburban with 8 people in it. On the other hand, most passenger jets fly nearly full these days...
Reply
Ian 10:13AM (10/30/2007)
If these trucks get close to 20 mpg versus 14ish then it's a terrific upgrade IMHO.
Reply
henrykrinkle 10:14AM (10/30/2007)
The reason some of us criticize it is because making a gigantic SUV a hybrid is like handing out free needles to drug addicts or passing out condoms to pre-teens. It treats the symptom - not the real problem.
The gas price spike after Katrina got a lot of people out of their big gas hogs and into something more efficient, and I was one of them. But those big gas hogs were the primary source of income for the domestics. Now GM will do anything to get you back into one even if it means making a hybrid. The profit margin is so high they can afford to not charge a premium for it.
Reply
mannisto.ilkka 10:37AM (10/30/2007)
"The reason some of us criticize it is because making a gigantic SUV a hybrid is like handing out free needles to drug addicts or passing out condoms to pre-teens. It treats the symptom - not the real problem."
And the real problem is a) gigantic SUVs b) society based on transportation by private cars?
If you look at the big picture environmentally, the real problem is b). In that context, Priuses and all those are also just treating the symptoms as much as the Hybrid Tahoe.
Reply
Ryan 11:02AM (10/30/2007)
Hybrid suburban 21/22 mpg
Honda
Ridgeline Truck 4WD 15/20
pilot 4wd 15/20
element 4wd man 18/23
CRV 4wd 20/26
civic 4 cyl, 2 L, Man(6) 21/29
civic hybrid 40/45
Accord 6 cyl, 3.5 L, Auto(5) 19/29
Toyota
Camry 6 cyl, 3.5 L, Auto(S6) 19/28
corolla 4 cyl, 1.8 L, Auto(4), Regular 26/35
Avalon 19/28
4 runner 4wd 8 cyl, 4.7 L, Auto(5) 14/17
FJ cruiser 6 cyl, 4 L, Man(6) 15/18
highlander 4wd 17/23
highlander hybrid 27/25
There are vehicles that get better mpg than the suburban hybrid, there are also plenty of smaller vehicles that get as bad or worse mpg in the city than a suburban.
I think we need to give credit where credit is due.
If GM can get 21 mpg city out of a 8 seater 6.0 liter V8 beast that is the suburban how come Honda can only get 40 out of a tiny 5 seater, 1.3L 4 cylinder hybrid?
People complain that "big" vehicles use too much gas. "Big" vehicle gets a hybrid drive system that reduces city consumption to below that of some "small" to mid size cars. People still complain.
What is it you want?
Do you want "big" vehicles to waste MORE gas... what would make you happy?
Reply