Jump to content

Interior Lighting in New SUVs

econometrics
 Share

Recommended Posts

econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
Posted

Hey current 2021 SUV owners, 

 

How is the interior cabin lighting at night? In the T1 trucks, it's terrible. I was wondering if GM improved this for the SUVs? I haven't been able to see any reviewers talk about this, because they're always reviewing during the daylight. 

 

Also, do the vanity mirrors have lights behind the sunshades? Another place GM skimped on the T1 trucks... no lights there, just the mirror. 

 

Thanks!

  • Like 1
JR09country Enthusiast

JR09country

Posted
Posted

On the summary build sheet for a Suburban LT
- Driver and front passenger visors with illuminated mirrors
-Include covered mirrors

Hopefully someone can confirm that, that is one of my wifes complaints with my TB.


Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 hours ago, JR09country said:

On the summary build sheet for a Suburban LT
- Driver and front passenger visors with illuminated mirrors
-Include covered mirrors

Hopefully someone can confirm that, that is one of my wifes complaints with my TB.


Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk
 

I did see that last night when I was looking over a build sheet online in more detail, too. That's good. 

 

RyanbabZ71 Senior Enthusiast

RyanbabZ71

Posted
Posted

My 19 Silverado has em had to out to check because I have never dropped my visors [emoji23]

 

4f421bbca8f90aaa5a4aaa4a64c8c70a.jpg

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, RyanbabZ71 said:

My 19 Silverado has em had to out to check because I have never dropped my visors emoji23.png

 

4f421bbca8f90aaa5a4aaa4a64c8c70a.jpg

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

? I guess it’s HC / Denali only... since only those owners need light to check to see how purdy they look? ??

  • Like 1
RyanbabZ71 Senior Enthusiast

RyanbabZ71

Posted
Posted
[emoji23] I guess it’s HC / Denali only... since only those owners need light to check to see how purdy they look? [emoji851][emoji23]


Like I said I had to check because I didn’t know if mine had them. My old 2010 had them too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
33 minutes ago, RhinoGuy said:

The lighting inside of my 21 Yukon is not very good at all. I'm pretty sure it has visor lights though.

Sent from my SM-N986U1 using Tapatalk
 

Thanks! 
 

Sounds like the SUVs got the same lighting as the trucks. ?

Denali2021 Enthusiast

Denali2021

Posted
Posted

Can confirm lighting is just about barely acceptable... Not sure why with leds they couldn't allow for more options on brightness. I'd say it's a 6 or 7 out of 10.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, Denali2021 said:

Can confirm lighting is just about barely acceptable... Not sure why with leds they couldn't allow for more options on brightness. I'd say it's a 6 or 7 out of 10.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
 

Thanks for the feedback. I really did hope they would correct this on the SUVs. It's just so bad on the trucks. The lighting is really limited to few specific areas in the cabin. It's terrible. 

  • 1 month later...
JR09country Enthusiast

JR09country

Posted
Posted

Going from a 19 silverado to a 21 tahoe, I will say that the lighting is better in the suvs. You at least get light in the footwell area which helps brighten the whole vehicle. Still bit the greatest but better than the trucks for sure.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, JR09country said:

Going from a 19 silverado to a 21 tahoe, I will say that the lighting is better in the suvs. You at least get light in the footwell area which helps brighten the whole vehicle. Still bit the greatest but better than the trucks for sure.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk
 

Thanks for the feedback. You finally get a Tahoe Z71? 

 

I was so close to trading in for a Z71 Tahoe or AT4 Yukon... but the market is just not right for me right now. I'm going to wait to see what the 2022 refresh trucks look like, then decide. I figure the SUVs will be through the kinks in production by then, and maybe some better rebates will be around if I want to go that route. 

JR09country Enthusiast

JR09country

Posted
Posted



Thanks for the feedback. You finally get a Tahoe Z71? 
 
I was so close to trading in for a Z71 Tahoe or AT4 Yukon... but the market is just not right for me right now. I'm going to wait to see what the 2022 refresh trucks look like, then decide. I figure the SUVs will be through the kinks in production by then, and maybe some better rebates will be around if I want to go that route. 


I did. I found one with the z71 offroad package and bench seat with no panoramic roof or rear entertainment system. I got very lucky, this is the only one I could find in a 500 mile radius with the air, magnaride and max tow.

I did the swap now since I figured this would be the best time for highest trade value. Once the 2022s are released with the updated interior I assume our values will go down significantly.

Any questions just message me. ff5771a112209498398382b2d3b579be.jpg

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Nice @JR09country! Yeah, that's really surprising you were able to find one without the pano roof and rear nav. That was the main issue I kept running into... I do not want the rear nav. And almost all the models on lots had that WITH the air ride. And I knew that ordering one was going to take forever to get built, so I just threw in the towel for now. 

 

How does that Tahoe ride with the air ride, anyway? Even though I've wanted the air ride, I've been on the fence about it as it relates to the longer-term reliability of it. 

JR09country Enthusiast

JR09country

Posted
Posted

@econometrics This is one of the best riding fullsizes I have ever driven, it was the main reason I made the switch from my truck to this. I never drove just a magnaride version so I cant speak to that ride but I did drive a regular suspension suburban and this ride is superior.

The reliability is a concern but I drive so little and dont keep my vehicles very long (expensive habit, I know) that I didnt let it change my decision. Honestly, everytime I drive the tahoe it confirms my choice and makes me wonder why I didnt just wait and skip the Trail boss all together.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...