Jump to content

Saw my first Tahoe in person Sat. Eve.

Elwood 2000

By Elwood 2000
in Future GM News & Rumors

Recommended Posts

Elwood 2000 Senior Enthusiast

Elwood 2000

Posted
Posted

All in all, very sharp. I must tell you though, the sun had set, but not dark yet and it was Granite, or at least that is what I think they called it. A very dark gray metalic flake paint. Very sharp with nearly black interior. This thing had every option, and I do mean every option and stickered for over $50k! :confused:

 

The seams were very tight, the lines smooth and it does look bigger. The rear and it's proportions look better in person than in photos. The chrome letters "TAHOE" on the door look nice and not tacky. The interior looks very nice, a huge improvement over current models. It looks rich and sophisticated. My only gripe is the very low front valance. I swear, the wifes Impala has a higher clearance on the nose. It looks like a definate "large car" instead of a truck, but that is what the public wants. I just hope they remember the "Z71" crowd when they put the badge on the rig.

 

All in all, I liked it. I hope to drive one soon.

 

Thought I would share.

jaslo Enthusiast

jaslo

Posted
Posted

I seen a couple of them last Saturday at the local dealership. One was white and the other one was black. I thought they looked very sharp. Both of them were loaded LTZ models but they stickered for less than $50,000. I am really anxious to see what the new trucks look like.

Truckman031 Senior Enthusiast

Truckman031

Posted
Posted

I was behind one on my way to a friend's house late Friday night. It looked black, but I couldn't tell. Anyway, I liked the overall design better in person than in the pics.

JimsZR2 Enthusiast

JimsZR2

Posted
Posted

I have seen one in person last sunday. it's a very nice truck but dang the front airdam is like low... I did like the gauges on it, and the overal quality of it looks ok. But at a sticker price of $51,000 I would have to live in it. :confused:

Wingnut Senior Enthusiast

Wingnut

Posted
Posted

I was screwing around this morning, and swung by a dealership and drove a couple trucks. The new Tahoe was one of them.

 

The interior is top-notch, and it rides better than any Chevy that I've ever been behind the wheel of.

 

And I absolutely love the new front end. I'll have a hard time not buying an '07 pickup when they hit the streets (if they keep that front end).

 

I also drove a Trailblazer SS (AWD). Holy hell that's a badass truck. It launches almost as hard as a Syclone...And that's saying something right there.

JAMIEZ71 Enthusiast

JAMIEZ71

Posted
Posted

I've also seen one of the new tahoes. I think it was very sharp. I passed it as it was turning into a local dealer. It was what looked like a pearl white color. Definately would like the trucks if they looked like this in the future.

Z71Adrenaline Enthusiast

Z71Adrenaline

Posted
Posted

There are two at a dealer in the town where I went to school. Its hard for me to believe they have 2 on the lot of a city with 4,500 people and all of the big city lots I've been by have yet to get any. I'm VERY impressed with them and I love where the new Chevrolets are going!

Aperformance Enthusiast

Aperformance

Posted
Posted

Power Chevy in Irvine, CA have quite a few and are already dressing them up with 22" rims. They have a black ltz with Black 5 spoke centers..looks very Euro. Not like any Chevy I've ever seen, much better in person, by far the best looking SUV out of Detroit...

Machine Enthusiast

Machine

Posted
Posted

I had the opportunity to sit in a new Yukon while attending the Fort Worth Stock Show / Rodeo. I must say that the seating position is nice, and the front seats are very, very comfortable. This SUV looks so much better in person, and the interior is phenomenal.

 

Also, I saw a Tahoe in a parking lot a few days back. It was already was sitting on 24’s…

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,691 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...