When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The Escalade I want is $100k new. That's too much.
I agree 100K is a lot of money....for a lot of luxury-truck. You might take a look at the GMC Yukon Denali, which, with REAL wood/leather/metallic trim (no fakes or substitutes) is virtually the same vehicle as the Escalade, but which should sell for less.....they start at 74-75K. Loaded Denalis, though, can be the same price as some Escalades......Denali Ultimates start at 96K.
Well, unfortunately, there's no magic-wand. Low MPG is simply the name of the game with these big heavy trucks. Weight and power takes a toll in fuel-use....although the turbo-diesel option will get somewhat better MPG than the gas engines.
Ever wonder why the Tahoe, Suburban, Silverado, Sierra, Yukon, Escalade, etc.... have been in production so long, and why the dealerships, whoever possible, keep so many of them in stock? (the Suburban, itself, goes back to 1936)
GM makes a boatload of cash (10-11K) on every one of them sold, partly because of high demand, partly because they meet so many of the country's driving-needs, and partly because customers are willing to pay a lot more for them (in factory-stickers and mark-ups) than they cost to produce. The dealership, of course, pockets the difference between the selling-price and invo
I don't mean to sound smart *** but tell us something we don't know. It's not hard to see why they're so massively popular. Vassssssttttt majority of them are also powered by.....V8s, and that's not changing anytime soon either.
Originally Posted by Margate330
Could they be selling good because they are lowgs.
Basically America does huge BOF trucks the best. And we love them. Big BOF SUVs are status symbols, or they can be. The Navi and Escalade are so nice it's stunning, compared to how they started.
Originally Posted by LeX2K
15 MPG combined is atrocious we need to get as many polluting vehicles like that off the road as possible.
Good luck with that. That's also, that mindset, why people love their V8s and won't get rid of them.
Originally Posted by Margate330
If it runs good I'd hold onto it.
Yeah, new car will get better mpgs but now you have a car payment.
Right but shouldn't you be driving the newest and cleanest car since that's what you're advocating for? You should probably bite the bullet and deal with a car payment and be greener. That old ES is burning dirtier than any of these huge BOFs, I'd be willing to bet. See how it sucks that I'm sorta telling you what to do?
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Well, unfortunately, there's no magic-wand. Low MPG is simply the name of the game with these big heavy trucks. Weight and power takes a toll in fuel-use....although the turbo-diesel option will get somewhat better MPG than the gas engine
Right. There is no magic wand. I think it's hilarious everyone is all excited about the dropped Hemi for this new Stellantis I-6 in the Grand Wagoneer as if it's going to be a gas miser. Real world economy will be no better than V8.
And the Diesel Suburban/Escalade/etc. that everyone including mags are trying to push on us? That's great that they have lots of torque and are refined, but they're SLOWWWWW. I would chew a bucket a broken glass before I bought a $120k Escalade that needs 9 seconds to get to 60. The quickness of all of basically all of these fancy, expensive trucks is part of the appeal. My LX is outclassed by today's standards but part of the fun is the acceleration and brute engine strength, 6.5 seconds to 60 is enough to be fun.
I don't mean to sound smart *** but tell us something we don't know. It's not hard to see why they're so massively popular. Vassssssttttt majority of them are also powered by.....V8s, and that's not changing anytime soon either.
No problem....you are entitled to your views and replies. As far as people knowing that, some do and some don't....this thread is for those who don't.
Basically America does huge BOF trucks the best. And we love them. Big BOF SUVs are status symbols, or they can be. The Navi and Escalade are so nice it's stunning, compared to how they started.
Yes, that's true. However, you need adequate driving/manuvering/parking conditions for vehicles that big....which are lacking in some areas. One of the reasons I went from a relatively large vehicle to one much smaller was exactly that....easier to cope with the conditions I face every day.
Good luck with that. That's also, that mindset, why people love their V8s and won't get rid of them.
Many Baby Boomers grew up with V8s in the 1960s...and are still living in nostalgia today. Others love big V8s simply because of what they can haul and tow. And they aren't concerned about fuel use.
Right but shouldn't you be driving the newest and cleanest car since that's what you're advocating for? You should probably bite the bullet and deal with a car payment and be greener. That old ES is burning dirtier than any of these huge BOFs, I'd be willing to bet. See how it sucks that I'm sorta telling you what to do?
People hold on to old vehicles for a number of reasons. One of the most common reasons, here in Virginia (and a few other states), is that, every year, counties in the state llevy a special Personal-Property "Car Tax" (which is not only on cars/trucks but motorcycles, farm equipment, airplanes, boats, and a number of transportation-machines).....this tax is based on the assessed-value of the property every year. Older vehicles, of course, depreciate, and are worth less as time goes on....so, of course, tax money is saved on them, even though the tax itself is Federally-deductible.
And the Diesel Suburban/Escalade/etc. that everyone including mags are trying to push on us? That's great that they have lots of torque and are refined, but they're SLOWWWWW. I would chew a bucket a broken glass before I bought a $120k Escalade that needs 9 seconds to get to 60. The quickness of all of basically all of these fancy, expensive trucks is part of the appeal. My LX is outclassed by today's standards but part of the fun is the acceleration and brute engine strength, 6.5 seconds to 60 is enough to be fun.
(Respectfully), I disagree with this in a couple of areas. First, IMO, 9 seconds is not slow....I myself usually take longer than that when I accelerate. Second, full-size trucks are are not sports-cars, and should not be expected to drive or accelerate like them. Third, the weight and power of these trucks are going to use fair amount of fuel no matter how you drive....the harder you accelerate, the more gas you are going to use. That is why their fuel tanks typically hold 25-30 gallons, and, even when gas prices drop, can easily cost over $100 to fill up.
And the Diesel Suburban/Escalade/etc. that everyone including mags are trying to push on us? That's great that they have lots of torque and are refined, but they're SLOWWWWW. I would chew a bucket a broken glass before I bought a $120k Escalade that needs 9 seconds to get to 60. The quickness of all of basically all of these fancy, expensive trucks is part of the appeal. My LX is outclassed by today's standards but part of the fun is the acceleration and brute engine strength, 6.5 seconds to 60 is enough to be fun.
I think you buy a diesel if it's the last truck you ever intend to buy because you can't kill it for personal use.
Think it's slow??? Lol
Yeah, but they can be tuned to VERY high HP numbers.
No problem....you are entitled to your views and replies. As far as people knowing that, some do and some don't....this thread is for those who don't.
I don't disagree with you, I was just saying... it's easy to see how these huge BOFs are cash cows.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Yes, that's true. However, you need adequate driving/manuvering/parking conditions for vehicles that big....which are lacking in some areas. One of the reasons I went from a relatively large vehicle to one much smaller was exactly that....easier to cope with the conditions I face every day.
You get used to it. Lots of fancy tech to help with that these days.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
Many Baby Boomers grew up with V8s in the 1960s...and are still living in nostalgia today. Others love big V8s simply because of what they can haul and tow. And they aren't concerned about fuel use.
They couldn't care less about MPG. My mother is going to buy her next car soon, I want it to be a gently used 570 but once I told her the Yukons had Corvette engines she's insisting on driving that too, haha.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
(Respectfully), I disagree with this in a couple of areas. First, IMO, 9 seconds is not slow....I myself usually take longer than that when I accelerate. Second, full-size trucks are are not sports-cars, and should not be expected to drive or accelerate like them. Third, the weight and power of these trucks are going to use fair amount of fuel no matter how you drive....the harder you accelerate, the more gas you are going to use. That is why their fuel tanks typically hold 25-30 gallons, and, even when gas prices drop, can easily cost over $100 to fill up.
9 seconds is slow for $120,000. Painfully slow. Nobody is saying BOFs are sports cars, but like I said, the powerful engines and quite good acceleration for their weights and sizes are part of the appeal and fun. I'm sure the diesel is nice and well behaved but no thanks. Me personally I don't care about gas mileage. You'd be left sucking dust from plain-Jane Sentras and Altimas in your $120k Escalade. Escalade has always been fast, since Gen 2....
Ever wonder why the Tahoe, Suburban, Silverado, Sierra, Yukon, Escalade, etc.... have been in production so long, and why the dealerships, whoever possible, keep so many of them in stock? (the Suburban, itself, goes back to 1936)
GM makes a boatload of cash (10-11K) on every one of them sold, partly because of high demand, partly because they meet so many of the country's driving-needs, and partly because customers are willing to pay a lot more for them (in factory-stickers and mark-ups) than they cost to produce. The dealership, of course, pockets the difference between the selling-price and invoice (wholesale)....but GM profits the difference between dealer-invoice and whatever it costs them to produce and ship them....and the shipping/destination-fee, of course, is part of the window-sticker. There is no reason to doubt a more or less similar profit margin at Ford, on the F-Series trucks/Expeditions and Lincoln Navigators, or at Stellantis on the full-sized Ram trucks.
The Arlington, TX plant, where these vehicles are built, is arguably the highest-margin vehicle-plant in the world.
(Hint: you may need to click the link itself to see the images..they are finicky about being posted)
Thanks to strong demand and high profit margins, it’s really no secret that full-size trucks and SUVs serve as cash cows for General Motors. With this in mind, here’s how much GM profits on average from each of these vehicles.
According to a new report from Reuters, The General has the potential to earn as much as $7.5 billion from sales of ICE-powered trucks and SUVs through 2035. This comes out to $10,678 per vehicle on average before accounting for interest and taxes.
These impressive profit margins serve as strong motivators for the Detroit-based automaker to continue investing in its ICE-powered future. To this end, General Motors recently announced a new $500 million investment into the GM Arlington plant in Texas to facilitate production of The General’s next generation of full-sized SUVs. This new investment will be used to introduce new tooling and equipment in the Arlington plant’s stamping, body shop and general assembly areas. Notably, the Arlington plant is considered as the most profitable plant in the world.
“Arlington produced 345,000 units in 2022, and by our estimate generated about $25 billion in revenue and $4 billion in EBIT – or about 30 percent of total company EBIT,” one analyst was quoted as saying.
For reference, EBIT stands for earnings before interest and taxes.
In another response to these high profits, General Motors is now expected to continue production of full-size trucks and SUVs up until the 2035 calendar year. This is noteworthy considering that GM has claimed it will feature a zero-emissions vehicle lineup by then. However, with the potential to earn $50 billion, or more, in profit during that time period, this development doesn’t come as much of a surprise.
For those who may not be aware, General Motors’ entire lineup of full-size trucks and SUVs includes the following:
with all of that money I would like to see them improve roof strength in a rollover crash. As it stands now, a rollover even in 2021 models, have a high potential of producing fatalities. Also middle passengers in the third row don’t get a headrest.
(Respectfully), I disagree with this in a couple of areas. First, IMO, 9 seconds is not slow....I myself usually take longer than that when I accelerate.
Sorry, but in 2023, 9 seconds 0-60 is horribly slow. How you personally drive has no bearing on measuring an all-out sprint as to how fast a car could go.
Just for everyone's FYI, as I understand it, the Gas-Guzzler tax is not charged on trucks or SUVs.....just on low-MPG passenger cars. So, any vehicles that are classified as crossovers are usually also except. You will find the GG tax mostly on high-performance pony cars, domestic and exotic sports-cars, Dodge Chargers, some Rolls-Royce/Bentley models, and other similar vehicles.
I disagree that either GM or Ford will go bankrupt because of EVs. The Bolt/ Bolt EUV and the Mach-E-Mustang have both been sales-successes (with more EVs from both ford and GM to come). I personally don't think much of the Mach-E (the Bolt EUV is, IMO, a far better buy for much less money)....but the public, as a whole, is gravitating to both of them, just as they began gravitating to Teslas in significant numbers several years ago.
The only people buying the MachE were people who didn't want to wait for the Model Y. The Model2 and Chinese EVs will sweep away any offerings on the low end by GM or Ford.
The only people buying the MachE were people who didn't want to wait for the Model Y.
Perhaps. I won't necessarily disagree, but there are also a lot of Ford fanboys who buy from the Blue Oval simply out of long-habit (their relatives and ancestors bought them), or because they ARE Fords. Another new Tesla model is not likely going to win them over....nor is GM's (IMO) excellent Bolt EUV.
The Model2 and Chinese EVs will sweep away any offerings on the low end by GM or Ford.
Again, remains to be seen. Tesla products have had a lot of well-publicized quality-issues lately. The Bolt EUV, on the other hand, has had very high customer satisfaction.
Sorry, but in 2023, 9 seconds 0-60 is horribly slow.
Not to many drivers, even today.
How you personally drive has no bearing on measuring an all-out sprint as to how fast a car could go.
First, I never said it did. Second, I am not unique.....in fact, most people don't accelerate that fast, particularly in dense-traffic conditions, unless they are forced to like on some (?) freeway entry-ramps. Third, I don't have to justify my driving style to others....it has saved me from a lot of tickets, and a lot of extra money on my insurance policy.
0-60 is a long-established metric (yes, only a single metric) of a car's capabilities; I don't understand why you keep making it about driving style. No one ever said anything about you, or your driving style.
I agree that a slow driver may not care about going fast. But a car that is unable to go 0-60 in less than 9 seconds in this day and age is slow, no matter who is driving.
06-18-23 | 07:29 PM
(the Suburban, itself, goes back to 1936)
Second, I am not unique.....in fact, most people don't accelerate that fast, particularly in dense-traffic conditions, unless they are forced to like on some (?) freeway entry-ramps.