I think I'm going to barf
 

GM's new Yukon hybrid gets just 20/20 mpg, AND costs $50,000-52,000! That's a $14,000 premium over the base Yukon, more than the cost of a Yaris.

https://www.edmunds.com/new/2008/gmc/...chlanding.html

Those idiot GM product planners could have used 4.3 liter engines (or even the 2.9 liter fours) and gotten 25 mpg in a full size SUV ..........but they wimped out. It would have been a publicity coup.

And the price is simply incredible. For this kind of money, GM should be offering a Yukon Hybrid Diesel that gets 30!

GM looks idiotic with this offering. I had much higher hopes for this vehicle. It's no wonder Toyota is eating GM's lunch.

I know what you mean! We can't even buy a FE vehicle anymore. Anything that was good got discontinued in the US. I guess we have to build our own.

You can take a FULL size 4x4 Chevy / GMC and drop in an Isuzu NPR Diesel and get 32mpg highway. It will still have plenty of power. This can be done for less than $10K.

GM can shove that 20MPG over bloated over priced POS.
I'd rather suck dumpster grease!

It might be 14k over a base Yukon, but it's only a few thousand more than an equivalent Yukon.

I'm not even sure the 4.3 would have helped with mileage if it was used instead. If you look at the Silverado or the Sierra that use the 4.3, it actually gets less mileage than the larger 5.3 in 4wd models. Most of that has to do with weight, not to mention very old design.

Don't knock it just because of its price or because it's in an SUV. It gets good mileage out of a gas hungry vehicle, while still being able to tow 6k lbs and carry 8 people. And no, I'm not saying you can do all that and still get good mileage.

Here's a bad comparison:

Lexus LS 600h L: 20city-22hwy
GMC Yukon Hybrid 2WD: 21city-22hwy
GMC Yukon Hybrid 4WD: 20city-20hwy

I don't like the whole SUV/truck mpg thing anyway. If I buy a giant, 4WD monster, I honestly want the most power possible. That is my first concern. I used to drive a 1982 Range Rover, the big, giant metal tanks, way before they became trendy. It was made for off road. The engine was small by Americna standards, but was still a British V-8. The mileage was maybe 10mpg, but in the hilly Cincinnati snow and ice, nothing compared, also off road and hauling/towing. Now I drive a Yaris because I want mpg. I guess I am philosophically opposed to giant engines trying to get great mpg.

I don't think anyone would have bought a big SUV with no power. Who buys a full size pick up or van with a V6? Small market and terrible resale.

I'd love to see more diesels, but the EPA continues to put big hurdles in the way because they are lost.


Isn't the California EPA looking at restricting caffeine? Nice.

diesel FTW. on a business trip yesterday I was driving a drop cap mitsubishi fuso 14' truck and got 10 mpg hauling about 5k lbs going 70-80 mph. not bad for a 13' high cube.

4WD trucks lose out because of driveline losses with a transfer case and front drive assembly. I have a friend with a 2wd silverado v6 rated 18 mpg city, 24 highway...same as my cressida and half again the V8

Last spring market news for GM was that they spend 14 million on ****** for pensioners. the same quarter, news for toyota was that they started employing a forging method to make the 3.5l (most common engine) aluminum block stronger and cost 1/2 as much to make each one.

I did, I am pretty happy with my GMC. My full size gets better mileage (mid 20s) than my 89 s-10 4cyl did and can haul 2X as much. The measly 200 hp does pretty decent hauling wood .

True, especially with a stick shift. That is how I got mine used at a good price :thumbup: .

I seriously doubt the 4.3 would have made any difference in the mpg but alot in functionality and sales. Take a look at the Tundra.

The 5.7L gets 1mpg worse in city and highway than the 4.0 V6 and if you compare power the V6 is pretty much worthless in comparison. 380hp and 401ft/lbs vs 236hp and 266ft/lbs. Almost double the power for 1mpg.

That's a BEAUTIFUL engine by the way. And I'm in no way dogging on that 4.0 V6, in the 4Runner it's a champ. I'd actually prefer it over the 8.

I'm sorry, I just can't get over this gas pig at such a ridiculous price. If I were ever to buy a Yukon, I'd be buy a base version anyway. They're already well equipped. Who needs all the geegaws and leather?

If GM had half a brain, they'd offer base Yukons (and pickups) without the pantywaist options.

And if the 4.3 was geared correctly, it would get better mileage than the 5.3...... Who needs the 5.3 (or 6.0) when the electric motor about doubles the 4.3's torque off the line?

Well, right...

But a use for an SUV like that is also pulling something. Boat, travel trailer, etc. An electric motor would get you off the line, which is a short term thing, but sustaining motion at 70MPH with a vehicle that doesn't have good aerodynamics pulling extra weight and potentially more area to pull through the wind.

Again, back to resale. Someone's gotta be the person that buys it new and then used. It's ok if you're buying it on the used side cheap. :D

And leather? Well, some people don't like 755's or CLK's.

Don't have to worry about my wife's SUV anymore, she hit a big doe last night and totaled it! She wasn't hurt....my wife, not the doe. Maybe I can talk her into that Civic Hybrid now....

Well sort of a British V8. ;)

https://www.austin-rover.co.uk/index....neroverv8f.htm

Some of the 3.1's only got a 3-speed.

i would soooo rather go for the lexus. the power in that has to be awesome.:thumbup:

There making there own down fall happen faster when they do stuff like this.

Even in 1982?

Keep in mind that some people DO actually use this truck for its intended purpose. Probably only 5% of the owners, but still, they are out there!

Personally, my feeling is the same, but I think the same thing for all the hybrids.

It's a transitional technology, period. Batteries are toxic and expensive. Since the US EPA is so crazy, diesel advances have been crushed in addition to groups continuing to work against them, even though that are excellent primary engines in the rest of the world.

As for intended uses of vehicles. Recognize that choice is a right.

Of course her argument might be, "If I had hit that thing in a CIVIC!!!!"..... :)

They wont sale more than 5 in holes USA, and when I see a Yukon, its usually a single person (or maybe a couple), they dont tow anything, and the Yukon are usually cleaner than my car (so off road my ***...).

BIG USE, BIG USE, 50k $ ... !

MONEY MONEY MONEY ! I'M LOVIN IT

I guess so long people buy it, they will make it.

I guess so long people buy it, they will make it.

The fundamental problem that brought SUVs like this about is that Americans in general just want, want, want and never stop wanting more. We can't be bothered to sacrifice for anything or anyone, it's just not "the American way".

This SUV represents gluttony and hubris:
It's bigger, more powerful and more luxurious than most other vehicles; a status symbol. It's high up and wide; it makes you feel safe and powerful at the expense of other peoples visibility and safety. Its got DVD players and satnav/radio; so you never have to feel like you've left your home. Now people don't want to give up the 8,000lb monster luxury vehicle so they can save gas money (oh my god! $3.30 a gallon! now I can't make my multiple credit payments!)and have the petty label of "green", so they wanted a hybrid version of the land yacht and they got it...

Very, very few SUV owners ever venture off road, pull anything or need around 300hp. Most people (around here at least) that do tow things with SUVs tow a couple of ATVs, a small boat or a SeaDoo, where a small pickup or a big station wagon would do. SUVs in general are no longer the "Sport Utility Vehicles" they were in up until the 90s, as a matter of fact, with their chrome, shiny paint and trim, DVD players and fancy leather interiors they're almost totally devoid of "utility". Today's SUVs are more along the lines of SSV, "Status Symbol Vehicles".

That's pretty good for a full size SUV.

A 2.9 Liter Four? Hahahaha. It wouldn't be able to fricking move if you were towing anything.

when my wife and i have our 3rd kid we'll have to get an SUV(SSV) 3 car seats wont fit in the back seat of an accord! I'm looking at a Honda Pilot, or maybe a 72 gran torino sedan...:D

Sooner or later, stripped out basic trucks are gonna arrive from China, farmers and tradesmen are gonna buy them like hot cakes, GM and Ford are gonna run screaming to Uncle Sam to "do something" ...

Yeah, lot of that crap out there is short on utility any more. I'd like at some point a basic 4x4, with real rather than nominal offroad capability. I'd sooner take my '88 Voyager offroad than some of the pretend SUVs out there now.... I'm probably going to have to put one together from pre 1995ish vehicles... you know, I think the Russians REALLY got it right with this...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lada_Niva
Shame they're so rare here and they are no longer imported.

You're right. Trucks used to be trucks. Now they're pimped. And don't get me going on the ridiculous 20" chrome wheels. They last 60 seconds during real off road driving. You can't buy a truck with 235-85R16 10 ply tires anymore.

Mazda5! 2+2+2 seating and room for car seats in every seat. Plus you get as much hauling space as any other compact wagon.