Tahoe vs Q7 - which is a better tow vehicle?

[Acei]

Yes, I expect Tahoe to win this competition, but here are some comparison numbers:

- Length: 204-inch vs 199.6-inch
- Width: 80.5-inch vs 77.5-inch
- Height: 74.4-inch vs 68.5-inch.
- Wheelbase: 116-inch vs 118-inch !!!
- Curb Weight: 5602lb vs 4938
- Official tow rate: 8600 vs 7700

I am comparing this obviously since I do prefer the Q7 as a daily vehicle and I will only own one vehicle for both towing and non-towing. But at the end, I'll not go with anything that is considered dangerous.

My understanding is that the longer wheelbase is good, and in this case, the Q7 has longer wheelbase! Heavier weight is good so Tahoe comes out ahead but it is taller so perhaps the center of gravity is lower in the Q7.

Further more, the rear overhang on the Tahoe appears to be longer, which is supposed to be bad for towing.

I also expect to go over Rockies mountains. Perhaps the super-charged Q7 engine might have an edge here?

I'd like to pull a trailer with GWVR of 6000 and length of 25.5ft. No payload issue as we are very light and not much cargo in the vehicle either.

No 1/2t pickup please as they don't fit in my garage.

Your feedback are much appreciated!

[justafordguy]

SoCalDesertRider wrote:
I prefer the CJ3B over the M38A1, but that's just me. The CJ2A isn't bad. I'm not a big fan of the YJ and XJ, but I do like most iterations of the CJ. Early C/K's are alright too. I've been known to travel with an M1911, and an AR15, but sometimes have an 870 on hand as well, so watch out, if you like to sneak around. I was stopped by the DPS recently, acting as agents of the DOT. Turns out, I was A-OK, according to the LEO. He was fine with my not having a CDL. 🙂

Hey SoCal, I think you and I must be twins separated at birth. I totally agree with everything you said except I really like my 53 M38A1 better than the CJ3B. 😉

PS: I'd love to see a picture of that 69 EB of yours, I have a 77. :C

[BenK]

More and more non-full sized will be moving over to monocoque (unibody). As they
cost less to design & build...are lower in roof height...and have much more 'car'
like characteristics

Nothing wrong with that and fits the masses, but I'm on the end of that bell curve
and prefer a unibody on ladder frame for my trucks & SUVs

Stated earlier that there are two generations of Q7's and the current one shares
the platform with the Bentley SUV.

Am old enough to remember that pickups were the lowest cost vehicle out there.
Even lower than the compacts...as they were generally purchased by those who
used them for work of some sort. Also remember the base pickup did not have:

• A rear bumper
• No power windows
• No power locks
• No AC
• No carpets...just a rubber matt
• Interior had fiberboard panels
• No spare
• No Radio
• etc

They were at 'curb' weight...

Why asked if they would consider scratching the side from headlamp to
tail-lamp, or crawl over boulder to crash their underbelly, etc

Even the Tahoe isn't and is way far away from my K5 Blazer. Too much
stuff hangs below the axle tubes...that would be banged/scraped up/off

SoCalDesertRider wrote:
The Q7 doesn't appear to be comparable to the Expedition. The Expedition is based on a truck chassis (F150), as are the Tahoe/Yukon (GM 1500 pickup chassis). The Q7 appears to be more comparable to the Explorer, which is car-based now days (used to be based on the Ranger/BroncoII chassis).

[Bionic_Man]

SoCalDesertRider wrote:
The Q7 doesn't appear to be comparable to the Expedition. The Expedition is based on a truck chassis (F150), as are the Tahoe/Yukon (GM 1500 pickup chassis). The Q7 appears to be more comparable to the Explorer, which is car-based now days (used to be based on the Ranger/BroncoII chassis).

The factory tow rating suggests that it is much more capable than an Explorer.

[SoCalDesertRid1]

The Q7 doesn't appear to be comparable to the Expedition. The Expedition is based on a truck chassis (F150), as are the Tahoe/Yukon (GM 1500 pickup chassis). The Q7 appears to be more comparable to the Explorer, which is car-based now days (used to be based on the Ranger/BroncoII chassis).

[Bionic_Man]

SoCalDesertRider wrote:
Wow, $55,000...

$73k as tested. Which probably isn't a lot more than the Tahoe/Yukon.

And for the poster who mentioned the Expedition, I wouldn't put it in the same category until they do a major refresh. For whatever reason, the updates that have gone into the F150 have not found their way into the Expedition, and it is extremely dated compared to its competition.

[dshelley]

Acei. Looking at your needs and your choices, either would probably do fine. While each of us reading your post has our own favorites, I would also include the 2017 Ford Expedition to the list. It will certainly prove to be worth a look and would be an excellent alternative.

[SoCalDesertRid1]

Wow, $55,000...

[wilber1]

They are very different vehicles. One is truck based (certainly not a bad thing) and the other is intended for someone who needs an SUV but would really like a good sports sedan.

If It would do the job towing and I could afford it, definitely the new Q7 for an only vehicle.

Car and Driver Q7

[nevadanick]

We had a suv that i believe would be similar in size to the Q7 and also owned a 2015 Yukon Denali. We had a MB GL350 dsl and a GL450 twin turbo V6. All of them will tow what you are asking. The Yukon will do better in mtn driving because of the power and aslo seemed to handle a trlr a bit better. We only towed an enclosed trlr with motorcycles so not quite as heavy as you will be. Asa daily driver the MB's won out for my wife but i liked the Yukon better as i loved the V8. The Gas MB got a couple mpg better than the Yukon and the dsl 6-8 better. All dropped mpg signifacantly when towing. I would buy whichever you feel more comfortable in.

[Acei]

SoCalDesertRider wrote:

BigToe wrote:
Glen, a Q7 is an SUV made by Infinity, which is the upscale brand of Nissan. The Q7 is similar in size to, and intended to be somewhat competitive with, a Lexus LX460 aka Toyota Landcruiser, or a Toyota Highlander, or some models of Range Rovers.

Thanks for that description, Big Toe 🙂

Sorry, that's not the right model. This is Audi Q7, and they massively refreshed it recently..

[SoCalDesertRid1]

BigToe wrote:
Glen, a Q7 is an SUV made by Infinity, which is the upscale brand of Nissan. The Q7 is similar in size to, and intended to be somewhat competitive with, a Lexus LX460 aka Toyota Landcruiser, or a Toyota Highlander, or some models of Range Rovers.

Thanks for that description, Big Toe 🙂

[RinconVTR]

Acei wrote:
Both are new models. So the q7 is the recent model that just came out. And yes, I would consider Yukon Denali as well.

I would never DIY, so that's not an issue, and the car will be under warranty for the entire duration of towing. I was mainly interested in their towing capability. When not towing, I much prefer q7's characteristics...

Oh! Then if you are only towing a handful of times per year and likely only during the summer...then buy the Q7. It will not disappoint.

[Acei]

Thanks for the feedback guys.

We are not interested in off-roading at all. The worst it will face are roads leading to trailheads. We love hiking and backpack camping but most of them will be within national parks.

We plan to travel about 6 months per year, and this will be the only car we own, so it needs to be sensible.

I'm not set on either yet. My plan B is to get Yukon XL Denali which I assume well tow a 25ft 6k trailer well. I'm hoping for something slightly smaller though, if possible.

[Bionic_Man]

BigToe wrote:
Thanks for the correction Bionic Man. It obviously appears that I have a more difficult time keeping up with new models from import brands by foreign based manufacturers than SoCal. I had no idea Audi even made an SUV. I imagine it must be on a similar platform as the Volkswagon Tourag?

I have not kept up as much as I should. I know when I was considering one (previous body style), it indeed shared the platform with the Tourag and Porsche Cayenne.