Toyota Sequoia vs Chevy Surburban

[FishOnOne]

Here's a towing fuel mileage comparison of a Sequoia gas vs a Suburban diesel.

Enjoy...

Link


BTW... I'll take the Suburban or Tahoe all day long!

[Bionic_Man]

Purely speaking MPG, the Toyota did much better than I would have expected. And honestly, a bit underwhelmed by what the 3.0 returned.

I've towed my 7000 pound boat a bunch on that same stretch (longer runs). My EcoDiesel GC got 17 MPG eastbound, and about 15 westbound fighting a little wind.

The 6.2 Yukon would be closer to 12/13. And the Ex EcoBoost is around 11.

Which makes me suspect that there was something going on with the gas pump, and that they didn't really get a "full" tank of the Toyota.

[bikendan]

Until Toyota starts upping the miserable payload capacities of the Tundra, i'll never consider them.

[SpeakEasy]

After having been a Toyota-fan-club member for over 30 years, I've come to the conclusion (through experience) that for muscle (towing) Toyota is not the best choice. They're still my unshakable choice for a sedan, but not for anything heavy-duty. Nope.

-Speak

[Yosemite_Sam1]

rickguns wrote:
If towing is the main concern w/out a doubt the diesel. If pulling a lite weight I would go Toyota all the way.
I have driven Tundras and started on a T-100. Never a break down, never stranded, cheap to keep. Any workoil changes & usual maintenance and parts have always been reasonable priced and readily available. My 06 Tundra honestly looks like it just came off the show room floor to where other makes and models have rusted away or have become not worth fixing.
The engines and transmissions have a industry standard of 300,000 miles plus expectancy. There are at least two known Tundras that have topped the one million mile mark on original engine and trans.
True the Toyota isn't a updated model by any means "but if it ain't broke, don't fix it" I'll go with proven function over new technology any day.....but I'm old with old fashioned ideas LOL!!!:W
For a heavy tow queen or full time use...go Chevy, for light weight trailers and limited towing go Toyota and you'll have a vehicle for every day use for many years and hundreds of thousands of miles.
Just my opinion....flame away! LOL!!!

Ditto and I'm in my 3rd 4runner.

Never once left me with a breakdown somewhere -- nor compromised me in any difficult terrain as my tactical vehicle while hunting.

This little man-boy can on the steep part of 395 and Tioga Pass (9,000 feet)!

[rickguns]

If towing is the main concern w/out a doubt the diesel. If pulling a lite weight I would go Toyota all the way.
I have driven Tundras and started on a T-100. Never a break down, never stranded, cheap to keep. Any workoil changes & usual maintenance and parts have always been reasonable priced and readily available. My 06 Tundra honestly looks like it just came off the show room floor to where other makes and models have rusted away or have become not worth fixing.
The engines and transmissions have a industry standard of 300,000 miles plus expectancy. There are at least two known Tundras that have topped the one million mile mark on original engine and trans.
True the Toyota isn't a updated model by any means "but if it ain't broke, don't fix it" I'll go with proven function over new technology any day.....but I'm old with old fashioned ideas LOL!!!:W
For a heavy tow queen or full time use...go Chevy, for light weight trailers and limited towing go Toyota and you'll have a vehicle for every day use for many years and hundreds of thousands of miles.
Just my opinion....flame away! LOL!!!

[Grit_dog]

Lwiddis wrote:
Grit dog expectations of how we will fuel our vehicles is interesting.

Sorry, sarcastic tongue in cheek reply.
Symbolically, unicorn farts = the magical solutions that dreamers take to heart, that scientists and engineers can’t produce.

Agree with fish though. Probably not the best “around town” selection due to the nature of current diesel emissions equipment needs.

But that’s why they offer multiple drivetrains.
If you’re the businessman (or woman) who drives a bunch of miles to work every day and also uses as a tow rig and weekend soccer mobile, it’s probably fine.
If you’re the consumate soccer mom who has a $70k suv to drive your precious cargo 5 min to school and back and sit in line at the drop off zone idling for 20 min every morning and only drive it to the corner Starbucks and to pickup your internet order groceries, then it will be more prone to emissions issues.

[FishOnOne]

Grit dog wrote:

rjstractor wrote:

camp-n-family wrote:
The most useless “comparison” I have ever seen considering there is nothing comparable. Even though the Sequoia is a 2021 model it came out in 2007 and other than some cosmetic updates it has not changed since. The 5.7l is bulletproof but has always been thirsty, especially when still mated to a 6 speed and 4.30 gears. Pitting it against a brand new diesel with a 10 speed proves nothing. Not even apples to oranges. Diesel will always get better mileage than gas when towing as will new versus old technology.

And this is the whole point of the comparison!

Bingo!
One of these days when we're all pumping unicorn farts into our vehicles, the anti diesel guys will realize we should have bene batting for the same team the whole time!

Until a diesel engine design can eliminate the DPF I don't see these diesel's very friendly to the soccer mom market.

[Vintage465]

Lwiddis wrote:
Takes a bunch of miles to repay the cost of a diesel at a 2.8 mpg advantage.

X2 “BTW... I'll take the Suburban or Tahoe all day long!” Sequoia looks bad IMO.

I still don't really consider the "repay cost" to be a factor in my decision. For me having a Diesel is about absolute ease and effortless towing. Some things they didn't discuss was the RPM the engine was spinning on the road. Things like engine RPM, the quietness of the Diesel, lack of repeated down/up shifting all add to the effortless tow experience...........and not everyone is looking for the same factors in buying tow vehicle. Some people have to work it out on a calculator weather they can afford it or not. If it doesn't make sense on a calculator then they feel ripped off their whole time owning the vehicle. Me, it's all effort and ease. And yes, Tahoe or 'burb all day long!

[Lwiddis]

Grit dog expectations of how we will fuel our vehicles is interesting.

[Grit_dog]

rjstractor wrote:

camp-n-family wrote:
The most useless “comparison” I have ever seen considering there is nothing comparable. Even though the Sequoia is a 2021 model it came out in 2007 and other than some cosmetic updates it has not changed since. The 5.7l is bulletproof but has always been thirsty, especially when still mated to a 6 speed and 4.30 gears. Pitting it against a brand new diesel with a 10 speed proves nothing. Not even apples to oranges. Diesel will always get better mileage than gas when towing as will new versus old technology.

And this is the whole point of the comparison!

Bingo!
One of these days when we're all pumping unicorn farts into our vehicles, the anti diesel guys will realize we should have bene batting for the same team the whole time!

[RoyJ]

camp-n-family wrote:
The most useless “comparison” I have ever seen considering there is nothing comparable. Even though the Sequoia is a 2021 model it came out in 2007 and other than some cosmetic updates it has not changed since. The 5.7l is bulletproof but has always been thirsty, especially when still mated to a 6 speed and 4.30 gears. Pitting it against a brand new diesel with a 10 speed proves nothing. Not even apples to oranges. Diesel will always get better mileage than gas when towing as will new versus old technology.

So if GM dug out a tbi 350 from the warehouse, dusted off a power glide, shoved it into the new Burb, all of a sudden they're comparable?

Just because Toyota chose not to innovate, it doesn't make the comparison unfair.

Likewise, if the GM does break down more often, can we say "you can't compare the reliability, apples vs oranges"? If we compare reliability on equal grounds, then we compare performance / mpg on equal grounds too.

[rjstractor]

camp-n-family wrote:
The most useless “comparison” I have ever seen considering there is nothing comparable. Even though the Sequoia is a 2021 model it came out in 2007 and other than some cosmetic updates it has not changed since. The 5.7l is bulletproof but has always been thirsty, especially when still mated to a 6 speed and 4.30 gears. Pitting it against a brand new diesel with a 10 speed proves nothing. Not even apples to oranges. Diesel will always get better mileage than gas when towing as will new versus old technology.

And this is the whole point of the comparison!

[thomasmnile]

Toyota hasn't done much at all with the Sequoia over the years other than the price. Think like the Tundra, it's a niche vehicle that sells sufficently
to justify its existence to Toyota's bean counters. They know neither vehicle will sell like the Big 3 offerings, they're just showing the flag.

[Yosemite_Sam1]

Try comparing how much time each one spends in the repair shop instead.