Didn't those Trucks both come out just last winter? meaning they weren't in full sales volume/production yet. All I know is Nissan has missed it's sales goal with Both the Titan and the Armada. You could even say they have been a FLOP

 

Been out longer than that I think. On track for 87K Titans this year, think they wanted 100K. Not sure about Armadas. See what the rest of the year brings... If the numbers keep climbing they will hit their sales goals without having to offer rebates like all of the domestics are already doing for their 2005 models, hehe.

-B

 

Ya, I don't care if they sell one or one million. The quality ratings on these things are about equal to a plastic milk crate with a set of rusty lawn mower wheels nailed to it...

 

Actually I heard there is a pretty large rebate on the already cheap Titan.

 

Nissan's website says there is a $1500-$2000 rebate on '05's depending on cab configuration. The Armada has a $1500 rebate on the '05's.


-Mike

 

I was incorrect about the size of the rebate apparently.

So the statement of they will hit their sales goals without rebates is false then, right?

 

Bah! That's what I get for going to the first google.com result:

http://www.automotive.com/2005/12/ni...tes/index.html

 

Pardon me, but isn't the Excursion earmarked for extinction?

I'll agree that the Excursion was the ultimate working SUV. However, the Excursion is too huge for even a huge SUV lover like yours truly. I could never get used to the supertanker turning circle or the sluggish drivetrains.

I also draw the line at single digit fuel economy.

 

I hate to TELL you but you are wrong! The 400 body (4door)and frame for the Tahoe was concepted and built right here in Janesville, like I said I was on the team. We had to prove to GM that this was going to be the right idea and could be built within the structure that we had in place at the time. We were building Suburbans, K5 2door Blazer and Bid Dualleys at the time. Any time you want to debate the facts my GM plant is open to the public for tour and we will proudly explain were the Tahoe came from. After we made the 4 dor Blaze body it became the Tahoe and the K5 Blazer was taken away from us and it's productiuon was moved to Mexico.

You may have help with the switch from 400 to 800 BUT the 4 door Tahoe start out life as a 400.

Also remember that this plant built the J car before it was switched to a all 400 truck plant. And the NO tooling carried over from the J car to the truck era. Also no bodyshop tool carryover happened from GMT 400 to GMT 800, so your friend is wrong there. The GMT 800 bodyshop was built behind the 400 B/S and switched over in 3 weeks.....once again I was there.

Right now most of the robots from the GMT800 program are being re-kitted to build the GMT 900 and only 1 piece of sheet metal is all that carrys over from 800 to the 900. So it is an all new body except for 1 piece and it has been changed too.

True of most GM plants we are open to the public. If you want a tour of the GM Janesville plant contact me and I will give you the phone number of the tour office.

Roger

 

I would say yes



-Mike

 

very true! But boy do I wish I'd been driving an SUV with a HD suspension on a 'certain' day at Beechbend!!!!

 

Dude...you bent the car!

 

nope! just the radiator support! replaced the fascia from nasty asphalt marks....replaced the rad support.....and it was good to go....

(there WAS the issue of a FUBAR siren however.......)

 

Reason why IRS is not used in 18 wheelers, because solid rear axles work so well and are so simple to maintain.. they aren't concern about ride quality.. they just want it to work, cheap, and easy to maintain.. I saw the frame rails of the Semi's are just open C channels, designed to flex over heavy loads, so they don't snap... Again, they are in another world of concerns.


I believe, at least in the 1500 series, that IRS would be a neat thing in SUV's to increase interior room (hey maybe even lower the bed of pickup down a bit), and increase ride compliance and handling(although I won't be surprised if its not that much better).. if they manage to keep within spec of towing capabilities and whatever offroad capabilites they test stock suv's and trucks with.. I'm sure they can also design it to be relatively good with maintence..

But that all costs money.. and the GM trucks work just fine.

So IMO, For the current GM trucks, they need to first improve the interiors, and give beefier tranny's first.. and as someone else mentioned, raising the transfer case back up above the frame rail level..

If GM already did all that, and had extra money to play with for the trucks, I'd be a supporter for IRS for the 1500's.

 

Also , i'm a bit surprised a bout the interior quality ratings.. They interior of a tahoe should be the same of my 04 Avalache right?

If the Tahoe's interior is like my 04 Avalanche, it can use some major improvements in quality.. The rear door interior panels bduge noticably when you put pressure on them (like a passanger bracing his leg while going around a turn) which causes them to squeek. If you lightly pry and push at the panels there too, they give. and squeek.

Door handle holes are just that. huge gaping holes.

The slots where the rear seatbelts belts feed from up above, showed frayed plastic modlings/top layer stuff. Makes it look really cheap. PLus they are a few mm's too wide IMO.

The front door interior panels seem to be a bit sturdier, but I still see them flex and squeek a bit when I pull on them and stuff, specially when going in and out of the truck.

Those are my main beefs about the interior.. If it wasn't for that, I'd be 100% content with it.. If anyone has any ideas on what i can do to modify these panels to make them more ridged and squeek less.. tell me..

although perhaps I'll just wait for the new Av's to come in, and do a trade in with some extra $$, since GM claims they have improved the interior.. (and I hope with a better tranny!)