JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,579
From: The Land of Pleasant Living
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
I guess no one is going to mention that the armada is One Ugly SOB! 
I can understand all the crap the Aztec got for its looks, but nothing for that ugly POS? Double Freakin' Standard. Can't beleive they robbed the Rambler's look! 
Speaking of robbed, Skyline is pretty popular among the younger crowd! Didn't Chevy use that name in the 40's or 50's on some coupes? I could be wrong but it just sounds very familiar. Oh if you happen to be driving one of these ugly muts, and you see some nut in a Silverado LOL. That's me wondering what kind of drugs you were on when you decided to make that purchase. Armada has a better engine than GM! LOL that's a good one. Everyone knows GM has the best powertrains in the business... And if you don't... Now you do! 
I can understand all the crap the Aztec got for its looks, but nothing for that ugly POS? Double Freakin' Standard. Can't beleive they robbed the Rambler's look! Speaking of robbed, Skyline is pretty popular among the younger crowd! Didn't Chevy use that name in the 40's or 50's on some coupes? I could be wrong but it just sounds very familiar. Oh if you happen to be driving one of these ugly muts, and you see some nut in a Silverado LOL. That's me wondering what kind of drugs you were on when you decided to make that purchase. Armada has a better engine than GM! LOL that's a good one. Everyone knows GM has the best powertrains in the business... And if you don't... Now you do!
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by SCNGENNFTHGEN
Armada has a better engine than GM! LOL that's a good one. Everyone knows GM has the best powertrains in the business... And if you don't... Now you do!
The Q45's V8 has been praised for over a decade now for being ridiculously smooth, underrated, and almost bullet-proof in terms of reliability.
Guess what? The 5.6L is derived from that same historically praised platform. For that matter, Nissan's VQ V6 has been winning Ward's top engine award ever since Wards started doing so in the mid-90s. Wanna tell me GM's V6s are the best in the business, too? Hell... while you're at it, go ahead and tell me that the 4-cyl Saturn and Chevy models have amazing powertrains as well.
GM's LSx small block V8s have never been anything to scoff at in terms of power, and GM's 3800 and 4.3L V6s have never been anything to scoff at in terms of reliability. But with Nissan you'll find impressive power and reliability from their V6s and V8s.
Their transmissions and other components on the other hand are a different story depending on the vehicle in question. But point being, Nissan has been a formidable engine builder for ages now, and today is still no exception.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 3,748
From: New England
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by muckz
Nissan should have never bothered with their half-*** attempt to produce a pathetic ancient gas-guzzling engine in this modern era of efficiency.
Pretty soon the novelty will wear off, and people will see what a money-grabbing greedy attempt this is on the part of Nissan. They have nothing to offer than any and every other manufacturer does not offer and has not been for the last 5 - 8 years. A bit late, if you ask me.
Well, on the other hand, you will always find those brainwashed and braindead people whose loyalty to Nissan blinds their rationale. It's for people like that that Nissan makes the Armada and still exists.
Pretty soon the novelty will wear off, and people will see what a money-grabbing greedy attempt this is on the part of Nissan. They have nothing to offer than any and every other manufacturer does not offer and has not been for the last 5 - 8 years. A bit late, if you ask me.
Well, on the other hand, you will always find those brainwashed and braindead people whose loyalty to Nissan blinds their rationale. It's for people like that that Nissan makes the Armada and still exists.
Ridgeline:
Honda should have never bothered with their half-*** attempt to produce a pathetic minivan based truck in this modern era of trucks.
Pretty soon the novelty will wear off, and people will see what a money-grabbing greedy attempt this is on the part of Honda. They have nothing to offer than any and every other manufacturer does not offer and has not been for the last 5 - 8 years. A bit late, if you ask me.
Well, on the other hand, you will always find those brainwashed and braindead people whose loyalty to Honda blinds their rationale. It's for people like that that Honda makes the ridgeline and sells it.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by Threxx
The all new Chevy Malibu is a decent machine; but the old one was a piece of crap on four wheels according to my couple of experiences with them as well as consumerreview.com where consumers rated their experiences with them.
YET JD Power had them rated at 5 stars for almost everything pertaining to initial quality!
YET other surveys agreed they were terrible cars in terms of quality and durability.
I have a theory on this; only a theory, but my guess is that they KEY is that this is an INITIAL quality survey. With today's modern manufacturing processes, getting stuff put together to spec, is becoming an increasingly and increasingle distant indicator as to how the car is going to hold up after some milage.
If something goes wrong within 90 days, then it was a defective part, or assembled improperly from the factory. If it goes from after 90 months then it just plain' ol' wore out. To me, I care more about the 90 month mark... not the 90 day mark.
Furthermore, one car may, by spec, have a cheap or crappy design. Is anything wrong with it technically? Nope. I mean if the dealer goes to replace the part with another one, it's going to be equally crappy. So even though it's a cheap design, it's not technically defective. My GMT 800 Silverado had one of the most impressively cheap interiors I've ever seen on any modern day vehicle. Painted hollow 1/8th inch thick PVC plastic dash? Dash paint that rubs off on my finger if I touch the dash in a certain area often enough? Snap-on assembly about as tight as the last lego kit I got as a kid?
Now was anything wrong with the interior parts? Besides the paint coming off, and a bunch of squeeks that I just stopped even bothering to go to the dealer for because I didn't want to spend half my free saturdays at my dealership.. no. But it still didn't feel like I was driving a solidly crafted machine.
So again, we still go into another somewhat immeasurable detail. Just because something isn't technically broken, doesn't mean it doesn't just suck by default.
With all of that said, I prefer almost everything about the Tahoe to the Armada. Both interiors are cheap IMO, although the Armada has the advantage in materials and the Tahoe has the advantage in build. The Armada has a strong advantage in terms of the motor, but outside of that, the Tahoe is a much better choice IMO. Much stronger and more refined frame, much better rear end, traction system I would more likely trust off road, etc, etc.
YET JD Power had them rated at 5 stars for almost everything pertaining to initial quality!
YET other surveys agreed they were terrible cars in terms of quality and durability.
I have a theory on this; only a theory, but my guess is that they KEY is that this is an INITIAL quality survey. With today's modern manufacturing processes, getting stuff put together to spec, is becoming an increasingly and increasingle distant indicator as to how the car is going to hold up after some milage.
If something goes wrong within 90 days, then it was a defective part, or assembled improperly from the factory. If it goes from after 90 months then it just plain' ol' wore out. To me, I care more about the 90 month mark... not the 90 day mark.
Furthermore, one car may, by spec, have a cheap or crappy design. Is anything wrong with it technically? Nope. I mean if the dealer goes to replace the part with another one, it's going to be equally crappy. So even though it's a cheap design, it's not technically defective. My GMT 800 Silverado had one of the most impressively cheap interiors I've ever seen on any modern day vehicle. Painted hollow 1/8th inch thick PVC plastic dash? Dash paint that rubs off on my finger if I touch the dash in a certain area often enough? Snap-on assembly about as tight as the last lego kit I got as a kid?
Now was anything wrong with the interior parts? Besides the paint coming off, and a bunch of squeeks that I just stopped even bothering to go to the dealer for because I didn't want to spend half my free saturdays at my dealership.. no. But it still didn't feel like I was driving a solidly crafted machine.
So again, we still go into another somewhat immeasurable detail. Just because something isn't technically broken, doesn't mean it doesn't just suck by default.
With all of that said, I prefer almost everything about the Tahoe to the Armada. Both interiors are cheap IMO, although the Armada has the advantage in materials and the Tahoe has the advantage in build. The Armada has a strong advantage in terms of the motor, but outside of that, the Tahoe is a much better choice IMO. Much stronger and more refined frame, much better rear end, traction system I would more likely trust off road, etc, etc.
It's an interesting theory "How close to spec"... but I doubt that it holds any water.
How are these independant survey companies going to determine what is "spec" whether it is cheaply done or not. I doubt the manufacturers are handing out blueprints to these guys.
Surveys are just that... survey's of actual owners and their satisfaction with the cars, at least from everything I've ever read regarding the subject.
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,600
From: Pewee Valley, KY
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Threxx I belive that the 3800 SC V6 and the 4.2 I6 are both on Wards lists and they have been for quite a while. While the 3800 may not be DOHC smooth it is a VERY good V6. Also the 3.5 shortstar was on Wards list when it was made.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,376
From: Sarasota FL
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
The 3800 itself used to be...not sure if the s/c version is anymore. Glad you picked up on that...I was going to post earlier when I first read his post
I will still take the LSx over the Nissan 5.6. The Nissan is a nice motor, but the real-world MPG of the LSx matters to me far more than its lack of silkiness compared to the Nissan. This is a truck for crying out loud!
I will still take the LSx over the Nissan 5.6. The Nissan is a nice motor, but the real-world MPG of the LSx matters to me far more than its lack of silkiness compared to the Nissan. This is a truck for crying out loud!
Banned
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,954
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by Jason E
I will still take the LSx over the Nissan 5.6. The Nissan is a nice motor, but the real-world MPG of the LSx matters to me far more than its lack of silkiness compared to the Nissan. This is a truck for crying out loud!
From my own personal experience, I'm getting 16-18 MPG on 87 octane in my Armada. My buddy gets 13MPG on 93 octane(!) in his Escalade. Oddly enough, my Armada is still quicker than his guzzling Caddy.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
I've personally seen 2 Armadas go down the road, and the rear passenger side doors actually broke off the hinges. Cheap, cheap, cheap!
A good buddy of mine saw the transmission fall out from underneath an Armada on a bridge... it nearly hit that same boat full of people that Dave Matthew's tour bus dropped the poop on.
A good buddy of mine saw the transmission fall out from underneath an Armada on a bridge... it nearly hit that same boat full of people that Dave Matthew's tour bus dropped the poop on.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by redzed
I'm not sure where you get the idea that a pushrod V8 has superior fuel economy to a DOHC V8?
From my own personal experience, I'm getting 16-18 MPG on 87 octane in my Armada. My buddy gets 13MPG on 93 octane(!) in his Escalade. Oddly enough, my Armada is still quicker than his guzzling Caddy.
From my own personal experience, I'm getting 16-18 MPG on 87 octane in my Armada. My buddy gets 13MPG on 93 octane(!) in his Escalade. Oddly enough, my Armada is still quicker than his guzzling Caddy.
BTW, why is your buddy running 93 octane in his Caddy anyway?
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 4,600
From: Pewee Valley, KY
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by redzed
I'm not sure where you get the idea that a pushrod V8 has superior fuel economy to a DOHC V8?
From my own personal experience, I'm getting 16-18 MPG on 87 octane in my Armada. My buddy gets 13MPG on 93 octane(!) in his Escalade. Oddly enough, my Armada is still quicker than his guzzling Caddy.
From my own personal experience, I'm getting 16-18 MPG on 87 octane in my Armada. My buddy gets 13MPG on 93 octane(!) in his Escalade. Oddly enough, my Armada is still quicker than his guzzling Caddy.
The the 16-18 MPG in ANY large V8 SUV!Wanna prove it. Take a picture of your gas reciept and trip odometer.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by 91_z28_4me
The the 16-18 MPG in ANY large V8 SUV!Wanna prove it. Take a picture of your gas reciept and trip odometer.
Actually that's what my wife gets when she drives.
I'm more of a lead foot and with all the traffic and around-town driving I do its closer to 15-16 mpg. However out on the highway, easily 16-18 mpg and that's with a full boat. I even got 20 mpg once when it was new. But that was all highway with a minimal load.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
My wife and I, since we bought it, have currently averaged 21.6 MPG in the 4Runner with a moderate to light foot and about 85% city driving, FWIW.
I'm sorry, but I find that EXTREMELY hard to believe. I've never in my life heard of a transmission just dropping off of any car; new or old, unless maybe it had been amaturely worked on and not bolted back in. But that should take a multitude of failures before an entire trans physically fell out the bottom of the car and almost off a damn bridge.
And can you please describe these doors breaking off the hinge? You mean they were sagging or missing entirely or what? Sounds a bit over the top IMO.
Originally Posted by Darth Xed
I've personally seen 2 Armadas go down the road, and the rear passenger side doors actually broke off the hinges. Cheap, cheap, cheap!
A good buddy of mine saw the transmission fall out from underneath an Armada on a bridge... it nearly hit that same boat full of people that Dave Matthew's tour bus dropped the poop on.
A good buddy of mine saw the transmission fall out from underneath an Armada on a bridge... it nearly hit that same boat full of people that Dave Matthew's tour bus dropped the poop on.
And can you please describe these doors breaking off the hinge? You mean they were sagging or missing entirely or what? Sounds a bit over the top IMO.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by Threxx
My wife and I, since we bought it, have currently averaged 21.6 MPG in the 4Runner with a moderate to light foot and about 85% city driving, FWIW.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by Threxx
I'm sorry, but I find that EXTREMELY hard to believe. I've never in my life heard of a transmission just dropping off of any car; new or old, unless maybe it had been amaturely worked on and not bolted back in. But that should take a multitude of failures before an entire trans physically fell out the bottom of the car and almost off a damn bridge.
And can you please describe these doors breaking off the hinge? You mean they were sagging or missing entirely or what? Sounds a bit over the top IMO.
I can tell you I've personally seen 2 Armadas travel down the road, and the rear passenger doors physically ripped off the rest of the car. landed on the road, and made a few sparks as they slid to a stop.
Don't even let me get started on the time I personally saw a guy pull out of the Nissan dealership... you know, I sit there and often watch as people pull in and out... anyway, they guy just took delivery of his new Armada, and the radiator overheated, and the backed up steam pressure blew the hood clean off the truck! It must have flew a good 30 feet in the air!
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 936
From: Butler, PA
Re: JD Power ratings: 2005 Nissan Aramda is OWNED by the 2005 Tahoe
Originally Posted by Darth Xed
Don't even let me get started on the time I personally saw a guy pull out of the Nissan dealership... you know, I sit there and often watch as people pull in and out... anyway, they guy just took delivery of his new Armada, and the radiator overheated, and the backed up steam pressure blew the hood clean off the truck! It must have flew a good 30 feet in the air!
....... ........... -Mike