Bwahahahahahaha i saw an 4WD Chevy(?) 'Avalanche' ute-thing here the other day

[Nik]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

As much as I like my CC Frontier, it certainly does not have the backseat space of the Avalanche. Doesn't have the front seat road warrior buckets like the Av does either. They are still comfortable, but not like a full size pickup is. Plus the bed in our CC's are smaller than the Av's.

It's not as regal inside, either. Doesn't come with as many options, and doesn't have locking bed rail compartments. At the back of the bed walls, look closely next time you see one. You'll see key holes on the outside of the bed at the top, on either side. Those open up and you can store stuff inside. There's quite a bit of room and the compartments are pinholed on the bottom so you can put, like, wet clothes or a bag of ice with drinks sitting on top to keep them cool while alternatively not filling the compartment with melted water or letting your wet clothes mildue on the way home from the camping trip or beach or something.

Avalanche = teh winnar.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

Why are they better vehicles? I'm sure you have a good reason, other than being Japanese?

Well it's really not comparing apples to apples since I mentioned compact pickups and the Ava is a huge full size.

Why are compacts pickups better IMO?

Disadvantages for Ava: the Ava weighs 5,700lbs! No way it will get as good gas mileage (EPA estimates aren't out yet, but most likely 13-15mpg vs 15-18 for Front). It's a PITA to park b/c of its size and turning radius. It's about $10,000 more on invoice than the aforementioned trucks. Even though the Ava does have 310 HP to my Frontier's 265 and more torque (335 vs 284), it has a WORSE payload capacity (1337lbs vs Front 1381) and only 1900 more lbs towing (8000 for Ava vs 6100 for Front).

Advantages for Ava: More space inside, and a fold down cab to increase bed room into the backseat. Slight towing advantage b/c of its V8 vs V6.

That bolded/highlighted line is where you should've stopped. You're comparing two entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt; but it isn't a full-size. The Avalanche may not be the best pickup truck out there, but for the people who buy full-size pickups and want it to double as a convenient people-hauling vehicle as well, it blows the Frontier away.

Not that anyone *should* have a 5400lbs (not 5700lbs btw) daily driver just to haul their own ass around and once every 6 months tow something (like my father, LOL), but ya know, that's America!

Notice how I didn't put the Titan into this equation, it would have just made the Avalanche look even sillier. Seriously, it's not even about the weight of the vehicle, it's the fact that Chevy's V8 can't compensate on 0-60 speeds, even when chugging more gas. My Front goes 0-60 in 7.2, do you really think the Avalanche will be able to do that, aside from the gas mileage thing and weaker PAYLOAD?

I agree, if you're hauling people around all day then the Ava would probably be better, but for the average family a Front or Titan cab is still comfy. And IF you're hauling 6 people around everyday, there are better vehicles for that in the same price range (new RAV4 for example). I just don't see what niche the Avalanche fills... b/c its towing/payload is way too weak to overcome the traditional truck for functionality (i.e. construction companies), and there are much better options that are cheaper for transporting people. This is why GM is failing IMO, poor planning before production.

 

[0roo0roo]

no, the most absurd thing is a raised truck. dangerous to all others to boot. makes me wanna stab the drivers i swear.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: GuideBot

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

As much as I like my CC Frontier, it certainly does not have the backseat space of the Avalanche. Doesn't have the front seat road warrior buckets like the Av does either. They are still comfortable, but not like a full size pickup is. Plus the bed in our CC's are smaller than the Av's.

It's not as regal inside, either. Doesn't come with as many options, and doesn't have locking bed rail compartments. At the back of the bed walls, look closely next time you see one. You'll see key holes on the outside of the bed at the top, on either side. Those open up and you can store stuff inside. There's quite a bit of room and the compartments are pinholed on the bottom so you can put, like, wet clothes or a bag of ice with drinks sitting on top to keep them cool while alternatively not filling the compartment with melted water or letting your wet clothes mildue on the way home from the camping trip or beach or something.

Avalanche = teh winnar.

The Ridgeline, Tacoma, and Frontier all have "wet" storage compartments in the backseat or bed. And I sport a soft top for my Frontier, so I can just chuck any wet clothes or fishing gear, tools, or whatever in the bed. The only advantage I see with the Ava is the extra room for the fold down backseat, but I can somewhat compensate for that with my bed Xtender (special part that sits on your tailgate when it's down).

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

Why are they better vehicles? I'm sure you have a good reason, other than being Japanese?

Well it's really not comparing apples to apples since I mentioned compact pickups and the Ava is a huge full size.

Why are compacts pickups better IMO?

Disadvantages for Ava: the Ava weighs 5,700lbs! No way it will get as good gas mileage (EPA estimates aren't out yet, but most likely 13-15mpg vs 15-18 for Front). It's a PITA to park b/c of its size and turning radius. It's about $10,000 more on invoice than the aforementioned trucks. Even though the Ava does have 310 HP to my Frontier's 265 and more torque (335 vs 284), it has a WORSE payload capacity (1337lbs vs Front 1381) and only 1900 more lbs towing (8000 for Ava vs 6100 for Front).

Advantages for Ava: More space inside, and a fold down cab to increase bed room into the backseat. Slight towing advantage b/c of its V8 vs V6.

That bolded/highlighted line is where you should've stopped. You're comparing two entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt; but it isn't a full-size. The Avalanche may not be the best pickup truck out there, but for the people who buy full-size pickups and want it to double as a convenient people-hauling vehicle as well, it blows the Frontier away.

Not that anyone *should* have a 5400lbs (not 5700lbs btw) daily driver just to haul their own ass around and once every 6 months tow something (like my father, LOL), but ya know, that's America!

Notice how I didn't put the Titan into this equation, it would have just made the Avalanche look even sillier. Seriously, it's not even about the weight of the vehicle, it's the fact that Chevy's V8 can't compensate on 0-60 speeds, even when chugging more gas. My Front goes 0-60 in 7.2, do you really think the Avalanche will be able to do that, aside from the gas mileage thing and weaker PAYLOAD?

I agree, if you're hauling people around all day then the Ava would probably be better, but for the average family a Front or Titan cab is still comfy. And IF you're hauling 6 people around everyday, there are better vehicles for that in the same price range (new RAV4 for example). I just don't see what niche the Avalanche fills... b/c its towing/payload is way too weak to overcome the traditional truck for functionality (i.e. construction companies), and there are much better options that are cheaper for transporting people. This is why GM is failing IMO, poor planning before production.

WTF, you are talking about 0-60 on a truck? Obviously you are grasping at anything you can to put down Chevrolet. Please stop blowing Nissan, you are just as bad as MIKEMIKE and his lust for GM.

Oh, BTW: http://www.autos.com/autos/suvs/fullsize_suvs/acceleration

The Avalanche runs it in 6.8sec.

 

[imported_LoKe]

Nothing beats the element.

*shudder*

At least make it all the same fscking colour!!!

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

Why are they better vehicles? I'm sure you have a good reason, other than being Japanese?

Well it's really not comparing apples to apples since I mentioned compact pickups and the Ava is a huge full size.

Why are compacts pickups better IMO?

Disadvantages for Ava: the Ava weighs 5,700lbs! No way it will get as good gas mileage (EPA estimates aren't out yet, but most likely 13-15mpg vs 15-18 for Front). It's a PITA to park b/c of its size and turning radius. It's about $10,000 more on invoice than the aforementioned trucks. Even though the Ava does have 310 HP to my Frontier's 265 and more torque (335 vs 284), it has a WORSE payload capacity (1337lbs vs Front 1381) and only 1900 more lbs towing (8000 for Ava vs 6100 for Front).

Advantages for Ava: More space inside, and a fold down cab to increase bed room into the backseat. Slight towing advantage b/c of its V8 vs V6.

That bolded/highlighted line is where you should've stopped. You're comparing two entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt; but it isn't a full-size. The Avalanche may not be the best pickup truck out there, but for the people who buy full-size pickups and want it to double as a convenient people-hauling vehicle as well, it blows the Frontier away.

Not that anyone *should* have a 5400lbs (not 5700lbs btw) daily driver just to haul their own ass around and once every 6 months tow something (like my father, LOL), but ya know, that's America!

Notice how I didn't put the Titan into this equation, it would have just made the Avalanche look even sillier. Seriously, it's not even about the weight of the vehicle, it's the fact that Chevy's V8 can't compensate on 0-60 speeds, even when chugging more gas. My Front goes 0-60 in 7.2, do you really think the Avalanche will be able to do that, aside from the gas mileage thing and weaker PAYLOAD?

I agree, if you're hauling people around all day then the Ava would probably be better, but for the average family a Front or Titan cab is still comfy. And IF you're hauling 6 people around everyday, there are better vehicles for that in the same price range (new RAV4 for example). I just don't see what niche the Avalanche fills... b/c its towing/payload is way too weak to overcome the traditional truck for functionality (i.e. construction companies), and there are much better options that are cheaper for transporting people. This is why GM is failing IMO, poor planning before production.

WTF, you are talking about 0-60 on a truck? Obviously you are grasping at anything you can to put down Chevrolet. Please stop blowing Nissan, you are just as bad as MIKEMIKE and his lust for GM.

Oh, BTW: http://www.autos.com/autos/suvs/fullsize_suvs/acceleration

The Avalanche runs it in 6.8sec.

OWNED
Your Frontier may accelerate better, but I'd bet that is due to gearing and nothing else. The 4-speed Avalanche has a HUGE first gear, it probably hits close to 50. I floored it in my Dad's 06 and we were at 40mph by like 4000RPM. Tall gears are great for normal driving and hauling stuff, not for acceleration. Seeing as this isn't NASCAR, I think that'll be okay.

EDIT OMG I didn't even see you mentioned the RAV4. Talk about complete and utter fanboyism :roll:

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

Why are they better vehicles? I'm sure you have a good reason, other than being Japanese?

Well it's really not comparing apples to apples since I mentioned compact pickups and the Ava is a huge full size.

Why are compacts pickups better IMO?

Disadvantages for Ava: the Ava weighs 5,700lbs! No way it will get as good gas mileage (EPA estimates aren't out yet, but most likely 13-15mpg vs 15-18 for Front). It's a PITA to park b/c of its size and turning radius. It's about $10,000 more on invoice than the aforementioned trucks. Even though the Ava does have 310 HP to my Frontier's 265 and more torque (335 vs 284), it has a WORSE payload capacity (1337lbs vs Front 1381) and only 1900 more lbs towing (8000 for Ava vs 6100 for Front).

Advantages for Ava: More space inside, and a fold down cab to increase bed room into the backseat. Slight towing advantage b/c of its V8 vs V6.

That bolded/highlighted line is where you should've stopped. You're comparing two entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt; but it isn't a full-size. The Avalanche may not be the best pickup truck out there, but for the people who buy full-size pickups and want it to double as a convenient people-hauling vehicle as well, it blows the Frontier away.

Not that anyone *should* have a 5400lbs (not 5700lbs btw) daily driver just to haul their own ass around and once every 6 months tow something (like my father, LOL), but ya know, that's America!

Notice how I didn't put the Titan into this equation, it would have just made the Avalanche look even sillier. Seriously, it's not even about the weight of the vehicle, it's the fact that Chevy's V8 can't compensate on 0-60 speeds, even when chugging more gas. My Front goes 0-60 in 7.2, do you really think the Avalanche will be able to do that, aside from the gas mileage thing and weaker PAYLOAD?

I agree, if you're hauling people around all day then the Ava would probably be better, but for the average family a Front or Titan cab is still comfy. And IF you're hauling 6 people around everyday, there are better vehicles for that in the same price range (new RAV4 for example). I just don't see what niche the Avalanche fills... b/c its towing/payload is way too weak to overcome the traditional truck for functionality (i.e. construction companies), and there are much better options that are cheaper for transporting people. This is why GM is failing IMO, poor planning before production.

WTF, you are talking about 0-60 on a truck? Obviously you are grasping at anything you can to put down Chevrolet. Please stop blowing Nissan, you are just as bad as MIKEMIKE and his lust for GM.

Oh, BTW: http://www.autos.com/autos/suvs/fullsize_suvs/acceleration

The Avalanche runs it in 6.8sec.

pwnt


my uncle has an avalanche, its nice

 

[AdamK47]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
dug, may i remind you that you aussie's buy UTES! they are far more hideous

</thread>

What? I love the Holden Utes! I'd buy one and park it in the garage next to the GTO if it was offered in the US. I'd trade in the Camaro and Corvette in on one.

 

[dug777]

Wow this thread got heated :laugh:

Anyways, no one answered by question about what they use to stop dust & crap coming in and spoiling your beautiful leather seats when you activate the hilarious 'bed extender' function...it seems to me you could get far more use out of something like a Suburban for a family & towing, or a real ute with a proper bed for work...

 

[iamwiz82]

Originally posted by: dug777
Wow this thread got heated :laugh:

Anyways, no one answered by question about what they use to stop dust & crap coming in and spoiling your beautiful leather seats when you activate the hilarious 'bed extender' function...it seems to me you could get far more use out of something like a Suburban for a family & towing, or a real ute with a proper bed for work...

I have no idea on the dust thing.

One nice thing is that it's shorter than a fullsize truck, so you can actually fit it in most garages. The guy who picked up my old fridge had an avalanche and we just lifted right up onto the bed. That'd be mighty hard to do in a Suburban.

 

[AdamK47]

Originally posted by: dug777
Wow this thread got heated :laugh:

Isn't that what you were going for?

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
The Av just aims at a bit different market than the Frontier.

The Av is for an active family of four with older, more grown up children(5+ years old). You can haul the kids, plus all the camping stuff for the weekend, plus tow a boat comfortably for a weekend run to the lake/park/whatever. It hits that middle age bracket.

The Frontier/Tacoma is aimed at two audiences - much younger with either no kids or very young ones. Or older guys who's kids are out of the house and you just need a functional, tough little truck to get you to the fishing holes or home depot for that remodel after your kids are out of the house.

The Ridgeline is an interesting vehicle in that it crosses over between both demographics. It just isn't the hauler or off roader that the other ones are.

You can easily fit a family of 4 in a Titan, and it's comfy in the Frontier. Both can easily tow a boat.

Also, I think there are many better options for that price range for a "family road trip vehicle" that can tow. How about the Toyota 4Runner, Dodge Durango, Nissan Armada or XTerra or Pathfinder, Honda Pilot, Jeep Grand Cherokee Overland, Mercury Mountaineer, Volvo XC90, etc.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

Why are they better vehicles? I'm sure you have a good reason, other than being Japanese?

Well it's really not comparing apples to apples since I mentioned compact pickups and the Ava is a huge full size.

Why are compacts pickups better IMO?

Disadvantages for Ava: the Ava weighs 5,700lbs! No way it will get as good gas mileage (EPA estimates aren't out yet, but most likely 13-15mpg vs 15-18 for Front). It's a PITA to park b/c of its size and turning radius. It's about $10,000 more on invoice than the aforementioned trucks. Even though the Ava does have 310 HP to my Frontier's 265 and more torque (335 vs 284), it has a WORSE payload capacity (1337lbs vs Front 1381) and only 1900 more lbs towing (8000 for Ava vs 6100 for Front).

Advantages for Ava: More space inside, and a fold down cab to increase bed room into the backseat. Slight towing advantage b/c of its V8 vs V6.

That bolded/highlighted line is where you should've stopped. You're comparing two entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt; but it isn't a full-size. The Avalanche may not be the best pickup truck out there, but for the people who buy full-size pickups and want it to double as a convenient people-hauling vehicle as well, it blows the Frontier away.

Not that anyone *should* have a 5400lbs (not 5700lbs btw) daily driver just to haul their own ass around and once every 6 months tow something (like my father, LOL), but ya know, that's America!

Notice how I didn't put the Titan into this equation, it would have just made the Avalanche look even sillier. Seriously, it's not even about the weight of the vehicle, it's the fact that Chevy's V8 can't compensate on 0-60 speeds, even when chugging more gas. My Front goes 0-60 in 7.2, do you really think the Avalanche will be able to do that, aside from the gas mileage thing and weaker PAYLOAD?

I agree, if you're hauling people around all day then the Ava would probably be better, but for the average family a Front or Titan cab is still comfy. And IF you're hauling 6 people around everyday, there are better vehicles for that in the same price range (new RAV4 for example). I just don't see what niche the Avalanche fills... b/c its towing/payload is way too weak to overcome the traditional truck for functionality (i.e. construction companies), and there are much better options that are cheaper for transporting people. This is why GM is failing IMO, poor planning before production.

WTF, you are talking about 0-60 on a truck? Obviously you are grasping at anything you can to put down Chevrolet. Please stop blowing Nissan, you are just as bad as MIKEMIKE and his lust for GM.

Oh, BTW: http://www.autos.com/autos/suvs/fullsize_suvs/acceleration

The Avalanche runs it in 6.8sec.

Yeah, I BET it runs a 6.8, that's BS. Autos.com is full of sht, it says the Front runs a 9.3 :roll:
Try 7.6 Text

Again, if you really believe that an Avalanche does 0-60 in 6.8 there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd love to sell you.

 

[AdamK47]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

Why are they better vehicles? I'm sure you have a good reason, other than being Japanese?

Well it's really not comparing apples to apples since I mentioned compact pickups and the Ava is a huge full size.

Why are compacts pickups better IMO?

Disadvantages for Ava: the Ava weighs 5,700lbs! No way it will get as good gas mileage (EPA estimates aren't out yet, but most likely 13-15mpg vs 15-18 for Front). It's a PITA to park b/c of its size and turning radius. It's about $10,000 more on invoice than the aforementioned trucks. Even though the Ava does have 310 HP to my Frontier's 265 and more torque (335 vs 284), it has a WORSE payload capacity (1337lbs vs Front 1381) and only 1900 more lbs towing (8000 for Ava vs 6100 for Front).

Advantages for Ava: More space inside, and a fold down cab to increase bed room into the backseat. Slight towing advantage b/c of its V8 vs V6.

That bolded/highlighted line is where you should've stopped. You're comparing two entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt; but it isn't a full-size. The Avalanche may not be the best pickup truck out there, but for the people who buy full-size pickups and want it to double as a convenient people-hauling vehicle as well, it blows the Frontier away.

Not that anyone *should* have a 5400lbs (not 5700lbs btw) daily driver just to haul their own ass around and once every 6 months tow something (like my father, LOL), but ya know, that's America!

Notice how I didn't put the Titan into this equation, it would have just made the Avalanche look even sillier. Seriously, it's not even about the weight of the vehicle, it's the fact that Chevy's V8 can't compensate on 0-60 speeds, even when chugging more gas. My Front goes 0-60 in 7.2, do you really think the Avalanche will be able to do that, aside from the gas mileage thing and weaker PAYLOAD?

I agree, if you're hauling people around all day then the Ava would probably be better, but for the average family a Front or Titan cab is still comfy. And IF you're hauling 6 people around everyday, there are better vehicles for that in the same price range (new RAV4 for example). I just don't see what niche the Avalanche fills... b/c its towing/payload is way too weak to overcome the traditional truck for functionality (i.e. construction companies), and there are much better options that are cheaper for transporting people. This is why GM is failing IMO, poor planning before production.

WTF, you are talking about 0-60 on a truck? Obviously you are grasping at anything you can to put down Chevrolet. Please stop blowing Nissan, you are just as bad as MIKEMIKE and his lust for GM.

Oh, BTW: http://www.autos.com/autos/suvs/fullsize_suvs/acceleration

The Avalanche runs it in 6.8sec.

Yeah, I BET it runs a 6.8, that's BS. Autos.com is full of sht, it says the Front runs a 9.3 :roll:
Try 7.6 Text

Again, if you really believe that an Avalanche does 0-60 in 6.8 there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd love to sell you.

It appears that you aren't debating on which one is faster. You're debating on which one is less slow.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: AdamK47 3DS

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

Why are they better vehicles? I'm sure you have a good reason, other than being Japanese?

Well it's really not comparing apples to apples since I mentioned compact pickups and the Ava is a huge full size.

Why are compacts pickups better IMO?

Disadvantages for Ava: the Ava weighs 5,700lbs! No way it will get as good gas mileage (EPA estimates aren't out yet, but most likely 13-15mpg vs 15-18 for Front). It's a PITA to park b/c of its size and turning radius. It's about $10,000 more on invoice than the aforementioned trucks. Even though the Ava does have 310 HP to my Frontier's 265 and more torque (335 vs 284), it has a WORSE payload capacity (1337lbs vs Front 1381) and only 1900 more lbs towing (8000 for Ava vs 6100 for Front).

Advantages for Ava: More space inside, and a fold down cab to increase bed room into the backseat. Slight towing advantage b/c of its V8 vs V6.

That bolded/highlighted line is where you should've stopped. You're comparing two entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt; but it isn't a full-size. The Avalanche may not be the best pickup truck out there, but for the people who buy full-size pickups and want it to double as a convenient people-hauling vehicle as well, it blows the Frontier away.

Not that anyone *should* have a 5400lbs (not 5700lbs btw) daily driver just to haul their own ass around and once every 6 months tow something (like my father, LOL), but ya know, that's America!

Notice how I didn't put the Titan into this equation, it would have just made the Avalanche look even sillier. Seriously, it's not even about the weight of the vehicle, it's the fact that Chevy's V8 can't compensate on 0-60 speeds, even when chugging more gas. My Front goes 0-60 in 7.2, do you really think the Avalanche will be able to do that, aside from the gas mileage thing and weaker PAYLOAD?

I agree, if you're hauling people around all day then the Ava would probably be better, but for the average family a Front or Titan cab is still comfy. And IF you're hauling 6 people around everyday, there are better vehicles for that in the same price range (new RAV4 for example). I just don't see what niche the Avalanche fills... b/c its towing/payload is way too weak to overcome the traditional truck for functionality (i.e. construction companies), and there are much better options that are cheaper for transporting people. This is why GM is failing IMO, poor planning before production.

WTF, you are talking about 0-60 on a truck? Obviously you are grasping at anything you can to put down Chevrolet. Please stop blowing Nissan, you are just as bad as MIKEMIKE and his lust for GM.

Oh, BTW: http://www.autos.com/autos/suvs/fullsize_suvs/acceleration

The Avalanche runs it in 6.8sec.

Yeah, I BET it runs a 6.8, that's BS. Autos.com is full of sht, it says the Front runs a 9.3 :roll:
Try 7.6 Text

Again, if you really believe that an Avalanche does 0-60 in 6.8 there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd love to sell you.

It appears that you aren't debating on which one is faster. You're debating on which one is less slow.

Yeah, keep in mind we're comparing a V8 to a V6. The Ava's V8 is garbage, especially compared to something like the Navigator which would eat the Nissan V6 for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

0-60 on the 2007 Avalanche is 8.5 seconds. 6.8 my ass. Proof.

 

[foghorn67]

Design Inspiration

 

[Jfrag Teh Foul]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
You realize that in the U.S. most people who own any type of SUV or truck 99% of the time just cart their own ass around in it right? C'mon, we as Americans just cannot own anything practical.

I call bullsh!t. I pwn a Dodge Dakota 4 door truck. I have a family of 5 that I can haul around fairly easily, plus even though the "tray" (snicker) is smaller than a regular bed pickup, it has been used to the point that the liner is scarred appropriately. Oh, it has a v8 in it as well... that has been used on multiple occasions to haul a tandem axle trailer for various things. All-in-all it has been a perfect vehicle for my situation. Before this vehicle I had a 4 seater coupe... loved the mileage, loved the car, but my needs just outgrew it.

I think it depends really on where you are in the US. I live in a rural area, so my needs are different than say somebody living in a metro area.

BTW, I now live on a gravel road, so my wife will probably be getting a SUV like the FJ Cruiser for her next vehicle. A full framed vehicle just lasts longer for that type of driving over the current unibody van she drives now.

Not all of the US is living outside of what is needed... that kind of blanket statement just isn't applicable given the diversity of America's roads.

 

[waggy]

i looked at buying one when they first came out. but the plastic turned me off. it was frickne ugly. i notice the newer ones have a lot less of the plastic. so it is on my list. But the honda looks nice also.

though i do not need a truck anymore. it would be handy when i want to go get firewood heh

 

[Toastedlightly]

Hold on... lemmie find the specs on the big engine for the Av... (8.3L), then we'll talk 0-60 speeds (although, why the fvck does it matter w/ pickup trucks anway!?

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: Jfrag Teh Foul

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
You realize that in the U.S. most people who own any type of SUV or truck 99% of the time just cart their own ass around in it right? C'mon, we as Americans just cannot own anything practical.

I call bullsh!t. I pwn a Dodge Dakota 4 door truck. I have a family of 5 that I can haul around fairly easily, plus even though the "tray" (snicker) is smaller than a regular bed pickup, it has been used to the point that the liner is scarred appropriately. Oh, it has a v8 in it as well... that has been used on multiple occasions to haul a tandem axle trailer for various things. All-in-all it has been a perfect vehicle for my situation. Before this vehicle I had a 4 seater coupe... loved the mileage, loved the car, but my needs just outgrew it.

I think it depends really on where you are in the US. I live in a rural area, so my needs are different than say somebody living in a metro area.

BTW, I now live on a gravel road, so my wife will probably be getting a SUV like the FJ Cruiser for her next vehicle. A full framed vehicle just lasts longer for that type of driving over the current unibody van she drives now.

Not all of the US is living outside of what is needed... that kind of blanket statement just isn't applicable given the diversity of America's roads.

So you paid $5K more for a something you could have done in a Crew Cab Titan? :golfclap:

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: Jfrag Teh Foul

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
You realize that in the U.S. most people who own any type of SUV or truck 99% of the time just cart their own ass around in it right? C'mon, we as Americans just cannot own anything practical.

I call bullsh!t. I pwn a Dodge Dakota 4 door truck. I have a family of 5 that I can haul around fairly easily, plus even though the "tray" (snicker) is smaller than a regular bed pickup, it has been used to the point that the liner is scarred appropriately. Oh, it has a v8 in it as well... that has been used on multiple occasions to haul a tandem axle trailer for various things. All-in-all it has been a perfect vehicle for my situation. Before this vehicle I had a 4 seater coupe... loved the mileage, loved the car, but my needs just outgrew it.

I think it depends really on where you are in the US. I live in a rural area, so my needs are different than say somebody living in a metro area.

BTW, I now live on a gravel road, so my wife will probably be getting a SUV like the FJ Cruiser for her next vehicle. A full framed vehicle just lasts longer for that type of driving over the current unibody van she drives now.

Not all of the US is living outside of what is needed... that kind of blanket statement just isn't applicable given the diversity of America's roads.

I never said ALL Americans are that way, just the majority of them. Congrats for having and using a sport utility vehicle the way it is supposed to be used. The Dakota's are nice

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: Jfrag Teh Foul

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
You realize that in the U.S. most people who own any type of SUV or truck 99% of the time just cart their own ass around in it right? C'mon, we as Americans just cannot own anything practical.

I call bullsh!t. I pwn a Dodge Dakota 4 door truck. I have a family of 5 that I can haul around fairly easily, plus even though the "tray" (snicker) is smaller than a regular bed pickup, it has been used to the point that the liner is scarred appropriately. Oh, it has a v8 in it as well... that has been used on multiple occasions to haul a tandem axle trailer for various things. All-in-all it has been a perfect vehicle for my situation. Before this vehicle I had a 4 seater coupe... loved the mileage, loved the car, but my needs just outgrew it.

I think it depends really on where you are in the US. I live in a rural area, so my needs are different than say somebody living in a metro area.

BTW, I now live on a gravel road, so my wife will probably be getting a SUV like the FJ Cruiser for her next vehicle. A full framed vehicle just lasts longer for that type of driving over the current unibody van she drives now.

Not all of the US is living outside of what is needed... that kind of blanket statement just isn't applicable given the diversity of America's roads.

So you paid $5K more for a something you could have done in a Crew Cab Titan? :golfclap:

So have you gotten your dick stuck in the tailpipe of your Jap truck yet or is it so small it just slides in & out real smooth like? :roll:

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Yeah, keep in mind we're comparing a V8 to a V6. The Ava's V8 is garbage, especially compared to something like the Navigator which would eat the Nissan V6 for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

0-60 on the 2007 Avalanche is 8.5 seconds. 6.8 my ass. Proof.

Um, the GM 5.3L V8 is a fine engine. Plenty of power throughout the range and more fuel efficient than the V8's in most trucks. Users generally get 20MPG or above on the highway, something you don't see in most pickups.

Now I can't speak to your Nissan trucks, because of all the people I know who rely on a pickup truck as the main vehicle for their jobs & lives (thus, people who actually use it as it was intended) none of them own a Nissan. Not saying its a bad truck, but ya know...

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: AdamK47 3DS

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: iamwiz82

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Avalanche is a POS, and you wonder why GM is so screwed. The 4 door Tacoma and Frontier, and even the Ridgelines are much better options.

Why are they better vehicles? I'm sure you have a good reason, other than being Japanese?

Well it's really not comparing apples to apples since I mentioned compact pickups and the Ava is a huge full size.

Why are compacts pickups better IMO?

Disadvantages for Ava: the Ava weighs 5,700lbs! No way it will get as good gas mileage (EPA estimates aren't out yet, but most likely 13-15mpg vs 15-18 for Front). It's a PITA to park b/c of its size and turning radius. It's about $10,000 more on invoice than the aforementioned trucks. Even though the Ava does have 310 HP to my Frontier's 265 and more torque (335 vs 284), it has a WORSE payload capacity (1337lbs vs Front 1381) and only 1900 more lbs towing (8000 for Ava vs 6100 for Front).

Advantages for Ava: More space inside, and a fold down cab to increase bed room into the backseat. Slight towing advantage b/c of its V8 vs V6.

That bolded/highlighted line is where you should've stopped. You're comparing two entirely different vehicles designed for entirely different purposes. The Frontier is a good truck, no doubt; but it isn't a full-size. The Avalanche may not be the best pickup truck out there, but for the people who buy full-size pickups and want it to double as a convenient people-hauling vehicle as well, it blows the Frontier away.

Not that anyone *should* have a 5400lbs (not 5700lbs btw) daily driver just to haul their own ass around and once every 6 months tow something (like my father, LOL), but ya know, that's America!

Notice how I didn't put the Titan into this equation, it would have just made the Avalanche look even sillier. Seriously, it's not even about the weight of the vehicle, it's the fact that Chevy's V8 can't compensate on 0-60 speeds, even when chugging more gas. My Front goes 0-60 in 7.2, do you really think the Avalanche will be able to do that, aside from the gas mileage thing and weaker PAYLOAD?

I agree, if you're hauling people around all day then the Ava would probably be better, but for the average family a Front or Titan cab is still comfy. And IF you're hauling 6 people around everyday, there are better vehicles for that in the same price range (new RAV4 for example). I just don't see what niche the Avalanche fills... b/c its towing/payload is way too weak to overcome the traditional truck for functionality (i.e. construction companies), and there are much better options that are cheaper for transporting people. This is why GM is failing IMO, poor planning before production.

WTF, you are talking about 0-60 on a truck? Obviously you are grasping at anything you can to put down Chevrolet. Please stop blowing Nissan, you are just as bad as MIKEMIKE and his lust for GM.

Oh, BTW: http://www.autos.com/autos/suvs/fullsize_suvs/acceleration

The Avalanche runs it in 6.8sec.

Yeah, I BET it runs a 6.8, that's BS. Autos.com is full of sht, it says the Front runs a 9.3 :roll:
Try 7.6 Text

Again, if you really believe that an Avalanche does 0-60 in 6.8 there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd love to sell you.

It appears that you aren't debating on which one is faster. You're debating on which one is less slow.

Yeah, keep in mind we're comparing a V8 to a V6. The Ava's V8 is garbage, especially compared to something like the Navigator which would eat the Nissan V6 for breakfast, lunch and dinner.

0-60 on the 2007 Avalanche is 8.5 seconds. 6.8 my ass. Proof.

You're a complete idiot, please stop posting. the 5.3L Vortec is a pullet proof engine not designed for 0-60 but for hauling. If you want to compare Nissan's truck V6's to Chevy's V8's then how bout we throw down the 6.0L Vortec, then Chevy win's in 0-60 and hauling and it's still eats up the Titan's engine. No matter how you slice it GM's got you covered when it comes to the best truck engines.