Expedition vs. Suburban vs. Durango

I just looked into a Montero... Gotta remove the intake to change spark plugs? Hmmm, remove skid plate to change oil?

In reply to ebonyandivory:

I mostly threw that in to counteract Tom's trooper posts I'll be honest, timing belts are annoying but I bought mine recently done (with paperwork) and by the time I rack up 60k miles on it, I'll probably just unload it. Sparkplugs are usually done along with timing belt and water pump since its all internal and such. Skid plat is annoying, but if you aren't doing any crazy 4x4ing, just leave it off?

Freinds had a Durango and I agree with others who think its small and gets potentially worse mpg than the ford/chevy. Again, expeditions and suburbans are both decent and I feel like you're going to get a lot of brand loyalty. Find the one thats in the best shape with the most maintenance for your price and be happy.

We've had our Burban for close to 3 years and we love it! The interior quality isn't the best and we're dealing with minor electrical issues (D/S power lock control, power seat memory, piddly stuff like that.)

It currently has just over 156,000 miles and runs great. There were a handful of instances where it would take off in second gear for a moment then down shift into first but other than that we've had no complaints. Worst mpg (mostly in-town driving) has been 12.7, best mpg (mostly highway) has been 19.8. That's calculating it after filling the tank.

Things I wold like to change:

swap 4L60 for 4L80

install 3.73 or 4.10 gears and a G80

larger sways

larger brakes

In other words I recommend a 3/4 ton Suburban!

Mrs. Oldtin had a 99 durango. All the capacity of a small suv, the economy of a full size and apparently have glass transmissions.

suburban is the clear choice in my mind, between those three. the ford does a few things well, but none of them better than the chevy. the durangos are just terrible.

So has the OP given up on Durangos yet? I mean, even if i cant ALSO talk you completely out of the Ford, i hope you can at LEAST just completely write off the Durango.

Trust me, i love Dodge, and i like certain Dakotas of that generation, but the Durango just has almost no upside compared to the Suburban unless you just WANT something smaller or faster.

Which, yeah, a 4.7 Durango's turning radius and acceleration will kick the ass of a 5.3 Suburban, but the 90% of the time when you care more about plain old roominess or a 3rd row that's worth a crap, the Suburban kicks the Durango's ass all up and down the street.

In reply to Vigo:

No to Durango. Too much bad mojo!

In reply to ebonyandivory:

Two years ago I went looking for a 4x4 Suburban or an Excursion I could afford -- maybe $7000 or under. Every diesel Excursion was way more; there were almost no 5.4s, and the remaining V-10s -- They all seemed like clapped-out junk (three different brands of tires on one vehicle seemed the norm) or were cherry and $12,000. Ran across a one-owner Suburban with 225k miles, far more than I would go for, but it was in superb shape, and the owner just bought a brand-new Sub, same color even, suggesting he was pretty happy with the old one. I bought it and love it. That said, I could have gotten an Expedition that was newer and had far fewer miles, and if I didn't need the extra room and towing capacity, would have, or maybe a Navigator. Both are drastically underpriced right now, and clean, later Suburbans are not. A really clean Navigator, owned by empty-nest adults, is a heck of a buy.

Yeah, but you're still stuck with that lump of a motor. The 2v modular v8s are the only reason i have to downtalk expiditions. I like the rest of the truck just fine..

The 5.4L 2v isn't that bad......I've towed a 26x8.5 with one before(granted 2nd gen) and it did decent......the entire trailer full of high end DJ equipment didn't exactly help matters though.

Suburban. It's works for the Secret Service, it should work fine for you.

You said reliable. Why even think about a Durango?

Durango meets your requirements about as well as all the off-requirement posts in this thread. Looks like some people need to brush up on their reading comprehension.

Are any of the original choices available with diesel?

burb > all

this would be my preferred order

burb = ls truck engine, either a 6.0 or 5.3 with 3.73 or higher. i love the 5.3 but i think i only love it in my big heavy truck because i have 4.10's so it pulls like a mofo.

expedition = mod motor, i have a personal preference to never own another again. plus fords have let me down every time i have given them a chance, so i'm just done.

walking

durango = fall apart around whatever dodge put in it.

I don't want to thread jack, but this aligns with my interests. What would be the preferred drive train choices in the Suburban? Bad combos? The Ford spark plug ejection feature has come up; is there any mitigating the risks here?

I bought an 04 Suburban 2wd about18 months ago with 117k miles on it. I only paid $6k for it on CL. It was a transplant truck from TX, and had only been in MA for about two months. It even still had the TX plates on it still. I have been very happy with it so far. The interior is a bit cheap, but nothing worse than the 01 Dodge Ramwagon van I replaced. The ride is amazing compared to the old van, but that isn't saying much. The 5.3 litre is a great engine in my opinion, and I think I am now a Chevy guy when it comes to trucks after years of Dodge's. I have only had to replace a bad window regulator, O2 sensor, and the belts so far. Plus a couple of oil changes. It gets pretty respectable fuel mileage as well.

I'm not a GM fan by any means, but I'd pick the suburban any day of the week. The 5.4 spits spark plugs and I'm sick of replacing them at work, the durango R/T with the 360 is pretty neat, but those things rust terribly, not to mention don't hold any value and drink fuel something awful.

Plus the Suburban once came with a diesel.

ebonyandivory wrote: Any thoughts?

Durangos have 3rd row seating but somehow they lost a lot of interior room compared to the Dakota. There is simultaneously less legroom, knee room, head room, and elbow room, and the seats are so high that I end up sitting on my thighs instead of my butt, and I have a 34" inseam.

Interior space aft is also rather cramped.

Get the Suburban. Or the Yukon if you don't need to go THAT big.

fanfoy wrote: Or a more obvious choice:

I often think that a Trailblazer might make a decent tow rig.

Then another one comes in and I change my mind again. It is astounding how those things can regularly rack up $2000+ repair bills.

And this is before the problems that they have with the magnesium-case rearend. They're supposed to have issues with the bearings spinning and wallowing out the bores, but I haven't seen it yet.

^ I've also seen one have a totally random computer failure. But then again i've seen the same thing on BCMs and amps on the GM pickups.

One of my local friends tows with a trailblazer. It's a decent vehicle for it, and i'd take it over a Durango, but it still doesn't hold a candle to a suburban for the same money.

The 5.4L 2v isn't that bad......I've towed a 26x8.5 with one before(granted 2nd gen) and it did decent.....

Yeah, but 80% of my annoyance with the mod motors comes from working on them. They are a goofy design that gives totally mediocre results and have stupid issues that the gm 5.3 just DOESNT have. The reliability factor just isn't even in the same ballpark between that and a 5.3.

Well, to be fair, the 5.4 is still light-years ahead of other junk 4.7.

The difference is, when a 4.7 dies you throw the truck away. If a 5.4 dies, the truck is usually worth installing a new engine.

I think it's funny how people center on the engine as far as truck longevity is concerned. Even the crappy engines last a long time. Engine life is not the big issue here IMO. Nickel and dime crap like brakes and front-end work and electronics are what get you.

It's why I kinda miss those old TTB trucks. Ball joints failed with depressing regularity and it was 6-8 hours a truck to replace them. Made a lot of money servicing fleet Econolines and F-series. If an engine lasts 250k and ball joints last 20k, what are you going to spend more money for repair over the life of the truck?

Or how about those Trailblazers with the crappy calipers that fail all the time, so "brakes squeak" turns into "pads/rotors/calipers all around"...

Knurled wrote:

fanfoy wrote: Or a more obvious choice:

I often think that a Trailblazer might make a decent tow rig. Then another one comes in and I change my mind again. It is astounding how those things can regularly rack up $2000+ repair bills. And this is before the problems that they have with the magnesium-case rearend. They're supposed to have issues with the bearings spinning and wallowing out the bores, but I haven't seen it yet.

Totally agree...these are big turds.

sethmeister4 wrote: Are any of the original choices available with diesel?

The Suburban is (if it is a 3/4 ton).

The Durango and the Expedition are not.

The Expedition's big brother, the Excursion is.

The Excursion came with two in its lifetime, the 7.3 and the 6.0 Ford Diesels. The 6.0 has it's problems, but they're well-documented and fixable via the aftermarket if need be.

In reply to DoctorBlade:

True.

The Suburban came with at least 4 different diesels during its lifetime. 5.7L, 6.2L, 6.5L, and a 4.0L in some foreign markets. There may have been more, I'm not sure about the early ones (the 'Burb has been around since 1933). In the newer vintage Burb's, you'd be looking at a 6.5L.

A diesel Suburban is what I'd be looking for then...or at least a 5.3 or bigger.