[cajunfj40]

Hello hersbird,

So you like the GMT800 platform, then. Honestly, the only thing (other than don't have the cash to buy it now, too many other things going on, etc.) keeping me from just tracking down and finding a decent 2500 series Suburban/Tahoe XL/Yukon XL is the sheer size of the thing. I haven't driven fullsize since that Dodge Ram, and kind of like fitting everywhere. Plus they're not exactly great on fuel - and I drive 10 miles one way in the dead of winter for my commute. A big cast-iron block will have issues with that. Block heater, sure, but still.

Good to hear it rides well on rough roads - that's one of the "should do this" things that I forgot to put in my wants/needs list.

There is a compelling argument for these GMT800/900 rigs, though: they are inexpensive to buy and repair as you note - if they have been serviced. A clean GMT400 is a possibility, as the '93-'94 Suburban actually did well in crash tests without airbags. Soft front end just folded up, protecting the passengers and driver like it should.

The 1500 version isn't too bad on "net payload" either - somewhere around 1700lb. All the 2500 stuff is bolt-on, and that torsion-bar chassis kept on through the 2013 2500's, even under the GMT900 body. So if the 1500 suspension wears out, bolt on 2500 stuff. Set of used knuckles, pair of axles, conversion U-joints, CV half-shafts, and then all the new bushings and upper control arms and tie rod ends and unit bearings, brakes, etc. that need to be replaced anyway due to wear. The 1500 4L60 transmissions apparently don't like towing, though, and the cooler lines like to rot out, starve the trans of fluid, and burn them up. (happened to my MIL, rebuilt trans has always shifted "funny" since...). Good for a "slow buildup as funds allow" kinda thing. Though the 2500 starts out with all that.

I read really good things about the LS engines in general - lots of 250-300k plus mile stories. Some caveats about the Active Fuel Management system having issues, though looking at TSB 10-06-01-008F it seems that these engines tend to keep their cylinder wall cross-hatching - and GM specifically recommends against honing when replacing pistons/rings if they got gunked up by an AFM issue. Dodge has their MDS system that does the same thing - turn off half the cylinders via regulating oil pressure to those lifters. They apparently don't have the same issues, so the GM bulletin about oil spray in excess quantities at high RPM (long empty highway drives at speed...) seems legit for a potential cause.

Another issue I found info on, though I can't recall the TSB, was early LS1 engine oil consumption. Proximal cause was similar - high-rpm light-load operation. In those engines, though, it was the low-tension rings going into a "flutter" situation. The fix there - for drivers that would refuse to modify driving habits - was a set of slightly higher tension oil and lower compression rings to minimize the flutter.

I'd heard that about the Excursion - they went rather soft on the rear springs to get a better ride, so the rear GAWR was limited by that, and hence the GVWR was limited. Being based on the Super Duty, they started out heavier, too. Not exactly an attractive combo, but the crash test info still holds at least.

I can get better commuting MPG from something like a recent Explorer or Jeep Grand Cherokee, but at a higher buy-in. Going from 13MPG to almost 20MPG would take somewhere over 7 years to pay off (at 10k miles/year) in fuel savings if the 20MPG vehicle is $5k more.

If I'm not careful, with that logic I'll end up with a big-block monster, and it'll sit most of the time costing insurance/registration while I drive a cheap beater for fuel economy because it just feels wrong to burn so much fuel. Even if it does take 7 years to break even on cost. Driving a cheap beater while the thirsty truck sits now, and I hate it. (Green truck is sitting, admittedly due to bad front axle, not MPG, but still.)

Too bad auto-stop wasn't available in either generation except on the hybrids. One of those would be really nice, but they are a *lot* less common than the standard variants, and they have a lot of aluminum parts and low-hanging plastic bits to counter the hybrid weight gain and to make the cD lower. All of that pretty plastic would get ripped off off-road, and I'm not sure how well aluminum bits would do under such a heavy beast.

Jeep Grand Cherokee actually makes the lower front fascia removeable, and there are a few OEM and aftermarket rock-rail setups that basically replace the plastic rocker panel trim. The 2014+ V6 has a reasonable tow/payload rating, and can be had with the high-end Active Drive 2 4WD system that is apparently super-effective - comparable to at least Eaton ECTED MAX lockers at both ends, but seamlessly integrated. For a "just drive it" option, with only a bit of armor, some tow points, and better tires, it might be a really good bet for the few times I'll get to go play.

Of course, I can get a 4th gen Ford Explorer a lot cheaper, and the brake-based traction control is apparently no slouch so long as you can keep a rock-steady accelerator position.

I'll probably have to just quick looking into this stuff (yeah right) for a while and get a bunch of honey-do stuff done, get backlogged projects done or sold off, etc. so I'm in a better spot to do something and my wallet recovers from the sunk costs of the Fords.