By on September 11, 2014

2015 Chevrolet Tahoe whiteGM’s market share in the full-size, truck-based SUV segment grew to 82.9% in August 2014 as the company’s four candidates grabbed the four top spots in the category. Not unpredictably, Ford Expedition sales declined as we approach the arrival of a revamped 2015 Expedition with EcoBoost V6 power, further enabling GM’s quest for world domination.

Or American domination. Domination in a specific vehicle category. In a category which, while expanding in comparison to the recent past, simply doesn’t amount to what it once did.

That’s not to say GM’s four full-size Chevy and GMC SUVs form a low-volume quartet. The Suburban, Tahoe, Yukon, and Yukon XL were responsible for 8.1% of the volume generated by America’s largest seller of new vehicles in August.

So far this year, they’ve managed to outsell all but three premium brands: Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and Lexus. 7.7% of the new vehicles sold by GM so far this year have been Enclaves, Encores, LaCrosses, Regals, and Veranos, Buicks all. 7.4% have been Suburbans, Tahoes, Yukons, and Yukon XLs.

In other words, these big SUVs play an important role in GM’s generation of sales in the company’s home market, and an essential role in GM’s generation of profit. We haven’t even taken into consideration the most costly SUVs that ride on the platform. Cadillac sold 2277 Escalades and 1257 Escalade ESVs in August, 89% and 64% year-over-year gains, respectively. Total Escalade sales, defunct EXT included, are up 21% to 17,884 in 2014.

Auto
August 2014
August 2013
% Change
8 mos. 2014
8 mos. 2013
% Change
Chevrolet Suburban
5,748 4,003 43.6% 34,487 31,847 8.3%
Chevrolet Tahoe
8,216 6,818 20.5% 64,837 54,794 18.3%
Ford Expedition
2,623 3,176 -17.4% 29,093 23,661 23.0%
GMC Yukon
4,715 2,345 101.1% 27,458 17,240 59.3%
GMC Yukon XL
3,319 2,779 19.4% 19,763 20,626 -4.2%
Nissan Armada
1,006 1,114 -9.7% 8,411 9,601 -12.4%
Toyota Sequoia
913 1,280 -28.7% 7,814 9,045 -13.6%
Total
 26,540
21,515   23.4%  191,863 166,814  15.0%

Even the so-called volume brand sport-utilities we’re discussing in this space can be viewed on dealer lots with frighteningly Cadillac-like MSRPs. (There’s no denying that with 21,998 sales between the GM products alone, they’re still volume vehicles, regardless of price. The Tahoe is America’s 20th-best-selling SUV/crossover, behind the Lexus RX and two-wheel-bases-included Hyundai Santa Fe, but ahead of the Dodge Journey and Jeep Patriot.)

The true premium brand contenders from Cadillac, Infiniti, Land Rover, Lexus, and Mercedes-Benz, for example, combine to sell approximately once for every three copies of these seven contenders.

Two of these contenders, however, sell less often than a number of the higher-end full-size SUVs. Sales of Nissan’s ancient Armada are down 12% to just 8411 units in 2014, just 4.4% of the segment. Toyota Sequoia sales are down even more sharply, falling 14% to just 7814 units during a period in which sales of its refreshed Tundra pickup stablemate have jumped 10% to 80,133.

Both Toyota and Nissan do a better job of selling higher-priced utility vehicles when they sell them through their Lexus and Infiniti outlets. Lexus GX sales, for instance are up 127% to 14,429 in 2014 – Lexus is on pace for its best GX sales year since 2007. (The RX is America’s top-selling premium brand utility vehicle, although its base price actually places the RX a few thousand dollars below the Sequoia.)

Infiniti QX80 sales have risen slightly, just 2%, to a near-Armada-like level of 8119 units in 2014. Infiniti generates more than a quarter of its volume with the Pathfinder-based QX60, formerly the JX.

Obviously those numbers pale in comparison to the figures achieved by GM’s full-size SUVs. And if you think these GM numbers are large, stretch your mind back to 2002 when General Motors sold more than 67,000 Suburbans, Tahoes, Yukons, and Yukon XLs in America during the month of August alone.

Timothy Cain is the founder of GoodCarBadCar.net, which obsesses over the free and frequent publication of U.S. and Canadian auto sales figures.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

90 Comments on “Cain’s Segments August 2014: Full-Size SUVs...”


  • avatar
    johnhowington

    suburban sales less than half from 10 years ago. progress?

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Well when the price increases 20k+ in 10 years, what are we to expect?

      No competition has made GM stupid.

      If someone (cough ChryCo) could build a utilitarian Fullsize SUV, GM would be in trouble.

      Hint hint fiat.
      Everything is there for Ram to make it, 3 excellent engines, a good frame, solid axle.
      Make me a tradesman, in painted steel bumpers, bench seats with fold down center… Fiat that’s at minimum an extra 5% market share if you can start the pricing below 30k.

      • 0 avatar
        johnhowington

        they did, the previous dumpy durango was nearly full size and was a turd. perhaps they are gun shy.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          The previous Durango (read all) was a terrible attempt, should have came from mahindra or 1990s Hyundai.

          Hopefully fiat could figure out how to make a fullsize, as long as they use the same front end as the Ram(read interchangeable parts), it can’t turn out too bad.

      • 0 avatar
        Toad

        FCA could print money with a full size Ram SUV. Stamp out a little more sheet metal, add a D pillar, and Presto! a full size SUV on the existing pickup chassis. The small diesel would be a hit with RV/horse trailer/family travel vehicle set.

        Not only would North Americans buy it, it would probably do well overseas too. I’m sure Sergio has a reason not to build it, but I can’t figure it out.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Probably how high priced there midsizers are, can’t have your fullsizers showing up your midsizers,

          Odds are a stripped fullsize at 30k with V8, Bof, and solid rear would outsell a JGC with V8, lacking above parts, priced at 40k.

          The notion is that size no longer sells, well when a midsize non-luxury can go above 70k (JGC) that leaves no room for a fullsize.

          And quantifying costs by adding something to the Ram platform would be too much of draw to overprice and make 20k a unit.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Americans don’t buy stripped versions of anything at all in volume. Not even pickups. The Tradesman is a small seller compared to the volume SLT. And full-size SUVs are selling to a far more luxury-oriented crowd.

            A stripper full-size SUV would sell to a few hardcore outdoor enthusiasts and a few government agencies, and no one else.

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            I think it has more to do with a 30K fullsize costing 25K to build, while a 70K one costs 35K to build. And GM is concerned the 30K one will cannibalize more 70K sales than it brings in in new profit.

            There’s also a new guy with quite some sway over GM decision making, who don’t particularly want regular peons to pilot vehicles that look threatening to his main donor clientele.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Right, Stuki… in between trying to deal with ISIS, immigration, and health care reform, the president is personally making GM’s product planning decisions, and doing so with the intent of oppressing peons.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            I tend to agree, this new guy is far to busy golfing and ignoring world events to be bothered attending product planning meetings at RenCen.

      • 0 avatar
        zamoti

        I’m not sure why Ford canned the Excursion. While I’m not particularly interested in driving such a large beast, it seems like it would at least have a good chance at nabbing some market share without having to work too hard. It was just an F250 with a body. Dodge never made a giant SUV based off of their full size pickup, so that’s perhaps a bit more work to complete before one could hit the market. I’d be curious why Ford got out and Dodge never took the bait.
        Given that many of these land-yachts are purchased in protest to the idea of owning a mommyvan, there’s certainly a market for these monsters.

        • 0 avatar
          PrincipalDan

          @zamoti, I’ve driven Excursions and Tahoes and Suburbans. The Excursion drives like you need a CDL to own one. The Tahoe/Suburban are far more car like and have been far more popular in the market.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          The Excursion was mismarketed toward suburbanites. Had it been intended for the fleet and farmer crowd and sold as the “F-250 Wagon” or some other unsavory name, it might still be with us. Those few behemoths I see roaming the roads are generally well-kept.

          • 0 avatar
            danio3834

            The 7.3L diesel equipped Expeditions are still very popular in the used vehicle market due to their longevity. They command basically a 100% premium over gas versions and even a premium over the later 6.0L diesel models whose engines are world renowned garbage.

            The fact that there hasn’t been a large/HD SUV available with a diesel (GM discontinued the diesel in the Suburban with the arrival of the GMT8x0) in such a long time has kept demand pretty high for those beasts. Whether the market is large enough to support a new version is questionable as GM hasn’t even bothered to chase it with it’s latest large SUVs though.

          • 0 avatar
            cargogh

            My sister searched all over and she and her husband finally found an ’05 diesel Limited Excursion a couple of years ago. They used it pulling a travel trailer across the country one summer. It seemed like a classic to me, but driving it reminded me of a school bus as did riding in the rear seat. While they live on a farm, she said she had to become much more selective finding in town parking, was tired of the back-up beeping and the diesel clatter at idle. So they got something smaller, a ’12 Suburban. And now a Pilot. When I look at the prices for the GMs, I find it incredible they charge so much. I’ve driven a ’13 Tahoe and their Suburban. With all the leather, and sound deadening, it would seem GM could at least trim off some of the plastic moulding flashing. Every time I’m in one, I know the cheap door hinges will be sagging soon, and the panels will be loose and rattling. Dodge could sell a boatload if they offered a version of the Ram.

          • 0 avatar
            Lou_BC

            @Drzhivago138 – diesel Excursions were extremely popular with Forest Resource companies in my region. When they were discontinued no one went to Suburbans.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          Ford canned the Excursion because it wasn’t selling enough to justify the cost of keeping it up to date. Its buyers were fanatically devoted, but there just weren’t many of them. Most people who need HD truck capability find an actual truck more useful.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Right, Ford decided to focus on the SuperDuty truck line instead, which has helped keep the company alive.

            Those who really want an Excursion can buy a SuperDuty and shell out the additional $25K to have it converted to an Excursion. Custom Autos By Tim (CABT) has some sweet examples. He even has some six door versions.

      • 0 avatar

        Sergio is promising a Jeep Grand Wagoneer some time in 2016 (a year ahead of new Wrangler). Basically a Commander redux, I expect.

      • 0 avatar
        suspekt

        I cannot agree enough with you.

        Do you also own a Hummer H2?

        This takes me back to some comments I made about these full SUV’s a while back.

        #1. With the new 8 speed auto from GM, will we finally see a TAHOE SS and Escalade V with the new LT4 powerplant? These units would sell. Especially with bespoke bumpers and bodywork.

        #2. GM should offer HD versions of the Tahoe and Yukon with the Duramax/Allison combo. I sincerely think Diesel power has high-end appeal both in North America and abroad. The motor/tranny combo should also come with beefed up body mods.

        #3. Chrysler should make an SUV built off the Power Wagon look but with options ranging from Tradesmen style up to Longhorn. Give it a Hemi and a Cummins.

        • 0 avatar
          Hummer

          Who me?
          If so,
          Yes I have two.
          And I’ve always loved the idea of a duramax suburban, but with the loss of the 3/4 suburban they clearly don’t want to provide one.
          That and the starting price would probably be 65k+ the way they price vehicles.

          Dodge/Ram is in a good position to give it a try, they haven’t made a decent Fullsize since the Ram Charger, and that wasn’t exactly competitive to the K5/Bronco.

    • 0 avatar
      Carlson Fan

      @ johnhowingtons comment about FS SUV sales 10 years ago. Sorry for stating the obvious, but the market has shrunk. And it isn’t coming back. Duh!

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @johnhowington – could those reductions in sales come from the massive amount of competition read “consumer choice” in the SUV/CUV market?

      Perhaps the “pro Gallus gallus domesticus levy” crowd does not want the same thing happening to their full sized SUV’s with a balcony aka full sized 1/2 ton crewcab pickups.

      I’m sure the “Gallus gallus domesticus levy doesn’t have any effect” crowd with try to pummel me into the ground for that comment ;)

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        @Lou BC
        I do think the loss of these larger SUV moved over to the full size pickups. Some have moved into the SUV/CUV market.

        The full size pickup has transformed into a SUV.

        This also highlights the move over to the crew cab ‘carlike’ pickups.

        The Detroit manufacturers has successfully managed to ‘draw’ the large SUV customer over to a highly profitable and protected market.

        They have done well to achieve this.

        The full size pickup market hasn’t increased in size proportionally with these newcomers from SUVs over the past 20 years or so.

        So, the actual size of the old full size pickup/full size market has shrunk when you combine those two market segments.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @Big Al from Oz – I was doing some research to se IF there were any articles that countered our side of the chicken tax debate and found an interesting factoid. Vehicles in the USA were subject to luxury taxes if over 30K. It was lobbied on behalf of car companies that pickups over a set weight were exempt. That fostered the boom of luxury pickups. That tax has since been rescinded but it has indirectly shaped the pickup truck market.

          Why buy a luxury SUV that faced a tax when pickups were exempt.

          Fits the whole ideal that pickups are alternatives to SUV’s.

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      Absolutely progress.

      GM is actually profitable (even with the recall debacle, but barely) and less dependent on large SUV sales then ever before.

      The last I checked, corporations exist to make profit and return equity to their shareholders. GM bean counters made that happen with shell games and an investment portfolio (which made more money than GM itself) to the point that leadership declared at one point to paraphrase, meh, we aren’t really a car making company anymore. We know where that went.

      If GM can still be the top maker, make profit, and sell less big SUVs, that is progress.

    • 0 avatar
      formula m

      This size of vehicle hit the peak when any small business owner could write off up to $100,000 towards a vehicle that weighed over 6000lbs. Bush implemented this bright idea lol. When that ended so did huge sales numbers for full-sized SUV’s.
      http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/auto/car-guide-2004/tax-SUVs1.asp

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        That’s completely unrelated to 95% of GM SUVs at the time.
        The Tahoe, suburban, Yukon, Yukon XL, escalade, Escalade ESV, were all under 6,000lbs.

        2003 suburban 1500 weighed 5,320
        2003 suburban 2500 (w/ 6.0) weighed 5,520

        Even with the 8.1L big block I don’t think it would hit 6k.

        Edit; Found it.
        2001 suburban 2500 (w/ 8.1) weighed 5,840

        • 0 avatar
          formula m

          I don’t know what to say… Your Hummer h2 is 6400-6600lbs depending on 6L or 6.2L and the Ford Excursion is 7250 for gas and 7700 for diesel. The suburbans should be in the same range. Wiki doesn’t have the suburbans weight listed.

          • 0 avatar
            cargogh

            Chevy’s site says Suburban’s weight is:
            2WD: 5664 / 2569 (with 20-in. wheels)
            4WD: 5896 / 2674 (with 20-in. wheels)
            It is nicely distributed at 51/49.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            H2 is a totally different vehicle than the other GM SUVs, heavier frame, axles, lots of steel plating and other bits. not really surprising a vehicle totally different from the other fullsizes has totally different weight. Don’t forget Im setup with a 2,200lb payload as well
            —–

            True, but the entire 7 model year run of H2s only amount to about 250k trucks.

            The Tahoe and Yukon combined sold over 280k units a year for a couple of years, that’s not including suburban, Yukon XL, or the escalade duo.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            You have to look up “suburban weight” and go through old car review/info sites to find the weight of the trucks back then.

        • 0 avatar
          formula m

          When I worked for GM there was a way to option the SUV’s to get over 6000lbs so they qualified. Mid 2000’s when the rebate was in effect. GM would not lose out on those potential sales because of 100-200lbs. With the Excursion being 7250+ it’s hard to think GM was 1250lbs lighter in a similar configuration.

          Gas prices jumped a lot from 2006-2008 which is probably the single greatest factor along with new models starting around that time. Around 07 customers had options in the 5+ pass segment other than a minivan or full-size. Traverse, Pilot, highlander, etc…
          For the people who really didn’t need the largest SUV in the first place

  • avatar
    Hummer

    Need a poverty spec
    4×4, LS5.3, the end
    Rubber floors, vinyl seats, FM, steel bumpers, etc

    Subtract -25k price from current pricing

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      When was the last time the Suburban had steel bumpers? GMT800 or GMT400?

      Go find a GMT400 with the 454 I guess.

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        GMT 800.
        To 06
        GMT 820 to 09 although that’s 3/16(1/4?)in plate steel

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          I wasn’t arguing. I honestly didn’t know and figured you would.

          I think the new GM and Ford large SUVs are very good. I know you don’t like the Ford twins, but we’ll have to agree to disagree. I do wish, like you, that there were more stripped down versions available. I’d buy a poverty spec Expedition. Instead, I’ll just have to wait for a used 2015 Expedition in a few years. I’ll end up having to pay close to $30K to get a decent one anyway.

        • 0 avatar
          APaGttH

          Ya – a $25K Suburban, because you know, GM is a charity not in the business to make profit.

          Good luck finding any thing new Suburban sized for $25K and good luck getting any auto manufacturing selling in the US to build anything close to $25K or any maker ever even considering it.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            You can’t find a 3 year old used one with under 40K miles for $25K.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            That’s actually my mistake, I was under the belief that the new trucks, suburban in this case started at 55k, and my post meant subtract 25k from that.

            30k was my actual goal there, but the 25k kinda carried on and I went with it.

            30k is not impossible, that’s still most likely leaves room for more profit than most midsize cars sold.

            That and a Tahoe’s frame is similar in size to a reg cab short bed pickup so adding a bench, two doors, roof, tailgate shouldn’t be unthinkable for 30k.

          • 0 avatar
            Dan

            Many police departments are required to publish their purchases. GM has been selling them $25,000 2WD Tahoes for years.

    • 0 avatar
      bumpy ii

      I don’t think you can get a regular pickup truck for that price, let alone a Suburban. The days when GM could afford to churn out BOF iron for large mainstream sedan prices are over (and, given the bankruptcy, GM probably couldn’t afford it then, either).

      • 0 avatar
        JustPassinThru

        Oh, they made money on them. Of course they were more spartan then; and didn’t have all the magic gris-gris that are now required…blow-up pillows and the like.

        Trouble is today, the pickup “segment” has to carry the Volt “segment” – cars that have been mandated either by CAFE or by special direction by political leaders; but JUST DO NOT SELL. So to move the iron and keep the meddlesome elites happy, they sell at a loss…and that loss must be made up somewhere.

        The trucks are what is carrying that; and that is why a cheap truck is a $40,000 truck.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          Sure GM let’s just focus on trucks and not worry about developing cars like the Volt. Think short term profits, it worked so well in the past.

          • 0 avatar
            APaGttH

            What part of this is now less than 10% of their business did you miss in the above story?

            If this suddenly went to zero it would definitely hurt, but it wouldn’t be 2005 – 2008 all over again.

        • 0 avatar
          dal20402

          The Volt is a tiny part of GM’s business. Their volume CAFE-friendly cars (Cruze, Sonic) are doing just fine and are profitable, although not as profitable as pickups and BOF SUVs.

          They raised the prices on pickups and BOF SUVs not to subsidize the rest of the company but because the market for the trucks has changed. Fewer buyers want them, but the buyers who do want them have plenty of money and are willing to pay.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          This

    • 0 avatar
      danio3834

      Sounds like a police-spec Tahoe is what you want, although even that doesn’t even come close to the 25k price point.

      • 0 avatar
        George B

        I look at the previous generation Tahoe PPV and think I’ll have to look for them on the used market is a couple years. I like how they come from the factory with a slightly lowered stance, upgraded suspension, and skid plates. I prefer the Tahoe front clip as compared to the big bold grill of Silverado. The black steel wheels also look good to me.

      • 0 avatar
        Dan

        Link below, NJSP buying 2WD Tahoes last year for 24 and change.

        http://tinyurl.com/koz5buu

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      1000 sales to government agencies and another 1000 to the public.

      If there were money in such a spec, there would be one.

  • avatar
    Carilloskis

    I wish that GM still made the suburban and its sibilings in lower trims as well and would continue to offer off road packages. when i was growing up my familly had 2 diffrent GMT 400 suburbans (I have 5 younger brothers and sisters) and my first vehicle was a GMT 800 Suburban z71. both of those generations had fenderflares, real skid plates, metal bumpers, recovery hooks(seriously they got rid of the recovery hooks on the current models) the 3rd row could be removed freeing up space and the second row could fold flat, allowing for a flat load floor and ultimatly better cargo room, If you bought the 9 pax version the person up front could put their feet on the ground unlike the 900 serise. If ford can use the same dash pices on every f-150 trim level reguadless of whether it has a flow through consel or bench seat, and still fit a full grown adult male in the front center seat, then why can’t GM do the same, instead of making the suburban wear a car dash instead of a truck dash. while im on appearnce, why not make the suburabn look exatly like the slivarado. when it sold better it looked exaclty like the Truck it was based on thats what sells. A truck that seats 8-9 people. there are plenty of families who use suburbans for out door activity and need a truck to do those things. These things are now just soccermom mobiles.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      This x10

      How does a company that made the GMT800 SUVs, ones that defined a segment, 200k+ sales a year, replace them with the GMT900, and then refused to learn from that blunder and went further the wrong way with the K2xx

      • 0 avatar
        psarhjinian

        In fairness, the whole BOF SUV market cratered. The GMT900s didn’t lose the market out of their own failure, the market evapourated, going instead to the Lambda crossovers and similar.

        The gas price spike and Great Recession didn’t help much; it forced people to re-think vehicles in that size class.

        • 0 avatar
          Carlson Fan

          Some of these guys just don’t get it. The market evolves and what worked in the early 2000’s doesn’t work now. The fact that GM still owns the FS BOF SUV market by a long shot tells you they must be doing something right.

          The GMT-900 SUVs are/were leaps and bounds better than the 800’s they replaced. No comparison. The new/current SUV models don’t share a single body panel or door with the PU’s for the first time ever. GM is obviously trying to differentiate their 1/2 SUV’s from their 1/2 ton PU’s.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            Yea, and see how seperating them from the trucks are working?

            When they were basically the same as the trucks, they sold 200k+. There’s no need for a car like interior on a truck with all of the availible crossovers.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Hummer, the changes in the product are not the reason for the drop in sales. A big part of the market rejecting full-size BOF SUVs is the reason for the drop in sales. If there’s one thing GM knows how to do, it’s to market BOF SUVs. If making them identical to the pickups would sell more copies, they’d be identical to the pickups.

          • 0 avatar
            formula m

            It’s funny, people use to want and SUV that was just like the truck but better for carrying people. Early 4Runners are a great examples as well as the 73-91 GM full size blazers. Truck with back seat.
            My Dad made our own with a 1983 Dodge Ram. We bought it from an old lad and it had a cap with lighting and interior matching carpet in the bed. He bolted down a bench seat like Subaru Brat in the back for me lol. With a family of 4 and being the older brother I had to ride in the back with my dirtbike since we couldn’t all fit with said bike in the 1991 Plymouth Voyager. Come to think of it I would have been crushed by the bike in an accident…
            When people started to pay big money for utility the market demanded more than just a truck with seating for 4 and they have turned into $50k + luxury vehicles or trucks with 5.5ft boxes

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          Compared to the pre-recession peak, everything with relatively high fuel consumption and a mainstream badge has taken a hit, including minivans. Those customers have obviously moved on to more efficient vehicles.

          • 0 avatar
            Carlson Fan

            Exactly! How big was the CUV market in 2000?

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            There essentially was none. Sure, CUVs existed, like the Forester, CR-V, RAV4, and new-for-2001 Escape, but they were styled boxy like SUVs and sold as such despite their FWD, unibody nature. (The first-gen Escape was sold as a replacement for the compact Explorer after the Explorer upsized.)

            In some ways, the Aztek was really the first true crossover, in that it was based off a minivan platform (mid-size and full-size CUVs today are essentially reskinned minivans, no?) and it was the first to attempt “quirky” styling instead of aping a current RWD BOF SUV.

        • 0 avatar
          formula m

          +1

    • 0 avatar
      Toad

      I think there is another reason the market cratered for full size SUV’s: they can be a chore to drive. I own a full size SUV and hate using it for run of the mill errands. It is bulky, heavy, has large blind spots, and maneuvers poorly compared to a mid size car or CUV. I use my wife’s smaller car for most short runs and find driving it a lot more enjoyable.

      Once most people got over the novelty of driving a full size truck based SUV, then suffered through spending $100+ per week in fuel, they bought something smaller, more practical, and easier to drive. CUV’s are more popular for lots of reasons and that is reflected in the sales numbers.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Yep, this, exactly. Full-size SUVs were fashionable in the early 2000s, so every soccer mom drove one. And many of them discovered they didn’t like driving full-size trucks. Now the full-size SUVs sell either to people who actually need their capabilities or people in rural/exurban places where every parking lot is huge and every lane is 12 feet wide. (My sister-in-law, who lives on the outskirts of Tyler, Texas, drives one and loves it even though everything she does would easily be handled by a Traverse.)

  • avatar
    petezeiss

    I wonder if the last company making buggy whips got away with crazy prices for a decade or two.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Wow so silly high prices have done nothing to dent enthusiasm? The great irony is that I remember seeing figures 10+ years ago that said that the average Suburban made $10,000 pure profit for GM. The number now must be easily in excess of $20,000.

  • avatar
    mjz

    I really hate those curly cue turn signal lenses on the Tahoe/Suburban. Looks like a Nissan design cue.

  • avatar
    carguy

    GM has been pursuing a successful strategy for this shrinking market segment by being the only manufacturer to actually still invest in their BoF SUV platform. This has left them the last player standing and kept their margins healthy.

    For those wondering where all the vinyl seat, AM radio stripper models have gone: they make little commercial sense for much the same reason BMW will not sell you a car with cloth seats. Full size BoF SUVs have essentially become a luxury product and the trim levels reflect that.

    For those looking for cut price towing and utility, crew cab trucks is what you should be looking at.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Ford did a good job on the refresh of their BoF SUVs. They won’t command the pricing premium GM gets for theirs, but they are worth a look. Ford finally addressed some of the issues with the product. Also, the Expedition and Navigator will finally be all new in a few years. Look for aluminium in the future.

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    The GM SUVs have pricing issues. A Tahoe LS with Cloth seats, no nav and manual climate control is over $50k. That is utterly ridiculous.

    10 years ago, $50k would have gotten you a loaded Denali or Escalade.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      For less than $60K, you can get an Expedition King Ranch 4×4. $52K will buy an XLT with leather, nav, and 4WD.

    • 0 avatar
      davefromcalgary

      Mandalorian, I would suggest that GM has pricing issues, period.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      I wonder what the depreciation is, though?

      • 0 avatar
        Hummer

        Wait 6 months to see what a 90k escalade ESV does.

        • 0 avatar
          Carilloskis

          My 05 Suburban z71 luxuary pkg MSRP 47K sold december 05 41k i bought used 46k miles July 08 for 15.5k sold w/ 98k miles March 11 12.5k these things depricate like rocks now contrast to 1999 at the height of the SUV craze the GMT 800s where just coming out and there where deals to be had on the GMT 400s, my parents sold their 95 suburban LS with 78K miles for 23k and picked up a new 99 with simialr options for 28k not bad to get a brand new vehicle. the people we sold it too had only 2 kids while we had 6 looking back it seems kind of funny that they bought that truck, then again there where no crew cab half ton pickups back then, which i think drasticly affected the BOF SUV market the f150 didn’t offer a crew cab till 2001 Gm didn’t have a true half ton crew cab till 2004, Ram 2009, Toyota 2003, Nissan Tian 2004. I think that these trucks took some SUV sales away, and they cost less than the SUVs and you get a better range of options and equipment avalibility by going with one over the SUV. The Fact that you can get a loaded Diesel 1 ton for less than a 4×4 suburban LTZ speeks for itself.

          • 0 avatar
            Mandalorian

            Agree with the Crew Cab pickups stealing SUV sales. I just went onto Chevy.com and priced them out.

            A 2WD Suburban LS with no options is $48,950

            A 4×4 Silverado LTZ Crew Cab with Nav, Bose Audio, heated + cooled leather, climate control, the LTZ plus package and a ton more options is $48,950.

            If one only needs two rows of seats, there is no doubt on this one.

  • avatar
    Mervich

    These days, with accountants occupying most upper management positions in EVERY kind of business, absolutely nothing is priced based on cost + profit anymore (or its true value). Pricing is based solely on what the market will bear. Retail, real estate, services…you name it, all priced on a “how much can I charge and still sell it” proposition.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      I have no doubt GM enjoys massive profits.

      But what the market can handle becomes a smaller part of the problem if there’s serious competition.

      GMs the only one who’s half serious about the segment, the only one that actually makes a fullsize SUV that resembles a full size SUV.

  • avatar
    VenomV12

    These GM full-size SUV prices are insane. I prefer the methodology my best friend’s dad employs. In the 90s he had a mint condition but old as hell 80s Suburban, bone stock that you could throw anything into and cost virtually nothing. Then he upgraded later on to an equivalent 90s 3/4 ton version. Keep a nice regular car for the rest of the time. Investing $60K plus in these things is ludicrous. $90K is just laughable.

  • avatar
    racer-esq.

    It’s fairly rediculous that the “luxury” full size SUVs aren’t included in this list. I’m sure, for example, that Yukon Denalis and Escalades are cross shopped, with the potential buyers asking the Cadillac dealers how much they will undercut a Denali to make up for the embarrasment of an Escalade.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    It appears the data I have doesn’t break down the SUVs into ‘rich peoples’ SUVs/CUVs ie, BMWs, MB, etc. They are grouped with the laymans SUVs/CUVs. Hmmmm…..

    According to the graphs in this link the full size SUV/CUV market has grown immensely since 1990. But this data might be inaccurate as shown by the data below.

    I do think the US BOF full size SUV market has shrunk. Many of these people have moved over to the full size pickups.

    With the up and coming aluminium F-150 I do think the full size SUV market will shrink further.

    I also think many of the current SUV people want the utility and capability of the large SUVs. But they don’t want the size of a full size pickup.

    What will they have in the future? CAFE will make these full size SUVs more or less obsolete. The more expensive aluminium full size pickup, which will more than likely be in their targeted price range of affordability will be a prime vehicle for them.

    This is good for full size pickups, except for the people who will be forced down the market because they can’t afford the newer and more expensive aluminium full size pickups.

    I suppose they have the new midsizers. They will be more than capable to do most of what many use a pickup for. Or they can buy a midsize van or CUV.

    http://www.statista.com/statistics/184398/us-market-share-of-sold-light-trucks-1990-2012/

    Now what constitutes a large SUV? Look at the numbers in this article it seems a Ford Explorer and Grand Cherokee must be regarded as a large SUV.

    http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2014/05/april-2014-usa-suv-crossover-sales-rankings-by-model.html

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      For these purposes, a large mainstream SUV is basically a truck based SUV sold by a non luxury brand.

      These vehicles are going to continue to get more expensive. Even the Expedition base price went up by a few thousand with the new model. Ford will at least be going the aluminium route with the next generation. I don’t know about GM. The 10-speed transmission, plus additional engines may help too. These beasts are still profitable enough that Ford can sell the small numbers they do and print money.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Hummer: Jeez, I can’t imagine paying that much for 1 vehicle, $1,900 is what one could expect to pay for about 3-4...
  • geozinger: Fnck. I’ve lost lots of cars to the tinworm. I had a 97 Cavalier that I ran up to 265000 miles. The...
  • jh26036: Who is paying $55k for a CTR? Plenty are going before the $35k sticker.
  • JimZ: Since that’s not going to happen, why should I waste any time on your nonsensical what-if?
  • JimZ: Funny, Jim Hackett said basically the same thing yesterday and people were flinging crap left and right.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States