By on September 12, 2018

We started our ranking challenge for every generation of Chevrolet Suburban in last week’s QOTD. That post covered the first through sixth generations, which range from truck with wagon body format to nearly a modern Suburban. Some struggled with the first challenge installment, citing a lack of knowledge and experience with old trucks dating back to the 1930s (you youths!).

Today we’ll rank Suburban generations seven through eleven; undoubtedly these will be much more familiar to many of you.

1973-1991

Beginning with the 1973 model year, the Suburban entered what is essentially its present format. Four real passenger doors allowed entry for the family, and gasoline or diesel V8s of between 5.7 and 7.4 liters of displacement powered these broods around the globe. Based on the hugely successful C/K series of pickup trucks, this is the longest-lived generation of Suburban. Nineteen years, minimal changes. Scottsdale and Silverado trims debut here as well.

1992-1999

The follow-up to the C/K generation trucks is the series which will come to mind for many when they hear the word “Suburban.” The GMT400 brought Suburban into the 1990s, and with it more refinement and optional extras. Again, engines ranged between 5.7 and 7.4 liters, where the range topped out at the Vortec L29 V8 on the 2500-series Suburbans. For the first time, both the manual and automatic transmissions had four speeds from model introduction (they were added to the latter part of the C/K generation). This would be the final go for the GMC Suburban, which took the name Yukon XL for 2000.

2000-2006

The rugged square looks of the GMT400 were replaced by the more rounded GMT800 for 2000 (with limited edition 2000-only GMT400 exceptions). The old 5.7- and 7.4-liter engines went by the wayside, replaced by the 5.3 Vortec at the lower end, and Vortec 8100 (8.1L) for the 2500 versions. Listening to customer commentary, modernization was key for the GMT800. The spare tire moved underneath the vehicle so as not to take up cargo space, and there were new niceties like electronic climate control. For the first time, an Autoride load-leveling suspension was available for upper trims. Other new luxuries included Bose stereo, XM satellite, and power everything else.

2007-2014

For 2007, the GMT900 maintained a variation on the theme established by its GMT800 predecessor, with again more rounded styling. The 5.3-liter Vortec is joined by the 6-liter unit added late in the GMT800’s tenure. The upmarket Vortec 6.2-liter becomes available in this generation, as well. Trim variations offer capacity for between six and nine passengers. More power options and driver assists became standard throughout the years, though 2013 was the last model year for the 2500-series trucks.

2015-Present

2015 brings us to present times, as the eleventh-and-current generation Suburban debuted on the new K2XX platform. Sharper edges in design came back into focus. Assembly consolidated from three locations to a single factory: the Arlington, Texas plant that built your grandfather’s 1996 Buick Roadmaster. Engines consolidated here as well, with only 5.3- or 6.2-liter options. Six-speed transmissions found in the GMT900 era continue, and are joined by new automatics of eight or even ten speeds (2019+). Fuel economy and technological advancement were the order of the day.

Sound off — let’s hear your best to worst rankings for Suburban generations six through eleven.

[Images: GM]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

56 Comments on “QOTD: Care to Rank 11 Generations of the Chevrolet Suburban? (Part II)...”


  • avatar
    ajla

    1. ’92-’99. A lot has already been said about the GMT400 platform and it’s likely in the top 8 best things GM has ever done.

    2. ’07-’14. Lost the big blocks and got saddled with cylinder deactivation shenanigans. But I like the styling, a lot, the 6-speed was a big advancement, and you could get the port-injected 6.2L.

    3. ’71-’91. Power in this gen largely sucked, but the transmissions were tough, fuel injection was introduced (and sue me- I like TBI), ground clearance was plentiful, and the diesels were interesting.

    4. ’15-present. Too expensive, too much tech, too low to the ground, and the power of the 5.3L is falling behind the competition. On the positive side, if you’re rich the 6.2L is available, fuel economy is decent, the style is alright, and I think it is a great towing platform. Plus, it still exists as a BOF SUV instead of a CUV.

    5. ’00-’06. The 8.1L is cool and I don’t hate these or anything. However, despite on-paper improvements, the early 5.3L felt like a downgrade from the 5.7L and cost-cutting from the GMT400 is evident (which GM tried to hide by layering on some luxury frosting).

  • avatar
    I_like_stuff

    2000-2006 gets my vote. I had the Yukon XL version and loved it. Yesterday we were talking about comfortable seats….I could have lived in the driver’s seat of my Yukon, those were incredibly comfortable seats.

    The generation after that was OK. But the newest generation looks ugly as eff. Way too square.

  • avatar
    gtem

    1. GMT400 for best overall quality, durability, styling, offroad chops.

    2. GMT800 for taking the GMT400 and improving on drivability, power, and economy while retaining ground clearance and steel bumpers and the basic essence of an SUV. Minus points for the beginning of cost cutting and a slight degradation in quality overall (worse rust proofing especially). I don’t like the styling as much as the GMT400.

    3. ’71-’91 Unabashed old school trucks. They swill gas, rust like no tomorrow, but I still like them.

    5. K2XX much improved interiors, at a cost of losing a lot of interior room by insisting on a fold flat third row, just plain silly. Still a lot of Chinese content. But really nice on-road vehicles with impressive fuel economy. Same complaints as the GMT900 about an overall regression from classic “trucky” SUV design, but that’s just where the rest of the market went as well.

    5. GMT900 Lutz pats himself on the back for cutting down the panel gaps and putting big wheels on SUVs starting with this generation, I’d say he’s missing the point entirely. The beginning of weak plastic bumpers on GM SUVs, ever increasing Chinesium content leading to silly electrical problems, and all around the depths of cost cutting in bankruptcy-era GM. I do like the styling for the most part.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    1. Landcruiser 76 Series GXL V8 diesel.
    2. 200 Series GXL Landcruiser V8 diesel
    3. Izuzu MUX, 3L diesel
    4. 2017 Nissan Patrol.
    5. Ford Everest
    6. Mitsubishi Pajero 3.2 diesel.
    7. Toyota Prado 2.8 diesel.

  • avatar
    mechimike

    1) 71-91. “The” Suburban. My first vehicle was a 1977 GMC Suburban. The quintessential big box on wheels. Rust is about the only thing that can kill them. My wife now drives a ’91- last year of this gen. It has 200,000 miles on it and it gets used like a new vehicle. Tough, simple, yet comfortable. Growing up, we knew lots of families that bought these as replacements for station wagons.

    2) GMT400. A major evolutionary step, and a great bunch of trucks. Styling is timeless and, like the box-bodies, about the only thing that can kill them is the rust monster. Front IRS for the 4×4 versions was huge. They lost the cool roll-up rear glass in this iteration, though, and the vent windows.

    3) All the rest. I can’t get excited about any of the newer ones. They’re just bland new SUVs. GM screwed the pooch on the cylinder deactivation on the 2005 and newer stuff, and long-term reliability is a question mark.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    1973-1991 GOAT

    Specifically the 1991 iteration with composite headlights and fuel injection. Give me the 3/4 ton with 4×4 and 454 V8. Can get past every obstacle except a gas station.

  • avatar
    87 Morgan

    From a non-brutish off road perspective and via the lense of DD use.

    They are in the order of newest to oldest.

    15-present; just a spectacular driving vehicle that gets reasonable F.E basically a school bus size rig. As for the power deficiencies of the 5.3: An affordable tuner purchased on Amazon will wake the motor up.

    07-14: I have had one for 8.5 years and this month is its 11th year in service. Just a phenomenal rig. I am hoping to get another 10 years out of it. I had the DOD issue resolved with new pistons/rings and lifters 40k ago and have not burned a drop of oil since; also bought a tuner and turned off the DOD and moved the shift points. Drives like a dream and still gets 16 mpg around town.

    92-99: the Tony Soprano original Suburban. Durable and iconic

    73-91: Look the best with a 3 inch lift and some wheels. Great off road rig and stupid easy to work on. In theory, if you have one and don’t live in a rust prone area you could keep one of these going forever with junkyard parts only.

    00-06: my least favorite. See yesterdays thread on front seats. I found the front seats on this version terribly uncomfortable. Just did not fit me, obviously I am in the minority based on the number sold. Plus, the interior play Skool look just does not do it for me.

  • avatar
    BigOldChryslers

    1. 1973-91 edition: My dad had RWD 1988 Suburban with the 6.2L diesel. Really needed a turbo to wake it up because the 6.2L diesel was no powerhouse, and the steering was numb and uninspiring. However it was a reliable tall station wagon that could comfortably haul a family on extended trips, good on fuel for its size, and always felt well-planted on the road in any weather with all-season tires. (It may have had a limited-slip diff.) Since the later Duramax 6.6L diesel was never offered in a Suburban except via aftermarket conversion, I have to rank this generation #1.

    My only other experience with these was a (2014?) GMT900 Yukon rental that I drove for about a month. I have to assume the Suburban drove very similar. I hated the transmission due to poor shiftpoint programming. It was almost always in the wrong gear in any situation other than interstate driving, putting the engine well below it’s torque range. If I needed to accelerate, I’d push on the throttle and nothing would happen, so keep pushing further until the computer finally figured out I meant it, then it would downshift (twice?) and take off like a rocket! Commenter “87 Morgan” above says that a programmer would solve the transmission problems.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    1. The ’92-’99 GMT400. Some friends of our recently retired a ’96 Suburban with 325,000 miles. They took it on trips from California to Texas to upstate New York to South Dakota, and everywhere else, sometimes pulling trailers. They had even done things like get the driver’s seat (leather) upholstered, rather than buy another one. Their other vehicles are a couple of high-mileage (150-200k) Priuses.

    2. ’15 to present

    3. ’73-’91

    4. ’07-’14

    5. ’00-’06

  • avatar
    Maxb49

    C’mon guys! TASK FORCE!

    1955-1959 NAPCO Suburbans were the greatest generation.

  • avatar
    Weltron

    1) GMT 400- this gen is destined to be a classic eventually, if not working on it already. Clean simple design, great truck.

    2) GMT 800- I daily drive a 2003 Suburban, with the 5.3. That seriously is a great road trip car. Such a comfy rig too. Pretty good in snow too, even with garbage tires on. The rust proofing isn’t awful on this truck, I just have the back of my rockers going out (Michigan/Minnesota truck)

    3) 1973-91- Hard for me to put this one in 3rd. I like them all really.

  • avatar

    I am amazed that anybody would want to purchase such an obese vehicle. They probably aren’t interested in either performance or handling. How are you suppose to turn with something this large. Why not just purchase a Subaru or Volvo sports wagon, which have plenty of room and handle well. A family of four does not need something as large as a Suburban. If you are involved in a job like construction or in park service then the Suburban would be a good choice.

    • 0 avatar
      I_like_stuff

      I am amazed anyone would buy something that I don’t like. How dare the world not conform perfectly to my wants and tastes??

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Subaru builds a “sports wagon”?

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        @Subaru sports wagon…

        AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

        If they lower the Outback about 4 inches and give us the turbo 4 out of the Ascent MAYBE I’ll believe that statement.

        Heck a Mazda CX-9 AWD comes closer to being a “Sports Wagon” than anything Subaru currently sells in North America.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        I think they used to make the Legacy wagon with the 3.6 and a sportier suspension. Alas, those days are long gone.

    • 0 avatar
      jack4x

      “How are you supposed to turn with something this large?”

      Quadrasteer!

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        There is ONE Qudrasteer Suburban in the local area that I keep meaning to snap a pic of just due to what must have been production rarity.

        Classic GM: Come up with a better idea, barely advertise it, price it high enough that most people don’t bite.

        • 0 avatar
          jack4x

          I remember at least one print ad that boasted a Quadrasteer equipped truck having a tighter turning radius than a Lamborghini. That may have been for a Silverado/Sierra though.

          • 0 avatar
            87 Morgan

            No Quadrasteer on the Suburban or Tahoe

          • 0 avatar
            jack4x

            @87,

            Correct for the Tahoe, but 3/4 ton Burbs did have the option available. As Principal Dan notes, it was ultra rare. If I ever found a good condition 8.1L Suburban with Quadrasteer I would buy it on the spot. I have never seen one for sale, so possibly the option was 6.0L only.

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            Yes I didn’t believe the Suburban in question was Quadrasteer until I got down low and looked at the hydraulic rams and knuckles for the steering gear. The only one I’ve ever seen IRL.

          • 0 avatar
            Hummer

            I actually see quadrasteer suburbans fairly often in NC, possibly more common than quadrasteer Silverados here. However I have no idea of the 8.1L made it into a quadrasteer suburban, it would truly be the holy grail of Suburbans. If I ever found one near me I would have a hard time not buying it.

            Technically the quadrasteer trucks had to be derated for the axle on the 6.0 trucks but I try not to let that get my hopes down for finding one.

            The quadrasteer suburbans are easy to tell from a distance as they all have the marker lights on both sides of the rear wheel as well as the wider rear track.

    • 0 avatar
      gtem

      “Why not just purchase a Subaru or Volvo sports wagon, which have plenty of room”

      Define plenty of room. 35 cu ft of cargo space with the rear seats in use?

      Laughable “argument” that’s hardly worth responding to.

    • 0 avatar
      87 Morgan

      ‘they probably aren’t interested in either performance or handling’: I have a Corvette for that. Keep your Subaru.

      A family of four does not need something as large as a Suburban: Oh really? How the F would you know what my family of four does nor does not need? Do we need the space all the time, no. Have we filled it to capacity with all the seat belts in use? Yes. Has it been loaded for a week in the mountains? Absolutely.

      Why not just purchase a Subaru or Volvo sports wagon: You are welcome to bring your ever durable Volvo on over, after installing a hitch of course, and hooking up the 24′ Featherlite with a couple cows in it and tow away; You can use your Subaru to pull the Coleman Camper…

      Now that I think of it, it is such versatile vehicle in terms of long term use: easy 200k, low maintenance, low cost of said maintenance, plus really good resale etc. Why would anyone buy a Volvo or Subaru? You limit yourself and the activities that you can partake in with such a singular use vehicle.

    • 0 avatar
      DanHalli

      Well… Subarus and Volvos absolutely suck for towing, aren’t too great for big camping trips, and aren’t made to go off road. There’s a few reasons. Some people don’t care about on road handling, rather have other concerns. Off road handling is far more important to me. So is space and durability. Subaru doesn’t have either, not in the same context.

      Personally, I’ve owned Subarus, Volvos (a lot of them), tons of other cars… And always have a Suburban 4×4. I also have a family bigger than 4 (were 7 all together).

  • avatar
    xflowgolf

    1) GMT400 – excellent clean styling
    2) ’73-’91 squarebody. I’ll take an early roundlight two tone version please.
    3) Current ’15+ era. These have presence and are remarkably capable vehicles.
    4) ’00-’06 these are handsome in 3/4 guise as pictured
    5) ’07-’14 enter the era of plastic bumpers

  • avatar
    DEVILLE88

    I like all of them but i have a soft spot for the 1997 Suburban as i owned one and greatly enjoyed driving it.

  • avatar
    APaGttH

    Full disclosure: owned a GMT800 and own a GMT900 close relative:

    From a non-brutish off road perspective and via the lense of DD use.

    They are in the order of newest to oldest.

    2015-present: Yes they are expensive, yes the second row bench if equipped is about as comfortable as a wooden kitchen chair. Incredible fuel economy for it’s size and no turbo shennanigans, the 6.2L V6 is as good as it gets, the tranny is smooth, the transfer case and system is seamless and invisible, it’s the size of a “short bus” and drives like a car.

    2007-2014: No, the interior hasn’t aged well it looks really dated and cheap now. I think this was the most attractive platform from the exterior strictly. I disliked it visually when it came out, but it was almost ahead of its time, and it has aged well. That interior, which is a flaw today, was a huge step up from the GMT800 Soviet grade interior. You could get the 6.0 in some model years, the 6-speed transmission was a huge improvement when it arrived, and other GMT800 issues like weak front differentials were solved. I remember having one as a rental in 2012 that had 50,000 miles on the clock. It appeared brand new across the board inside/out/mechanically. Very easy to drive. If I look at this through an off-road filter, I would put this at the bottom of the pile. Lousy front and rear angle, weak bumpers, slightly lower ground clearance. The least capable in the rough of all of these (but still capable).

    1973-1991: Agricultural exterior and interior, panel gaps, numb steering, roughish suspension but built to last, big blocks and diesel options, manual, stupid easy to work on, great clearance and easy modification. In a lot of ways the best “off-road” version of these choices.

    1992-1999: The start of the bean countery BS. Yes, the agri-Suburban softened up and became a status symbol when you, “woke up this morning, and got myself a gun.” Everything became “better” but at the same time everything became worse.

    2000-2006: To qualify, the gap from worst to best is narrow, there is a reason GM continues to outsell all comers in this class of vehicle, but there was a lot to groan about. The Vortec 5.3 was weak with really no MPG improvement, the 4-speed auto was reliable but outdated, the manual went away in this generation, recirculating ball steering remained, interior materials got as cheap as you could get at this point. Low end trims were uncomfortable places of mouse fur and hard plastics with lousy seats (higher end trims with the 10 way power seats were way more comfortable. It was attractive, I’d say the second best looking Suburban of these choices by my eyes, and this was the last generation Suburban that was relatively easy to work on (electronic components are stupid easy to work on). Just a lot of flaws and a lot of cut corners.

  • avatar
    pwrwrench

    In my younger days I thought Suburbans were kind of a joke. Big, horrible gas consumption, poor quality control. Later I joined a motorcycle road race team. One of the group had a 1978 Suburban, 454, TH400, 3/4 ton chassis. I came to appreciate it’s ability to haul 4 or 5 people, all their race gear, other stuff required for a weekend’s racing, and pull a trailer with 4 motorcycles with spares and tools. At 80 mph, all day long to get to the track.
    They have their uses. I would not mind having one of the 1990s versions with the 4 speed auto.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      My father-in-law kept his 1973 2500 4×4 Suburban 454 until 2013 when he replaced in with a 2013 1500 5.3 RWD.

      The 2013 was a dog, right out the gate. Couldn’t hold a candle to the ’73 by any measure but by then the ’73 was falling apart and no longer safe for the road.

    • 0 avatar
      rocketrodeo

      My dad bought a 1979 3/4 ton Suburban with the LG7 454 in the fall of 1978. Pretty highly optioned. Silverado trim, cloth interior, two-tone brown and tan. It was a tow vehicle and occasional family hauler, which I took over about 1998. It still smelled new at that point. It had a few weird QC issues, like a speedo gear from a 1/2 ton so it always read much slower than it was actually going. But what a tank. You could occasionally get it to break 10mpg, but nothing, including four tons of trailer, could get it much lower than 8 mpg. I had occasion to drive several later generations of the Suburban, especially GMT400s and GMT800s, for work, and in my eyes they didn’t stand up to the earlier squarebodies. They probably got rougher treatment, but were maintained by the book–and they broke all the time. I had to replace a radiator once on mine, but besides that and several cruise control modules (3 total), over the 26 years we owned it nothing crucial ever broke. It was getting hard to find good 16.5″ tires though, for sure.

  • avatar
    Stephen Hood

    My parents owned 1975, 1985, and 1988 Suburbans. The ’75 and ’88 Suburbans were driven for several hundred thousand miles each, whereas the 1985 Suburban was traded away after a few years. Dad pulled Scout trailers and boats and loved the ’75 and ’88, but the ’85 did not live up to his expectations. In my mind these are some of the best family wagons ever built. I’m really disappointed that I can’t get anywhere near the purchase price of the current generation of Suburban. They are excellent vehicles but they have become a status symbol whereas the older Suburbans were modest family haulers (at least in Texas where a grew up). There was a dealer in Denton, Texas, that inventoried what seemed like hundreds of Suburbans with everything from bare bones work trucks to gaudy custom van styled conversions. I loved going there with my dad and looking at the wide variety of choices and hoping he’d get the fever for a new one.

  • avatar
    macnab

    Suburbans look so good because the cowl looks like it has a real engine inside and the suspension trim looks level. Cars used to look like this until they shaped them like wedges. To hide the queer shape they put confusing slanty creases on the sides making them look like the front springs are sagging. Suburban styling hasn’t changed much over the years and that’s why we all still like them. I note that the corners of the later ones are getting blunt, a sign of coming suppository styling. I had a MY74.

  • avatar

    1) ’07-’14.
    2) ’15-present.
    3) ’00-’06.
    4) ’73-’91.
    5) ’92-’99.

    I currently own a 2002 Tahoe with 216,000 miles and still, thankfully, going strong. The new ones drive like a bank vault; I’d own one if I could justify the payment. But I like the ’07-’14 styling most of all. That’ll be my next one.

    One nice point about a Tahoe/Suburban vs. a Subaru Outback: not needing $3k worth of “maintenance”/repairs in the form of head gaskets/water pump/timing belt every 100,000 miles. Newer 2.5s run a chain but are also saddled with that CVT for less power but no real upshot in fuel economy to compensate.

    So no thanks. After three Subies, I’ll stick with my Chevies. Economy is much more than just fuel consumption, and Suburban/Tahoe handle and ride quite well for their size.

  • avatar
    ernest

    We owned 5 of the GMT400 and one of the GMT800’s. The 400’s set the bar- durable, reliable, handsome, comfortable. The GMT800 was OK, but not up to the standards set by the prior bodystyle. Lots of niggly little things, and the interior was a marked step down from the GMT400.

  • avatar
    CKNSLS Sierra SLT

    Bought my wife a BRAND NEW GMC Suburban back in 1999. It was $30,000.00 back them. In the first 12,000 miles the alternator, rear end, and transmission were replaced. Between reliability issues and her deciding she really didn’t want something that big-we traded it in on a NEW Ford Explorer with marginally better reliability.

  • avatar
    01 Deville

    Currently own 2x 2007 Expedition EL and once owned 2001 Suburban. Been in 07+ ESV and current ESV of freinds.
    I would rate current one highest followed by last gen, then 92 and then GMT 800. Too young to know anything about older ones. But they looked cool when I was young.
    GMT 800 were rough with below par interior and weak spots.
    Prior generation was behind expedition in terms of FE and folding third row and pwoer step gates. But in real world driving are probably better. Hold their value def better than the ford

  • avatar
    Spartan

    In this order:

    1. GMT900 – Pleasant styling, powerful engines, and the success of these gave us the K2xx, so that’s why I rank the GMT900 above the others. The GMT900 HAD to be a hit, and it was across the board.

    2. K2xx – Radical styling on the triplets that has aged surprisingly well. LT motors alone are a huge selling point. Hands down the best full size SUVs on the market and it’s not even close. The Navigator doesn’t have a V8 anymore. Next.

    3. GMT800 – Reliable, stout, but a bit boring and weren’t fitted with the LS motors.

    I’m a proud owner of a 2016 Yukon XL Denali and to say I am satisfied with my purchase is an understatement. These vehicles are damn good. Not good for what they are, they are just good. When we’re on vacation, I go out of my way to rent a K2xx.

  • avatar
    Jagboi

    In the early 90’s I worked in the oil patch and we had a fleet of GMT400’s. Bought new and kept for 2 years when they were miled out. Every single one had sagging and drooping doors by 30,000 miles. The hinge bushes wore out, that was a constant maintenance item.

    The Chevys worked hard, but they also seemed to need lots of attention at the dealer too. In a fleet of 10 trucks we had an 11th as a spare to cover for when one was down for repairs.

  • avatar
    Hummer

    I think a lot of people haven’t been in post facelift GMT800s.

    The quality different in a 00-02 vs a 03-06 GMT800 is astounding, I wouldn’t touch the 00-02 with a 10 foot pole but the 03-06 was a fabulous place to spend time and the GMT900 that followed those 03-06 trucks were a severe downgrade in interior quality.

  • avatar

    Having specifically targeted and purchased an 03+ GMT800, I would generally agree with what you’re saying. The revised versions are the ones to get.

    I’d stop short of calling it fabulous though. The fitment of the interior panels is rather haphazard, and some of the buttons in my well-maintained example had no finish left. Lots of dash lights burned out. Sharp edges to the plastic on the console lid. Warped door panels.

    • 0 avatar
      Hummer

      Yea the button finish, specifically the radio and steering wheel controls all love to disintegrate before your eyes. I make a point not to press my fingernail against the buttons and it seems to prevent too much wear. Fabulous only in comparison to the earlier 800s and then the 900s maybe. I hate the all plastic panels on the 900s and of course my H2s. I like the soft touch material used on the 800 door panels.

  • avatar
    road_pizza

    Count me in as a ’73-’91 and ’05-’14 fan.

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • Jeff S: @zerofoo–Agree if you can get the permits and if you can it could take years. If you are an independent...
  • TheFirehawkGuy: My alter ego TheLincolnMarkGuy is loving this series. Had a VII and a couple of VIIIs in LSC guise....
  • Jeff S: @Lou_BC–I would definitely check out all the options if you decide to sell your F-150. I was shocked I...
  • Jeff S: The oil companies do see the handwriting on the wall and they are answerable to the stockholders who want...
  • Jeff S: @dukeisduke–Jay Leno owns a full restored Covair Rampside pickup and has a review of it on Jay...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Jo Borras
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber