2010 Escalade Or Keep My 2015 Tahoe LTZ

[hcvone]

I had 12 Escalade's, GREAT trucks, and 2010 was one of the best years, understand they are very expensive to repair, and many were not taken care of correctly, MANY. I would keep your truck and run it into the ground, you know what you got, you don' with something used

 

[Da90]

I would keep the 15 Tahoe. We have a 2009 Suburban and a 2017 Suburban. The 09 is junk! I have had many GM trucks and SUVs. My opinion is to stay away from the 07-14s. The only thing that the 2010 has is the 6.2. Also would much rather have selectable 4x4 over AWD.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Meccanoble]

You like 12mpg on premium?

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

Thats the only reason I ran away from them. 6.2 liter guzzler and only take premium. Worst of both worlds. Great for a family car, but terrible for a daily driver. Unless you baller

 

[rjr]

You didn't indicate that you were having any trouble with the '15. I have a '15 Yukon & had an '08 Yukon. The 2015 gets better mileage and has more safety features. Why would you spend $18k to buy a pig in a poke? Tere could be problems with the old Escalade. Old proverb: "Don't look for trouble. It can find you without any assistance."

 

[91RS]

I’d take the 2010 in a heartbeat, even more so if it’s the non-AFM 6.2L. The new ones get better fuel economy but that’s about it. I don’t like the super cheap feeling of the 2015+ trucks compared to the GMT-900. The 900s ride better, drive better, and they don’t have the booming and buffeting.

 

[wjburken]

Folks,

The OP stated the reason for thinking about downgrading was strictly a financial reason. I suspect it’s to reduce monthly payments to free budget up for an additional child.

 

[Seamus]

Downgrade? I have had 4 trucks in the new generation that last being a 2017 Yukon XL Denali that I bought brand new. The new trucks suck. Quality is terrible, and I have had issues with everyone of them. I am a maintenance freak and really take care of my vehicles. I could go on and on with a huge list of warranty issues with all 4 trucks but I will end with saying I hated them for the price they were. Quality was not there. I am still mad at myself for doing it 4 times!!! Money was not an issue for me and I went "backwards" to the GMT-900. A much better ride in my opinion. Ride, seats, comfort my "new" 2013 wins.

The new trucks have much better fuel mileage and the 6.2 with the 8 speed Denali is crazy fast and tows like a boss! Safety features were great. I have to give it a big thumbs up on that. Newer is not always better. They win in a couple of categories but it ends there. I don't think they will have the same reputation of high mileage as the older trucks. They have too many issues new.

I miss the fuel mileage but in reality it's a second vehicle in this house so not a deciding factor. But I just went completely over my truck top to bottom, and did every maintenance item needed and that could be done, including spark plugs, fluids, and O2 sensors. This truck is SO cheap to maintain! We have two German cars in this house and they can put you in the poor house. This thing is a dream in comparison.

Personally I paid up a little to get under a 100k and I wanted the 5.3 to avoid premium as the mileage is not there. I am very happy with the GMT-900 and the mileage with the 5.3 is not too bad. It does everything else pretty well. I would buy the newest you can the '13's and 14's seem to have a lot less little issues like door actuators. Owning a GMT-900 outright is great in comparison to a truck payment on a 75K vehicle and going to the dealer for a lot of nonsense. ( new truck needing to be ripped apart for a torque converter) (AC condenser in the middle of summer/ national backorder it was so common) Obviously my vote is GMT 900. There is a case to be made for either, but I don't feel the new ones will go the distance, and they are too much for what they are.
best of luck

 

[swathdiver]

I'd always take a truck that's free and clear and needs a little in regular monthly repairs/maintenance over a car payment. Oh wait, that's what I did do!

Love my 2009. If I were to do it again, I'd hunt up one of those rare 2010 4x4 XLs with the L9H 6.2 motor.

Currently, we are on the prowl for a 2009 2WD Denali (L9H) or 2010 XFE Yukon (heated and cooled seats) for my wife.

2012-2014 have improved motors and safety programming for towing and improved navigation and music features.

 

[humer101]

Looking to downgrade from my 15 Tahoe LTZ with 99k miles. Looking at a 2010 Escalade with 89k miles. Asking price is $18.5k.

I’d prefer a Tahoe/Yukon but they are the same price as the Escalade.

So my questions is-does this seem like a good deal? How reliable are the older Escalades?

Should I just suck it up and keep the Tahoe?

Why downgrade? if you take your time you will find a Better and newer car.
Don't worry i got 5 children you will be fine my friend.

 

[Rdr854]

Downgrade? I have had 4 trucks in the new generation that last being a 2017 Yukon XL Denali that I bought brand new. The new trucks suck. Quality is terrible, and I have had issues with everyone of them. I am a maintenance freak and really take care of my vehicles. I could go on and on with a huge list of warranty issues with all 4 trucks but I will end with saying I hated them for the price they were. Quality was not there. I am still mad at myself for doing it 4 times!!! Money was not an issue for me and I went "backwards" to the GMT-900. A much better ride in my opinion. Ride, seats, comfort my "new" 2013 wins.

The new trucks have much better fuel mileage and the 6.2 with the 8 speed Denali is crazy fast and tows like a boss! Safety features were great. I have to give it a big thumbs up on that. Newer is not always better. They win in a couple of categories but it ends there. I don't think they will have the same reputation of high mileage as the older trucks. They have too many issues new.

I miss the fuel mileage but in reality it's a second vehicle in this house so not a deciding factor. But I just went completely over my truck top to bottom, and did every maintenance item needed and that could be done, including spark plugs, fluids, and O2 sensors. This truck is SO cheap to maintain! We have two German cars in this house and they can put you in the poor house. This thing is a dream in comparison.

Personally I paid up a little to get under a 100k and I wanted the 5.3 to avoid premium as the mileage is not there. I am very happy with the GMT-900 and the mileage with the 5.3 is not too bad. It does everything else pretty well. I would buy the newest you can the '13's and 14's seem to have a lot less little issues like door actuators. Owning a GMT-900 outright is great in comparison to a truck payment on a 75K vehicle and going to the dealer for a lot of nonsense. ( new truck needing to be ripped apart for a torque converter) (AC condenser in the middle of summer/ national backorder it was so common) Obviously my vote is GMT 900. There is a case to be made for either, but I don't feel the new ones will go the distance, and they are too much for what they are.
best of luck

I had a 2008 Suburban 1 LT for 6 years and almost 100,000 miles. While it was comfortable and was used for road trips between Washington, DC and Houston, Texas, I cannot say that it was trouble free or even less trouble than my 16, 17 or 19 Suburbans. Warranty issues included an almost dry dipstick on the way to Texas (got a GMC Sierra PU to drive for the week — very nice), various interior trim pieces, a rear window because of the grid defogger, headlights hazing after 18 months, repainting the tailgate several times because of a paint problem causing the paint to chip off. I think those problems are far more serious than anything I’ve had with my 16, 17 or 19 Suburbans — which have involved replacement antennas, nails in tires and a loose thread on a steering wheel. I don’t have to worry about the finish coming off the steering wheel or the climate control buttons or dealing with the third row seats when cargo space is needed.