Aside from the new General Motors offerings, there's not a whole lot of action going on in the fullsize SUV segment. That doesn't seem to be stopping GM from pushing the envelope in the market as Automotive News is reporting that the automaker is looking to introduce some new powertrain options into the Chevy Tahoe (and Suburban), GMC Yukon (and Yukon XL) and the Cadillac Escalade – all have been redesigned for the 2015 model year.

Now, we already know that GM and Ford are collaborating on nine- and ten-speed transmissions for a broad range of applications (including the big SUVs), but this new report says that GM is also considering other options as a way to one-up the competition and, of course, to optimize fuel economy. AN quotes Jeff Luke, executive chief engineer for GM trucks, as saying that "interesting powertrain technologies" are coming including a return of a hybrid SUV and possibly even a diesel engine. Although it sounds like the latter could come down to how customers respond to the 2014 Jeep Grand Cherokee EcoDiesel.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 58 Comments
      atvman
      • 1 Year Ago
      The 4.3L should get some consideration, it's almost as strong as the older 5.3L from the early 2000s. The cancelled 4.5L Duramax would be nice too, but I'm not holding my breath.
      chrismcfreely
      • 1 Year Ago
      The only way diesels would be cost effective, is if the volume was huge. Since diesels make much more sense in a vehicle that size, if they had always been the main/only powertrain offered over the years, it would be cost effective, but at this point, it might be too late. Having them be the alternative engine choice will keep them too expensive, because of volume. All of the crap reasons people come up with for diesel engines costing more are baloney, volume is the only real problem at this point. Most of the costs involved in diesel engines are also there in modern gas engines.
        manure
        • 1 Year Ago
        @chrismcfreely
        Diesels are not really more efficient than gas, once you adjust for energy content per gallon. However, stripping out 1500 lbs would help a lot here.
          mitytitywhitey
          • 1 Year Ago
          @manure
          False. The diesel cycle is more efficient than the Otto cycle in most scenarios. This is why Mazda is experimenting with something similar to a diesel-cycle petrol engine for their next gen Skyactiv line.
      bookemd
      • 1 Year Ago
      I have maintained the new 4.3 L V6 would be a great choice, as it would enough power than most people need shuffling around town.
        The Wasp
        • 1 Year Ago
        @bookemd
        Why not the 3.6 V6? It has plenty of power, too.
          jtav2002
          • 1 Year Ago
          @The Wasp
          TT 3.6!
          Matt
          • 1 Year Ago
          @The Wasp
          Not enough torque for a vehicle like this. The new 4.3L V6 has around 40 lb-ft more. In the trucks, it feels very nice from a power standpoint and the mileage is excellent if you keep your foot out of it.
      banstaman
      • 1 Year Ago
      It would be interesting to see what the twin-turbo 3.6 V6 would do in either of these SUVs.
      AP1_S2K
      • 1 Year Ago
      i like that front-end design.
      ishmaelcrowley
      • 1 Year Ago
      These GM full sizers are for all the Soccer Moms out there who can't afford Range Rovers. (I can just see them pleading with their husbands, "But Jane has one and I want one too!")
        OptimusPrimeRib
        • 1 Year Ago
        @ishmaelcrowley
        Or my friend who makes $500,000 a year to use his 2500 Suburban to tow custom cars or parts to customers.
        Bernard
        • 1 Year Ago
        @ishmaelcrowley
        Have you ever noticed that old Range Rovers are never on the roads? Those are cars for people who don't mind having the vehicle spend an hour in the shop for every hour it spends on the road. For people that actually need to drive their vehicles, it's not an option.
        bluemoonric
        • 1 Year Ago
        @ishmaelcrowley
        You mean can't afford to keep the maintenance up on a Range Rover.
      FuelToTheFire
      • 1 Year Ago
      "possibly even a diesel engine" WHY, just WHY? A diesel engine was already tried out in the Suburban. NOBODY bought it. It didn't work then, and it sure as hell won't work now. I'd like to see the 6.2, and maybe even the 7.0 (or 6.2 SC) offered to potential customers who want more power and better acceleration, as well as higher towing capability.
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        Smilez1105
        • 1 Year Ago
        Everybody listen...do you hear it? It's the worlds smallest violin STILL playing for poor little Laser. I think the thing is on a never ending loop.
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Smilez1105
          [blocked]
      Brodz
      • 1 Year Ago
      Why do they need three of the same thing?
        jtav2002
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Brodz
        Because they sell plenty under each nameplate. Badge engineering is only bad if people are not buying the product. There are many people who own or would own a Sierra that wouldn't own a Silverado. I would imagine there is some of the same between the Tahoe and Yukon for whatever reason. And then the Escalade obviously brings another group of customers that may have not bought the others. So in this case, they're getting more customers than they are cannibalizing sales.
        bK
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Brodz
        Because thats what GM does
      mjzalucki
      • 1 Year Ago
      Does that Tahoe actually have those awful Nissan-like curly-cue front turn signals? Really? Seriously?
      ebn.hahn
      • 1 Year Ago
      Wow, one hedious front end.....
      Paul P.
      • 1 Year Ago
      Just give us the diesel option already, please? You tried the hybrid option, which sells/sold miserably. Now try the diesel.
        The Wasp
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Paul P.
        To be fair, GM already tried diesel in the Suburban as well.
          Paul P.
          • 1 Year Ago
          @The Wasp
          True, but that was also ~20 years ago and totally different technology from today. You're talking 180hp and 360ft-lbs tq from a 6.5L engine. Today you have 2.8L I4 diesels beating those numbers while being infinitely cleaner and more refined.
          The Wasp
          • 1 Year Ago
          @The Wasp
          The same argument applies to hybrids -- hybrids now are better than they were in the past. Also, I believe the last diesel Suburban was offered in 2001.
    • Load More Comments