China Falters on Fuel Tax
Montana Governor Stumps for Coal-to-Liquids

GM Introduces 2007 Full-Size SUVs

2007 Tahoe

GM has introduced its 2007 model year full-size SUVs, redesigned, based on a new GM full-size platform, and offering new powertrains that deliver incremental improvements in fuel economy through technologies such as displacement on demand and new transmissions. It is on this new platform that GM has pledged first to introduce its two-mode hybrid system.

Yet as critical as the full-size SUVs are for GM’s financial picture, the company is stating up front that they expect flat sales in the segment—i.e., no growth.

Flat sales seems a lot to ask for. Despite extensive discounting, sales of GM’s full-size SUVs dropped 23% in August year-on-year. Ford is doing worse—sales of the Expedition dropped 40.2% in August year-on-year.

GM is leading the rollout with the Chevy Tahoe, the best-selling full-size SUV. (August sales dropped 33.9% from 15,051 in 2004 to 9,994 this year.)

This new generation uses the Gen IV small-block V-8 engine family, with displacements ranging from 4.8 liters to 6.2 liters, and horsepower ranging from 290 hp (216 kW) to 400 hp (298 kW).

Variable Valve timing is used on some engines to enhance performance and efficiency, as is Displacement on Demand.

Engine Offerings for the GM 2007 Full-Size SUVs
4.8 L iron RPO LY2 290 hp (216 kW)
5.3 L iron RPO LY5 320 hp (238 kW) Displacement on Demand
Includes E-85 version (RPO LMG)
5.3 L aluminum RPO LC9 320 hp (238 kW) Displacement on Demand
E85 capable
6.0 L iron LY6 350 hp (260 kW) Variable Valve Timing
6.0 L aluminum L76 355 hp (264 kW) Displacement on Demand
Variable Valve Timing
6.2 L aluminum L92 380 and 400 hp
(283 and 298 kW)
Variable Valve Timing

The two 5.3-liter engines that are E85-compatible use a new virtual fuel sensor. The Engine Control Module (ECM) samples the exhaust at the oxygen sensor, and an algorithm determines whether E85 is used, as well as its mixture percentage with gasoline. This, according to GM, is a much simpler, less costly system than previous systems that relied on fuel composition sensors. In fact, the entire system on the engine is simple: only the fuel rail and fuel injectors are different between E85 versions and non-E85 versions.

(If you ever wondered about the predilection of automakers to build millions of flex-fuel vehicles prior to widespread demand or the existence of a pervasive E85 fueling infrastructure: federal regulations allow automakers to use flex-fuel vehicles for CAFE mileage credits (and EPAct conformance)—whether the driver actually ever uses E85 or not.)

The 2007 Tahoe with the 5.3-liter engine delivers, according to GM’s early estimates, combined cycle fuel economy of 20.5 mpg US (11.5 l/100km) in two-wheel drive, and 20.1 mpg US in 4-wheel drive. That’s a big relative increase from the 2005 Tahoe’s (5.3-liter, 2WD) combined results of 17 mpg US—but still falls well below even the current CAFE standard target for 2007 of 22.2 mpg.



Another full size SUV! Is it due to popular demand, or something else? 6.2 L displacement! That really sound like a toilet flusher... Why would americans prefer such giants displacement?

Slippery Slope

Well, my wife and I are trading our 2001 Chevy Blazer (compact SUV) for a 2006 Toyota Prius. We are on a waiting list and will pay the MSRP but receive an approximate $3,100 tax credit for the 2006 tax year. Poor GM. They will be stuck with the design, tooling, production line, worker training, marketing expenses for a line of SUVs that no one wants. No way Congress should bail them out when they declare bankruptcy! Go hybrids!

Mikhail Capone

Congrats on switching to the Prius, S.S.! Good choice..


I just don't understand what is going on in their heads that they think that crap like this is going to sell.

Part of the problem I suppose is this fascination with performance - I suspect it runs deep in the GM culture, and they had gotten quite good at marketing those types of vehicles. The problem is that they don't really know how to build and sell anything else. Too bad, so sad. When they finally go bankrupt, I won't be sad.

I have no regrets in buying a VW diesel last year. Even at 3$/gallon, I feel no pain.


As seen on TV, a gang of black Escalante's go full speed prowling through an urban danger zone. Suspicious-looking pedestrians peer lustily at this trio of muscle machines as they roar down boulevards and finally screech to a halt, perfectly side-by-side before a crosswalk and dare one to cross.

GM put this commercial together for those who drive to intimidate. What's good for GM has NEVER been good for America.

The GM Saturn SUV is a phony Hybrid. Buy the Ford Escape Hybrid instead, America.

The Anonymous Poster

I haven't seen that commercial, Wells. But Toyota should do a similar commercial, except when the SUVs stop at the intersection, it's because they ran out of gas (cut to shot of gas gauge). Then a Prius drives in front of them. That would be cool ^_^


When I was up in northern California I saw a Toyota billboard for one of their trucks. The line was "So big it's scary" or some such.

The deal with Toyota isn't that they are environmentally pure - it is that they are good enough businessmen to offer every customer what they want. You can buy a Prius or a V-8 Tundra pickup.

GM's problem (and to a lesser extent Ford) is that they have just one mental image of their customer base - more power - more size - etc.

Maybe I've done a similar comment here in the past, but I think GM blew it when they stopped building Saturn as a Japan-clone brand. If they'd kept going they could at least point to ... heck, the little 50 mpg Saturn hybird coupe their customers would buy.


Panoz makes the Escalante. I think you mean Escalade.

The Anonymous Poster

Odograph is right, but what Toyota is trying to show is that THS can be applied to any vehicle. Someday, even the giant Tundra V8's will have hybrid systems for improved fuel economy and emissions.


Its Panoz "Esparante" not Escalante. Performance is not necesarily a bad thing, but anyone that is driving an SUV is stupid to think that he/she would get performance. A BMW 330i wagon would outperform the 400hp monster of these fullsize trucks, and still do a not so good but descent 27mpg. People should pay the price of very low performace and high fuel consumption for choosing an SUV in the first place, don't give them more power to compensate.

GM is heading for a crash course.

Mikhail Capone

GM made so much money with SUVs in the 90s (they are after all mostly pickups trucks with seats in the back sold at a 10k+ premium) that it seems they can't believe it's over and try to re-live that period.

They dropped all the rest to concentrate on what made the most money, and now they don't have anything else to offer.

Why are they coming out with these monsters nobody wants now? Because the design cycle for a vehicle is quite long and they started working on those when gas was still below 2$/gal in the US.


Good market background for this discussion is in Keith Bradsher’s 2002 book High and Mighty. SUVs: The World’s Most Dangerous Vehicles and How They Got That Way

The irony is that the Japanese automakers probably would have participated as equally enthusiastically as their US competitors in the early days of the SUV market in the US if they hadn’t faced regulatory barriers with origins stretching back to the Kennedy administration.


As I have done for every vehicle maker, I sent GM a copy of my BioDiesel, in wheel drive. I got a letter from them yesterday. wanting me to sign that it was a "Gift". Nowhere have I shown any interest in patenting any of the radical improvements. I just want automakers to use whatever strikes their fancy. Over time, everything I have suggested will come to pass. Mitisubishi has already built a very good prototype of the in-wheel drive. When they show what it will do, it will become the primary method of propelling ground vehicles.


Remember Mike (10:19:45 AM), the Japanese car companies are shaped by their national world view - island nation, no native oil industry, all imported. We benefit greatly from them being "ahead of our curve" as it were.

BTW, let's see if I can cancel the italic!


Second try!


Duh gm is a truck company they always have been. Thats why cafe was a shit stupid idea in the first place. Not all the companies are car companies nor should they be. Gm knows how to make heavy duty trucks. They invest money into truck engines for those who NEED to haul heavy loads without having to spend 350k on a freaking medium duty truck and then get a class 5 licsense just to drive the damn thing.

If you think a gm suv is a gas guszzle wait till you see the typical medium duty truck gms suvs and pickups replace.

That massive chunk of steel with a solid steel bumper and an engine the size of a vw.. thats a medium duty truck. Which do you want bussinesses buying by the million each year hm? Do you even have a clue how many medium duty trucks have been replaced by high performance light duty trucks in the last 10 years?

No you dont do you?


I am as highly skeptical of manufacturers HP claims as I am of EPA mileage claims. If only we could convert Madison Ave hype into Btus. We can do it with other sources of manure.

Mike Weindl

In all other countries except the US people have a Turbo-Diesel engine in there trucks, suv's or delivery
vans if they work with heavy loads. So why not here..?

Mike Weindl

For example as I read in, a Dodge Sprinter 2.7 turbo diesel delivery van had an EPA of 26 and was tested with 30 mpg whereas its counterparts with
gas engines Chevy Express reached 17 mpg and a Dodge Ram reached 13 mpg....?


Mike Weindl - broadly speaking the US thinks the diesel particuate exhaust health threat is greater than the mpg benefit.

Mike Weindl

If they are fitted out more and more with filters...and you can use Bio Diesel....?


Gm tried many times to sell diesel trucks hell my dad owned one of thier diesels. The problem was early light diesels had a tendancy to explode... not a good thang. My dads truck blew up so bad the piston rod was fired 60 feet into the air.


Pls tell me why american housewives need to drive those
behemot SUVs? WHy do they need performance when highway speedlimit is 110km/h? Why do we need this monsters for just going to/from work?Makes absolutely no sence.
GM had EV1 and EV2 running just fine, ppl were happy, but they (GM or whoever behind them)decided not to make the case and stoped the whole programm. Those who own stocks of GM own major oil stocks either, care not about future of this country but of their own profits today(sure feels yummy for them now with late gas prices). Goverment consist of ppl who are fed cramps from oil magnat's table during elections and they don't care how many american boys will be laid down in Iraq to achieve the dirty goals of their sponcors. Huge money are flowing to Middle East and US can't control how those money influence its internal US policymakers.
Adoption of EVs will cause money to stay in America and make this country truely independent from Middle East(so Bush wouldn't need to hold hands of Saudis, EVs will
create jobs in US, they are greener, what more does
goverment need? Yes all muffler - pump specialists will loose their jobs but they will loose it anyway in 5, 10 25 years. Taxes for gas should be increased NOW. This way country makes more money instead of oil companies.
Carbon tax should be implemented. Why should I inhale
smoke from SUV? Just because owner is rich? If so then make him pay more for privilege to poison folks around
and make those folks develop health problems and then go to public healthcare institutions. Smoking is forbidden, driving tanks on streets should be highly
costly for those who likes PERFORMANCE at someones expence. But that is what the goverment is for. Surely Bush is a nice guy but nice guy is not enough to make
cosiety prosper.


one word to explain junking of EVs. Profit, spells P-R-O-F-I-T. Details? Not profitable.


"Pls tell me why american housewives need to drive those
behemot SUVs?"

Because they wish to send social signals to all those they meet.

Status seeking is a constant in all the world's cultures. We have just allowed it to be a bit energy-inefficient in the US. With different rules they'd be out there status-competing in luxury hybrids.

The comments to this entry are closed.