Ross Werner wrote:
Hehehe, I think it's funny that 28 MPG is considered not only "good fuel
economy" but "major redesign for fuel economy". Good ol' US of A!
I'm not a fan of Tahoes or any other BFT on the road. I hate em. I hate
trying to park by them. I hate soccer moms who can't drive them let alone
drive and yack on the phone at the same time. I hate them. I hate them. I
hate them.
Now, that being said, the 2005 Tahoe really isn't bad comparatively when
talking about gas mileage.
2005 C1500 Tahoe 2WD - 17 MPG
2005 Ford Expedition 2WD - 16 MPG
2005 Toyota Sequoia 2WD - 16 MPG
2005 Nissan Armada 2WD - 15 MPG
2005 Dodge Durango 2WD - 16 MPG
The Tahoe doesn't "kick butt" on its competitors, but it does fare better.
I'm sure glad I don't drive ANY of these or their 4WD or AWD equivalents.
I've been thinking about getting a Honda Pilot, but not anymore. Not with
fuel prices where they are. Maybe... a Vespa.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is Doran L. Barton, president, Iodynamics LLC
Iodynamics: Linux solutions - Web development - Business connectivity
"If your weight gains rapidly, it is a sign of swell or fatness."
-- From a Japanese guide for pregnant women
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
