The 2014 Tahoe has been spied in full camouflage not far from GM’s proving grounds, with a Toyota Sequoia and Ford Expedition in close proximity. And for once, the Tahoe wasn’t towing two other vehicles into a nearby repair shop. But it’s clear that engineers are determining how their upcoming full-bodied SUV stacks up against rivals. And unlike the Ford and the Toyota, the new Chevy Tahoe (known as K2UC to insiders) and 2014 GMC Yukon (K2UG) are expected to keep their live axle setup rather than switching to an independent rear suspension, probably for the sake of towing prowess.
The full-size SUV segment has been dominated by GM for longer than most of us have been alive. And the automaker plans to keep it this way by combining new fuel efficient enhancements while retaining the rugged capabilities consumers have grown to love. Rumors of anything from an eight-speed automatic transmission to some sort of diesel engine finding their way into the powertrain setup have been speculated, but we’re definitely more likely to see the next-generation small-block V8 engine GM has in store for us over anything else. Displacement has been expected to remain the same as the current 5.3L and 6.2L offerings, but will receive direct injection this time around. There’s also a rumored 5.5L V8, but that could be for something else.
From what we can make out of the heavy camo, the Tahoe’s mirrors have become considerably sleeker, while LED lights accompany the front fascia along with front-mounted ultrasonic parking sensors — could those be for a self-parking system of sorts? We certainly hope so.
Speaking of the fascia, there appears to be an oval-like shape in the center of the grille, rather than a bowtie. We’ll assume this is some sort of trickeration by the dress-up crew; it almost had us fooled, if not for the typical GM number and tag marking locations on the windows and covered Chevy logos on the wheels.
GM has high expectations for this new generation of SUVs, and for good reason, as they’ve just spent $500 million (not a typo) on the Arlington, Texas plant in the past three years. The full-size pickups are to be updated first, followed by the SUVs. But as it stands, which would you rather have: Asia’s new TrailBlazer? The new Traverse? Or this new Tahoe?
Comments
but what i don’t get is that why putting the oval?
*this just in, Ford didn’t really get their Blue Oval back, GM bought it*
haha wow that’s some jumbo size Ford Badge lol
I think I’d take the Tahoe.
I would take the Trailblazer. Good combination of size, ride, price, and versatility. Besides, we want to lure the Trailblazer into North American market; Tahoe and Traverse will definitely be available here. Trailblazer gives me more range of choices.
that 5.5L V8 is very well rumoured to be the base engine in the C7. More power and more mpg that the current base 6.2
But then again you can find those front parking sensors in the Volt, SRX, XTS too and they dont have any self parking feature.
Yet the Ford offers it in some of their smallest models.
I don’t think Fiesta has one does it?
The new TrailBlazer’s size and versatility wins me over the chunky Tahoe. If I wanted something that large, I might as well get the Suburban. At least it has a trunk, and a third row that isn’t laughable. The Traverse would be the next choice if I had nothing significant to tow.
So then if it’s a Ford you would rather have a Explorer than Expedition?
No. Why would I want a fwd crossover that poses as an SUV (Explorer)? The TrailBlazer is a legit SUV.
just saying…. isn’t the explorer the same dimensions as the trailblazer?
These are all about the same size: Traverse, Explorer, Durango, CX-9, Pathfinder (new) for CUVs, and the Tahoe, Expedition, Sequoia on the SUV side.
They better keep the suburban because that’s one of the longest running nameplates
Suburban ain’t going anywhere. i do recall reading somewhere that they might drop the Tahoe nameplate in favor of keeping the Suburban on as the sole BOF SUV, but that is apparently not the case.
By that, you mean rename the Tahoe the Suburban, and renaming the Suburban the Suburban XL?
How about just Tahoe and Tahoe XL?
Nope. Deep-sixing the Subarban name would be foolish.
No. The Tahoe would have gone away completely. Had the Volt not gone into production, I suspect that is what would have happened. However, the CAFE room it gives them should allow both BOF SUVs to stay for a while.
According to my research, the Suburban nameplate IS the oldest ever. F150, 911, and even the SL aren’t as a old as it.
As for the Suburban itself, considering it occupys a unique part of the full-size SUV segment, I would like to cannibalize the Tahoe (thus better positioning it and making the name more aware) and offer better drivetrains (ex: 6-pot diesels, perhaps Voltec 2.0).
With better and more efficient powertrains, the Suburban can stay around longer and perhaps help shed the image of a gas guzzling SUV.
some people need the suburban…….you seat 7 and your not squeeze like a sardine in a can..found this funny some car company advertise 7 passenger 7 kids maybe..
I should hope that more power is part of the package, seeing as the 6.2L V8 was dropped from the Tahoe after MY 2009, and the current 5.3L is kind of outclassed as well, especially if rumors saying that the Expedition/Navigator twins will get the EcoBoost 3.5L V6 for 2013 prove to be true.
Also (I know I’m gonna get flamed for this), does anyone else see a hint of the Super Duty in the new front end (besides the trollbait oval)? I mean, it looks blockier than the current Tahoe.
I see a much more modernized current generation Silverado than a Super Duty, which I like that the split bar grille is still to stay.
Not feeling the lines. The current face of the Suburban/Tahoe/Avalanche is the way to go…not sure I like this new direction at all.
Tahoe will not go away it outsells the suburban they will keep them both.
Richard, going to have to agree with you, not impressed, way squared off. But then again there is a lot of cladding, making it difficult to see big picture. I hope I am surprised, this needs to be the revolutionary or evolutionary truck/SUV design from GM. What I get from this is a step back. The existing Tahoe shows muscle and brawn. Does this vehicle look like it has been shrunk or is it just me…
Guys, can we just take a breath here to realize that we’re discussing the appearance of a heavily-camouflaged vehicle? The camo is made to (wait for it) disguise the vehicle; if it weren’t for the testing location and context, everyone would have thought this was a Ford for crying out loud! So can we at least pretend to reserve judgement on the styling of the vehicle until we see some skin? 🙂
everyone would thought its a Ford if it doesn’t have the OnStar antenna
the light on this truck just kinda scream escalade
I don’t think the the lights are production – if you look at spy photos of other GM vehicles, they usually have a black block filing the void where the production lights go, and stick in a few projector beams and LED’s to make them street legal.
So I pulled up the pictures on an actual computer screen not my I phone, your correct Alex in saying we should not judge styling at this time. It is very difficult to say what this vehicle will bring, other than it will retain it’s class leading body on frame utiliynesssss.
I’ve a 2012 Tahoe LTZ which represents the zenith in the development of this body-style’s development. I deem mine as flawless and versatile and enjoy driving anywhere in it. I am eager to see the new body-style when it debuts in early/mid-’13 and expect it to be the logical successor to the fine vehicle I own at present.
For God’s sake… I thought you people are GM fans!
This blog showed up on my google search, and I want to discuss the matter spie pic because I plan to get Tahoe within the coming weeks, but I will sure hate it if I buy it now and only to have it change to the better in a year or two.
I hope this message will be received and responded to.
I believe all of you are wrong, this spy pictures are of a FORD vehicle and NOT Chevrolet.
Here is why I believe this is a Ford, do bare with me even if the observations felt naive:
1. Grill: It clearly shows oval badge similar to Ford, it is square shaped, very much close to the Ford pickup line, somewhat similar to the Expedition grill, and identical to the Escape grill. So the grill has three ford features; its square, has a stripe in the middle, and has an oval logo.
2. Head lights: They might have made you think they’re GM because there are some aftermarket head lights with exact similar design being sold for the Tahoe and Yukon. However, square head lamps are not strange to the Ford line. Again, all Ford pickups has the square headlamps plus the Expedition and Escape are heading towards that direction…. which makes it reasonable that the lamps are getting more and more square almost similar to the Tahoe’s. In fact, the headlights in the spy shots show that the lamps are not 100 square but rather they have a little extra bump on the inner side near the grill to accommodate one circular light. Typical ford design.
3. Rims: From the pictures, I see Ford badge on the rims, not Chevrolet. If you want to argue the badge, look at the spokes themselves. They are evolution of Ford’s rims rather than Chevrolet’s. Google pictures of the two and put them side by side, you’ll see that Tahoe’s usually have deep groove on the spooks, while Ford’s is curved, just like the spy pix.
4. Rear suspension: This one showing independent, just like in ford Expedition.
5. Hood: Camo shown in the pictures deliberately attempting to hide the curves and sharp edges and drops on the hood. It can be viewed clearly in at least four pictures that the distinctive features of the Expedition hood are being hidden in the pictures using that ‘bump’ in the camo.
6. Doors: Tahoe doors go all the way up. Ford’s SUVs doors are not all the way up to the roof but rather identical to the one in the spy pic. Now I don’t know if having doors all the way up is a disadvantage and a design flaw that needs to be removed, however having long doors like that gave Tahoe’s roof its distinctive feature and seperated Tahoe’s from the Expedition and Nissan’s Armada or whatever its called.
7. Handle bar: The handle bar near the windscreen inside the car on the passenger side shown on the spy photos… clearly they have sharp edges. This is feature of Ford Expedition. The ones on Tahoe come with very nice curves.
8. The rear: its more box shaped especially upper half section, a ford expedition feature.
SO all those features make me believe that the pictures above are of a Ford vehicle, most probably a Ford Expedition.
You believe you’re a Chevrolet fan? Convince me I’m wrong. Don’t give me numbers and IDs, those are things I can’t check and they’re just wild guess. But here I have presented you with apparent and distinctive features that I believe are basis of good argument.
Again, I want you to prove me wrong, my wallet is at stake here ;p
So if this is the Ford Expedition, then why does it have the OnStar antenna?? The last time I checked Ford uses SYNC not ONSTAR
Such an elegant theory, de-bunked by such a simple, how shall I say, a simple turn-of-phrase!
Touche! as the French would say.
So now you’re calling me a Touche?? I’m just telling the fact!! If y’all can’t see that there’s an antenna on the top of the car then open your eyes a bit more why don’t ya…. good lordy.
i thought it was direct at me! ;/
I’m so confused
I missed the antenna bit. We don’t have these services in Kuwait.
However allow me to ask… If one would go through the hassle of camouflaging the whole vehicle, would it be too much to camouflage the antenna as well?! Isn’t it one of the special unique marks of the car brand as you put it?
Aftermarket antennas are available with different shapes and are relatively easy to install.
If the new z71 does not get HID headlights, A/C seats and digital speedometer, you won’t see me in a Tahoe anymore…
Chevy has the tahoes running so far behind because of the escalades and denalis. its not even funny anymore. GM should get rid of GMC and load up the tahoes more. caddies more have LED lights so give the Tahoe HIDs already. Digital speedometers can be programmed to look different in every vehicle. economies of scale! buy all the same digital screens rather than two or more different kind of analog speedometers. use Corvettes old 6 liter engine from 2008 have me over 20 mpg. no need for stupid flex fuel…
Well seeing as how the Z71 package is strictly an ‘off road’ package “2-speed transfer case (4WD), heavy-duty air cleaner, unique exterior trim, wheel flares, side steps, tow hooks, skid plates, off-road suspension, 265/65R18 on/off-road tires”
why would they include options that are in the LTZ trim. What you want is the LTZ trim, there is absolutely no confusion on Chevrolet’s part.
with the next gen of trucks and SUVs you are going to see a greater differentiation between the Chevy and GMC twins. GMC is going rugged and premium, Chevy is everyday man. You want a Tahoe with some of the “bells and whistles” get a Yukon Denali. If you want the top, get an Escalade.
GM and Chevy arent trying to fool anyone with there options and packages. Z71 is and has always been an offroad package for all of it’s trucks. Not sure where the bitching is coming from then?
Andrew,
what I want is the off road capabilities and looks of the z71 with the bells and whistles of the LTZ. Not too much to ask is it? Just want the options to be available that’s all.
As far as GMC goes, GM should ditch the brand and pay back the bail out before offering similar vehicles with no differentiation other than headlights and badges.
Not sure how GMC will go more rugged… off road tires maybe lol…
Fair enough, but having never spec’d out a truck/SUV is it not possible to get the LTZ trim with the Z71 package?
GMC is a huge brand for GM, ditching GMC doesnt mean all the GMC brand buyers with transition over to Chevy, most would go elsewhere, which when GM was deciding which brands to shutter, and which to sell, etc GMC was safe. There were more people questioning keeping Buick around and not Pontiac, but that seems to have worked out well, very well.
GMC has a more rugged appearance. Compare their lineup, both interior and exterior, to the Chevrolet and Buick platform mates.
GM has paid back their bailout to both the US and Canadian (and Ontario) governments in April of 2010. As for the loans, the US gov’ment holds a stake in the company (no voting or any sort of decision making rights for products) and also a couple billion in preferred shares, where as, if im not mistaken (this is all off the top of my head and from memory) Ottawa and the GM retirement fund also has a small stake.
The US government has said they are not concerned with breaking even in term of their stock ownership, the fact that GM survived (and to a lesser extent Chrysler) has made it a worthy investment. When the time comes to sell their (US government) stocks, they are not concerned with making money on it. Not to mention the break even point is a stock value something like $40 (might be closer to $50, currently trading at $20ish).
The problem for the government now is, if they sell now they are criticized for taking a huge loss, if they hold onto it they are criticized for still having a stack in GM.
And suggesting they ditch the brand and pay back the bailout (which like I said is already paid back, and was so well ahead of schedule), shutting down GMC wouldn’t suddenly give GM billions upon billions of dollars. GMC has a low operating cost since they share so much with Chevrolet. It’s a make money brand.
When GM built the CTS-v wagon, they sales hopes were to sell a dozen, so essentially none, they did it because they could. To break even on the development costs they only had to sell 6, and they have sold well more than 6, and well more than the 12 they leisurely hoped to sell. Why does that matter? Well if they needed to sell 6 V wagons to break even, how much do you think they are making on the Sierra (only in terms of development costs, this has nothing to do with materials or labor).
It could be a form of distronic cruise, the reason for the oval in the front.
From its side and rear profiles, it is quite clear that the next-gen Tahoe will be boxier and more sharply styled than its somewhat-rounded predecessors.
I hope we get the trail blazer cant wait for the next gen trucks and s.u.v.s
projector headlights on a $50k+ vehicle…good bye Chevy!
Chevy is too scared to pull off anything good and new. they sold too many Tahoes this late in the game that haven’t changed since 2007 to make significant changes. cheap upgrades such as LED s, heads up display from the Corvette, that’s probably all… same thing they are doing with the Corvette. nothing sensational to expect there either.
@Z71 Because projector beam headlights make a car REVOLUTIONARY all of a sudden… right?
Sarcasm aside, none of us have seen these vehicles — Tahoe, Suburban, or Corvette. This segment that the Tahoe and Suburban exist in, however, is slowing fading away — so there’s no reason to make something revolutionary simply because the customer base demands a tried and true package.
I would be interested in trading my pristine Yukon Denali 4×4 for a new model, but it must be a little shorter so I can get it in the garage and not be butt ugly like the Traverse. Why would GM try to emulate the foreign SUVs rather than use our more traditional and superior designs.
@W.K. “Why would GM try to emulate the foreign SUVs rather than use our more traditional and superior designs.”
Because the traditional (body on frame) designs aren’t “superior” for most buyers who would never use a truck-based SUV to its full potential. And who ever said that crossovers are “foreign”?
But never mind all that… GM has already made all other foreign crossovers inferior with its Equinox and Terrain:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2012/10/gm-celebrates-production-of-1-millionth-chevy-equinoxgmc-terrain/
anyone hear if chevy will at some point make there third row seat fold flat electronically???big deal breaker for me as fords expedition does have this feature and is redesigning it for 2014….