The all-new 2025 Ford Expedition has arrived, and despite our obvious pro-GM bias, we’re impressed. The outgoing generation of the Blue Oval’s full-size SUV had some advantages over the Chevy Tahoe and Suburban like better fuel economy and a roomier third row. But with this new generation, the 2025 Ford Expedition is really bringing the goods. It surpasses its GM rivals, which are the sales leaders in this class, in a number of ways.
Here are five things the Chevy Tahoe, Chevy Suburban, and GMC Yukon can learn from the 2025 Ford Expedition.
Split Liftgate
Our favorite feature of the 2025 Ford Expedition is the split tailgate. We know you, the readers, are a bit split (pun intended) on this issue, but we wish the full-size SUVs from GM had their own version of the Ford Split Gate, which is shared with the 2025 Lincoln Navigator.
The biggest benefit of the split liftgate is that stuff can’t roll out of the cargo area when you open the hatch. It also has the benefit of creating a seating space like the liftgate of a pickup truck. Ford even offers a backrest for using the bottom of the liftgate like a bench, and it transforms into a little serving table. Meet the new king of tailgating SUVs.
Zone Lighting
Available exterior zone lighting gives the 2025 Ford Expedition four lighting zones – front, sides, and rear – that can be controlled via the infotainment system. This is an awesome feature for setting up a tent at night during a camping weekend or a tailgating experience where extra illumination is needed.
Digital Device Holders
Other than families who don’t do tablets, nobody uses built-in rear entertainment systems anymore. They’re even going away in minivans. Most people prefer to consume their digital media via streaming services on phones and tablets rather than physical media like DVDs. For that reason, the available digital device holders in the 2025 Ford Expedition are invaluable. They also have charging ports integrated into the seats, so you don’t have to worry about the battery. We hope GM is cooking up something similar.
Cargo Pass-Through
The 2025 Ford Expedition has 40-20-40 split folding second- and third-row seats. Compare that to its GM rivals, which have 60-40 split folding seats in the second and third rows. The Ford allows for more customizability on how you want to optimize passenger and cargo space, and it’s especially handy for hauling long items and passengers simultaneously. Even if you don’t think you’ll be hauling skis or long lumber very often, having more configuration options is always better than having fewer.
Potent Turbo V6
Don’t get us wrong; we appreciate that GM is the last automaker standing with V8 power in this class. However, the spec sheets don’t lie. On paper, the High-Output version of the turbocharged EcoBoost 3.5L V6 powering the Ford Expedition is just plain better than GM’s 6.2L L87, the range-topping V8 in the Tahoe, Suburban, and Yukon.
The more potent tuning of this gutsy V6 is standard on the Expedition Tremor and optional on the Platinum trim. It pumps out 440 horsepower and 510 pound-feet of torque, leaving the L87 in the dust with only 420 hp and 460 pound-feet of torque.
Then there’s fuel costs. Looking at EPA estimates for the 2024 model years of these vehicles, the fuel costs for the Expedition are about $100/month less than a full-size GM SUV with the 6.2L V8. That’s not because of a dramatic difference in fuel economy (18 mpg combined for the Expedition with 4WD versus 16 mpg for an L87-equipped Tahoe with 4WD); it’s because the GM L87 V8 requires premium fuel while the EcoBoost mill in the Ford gets by fine with regular octane.
Bonus Item: Comms Antenna In Back
This one is minor, but we prefer the comms antenna fin mounted at the back of the SUV like it is on the 2025 Ford Expedition rather than the front, like the GM SUVs. We just think it makes the vehicle a little more pleasant to look at from the front without a growth coming out of the roof above the windshield.
There’s a lot to love about the Chevy Tahoe, Chevy Suburban, and GMC Yukon, and we’re impressed with their respective mid-cycle refreshes for the 2025 model year. However, that doesn’t mean we can’t admire their chief rival when it really knocks it out of the park. Here’s hoping GM’s plus-size SUVs don’t rest on their laurels and can benefit from some healthy competition.
Comments
Appreciate the honest commentary and agree on these points, however I cannot get past that dash/infotainment setup. As someone looking at large SUVs for the first time, that’s seems like a dealbreaker for me.
Now let’s name the 10. Things the expedition could learn from gm trio… also Yukon Denali an Escalade both have zone lighting under the running boards,door handles, and side mirror. The headlights and taillights both give off their own lighting…
Yeah, but the one thing they got wrong is that that terrible dash. It looks like a 2005 Honda Civic with LED screens.
I agree with all except for the V6. They just don’t last anywhere as long as a naturally aspirated V8. My buddy at one of our local ford dealers call it the Ecoboom. That being said though I agree that the 6.2 is showing its age and needs to be updated. I guess we’ll see what the gen 6 SBC offers.
Sorry, but I really disagree with nearly the entire article.
2024 GMC Yukon XL AT4 owner here.
1. Split tailgate would be a waste of money in my opinion. The vehicles already cost enough. Adds zero value to the vehicle in my opinion.
2. As others have mentioned, my GMC has plenty of zone lighting; only thing missing is perhaps more lighting under the rear gate; but I have never considered this to be an issue, and never crossed my mind until this article.
3. We don’t like tablets because they don’t integrate with the vehicle. We enjoy watching movies together on road trips and playing the audio over the speakers. Makes the trip more about doing things together versus the kids zoning out with headphones on and getting lost in YouTube. If someone doesn’t buy the native entertainment system, high quality tablet holders can be purchased on Amazon for $25ea.
4. Cargo pass thru is hardly a feature. The rear seats fold 40/60, which is nearly the same as the Ford, and our vehicle 2nd row is bucket seats, so no need for a pass thru.
5. I see your point on the V6, but everyone freaked out about the turbo 4 cylinder on the new Traverse/Acadia/Enclave (down from V6), so I cannot imagine that the GM customer base would be accepting of a turbo V6 option on Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade. Seriously, go look at the uproar of people who now wont by Traverse/Acadia due to the turbo 4 cyl.
I wish my Yukon XL had a traditional tailgate/hatch. I am not a fan of the liftgate – reminds me of an 80s Dodge Caravan. The tailgate would be great for sitting on, loading items, etc. They’d just need to ensure it didn’t squeak.
1. The article clearly gives two benefits of the split tailgate, the cost add on a $60k vehicle won’t even be noticed.
2. Lighting under the lift gate is a major need, especially when all your stuff rolls out in the dark because of no split tailgate.
3. Your take is based on opinions – but I can imagine there are plenty who can only take so much ‘bluey’ on a road trip.
4. Key word – nearly – good luck carrying 6 passengers with that one long item too.
5. I think the upcoming new V8 engines are going to even the tables with the small turbos… so I agree. There is no place for ‘small’ turbo charged ‘efficiency’ engines in a premium vehicle.
1) cost won’t be much different for a more useful tailgate…
2) agreed, though turning on each section like a cargo light feature is nice, don’t think GM does that. If you could turn on the back up lights like a cargo light that is nice (or some other feature)
3) Huh? So you as the driver want to hear your kids Paw patrol in back? You can still listen to music and stuff over the speakers, but watching something, those in back pair together to a single screen or you have two tethered together. Tablets I think are superior as it already has your stuff in it. The GM and being able to send stuff to the driver is nice, but not used much, other wise it is basically a solid mounted tablet. I like the idea and follows what airlines are doing, a place to hold your own device that is constantly updated with what you want to watch or do on it. We have the rear media in our Denali, have yet to use the send to the driver feature and have to play with it everytime to set it up for the kids, they know how to use an ipad.
4) Having a 40/20/40 is nice as you can have two still sitting in back with something long in the middle like skies. So you can have 6 people in there with 2×4’s or skies, can’t do that with the GM twins. Though I am sure it adds another step or leaver to pull to fold the rear seats flat though.
5) Everyone freaked out? A few car guys that are uninformed freaked out with their dated ways of thinking. That is 100% false (well 99%) as the Traverse is selling fantastic, that is a non issue and Ford has proven that.
There is no free lunch and with turbos this is esp. true. The price paid with these is complexity, heat, and longevity. The ultimately don’t last like a normally aspirated engine. I do like the Range Rover like split tailgate. Even at 6’6” tall it’s impossible to sit on the back of my Denali.
Some people just want to defend GM no matter what. Even though I have 2 GM vehicles, I believe that GM could and should learn from the competition. Bran likes his 60/40, so let Bran keep his 60/40, and mean it, unlike a former US president. Offer the 40/20/40 as a no/low cost option, I’d take it. As for the turbo 6, if they could make it reliable and run off of regular, AND offer a 100-150K mile powertrain warranty, I’d take that over a premium-unleaded everytime. Good article, thanks for hopefully offering up a good-idea fairy to GM.
TXMave,
I don’t disagree. We just hear at nausea that the vehicles cost too much. GM just announced that they will be reducing the number of trim levels and individual options (moving towards more packages). With this in mind, adding yet another SUV seating configuration, will add cost to the vehicle. This will be passed to all customers in the base price of the vehicle, or as an option price.
I also agree on the V6. I have the twin turbo V6 LF4 in my Cadillac. It’s smooth as glass, and it would happily power my SUV. GM certainly could use something like the LGY V6 for the SUV’s; they have more power and torque than my L84 5.3L V8.
Most of the items mentioned here are something that would make me switch to a Ford . One thing I will say is, GM does need to focus more on hp and torque, in there trucks and SUVs.
I view a normally aspirated V8 as a plus not a minus. Turbo engines have not proven their reliability over the long haul with large vehicles that tow 7000lbs. This is specifically why I bought GM and not Ford.
Pretty much every 30,000 lb + GVW tractor-trailer engine on the road is equipped with turbos. I’d say that’s proven reliability over the ‘long haul’.
The 3.5L EcoBoost has been in production since 2011.
As long as Fords 3.5 doesn’t drop lifters and eats camshafts, it’s a win for them.
As a GM/Ford owner i shop both brands I have 23 C8, 2008 G8, 2016 f150 and 24 expedition. Now I looked at both all options 24 tahoe/yukon, 25 tahoe/yukon and 24 expedition and laughed at wagoneer the 25 expedition wasn’t officially released so I had spy shots and the 25 navigator just was released. So I had an idea of what was changing on expedition. The 24 expedition tech wise is much better than tahoe/yukon.I think the 24 expedition still beats a 25 tahoe tech wise. Im Not a fan of the new Google system in all the 25 as that’s just a way for both ford and GM to get connected service money from you. I prefer the built in maps as a backup on ford sync 4 system or for gm my 23C8 still had gm older system with navigation built in. The tahoe/ yukon exterior looks better than expedition not even close
The ecoboost engine is quick and faster than 5.3 buy alot and still faster than 6.2, but 6.2 sounds better. From a guy that has a GM 6.0,6.2 and ford 2.7 and 3.5 in driveway I’m not bias or a fan boy I just buy the best product to fit my needs. When it comes too infotainment screen gm was far behind Ford my 24 expedition screen is double the size of the gm 10″ but whats really funny is the 25 yukon copied ford outgoing screen down to the volume knob. Now that I see the 25 expedition screen I think they screwed up going away from the screen they had on 24 model it’s perfect size but what put the nail in gm for me is gm self driving tech. Ford and Gm has bluecruise and supercruise both was hard to get on 24 model but wide spread on 25. Both cost a fee either pay inadvace or monthly to use. But Ford co pilot 360 has advance cruise control with lane trace basically assisted driving for free my expedition can drive itself on the free way turn stop and accelerate with either a hand on steering wheel. GM don’t have that ability you either have to pay for super cruise or u get basic adaptive adaptive cruise. Which by now is old tech cars are steering and avoiding crashes now without a monthy fee.
It gets many things right, but outselling GM isn’t, and hasn’t been one of them.
I’m laughing at all the turbo V6 “reliability” comments. News flash, all modern engines have issues due to epa and mpg tuning. And yet they are all superior to their equivalents from the 60s, 60s, 80s, and 90s.
For the ecoboost the #1 factor is to change the oil with a synthetic every 6000 miles. I have owned several that went over 150k miles with no issues. Do NOT run 10,000 mile oil changes.
The split liftgate should just be an option in the same way the Suburban/Tahoe and Yukons offer a front-bench. Something that better not go away during the trim “simplifying” in the next-gen models. It isn’t that big a deal. It shouldn’t be there.
You know, it’s not necessary for every expensive feature that can be dreamed up to be attached to every model in a line-up. Zone-lighting can stay a high-end Yukon and Escalade feature. Where it belongs. Like every vehicle, the Expedition isn’t worth its price. But it’s worse with that kind of $hit.
Losing the rear-seat media should drive down the overkilled price. I’m for it.
The point of full-size SUVs is to be as useful as possible. 40/20/40 splits is a no-brainer.
Every vehicle needs more power. It’s true the Expeditions are more powerful. But on the other hand, they don’t get nearly the MPG they’re supposed to get. Just like every other turbo. The 5.3L, in particular, has been in place forever. It should continue to be. It should be updated until it’s ahead of the competition, but it should be there pretty much until the end of time. Which is how long the Suburban, in particular, will probably be around.
One thing to note about the HO V6 in the Expedition Tremor is that the performance numbers of 440/510 are with premium fuel and the EPA fuel cost numbers are with regular fuel.
Ford loses many points with poor looking dull wheels. Black, brake dust grey and removal of what little bright trim they had gives these a cheaper lower trim level appearance