Expedition EL Takes on Suburban In Wall Street Journal

[kool_zx3]

The Wall Street Journal has the first head-to-head test of the 07 Expedition EL vs the 07 Suburban.

The Overall Winner: Expedition EL - "sophisticated transmission and suspension make it more pleasant to drive"


Powertrain:

Ford's smooth V8 and six-speed gearbox delivered quiet power and near seemless shifting. Never labored on long hills.

The Suburban seems to labor at times when climbing long hills.


Mileage:

Sub 15/20 during test 17 mpg
Exp EL 14/20 during test 17 mpg


Verdict:

"The Chevy is a better looking vehicle, with a slicker exterior than the boxy Ford. But the Expedition EL has the overall edge because of its smoother ride, more modern transmission and easy folding third row seats"


Summary:

"Even after loading the Ford at 4AM and driving for 12 hours straight to Maine we didn't feel as tried as we did after a shorter stint in the Checy."

Thanks to range on BOF....

Nice to see that "warmed over" Expy is still a damn good SUV...

[SobeSVT]

Let the bashing begin!!!!!!!

[paul8488]

Hey, I'd say a Ford versus Chevy comparison is going to get the most honest treatment, as they're both domestic and generally disregarded. Sounds like if you want a comfy long-haul cruiser the Ford is the way to go. Kudos to them. Thankfully many people place high emphasis on look, and having the newst thing on the block, so the Chwevy won't sit on lots, but it's too abd that they didn't match the Expeditions seating or comfort level.

[69Firebird400]

Originally Posted by kool_zx3

Nice to see that "warmed over" Expy is still a damn good SUV...

The Suburban definitely is a looker, especially compared to the hodgepodge of shapes that make up the 2007 Expedition. They really beat up the Expedition on looks, which I agree with.

Our Expedition EL tester came in the Eddie Bauer trim, with bright, metallic-red paint and wide swaths of tan along the bottom edges of its body that gave its squared-off shape a busy look. Yet even in one color it would have lacked the Suburban's graceful shape.

Ford seems to have tried too hard to make the dashboard stylish by using a mix of rectangular and round chrome bezels around the gauges that looked retro and out of place, as well as a bit cheap (the chrome is plastic underneath).

The only things that the Sub were nicked on were the transmission and lack of rear IRS (which also explains the lack of a fold-flat third row). The transmission issue will be addressed next model year, which will also improve its fuel economy and performance relative to the Ford.

BTW, since we are supposed to post a link to the article (I assume you're a WSJ.com subscriber), the way I do it is to e-mail the article to myself, and copy the URL from the e-mail. Nonsubscribers can get the article for a week for free. Here is the URL:
http://online.wsj.com/wsjgate?subURI...TQyNzUwWj.html

The issue they mentioned about having to use a second credit card to fill up the Suburban is really starting to aggravate me. Why would gas companies do this? When I filled my Pathfinder a few weeks ago, I was stopped at $50, which fortunately just about filled the tank, but it wouldn't let me re-swipe the same card to put the last few dollars' worth in. They really need to recalibrate the pumps to fix this problem if they're not going to go with the preferred solution of lowering prices.

[bhoppes]

I'm kinda glad that Ford does have something going for them. This past week's headlines have not been good to them.

[GotAWD]

Originally Posted by bhoppes

I'm kinda glad that Ford does have something going for them. This past week's headlines have not been good to them.

i agree with that, i just find it kinda harsh to hear that the new GM model still gets second place. but oh well

[ChrisNJ]

Can only get the 5.4, with max towing of 9K. Not enough for us tow'ers. Can't get a new burb with a big engine either (yet?). So for the next year or so, us big engine suv users are SOL! Correct me if i'm wrong but ford doesn't have anything bigger than the V10 or diesel which I doubt can fit in the Expedition. Gm is probably our only hope?

[Yarddawg1987]

I believe the Chevy will still claim the sales crown.

[SVTKAR3]

I will agree that the Suburban does win in the " looks" department, but i would still go with the Expedition EL!

[kool_zx3]

Just wondering if wall street journal liked the f150 interior?????

If they did it would look kinda stupid to like the f150 but hate on the Expy's..... Since they have a very similiar style.

[GM-Joe]

I never knew 3rd row seats were so important, I definately would get something with a niftier 3rd row of seats rather than something that is better looking.

[JVal14]

In the current generation, I think think the biggest knock against the Tahoe/Suburban and GMC iterations will be the rear seats. Apparently they are difficult to fold, and they don't fold flat. You can bet that Toyota will take care of that with the next Sequoia, and GM will get bashed for it.

[FordFan]

people aren't buying SUVs anymore, so you'd think that looks wouldn't matter like it did in 1998 when gas was dirt cheap, when people buy SUVs now it's for their needs, it seems that the Expy EL is more useful, and the Suburban is the better looker.

[BTrzebiato]

Here is my opinion on the Ford have ILS and GM not. Why would GM do that when in size the new Acadia, Enclave, and Outlook are close it size and off the comfort and better mileage for this type of need? The Suburban, Tahoe and Yukons are a truck and can be used as a truck. It would have been crazy for GM to offer ILS on the GMT900 Suvs when they are having the ILS on the smaller CUVs that will fit most people's idea of a car/suv.

[goblue]

I've questioned GM's decision before to continue with the SRA. Whatever the reasons - I'm inclined to think a little mind before matter is at work in this review. Interesting to note, the Stang suffers from the same problem. I've read many reviews that nail it for the SRA far more than is legitimate.

The folding rear seat thing? If you envision the vehicle as an 8 passenger vehicle, then yes - that was a mistake. Especially on the suburban, GM cheaped out and didn't want to engineer a new seat - because theres room in the suburban for it to fold. On a vehicle class this important, an IRS should have been designed for certain 900s, (especially the Caddy) and an SRA for the others, as well as the trucks.

The transmission attack is out of line however. Transmissions on SUVs are means to an end - and that is all. If the MPGs are there - and they are, the review should have read, why does Ford's engine require a 6 speed to do what Chevy does with 4. I'm ticked at GM for not accelerating the 6 speed program - but when the gas mileage is there and performance is comparable...again, a little mind before matter.

GM chose a two prong attack, while Ford tries to do everything with one vehicle. Just as people will cross-shop the BOF SUVs, there will be plenty that will also compare the Lambdas to the Expedition, and for most customers thats an easy fight for GM to win - in the age of 3.00 gas.

Regardless, the track record GM holds with these vehicles far outweighs Fords. And much like the Camcords are the "safe bet" in many people's eyes - GM's SUVs occupy the same place. Ford will win some reviews and will lose others - thats a draw, and largely based on what you're looking for. Ford didn't need a draw - they needed a clear victory, thats what cheanges marketshare - and thats not what the Expedition earned.