I’m shopping for a used full-size 4WD SUV and it’s basically down to either a Suburban or an Expedition. My budget is around $15k.
What’s surprising is how much cheaper the Expeditions are compared to Suburbans. Other than Chevy having better marketing, is there a real reason for this price difference? Are Suburbans actually that much better, or is this just perception?
If anyone has experience with both, what do you see as the key differences? I’d love to hear what customers or owners have said.
Expeditions feel like they’ve been ignored for years by Ford. The 5.4 engine they used for ages has its issues, while the Suburban’s 5.3 is more reliable overall. Plus, the Suburban drives more like a car, which appeals to a lot of buyers.
@Uma
I disagree—GM interiors from 2003-2012 tend to fall apart. Gauge clusters stop working, and things break constantly. I’ve been working on cars for 12 years, and I see it all the time.
Bailey said: @Uma
I disagree—GM interiors from 2003-2012 tend to fall apart. Gauge clusters stop working, and things break constantly. I’ve been working on cars for 12 years, and I see it all the time.
I’ve been selling Chevys for 4 years, and I haven’t seen those issues at all.
@Bailey
That’s because you’re selling them after they’re cleaned up and fixed. I’m talking about the cars people bring in that haven’t been detailed for resale.
Bailey said: @Bailey
That’s because you’re selling them after they’re cleaned up and fixed. I’m talking about the cars people bring in that haven’t been detailed for resale.
Tahoes and Suburbans hold up way better than you’re giving them credit for. I’ve never seen major interior issues in them—radio buttons wearing off is the worst I’ve had to deal with.
The Expedition didn’t see a real update for years, and the 5.4L engine can be hit or miss. The Suburban drives better and has more reliable engine options overall, but I’d avoid the 2007-2008 models since they had some issues when Chevy introduced new tech.
@Micah
I wouldn’t call Chevy engines bulletproof. The 5.3 with AFM (cylinder shutoff) has caused plenty of problems. I’ve seen those engines fail under 40k miles.
Adley said: @Micah
I wouldn’t call Chevy engines bulletproof. The 5.3 with AFM (cylinder shutoff) has caused plenty of problems. I’ve seen those engines fail under 40k miles.
They’re not perfect, but they’re solid for the most part. I’ve seen plenty with 100k+ miles still running fine.
Adley said: @Micah
I wouldn’t call Chevy engines bulletproof. The 5.3 with AFM (cylinder shutoff) has caused plenty of problems. I’ve seen those engines fail under 40k miles.
I just traded in a 2010 Tahoe with 215k miles on it, and it still ran flawlessly. GM small-block V8s are some of the best engines ever made.
I just went through this exact decision and bought an Expedition.
If you’re looking for something to lease or sell before the warranty runs out, the Suburban is better—it drives nicer and has a more upscale interior. But if you’re planning to keep it long-term, the Expedition wins on reliability for electronics, transmission, and longevity overall.
Check out Consumer Reports; GM full-size SUVs rank among the least reliable for long-term use.
Here’s the thing: Chevy has put more attention into the Suburban, and it shows. The Expedition has been neglected for years, though Ford is finally doing a big update. When that happens, the Suburban won’t be able to match Ford’s tech.
But for now, the Suburban is the better choice. It’s more refined, and GM has stayed ahead.