General Motors announced today the September 2017 arrival of the 2018 Chevrolet Tahoe Custom, priced from $44,995, including destination fees. That represents a $3,750 price cut for what will now become the base Tahoe, down from the 2018 Tahoe LS’s $48,745 MSRP.
GM says the 2018 Tahoe Custom is a response both to “strong consumer demand for Tahoe,” and to the “full-size SUV segment moving upmarket.”
Therefore, there’ll be no cooled seats here. No adaptive cruise. No head-up display.
No third row of seating. Gasp.
The 2018 Chevrolet Tahoe Custom will, however, feature the capability of a Tahoe, with towing capacity rated up to 8,600 pounds and — because of the third row’s removal — more cargo capacity.
While providing the Tahoe Custom with 2.3 extra cubic feet of cargo capacity behind the second row, Chevrolet didn’t turn the Tahoe into a vinyl-clad penalty box on 18-inch wheels. It’s essentially a Tahoe LS, with Apple CarPlay/Android Auto, affordable data for 4G LTE WiFi, remote start, GM’s rear-seat reminder first seen in the Acadia, and the 355-horsepower 5.3-liter V-8.
Through the first seven months of 2017, U.S. sales of the Chevrolet Tahoe are up less than 1 percent to a segment-leading 65,584 units. The Tahoe is one member of a six-strong General Motors full-size SUV lineup that this year accounts for 9 percent of GM’s U.S. volume. That’s up from 8 percent two years ago.
Among volume brand full-size SUVs, where a quartet of Chevrolets and GMCs competes with the Ford Expedition, Nissan Armada, and Toyota Sequoia, General Motors’ market share stands at 67 percent in 2017. That’s down from 72 percent a year ago, as segment-wide sales have expanded largely because of the second-generation Armada. Nissan’s slice of the pie tripled in size from 3 percent in 2016’s first seven months to 9 percent so far this year.
The 2017 Nissan Armada’s base price is $46,095. The 2017 Toyota Sequoia is priced from $49,595. The all-new 2018 Ford Expedition XLT’s base price is $52,890. In 2017, the basic GMC Yukon was $1,315 more than than its Chevrolet counterpart.
As for the Tahoe specifically, 2017 was already on track to be the second-biggest Chevrolet’s best year of U.S. sales in a decade. And that was prior to the anticipated Q4 impact of the 2018 Tahoe Custom’s broader appeal.
Timothy Cain is a contributing analyst at The Truth About Cars and Autofocus.ca and the founder and former editor of GoodCarBadCar.net. Follow on Twitter @timcaincars.
I’d be shocked if a lot of people opted for this trim, namely for the lack of third-row seating. This is just anecdotal, but since the non-minivan, non-crossover choice of families in my area tends to be mostly Tahoes, the lack of third row probably won’t be an option they’d check. Not that they need it…they want it. Just like 90% of car features.
That’s true. However, you really do have to consider the number of people who just want a big, traditional, solid-axle SUV that can tow, but who don’t necessarily need the third row. Owing *to* that solid axle taking up space under the floor, the Tahoe’s third row is considerably less useful than those of many large crossovers (Pilot, Atlas, Pathfinder, Durango, Highlander, etc…).
True — the third row in many BOF SUVs is sort of an afterthought when compared to more purpose-built crossovers.
Again anecdotal, but I see a lot of people who need towing and offroad utility (and only carrying up to 5 passengers)…in pickups. That gives them somewhat comparable cargo space, plus lots of room for dirty cargo, too. In other words, this is a big vehicle to have so few seats and a large/enclosed cargo area, at least by modern standards. $50k buys a pretty nice GM pickup compared to a base model Tahoe.
They’re much more willing to deal on the trucks than the SUVs, yeah. My understanding is that Jack Baruth’s 2017 Silverado 1500 4WD LTZ / Premier with the long-bed, the Max Tow package, and the 6.2-liter…didn’t cost much more than $50K.
Probably not going to be on a dealers lot so you will have to order it. Mean while Chevy salesmen will work you over for a little more a month I can put you into this deluxe version.
Agreed. The Tahoe–in various years from new to 15 years old– is the de-facto family hauler for the lower, middle, and upper-middle class. If you don’t need a third row, you just get a Silverado.
Not true, and I put $40K behind that when I bought my Tahoe. I didn’t want a pickup, I wanted enclosed space, not a bed, not a bed and cover.
Back in January, 2017 I bought a new 2016 4WD Tahoe LS that had but a single option on the Monroney, 20″ polished aluminum wheels.
Sticker was ~50,500. through a combination of dealer price cut, “tag discount”, competitive lessee discount and an extra “dealer-picks-some-vins-to-get-an-extra-discount discount” my out the door price was ~40,500. (No trade involved, cash deal)
If it didn’t have the 20″ rims I would have been able to get the price under $40K. I would have liked the bench front seat instead of the console, but I couldn’t find one with a bench in stock within 2 states of here.
I would have bought it without the third row. I had been cross-shopping it against police Tahoes (SSV & PPV) that had outlived floorplan. I removed my third row and put it in the basement.
I think that Chevy is on to something here. I can’t be the only buyer looking for a body-on-frame truck that doesn’t want to pony up for leather, electric gew-gaws and the like.
Now if I could just get someone to remove the cloaking device.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpNvJxR8z84
How exciting. This is what people have been begging for. They should do the same for the Suburban.
They should decontent it even more.
Agree. Time for a Tahoe and Suburban W/T.
This discount should have knocked $5K off the price. Then I’d pay attention.
They probably de-contented it as much as they could. Any more, and they’d then have to look at stuff like engineering (and stocking) a separate instrument cluster or dashboard or infotainment system…and differentiation like that on the production line starts to *cost* money, rather than save it. Not a whole lot of de-contenting went on. I think what GM did here was give up more of the built-in profit margin for this platform to allow a lower price of entry…because it could sway someone looking at one of the large crossovers, and even for $44K, it’s still more profitable to have someone buy one of these BOF-ers than the loaded crossover for the same money.
Now, back when the SUVs shared their interiors and body panels with the trucks—which to my knowledge last happened with the GMT800s—yeah, they could totally make a stripper Tahoe or Suburban because they’d have already had stripper Silverado components that could bolt right in.
One thing I do like about this Tahoe Custom is that GM didn’t go the truly cheap route and put plastic black door handles or mirror skullcaps on it, and the wheels still look nice.
All those items are addressed at suppliers that do a JIT delivery system for the IP, seats, fascia, etc..
Infotainment can be pulled directly from the police version they already manufacture and they’ll probably end up using items that were originally on the 1FL package which was the smaller IP display (not the color unit), no HD radio, urethane steering wheel, etc. I wonder if this will use a single speed transfer case or two speeds—two speeds is optional on the fleet package.
I’m shocked to see that they actually do a 3500 HD model that’s available for fleet customers only. (3500 lb towing capacity though…..)
I forgot about the fleet and police-spec models.
Why would the 3500HD have such a lower tow rating? Seems odd. Or did you lose a 1 at the beginning and it’s 13500?
The Suburban HD is fleet only, costs $80K, and has a *big* 4400lbs payload capacity but for some reason is only rated at 3000lbs towing.
gmfleet.com/chevrolet/suburban-hd-heavy-duty-suv.html
I’m guessing there is some goofy reason why it was rated that way.
Probably not the only reason, but the HDs are very suitable for armor and puncture resistant/proof tires.
The main reason for the 3500HD version seems to be for upfitting it with the full armor treatment w/o the need to do anything with chassis. Otherwise why would you offer the leather interior, Nav, ect in a “fleet” truck. So presumably that is why they don’t build it with the 10k tow rating that they certainly could give it if desired, or at least a little bump over the 1500 version.
They have a cheaper infotainment system on the shelf – It currently goes into the fleet (police) Tahoes.
Pardon my density, but what does it lack that the LS has? Does the LS come standard with a third seat?
LS comes standard with the 3rd row. So probably deletes the rear climate control as well.
I’m shocked people aren’t jumping up and down as you can get the Tahoe with a bench seat in the front.
So, Camaro Custom 6.2L coming soon?
Actually, yes. GM has announced that it is considering lowering the barrier of entry for the SS and its 6.2-liter on the Camaro by making a cheaper version.
Yea, I’m excited about it. The Camaro isn’t perfect but a $33K 6.2L car would be hard to pass up.
One of the few exceedingly few GM vehicles I could recommend in good faith, and it’s essentially half the price of the Ecalade (both being K2XX platforms, with the Tahoe as the GMTK2UC and the Escalade as the GMTK2XL), being a two-row standard Escalade.
Give it the 6.2 liter as a $1,800 to $2,200 standalone option, and this would be even more of a recommend (who is kiddiing who, GM would never let such a thing cannibalize their re-badge GMC and Escalade kissing cousins).
Also, agreed that there should be an even more de-contented version for about $36,800 so people don’t have to wait for the red tag 20% end of year clearance.
*Fun fact – This can tow 2 100% Chinese assembled and made of 100% Chinese-sourced parts’ Buick Envisions.
In both mass & profit.
Moves like this, showing up all over the industry, are a response to the current administration’s very clear signals that it is not going to take enforcement of fuel-economy rules seriously.
They’re also strategically shortsighted. There will be another fuel crunch, another Democratic administration, or both within a few years, and the more dependent the US carmakers get on easy truck sales the less prepared they will be when the inevitable happens.
But these days publicly held companies don’t get to think years in advance. Any move that is about any goal other than getting cash to shareholders within the next three months results in thieves, er, “activist investors,” braying for management’s heads.
So what’s a car maker to do? Build a bunch of high mileage sedans and wait for the next democrat led congress or oil prices to sky rocket again… and watch someone else make money today? Yeah, that’ll work well.
Keep developing new powertrain technologies. If you’re GM, don’t let the Bolt and Volt languish on the vine; keep refining those components and put them in products in more popular segments. Yes, you’ll lose a bit of margin during the party years, but you won’t get your lunch eaten by Toyota and have to go bankrupt in the next downturn.
Isn’t this what you see happening today? Volt is on Gen 2 (with 20% more electric range) and Bolt is based on Volt technology. So why the comment on being strategically short sighted?
Isn’t this what you see happening today? Volt is on Gen 2 (with 20% more electric range) and Bolt is based on Volt technology. So why the comment on being strategically short sighted? Is it because the Bolt power train isn’t in a Tahoe? The laws of physics prevent that from being done at a price point a mortal could pay.
Once the Bolt came out, I haven’t heard much about continued application of the technology in other products. And there was the rumor that Gen 2 will be the last generation of Volt. The rumor of a Bolt-ized Encore was promising, but where is a bigger CUV using the same technology?
@Dal, the Bolt isn’t even widely available yet!
“So what’s a car maker to do?”
Develop a complete lineup of appealing high-quality vehicles that offer customers their choice of size, cost, efficiency, and capability?
It’s more work, but then you’re not exposed to rapid shifts in customer preference or fuel costs.
Or they can just chase low-efficiency vehicle short-term profits off of a cliff like they’ve done at least twice before. Worked out well in the 70’s and 2000’s, right?
…They’re also strategically shortsighted. There will be another fuel crunch, another Democratic administration, or both within a few years, and the more dependent the US carmakers get on easy truck sales the less prepared they will be when the inevitable happens…
And GM has the Bolt, Volt, Sonic, Cruze, small diesel engines, Malibu Hybrid…
Unlike 2000 when it was gas guzzlers paying the bills and non-existent offerings that got good fuel economy that people actually wanted, GM is in a better position to pivot.
If there is any one car company ill-prepared for a sudden shift in fuel prices, it is FCA.
Honestly FCA’s best bet is sticking to it’s big V8-Hemi-Hellcat-Demon power niche. Say we have another fuel spike or the rare politician who cannot be lobbied by the most powerful industries in the world takes office. Every major automaker is going to trip over themselves in a race to the bottom, while FCA sticks to its proven profitable niche. Sure, there might be some sacrifice of market share for profit, but I highly doubt the demand for vehicles the the Wrangler, Challanger, Charger, or Ram is going away in this lifetime.
“Moves like this, showing up all over the industry, are a response to the current administration’s very clear signals that it is not going to take enforcement of fuel-economy rules seriously.”
I genuinely believe that auto sales are slowing, inventories are building rapidly, and that it’s no coincidence at a time when total household debt has reached an all-time high at the same time wage stagnation has deeply gripped hold, and that GM is unveiling lower-cost versions of vehicles such as the Tahoe to better hedge against these factors, and try to maintain market share/sales volume.
Let’s look and see what happens with the competition in this segment in the months and years ahead.
It’s no exaggeration to claim that unbiased data is showing that household incomes are being devoured by spiking housing, health care, education and child-care and elder-care costs (all major expense categories that are far outpacing general rate of inflation, so much so that housing costs alone now consume 50% of net household income in many more parts of the country. I could also speak to what these rapidly-flaring major expenses are doing to the country politically and socially, but will refrain).
And on top of that, Ford now finally looks to have a competitive offering in the segment……
Offer the G80 auto-locker as part of some sort of towing package and we’re in business. I can rip that chin spoiler myself. I think it looks great with those rationally sized wheels/tires (which are still pretty hefty 18s). Third row in Tahoes sucks anyways, and in the K2XX trucks ate up a ton of room both when stowed, and ate significantly into what little space was left behind the third row due to the false-floor to make the area flat when said third row was folded.
Let me also say that a modern-day K5 Blazer with the 6.2 would be beyond badass.
I would seriously consider purchasing a new two-door Tahoe (I don’t think they’d bring the Blazer name back). It’s the perfect single guy vehicle.
Far more livable than a Wrangler, huge aftermarket thanks to the full Tahoe and Suburban, easy to fix and maintain… but they’d probably sell, at best, 10K or less a year and it wouldn’t really make them money.
Hell I’d buy one too and I’m not even single
I’d rock a two door f/s BOF SUV.
It’s interesting to note flip-flops RE: C-pillar badging.
GMT400, LS badge
GMT800, no LS badge
GMT900, LS badge
GMK2XX, LS badge
GMK2XX, no Custom badge
I’m ahead of the curve, I debadged my 2016 LS.
I think I would have debadged even an LT or LTZ — Eye level badging is ugly.
Also, the sand background is quite relevant. The big GM SUVs are an absolute favorite of the Outer banks, NC vacation crowd, saw many out on the beach and lumbering through some pretty deep sand, chin spoilers be damned.
Interesting, this means we may finally see sub-40k transcation price Tahoes again…
Note to self: put Tahoe back on shopping list.
My interest is highly piqued! If GM does the same for a Suburban I may just have to buy it.
A Tahoe Custom 2WD with max tow and without the weight of the 3rd row, 20’s, etc should be a very quick efficient hauling machine, I’d expect 0-60 to be near 6 flat and low/mid 20’s to be entirely reasonable on the freeway.
Dang! Where’s that Bollinger B1? I’d luv to sail thru the dunes in that. Can you imagine the heads it would turn? Pull out the plank load the dachshund out thru the front hatch…
In the meantime we’re stuck with tweaked twentieth century.
Why don’t they just offer a 3rd row delete on an LS? Wouldn’t that make more sense?
Back in GMT800 days, I believe the 3rd row was an option on the LS. Occasionally you’d see one without it – always worth less money than the 3-row versions.
Resale (as a %) will be worse on this “Custom” model compared to its siblings BUT depending on what adding 4×4 will cost and if I can spec the tow package I’d be interested in a two row Tahoe for a “let’s see how many hundreds of thousands of miles we can get out of this sucker.”
I really don’t need all the toys, just more crap to break.
Resale value can’t be much of a concern, or who would buy one? Fullsize SUVs go from $50,000 shiny new, down to $5,000 generally, in just 10 or 11 years. I recommend them to anyone frustrated with the lofty prices of used fullsize pickups, crew cabs especially.
Plus if reliability is of major concern, dealing with 150,000+ mile (affordable) vehicles, they’re about impossible to beat.
“Fullsize SUVs go from $50,000 shiny new, down to $5,000 generally, in just 10 or 11 years”
You might want to check what ’07 Tahoes/Suburbans/Yukons are going for even with high miles. The GMT800 SUVs are generally significantly more affordable, however.
“down to $5,000 generally, in just 10 or 11 years.”
Where do you find clean title 2007 GM full-size SUVs for $5K?
The average price on Autotrader within 500 miles of me for a ’06-’07 Suburban/Tahoe/Yukon is $13.5K.
10 year old Durangos are about $6.5K and the Armada is $8.5K. Although I don’t think those were leaving the showroom at $50K.
Prices can swing wildly, especially “asking price” at dealers. Anything close to $10K is huge depreciation anyway.
But here’s couple averaging $5,000 in clean/excellent condition. They’re definitely out there.
denver.craigslist.org/cto/d/2007-gmc-yukon-4×4/6257628733.html
denver.craigslist.org/cto/d/2008-chevrolet-tahoe-sport/6266021919.html
Yeah round here Full size SUv’s have better resale then the pickups. Almost as good as 3/4ton pickups. I still see 15 year old Suburbans trading int 8-9k range.
“But here’s couple averaging $5,000 in clean/excellent condition. They’re definitely out there.”
That’s not how “averages work,” with a “couple” of examples, one of which was a scam ad LOL
The 3rd row in the Tahoe is about useless anyway, so this makes a lot of sense to me. Its the Tahoe I’d pick, hands down.
Interesting about Armada sales for a new vehicle I see a ton around. I asked a friend who works at a Nissan dealer, he said they are seeing alot more people coming into stretch up to an Armada then they did with the old version. He says he’s seeing alot of traded in 10-15 year old Sequoia’s and GX470’s on them and a few Escalades.
As in the people who buy those used are happy to buy a new Armada for 40k.