Last year, Chevrolet introduced Rally Sport Truck (RST) variant of the Tahoe. Effectively an appearance package for the body-on-frame SUV, it also opened the door for a performance package containing General Motors’ Magnetic Ride Control, a 420-horsepower 6.2-liter V8, and the 10L80 10-speed automatic transmission. The company did the same for the Suburban a short time later.
According to the manufacturer, people love the engine more than their own children. As a result, Chevrolet wants to expand its availability while it makes a little heaping mounds of money on the side. For 2019, Chevy adds the motor to the Premier Plus special editions of the Tahoe and Suburban — which represent a half-step in luxury above the standard Premier trims, but a giant leap in overall price.
“Our customers have shown strong demand for both Tahoe and Suburban with the 6.2L V-8 option,” said Sandor Piszar, director of Chevrolet Trucks Marketing and Advertising. “Thirty-six percent of all Chevy full-size SUV special edition models are now sold with this engine. Premier Plus gives both Suburban and Tahoe customers another option to choose from with several added premium touches.”
GM claims the Premier Plus editions feature meaningful interior upgrades, like distinctive heated and ventilated leather-appointed front seats, two-tone interior colors, power steps, a head-up display, 8-inch touch screen. However, most of that equipment can be found on the standard Premier trim. The truly unique stuff is the additional badging, gold Chevy logo, and 22-inch wheels that are specific to the special edition models.
What you are really shelling out the big bucks for is that engine, and it doesn’t come cheap. The standard Tahoe, in Premier guise, starts at $63,895 before destination. For the Suburban, it comes to $66,595 with the 5.3-liter EcoTec3 equipped. But the 6.2-liter Premier Plus will set you back $74,100 for the Tahoe and $76,900 on the Suburban (plus a $1,295 destination fee). That’s a lot of money for what is basically an engine upgrade.
While that cash does take you from 355 hp and 383 lb-ft of torque (with a six-speed) to 420 horsepower and 460 lb-ft of torque (with a 10-speed), we’re not sure ten grand is a bargain unless that grille ornament is made of real gold. We’re absolutely positive people will still buy these vehicles, however. Denali has already proven that GMC can use special luxury trims to print money for itself.
Chevrolet is clearly expecting strong sales. It claims the first 5,000 customers to order either of the special editions through a Costco member incentive can save $4,500 off the price. We imagine that still leaves General Motors with a tidy profit, even before customers tack on optional extras.
[Image: General Motors]
So roughly $10K?
Profit margin predictions… 50%?
PD, gotta be more than that. It is not like you buy the 5.3 AND get a 6.2 also. As you know you get the 6.2 in lieu.
FWIW you can buy a 6.2 from GM Performance for about 9k with a 4L60.
Maybe the increase in cost is due to the 10L80? Either way, I bet they make 70 cents on the dollar increase.
It’s a $77k SUV. Profit margin of 50%…on the whole truck.
Yes, more V8, more power… and a lot more money
I find it hilarious that people will readily shell out $80,000 for these things, but consider an impala at $35,000 overpriced.
I just got a flyer from my local Chevy dealer, brand new nicely equipped Impalas… $27K, but if you don’t want or like Impalas it doesn’t matter what price they are
They don’t make 6.2L Impalas though.
That would be an interesting car, especially in coupe form
Too bad Lie2me GM didn’t consider making the now defunct SS an Impala and conversely a 6.2 powered Impala SS.
The Monte Carlo SS (which admittedly only had a 5.3) was a V8 coupe Impala that sold poorly. It had a lot more torque-steer than its high-performance W-Body siblings (Grand Prix GXP, LaCrosse Super, Lucerne Super).
Introducing the all-new Impala SS 6.2. If you thought the 5.3-equipped SS had torque steer…
Be nice if Impala SS package, twin screws 400hp and AWD.
Be nice if Impala SS package, twin screws 400hp and AWD.
Well, the Impala has that stop-start system, you know…
If the Impala had a V8 and AWD it would be a better deal.
License to print money, though perhaps it will steal some sales from GMC.
“According to the manufacturer, people love the engine more than their own children.”
If you expand the availability of your best engine, demand for your products will increase.
“22-inch wheels ”
Sigh.
I don’t disagree (18″ is big enough for any full-size truck), but it’s possible to, you know, switch the wheels out.
Good God almighty, how much for ONE tire? Much less a set!
Does the RST get the same shoes, or 20” wheels?
sgeffe
If you can afford a $70,000.00 SUV something tells me you can afford to put tires on it……
That’s making the wild assumption that the people buying 70k suvs CAN afford them;).
Keep extending those financing terms and they will keep signing on the little lines.
Vanillasludge-
Your jealousy is showing with that comment. Just because you can’t afford one it doesn’t mean most who buy/lease one can’t afford them. GM knows the statistics/income bracket on who can buy those things- and what the market is.
“If you can afford a $70,000.00 SUV something tells me you can afford to put tires on it……”
This is a bad assumption. There are plenty of people out there who just barely can afford the payments on the vehicle itself. Consumer debt is at its highest level since before the Great Recession.
Maxb49-
With all due respect-this is exactly what someone says when they can’t afford the vehicle we are talking about.
The people who buy these new will never replace the tires, unless they curb one. They’ll just take their section 179 100% depreciation deduction and buy a new over-6000-lbs-GVWR overpriced truck again next year.
CKNSLS-IF you can afford a 70k SUV, then yes, that is true. But just because you drive one does not mean you can afford it.
bking12762-
SEE MY COMMENT ABOVE….(to Maxb49).
In the 1960s, full size cars bigger than these vehicles had 14 inch wheels. The 1920 big Chevrolet had 33 inch wheels. We appear to be headed back to the conestoga wagon era.
No one in his right mind would pay sticker for one of these.
True, but the rest of them will.
Well, I can say this: the 6.2 is a superb engine. Gobs of low end torque, revs easily and smoothly, tons of power. It sounds glorious near redline. And as an added bonus, it returns excellent highway fuel economy. Perhaps the only demerit – if we are picking nits – is the idle is not totally smooth. Not at all a problem in my car, but maybe needs “better” mounts with more isolation for more luxury geared uses. Ok, it only redlines at 6500 RPM.
GM may have f-up many things, but when they hit a home run, its a grand slam.
This. I’m as much of a GM fan as DeadWeight, the K2xx’s high dash ergonomics positively suck in my book, the mandatory LTZ bundling was $10,000 of stuff I mostly didn’t want even if it were free, and the 6.2 had me entertaining thoughts of buying one anyway.
That engine should go in every vehicle that they make and if it doesn’t fit then they shouldn’t make it.
Amen! Brother, Amen! When GM uses their “special sauce” the results are truly world-standard and amazing. Any GM BOF or having an LS-engine is truly good. Or bad for the cool kids. Now if Caddy could hold up to an S Class and 18 year old Impalas be in demand as much as 18yo Camcords.
I thought everyone in the country wanted tiny engines in their trucks and cars now. I guess the silent majority speaks with their money!!!
Only the Eco-geeks at the EPA and tree-hugger/metro-sexual citizens who wouldn’t be caught dead in a truck or SUVs want the normal citizens who do buy trucks and SUVs to have tiny engines.
I agree. All this small motor, electric car, mobility nonsense has to stop.
Just put it in the base model you jerks! Why is this so difficult?
CAFE is one reason, profit is the next. I expect the manufacturing cost difference between the 5.3 and 6.2 is about $1.99, so getting $10K more is pure gravy and GM can legitimately blame big price bump totally on the government.
With big trucks, GM is where it was 50 years ago with big cars. A Buick Electra 225 or Olds 98 with a 455 V-8 cost 30-40% more than a Chevy Caprice with a 350 V-8. And the Cadillacs cost way more than that. What’s changed?
Ford sells lots of F-series with EcoTech V-6s and RAM may sell more Pentastar V-6s than Hemis. Someone must care about weenie motors.
“RAM may sell more Pentastar V-6s than Hemis. ”
I don’t know about that, Hemis are tremendously popular with Ram buyers.
“Someone must care about weenie motors.”
Yes, the previous White Houses. The Hemi being a 12v pushrod motor is cheaper to produce than the 24v DOHC Pentastar. If it wasn’t for the rapidly rising CAFE target between 2008 and 2016, the V6 would have been mere fleet specials.
Ford’s success with the EcoBoost is not surprising considering they made they buyers suffered for a decade with the top V8 in 1/2 tons being the anemic 5.4 Triton, while GM and Dodge had decent pushrod engines to offer, talk about a low bar for the turbo V6s to be measured against.
No choice with Ford. The only V8 option is the 5.0 which is fairly anemic just like the 5.3 GM engine. I drive a Ford 3.5L ecoboost and it’s strong and I need the power for the towing I do. However, if Ford would offer a larger V8 or even a twin turbo 5.0 option I’d be all over it and I’d never choose the V6.
GM isn’t gonna let you have too much fun. The 6.2 is mated to a (forced) 3.23 axle ratio on the Tahoe/Suburban. The Coyote 5.0 V8 with a 3.55 would get you similar performance.
DOHC engines have more power per displacement, vs pushrods, so no surprise the 5.3 comes with well under 400 hp and torque.
The Coyote engine is at least equivalent to the Hemi 5.7, neither of which are “anemic”.
You guys kill me – yeah, those tiny engines (you know, the ones with 500 lb/ft of torque at 1800 rpm) are nothing more than a commie plot!
Can’t wait for the next episode of Sacha Baron Cohen’s “Who is America” – I’ll finally get to see what some of the more strident members of the TTAC B&B look like in the flesh.