Thread: GM droping the Avalanch

Tweet

In my opinion they never should have built it... A big usless vehicle for hauling wanta be truck drivers around.

Yeah, I never saw much point in the Avalanch, either. If you want a truck, buy a truck. If you want the SUV, buy the SUV. Almost as bad as the Honda Ridgeline, or whatever they called that non-truck.

Originally Posted by rspears

Yeah, I never saw much point in the Avalanch, either. If you want a truck, buy a truck. If you want the SUV, buy the SUV. Almost as bad as the Honda Ridgeline, or whatever they called that non-truck.

Hey I always thought they were 2nd cousins..lol

While the first ones with the plastic were ugly the later ones were a little better. It couldn't have cost much more for GM to build it. Just a few different panels and people can have something different. While I probably never would have bought one I do like things that I can switch up and keep me interested. Then again GM is trying to be leaner and meaner and things like the Avalanche and 10 of the same car across all their brands is not smart in the long run. The Avalanche wasn't quite as odd as that Envoy where the roof in the cargo area opens. That was a weird idea haha..

Must say I agree on that, stupid looking. Truck that did not know if it were a car or truck. Kind of looks like it started on the car side of the factory and was finished off in the truck assembly area.

Originally Posted by angrystroker

Kind of looks like it started on the car side of the factory and was finished off in the truck assembly area.

It's an Alien Ute from another time in space..........

Well, you guys put me in the position of being the outlier again and having a different perspective on things! Having owned pickups of many brands/configurations over the past 40+ years, I may still be a wannabe, but after owning one of these for the last 3 years I think it's the most versatile vehicle I've owned. We took the Pres seriously three years ago when he promised that his policies would "......necessarily cause energy prices to skyrocket." My bride got a Mini that meets her commuter needs, is easy to park, fun to drive, and gets good fuel economy. If the onboard computer is to be believed, it's averaged 38 mpg overall in three years of multi-use driving. For me we wanted something that would fill most or all of the other needs of a family vehicle: 4 doors, multi-passenger comfort for local or long distance, towing capability, parts and material hauling, and anything else that might pop up. Being the same basic structure as a Suburban it's not the easiest for parking, but not impossible. It's the same chassis and drive train as the full size truck (though suspension is a variation), so it's got nearly all the utility of the pickup with some features a pickup can't offer. Typical 4 door, full seat/legroom trucks only have a 6 ft. bed, but this one can convert to 8' with a couple minutes effort. It's basically a 'burban without the rear roof section which gives it flexibility for loading things with a cherrypicker like engines, which I've done a few times, or taller shrubs and such upright. It will handle full sheets of plywood, but because of the built in storage bins it loses some of the outright utility space of a standard pickup along the side walls. For what I usually do this isn't much of a concern. The trade off is the extra security of a hard tonneau that is lockable to protect material if you're making multiple stops.

GM has never done a good job of promoting the features of this rig, and as many show here, a large portion of the potential customer base misunderstands the rig, but that's life. Now that GM is run by political hacks, it isn't about product innovation, it's about pushing a political agenda. Large SUVs are products of Satan................screw what some consumers want and the multi-tasking capabilites these offer.

Thought I'd give a live example of what I find useful. Try putting 12' material in your pickup, especially the 6' bed ones............and be able to have the load completely closed in. I had more sticks in there, but I didn't think to take a pic till I was almost done unloading.

Perhaps one of the major problems with it is it's name....."Avalanche" ....it doesn't give you any security that it's here to stay, if you know what I mean! It's kinda destined to slide down hill!

Aside from that, as 35Fordcoupe mentioned, that first year or two it looked like the older, bigger & uglier cousin of the Pontiac Aztec, which, while being totally utilitarian, had to be one of the ugliest vehicles on the road!

Then they glammed it up a bit and made a Cadillac version of it so the Ryan Seacrest types would buy it and roll down Sunset on their 22's with the music thumpin'.

I wouldn't trade my 66 F100 shortbed for one but there are times, Bob, when I wish mine would do some of those "transforming" things like yours does.....

Originally Posted by Bob Parmenter

Thought I'd give a live example of what I find useful. Try putting 12' material in your pickup, especially the 6' bed ones............and be able to have the load completely closed in. I had more sticks in there, but I didn't think to take a pic till I was almost done unloading.

I can just open the sliding rear window on my F350 short bed Super Crew - works every time up to 14'. And as far as load carrying capacity - well the 1800-2000 pound pin load of my 12,000 pound 5th wheel trailer brings the suspension down about an inch.

I'am with Bob on this one, never own one but always wanted too.I Like the looks and as Bob has shown the bed. I may run down to the local GMC and see what my 07 GMC will get me towards a avalanche.

I like the concept; reminds me of my old Suburban ('78 to '88). If I were in the market for another vehicle, the Avalanche would be on my take a look at list.