16th Dec 2010, 22:36

I have a Trailblazer, and it's a SUV. I also have a new Silverado, and it's a truck. When parked next to each other, they look different as well. No issues on either as far as similarities mechanically. A Trailblazer is not a truck.

17th Dec 2010, 15:19

What are you, the vehicle police? Ha ha ha!! A Trailblazer is a truck with a full frame... na na na na na na! Seriously, you had to post and tell me I was mistaken in calling this poor excuse of a vehicle a truck? I really don't care what it is labeled as, because it is a piece of junk anyway you look at it, name it... or do anything else with it. I am an import buyer for life thanks to these pitiful vehicles!

17th Dec 2010, 16:42

"Can't think of a suitable replacement..."

Neither can we, so we are opting to keep ours for another 100,000 miles. At just under 100,000 we have not had a single repair. The body-on-frame Trailblazer/Envoy/Rainier/Bravada/Ascender (all are the same vehicle) are by far the best SUV's made and the flimsy front-drive "cross overs" are NOT SUV's, they are cars with station-wagon-like bodies.

I just read a review about the new car-based Ford Explorer. Like all Fords, it was top-rated and highly praised, however it is basically a Taurus with a boxy body.

The safety and bad-weather driving characteristics of the Trailblazer/Envoy are very important to us. My wife is a medical professional, and must get to work in any weather. Her cars have to be very reliable and capable of traversing high water during our occasional floodings and snow and ice. The high ride height and excellent traction of the Trailblazer/Envoy make it perfect for poor weather driving. It is only rear-drive, but still greatly outperforms our front drive mid-size car on snow or ice.

At this point, if we had to replace our SUV, it would be with a low-mileage late-model Trailblazer, Envoy or Rainier. My choice would be the Rainier, because of its plusher and more upscale styling. No current new midsize SUV could be as great-driving and perform as well. A car with a fat body or an unreliable import is simply not practical for our use.

17th Dec 2010, 17:15

Take a look underneath your Trailblazer and your Silverado. What do you see? On each you will find a full frame, more heavy-duty suspension, solid rear axle, and if you have 4-wheel-drive, a transfer case. The ONLY thing that really makes the Trailblazer any different from the Silverado is instead of having a truck bed, it has an enclosed cab for carrying passengers.

18th Dec 2010, 09:34

"The flimsy front-drive "cross overs" are NOT SUV's, they are cars with station-wagon-like bodies."

Um, I think the auto companies are the REAL authority on naming their vehicle classes. Crossovers are as much of an SUV as your dinosaur Trailblazer is. The Trailblazer isn't even made anymore, thankfully, so who cares what it is labeled as? My RAV 4 is much more of a competent SUV than my TB ever was, as it isn't in the shop every other week for more repairs!

19th Dec 2010, 10:35

My 1990 GM Conversion Van has a 3/4 based truck frame, but I am not going over to my building supply to dump 3/4 ton of gravel in the back; I will use my pick up truck. In all fairness, it's like comparing a EL Camino 454SS my friend has; more a car than a truck. To me, it's a compromise. He can load it up and pump up the air shocks, but it's a car. His is a great dragstrip car/truck? Of sorts. The Ridgeline to me is another passenger vehicle, not a truck with light van frame. I would be afraid the trans would fail with any exertion placed on it like our Hondas we had.

20th Dec 2010, 12:16

"Um, I think the auto companies are the REAL authority on naming their vehicle classes.

True. But the American public has a lot to do with car names. All current "crossovers" are simply station wagons, but because that term is not regarded as snooty or sporty enough, the term "crossover" was used. Ford even did a public opinion survey before classifying the new car-based Explorer (a Taurus station wagon) as an SUV. It found that the public was more likely to buy it if it was called an SUV instead of a crossover.

With the demise of the truck-based Explorer, there are no true truck-based rear drive SUV's now other than the full size models from domestic makers. At this point, we would most likely just opt for the full-sized GM SUV, as it has the best resale and is much more rugged and reliable than the import competition, and requires no repairs or maintenance, beyond tires, batteries and oil changes for the first 100,000 miles.

20th Dec 2010, 13:19

A crossover is just what it is named as... a cross between a car and a truck. SUV stands for sport utility vehicle. There is nothing in there about "truck" or "full frame". If your vehicle is sporty, has a certain amount of utility as in hauling space and versatility, then it is an SUV. It doesn't really matter what kind of frame it has. Most crossovers are within the SUV category, because of the sport and utility aspects of that name. 99% of people don't do any heavy hauling or off-roading these days with the average SUV, so full framed vehicles are just unnecessarily heavy, and they waste gas for no good reason.

Station wagon is a dated term, and really only applies to vehicles that have a sedan counterpart like a VW Jetta or a Subaru Legacy. They still exist, obviously, but they aren't as prevalent these days. To say the new Explorer is a station wagon is a real stretch though. You are saying that the SUV is dead then, as there really is none left with frames other than the full sized GM and Ford vehicles. After gas hits $4 per gallon this summer, we'll see how long those survive.

20th Dec 2010, 16:51

The higher the gas, the bigger I buy. I live and work close by. Why pay high car prices at the worst buying times. Buy a big SUV when gas is high and get a deal. Buy a smart car when gas is lower and no one wants one. When gas dropped a while back, people around me canceled their smart car orders.