Talk:Chevrolet Suburban

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

GMC category[edit]

Why is this article listed under the GMC category in addition to the Chevrolet category? Isn't it just a Chevrolet vehicle? — Vespristiano 17:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It was formerly produced as a GMC vehicle. — Jesse's Girl | Please talk! 12:33, 25 May 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That is, it was also a GMC vehicle. Some years back GMC started calling their 'burbs Yukon XLs. --Badger151 01:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • NOTE

Only from the year 2000 and up was the "GMC SUBURBAN" (A DIVISION OF CHEVROLET PROFESSIONAL LINES OF VEHICALS) named the "YUKON".

It is not within the scope of "WIKPEDIA" to be a manual for any truck or car line. Its only intended as a informative artical giving the general scope of the history of said car or truck lines. For retorical or technical information one should contact GM, or third party information such as Chiltons or like materials.

--Mdalev 02:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

GM CT

GMC is NOT a "division of Chevrolet Professional Lines of Vehicles". GMC is part of GM as is Chevrolet.

Onion article[edit]

I can't find the Onion article on their website (which is meant to be the complete archive) or any references to it on Google. If no one can verify it existed, it should be deleted.

(In fact I can't see the harm in deleting the entire References section) --87.82.16.118 18:56, 31 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yukon XL redirect[edit]

I think that it is retarded that the Yukon XL redirects here, the Yukon doesnt redirect to the Tahoe.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.186.18.218 (talk) 05:28, 24 June 2006

Older Suburban info missing[edit]

There's nothing in detail here about any Suburban before GMT400, and there's a complete information void between 1966 and 1988. Someone who knows anything about that time (I can't say I do) really needs to fill in those details. I have a photo of an 80s-model GMC Suburban waiting at the Commons, but there's nothing relevent to it in the entire article, so I'm hesitant to put it up. IFCAR 23:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Update: A thank you to whoever put up the picture. It would be nice if it referred to some part of the article though. IFCAR 23:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photo[edit]

'61 Stretch Suburban

I notice that all the photos in the article are of recent models; I don't know whetther that is policy or lack of images of older vehicles. I don't generally work on car articles, but someone might want to make use of Image:1961 Stretch Suburban 1.jpg, which I took at a street fair this summer.

By the way, if my memory serves me well, they used these on Long Island, NY as airport limos in the 1960s, but I don't have anything citable on that. - Jmabel | Talk 06:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've seen links on strech versions of Suburbans, as well as sedans and station wagons, but I forgot where they are. I don't doubt that some Suburbans were turned into airport limos in the 1960's, but I've seen more of this being done on cars than anything else. Long Island Airport Limousine Service, and Connecticut Limousine used to have fleets of those, most notably Checker Aerobuses, and converted Chrysler Newports. Also, if you've ever seen the movie Dog Day Afternoon, you'll find such a conversion on a 1969 International Harvester Travelall(http://www.imcdb.org/vehicle_57994-International-Harvester-Travelall-1969.html). DanTD 15:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here's a link for you(http://www.6066gmcguy.org/Stageway.htm) DanTD 14:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And another(http://my.net-link.net/~dcline/limostg1.htm). DanTD 14:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
File:53 chevy suburban.jpg
53 Chevrolet Suburban Lowrider

The photo Image:53 chevy suburban.jpg is a beautiful truck, but is a lowrider, albeit one that appears to be authentic in other respects. Most of us know that the ride height is not correct for a 1953 vehicle, but I think this could be very confusing to a reader less familiar with cars. Additionally, this photo may have been lifted from [classictrucks.com] and have copyright problems. Does anyone have a free picture of an authentically restored example of this generation? -- Bdentremont (talk) 19:13, 3 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chassis[edit]

Is it a body-on-frame or unibody? // Liftarn

Unibody is defined as a "Union of Frame an body"

GMC an Chevrolet full size SUV'S are full frame,

and not unibody. Suburban full size were "Body on a frame".

A pickup frame with a Suburban body.

A good example of a simple unibody would be a 1969 Chevrolet Camaro.

--Mdalev 02:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

"The Forgotten Years?" I doubt it.[edit]

I'm pretty sure the 1960-66 Suburbans, as well as the pickups and other Chevrolet-GMC Trucks were referred to as "Jet-Age", or "Space-Aage" or something like that. DanTD 00:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm pretty sure the article is referring to "forgotten" by the current generation. I'm 18 and I sure as well don't know what 60-'66 suburban looks like(I don't pride myself of my knowledge of cars tho either). They may have been great vehicles, not "forgotten" by GM in it's time period.--Tygone2 15:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

why redirected from Suburban[edit]

Why does Suburban redirect here? --Blake3522 07:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Luxury SUV?[edit]

Isn't this a luxury SUV?-- Vintei  talk  23:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

only on the Caddy escalade and GMC Yucon Denali XL and the Suberban LTZ other than that no.--Conor Fallon (talk) 20:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shorten Article Starting with Vehicle heights[edit]

The height measurement for the individual versions of the later models needs to be shortened. It can be moved to a table on the main page but for the side bar give the minimum and the maximum for the model else it's too big. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LSX (talkcontribs) 04:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So shorten it, no one's stopping you. What I do is average the similar ones together and unless there's a significant difference, I only use one measurement.--Flash176 (talk) 16:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Finally done! No large gaps between sections now, huzzah. As a reminder to all, this is not a fansite or car manual; we do not need each and every measurement for each and every model in the infobox. --Vossanova o< 19:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chevy HHR[edit]

No mention of the HHR styled after the early suberbans?


the hhr is styled after the 47-55first series suburban, but the hhr is 4 door, suburbans where 2 door until 67. ~~57belaire

--Conor Fallon (talk) 21:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

700R4 Transmissions[edit]

Article states that 7oor4 transmissions were introduced in 1986 or 1987. These 4 speed overdrive transmissions were in fact widely available before that. I have owned both a 1984 Chevy c10 Suburban and a 1984 GMC 3/4 Ton Suburban that had the 700r4. Both were completely original with factory trannies. Will research exactly when this became an option. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zzzax3000 (talkcontribs) 20:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

resolve things about square body (73-91) burbs[edit]

ok, it says that the gmt 400(92-99) was when independant front suspension(ifs) was introduced, but i have a 1986 Silverado C10 suburban, and it has ifs. i also have a 1992(gmt400) stepside silverado C1500 and it has a front suspension identical to tha of my suburban. my burb is 100% factory, so i know im right, the 73-91 burbs is when ifs was introduced.

as for the 700r4 thing above, my 86 burb has a 700r4, and my 79 stepside gmc has a 4 speed auto from the factory that im sure is a 700r4

also, i didnt see anything in the article about 73-91 burbs having an optional rear a/c, mine does.

and for the tbi, im 99% sure that tbi was introduced in 87, and carbs were dropped in 87, my 86 has a 350 topped with a factory q-jet carb —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.254.44.246 (talk) 03:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I believe it should say that IFS was introduced on the 4x4. 199.224.122.199 (talk) 17:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

weights[edit]

Be useful to know the vehicle weight. The article mentions a model called the "three-quarter ton" model. There's no way this vehicle is that light, so what does this mean? 3.25 tons? Needs clarification. 124.184.251.188 (talk) 11:38, 6 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Three quarter ton refers to the model between half ton and 1 ton trucks, not their actual weight. Zuranamee (talk) 20:40, 10 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flashpoint[edit]

Shouldn't this article mention that a version of this vehicle is use on Flashpoint? 71.167.137.83 (talk) 01:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In Popular Culture[edit]

The consensus shown at WP:WPACT is that 'In popular culture' sections on vehicle articles "should be strictly limited to cases where the fact of that reference influenced the sales, design or other tangible aspect of the vehicle." The unsourced items listed here do not meet those requirements. Is there any reason this article should be an exception to WP:WPACT? Bahooka (talk) 01:48, 7 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edited by GM's Marketing Dept?[edit]

The sections about the eleventh and the twelth generation seem to be edited by GM's marketing people. And it looks like they didn't even take the time to revise their press package and simply did a copy + paste. Could somebody who knows the cars please redo it and make it decent.Chilrreh (talk) 20:25, 15 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was curious if the Suburban would be offered in a diesel 3/4 ton version and was told no by Chevrolet that it would only be sold as a 1/2 ton gas powered model. I think a diesel engine would be a welcomed edition to the Suburban model.In four wheel drive also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.26.219.211 (talk) 21:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Grand Theft Auto V in introduction paragraph?[edit]

The intro paragraph mentions that the Chevrolet Suburban is called the Jollibee Granger in GTA V, and has a link to the real Jollibee corporation. Does this belong in the intro, or on this page at all? Maybe in a trivia section?

{{SUBST:Nosubst|Signatures/Metlman13}} (talk) 03:57, 17 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merging Suburban and Tahoe Articles[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


The idea of merging the Wikipedia articles about the Chevrolet Suburban and Chevrolet Tahoe is not a good one, as both articles are too long to read, given that the Suburban should be the primary article (the Tahoe section would have to be combined with the ninth to twelfth generation sub-sections) plus the merging would mean taking out too many sources as the vehicles do have different histories. Unless there was a proposal to give the GMC Yukon its own article (which would be a better idea and could reduce the excessive amout of information), then there would be a reason. They should be kept as separate articles. (Robert Moore) (talk) 08:18, 09 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose The Tahoe and Suburban, despite being related vehicles, have their own distinct histories (especially the Suburban) to even consider merging. I'm not sure why the nominator even suggested the merger, as he appears to oppose a merger himself. I would keep separate and close the discussion. Jgera5 (talk) 05:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The history between the three are too different. Seqqis (talk) 01:22, 26 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose It would be awkward and confusing to readers. Many sentences would have to begin, "In the case of the Suburban..." or "In the case of the Tahoe..." Tetsuo (talk) 05:11, 27 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Weight and fuel usage[edit]

I do not find these viable information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.229.247.159 (talk) 15:47, 29 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Too much whitespace[edit]

Too much whitespace

Because of all the infoboxes on the right side of the article (which are necessary), it leaves a ton of whitespace down the left side. This is a very popular article, so I don't want to go messing with the aesthetics without some consensus, but can I suggest that the infobox photo for the second to sixth generation be moved to the left, under the text? I realize not all browsers show so much white space, but on some browsers it looks like a wasteland ("clear" templates had already been added to deal with this problem). I've created a draft HERE to show what this would look like. This really "tightens" the look of this very well done article. Thank you for your feedback. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:37, 14 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is unorthodox to do what you propose, but I feel it is an improvement. OSX (talkcontributions) 23:20, 14 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photo removed[edit]

Suburbans in U.S. President George W. Bush's motorcade, 2008

An editor (probably a Democrat) removed this photo from the article with the edit summary "unless you can give an example that non-stock vehicles are notable please do not list them on the car articles".

Of course non-stock versions of vehicles are notable! Many production vehicles are modified for various purposes, such as utility vehicles, taxis, or for the military. This fact is so notable that some versions of the stock vehicle, like the Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor, have their own articles.

Photos of non-stock versions are all over Wikipedia's car articles. See:

There's already a non-stock photo of the Suburban on the article, see.

Finally, Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles says nothing about photos needing to be of stock versions. And...it's a good picture! Magnolia677 (talk) 03:54, 4 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am not a democrat, I am from Australia. Furthermore, please read WP:CARPIX for further details --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 03:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
.Also that non-stock vehicle is notable in the article --EurovisionNim (talk to me)(see my edits) 11:09, 4 April 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chevrolet Suburban. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:01, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No second generation?[edit]

The article seems to jump from first generation (1935-40) to third generation (1941-46) with no second generation. Is this just a typo that's gone unnoticed, or is there some reason for not having an official "second-generation" model? Thanks in advance.192.190.207.188 (talk) 21:26, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Initial picture is of a 1990 Chevrolet Camaro[edit]

I was going to remove the opening picture, but i will leave it up for discussion. The picture listed (even from source documentation) is of a 1990 Chevrolet Camero, with racing stripes. Recommend removal of the picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.159.28.137 (talk) 02:40, 30 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Photo incorrect for four chevrolet/ gmc suburbans[edit]

2007 suburban photo is of a Ford suv.

1967 to 1972 photo is a Chrysler car product . 
1993 to 1991 photo is a Chrysler car product too.
1992 to 1999 photo is a ford car product.  thank you    Mrspeedyt (talk) 23:02, 30 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Chevrolet Suburban. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:23, 4 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Generation count ?[edit]

An edit by user 142.134.101.31 on 6 February 2016, leading to article version Chevrolet_Suburban&oldid=703632252, redefined the generation count, shifting all generations by one (down), and for instance bringing the generation count out of step with this source, And the first sentence of the "eleventh generation" section even begins with "The Twelfth generation ..."

Shouldn't all generations be counted one up again, starting with the first gen in 1933, and counting to the current (2015) as the twelfth ?
GeeTeeBee (talk) 21:42, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:51, 16 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]