My old Suburban

[ConstitutionCowboy]

We have a 1999 GMC Suburban, bought new in December 1998, it has ~ 130K miles on it, been rear-ended once, fixed it, and It is still 'good as new'. Also have 1996 Tahoe bought used in 2011, it now has ~186K miles on it, and it runs like a top as well. My only complaint is that you can't get a new steering box for either vehicle and they will wander a bit in crosswinds. We never plan to replace either vehicle, we'll just keep them up.

Woody

 

[30BulletHoles]

Nice looking vehicle.
I'm sure this is going to start something, but IMHO, NEVER get a transmission flush. Drop the pan, get fluid all over the floor, clean it up and put fresh fluid back in.
The flushes stir up debris that causes issues down the road. I'm not a transmission mechanic, but I am friends with several that experienced the same issue as you did. Flush=tranny failure.

I'm with you buddy, just say no to trans flush! On the other hand, most newer transmissions don't have a drain plug for the torque converter unfortunately. In that case make sure its not a reverse flush, just enough to push the old fluid out and new in, with pan drop and new filter of course.

 

[Capm_Spaulding]

For the money you could have bought basically anything pre 2010 you wanted if you looked hard enough, but if you really like the square body suburban, hey, you probably have the nicest one around.
What will suck is if you get in a wreck or run into any sort of insurance claim, because it is still a 20 year old truck at the end of the day and they will never pay you what you put into it.
I would never do that myself, as I scavenge ebay and multi state craigslist ads to find my vehicle deals. I only paid a few more thousand for my 2014 Wrangler with 0 miles fully loaded two years ago with an extended warranty. There's always a few z71 tahoes out there under 10 with under 100k miles and plenty of 2007 model tahoes in that same price range you ended up paying. It's all about what you like.

 

[BryanDP]

I'll give you a "YES" vote, with one "but...." I flipped through most of the posts and didn't see my only concern about this scenario addressed, so I'll make it here. If somebody runs into you and does $6K in damage I doubt you'll be able to collect more than the book value on the car even though you have close to $20K in it. But, new cars are also a risk in that you generally almost immediately own a car that is worth considerably less than you paid for it.

I don't think you made a bad decision, though. It's not something i would have done, but it would be pretty cool to own a "new" 20 year old vehicle.

Bryan

 

[dennishoddy]

I'm with you buddy, just say no to trans flush! On the other hand, most newer transmissions don't have a drain plug for the torque converter unfortunately. In that case make sure its not a reverse flush, just enough to push the old fluid out and new in, with pan drop and new filter of course.

Yeah, torque converter is a different deal. Most vehicles don't have a drain plug in the tranny pan, but I'm happy to report there are aftermarket plugs that can be installed. Punch a hole in the BACK of the pan, allow to drain, drill and insert the fitting. Pretty simple job.

 

[Okie4570]

Super Dutys have drain plugs in the pan. 90's Ford pickups had no pan drain plug, but had torque converter drain plugs lol. Another no vote for flushes. Drain, change filter(s) replace the amount you drained.

 

[71buickfreak]

Personally, I prefer the 80s version (I have an 87, have owned several and a '13), but hey it's about you and what you like. I would have swapped in a 6.0 LS for considerably better fuel economy and longevity, but other than that, you did good.

 

[71buickfreak]

For the folks that say it was a bad because he didn't buy a 60s model- While I love those too, what you don't get with one of those is daily-driver comfort. That doesn't mean you can't drive one daily, it means that things like wind noise, road noise, AC/heat, even ride quality all suffer because the older vehicles did not have nearly the same level of attention given to those areas. I build customs for a living, and you will never get a car from the 60s to seal up like one from the 90s or newer. That has value too.

As a true daily driver, that can mean a fair amount to a prospective owner. The car in my avatar- a 1971 Buick GS convertible. I drove it daily for 6-7 years until I tore it down for a rebuild. That build has been done for almost 10 years. It is in the shop for a fresh build. It runs fine, suspension is still tight, but it has new rattles, replacement parts that have worn out, the new top seals leak (always have really), it just isn't built to seal up. I don't drive it daily anymore because I have nicer cars to drive that better than 12 mpgs. It's a 50k car easily, but it has 10 years on a restoration that has been driven across country and driven hard regularly. They just don't hold up to regular use. Also, tiny scratches and dings can really make you angry when you have 10k paint job, so you tend to enjoy them less.

 

[RidgeHunter]

For the folks that say it was a bad because he didn't buy a 60s model- While I love those too, what you don't get with one of those is daily-driver comfort. That doesn't mean you can't drive one daily, it means that things like wind noise, road noise, AC/heat, even ride quality all suffer because the older vehicles did not have nearly the same level of attention given to those areas. I build customs for a living, and you will never get a car from the 60s to seal up like one from the 90s or newer. That has value too.

As a true daily driver, that can mean a fair amount to a prospective owner. The car in my avatar- a 1971 Buick GS convertible. I drove it daily for 6-7 years until I tore it down for a rebuild. That build has been done for almost 10 years. It is in the shop for a fresh build. It runs fine, suspension is still tight, but it has new rattles, replacement parts that have worn out, the new top seals leak (always have really), it just isn't built to seal up. I don't drive it daily anymore because I have nicer cars to drive that better than 12 mpgs. It's a 50k car easily, but it has 10 years on a restoration that has been driven across country and driven hard regularly. They just don't hold up to regular use. Also, tiny scratches and dings can really make you angry when you have 10k paint job, so you tend to enjoy them less.

This is true. A 67-72 with modern drivetrain (ls, 6.0/4L80e, etc) can be pretty close for a classic, tho. 67-62 Chevys seal up pretty well for a classic. Better than an old soft top that's for sure.

They will always be louder and feel more primitive, tho.

IMO most people don't drive enough for it to matter. My cousin is debating a classic vs a new mustang. His wife has a CRV and they drive it as a family car on trips. He only drives to work, on 35mph streets, 5 minutes from home in his car. I'm like dude...no contest. Old car.

Also the worst thing about driving an old car daily: you are deader than dead in a crash that's survivable in a more modern car. Classic cars are death traps in wrecks.

But fawk $10k paint on anything.

 

[dennishoddy]

Rebuilds don't always involve the drive train. The entire frame that has isolation pads are typically trashed after a few years. Front end parts are typically necessary too.