Straightline

As I recall, the body-on-frame layout was also partially because that layout is generally better for heavy duty towing and hauling...which was these vehicles' original purpose. Assuming that's true (correct me if I'm wrong, somebody), wouldn't that basically relegate these things to...supersized Lambdas? Seems that it'd be smarter to just eliminate the half-ton versions?

I fully expect that a "properly engineered" unit-body full-size SUV to still have excellent towing capacity, and that it will likely match up pretty close to the body-on-frame models now being offered.
 
Remember, there are several mid-sized unit-bodied SUVs that can match or exceed towing of the best mid-sized b-o-f SUVs. The Jeep Grand Cherokee/Commander, LandRover LR3/Range Rover, and VW Touareg/Porsche Cayenne come to mind here. So I expect this to still be true when scaled up to full-size SUV proportions.

Let's think about this. Do most people tow/haul with their full-size SUV's? I would say no. Without proper stats, I'd say only about 40% of people tow with their SUV's (which is arguable). And maybe only 10% of large SUV owners actually NEED towing capabilities on a regular basis (ie. once a week, or something).
 
That being said, I would say that most SUV owners own SUV's either because it's a trend or they want to feel "safe" with an increased ride height/4WD. Correct me if I've left anything out. Considering that, why would anyone want to choose a Suburban/Tahoe over the Outlook/Acadia/Enclave/Traverse? The latter four vehicles are all able to tow 4500lbs which is plenty for hauling around a boat or small camper. If people ARE towing with an SUV, that's usually all I ever see being towed. Plus, they get better MPG than the former.
 
So where does that leave the large BoF SUV's? I say leave them the way they are (ie. with BoF construction) for people that actually NEED to tow/haul more than 4500lbs on a regular basis while still having the ability to transport 7 or 8 people around in the back. Just limit the quantity being produced to better meet demands.
 
No sense in making everything from the same vein just to get better CAFE ratings with little regard for people that actually have a need for something like a Suburban.

flicmod
 
The European unit-bodied mid-sized SUVs that I mentioned tow over 7700 pounds. I have no doubt that a properly engineered full-sized unit-body SUV can tow upwards of 10K, maybe even more.
 
I do agree with you that most people don't need a full-size SUV. However the point is for GM to meet future regualtions, and the feeling is they can't without switching over to unit-body designs.

That's about my favorite ad slick photo ever.
 
Maybe if I keep asking, GM will do another one but reverse the vehicles - it'd be a hoot to see the classic pulling a new one around.

I think this idea is absurd. Making super-sized lambdas would mean they would still have gas mileage too low for anyone who just needed to transport people and normal cargo.
 
Most people who have bought full size SUVs in recent years do not need them for hauling or towing. The absolutely largest car they would conceivably "need" would be a lambda-size crossover. Making uni-body full size SUVs would still make them too big and inefficient for the needs of the non-towers and haulers, and would make them inadequate for the needs of the towers and haulers.
 
To make this story short: keep them truck based and you'll sell a small amount to the people who need them. Make them uni-body and you'll sell absolutely none.

stovt001, since when do most Americans buy because of "need"? They buy because of "want." This is nothing new.
 
Yeah, sure there are those who buy vehicles strictly because of rational reasons, but that's not the case for most people. If that were the case, all families would have some sort of minivan, and there would no sporty vehicle market.

That's exactly why I put the the word need in quotation marks. They buy them due to style and what's popular, and it is not stylish and popular to buy a full-size SUV anymore. Seeing how sales have dropped off, I'd argue that a higher percentage of those sales are made of people who really need those abilities. Making them uni-body would tap the quickly evaporating market for people who just want a big vehicle for no real reason, while abandoning the relatively more stable market of people whole use the capacities of a truck-based SUV.

Does GM really need a unibody bigger than the Acadia/Outlook/Enclave? Those are already full-sized.
 
Either way, I will be surprised, because GM still uses a solid axle now, while others have gone IRS.