Model Year | 2006 | 2016 | |
Model | Kia Sorento | Chevrolet Tahoe / Suburban | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 106.7 in | 116.0 in | -9.3 in |
Length | 179.8 in | 204.0 in | -24.2 in |
Width | 73.3 in | 80.5 in | -7.2 in |
Height | 68.1 in | 74.4 in | -6.3 in |
Curb Weight | 4112 lb. | 5466 lb. | -1354 lb. |
Fuel Capacity | 21.1 gal. | 26.0 gal. | -4.9 gal. |
Headroom, Row 1 | 39.7 in | 42.8 in | -3.1 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 58.9 in | 64.8 in | -5.9 in |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 55.3 in | 60.8 in | -5.5 in |
Legroom, Row 1 | 42.6 in | 45.3 in | -2.7 in |
Headroom, Row 2 | 39.5 in | 38.7 in | 0.8 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 58.4 in | 65.1 in | -6.7 in |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 58.0 in | 60.3 in | -2.3 in |
Legroom, Row 2 | 36.1 in | 39.0 in | -2.9 in |
Headroom, Row 3 | 0.0 in | 38.1 in | -38.1 in |
Shoulder Room, Row 3 | 0.0 in | 62.6 in | -62.6 in |
Hip Room, Row 3 | 0.0 in | 49.3 in | -49.3 in |
Legroom, Row 3 | 0.0 in | 24.8 in | -24.8 in |
Total Legroom | 78.7 in (over 2 rows) | 109.1 in (over 3 rows) | -30.4 in |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 31.4 ft3 | 15.3 ft3 | 16.1 ft3 |
Cargo Volume, Behind R2 | 31.4 | 51.6 ft3 | -20.2 |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 66.4 ft3 | 94.7 ft3 | -28.3 ft3 |
2006 Kia Sorento Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2007 | 4dr SUV 262-horsepower 3.8L V6 5-speed shiftable automatic 4WD, part-time w/low range |
Plenty of room for my large frame. Seats are comfortable with adjustable lumbar support. see full Kia Sorento review |
2005 | 4dr SUV 192-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic RWD |
The leather seats are supportive yet soft. it feels like a couch. see full Kia Sorento review |
2005 | 4dr SUV 192-horsepower 3.5L V6 5-speed automatic 4WD, part-time w/low range |
It is a comfortable seat position to provide good all around visibility. see full Kia Sorento review |
2016 Chevrolet Tahoe / Suburban Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Comment | |
2015 | Some (perhaps more than some) people are drawn to large SUVs because they like to feel like the king of the road when behind the wheel. Others need a lot of space while driving, or at least feel they do. Few vehicles have more front seat room than the new Tahoe. With an inch-and-a-half less shoulder room, the Ford's front-row dimensions aren't quite as generous, and its taller, shifter-festooned console is more intrusive. The front seats are comfortable in both. The Expedition's are a little wider and softer, and they're upholstered with especially rich hides in the King Ranch and Platinum (vs. the most recently tested and photographed Limited). Whether this is preferable is a matter of taste. see full Chevrolet Tahoe / Suburban review |
2016 Chevrolet Tahoe / Suburban Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
Year | Comment | |
Both the Tahoe and Expedition have roomy, comfortable second-row seats, with a slight edge to the higher cushions in the Chevrolet. Bonus points to the Tahoe for automatic rear climate controls (they're manual in the Expedition). Move to the third-row seat, and you'll wonder why, despite redesigns for 2007 and 2015, General Motors has stubbornly refused to follow Ford's 2003 switch from a solid rear axle to an independent rear suspension. With a solid axle, the rear floor must be high to permit the rear differential to travel up and down when a wheel hits a bump. Consequently, the Tahoe's third row seat must be very thinly constructed and mounted very close to the floor. Even pre-teen children won't be comfortable in it. In sharp contrast, the Expedition's third-row seat is higher off the floor than its second-row seat, much less the ridiculously low third row in the Tahoe, and is--surprise--considerably more comfortable as a result. The Suburban's third-row seat is roomier than the Tahoe's but still far inferior to the Expedition's. see full Chevrolet Tahoe / Suburban review |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2016 Chevrolet Tahoe / Suburban.