Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

GMC Yukon XL and Yukon XL Denali



  • smart1smart1 Posts: 1
    i can help you with that, but i am in tx
  • I have a 2002 Sub with the 8.1.
    Around town I get 11-12 mpg.
    I once got 15 on the highway, but I was really trying!
    Towing my 6,000 trailer is around 8 or 9.
    The 5.3 would do the job.
    With the 8.1, you won't even know it's back there!

    Mileage is the only reason you would regret the big block.
    Other than that, I love it.
  • I have had both.
    It is purely a matter of trim and options.
    I think you have a litle more control of the options when you go Chevy.
  • gmc4megmc4me Posts: 6
    About to buy a 2005 Yukon Denali XL (NAV-SUN-DVD-XM). No financing price will be $46,560. For 0% financing (36 months) price is $49,376. Both do not include tax and tags. Sound good for Philadelphia??

    Anyway, wife likes bench seats for 2nd row (we have a 1yr old, a dog and 2nd kid on the way).
    whereas I like the captain seats. Advice is very welcomed.

    Also, summit white or silver brich? Both have bench. A black one with captain seats is avalable, that i want to get. help talk me out of the black.
  • beach15beach15 Posts: 1,305
    I prefer the 2nd row bench too (just makes it seem roomier in my opinion). The captains seats are nice, I guess, and can be reclined, but overall you can get more use out of the middle bench and have more stretch out room on it.

    As to color, we used to have a '02 Avalanche that was Onyx Black, and while beautiful most of the time, having the cladding was its saving grace, since it ment less black to care for. We traded that truck for a '04 Suburban, which technically has more exterior surface area to care for, so Summit White was the choice this time and we haven't looked back.

    On the Denali, black is, by far, the absolute best looking choice but only when it is cared for often and properly (i.e. no car washes and frequent, careful polishing and waxing). Since I prefer the middle bench, and white or silver are your choices there, I'd probably go with the Silver Birch. While probably the most common, it is only second in line to the black in terms of good looks, plus still maintains the best benefits of silver (or any light color): doesn't absorb excess heat, doesn't show scratching nearly like a dark shade, and just looks clean and classy when cared for correctly. The Summit White is nice too, but on something flashier like the Denali, I think something with metallic in it looks best.

    Then again, white can be even classier then the all too common Silver, so I guess it's a toss-up for me! :confuse:

    Good luck!
  • gmc4megmc4me Posts: 6
    Thanks you your input Beach.

    Does anyone have any experience with an after market rear assitance device added to their SUV? They said they can have it install for 375. (just beeps) or video for 650.
  • tdohtdoh Posts: 298
    See my reply regarding your bench vs. chair dilemma in the other forum you posted your query in...

    As far as your question regarding rear assistance devices--here's my simple take on the pros and cons of both types:

    Sensor: Pros--cheaper than most camera solutions; gives you a relatively more definitive indication of how close you really are to an object. Cons--can't SEE EXACTLY what's back there; most likely will require drilling holes to install sensors; susceptible to interference which may impair its accuracy (rain, etc.--not often but it can happen).

    Backup camera: Pros--you can actually see exactly what's in view of the camera; no signal interference (unless you consider putting a tape over the lens "interference"). Cons--even the cheapest backup camera solution is more expensive than all but the most reliable backup sensor kits (microwave; infrared and ultrasonic are relatively less reliable/accurate than microwave, with ultrasonic being above infrared); not really effective in low/no-light conditions unless you either have a light mounted in back that puts out enough ambient light to light up the area surrounding the camera, or a camera which includes multiple LEDs for nightvision; won't help you determine EXACTLY how close you are to an object (due to the optics used in most inexpensive backup cameras); depending on viewing angle of camera, you may not be able to view objects on the extreme outer edges (i.e., rear corners).

    Me--I went with the backup camera solution in part because it was a "fancier" solution than backup I didn't need to drill a single hole in order to install the camera on my DXL. I must admit that my backup camera solution cost more than the $650 you were quoted...if only because I have my backup camera hooked up to a Pioneer AVH-P6500DVD head unit--the backup camera itself (w/ billet mount) cost $199.

    Pic of backup camera attached to opening right above hitch receptacle:

    Pic of AVH-P6500DVD showing backup camera in action:
  • gmc4megmc4me Posts: 6
    The installer said the camera would go in the trailer hitch so you wouldn't even know it was there.
    They would then install a small lcd by th rearview mirror. not sure i like the sounds of that.
  • kleinckleinc Posts: 13
    I'm looking to buy also and have a question on the gas mileage difference on the 4x4 with the 4.1 gear ratio compared to the 3.73? Anyone know the answer? I'm trying to decide to buy off the lot or order one without the 4.1 since most 4x4 on the lots come with the 4.1.
  • lobsenzalobsenza Posts: 619
    I have a 2001 Denali XL, so I cannot directly answer your question. I can tell you that when I was test driving these vehicles, there was a noticible performance difference between a Yukon XL/Suburban with the 5.3 engine and the 4.1 axle vs the 3.73 axle. If I had not purchased the Denali XL, I would have gotten the 5.3 with the 4.1 axle.
  • rand01rand01 Posts: 75
    I have ordered the 4.10 gear set on both of my last 4wd Suburbans with the 5.3 engine and wouldn't have it any other way. Performance is worth any decrease in mileage, plus you can go to a slightly taller tire without totally killing the performance. I don't keep that close of tabs on mileage but 16 or 17 is about the best I can remember getting cruising at 70 down the highway.
  • tdohtdoh Posts: 298
    Hmmm, I guess GM must have changed the ratio of 4x4s w/ 4.10 vs. 3.73; my '03 YXL 5.3 came with the 3.73--standard, IIRC. As others pointed out, you will gain some performance at the sacrifice of some fuel economy; however, ask yourself this--do you really need that small gain in performance that a 4.10 offers? Or, do you plan on towing quite a bit? If the answer to either or both is no, then you definitely wouldn't be worse off getting the 3.73. I've never driven a GM truck/SUV w/ the 4.10 so I can't honestly compare between that and the 3.73 but FWIW, the 3.73/5.3L combo was good enough for my needs.

    Of course, now that I drive a DXL, that combo feels like it has the power of an econocar... ;)
  • rand01rand01 Posts: 75
    No Tony, I think the majority of those 4wds on the lot will still have the 3.73 gears from the factory, at least all the ones that I have seen the sticker on. I had to special order the 4.10 on my last two Suburbans.
  • kleinckleinc Posts: 13
    The 4.10 is still a option($100). Most of the dealers add it on in their orders, thus the ones I have looked at have it already. My major concern was whether there would be a significant loss is gas mileage. I have a 97 trooper right now so performance isn't as big an issue. I only get 13-14 on good days with the trooper so any increase in gas mileage is bonus. I plan on keeping the yukon xl for eight years or so also and don't want to kick myself later for not getting an option that's important. I'll go test drive this weekend. thanks for your comments, have a great weekend.
  • lobsenzalobsenza Posts: 619
    I did test drive both back in 2001. The 3.73 definitely was slower. There was a "flat spot" where the 3.73 felt like it was short on power. This was not felt with the 4.10. It was noticible. I could tell which axle was in the vehicle after a test drive without looking at the sticker.
  • beach15beach15 Posts: 1,305
    We've had the 3.73 on both our '02 Av and now the '04 Suburban and I'm familiar with this "flat spot" too. They both feel very powerful from a stop, but then as you reach normal speed (50-60), it's like it just fully runs out of steam. I know it isn't technically, but it's an annoyance I wish wasn't there.

    It would have been nice if either of these trucks has the 4.10, but with us buying moderately optioned 2wd models, it doesn't seem like a common add-on for dealers to choose.
  • kleinckleinc Posts: 13
    Is there anyone out there that could give me a gas mileage average for 5300 v-8 and the 4.10 rear end? I have the figures for the 3.73. Right now I'm leaning to get the 4.1 off the lot and not hassle with the ordering process.
  • I recently bought a 2005 Yukon Denali. I heard that there is an adaptor for the NAV system that will allow regular DVD movies to play. Has anyone else heard of this?
  • tdohtdoh Posts: 298
    I assume you saw the response in the other thread you posted in; I just want to add that, in case you weren't aware, you still would need to cough up a separate DVD player in order to watch a DVD movie on your nav screen w/ the adapter.
  • chloe5chloe5 Posts: 1
    Did you every find out what was wrong? I purchased the same vehicle two weeks ago. I just got it out on the highway and 40 miles later found it to be doing the exact same thing you are describing. I only have two weeks left on the warranty. I do have a transmission cooler and it only got up to 150. Help. :confuse:
  • kleinckleinc Posts: 13
    I bought a white 4x4 xl with the 4.10 off the lot. The 4x4 actually come stock with a 3.43 for 2005. There didn't seem to be a noticeable decrease in the gas mileage and it does drive nicer. thanks for all your input. I need bigger tires now and side steps. I don't like the factory ones.
  • dobrodandobrodan Posts: 1
    I realize that this thread is pretty old, but my experience may help someone else with this problem. I also had a strong mildew smell from the rear AC in my '03 Yukon XL. Since I had the same problem with my '96 Suburban I suspected the problem was a leak in the AC condensation resevoir. I removed the cowl to inspect the unit and discovered that it was leaking and the carpet and pad were wet all the way to the front seats. The carpet has a rubber backing so it was dry on the top surface. I have now removed the entire interior except for the front seats and console. The seal at the bottom of the AC unit where the refrigerant lines exit was faulty - a poor design, even worse execution. In Detroit water must run uphill because the seal is lower than the drain for the unit - which was not blocked - and water was leaking under the carpet for who knows how long. I recommend that you ckeck the drain for the unit (a little rubber tube near the refrigerant lines behind the back wheel) to be sure it is clear. I am going to seal the entire unit and cut the end of the rubber drain to keep it running freely. Hope this helps someone.
  • arkitectarkitect Posts: 75
    will the 07 models come with deisel engines
  • arkitectarkitect Posts: 75
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    It's a bit like predicting the weather, unless someone has seen an announcement. Try the Diesels in the News discussion.

    Steve, Host
  • arkitectarkitect Posts: 75
  • gapjs40gapjs40 Posts: 6

    We recently bought a 2002 Yukon XL and are having the knocking problem. Do you have an address I can use to try to get GM to fess up and correct the problem?
  • Good luck.

    I have the same year Chevy Sub with the 8.1 engine that knocks for a minute or so.
    I knew it when I bought it, but I 'needed' the vehicle.

    I think the best you might get is an extended warranty, IF your original warranty is still in effect. Most people agree that while it sounds bad, the vehicle will still give you reliable service for 100,000+ miles. I don't believe they have ever 'fixed' the design problem. The pistons are so short that a small variance ( undersize ) in the diameter can make all the difference. They can't make them taller, because the crankshaft is in the way. This is just what I have read. I have not actually pulled one apart... yet.

    I hate to hear it, but I will just run it until I can justify a rebuild. Then, I will make sure that the replacement pistons are matched to the cylinder bores.
  • surfn69surfn69 Posts: 2
    I know what you mean, I wold be nice if we could connect a regular cell phone not to the on star, but to the speakers and mic in the car.

    Then we can use our voice activated cell phones with the vehicles hand free and comm with the mic and speakers of the car while using our cell phones.

    somebody knows how to do this?
  • surfn69surfn69 Posts: 2
    I have an 8.1 avalanche and it knocks since new, at the dealer they turn on a 0 miles one and it did the same thing.

    Just step on it, it will knock for 130k miles with no problem
Sign In or Register to comment.