Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

GMC Yukon / Yukon Denali

1434446484964

Comments

  • avolvofanavolvofan Member Posts: 358
    Ezrapon, frankly, I didn't check to see if the transmission temp guage was missing. (It would not surprise me to learn that the temp guage is dropped as well....) The last time that my Denali was in for an oil change, I wandered over to confirm the absence of the transmission oil cooler on a new 2004 that had just arrived. Low and behold - no transmission oil cooler. I was in such a state of shock at how GM could have made such a dumb decision to drop the transmission oil cooler that I did not bother to check the interior of the 2004.
  • tdohtdoh Member Posts: 298
    Yes the '04 Denalis still have the tranny temp gauge--I know 'cuz I own an '04 DXL! Even with the omission of the tranny oil cooler on the '04 Denalis, I will comment on this--I dunno if it's the cold weather here in the Northern California (specifically, Sacramento) area (temps don't regularly reach 60 deg F in the daytime, and almost always below 50 during the evenings)...but even after 30 minutes of no-tow driving (tranny in D) the tranny temp hardly ever goes past 120, and much of the time barely reaches 110. Service tech says nothing wrong with the gauge, and no tranny-related error codes have popped up...so unless normal operating non-tow-condition tranny temp is supposed to be < 140, then maybe the tranny oil cooler might not be needed under most day-to-day driving conditions?
  • bcs77bcs77 Member Posts: 1
    Just wondering if anyone can share their experiences on how the DXL handles in snow and ice. I have a '03 and so far no snow for us. But the traction on wet roads seems very good. Also does the Stabilitrak system really work or is it more of a gimmick?
  • lobsenzalobsenza Member Posts: 619
    I have used another manufacturers comparable system on a closed wet track. I compared running with it and without. It was unbelievable how much it helped...
  • avolvofanavolvofan Member Posts: 358
    Tdoh, you are referring to current (jan, 2004) temperatures aren't you? Summer is an entirely different proposition in Sacramento. (More like 100+ degrees F.) I would be very curious to hear about the transmission operating temperature in the summer. I can remember driving through Paso Robles this past summer with my 2003 Denali (100 degree outside temperature with trans cooler and not towing at the time) and the transmission temperature got up to the 150 - 160 degree range.
  • blockislandguyblockislandguy Member Posts: 336
    IMHO tranny coolers are absolutely mandatory if you hope to get anywhere near 110K out of the vehicle before it is ramp trucked to AAMCO. So, we tend to buy the "trailer package" on our vehicles just to get the cooler (we maybe use the vehicle to tow something once or twice in the 10 years we own it) and then we run RedLine ATF. Knock on wood, this has worked.

    So, if I had a new '04 Denali I'd find a GM parts guy who could give me all the part numbers for an '03 cooler. Then I'd order it and have it installed. OR, I'd buy a better, bigger cooler in the aftermarket for far less money. I sure as heck wouldn't expect an automatic tranny to hold up to moderate service w/o a cooler.
  • erinsquarederinsquared Member Posts: 178
    I think one of the reasons people are attracted to vehicles like a Denali is the comfort knowing that it is up to extreme duty tasks like towing huge loads and scrambling up slippery paths. The fact that most drivers do not use the vehicle in this capacity does not diminish the fact that we are paying a premium for these features if the need arises. Otherwise, why not just drive a stationwagon which handles better, accelerates faster, and gets better mileage? I think GM recognizes that a trans-cooler is probably overkill for how most people use these vehicles and reasons that people will add a cooler if they do a lot of towing. The transmissions are probably fine without a cooler in most situations, since I have not heard of high failure rates in regular Tahoe/Yukon models and the Denali has a more heavy-duty transmission. Unfortunately IMHO, this is moving in the wrong direction for the brand touted as "professional grade". This is probably just a way to eek out a little more profit from these vehicles as they approach the end of their production run.
  • maico1maico1 Member Posts: 2
    For what it is worth...Just placed my order last night for 04XL and KNP shows up on the build sheet...Go to your dealer ask them to run a copy of the standard equipment print out generated by GM AutoBook....Under vehicle details Standard Equipment-TK15906 4dr 1500 AWD MECHANICAL you will see listed....Cooling, external transmission oil cooler,auxiliary,heavy-duty air-to-oil..This info was last updated on 1/20/04...According to my dealer KNP has always been considered standard equipment therefore it was not part of that Non-RPO Update dated 6/03 as referenced in post# 2331.
  • tdohtdoh Member Posts: 298
    I guess the only way to find out for sure if the '04 Yukon Denali/Denali XL comes with the tranny oil cooler (RPO code KNP), short of physically looking for the unit in the vehicle itself, would be to see if KNP is listed among the numerous RPO codes on the sticker found in your glovebox compartment...assuming of course the codes listed on the sticker are indeed indicative of the equipment actually installed on said vehicle.

    maico1--not disputing the info you provided, but if such were indeed the case (KNP being standard with trailering package), then why would the non-RPO update (which I referenced in my post #2331) specifically mention the fact that--among other things added and/or deleted--the tranny oil cooler was deleted for the '04 Yukon Denali/Denali XL? If it's still standard, then why would the non-RPO update mention anything about it at all?

    Not trying to be argumentative, but something doesn't make sense; in any case, I'll have a better idea later on when I go check the codes in my glovebox...
  • tdohtdoh Member Posts: 298
    One more thing I can think of regarding the availability of KNP on the '04 Denalis--you said that you just placed an order for a DXL, plus the date you reference regarding the availability of KNP was stated as 1/20/04; maybe GM decided to make KNP available on the '04 Denali again and just haven't updated their online/web page to reflect this?
  • ezraponezrapon Member Posts: 348
    not taking the cooler off the car. It is not offering it as an option. I have one on my 03 (plainly visible in the mouth of the lower grill) And other than a bike rack, I'll never tow anything. I probably won't ever need it. But should I have a trailer I'd think the cooler would be a high priority. What where they thinking?
  • tdohtdoh Member Posts: 298
    Looks like the '04 Yukon Denali/Denali XL gets the KNP tranny oil cooler after all; I went home and took a look at the RPO codes listed in the glovebox of my '04 DXL and sure enough, KNP is listed. Assuming that the info listed on the glovebox sticker is accurate, then it appears that the info on the gmfleet.com website isn't completely accurate...oh well, at least it's nice to know that the '04's have them after all.

    On a somewhat related note, it appears that the '04 Denalis also come with an auxiliary engine oil cooler--RPO code KC4, which is also listed on my glovebox sticker.

    Again, I'm only assuming that both coolers are there based on the sticker; I haven't physically checked underneath/up front to see if either or both coolers are indeed there.
  • maico1maico1 Member Posts: 2
    Because of your post, #2331 is why I questioned my dealer....for I to would have concern if it were deleted....so I want to thank you for that...however all I was trying to do was pass on the info I gathered and I tried to be specific enough so anyone else could check it out for themselves...when I take delivery I will let you all know whether KNP exists or not....
  • orwoodyorwoody Member Posts: 269
    My 2001 Denali came with Michelin Cross Terrains which were great on dry or wet, but I thought sucked in the snow and ice. I changed to some more aggressive SUV All Seasons (Les Schwab XTX) and the Denali handled great in the snow and reasonable on the slicker snow/ice. I did put it into low gear (1) when going downhill in the snow and felt in total control.
  • juice22juice22 Member Posts: 29
    I have been following this topic for the past day or so and it has sparked my interest. My story is that I had a 02 Denali and then, because GM repurchased my 02 Denali under Lemon Law, recently purchased a 2004 Denali. In the summertime, I do lots of towing (big boat) thus my need for a vehicle like this. I specifically asked my salesman while purchasing about the external air to oil tranny cooler. He said it has the option &#147;KNP&#148; and I verified on the option sticker on the glove box. I feel it helps when you have outside temps of 100 degrees and pulling a couple thousand pounds of weight and 7 people and gear in the truck itself. My 02 had it; the salesman showed me on paper my 04 will have so I am thinking I am good to go. So, I crawl under my 04 Denali last night and I DO NOT see anything resembling a external Heavy-Duty tranny cooler. I am going to ask a stupid question…Is it part of the big radiator (like all cars on the road) or is there a separate cooling device like the engine oil cooler (which I see plain as day) or the A/C radiator that sits in front of the big radiator. Tell me if I am wrong…If it is on my option list in my glove box…It should be on my truck…Yes.

    And don&#146;t get me started about my 04 not having the locking rear end…how does Stabilitrac take the place a locking rear end. IT DOES NOT. Try this test…put two tires (drivers side) on ice…have the other two (passenger side) on dry pavement…ease on the gas and you will go nowhere. Makes no sense. If you had locking rear…the axle would lock and you are moving. Seems simple to me!

    Thanks in advance for any feedback!
  • donahuesdonahues Member Posts: 36
    I have an '02 Denali and the passenger front seatbelt locks up when extended and then ratchets back. So when a passenger leans forward, they get locked in and have to take the seatbelt off to release the tension. The service guy says this is normal, designed for a child seat. Has anyone found a way to resolve this problem other than a seat belt extension? It seems like a bad design since no child should be in the front seat since my model year does not have an airbag selector switch.
  • tkreytaktkreytak Member Posts: 5
    Just replaced my 01 Yukon XL with a 04 Denali XL, drove it for about a week (check engine light on the whole time)(different unresolved issue).

    Thought it might be the gas cap being loose.

    Stopped to fill up the tank for the first time.
    and like the 01 XL attempted to "hang" the loose cap from the bracket on the back of the gas door, didn't reach. Hmmm, was I doing something different.

    Then I went to insert the cap to prop the gas handle, so that I didn't have to stand outside in 5 degree boston weather, while waiting to fill up.... still too short....

    is this me, or is this a know feature?

    Is everyone's gas cap tether too short?
  • beach15beach15 Member Posts: 1,305
    Yes, you're right. For whatever reason, it is shorter on 2004 models, probably to save GM another .0001 of a cent.

    They never think such a little thing would be noticed...this just shows they're wrong.
  • ezraponezrapon Member Posts: 348
    Unles they changed the set up drastically, you can see the cooler in the front lower bunmper opening. On my 03 you can't miss it. Maybe they have incorporated it into the radiator, but I doubt it. Looks like a gray refridgeration coil.
    My tether, however, seems about the right length.
    It would appear, getting over ten grand off sticker and a cooler made my decision to grab an 03 a sound choice.
  • avolvofanavolvofan Member Posts: 358
    Juice22, the only air-oil transmission cooler that I am aware of is a separate device along the lines of the a/c condenser unit. If it is part of the radiator, then it usually becomes a water-oil cooler. You shouldn't have to crawl under the truck to see the cooler (if it is there). The cooler on both my 2001 and my present 2003 was/is visible through the grill.
  • cornellpinoycornellpinoy Member Posts: 196
    I haven't been impressed with the Cross Terrains in snow either. Did you notice any increase in road noise or any additional harshness with your new tires?
  • cornellpinoycornellpinoy Member Posts: 196
    The front passenger seatbelt on my '02 has been locking up frequently also. I don't agree with your dealer at all since my seatbelt only started acting up within the past month. Prior to that it was never a problem. The only thing I can think of is that during the past month, someone reclined the seatback all the way. The seatbelt been locking up locking up since then. I haven't had time to have it checked out yet, but when I do, I'll let you know what my dealer says.
  • lobsenzalobsenza Member Posts: 619
    One of the oil coolers (trans or engine) is part of the radiator. You can see this by comparing a Denali or 2500 vehicle to a standard 1500 vehicle and looking for extra lines going into the radiator.

    The gas cap teather on the 04s should be mounted to the gas door, so the teather doesn't have to be as long. Of course, it may not hold the pump on anymore.
  • circutmanncircutmann Member Posts: 40
    I wouldn't be surprised if an environmental agency or group pressured GM & maybe other manufacturers to modify the cap/tether in a way that does not allow the cap to be used to hold the gas pump nozzle open. I know many stations in NY State post signs stating that the person filling the gas must remain present at the pump while filling. The reason I am sure is to minimize the likelyhood of a spill.

    Not being able to use the cap as a wedge to hold it open, will keep more people holding it by hand. What a pain, especially when it is -10 degrees during the winter monthes in upstate NY.
    Dave
  • tdohtdoh Member Posts: 298
    I was one of the first to bring up the issue of the short gas cap tether on the '04 Yukon Denali (msg #3412 in the Yukon XL/Suburban forum), and can tell you what I found out about it:

    1) Yes it is indeed shorter on the '04 Denali--another one of GM's cost-cutting measures

    2) Spot-checking of another '04 Denali on the lot revealed that the tether was attached to a small hole on the back of the gas door; however, the service tech stated that that isn't where the shorter tethers are actually supposed to attach to; the original location is indeed supposedly the correct one, short tether and all. I could sorta believe this because I had attempted to relocate the mounting pin/tab that attaches the tether from its original location next to the nozzle opening to the back of the gas door. Although I was able to do so, the outer plastic sleeve that locks the pin in place got scrunched to the point where the pin that goes into it would not stay in securely. When I pulled the sleeve back out I noticed that it indeed got scrunched, apparently due to the fact that the hole in the back of the gas door wasn't deep enough to completely accomodate the sleeve without damaging it.

    3) Given #2 above, the solution for securing the gas cap while refueling (if you don't need to use it as a nozzle wedge) is to hook the lip of the gas cap onto the bracket found on the back of the gas door. Although not as elegant as looping the tether to the bracket a la '03, it is an acceptable and workable solution as it does not get in the way of the nozzle and of course, will not be hanging off the side of the vehicle, possibly marring the finish/paint in that area.

    For those of you who have a need to use the cap as a wedge to keep the pump nozzle open...well, I dunno what to say, but for the most part isn't usually an issue since most pump nozzles these days have a latch to keep the nozzle open.
  • blockislandguyblockislandguy Member Posts: 336
    erinsquared, you mentioned that Denali has a better tranny compared to Yukon. My Yukon/Denali brochure lists the tranny in the Denali as the 4L65-E, electronic four speed with overdrive. For the Yukon the brouchure just says "electronic four speed with overdrive and tow/haul mode". Aren't these the same??

    (I do realize that in the 3/4 ton models using the 8.1 engine, an Allison tranny is available, but we aren't discussing that here.)
  • lobsenzalobsenza Member Posts: 619
    is a heavier duty version of the standard Yukon tranny.
  • orwoodyorwoody Member Posts: 269
    It seemed a bit stiffer at first, but the Autoride seemed to adjust after a drive or two. No appreciable increase in tire noise. The Denali is a quiet ride. They also did a good job on balancing as I noticed no wandering or handling issues driving at high speed with them and I didn't see any noticeable drop in mileage.
    I recently put a set of XTX on my Sonoma and they are a huge improvement in handling and no more noisier than the original Uniroyals. I mention because the Sonoma is definitely an opposite in ride, quiet and comfort from the D.
  • erinsquarederinsquared Member Posts: 178
    Here is a link to the GM tranmission powertrain site:
    http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpowertrain/transmissions/hydra/app- s/4l60.htm

    The Denali uses the 4L65-E to handle the extra torque and towing rating of the 6.0L. These are great transmissions and is why Mercedes and BMW OEM variants of the hydromatic tranmissions in some of their v-8 products.
  • blockislandguyblockislandguy Member Posts: 336
    Erinsquared, nice link with some interesting reading. At first glance the benefits of the Denali Tranny (M32) over the Yukon (M30) seem like much to do about nothing. Yeh, sure the M32 has a 500 RPM lower max shift speed (that is an advantage??), slightly (20) more pounds capacity of max engine torque, and 60 more pounds capacity of max gearbox torque (gear boxes produce torque??). Then the good stuff is outlined: a massively bigger convertor and the tranny sump holds 3 more quarts of ATF. (So, who needs a tranny cooler?).

    Denali Tranny coolers. The posts earlier seemed a little bit like debating how many angels could dance on the head of a pin with no one apparently knowing what a cooler looks like and/or where it is mounted.
  • juice22juice22 Member Posts: 29
    It is not that I (speaking for myself) don&#146;t know where the air-to-oil tranny cooler &#147;SHOULD&#148; be located. I am stating that my option list (in the glove box) shows &#147;RPO-KNP&#148; otherwise known as air-to-oil tranny cooler; however, in my visual inspection it does not exist. For the record, the only place I have NOT looked for the cooler is up in the area where the spare tire is stored. Should it be there…unless there is a design needed to keep the spare from over heating…I don&#146;t think so.

    Therefore…I ask…How many people on the board have 2004 Denali (shorty) with RPO-KNP in their glove box yet have no cooler. By the way, I had my salesman (all the time him bragging that he knows everything about Yukons) show me that the A/C condenser is the tranny cooler. Idiot.

    Thanks for your help!
  • lobsenzalobsenza Member Posts: 619
    may be built into the radiator. Compare a 1500 std vehicle radiator to a Denali and look for extra tubes running into the Denali radiator.
  • blockislandguyblockislandguy Member Posts: 336
    lobsenza, not sure what you are getting at. Supposedly (according to the brochure that I read) BOTH Yukon and Denali have the tranny cooler as standard.

    FWIW, the aftermarket (maybe B & M Transmissions) sells not only super duty tranny coolers but nice external, spin on tranny filter kits. I think if one were to pull a horse trailer or a large boat regularly this would be worth adding on. If just $150 worth of a filter kit and filter changes prolonged the tranny life by 15K that would be well worth it. (And you probably would no longer own it at that point.)
  • lobsenzalobsenza Member Posts: 619
    I get mixed up. The engine oil cooler or trans cooler is part of the radiator. It is on the Denali and 2500 series. Look at the radiators and you will see a difference (at least there was one when I bought in 2001).
  • orwoodyorwoody Member Posts: 269
    Can come built a couple of ways. If designed in the mfr will take advantage of the coolant radiator by running the tranny lines into a separate section taking advantage of the existing radiator fins etc... They can also "add it" by placing a second (smaller) radiator usually in front of the coolant radiator. The ones who integrate them usually expect that their rigs will be used for a lot of towing etc. so in the long run its cheaper to integrate with the coolant radiator.
    I've had both styles.
    Rigs often have both tranny and oil coolers integrated into the single radiator.
  • juice22juice22 Member Posts: 29
    Can I get some help understanding the concept of deleting the "Locking Rear End" and replacing with "Stabilitrac". Why can the vehicle have both. The way I see it, they serve two different functions! Yes?

    Thanks!
  • erinsquarederinsquared Member Posts: 178
    I'm interpreting your comment to mean 'why not have both a locking differential and stabilitrac'?. In theory, Stabilitrac performs the same function as the locking differential by controlling torque distribution to the wheel with traction. This is the same purpose a limited/locking differential serves, so having both would duplicate this effort and add an unnecessary expense.
  • lobsenzalobsenza Member Posts: 619
    will help in any kind of slide situation, not just from a stop. I tested a car on a wet closed track with a stability control system. First with it in and then with it off. It is unbelievable how much stability control helps. It clearly can assist in avoiding accidents.
  • blockislandguyblockislandguy Member Posts: 336
    I just compared Edmunds TMV on a used 2002 Denali and a 2002 Yukon SLT. Wow! There is a 6K spread which is close to the maybe 8K-9K spread between a typical 2004 SLT and a Denali when new.

    If my quick look at Edmunds TMV is correct, it looks like the Denali holds its value well and the used market isn't valuing it as a tarted up Tahoe/Yukon. Or, am I preaching to the choir?
  • avolvofanavolvofan Member Posts: 358
    When I traded my 2001 Denali for the 2003 Denali, I got money back on the trade. Getting money back from a dealer trade is something that frankly, I had not expected. (In fact, the truck was pre-sold - the dealer called me to enquire if I could bring in the 2001 before the scheduled date that the 2003 would be ready. Go figure....) It would seem that the Denali does in fact hold its value.
  • huma1huma1 Member Posts: 5
    hi all, its helpful reading the posts on this board. i am thinking of buying a 2001 denali with 36k on it for $30,000 edmunds says it is worth 32,500 from a dealer. its in great shape has 2 tvs and i spoke to the previous owner who said it was a great car no problems with it. i am buying it from a dealer. how do the numbers sound, any advice , t should i get the extended warranty, how do they hold up over time? thanks in advance for the help
  • lobsenzalobsenza Member Posts: 619
    The newer SUVs have an additional position on the headlight switch that my 2001 does not have. What is it for?
  • orwoodyorwoody Member Posts: 269
    Price is very reasonable. I sold my 2001 for $32k with 40k miles.
  • csi35csi35 Member Posts: 28
    Go to www.gmfleet.com and pick your vehicle and year. Then click on view online order guide and then select New for 200X.
  • blockislandguyblockislandguy Member Posts: 336
    Take a look at the 2004 Edmunds TMV for Denali, Tahoe, Yukon, and E B Expy. Edmunds presents data based on actual retail transactions that adjusts the TMV by body color. Sure, we all know that green cars have a lower resale, but Edmunds puts a number on it and says that even when new a Denali in green is worth $128 less (than what?)and a Tahoe/Yukon in green is worth about $25 less.

    Now here is where it gets interesting. A silver Denali is worth $120 less while a silver Tahoe/Yukon is worth about $20 more. What, the presumably lower income Tahoe/Yukon buyers like silver more? In black it is reversed: a black Denali is worth $44 more and a black Tahoe/Yukon is worth $40 less. The Eddie Bauer Expy color-adjusted transactional prices track better with the Tahoe/Yukon than the Denali. This probably isn't a surprise because the sale prices are similar and presumably the buyer's income, education, etc.

    While numbers usually don't lie, I see a lot of silver cars in rental fleets and those guys buy with resale in mind.
  • cornellpinoycornellpinoy Member Posts: 196
    There is no true "silver" offered on the Denali. Yes, I know "Quicksilver" was added in '04, but it is more pewter than gray. In fact, this is what replaced the pewter metallic offered in previous years. A possible explanation is that a "silver" Denali is worth less because it was re-painted.
  • dako_tiandako_tian Member Posts: 298
    They tend to generalize the colors (Toreador Red and the bright Red, quite different colors on Ford pickups, just became "Red" in the ratings), so I would guess that anything silverish to gray becomes "silver." If they didn't, then the ratings would be useless from the endless categories of colors and color names as manufacturers monkey with the available choices.

    BTW, are you an Ivy League Filipino? Just curious as my wife is from Mindanao (thus the flag choice).
  • blockislandguyblockislandguy Member Posts: 336
    cornellpinoy, yes, in 04 Denali is available in "Silver Birch Metallic" which to my eyes is as silver as silver gets.

    I"m suprised though that no one commented that the (presumably) lower income Tahoe/Yukon/Expy buyers preferred the silver not the black, red and not the white compared to the Denali buyers. There's got to be a Master's Thesis is these data for someone.
  • 4burb4burb Member Posts: 55
    Cornellpinoy,
    I agree, the new SBM color GM has is almost just as pewter as last years.
    Blockislandguy,
    Not trying to start an argument, to each their own but why would you say that buyers of the Tahoe/Yukon/Expy make less income (presumably)? Maybe they just have other things they would rather spend it on...like whatever they tow or the place next to the lake or in the mountains they tow it to. Just curious. By the way, I choose a 4WD Burb w/locking diff over the Denali. My uncle has the Denali XL in the family.
  • dako_tiandako_tian Member Posts: 298
    4burb asks the right question. You cannot assume much about economic status by the vehicles folks drive. Think about how many luxury cars sit in apartment complex lots.

    Some people, like myself, might value a home over vehicles (we put more of our available money into our home and have so far lived with only one vehicle for our 4-person family - 2 drivers).

    My neighbor owns a maybe $300,000 home (this is Texas so the value is really good!) and has probably $120,000+ in original-cost vehicles for his 3-person household (3 vehicles for 2 drivers).

    You will find some very wise investment folks with resources way beyond what I will ever accumulate who drive 10-year-old cars because they aren't unduly influenced by status vehicles' allures.

    I would also hazard a guess that far too many people are "upside down" in their vehicles perhaps in foolishly trying to drive beyond their means.

    It all makes me remember what Mom said the word "assume" breaks down into.... ;-)
Sign In or Register to comment.