Advice on engine, package 2011 Yukon, Suburban
 

Looking for real world opinions on the option of the 5.7 or 6.2 engine in Suburbans/Yukon XL. This is for my wifes car which will just tow our Nautique. She wants an LTZ or Denali package, 4wd. I see the 5.7's are a little better on fuel. The 6.2's have AWD which typically I'm not a fan of because they don't seem as smooth at the wheel. Anyone know what suspension options are the best? Thanks

We have an 09' Tahoe LTZ 6.2. Great truck so far. About 35k miles. Has every option avail I think.
Very smooth ride. about milage, well lets just say MAYbe 15? in real world.
I think I saw 16 once. Thats on Paper not DIC.
Have heard some minor tweaks and it will Really wake up the motor. WIfe wont let me touch it YET! Did I say its her truck?!.

I had a 6.0L AWD Denali XL and was not a fan as compared to the 5.3L 4WD trucks I had owned in the past. As it is your wife's vehicle and will be used for occasional light towing, I would not opt for the 6.2L/AWD.

What were the things you didn't prefer about the awd, thanks for the replies

I just prefer to have control over whether or not I am engaging the front axle. I rarely put a vehicle in 4WD even during the winter months here in IL. So the 98% of the time that I do not need 4WD I prefer to run just off the rear axle and get better fuel mileage. That said, it was hard to get into trouble with the vehicle in any road conditions and I did like the extra power of the bigger motor when I towed. I just wish they offered AWD as an option with electronic shift 4WD as standard.

What is this 5.7L engine you speak of?

I'm sure you mean 5.3L. The 5.3 will suit you fine, and have more than enough power/tow capacity (for a ski boat) with the 6 speed auto. Fuel economy will also be better due to the smaller displacement, and part time transfer case vs. the 6.2 AWD Denali.

If you get the 5.3 make sure you get the tow package and the highest numerical rear axle ratio like a 3.42 or 3.73 axle. These engines with the 6 speed trannys will pull a ski boat no sweat. The AWD does suck fuel. Having a 4wd you select is fine.

Wannabe

I wouldnt get the AWD get 4wd in any case better gas. Get the 5.3 in a min of 3.55 probably get 3.73 gears. 6.2 in a tahoe is a waste of money if your only towing a 3-4k ski boat. As far as LTZ or denali personally I think loaded out vehicles are a waste of money and I dont like leather. So I usually get the Chevy LT or Ford XLT pretty well equiped and save me some money

My wife is on her second Denali and loves them. The milage isn't that bad 16-18 mpg and the AWD is nice in the winter because you don't get the hop when turning. The level ride system is nice for towing also. I like having the larger engine, I've never known anyone to say they had to much power.

I understand what everyone is saying about the 5.3L getting better mileage due to displacement but if you compare 6.0L all wheel drive to 6.0L 4WD then doesn't the all wheel drive actually get better mileage? Sounds crazy but on the newer (post '03) push button 4WD's all the drive components are turning, just not being "driven" which leads to friction drag and a waste of energy causing more fuel consumption.

No it's just the opposite, AWD means all the time drivetrain is working. 4wd is only when 4wd is selected. In AWD there is a center clutch to slip between front and rear when taking tight corners.

Wannabe

My wife has an 09 Yukon Denali XL with the 6.2.Before I got it for her I drove a Yukon XL with the 5.3.Its night night and day performance wise.And the Denali has AWD the Yukon with the 5.3 just had 4 wheel that could be turned on an off.

Around town wife gets around 14 but on the highway we have seen 18.

Agreed as far as the AWD version. Would you agree that on the 4WD that the front drive shaft and front axles are turning since they're still "locked in" at the front wheels even when it's in 2WD mode? That's my line of thinking.

No in 2wd mode the front shafts and hubs do not turn. The GM system uses automatic locking hubs. Ford on the other hand uses manual hubs on many (not all) of their vehicles.

Wannabe

Yes, and the dodges don't have locking hubs at all... Ford hubs have been notoriously problematic in auto mode, although if you get out and lock them in manually, they'll work.

Hmmm that's strange. I know I've seen the front axles turning on a lifted '02 or '03 Burb while in 2WD mode and I know my drive shaft turnes on my '04 Avalanche while in 2WD mode. Now I'm really curious, so I guess I'll look at my truck in the morning.

Since when? All GM 4wd vehicles use CV half shafts, at least since 1988 (for full size). There is a disconnect that unlocks the long side shaft from the differential, but that's it, no automatic hubs. Unless it's changed in the last year or so...but I would be surprised.


GM hasn't used 'hubs' since they put a solid axle under the front of the trucks/blazers/suburbans (granted the subs/blazers didn't change body style/axle until 91-ish).

Thanks for the advice. She drove a camaro ss and liked that. It's going to be a tough choice.

My '06 6.0L 3.73 AWD Denali XL was lucky to see 16 MPG highway. This is hand calculated mileage, not going off the DIC. It never passed a gas station it didn't want to pull into. I liked the extra power over a 5.3L truck when towing. If it is a daily driver that will only see occasional light towing duty, I would stick with the 5.3L.

+1......My wife has a 2009 2WD Yukon 5.3 and real life is 14 around town, 16-17 highway (not towing anything). Truck has 45K miles on it and no issues except for the rear door lock failed. It would lock/unlock about one out of 10 times.

^ This is the correct answer.

The CV shafts still turn when in 2wd, but there is a disconnect in the front diff, that keeps the driveshaft from spinning. The CV shafts are splined to the unit bearing/hub, and there is no way to "unlock" the hubs.

I have an SS with the 6.2 lots of power think camaro has the 3.43 gears. I get about 17-19 in that car. Add 2k lbs less aero dynamic bigger gears and an automatic transmission I doubt that Tahoe with the 6.2 get any better than 14-15 anytime of the day

I would still go for 6.2, huge performance difference and the mpg is negligible, 5.3 barely get's better mileage in the real world.


I'd say something is wrong with your Camaro or you foot is hammering it all the time lol. I almost bought a Denali, but a friends 6.2 gets 20-21 on the highway at 75, granted he has some mods but that torque and the gearing of the 6 speed is a pretty efficient combo for the truck (his is 2wd).

, but a friends 6.2 gets 20-21 on the highway at 75,


That must be coasting down hill or sumthing.
Never been close in ours.

Intake, headers, full exhaust and tune... stock was like 18-19 mpg. We went to Atlanta from Boca last year, and got avg 20.8 mpg at 75. Remember we're in FL, nice and flat.... hilly areas and altitude kill gas mileage. Let me tell you, that truck is no slouch stock, but with those mods on the 6.2 you would not believe how fast that truck is w/o forced induction. He's 2wd as well Have another friend with a regular Tahoe 5.3, mileage is basically the same between the two, 5.3 lil better in the city.

But if you want 4wd then you only choice is the 5.3, which isn't a bad combo especially now that they added the 6 speed to it as well, before that 4 speed pos trans sucked with the 5.3, both for towing and driving, felt lethargic.

Have the 5.3 in my tahoe pulls my 28ft powerquest no problem...we use it instead of my 2500 most of the time

Yeah hes either full of chit or something else. I average 17 in the camaro and it will do 21 crusing long dinstances. I guess your friend did a lot of stuff to get that MPG. If you spent thousands upgrading its going to take a lot of miles doing a couple miles better to make up for the upgrades plus you tank your warranty, not a good idea.

Again 6.2 is better peformance but when you get to be older and have kids if your trying to have a hot rod tahoe you have problems.

Your Camaro is rated 24 on the highway, you can check forums and see others avg quite higher then 21... you'd have to be going pretty fast to avg only 21, even with the porky weight of the Camaro as 6th is geared very tall.

But I don't see how you think the mileage on the Denali is fake? I owned an 07' Lade for about 8 months, rwd. I think the rwd was 19 highway, but I know the awd was 18 highway rated. I got 19-20 mpg as well on the highway... so how do you see that as far fetched when it's rated right in that range? buddies Denali got the same, he's rwd as well. He didn't spend thousands on mods, but he has a maggie going on soon, either way those mods made for even better mileage and big power gain, but the mpg wasn't that big, around 1-1.5 mpg. I looked at getting an used Denali to play around with and for towing, like the looks better then the bling of the Lade, but I had issues with that 07'.

Remember conditions can affect mpg, we live in FL, which is flat and nice weather. If you live in higher altitudes and hilly areas, then yeh your gonna get worse mileage then avg.

edit - actually here's a quick insert I found online from a Car & Driver test on an 07' Denali Even with an increase of 45 horsepower and 40 pound-feet over the previous Denali, the 2007 model manages the same 13-mpg city rating and betters the highway number by 2 mpg to 19. We were surprised to attain 20 mpg on highway stretches, even at near-80-mph speeds. ... still don't see what's so far fetched about the highway mileage? Yeh city and avg is lower obviously, but for these trucks size their pretty decent on the hwy.

Wife chose a 2012 inferno orange metallic/black racing stripes Camaro. I wish she would have picked the Suburban to drive, but the Camaro is nice and the Matches the color of the DCB engines.

I have the 2010 and when it came out was rated at 21 or 22 HWY. I think in the last year or two they have flashed the computer to gain a few more MPG. I do not drive more than 8 over the speed limit on the highway. Honestly 24 is very presumptious in that car. I would believe it going 60 in sixth gear on a flat rod. My camaro will be three years old in may and I have 3k miles on it, so I hardly beat it.