I average about 14 mpg, she sure loves gas. :eek7:

Is this mainly due to the AWD system? I was looking to get a Denali, but I have read they seem to have quite a few issues. Not to mention the gas mileage. I currently have an S10 and am getting 14 on the highway. Looking to upgrade to fullsize, and a little class.

Hello,
I get 10mpg in town and 14mpg on the highway with a 2001 Yukon XL 4WD K2500 6.0 liter engine and 4.10 rear end.
This is the same engine as in the YXL Denali.
Bear in mind that it has a tow rating of 10,000 lbs.
You will have to pay a price for that.
If you want gas mileage and less performance get the 1500 with the 5.3 liter engine and the 3.73 rear end.
It is not as zippy, though.
Take care, Eggert :bananasmi

Hmm... how about the 6.0 in the S10... Granted I still don't gain the fullsize, but it gives me the power....

Still looking into '96-'99 bodystyle Tahoes... Would include '95, but want to Vortec engine, unless I do a 6.0 swap into it. A lot cheaper on insurance, would be better gas due to no AWD system, and lighter (less tow capt). Still not quite sure though. Any opinions?

I'm getting around 14 mpg overall in my '04 DXL; I read somewhere on another forum that some guy's Escalade (w/ the 6-liter engine) was getting 16 mpg...

Charlie,
here is my humble opinion.
I had a 95 Suburban, it got 16mpg and was outright lame.
That engine was limited to 4000RPM. The 1996 got the better 5000RPM engine.
No comparison to my 01 YXL 2500 with the 6.0 l engine.
The new body style (2000 and up) is so much better in a lot of ways,
you could not make me go back to the old body style (up to 1999).
To me it would be new body style and either the 1500 with the 5.3 liter for fuel economy, or the 6.0 liter engine for decent, enjoyable power.
This means 1500 Denali or 2500 non-Denali.
Towing capacity: 6.0 liter 1500 Denali=8000lbs, 6.0 liter 2500 with 4.10 rear and 8.1 liter 2500 with 3.72 rear=10000lbs, 8.1 liter with 4.10 rear=12000lbs.
You really only would go for the 8.1 l engine for a lot of heavy towing.
Gas mileage while towing: there is none...(may be 4 to 6, don't know yet)

Hope this helps, take care, Eggert :bananasmi

My 2003 SLT with the 5.3 liter gets a consistent 14 around town and 17 on the highway. With the towing package it is quite acceptable for frequent light towing and rare heavy towing. We have an 18-foot SeaSwirl ski boat and the 5.3 handles it just fine. At $2.25 a gallon, I couldn't justify the larger engine.

Comparisons:

'03 Denali 6.0L 13 city 17 highway
'94 Jimmy 4.3L 17 city 21 highway

Hmm, I wish I could get 21/22 on the highway again. But with a 100lb front bumper, among some other stuff, im down to 14 on the highway.....

getting ready to have 33's should regain some mileage, but will kill my acceleration without regearing

I think we all knew when we bought Yukes that the gas mileage was to be desired, but hey - I love driving my 2001 XL 1500 with the 5.3 and getting about 18 hwy/14 city (I assume).

Well we had the following, all mostly city driving:-

2001 Yukon 5.3 - 14mpg
2003 Yukon XL 5.3 - 13mpg
2004 Yukon XL Denali - 9 mpg !!!!

Have complained to dealer about 9mpg but not interested even though it is only 2 months old

I have an 04 SLT 2WD and 342 gearing with a 4.8 liter. I have installed Gibson headers, Flowmaster muffler, K&N 77 series. I run full syn. oil so it took me about 8,000 break-in until I consitantly get the following mileage's:

city: 17.2 - 18.0 (3rd gear around town speeds under 45 MPH)
highway: 21.5 - 21.8 (72 MPH average)

I have found with my rig it runs best (combo of power and speed) at about 84-85 MPH @ around 3200 RPM @ 19.4 MPG. I dont know where it gets the best milage? 65 MPH? I will find out someday I guess. I imagine that I should get over 22.5 MPG if it runs around 65 average.

I believe that the 5.3 liter would probably do just as good or even better on the highway (milage/power). I feel the 4.8 has to work harder hence the "comfort" zone for my engine at 84 MPH @ 3200 RPM. The 5.3 would have an easier time propelling the vehicle if given the same circumstance.

I dont tow, so I ordered it with the 4.8; I knew what I was getting into. However, although I am very happy with the 4.8, I would spring for the 5.3. The 4.8 is limited to only its own vehicle weight. I do like the city milage it gets however. Thats its one advantage. Im also sure that the mods I have done have helped the milage too. Overall I am very happy with the perfomance/milage of this great GM V-8...all GM's are "economical" when compared to Ford and Chysler, so it should come as no suprise.

I use regular 87 octane.

I see I posted 3200 RPM...I ment 2200 RPM.

Hi UK Aussie, 9 mpg may be the lower end of the 'acceptable' range, I get 10. What do you get on the highway?
Do you have the 3.73 or 4.10 rear end?
Does anyone have the mpg numbers for the 8.1 liter (496 CID) engine?
I expect 9 mpg around town and not much more on the highway, towing probably around 6 to 8, depending on the hills.
Take care, Eggert :bananasmi

My Yukon doesn't quite have 1,000 miles on it yet but the fuel mileage is a pleasant surprise to me. It replaced a regular cab '99 5.3 Sierra 4x4 with 3.73's. The heavier Yukon has 4.10's, much peppier than the Sierra and with the same type driving, gets slightly better mileage. 17.5 vs. 18.

'04 Denali with 6.0L and 3.73 @ 8000 miles is now getting 13/17 city/highway - not great, but if you can afford a $55K vehicle then who cares about gas mileage?

'04 Denali with 6.0L and 3.73 @ 8000 miles is now getting 13/17 city/highway - not great, but if you can afford a $55K vehicle then who cares about gas mileage?


...thats right. That is great milage I might add for a 6.0 liter. There are many mid-size and compact so called SUV's that get that milage too; with a 4 or 6 cylinder!

I had a '92 2dr. 4X4 Yukon that averaged 16-17 mpg city/hgwy, now I have a '99 4dr. 4X4 Yukon that averages 15-16 mpg city/hgwy.

I recently bought a 99 4x4 Yukon with a 5.7L.
I just filled it up today and got 14.4 mpg average for the tank.
This is in Utah and I drive between 4500' and 7000' regularly.

I have gotten as much 19.5 mpg in my Yukon averaging 75 mph, Syn oil and A K&N filter, stock exhaust. But constantly 17 -18 mph hwy.

I have gotten as much 19.5 mpg in my Yukon averaging 75 mph, Syn oil and A K&N filter, stock exhaust. But constantly 17 -18 mph hwy.
Is your Yukon the 5.3L or the 4.8L? You didn't mention which Yukon you have, but I'll guess you have the shorty since you didn't mention XL--IIRC the shorty only comes with the 4.8L (except the shorty Denali, which comes with the 6.0L), whereas the XL comes with the 5.3L or 6.0L (Denali only). If you have the shorty w/ the 4.8L, then 19.5 mpg is pretty good but not really extraordinary, given the engine. OTOH--if you have the 5.3L (or the 5.7L--dunno if you have the OBS or NBS Yukon), then 19.5 is a really good figure!

i have an 01 yukon slt with the 5.3 that used to get great mileage. i was consistently up around 18.5-19 mpg for the first few months that i had it. since then it's begun to dip to the point where i am now lucky to get over 17.5 and usually end up in the mid/upper 16 mpg range. i've had the car for just over a year now and i've lose almost 3 mpg during that time. i don't get it. my driving habits are the same as before (mostly highway miles, about 5000 per month - use it for work, keep it at about 80 on the interstate).

i recently replaced the fuel filter and plugs to see if that would have any effect, and while it cleared up the little bit of engine knock i was picking up, it didn't improve mileage one bit. does anyone know what might have caused the sudden drop in mileage?

My 03 Yukon Denali at first was getting like 14 mpg, now since I change the oil, and and use the cruise control a lot I get 16. Plus I am easy on the brakes a lot of women drive them for whatever reason, and they slam on the brakes constantly and that will give you low miliage too. Go with your standard Yukon Denali, it's big enough and easier to park. I haven't had a single issue with my Denali knock on wood.

Our Denali is a whopping 13.6 all the time. I did a comfirmation manually. Will be unloading soon. Very dissatisfied over all. (other problems with stuff and bad gas mileage) Lose /Lose for $50K

(...keep it at about 80 on the interstate).
Well that's your problem right there--you definitely won't get decent fuel economy out of a Denali at those speeds. Based on personal observation, I find the "sweet" spot as far as getting good fuel economy at cruising speeds to be between 65-70 mph.

FWIW--I get around 14 mpg with a 70-30 city/hwy driving mix, 15 with a 50/50 mix, and 16 with a 30/70 mix. I recently averaged 17 mpg on a full tank of gas during a recent trip to Oregon...fairly impressive IMHO, considering that I was driving a DXL loaded with 4 other passengers and a fully-loaded rear cargo area.

Well that's your problem right there--you definitely won't get decent fuel economy out of a Denali at those speeds. Based on personal observation, I find the "sweet" spot as far as getting good fuel economy at cruising speeds to be between 65-70 mph.

FWIW--I get around 14 mpg with a 70-30 city/hwy driving mix, 15 with a 50/50 mix, and 16 with a 30/70 mix. I recently averaged 17 mpg on a full tank of gas during a recent trip to Oregon...fairly impressive IMHO, considering that I was driving a DXL loaded with 4 other passengers and a fully-loaded rear cargo area.

normally, i would agree with you, but since i was driving the same speeds and routes several months ago when i was averaging close to 19 mpg it doesn't make sense that i'd lose 2 mpg over a pretty short amount of time. it's not like i changed my driving habits in the last couple of months. everything is the same except gas mileage.

my Denali gets 11 towing my open bed race car trailer... and about 8.5 towing my enclosed 3000 trailer.

Hi UK Aussie, 9 mpg may be the lower end of the 'acceptable' range, I get 10. What do you get on the highway?
Do you have the 3.73 or 4.10 rear end?
Does anyone have the mpg numbers for the 8.1 liter (496 CID) engine?
I expect 9 mpg around town and not much more on the highway, towing probably around 6 to 8, depending on the hills.
Take care, Eggert :bananasmi

Not sure what it does but ave info on trip computer said 12mpg when I reset it before a fwy trip and read it at end of trip

normally, i would agree with you, but since i was driving the same speeds and routes several months ago when i was averaging close to 19 mpg it doesn't make sense that i'd lose 2 mpg over a pretty short amount of time. it's not like i changed my driving habits in the last couple of months. everything is the same except gas mileage.
Notwithstanding the possibility that there may indeed be something wrong w/ your vehicle, I would like to ask you this--do you live in a state where they switch from summer gas to winter gas during the cold season? If so, then that might fall in line w/ your statement that fuel economy seemed to be okay "several months ago"...although to be honest w/ you, I can't say whether gas formulation could result in a 2-mpg loss. 1-mpg, maybe...I can only assume you've checked the trivial possibilities, e.g., tire pressure, etc.--no?

My 1975 GMC 4x4 pick-up gets 12 -13 mpg. My 2003 Yukon is getting about 15-16 mpg. This is calculating them the old way (with a pencil). 30 years difference between them. The 75' has about 500,000 miles on the drive train. In 1999 I put a stock 350cu.in. Goodwrench crate motor in it. It's getting the same mpg as my original motor. Do they mean to tell me, that in 30 years time, with todays technology, only 3 mpg more can be achieved in the computer laden Yukon. That's 1 mpg per decade. Is that obscene? No, that's big business. That's big oil. I was watching the news in Feburary, and they were showing a segment of a CEO or COO speaking to an annual conference of oil industry execs, which, to have let news cameras inside is not just rare, but it's never been allowed before according to the news broadcaster. This CEO was saying how they (the oil companies) have made so much profit over the last year and a half, and that it's so absolutely astounding even to themselves, that he hopes they haven't shot themselves in the foot by letting news crews in. Have you ever noticed that when someone invents or designs a car or component that gets super gas mileage, that you never here about it any more. Like the 2 junkyard guys who tweeked a Capri and got 80 mpg driving coast to coast. OH WELL!

EVERYONE who drives a car needs to see this site if you want to get a better handle on the whole oil issue:

http://www.dieoff.org/page140.htm

PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF ON THIS TOPIC!!! Its not REALLY about "big oil getting rich" or total crap lines like "The reason oil is high is because of Bush". ... get real folks. If that was the case Clinton has more to blame than the current admin based on his "no-nuke power" stance during his regime. This site clears up alot of questions and sheds light on the real issue; a slowly withering oil supply globaly and an overall consumption of energy in general particularly in emerging countries such as China and Africa. In short, the days of $1.00 are never to return.

Again, PLEASE read this site. Get informed. It opened my eyes to the real reason behind gas prices. I can now debate idiots who complain about high prices.

15.2 BEFORE change to synthetic oil and Hypertech firm tranny shift and regular gas tune options.
1600 miles
I drive like there is a raw egg under the pedal. ROTFLOL!

My Yukon doesn't quite have 1,000 miles on it yet but the fuel mileage is a pleasant surprise to me. It replaced a regular cab '99 5.3 Sierra 4x4 with 3.73's. The heavier Yukon has 4.10's, much peppier than the Sierra and with the same type driving, gets slightly better mileage. 17.5 vs. 18.

If you drive under 65-70mph on the highway, you will get almost 20 MPG out of a 2004 6.0L Denali XL (mine gets 20 but I have an AEM intake, might help a bit).

It is difficult to get over 12 with city driving (I live in LA and it is rough).

who cares when it looks like this

My 03' Yukon SLT w/5.3 & 20" wheels is 16.9 mpg-hwy according to the DIC or pen&paper (my foot is usually in it also)
My 75 GMC K-15 (I'm orig. ownr) 350ci eng.(2nd) w/400,000mi. on orig. drive train & running 10x31x15's gets 13mpg
That means in 30 years GM's mpg's for somewhat similar rides has improved a whopping 1.3mpg per decade.