|
05-26-2018, 10:15 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
|
|
2006 Denali gas mileage
I'm thinking of buying a 2006 Denali for my son and I was wondering if someone with a 2006 (or probably any 2004-2007) Denali pickup could tell me how they are on fuel? I have a 2013 chevy 2500hd with the 6L engine and it's a lot harder on fuel than my 2008 1500 with the 5.3. I'm not sure if it's just the engine or because it's a 3/4 ton.
|
05-26-2018, 10:41 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,190
|
|
It's probably the engine. I have a 2012 GMC 3500 with the 6.0 and it burns 17-18l/100km empty and 28l/100 km with a 3500 lb camper
|
05-26-2018, 11:01 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 9,671
|
|
Everyone I know who has a 6.0L says the same thing, loves it's fuel. Everyone I know who had the 5.3 said they loved the fuel economy it got. One owner drove a Suburban with the 5.3L and loved it do I doubt 3/4 ton means much.
Can you get a Denali with the 5.3?
|
05-26-2018, 11:53 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sooner
Everyone I know who has a 6.0L says the same thing, loves it's fuel. Everyone I know who had the 5.3 said they loved the fuel economy it got. One owner drove a Suburban with the 5.3L and loved it do I doubt 3/4 ton means much.
Can you get a Denali with the 5.3?
|
I have a Tahoe with the 5.3 and it gets excellent mileage for a full size SUV. I'm not sure about the 5.3 Denali, the one I'm looking at has a 6L.
|
05-27-2018, 06:41 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 45,116
|
|
The Denali uses all wheel drive, which uses more fuel than the standard system which can be driven in two wheel drive.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
|
05-27-2018, 07:13 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,108
|
|
If it is the 6.0L (fairly certain it is) fuel economy won't be stellar. All wheel drive and wider tires don't help compared to a SL, SLE, or SLT. From 2014 onward you could get a Denali with either the 5.3L or 6.2L. Incidentally the 6.2L is far superior than the old 6.0L and is very good on fuel although I believe it is recommended to run on 91 octane.
For comparison my 09 with a 5.3L averaged around 13.5L/100km. My 17 with the 5.3L is averaging around 11.0L/100km.
|
05-27-2018, 09:02 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Parkland County
Posts: 2,380
|
|
One of my first vehicles I owned was an 05 Sierra Denali. I got 19L/100km on the dot in that thing on average city driving as a young kid with a nice truck (and when it came to the dead of winter and tons of snow, I was getting as bad as 21L/100km). Highway cruising in the summer I got closer to 15L/100km, which isn’t bad considering those trucks came standard with fulltime AWD and 4.10 gearing. That 6.0L LQ9 engine made the truck fairly fast for what it was, too.
I miss that truck a lot lately. Never gave me any problems beside an O2 sensor.
__________________
And unlike the clock on the wall at your momma house, I do not have time to hang.
|
05-27-2018, 08:57 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 338
|
|
Denali
Our 2007 had the 6.2L engine and it was awesome on fuel. We traded it in on a 2017 Tahoe last year and it’s a gutless gas eating piece of crap.
|
05-27-2018, 09:38 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
|
|
Well I bought the Denali, I figure it'll get about 525km to a tank which is almost what my Chevy LTZ with the 5.3 gets but I've got a lift and bigger tires on that one. I got one happy boy too! Lol.
|
05-27-2018, 09:49 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 1,316
|
|
6 litre is a pig on fuel, I have one, not my every day driver, I had a 5.3 engine.
I suspect he better get second job to pay the fuel. The 6.2 is a good fuel miler, but you can't get it in a 2500.
|
05-27-2018, 09:59 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastoff
6 litre is a pig on fuel, I have one, not my every day driver, I had a 5.3 engine.
I suspect he better get second job to pay the fuel. The 6.2 is a good fuel miler, but you can't get it in a 2500.
|
I get the same mileage out of a tank of fuel on my 5.3 1500 as my 6.0 2500, but the 2500 has about another 40L fuel capacity over the 5.3
|
05-28-2018, 12:50 AM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Parkland County
Posts: 2,380
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505
Well I bought the Denali, I figure it'll get about 525km to a tank which is almost what my Chevy LTZ with the 5.3 gets but I've got a lift and bigger tires on that one. I got one happy boy too! Lol.
|
Nice! That’ll be a good truck for him!
__________________
And unlike the clock on the wall at your momma house, I do not have time to hang.
|
05-28-2018, 04:16 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 564
|
|
You can’t put a price on happiness.
|
05-28-2018, 05:12 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,119
|
|
I was not spending enough on fuel with the 5.3 suburban. Only proper thing to do is to drop in a supercharged 6.0. that will fix the problem. Not to mention makes one hell of a grocery getting sleeper!!
__________________
|
05-28-2018, 06:34 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
|
|
The way I see it, if it likes to burn the fuel maybe he won't be going anywhere he doesn't have to go
|
05-28-2018, 07:52 PM
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,234
|
|
As the saying goes, if you have to ask, you likely can't afford it.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:09 PM.
|