Help Please: 2003-2006 Escalade ESV\Denali XL Reliabilty Versus 2011-2014 Escalade ESV\Denali

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

Adrimagnon

TYF Newbie
Joined
Sep 4, 2023
Posts
1
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm looking to get a 2003-2006 Escalade ESV with the factory M80 locker or a 2003-2006 Yukon Denali XL with the factory M80 locker. I am looking at these because I want to have the size of a suburban, light off-road capability with AWD or 4WD, stock leather seats, and a quiet ride from the factory. I saw on a Youtube series by AFL that the 2003 Escalde they used was able to keep up and sometimes exceed in contests against a 1999 Suburban and a 2000 Excursion. I had read that the Escalde's interior is quieter than the Yukon Denali's, and the Yukon Denali is quieter than the Suburban, and the Subruban is quieter than the Tahoe. Also, I had read the most reliable years of these vehicles is 2000 to 2006 becuase the DOD/AFM issues first started in 2007. I want to add 100,000 miles to the vehicle with as few headaches and extra expenses as possible.

I am having trouble finding ESVs or Denali XLs in the condition I want. I have seen that there is a computer DOD/AFM delete kit that supposedly fixes the 2007 to 2014 lifter issues if they do not exist in that engine yet. I also recently saw a video that said the DOD/AFM issues where almost eliminated starting in 2011 and through to 2014.

Would it be wise for me to expand my search to ESVs and Denali XLs from 2011 through 2014?
If so, would I still need that DOD/AFM Delete computer plug in kit?
Will I have similar reliability to the 2003 to 2006 years with the 2011 to 2014 years?
Are there any questions related to this that I overlooked or did not ask correctly?


Thank You For Your Advice,

Adrimagnon
 

OR VietVet

Multnomah Falls
Supporting Member
Military
Joined
Oct 8, 2014
Posts
19,261
Reaction score
31,735
Location
Willamette Valley
Welcome to the forum from Oregon.

The NBS rig, IMO, is the way to go and it makes sense that the Cadillac would be the quietest. I am assuming it would have the 6.0 engine and IMO again, I wish I did too but my 5.3 has not let me down at all. Less electrical gremlins. The closer to 2005 to 2006, the better.
 

adventurenali92

Full Access Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Posts
7,245
Reaction score
8,348
Location
Big Bear Lake, ca
The GMT800 series is easy to work on, parts are still plentiful and fairly in expensive. They’re a great rig. At this point in time, with most of the trucks of this generation being anywhere from 23 years old on the 2000s to 17 years old with the 2006, the majority of the trucks you find for sale are going to be high mileage and varying conditions. There are definitely low mileage rigs out there in good condition. But to get one takes some work lol. You will more than likely need to be willing to travel far and wide and to get one. I lucked out in 2015 and my scored a good deal on my 2006 Yukon xl Denali only two hours away from my home town in the mountains. It had 74k on the odometer and was a one owner rig. I’ve since put over a 100k onto it in the 8 1/2 years I’ve owned. I absolutely love it. It’s not perfect. My clearcoat is garbage because GM had garbage clearcoat in that era. But that hasn’t stopped me from running it. The space in the long wheel base XL versus the regular Yukon is unbeatable! I specifically wanted a long wheel base for over all space the rig gives me. My LQ4 6.0 has never let me down. I tow boats up and down mountains pretty regularly now.it pulls all day long without a second thought! The 5.3 is a great engine as @OR VietVet mentioned above. It’s a tried and true engine that’s just crazy reliable even when they’re beat and not maintained. Personally I felt though that it was not quite enough power for the weight of the XL Yukon being longer and heavier than a Tahoe or regular Yukon, and that was the deciding factor in wanting a Denali trimmed Yukon xl for me since I wanted the 6.0. I drove both a 2004 Yukon xl SLT, and a 2005 Z71 package suburban that had 5.3s and I definitely noticed the 6.0 moves these long wheel bases easier than the 5.3.
I run a mobile auto detailing business with my Denali. And I use it on road trips for vacations. It handles it all. It’s been reliable, stupidly comfortable with big leather bucket seats, it rides nicely on the air assist shocks in the rear end and computer dampened auto ride shocks in the front. Keep in mind you’re probably going to need to address this system if you end up with one. They’re known for needing replacement and most owners just let it ride since the rear shocks still ride ok even when the air bladders blown and the compressor doesn’t fill them up to keep the trucks level. I replaced mine with the top quality aftermarket company that remanufactures the air assist shocks and I’m very happy.


Some things to know about the GMT800 Denali trim Yukon and Yukon XL, and along with the Escalade ESV. First off the best years were 2005 and 2006. These were the last two years of the platform. Most of the bugs in the designs of these trucks were worked out by 2005 and 2006, most notable the change over from one single mechanical clutch driven engine cooling fan up front, to two computer driven fans that eliminated the mechanical clutch. The clutches for the fans were a known failing point and a pain in the behind to replace. I specifically searched for a 2005 or 2006 to avoid the clutch fan issue. And the computer controlled fans give much better filling performance for these rigs and my fans have never had a single issue. That and the fact that the fan setup doesn’t block the front of the engine in where the water pump, all the pulleys and tensioners, and cooling hoses are, makes it crazy simple to replace all that. On the pre-2005 rigs, the fan and shroud needs to be removed to access all that for replacement. It’s not hard to remove but adds a tone of time to the repair jobs, where as every accessory at the front of the engine is easily accessible with the 2006’s eFan setup not restricting access. That’s a nice little bit to know as labor charges go down a little bit in shops on those items. Something to think about for the maintenance a rig will need to for you to be able to drive it another 100k. I do most of my own repairs and maintenance so I definitely appreciate the eFan setup and the easy access to everything in the engine bay. There were some other changes that the 2005s got to address issues as well that I can’t remember off the top of my head.

Next on the list is that a 4 wheel drive transfer case equipped with 2HI, 4HI, and 4Lo and in the case of these rigs, an auto-4 option, was not an option from the factory in these trucks. There were a handful of 2005 regular wheel base Escalades built in 2005 with the 5.3 V8 with only rear wheel drive. I believe it was only offered on the regular wheel base and NOT the ESV trucks. Every ESV I’ve come across from 2003-2006 The regular wheel base Yukon Denali and yukon xl Denali are all full time all wheel drive transfer cases with no selectable ranges. With that being said the all wheel drive in my Denali is awesome. In the summer it cruises up and down the 7,000 feet in elevation gain of mountain roads I live on pretty damn well for a nearly 6,000lb vehicle. As far as inclement weather my truck sees it all! Sunshine, rain, snow, everything. This year our mountain ski town saw 10 feet of snow in just 10 days in late February. We never get that much snow all at once! It was so bad at one point that all three highways in and out of town were closed because CalTrans just couldn’t keep up with the sheer volume of snow. And through all of it my Denali plowed through with no issues even with no low range in the transfer case. The right set of tires and the all wheel drive will take you most places.

As for the GMT900 platform rigs. I like them as well and while they ar Elrond to some issues overall I’d say they’re still very reliable rigs. There are many ways to work around the AFM system issues. The range device shuts it down in the computer but has to be left plugged into the trucks OBDII port at all times. It’s a cheaper solution but works. Another option is to have it shut down in the computer via a tune thorough HPTuners, blackbear performance or similar. Pricier option but then you get to play with more parameters of how the truck operates rather than just shutting down the AFM system. And no need for the range device to always be plugged in. You can also do an AFM delete with invoices replacing the system with non AFM lifters and such. Pricey but a good option as well.

The GMT900s are still fairly easy to work on and they’re very nice rigs. Comfy interiors. Though personally I think the seats in my 2006 are better. The big upgrades being the 6.2L V8s which are stupidly awesome engines and the 6 speed transmissions mated to it. While my 4L65 trans isn’t terrible, the 6L80 would make towing better and easier for me up and down the mountains and better fuel economy. But oh well... Lol. The GMT900 Denali trimmed Yukon XL, and the Escalade ESV were also NOT offered with a 4 wheel drive transfer case. They were either built with rear wheel drive or all whee drive transfer cases. However the rear whee drive units were much more plentiful in this generation. The single and 2 speed 4 wheel drive transfer cases were only offered on non Denali Yukons and Yukon XLs same as the GMT800s.

I have tons of detail clients running both generations and they all love their vehicles. I’ll be in the market soon for a 900 series Denali XL or an ESV soon and I wouldn’t hesitate to buy a higher mileage rig. There’s so much knowledge widely available on this forum that I feel I can tackle any issue that comes up. I already can do that with my 2006 and I’m very thankful that I can say that.

I highly suggest you check out these two threads, most of the info you’d want to know about either generation can be found in these threads:


 
Last edited:

Geotrash

Dave
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2018
Posts
5,620
Reaction score
13,366
Location
Richmond, VA
I've owned both (2002 Suburban) and now have two Yukon XL Denali's (2007 and 2012). I prefer the newer trucks.

I lucked out with my 2007 especially. Paid $9500, IIRC in January 2018. It was a 1-owner truck from Arizona with 196K on the clock. L92, which means no AFM, and while the Carfax didn't show it, the engine and transmission both have much newer date codes in their castings. The engine shows October 2013 and the transmission shows August 2008. Accordingly, I believe the engine was replaced with a new one sometime after 2013, and the transmission was probably replaced with a rebuilt unit. I've since put another 32,000 relatively trouble-free miles on it. On the 2012, I deleted AFM with a cam, but honestly wouldn't worry about it if I had it to do over again. I'd simply replace the VLOM (afternoon job), along with the oil sender screen and call it a day, going no more than 5K between oil changes.

The mag ride suspension and the rear air ride make these both the most comfortable highway cruisers/best tow vehicles I've ever owned. I wouldn't hesitate to drive either of them to Alaska tomorrow.

You're going to get opinions all over the map on this but having owned both, I prefer the GMT900 series Denali/Escalade because of the 6.2L and the 6-speed transmission. I also prefer the slightly firmer seats and the excellent sound system. All of them are easy to work on.
 

petethepug

Michael
Joined
May 4, 2016
Posts
2,440
Reaction score
2,457
Location
SoCal
Back in ‘14 the only option to replace our beloved ‘06 YXL Denali was two states over and stickered for $12k @ 60k mi. They’re hard to find on the West Coast that don’t look like a day care inside.

Ultimately back then the 07 & 08 YXL were unloved and plentiful @ 90-110k mi. Everyone wanted the 10-14 with AFM and factory BT (OnStar equipped) module, LOL. The availability, cost, 6SP vs. 4SP only trans and longevity of the 6.2L is why we jumped up to gen 4.

Hindsight, I had no idea that 07, 08 or 09 6.2L did not have AFM or adding factory BT was a 30 minute $20 upgrade.

The only factor here in CA was fuel cost. The 06 & 08 YXL were both sold due to $120-$180 fill up costs. Anywhere else that doesn’t matter. The full size SUV is a must for our giraffe family. The previous two YXL were training wheels for maintenance, features and options.

In ‘20 we paid $1500 more and swap’d the 08 YXL Denali for an 09 Esky Platinum in TX. both had 140k on the clocks. Neither have AFM, but in 09 GM added e85 to the 6.2L. That means today when I fill up, it’s corn gas for $83 bucks with a grocery store discount vs a spread of $153 to $189 for 91. Not bad economy for 400+hp, safe, 3T, reliable luxo mobile.
 

Doubeleive

Wes
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
23,719
Reaction score
34,681
Location
Stockton, Ca.
Hi,

I'm looking to get a 2003-2006 Escalade ESV with the factory M80 locker or a 2003-2006 Yukon Denali XL with the factory M80 locker. I am looking at these because I want to have the size of a suburban, light off-road capability with AWD or 4WD, stock leather seats, and a quiet ride from the factory. I saw on a Youtube series by AFL that the 2003 Escalde they used was able to keep up and sometimes exceed in contests against a 1999 Suburban and a 2000 Excursion. I had read that the Escalde's interior is quieter than the Yukon Denali's, and the Yukon Denali is quieter than the Suburban, and the Subruban is quieter than the Tahoe. Also, I had read the most reliable years of these vehicles is 2000 to 2006 becuase the DOD/AFM issues first started in 2007. I want to add 100,000 miles to the vehicle with as few headaches and extra expenses as possible.

I am having trouble finding ESVs or Denali XLs in the condition I want. I have seen that there is a computer DOD/AFM delete kit that supposedly fixes the 2007 to 2014 lifter issues if they do not exist in that engine yet. I also recently saw a video that said the DOD/AFM issues where almost eliminated starting in 2011 and through to 2014.

Would it be wise for me to expand my search to ESVs and Denali XLs from 2011 through 2014?
If so, would I still need that DOD/AFM Delete computer plug in kit?
Will I have similar reliability to the 2003 to 2006 years with the 2011 to 2014 years?
Are there any questions related to this that I overlooked or did not ask correctly?


Thank You For Your Advice,

Adrimagnon
you will likely get a lot of mixed opinions.
but the truth is they are both "good"
in my opinion the gmt900's interior is better suited for longevity. that is one key difference.
that being said
it is important to note that you will find more available parts compatibility (crossover) as such:
gmt800 03-06
gmt900 10-14
those crossovers can make a economic difference, not a lot but it can make things easier.
and the 10+ had some extra features, little things like a oem usb port or hill assist
 

mikeyss

Full Access Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2011
Posts
1,626
Reaction score
3,042
Location
Longmont, Colorado.
Everyone has great comparison points. I don't think I've seen a few other differences listed:
-GMT900 has rack and pinion steering, and also has a coil spring/strut set up front suspension.
-GMT900 has bigger front brakes
-GMT900 can be equipped with a center speaker in the dash and makes the Bose sound better. But... you have dash cracks to worry about.
-I've read somewhere that the GMT900 has a wider track which helps stability, but I could be wrong.
-Nav radio unit looks better than the GMT-800
I have owned both '800' and '900' Tahoe platforms and hands down I love my '900' so much more. BUT.... I miss the seats from my '800', they offered more lumbar support and felt like a lazy boy. The seats in my '900' have cooled option which is nice though
 

Marky Dissod

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2023
Posts
1,184
Reaction score
1,535
Location
(718)-
If you'd like extra power on demand, and/or don't mind learning to hypermile to save on fuel costs, 6.0L V8s are pretty damn good.
6.2L V8s are even better.

6.0L V8s don't have that much more PEAK power, just a lot more down low grunt than 5.3L (unless you reprogram / mod them ...).
6.2L V8s are better than the extra 0.2L would suggest, and they respond even more enthusiastically to reprogramming / mods.
If you thirst for power, GMT900 with a 6.2L. If not, a GMT800 with a 6.0L will do just fine.

YES YOU SHOULD DEFEAT V4 MODE! Everyone should, somewhere between ASAP & STAT.
(I'll keep being nice to people, but the question has been asked and answered too many times, definitively.
V4 mode is a problem to overcome, every time.

Best to mechanically convert your V8 so it cannot possibly ever impersonate a V4. (This REQUIRES an ecm tune, you won't regret it.)
If that's not in the budget, do something to the ecm (plug-in at a bare minimum, tune fixes several other things and improves smiles per gallon) to at least avoids V4 mode.
This is not a permanent fix, it's a patch.
The V4 mode lifters will last longer if they never impersonate a V4 again, but they will likely fail before the V8 lifters.
The less often you change your oil and filter, the sooner the V4 mode lifters will fail.

There is a 'screen' unique to the V4 mode engines that additionally 'filters' the oil fed to the lifters.
See about changing it out with a newer one; that'll also help the V4 mode lifters delay their failure.

V4 mode also shortens the life of the 6L80E's torque converter clutch.
When that TCC fails, it tends to require a full 6L80E rebuild.
Since this is the chief failure mode of the 6L80E, replacing / upgrading the torque converter is also a damn good idea.

Despite lacking my 2012 Yukon XL's @$$warmers, my '02 Tahoe's plain seats are more comfy-wumphie.

Any GMT800 can use a GMT900 front brake upgrade.
(Upgrading a GMT800 to GMT900's rack'n'pinion steering seems exponentially harder, far more costly, and likely unimpressive.)

Food for thought ...
 

adventurenali92

Full Access Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Posts
7,245
Reaction score
8,348
Location
Big Bear Lake, ca
If you'd like extra power on demand, and/or don't mind learning to hypermile to save on fuel costs, 6.0L V8s are pretty damn good.
6.2L V8s are even better.

6.0L V8s don't have that much more PEAK power, just a lot more down low grunt than 5.3L (unless you reprogram / mod them ...).
6.2L V8s are better than the extra 0.2L would suggest, and they respond even more enthusiastically to reprogramming / mods.
If you thirst for power, GMT900 with a 6.2L. If not, a GMT800 with a 6.0L will do just fine.

YES YOU SHOULD DEFEAT V4 MODE! Everyone should, somewhere between ASAP & STAT.
(I'll keep being nice to people, but the question has been asked and answered too many times, definitively.
V4 mode is a problem to overcome, every time.

Best to mechanically convert your V8 so it cannot possibly ever impersonate a V4. (This REQUIRES an ecm tune, you won't regret it.)
If that's not in the budget, do something to the ecm (plug-in at a bare minimum, tune fixes several other things and improves smiles per gallon) to at least avoids V4 mode.
This is not a permanent fix, it's a patch.
The V4 mode lifters will last longer if they never impersonate a V4 again, but they will likely fail before the V8 lifters.
The less often you change your oil and filter, the sooner the V4 mode lifters will fail.

There is a 'screen' unique to the V4 mode engines that additionally 'filters' the oil fed to the lifters.
See about changing it out with a newer one; that'll also help the V4 mode lifters delay their failure.

V4 mode also shortens the life of the 6L80E's torque converter clutch.
When that TCC fails, it tends to require a full 6L80E rebuild.
Since this is the chief failure mode of the 6L80E, replacing / upgrading the torque converter is also a damn good idea.

Despite lacking my 2012 Yukon XL's @$$warmers, my '02 Tahoe's plain seats are more comfy-wumphie.

Any GMT800 can use a GMT900 front brake upgrade.
(Upgrading a GMT800 to GMT900's rack'n'pinion steering seems exponentially harder, far more costly, and likely unimpressive.)

Food for thought ...
That last bit… upgrading to gmt900 front brakes is excellent advice! I did it to my 2006 and don’t regret it one bit! Those bigger front brakes, with the addition of drilled/slotted rotors and carbon fiber ceramic pads are a heavenly upgrade! I live at 7,000 feet of mountain ski town and the brakes up and down the mountain are awesome! Plus the drilled/slotted rotors and ceramic pads last so much longer than standard brakes!
 

OR VietVet

Multnomah Falls
Supporting Member
Military
Joined
Oct 8, 2014
Posts
19,261
Reaction score
31,735
Location
Willamette Valley
That last bit… upgrading to gmt900 front brakes is excellent advice! I did it to my 2006 and don’t regret it one bit! Those bigger front brakes, with the addition of drilled/slotted rotors and carbon fiber ceramic pads are a heavenly upgrade! I live at 7,000 feet of mountain ski town and the brakes up and down the mountain are awesome! Plus the drilled/slotted rotors and ceramic pads last so much longer than standard brakes!
I am sure it has been discussed and documented here, but, will the front brake upgrade clear stock wheels and does it make a difference if is vacuum or hydro boost?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
129,238
Posts
1,812,620
Members
92,338
Latest member
ajdahl8660
Top