Is a Denali worth it?

[Ilikemtb999]

I’m not new to full size SUV’s and always seem to end up back to looking at them but I’ve never driven or been in a Denali, specifically looking at an 05 Denali xl.

My last nbs was an 03 Yukon SLT with full time 4wd and can’t say I loved it over just a selectable 2wd/4wd t case. All the extra bells and whistles are enticing with the Denali though like dvd player and this one appears to even have heated middle row seats.

I’m really just curious if it’s worth pursuing over a suburban lt or ltz (I know 06 was awd for those too).

 

[B-train]

They are nice. The 6.0L has a lot of grunt and sounds healthy. The ride is superb. I have owned 6 Denali suvs over the years and won't go back to a regular one now.

 

[wjburken]

If the vehicle has been maintained and the suspension system hasn’t been gutted, the Denali package does make a nice vehicle to drive and ride.

 

[S33k3r]

This is not quite apples to apples, but my daughter has an '03 Sierra Denali, and that thing is FUN to drive. And it is all stock. My wife has an '05 Suburban 2500 Quadrasteer, and we pretty much take it everywhere. That said, it is overdue for a suspension refresh. We've got well over 200k on the original suspension.

If the one you are looking at was well maintained, get it. If it was not, determine how deep a money pit you can fund. These things are really hardy, and they can drive for years in not 100% perfect condition. But the ride, among other things, can really suffer.

 

[adventurenali92]

I drove all the variants of the long bodies when I was shopping for one in 2015. I knew I’d enjoy a Denali but didn’t want to come off as too flashy being that I was only a few months shy of turning 23. But the more I drove the other variants the more I wanted a Denali. I found a 2005 Z71 4x4 suburban for sale that wa sun good shape. Drove it and I had the options I knew were non negotiable, like leather interior, front heated seats, and 4x4 drove train. But I felt the 5.3 in the longer heavier burb was a bit under powered. Found a 2006 XL SLT package and same thing, had what I wanted but still a 5.3. Almost bought a beautifully well maintained 2006 Escalade ESV I found through a private seller, and the Escalade is my dream car. Always wanted a GMT800 Escalade. But I just couldn’t get over the fact that I wasn’t 23 yet and would be daily-ing a caddy….. i live in a small mountain town and people talk enough BS as it is. Lol. Found my 2006 XL Denali, and that was all she wrote. Lol.

I definitely enjoy having an LQ4 6.0 over any 5.3. It’s just so fun to drive with a 6.0. I would like to turn off the all wheel drive for summer when I don’t need it but honestly it makes driving up and down the mountains I live In So much more fun with all wheel drive. It’s never met a situation where the all wheel drive couldn’t handle, and this passed winter we had 10 feet of snow in 10 days, a record shattering storm. It handled all the snow just fine. Everything about is more comfortable. My snowbaord buddies, most of whom are coworkers from my home ski resort always love to take my truck on trips to mammoth mountain, which is our sister resort for training because it’s big and comfortable. Everyone loves the mid row heated seats. You’ll only get that feature in a Denali trim Yukon or an Escalade as that’s exclusive to the Y91 “lux option” package for the GMT800s.
The suspension package in the Denali is awesome. I replaced all the Z55 autoride suspension parts with direct replacements from arnott industries. It all functions just like it did out of the factory and rides just as good. Plus the auto leavening rear shocks are awesome for towing which I do a lot of. Plus having the HD tow package option which I believe is standard on the Denali, gave me engine oil cooler and a transmission oil cooler, plus that trans cooler is easily upgradable which I did. The trans temp gauge in the cluster is a nice addition too.

The only GMT800 SUV I’d get rid of my Denali for, would be a platinum trimmed Escalade. Lol. I wouldn’t trade my Denali for even the lowest mileage LTZ 2006 burb or SLT Yukon.

 

[S33k3r]

My wife has a 2005 Suburban 2500 with the 6.0 and 3.73 gears. My daughter has a 2005 Suburban 1500 with the 5.3 and 3.42. My daughter needed the MPG over the oomph of the 6.0, butI have found her Suburban to be peppy enough. I also suspect that 3.73 gearing on a 5.3 would give you the experience you like so much. The 5.3 is a really good engine, in and of itself. That said, the only thing I have "against" the 6.0 is its MPG (or lack thereof). It pretty much defines the statement that you can pass everything except the gas station.

 

[adventurenali92]

My wife has a 2005 Suburban 2500 with the 6.0 and 3.73 gears. My daughter has a 2005 Suburban 1500 with the 5.3 and 3.42. My daughter needed the MPG over the oomph of the 6.0, butI have found her Suburban to be peppy enough. I also suspect that 3.73 gearing on a 5.3 would give you the experience you like so much. The 5.3 is a really good engine, in and of itself. That said, the only thing I have "against" the 6.0 is its MPG (or lack thereof). It pretty much defines the statement that you can pass everything except the gas station.

I did forget about the gearing. 3.73s definitely help and my Denali has that out of the factory. Another reason to go Denali. Lol.

Oh I agree that the 5.3 is a great motor. Tried and true tech and proven reliable. I just knew it wouldn’t have the umph I wanted. And in real life testing when I was driving them, the 5.3 fuel mileage was only minimally better than the 6.0, not enough difference to make me want to buy a 5.3 powered long body over a 6.0 powered long body. The real difference in fuel expense comes in the octane of fuel used. I ran 87 the first year I owned mine, not knowing I needed to anything different. But the minute I switched over to 91, I noticed much better engine operation. For me at least, it was noticeable how crappy the engine was running on 87, and my fuel economy was in the crapper. Started running 91 and it almost immediately got better. And then when I had blackbear performance tune it in November of 2017 he adjusted the tune to accommodate running 91. Yeah 91 is more expensive to buy, but so much more worth it given the truck performs better and sees better fuel economy even around town running it.

 

[jeremiahm]

The suspension refresh and running 91 are the key elements. I missed the 91 need the first few months I had mine and as soon as I switched it was a whole new beast. I know its not apples to apples as I have the 6.2. I thought about gutting the suspension for simplicity, but reading through the forum I will keep it! The Arnotts have treated me well.

 

[jeremiahm]

I also had an 05 ESV and it was a 7000 pound go-cart, that was a great ride!

 

[S33k3r]

I did forget about the gearing. 3.73s definitely help and my Denali has that out of the factory. Another reason to go Denali. Lol.

Oh I agree that the 5.3 is a great motor. Tried and true tech and proven reliable. I just knew it wouldn’t have the umph I wanted. And in real life testing when I was driving them, the 5.3 fuel mileage was only minimally better than the 6.0, not enough difference to make me want to buy a 5.3 powered long body over a 6.0 powered long body. The real difference in fuel expense comes in the octane of fuel used. I ran 87 the first year I owned mine, not knowing I needed to anything different. But the minute I switched over to 91, I noticed much better engine operation. For me at least, it was noticeable how crappy the engine was running on 87, and my fuel economy was in the crapper. Started running 91 and it almost immediately got better. And then when I had blackbear performance tune it in November of 2017 he adjusted the tune to accommodate running 91. Yeah 91 is more expensive to buy, but so much more worth it given the truck performs better and sees better fuel economy even around town running it.

Sometimes it isn't the cost of the gas, it's the number of gas stations you can pass.

 

[adventurenali92]

Sometimes it isn't the cost of the gas, it's the number of gas stations you can pass.

I mean they’re essentially near 6,000lb land yachts….. I didn’t buy it hoping to get the fuel economy of a Toyota Camry…… lol

 

[Onlyone]

I mean, what other model would you actually want? Not the peasant base Tahoe or Yukon. Pssshhhh.

 

[SilverSport]

I thought the 6.0 LQ4 required 87 octane...are you getting better fuel economy/performance running super unleaded?...

I'm only on my 3rd tankful since getting my 2005 Denali but I find the MPG slightly higher than both my previous 5.7 2000 Escalade or my 5.3 2002 Avalanche...

Bill

 

[drdave81]

I thought the 6.0 LQ4 required 87 octane...are you getting better fuel economy/performance running super unleaded?...

I'm only on my 3rd tankful since getting my 2005 Denali but I find the MPG slightly higher than both my previous 5.7 2000 Escalade or my 5.3 2002 Avalanche...

Bill

The 6.0 does only require 87 octane. Unless the ECM is tuned for running something more than that, you won't really get any benefit from it. People run premium for all kinds of different reasons (more power, cleaner, etc) and think it does something, but for the most part, it's a placebo effect.

 

[SilverSport]

I agree...at least that's been my experience with other vehicles and using the recommended/required fuel octane over using other than recommended/required octane...

Bill

 

[steiny93]

I’m not new to full size SUV’s and always seem to end up back to looking at them but I’ve never driven or been in a Denali, specifically looking at an 05 Denali xl.

My last nbs was an 03 Yukon SLT with full time 4wd and can’t say I loved it over just a selectable 2wd/4wd t case. All the extra bells and whistles are enticing with the Denali though like dvd player and this one appears to even have heated middle row seats.

I’m really just curious if it’s worth pursuing over a suburban lt or ltz (I know 06 was awd for those too).

Wife and I have owned a few full sized GM's in this year range. We owned a Denali, a Tahoe and an slt. Currently have a new Denali and an '08 ltz on tracks.

In the 00-06 vintage between the Denali and non my thoughts.
For the Denali, the 6.0 is a great motor, has more power, the ride is more forgiving, uses more fuel, all wheel drive is nice in that the driver doesn't need to consider if they should be in 4wd or 2wd (ice'y roads for example). The air ride is a mess.

For the non Denali, the 5.3 just works, better fuel economy, fewer annoying issues (seat heaters, infotainment, hvac, etc). Basically fewer options so few problems.

I personally didn't really consider the power or mileage differences a factor in either direction. I preferred the stiffer suspension of the non Denali's but the air suspension is nice when it works if you tow anything. The wife definitely liked the Denali better for the options.

 

[Ilikemtb999]

My wife has a 2005 Suburban 2500 with the 6.0 and 3.73 gears. My daughter has a 2005 Suburban 1500 with the 5.3 and 3.42. My daughter needed the MPG over the oomph of the 6.0, butI have found her Suburban to be peppy enough. I also suspect that 3.73 gearing on a 5.3 would give you the experience you like so much. The 5.3 is a really good engine, in and of itself. That said, the only thing I have "against" the 6.0 is its MPG (or lack thereof). It pretty much defines the statement that you can pass everything except the gas station.

All of my nbs trucks/SUV’s have been 5.3 with 3.73 gears. They do just fine.

I mean, what other model would you actually want? Not the peasant base Tahoe or Yukon. Pssshhhh.

I think I’m after an LT (or ltz if selectable 4wd) trim Chevy, I really dislike the awd/full time 4wd of the Yukons even though the front end looks so much better.

I actually prefer rwd but those are so hard to come by especially here in Denver.

 

[adventurenali92]

All of my nbs trucks/SUV’s have been 5.3 with 3.73 gears. They do just fine.



I think I’m after an LT (or ltz if selectable 4wd) trim Chevy, I really dislike the awd/full time 4wd of the Yukons even though the front end looks so much better.

I actually prefer rwd but those are so hard to come by especially here in Denver.

The only GMT800 mode you will find with a LTZ will be in suburban and it will only be 2006. That was the first year it was offered and they’re hard to find since Chevy didn’t build a ton of those that year. Plus you won’t have a two speed transfer case with selectable 4x4 options. The LTZ package was only offered with the same AWD transfer case that came in the Denali trimmed Yukon and the Escalade.

 

[S33k3r]

If you really love everything about the Denali but want part time 4WD vs AWD, see about getting one converted. HOWEVER, I put my youngest daughter in an AWD Sierra Denali after reading up on it.Aside from the ~1 MPG loss, it is a really good system.

 

[petethepug]

Coming from an 06 YXL Denali to an 08 and lastly an 09 Esky ESV, the 06 was the smoothest of them all with the 20” alum alloys and z55. Back in ‘14 we couldn’t find a decent 01-06 to replace it so we went to an 08.

The next Gen moves to rack & pinion steering and a much more refined 6 second AWD beast. The drivability and milage goes up with the 6SP trans. We moved to the 09 Esky to get the one year only L9H 6.2L without cylinder deactivation (AFM) and e85 capability. Since ‘20 the savings by using e85 vs 91 in CA have almost paid for the purchase price of the truck. It’s an $80 vs $160+ differential for the 30 gal tank.

Both Gen are predictable 300k+ milage platforms. The dual a/c - heating is unmatched along with 4 heated heats. In 09 Denali offers a/c front seats, 2WD and Esky also goes 2WD in 09 with a/c front seats from 07. After 10 all a/c seats went to fans only.

Happy Hunting for the jewel.