What year is best if money is an object

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.

swathdiver

Full Access Member
Joined
May 18, 2017
Posts
19,148
Reaction score
25,182
Location
Treasure Coast, Florida
Greetings-

First got on here to find out if a 2000 stripped down police Tahoe would be a good idea a few years ago. As a proof of concept, the Tahoe has been perfect for what I need - periodic towing, some rough 4WD, and comfort for my 6' 4" frame. Now I am looking for a newer ride with the 5.3 L engine (mine has the 4.8), power windows, power mirrors, etc. I understand after 2007 there's a 5 speed trans, and after 2009 a 6. Is it worth going with 2009+ for the six? Any years shine brighter than others? Looking to spend $10-15K.

Thanks! Alec

Alec, in 2009 the 6-speed transmission was paired with the 5.3s. In 2010 the 5.3s got VVT which gave them slightly better fuel economy.

The 6-speed trucks have either 3.08 or 3.42 gears. Towing capacity/prowess is limited with the 3.08 gears.

In 2009-2010 there was an XFE sub-model. This had the aluminum 5.3 motor, slightly lowered, aluminum suspension parts, etc. designed to give them 1mpg more. They had 3.08 gears.

2009 was also the year of the 6.2 Tahoe. These have the motor without AFM and were 4x4s mostly. The 2009 Denalis are AWD and had the same 6.2 motor without AFM (L9H).

Consider also the Suburban and Yukon XLs. The Tahoes because of their popularity often command a premium over the other models.

I like having the integrated trailer brake controller and Bluetooth and the built in navigation.

The trucks with 3.42 gears will also have larger radiators, external transmission coolers, an engine oil cooler and more powerful cooling fans.
 

willinnashville

Full Access Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Posts
271
Reaction score
375
Location
Nashville
2009 was also the year of the 6.2 Tahoe. These have the motor without AFM and were 4x4s mostly. The 2009 Denalis are AWD and had the same 6.2 motor without AFM (L9H).

Not that I'm an expert, but I didn't know that. Were Escalades of this year also without AFM?
 

Neill Campbell

TYF Newbie
Joined
May 23, 2018
Posts
9
Reaction score
7
I had a Denali, 6.2 six speed, but it hadn't been loved. So I dumped it.

Bought a Tahoe 5.3 with 3.42 gears and it towed far better than the larger engine 6 speed tahoe.

So my vote is get the car in the best condition you want, with the gear ratio for towing if that's what you want.
 

jsoltren

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Posts
159
Reaction score
95
> The 6-speed trucks have either 3.08 or 3.42 gears. Towing capacity/prowess is limited with the 3.08 gears.

The 2500s have a 3.73. Not that you're looking at a 2500 necessarily.

> Id just get a nbs...

Having owned both I prefer the NBS. It's a personal preference but I find the seats more comfortable, the interior to be higher quality, and prefer the more spacious interior for cargo. Of course the NBS is at best a thirteen year old truck at this point.

Every 10+ year old vehicle I've owned has needed fluids, an alignment, a brake job, e-brakes, belts and a new AC. You may have broken exhaust header bolts, need a new front end, need to replace an ancient and cracking spare tire, need to redo the seat covers, or need a new radiator. You may have to deal with rust too.

Get a low mileage well maintained NNBS because it's newer, or if you just like it better.
 

jsoltren

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Posts
159
Reaction score
95
Hey Jose, can you elaborate on this?

Yes. With the NBS you can remove row three entirely and row two folds down completely flat. There is an uninterrupted cargo area that is at least three feet tall, four feet wide and eight feet deep. I used my NBS to bring a couch home from Sam's Club, and, the box was exactly this size.

With the NNBS you can remove row three but there are plastic guide tracks on the floor that make the floor not perfectly flat. Row two can fold down but is not flush with the cargo area. If you fold and tumble row two there are two concerns. One, the seats are not secured in the vertical position, which means they'll fall backward unless you secure them. I tie a ratchet strap between a bar under the row one seat and the row two seat's top tether anchor to keep it from falling (or cargo can keep it upright). Two, the seats when tumbled reduce fore-aft clearance at floor level by a foot. In either case, there is no gap filler plate between row 3 and row 2.

The Excursion has a similar problem- row two does not fold completely flat. But it's less severe than on the NNBS: the seat backs are at about a ten degree angle to the cargo floor, instead of just sitting 4-6 inches higher.

When we were renovating the garage the NBS was able to bring home about twenty-five sheets of drywall with no trouble at all. Went right in, came right out. If I wanted to do this with my NNBS we'd either have to stack the drywall sheets on cinder blocks and plywood to be even with the row two folded seat (and be able to carry less), or remove the row two seat entirely (and build a rack to create an even floor, and remove the row three plastic guides).

I don't think PPV NNBS trucks have the plastic guides, at least.

Realistically, I also own a 17' landscape trailer, so if I need to bring home that much drywall again, or get another couch, I'll use the trailer.

Interior space is otherwise extremely similar on the NBS and NNBS. Both have about 40" of cargo height at the center of the loading floor. If you wanted to do something like an RV conversion (bed in the back) you'd be looking at ripping out a bunch of the interior anyway so there is no real difference.

I also feel like my '01 Denali's interior was just higher quality than my '13 2500. The buttons are a higher quality plastic, the doors have lights, the seats are a bit more comfortable (closer to a couch than an airliner seat), the dashboard wasn't cracked, it had fewer rattles. GM really scrimped on the NNBS interior. But my '01 was bleeding me dry with maintenance costs (since I'm not able to do many repairs myself at the moment).
 

swathdiver

Full Access Member
Joined
May 18, 2017
Posts
19,148
Reaction score
25,182
Location
Treasure Coast, Florida
Yes. With the NBS you can remove row three entirely and row two folds down completely flat. There is an uninterrupted cargo area that is at least three feet tall, four feet wide and eight feet deep. I used my NBS to bring a couch home from Sam's Club, and, the box was exactly this size.

With the NNBS you can remove row three but there are plastic guide tracks on the floor that make the floor not perfectly flat. Row two can fold down but is not flush with the cargo area. If you fold and tumble row two there are two concerns. One, the seats are not secured in the vertical position, which means they'll fall backward unless you secure them. I tie a ratchet strap between a bar under the row one seat and the row two seat's top tether anchor to keep it from falling (or cargo can keep it upright). Two, the seats when tumbled reduce fore-aft clearance at floor level by a foot. In either case, there is no gap filler plate between row 3 and row 2.

The Excursion has a similar problem- row two does not fold completely flat. But it's less severe than on the NNBS: the seat backs are at about a ten degree angle to the cargo floor, instead of just sitting 4-6 inches higher.

When we were renovating the garage the NBS was able to bring home about twenty-five sheets of drywall with no trouble at all. Went right in, came right out. If I wanted to do this with my NNBS we'd either have to stack the drywall sheets on cinder blocks and plywood to be even with the row two folded seat (and be able to carry less), or remove the row two seat entirely (and build a rack to create an even floor, and remove the row three plastic guides).

I don't think PPV NNBS trucks have the plastic guides, at least.

Realistically, I also own a 17' landscape trailer, so if I need to bring home that much drywall again, or get another couch, I'll use the trailer.

Interior space is otherwise extremely similar on the NBS and NNBS. Both have about 40" of cargo height at the center of the loading floor. If you wanted to do something like an RV conversion (bed in the back) you'd be looking at ripping out a bunch of the interior anyway so there is no real difference.

I also feel like my '01 Denali's interior was just higher quality than my '13 2500. The buttons are a higher quality plastic, the doors have lights, the seats are a bit more comfortable (closer to a couch than an airliner seat), the dashboard wasn't cracked, it had fewer rattles. GM really scrimped on the NNBS interior. But my '01 was bleeding me dry with maintenance costs (since I'm not able to do many repairs myself at the moment).


Got it, thanks for the detailed explanation. I read somewhere that the NNBS trucks had more interior space due to advances in design that gave them a slightly longer interior. But this matters not when it comes to pulling the seats and hauling sheets of plywood and the like.

Funny thing, the last time I had to haul lumber and plywood, we took the Pontiac Montana. We just fold down the two rows of seats and put the 4x8 sheets on top and lumber on top of that. Used a bucket in the very rear to help prop the sheets. If we needed more clearance we could have pulled all the seats out easily enough. This Montana is of the same style and architecture as the GMT-800s, they are indeed very durable. Our 2006 Montana is of the style of the NNBS and while I like the looks and features better, it is/was not as enduring.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
129,209
Posts
1,812,202
Members
92,308
Latest member
madmax442
Top