When automakers offer both a gasoline and a diesel engine in their trucks, they will typically charge a premium for the diesel engine. The 2021 GMC Yukon Denali bucks this trend, however, as the available oil burner in the SUV actually costs less to equip than the V8.
The base price for a 2021 GMC Yukon Denali with the GM 6.2L L87 V8 engine is $69,695. However, this price dips to $68,195 when the available GM 3.0L LM2 inline-six Duramax turbo-diesel engine is equipped, representing a rather significant savings of $1,500.
This discount compounds with the potential fuel savings the 3.0L LM2 diesel engine offers, as well. While the official EPA-certified fuel economy ratings for the 2021 GMC Yukon Denali diesel have not yet been released, the fuel economy ratings for the 2021 GMC Sierra provide an indication of the type of efficiency gains to expect. When equipped with the 3.0L diesel engine, the Sierra is rated at 22 mpg city, 26 mpg highway and 24 mpg combined, while similarly equipped 2021 GMC Sierra trims with the 6.2L L87 V8 engine are rated at 16 mpg city, 20 mpg highway and 17 mpg combined – an improvement of around 30 percent.
The 3.0L LM2 turbodiesel is rated at 277 horsepower and 460-pound-feet of torque and is paired exclusively with the GM 10-speed automatic transmission in the various trucks and SUVs that it is offered in. The engine is being offered as a late availability option in the GMC Yukon and Yukon XL and Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban for the 2021 model year. The order books for the diesel engine versions of the SUVs will open in November.
It will be interesting to see if taking $1,500 off the initial buying price of the 2021 GMC Yukon Denali will be enough to convince buyers to opt for the more efficient diesel engine over the thirsty 6.2L L87 V8.
Comments
The choice is simple.
If you care about the environment: Diesel.
If you are an arrogant selfish showoff that only cares about 0-60 times then gas guzzling 6.2.
Tell us how the 6.2L has hurt you.
Ask Gavin Newsome what’s going to happen to pollution mills like the 6.2.
Nothing. His ban is unlawful and will be overturned when that communist is thrown out. There will be ICE until the well run dry.
Does anyone know the 0-60 times for the Diesel in the Yukon XL Denali?
i only buy flex fuel
While that is great news and encouraging to see the diesel will have a fighting chance here are the issues that will happen. First off the dealers will be the main issue, walking into a GMC showroom they probably will have 20 to 1 gas vs diesel Denali’s in stock. Second, if GM really wants to promote the diesel in any of its full size SUV’s they should create a very aggressive lease program initially to get them in the hands of the public. In typical GM fashion the diesel while cheaper in price will probably have a higher lease price which will effectively take it out of the market. GM could really have something special with the full size SUV diesel option, how successful they are will be completely up to them (GM, Dealers).
Agreed.
Until government intervention fixes that.
Such as a $5000 gas guzzler tax being applied to every 6.2 powered Truck/SUV
just like the flex fuel sham…
While logic would suggest that opting for the GMC Yukon Denali with Duramax diesel engine makes more sense being less expensive than when configured with a 6.2L V8; one has to remember that finding stations that sell diesel fuel in some neighborhoods is still difficult.
With the appropriate hitch & jerk in the process, dealers typically will stock what customers want to buy. I would think the diesel option would be best for those that tow, as mileage / range plummets pulling trailers, where the diesel has a strong advantage. The higher cost of diesel fuel negates most mileage gains (depending upon the market), not to mention the inconvenience of finding the one diesel pump among all the gas pumps and having a glove that smells like diesel. Had both and switched back to gas when the towing need ended.
If you don’t do a lot of towing the diesel and the 6.2 are stupid, the standard 5.3 will get you where you’re going just as fast as the speed limit is the same for all engines. As for the diesel until they change the design for the oil pump drive from an internal drive belt that you must drop the transmission to change it I wouldn’t consider it. That has got to be the most stupid design since the Edsel. I know they say it’s good for 100,000 miles, well by the time all those diesels accumulated 100,000 miles the general public is going to know about it and how much is that engine going to be worth on trade in or sale, a used car salesman will have to change that belt before he can sell the vehicle. I wouldn’t buy a vehicle that I knew I was going to have to spend $500 to replace a $10 belt when it rolled over the 100,000 mile mark.
Bob, I completely agree with what your saying. It would be frustrating to know you will have to replace a belt at the 100K mark. However, if you’re getting ready to spend north of 70K of a Yukon Denali, and you plan on keep the SUV past 100K I don’t believe $500.00 is all that much of a concern.
The point I was making is most people get rid of a vehicle by 80-90 thousand miles before it has any major maintenance issues. I realize today’s trucks can go 250 thousand miles before problems develop, but the average owner is getting tired of the vehicle by 90,000. Then it gets traded in, the new truck dealer doesn’t want that truck on his lot and sends it to the auction. Now jo Smos used car lot buys it and if he’s not aware of the belt driven pump he can’t sell it unless he finds someone dumber than him.
I’d rather spend my money on a propane or NG conversion, either of which I think burns cleaner than diesel. Can’t help but think about the Olds diesel disaster of the 80’s. Here’s hoping more retail outlets appear for propane and compressed natural gas.
I think most folks replace their Yukons not because of failure, but because they seek the newer technology. I had an ‘03 XL Denali that I replaced with a ‘12 XL Denali at 200,000 miles which is being replaced with a ‘21 XL Denali after 160,000 miles and neither vehicle was tired other than the drivers’ seat
Sure wish GMC offered an optional 45 or 50 gallon fuel tank on the Yukon XL Denali.
We have a 14 F250 that runs on CNG/Unleaded.
I like the concept of CNG, but its very impractical.
18 GGE (gasoline gallon equivalent) only gets you about 80-100 miles depending on how you drive, the fuel storage is about the same size as the factory gas tank (30 gallons I believe) under the truck. It takes a bit longer to fill, and not to mention a bit more dangerous. (we had a line blow on ours as it was filling up. 3600 PSI of dino-farts, flowing through a pin hole really makes a lot of noise!) Plus, the tank has a “life” on it. Expires in 2023, and the entire system has to be inspected every 3 years/36k miles by a CNG certified dealership.
Hopefully GMC marketing will highlight the availability of a diesel engine and not leave it to the dealers to stock them. But outside of the HD truck I’ve never seen any marketing from GMC on any other available diesel models whether it was the terrain, canyon or even the sierra.
Diesel is still looked at as dirty and loud by a lot of vehicle buyers in N/A. Also expensive to fix. Not that i agree.
Because of the fiascos of the Oldsmobile diesel of the 80s due to the”bean counters” in charge rushing the engine to market before the bugs were worked out caused the American public to turn against Diesel engines. Now 40 years later (2 generations) people still turn away from the diesel even though today’s diesel is actually cleaner than gas engines. Blame Roger B Smith and his staff at GM. He’s also the father of the Saturn, that was his baby from the start.
What’s the source of this info? Local dealers don’t have prices for diesel.
GMC.com
Ok everyone that mentions the 1980’s Diesel engine should punched in the nuts everytime they bring it up. That was 40 years ago!!!!! Some people that are going to buy these weren’t even born then. The new diesels are cleaner than the gas engines now. Plus the mileage will be more than 30% better because those are based upon govt numbers which diesels always do better than and usually less for gassers. This kicks ass that GM is selling these at a rebate compared to the gassers. Once you drive one for a year you probably won’t ever go back to a gasser.
I’ve been driving a diesel powered vehicle for eight years now and the need to carry a smelly glove with me for fueling is spot on. Everyone knows what I did for hours after fueling. Diesel order does not evaporate.
Why is it that a diesel powered Class 8 truck can run for 1 million miles without major out of service events yet in a GM passenger vehicle can’t go past 100,000 miles? Just don’t think this is a solid move for GM. They should find the weakest component and redesign it, then find the next item to be the presumed fail point and redesign it. GM should present a Diesel engine without shortcomings to the public that is capable of making 300K without an event that stops the vehicle in its tracks and demands an immediate fix. Or stay out of this market segment.
Not sure what the big issue is concerning the changing of the belt at 100,000miles. This use to be normal maintenance with timing belts on damn near everything not long ago. Even timing chains use to need to be changed at about that mileage. Just think that the money you will save in fuel costs will easily pay for it and other maintenance.