Notices
Racing & Drivers Education Forum
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

X-post: help with a Suburban/Yukon XL

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-02-2009, 03:14 PM
  #1  
Edward
Addicted Specialist
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
Edward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: So.CA
Posts: 6,111
Received 346 Likes on 195 Posts
Default X-post: help with a Suburban/Yukon XL

Sorry for the OT, but as most of you guys here drive a variety of cars, and since most of you know about hauling stuff...
So I am looking for a new family hauler that can seat 6 comfy for family trips, accomodate copious amnts of stuff + tow my Trackmeister, but don't want a p/u truck (I prefer the security of a closed vehicle). Primary concern is reliable and under $15K (absolute ceiling; closer to 10K the better). My preliminary search has netted Suburbans/Yukons in the 2000-03 range. So if you can help me, I'd really appreciate it, guys!!

1. Are these truly reliable, especially as miles accumulate?
2. Is getting, say, 200K miles w/o expensive repairs a norm or an exception?
3. Any years or particular engines to avoid (I don't need a beastly engine as my trailer/car is only about 3400lbs. all told).
4. What kind of actual mileage can I realistically expect: city and hwy (w/o towing, just crusing on the superslab)?
5. I am not "married" to these choices. I am open to any vehicle that fits my stated purpose.

Really appreciate the feedback, all. Thanks!

Edward
Old 04-02-2009, 04:02 PM
  #2  
BC
Rennlist Member
 
BC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 25,147
Received 73 Likes on 54 Posts
Default

You can easily find a lowish mileage Suburban 2500 in the 2000-2003 category. Understand that sometimes, especially with Chevy, getting one OVER 100k may be a good idea - do your own work - much has already been replaced.
Old 04-02-2009, 07:51 PM
  #3  
mistressmotorsports
Track Day
 
mistressmotorsports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: SoCal
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I have a 2004 Yukon (not for sale) that I used for towing a much heavier enclosed trailer for a while. It's just a family houler now that I stopped racing. It has the 5.3 liter with towing package. Great highway cruiser with a comfortable ride. My on board computer has me at 17.4 mpg average over the 44,000 mile life of the vehicle. Mostly, I use the truck for longer trips, I would think 15-16 is a more realistic average for combined driving. It's designed inhale 87 octane, so you can run the cheap stuff.

While I don't have a lot of miles on mine, it has been very reliable with no problems that I consider major. I had a rear seat belt retractor lock up once (replaced in 15 minutes at the dealer) and a recall for a freaky speedometer. No drivetrain issues, no leaks, etc. Hasn't burned one drop of Mobil 1 since new. Amazingly, it's on the first set of brake pads, and they probably will go another 20-30k still. Of course, as I said, I do mostly highway trips with the truck, so I'm easy on brakes.

The earlier (pre-2000) light duty trucks had a rep for bad trannies. I have not heard that about the 2000 and up units. Also, if you can find a heavy duty 3/4 ton Suburban, you will have an even more bulletproof hauler, but with the 6 liter (or 8.1, although I'm not sure those came in Suburbans,) you'll pay for it in fuel mileage and a loss in ride quality. With a 3400 pound tow package, you'll probably not even notice the load behind you with the base chassis and a 5.3.

I might avoid the smallest 4.x liter engine as it is pretty gutless and doesn't reward you with significantly better mileage.

Other comments: The paint and interior materials are great. Not in a luxury car way with perfect gloss and fancy leather dash, etc., but in the lack of wear. My truck sits out all the time, gets all kinds of water spots from the sprinklers and weather, basketball impacts, kid prints, etc, and the paint doesn't stain or scratch. Same with the interior. It's plastic, but light scuffs from your feet or tools or whatever don't leave permanent marks on the surfaces.

I don't know how the truck will be when it gets older, but for now, it runs perfectly and looks brand new. So, a thumbs up for me on this truck.
Old 04-02-2009, 09:08 PM
  #4  
Veloce Raptor
Rennlist Member
 
Veloce Raptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Guess...
Posts: 41,752
Received 1,539 Likes on 812 Posts
Default

The later the model year, the better. They started to get decent in 2002, and by end of run for that body style in 2006 were very very good.

In the 1/2 ton, I strongly recommend the 6.0 engine, if you can find it, not the 5.3. If you go baller style with the 3/4 ton, the 6.0 is very good. The 8.1 is stellar, and will be plenty of motor should you ever decide to get an enclosed trailer.

Mileage will not be stellar. NOT towing: City expect 13-15, highway 16-20 depending on engine and gearing.

These motors are VERY responsive to a better intake & an ECU remap, for a lot more power & better economy, as well as crisper shifting from the transmission.







Professional Racing and Driving Coach
Old 04-02-2009, 10:00 PM
  #5  
Manny Alban
Addict
Rennlist Member

 
Manny Alban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,095
Received 55 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

I sold my 96 1500 Suburban with 204K to my mechanic, who still has it. My 02 1500 has 139K miles and I've only had to replace the fuel pump at 103K. Both were tow vehicles from day one. No problems at all towing a steel open trailer with a 964.
Old 04-02-2009, 10:01 PM
  #6  
BC
Rennlist Member
 
BC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 25,147
Received 73 Likes on 54 Posts
Default

Its an interesting platform now that I bought a 2000 2500 Suburban 6L. I have done hours of "research" now online.

Its getting about 9mpg the way I drive, with no trailer. I think it needs some new plugs, maybe some other stuff.

I like how beefy everything is. As VR explained when I was searching, the rear has disk brakes after 2000.

I drove an 8.1 before I bought the 6L. It would be cool, but if I am getting 9-10mpg with the 6, I would get about 5mpg with the 8.1. I have a heavy foot. I am not complaining.

There is alot out there for the LQ4 and the later LQ9 6L blocks for this platform. You can make a very tough iron block/aluminum head 408 with a 4" stroke crank and 6.125 rods.

The truck intake manifold is something that others search out because it flows so well, so there is no reason to change that. But the truck I bought has some sort of Cold air intake that ads complexity but I do not know what it added from stock.

It seems as though it would be very stable when towing.
Old 04-02-2009, 10:22 PM
  #7  
Veloce Raptor
Rennlist Member
 
Veloce Raptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Guess...
Posts: 41,752
Received 1,539 Likes on 812 Posts
Default

The early 8.1's (IIRC, 2000 was the first year for this motor) were horrible with fuel economy. Later in the run, they got the Allison transmission (which the 6/0 didn't get) and fuel economy was very close to or equal the 6.0 in most conditions. Plus 440 lb-ft of torque!!!!!!!!







Professional Racing and Driving Coach
Old 04-02-2009, 10:29 PM
  #8  
Bill L Seifert
Three Wheelin'
 
Bill L Seifert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Hailey, Idaho
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Go 3/4 Ton, I had a Suburban 1500, and with a 24ft Pace, I had to tighten the stabilizers as tight as a banjo string, to keep Semis from blowing me off the road. Other than that, it towed fine.


Bill Seifert

1999 Honda Civic SI Race Car
1998 Boxster
Old 04-03-2009, 01:28 AM
  #9  
Edward
Addicted Specialist
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
 
Edward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: So.CA
Posts: 6,111
Received 346 Likes on 195 Posts
Default

Thanks, all, for sharing your experiences! I was thinking 2000-04 (fits my budget), but for whatever reason Consumer Reports finds the 2000-02 the most reliable for the sub-2005s so maybe will stick to those three years. Oh yeah, looking at the 1500 as the 2500 would just be serious overkill for me (remember my full car/trailer is a whopping 3400 all told ).

BTW, as I am seeing some 4x4 out there, any reason to avoid those? I figure the odd times we go to the snow that may come in handy ...unless there are added maintenance issues with them. Ok to have or better to avoid?? Thanks, all!!

Edward
Old 04-03-2009, 01:44 AM
  #10  
BC
Rennlist Member
 
BC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 25,147
Received 73 Likes on 54 Posts
Default

No long term experience on the electronic 4x4. But it sure seems like it would come in handy going up in the mountains of SoCal. The 2000 + seem to have the auto 4x4 which would switch automatically when there is slip. I do not know how quickly it would happen though.

One more thing - I got one with autoride. Do some research on this, as it may be maintenance finicky, but I can sure as hell feel it working even with no trailer on the 2500. It almost feels like active handling. Braking is SUPER stable, as the dive is reduced by alot, as is turning on large high speed turns - the body roll is greatly (seems, at least) diminished.
Old 04-03-2009, 01:45 AM
  #11  
BC
Rennlist Member
 
BC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 25,147
Received 73 Likes on 54 Posts
Default

I think VR may have an opinion for you about the good reasons to have the 2500.
Old 04-03-2009, 01:46 AM
  #12  
BC
Rennlist Member
 
BC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 25,147
Received 73 Likes on 54 Posts
Default

There is a 2500 that was for Sale in Yorba linda, lowish mileage. Several in Pheonix, though I stopped looking when I bought mine a week ago.
Old 04-03-2009, 08:29 AM
  #13  
Veloce Raptor
Rennlist Member
 
Veloce Raptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Guess...
Posts: 41,752
Received 1,539 Likes on 812 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Edward
Thanks, all, for sharing your experiences! I was thinking 2000-04 (fits my budget), but for whatever reason Consumer Reports finds the 2000-02 the most reliable for the sub-2005s so maybe will stick to those three years. Oh yeah, looking at the 1500 as the 2500 would just be serious overkill for me (remember my full car/trailer is a whopping 3400 all told ).

BTW, as I am seeing some 4x4 out there, any reason to avoid those? I figure the odd times we go to the snow that may come in handy ...unless there are added maintenance issues with them. Ok to have or better to avoid?? Thanks, all!!

Edward

IMO, unles you regularly go through mountain snows, avoid the 4x4. It adds weight & complexity, and reduces fuel economy due to weight & rolling resistance.







Professional Racing and Driving Coach
Old 04-03-2009, 09:10 AM
  #14  
machina
Racer
 
machina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I have had my 2001 XL since it was new and love it.

Its a 1500 and has easily towed 2 of my race cars (C sport racer & E production 914)

I had open trailers so the 1500 was fine. Would go 2500 if you tow a heavier enclosed trailer.

Only real problem i ever had was bad fuel pump which is common on these. They also have chronic knocking sound from steering shaft the dealer can never fix. Borgenson just came out with a stainless steel shaft. I installed it last weekend and now she is quiet.

http://ww2.borgeson.com/TRUCKS/CHEVY.html

dr

Last edited by machina; 10-07-2009 at 06:24 PM.
Old 04-03-2009, 11:14 AM
  #15  
007DT
Drifting
 
007DT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 3,007
Received 47 Likes on 25 Posts
Default

I've driven several of them and like the overall feel of the newer ones over the previous models. My T-Reg is getting replaced this summer with either a Q7 or an Escalade? Love the power of the Escalade! I'm in the air myself. With the way my family is growing I want the Slade. The way my wife manuvers vehicles I want the Q7.


Quick Reply: X-post: help with a Suburban/Yukon XL



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 06:25 PM.