Jump to content

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

Duramax (LM2) Escalade (and yukon/tahoe)


gregtay

Recommended Posts

On 12/6/2021 at 12:57 AM, TolCarMan said:

I'm kinda late to this thread, but I'll chime in to (maybe) help others in the future. 

We took delivery of our '21 Escalade back in March. It's a Sport ESV with the 6.2 and so far I freakin love it. I never thought I'd end up in an Escalade due to the image surrounding them, but here we are lol. I originally wanted the new TRX, but being single with 3 kids, we needed the extra space and couldn't swing having a SUV and a big truck. 

~7400 miles on the clock and zero issues. Living in Salt Lake, towing is our only option. Our favorite lake (East Canyon) is up in the mountains meaning we're towing up canyons- the average grade is about 6% at roughly 5500 ft above sea level. The 6.2 gets the job done (can cruise at 70 without much fuss), though I do miss the turbos in my previous 3.5 F150. I think they really help at our elevation. Let's just say, hypothetically the Ford could pass people at 90 mph while towing a 7500 lb trailer. The escalade feels pretty gutless in terms of passing power, but has no problem just cruising along. 

MPG isn't great to begin with. I average 13, granted thats 70% city driving. Towing a trailer is obviously worse averaging about 8 mpg with about 30% city, 40% highway, and 30% canyon highway. For reference, I think the F150 got around 10 mpg while towing the same trailer along the same routes. 

Can't compare mine to the diesel as I haven't driven one, but I'm sure it is also great. I just couldn't pass up the 6.2. There's just something special about a V8, plus It's kind of cool the car and the boat share the same block. If you're thinking of getting one, do it! (iCloud photo link found here)

That things sweet! Patiently waiting on our 22 Tahoe to be built, added the 6.2 to that.  Should be nice! 

Link to comment
  • 5 months later...
On 9/18/2021 at 6:07 PM, jjackkrash said:

Coinflip improved to almost a certainty. 

@gregtayI am really curious if you like (or love or whatever) the Super Cruise?  

 

Congrats! Sorry.. just saw your post from Sept.  I am about a year into owning this thing (10.5k miles) and I absolutely love it.  I really love SuperCruise... I love to drive, but there are just moments (like terrible traffic) where it is nice to just let Supercruise do its thing.  I am still waiting for the upcoming updates for MY21's to enable Supercruise while towing. 

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 5/11/2022 at 11:10 AM, jjackkrash said:

Escalade V = 682HP!  

I love high powered SUVs... the Duramax Escalade was a huge step back for me in power/performance.  Strangely... the V just doesn't quite do it for me.  Hellcat Durango was exciting because it was still a nimble package (performed well on a track, etc.)  I just don't have confidence that GM got the rest of the package right to make the V a fun and exciting car. Fast? Sure (but not crazy fast comparted to other ~$150k SUVs.... RSQ8 (or even an SQ8), Hellcats, AMGs, etc are on another level of performance.  Having the big size+performance is intriguing... and maybe I am wrong and GM got it right.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

I ended up with a Yukon XL with the 3.0 in mid March and just got back from my first long tow.  Prior to this, I have really enjoyed the 3.0.  I have driven Yukon XL's for the past 15 years, but always with the 5.3.  The 3.0 is a much better engine for daily driving and a MUCH better engine for towing.  I was pulling my 2013 247 LSV, which has a dry weight of 4200 lbs, so my guess is that the Gross Trailer Weight was between 6000 - 6500 lbs.  I was purposely low on boat fuel when I trailered, putting 68 gallons in upon arrival at Table Rock and 76 gallons in when I returned home (YIKES - didn't mean to cut it that close - it is only a 78 galloon tank!!!)

Everyday driving for the first 10k miles of this vehicle yields me 24 MPG.  This is mostly commuting into and around the Houston area.  A pretty good mix of 80 mph and stop and go freeway driving.  You can greatly increase the MPG numbers by keeping it in the 65 mph range, but I don't often have that much patience.  My hour long 80 - 85 mph runs to the lake really hurt the MPG.

I just completed a 1200 mile RT tow from Houston to Table Rock Lake.  Much hillier terrain that we are accustomed to in Houston, but not really mountain driving.  I kept it at 70 mph on the way up there and got 13 mpg.  On the way back I bumped it up to 75 mph most of the way and ended up with a 12.4 mpg blended average for the entire trip.  The one thing that I really noticed is the significant increase in DEF consumption when towing.  I was under the impression that DEF consumption was proportional to fuel, but I got about 200 mpg of DEF when towing vs +1000 MPG DEF when not towing.

The GMC included trailer TPM was a nice feature to have.  Good to be able to see tire pressures and temperatures to make sure things were not getting out of hand.  My SLT does not have the adjustable suspension, but I didn't feel like there was too much squat.  I think that it looks worse in this picture (parked on an uphill grade) than it felt while driving.  The smart trailer features were great too - plug the trailer in and the truck will tell you in you have any light issues - no more checking turn signals, brake lights, etc. manually.

The 3.0 was fantastic for towing.  I never felt like I was working the engine beyond its comfort zone.  Pulling up the 10% grade (per the onboard telemetry) launch ramp and surrounding hills at low speed or running at 70 mph up long 4 - 5 % grades on the highway(and not losing speed) really felt "comfortable" for this engine.  Most gas engines seme to strain at high RPM in these scenarios in my experience.  The only disappointment that I had was with the non-existent engine braking.  I noticed it on the tach once or twice, but never felt it have any effect.  I found myself manually downshifting on the significant downhill grades after a bit.  I never felt like the trailer was pushing me, even when I had to get on the brakes somewhat aggressively.

If you are on the fence about going to diesel, I highly recommend it.  I had never had a diesel for a daily driver, but I am sold on it now if it is an available option on the chassis that I am looking for in the future.

 

IMG_7863.thumb.jpg.9ca97f9c2970eb82d39ab24046d300e8.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
2 hours ago, amartin said:

I ended up with a Yukon XL with the 3.0 in mid March and just got back from my first long tow.  Prior to this, I have really enjoyed the 3.0.  I have driven Yukon XL's for the past 15 years, but always with the 5.3.  The 3.0 is a much better engine for daily driving and a MUCH better engine for towing.  I was pulling my 2013 247 LSV, which has a dry weight of 4200 lbs, so my guess is that the Gross Trailer Weight was between 6000 - 6500 lbs.  I was purposely low on boat fuel when I trailered, putting 68 gallons in upon arrival at Table Rock and 76 gallons in when I returned home (YIKES - didn't mean to cut it that close - it is only a 78 galloon tank!!!)

Everyday driving for the first 10k miles of this vehicle yields me 24 MPG.  This is mostly commuting into and around the Houston area.  A pretty good mix of 80 mph and stop and go freeway driving.  You can greatly increase the MPG numbers by keeping it in the 65 mph range, but I don't often have that much patience.  My hour long 80 - 85 mph runs to the lake really hurt the MPG.

I just completed a 1200 mile RT tow from Houston to Table Rock Lake.  Much hillier terrain that we are accustomed to in Houston, but not really mountain driving.  I kept it at 70 mph on the way up there and got 13 mpg.  On the way back I bumped it up to 75 mph most of the way and ended up with a 12.4 mpg blended average for the entire trip.  The one thing that I really noticed is the significant increase in DEF consumption when towing.  I was under the impression that DEF consumption was proportional to fuel, but I got about 200 mpg of DEF when towing vs +1000 MPG DEF when not towing.

The GMC included trailer TPM was a nice feature to have.  Good to be able to see tire pressures and temperatures to make sure things were not getting out of hand.  My SLT does not have the adjustable suspension, but I didn't feel like there was too much squat.  I think that it looks worse in this picture (parked on an uphill grade) than it felt while driving.  The smart trailer features were great too - plug the trailer in and the truck will tell you in you have any light issues - no more checking turn signals, brake lights, etc. manually.

The 3.0 was fantastic for towing.  I never felt like I was working the engine beyond its comfort zone.  Pulling up the 10% grade (per the onboard telemetry) launch ramp and surrounding hills at low speed or running at 70 mph up long 4 - 5 % grades on the highway(and not losing speed) really felt "comfortable" for this engine.  Most gas engines seme to strain at high RPM in these scenarios in my experience.  The only disappointment that I had was with the non-existent engine braking.  I noticed it on the tach once or twice, but never felt it have any effect.  I found myself manually downshifting on the significant downhill grades after a bit.  I never felt like the trailer was pushing me, even when I had to get on the brakes somewhat aggressively.

If you are on the fence about going to diesel, I highly recommend it.  I had never had a diesel for a daily driver, but I am sold on it now if it is an available option on the chassis that I am looking for in the future.

 

IMG_7863.thumb.jpg.9ca97f9c2970eb82d39ab24046d300e8.jpg

I've seen similar reports of high DEF burn rates towing. Burning a few gallons of that on a longer road trip offsets some of the MPG advantage for sure. 

Link to comment
14 hours ago, UWSkier said:

I've seen similar reports of high DEF burn rates towing. Burning a few gallons of that on a longer road trip offsets some of the MPG advantage for sure. 

It certainly surprised me, but really is pretty insignificant in my opinion.  The 5 gallons of DEF cost me $25.  The 100 gallons of diesel cost me just under $500...

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, amartin said:

It certainly surprised me, but really is pretty insignificant in my opinion.  The 5 gallons of DEF cost me $25.  The 100 gallons of diesel cost me just under $500...

I wish GM would make something like the F150 HDPP for their half tons.  I'd love that engine in a half ton chassis with about 1900 lbs of payload and decent features.  Kindof like that 1500HD they used to sell.

Link to comment

I ordered in February at 4 dealerships, but none of the orders got picked up.  I stumbled on this one locally that a customer backed out on.  Not 100% what I wanted, but it ticked almost all of the boxes (actually a couple more than I wanted!)

Link to comment

That was where my local dealerships were when I started looking - some even requiring the +10k on a custom order.  I did pay over MSRP, but only $2k.  In hindsight, I am glad that I did, as I would still be waiting and driving my spare 2022 Sierra...

Link to comment
  • 3 months later...

I just traded in a '22 Tundra for a '23 Sierra AT4 1/2 ton with the 3.0L D-Max.  I don't have 100 miles on it yet but so far I'm pretty impressed.  I think it's going to be perfect for hauling the ski boat 80 miles and back to the lake on weekends.  The power delivery is so smooth I think GM just nailed it. 

Edited by jjackkrash
  • Like 2
Link to comment

Have 1500 miles on my Yukon. I feel like it has endless torque and it is incredibly smooth paired with the 10 speed. As jackrash said, they absolutely nailed it with this engine and wouldn’t go back to a gasser. the fuel economy is insane too. 30 ish mph cruising at 80 mph 

  • Like 3
Link to comment

I'm a huge fan of the 3.0 diesel, but man, it seems like their days are numbered.  Ford already bailed on theirs.  So has Chrysler (or whatever they are called these days).

Average price for fuel is $3.78.  Even if you buy mid-grade it is "only" $4.19/gallon.  Compare that to diesel at $5.31/gallon.

If you go by the reported economy on fuelly, and you buy mid-grade (when almost all the engines only need standard fuel), there is no fuel savings in the Duramax. 

It only makes sense to go with this diesel if you like the driving manners because you don't save any money at the pump. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, RyanB said:

I'm a huge fan of the 3.0 diesel, but man, it seems like their days are numbered.  Ford already bailed on theirs.  So has Chrysler (or whatever they are called these days).

Average price for fuel is $3.78.  Even if you buy mid-grade it is "only" $4.19/gallon.  Compare that to diesel at $5.31/gallon.

If you go by the reported economy on fuelly, and you buy mid-grade (when almost all the engines only need standard fuel), there is no fuel savings in the Duramax. 

It only makes sense to go with this diesel if you like the driving manners because you don't save any money at the pump. 

Right now the price spread is a bit painful.  However, I am glad that I went with the 3.0 Duramax about 7 months and 20k miles ago for my Yukon XL.  Hopefully the price spread will return to more normal levels and will make the decision to go diesel a better financial one.  There currently is about a 50% premium for diesel vs 87 Octane where I am - Still cheaper than marina boat gas though :).

I will say that after 20k miles, I find it hard to believe that I will want to go back to a gasser any time soon.  I don't tow much, but it does tow well.  I got about 14 mpg on a 1200 mile RT tow with my boat this summer, which I felt was pretty good for 75-80 mph driving.   Everyday driving seems much smoother than my 5.3 Yukon XL that I had.  One really nice feature that I had not really factored in was the ability to consistently go 700 miles between fill-ups. 

Link to comment

The choice for me in the GM products is between the 3.0L and a 6.2l, which runs on premium.   And I hope the artificial price spread does not last forever, but who knows.  It does suck paying this much for diesel. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
43 minutes ago, jjackkrash said:

The choice for me in the GM products is between the 3.0L and a 6.2l, which runs on premium.   And I hope the artificial price spread does not last forever, but who knows.  It does suck paying this much for diesel. 

 

55 minutes ago, amartin said:

Right now the price spread is a bit painful.  However, I am glad that I went with the 3.0 Duramax about 7 months and 20k miles ago for my Yukon XL.  Hopefully the price spread will return to more normal levels and will make the decision to go diesel a better financial one.  There currently is about a 50% premium for diesel vs 87 Octane where I am - Still cheaper than marina boat gas though :).

I will say that after 20k miles, I find it hard to believe that I will want to go back to a gasser any time soon.  I don't tow much, but it does tow well.  I got about 14 mpg on a 1200 mile RT tow with my boat this summer, which I felt was pretty good for 75-80 mph driving.   Everyday driving seems much smoother than my 5.3 Yukon XL that I had.  One really nice feature that I had not really factored in was the ability to consistently go 700 miles between fill-ups. 

I don't think the price spread is going to get better anytime soon. Apparently the US is snatching up diesel shipments originally headed for Europe, and we know Europe is in an energy crunch too. It'll probably get worse this winter (and maybe spring) before having hopes of easing.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, jjackkrash said:

The choice for me in the GM products is between the 3.0L and a 6.2l, which runs on premium.   And I hope the artificial price spread does not last forever, but who knows.  It does suck paying this much for diesel. 

Did the ‘23 Sierra get a bigger fuel tank or still only 24 gallons? The range the diesel gets would make that decision easy if they don’t have a bigger tank option. At least with the diesel you can get a bigger aftermarket tank. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Pnwrider said:

Did the ‘23 Sierra get a bigger fuel tank or still only 24 gallons? The range the diesel gets would make that decision easy if they don’t have a bigger tank option. At least with the diesel you can get a bigger aftermarket tank. 

I'm pretty sure it's 24.  But I have not tried filling it yet.  Unloaded that will get me from Tacoma to Sacramento without filling up or at least really close.  

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Slayer said:

And they are a total PITA to do business with.

 

Lol. My 2019 Expedition spent 8 1/2 weeks this summer waiting for parts and a competent service department to fix it. And I’ve heard horror stories about GM as well. They all have their warts. 

Edited by RyanB
Link to comment
1 hour ago, RyanB said:

Lol. My 2019 Expedition spent 8 1/2 weeks this summer waiting for parts and a competent service department to fix it. And I’ve heard horror stories about GM as well. They all have their warts. 

I'm not talking about being the consumer.  Stellantis is a client of mine and they're a mess to do business with in that respect.  At least for the services we provide. 

 

Link to comment
ahopkins22LSV
38 minutes ago, Slayer said:

I'm not talking about being the consumer.  Stellantis is a client of mine and they're a mess to do business with in that respect.  At least for the services we provide. 

 

It’s company wide… worst OEM I’ve ever worked with and a big reason why I choose not to purchase their vehicles. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...