Looking over info before ordering new Duramax and find some ,odd to me, differences between the Denali and Sierra or Silverado.

1. The trailer brake controller doesn't appear to be available on the Denali, what's up with that?
2. Payload and 5th wheel trailering capacity is way down on the Denali; instantly taking it out of the equation for me, but wonder about the reason for that?
3. The Denali features show that it comes with an additional engine oil cooler in addition to the standard cooler; this as far as I can find is not a part of the Sierra or Silverado package, seems odd and something that I would like to have especially since I went to the trouble of addding one to my LBZ.

Any ideas?

Randy

the oil cooler thing you are seeing is for the gasser.

Are you sure you spec'd out a denali duramax when comparing things? A denali 2500HD should have exactly the same GVWR and payload as a similar 2500HD crew cab silverado.....

when you buy the denali package you get nicer door sill plates, exterior cosmetic changes, badging, 5.1 bose surround sound stereo (the non-denali trucks also have bose, but its a lower quality setup and is not 5.1 surround sound), more leather, wood steering wheel, nicer door panels etc...

Ben

the oil cooler thing you are seeing is for the gasser.

Are you sure you spec'd out a denali duramax when comparing things? A denali 2500HD should have exactly the same GVWR and payload as a similar 2500HD crew cab silverado.....

when you buy the denali package you get nicer door sill plates, exterior cosmetic changes, badging, 5.1 bose surround sound stereo (the non-denali trucks also have bose, but its a lower quality setup and is not 5.1 surround sound), more leather, wood steering wheel, nicer door panels etc...

Ben

Yeah, specs are for the diesel
Sierra/Silverado Denali
Payload 4192 2959
5th Wheel 17,800 15,600
These from GMC site, did not verify on Chevy site for the Silverado but assume it is the same.

Pretty substantial difference

Oil cooler does not mention gas of diesel, you my be right.

No brake controller seems stupid, especially considering that this is supposed to be the premium truck; guess it is really not geared for the towing sector---but does have the option of trailer wiring.

Randy

I posted the same question earlier about the GVWR differences assuming that was a misprint. Even though it was definitely LML specific given the weight ratings for the various incarnations the thread got moved into some other quadrant of the galaxy.:rolleyes:

The Denali tows and carries the almost exactly the same payload as a 2500HD. You have to take into account that the Denali is only available as a CCSB.

All wights and capacities taken from GMC's website under CCSB D/A

Curb weight is as follows
2500HD - 7208lbs
Denali - 6562lbs

Trailer towing (Ball mount)
2500HD - 13000
Denali - 13000

Trailer towing (5th wheel)
2500HD - 16,700
Denali - 15,600

Payload
2500HD - 2,792
Denali - 2,959

So overall the Denali Carries more in the bed weight wise but tows slightly less 5th wheel.

Their web sites aren't worth a crap!I was building a Vette the other day and it was mixing things in with and even showing a picture of a Traverse.

Looking over info before ordering new Duramax and find some ,odd to me, differences between the Denali and Sierra or Silverado.

1. The trailer brake controller doesn't appear to be available on the Denali, what's up with that?
2. Payload and 5th wheel trailering capacity is way down on the Denali; instantly taking it out of the equation for me, but wonder about the reason for that?
3. The Denali features show that it comes with an additional engine oil cooler in addition to the standard cooler; this as far as I can find is not a part of the Sierra or Silverado package, seems odd and something that I would like to have especially since I went to the trouble of addding one to my LBZ.

Any ideas?

Randy


I'm looking at the dealer options book and I am showing the trailer brake controller is standard on the GMC Denali 2500HD. Can someone verify that their Denali does in fact have the brake controller?

This is from the options book for 2500/3500HD series trucks. Looks like a brake controller in a Denali to me

http://www.bigkcomputers.com/downloads/bc.jpg
http://www.bigkcomputers.com/downloads/bc1.jpg

I have a trailer break control in my denali. When i was building mine at the dealership. On the duramax it was standard.

The Denali tows and carries the almost exactly the same payload as a 2500HD. You have to take into account that the Denali is only available as a CCSB.

All wights and capacities taken from GMC's website under CCSB D/A

Curb weight is as follows
2500HD - 7208lbs
Denali - 6562lbs

Trailer towing (Ball mount)
2500HD - 13000
Denali - 13000

Trailer towing (5th wheel)
2500HD - 16,700
Denali - 15,600

Payload
2500HD - 2,792
Denali - 2,959

So overall the Denali Carries more in the bed weight wise but tows slightly less 5th wheel.

Think your info is off a bit.
Also so it is clear, I am comparing Crew Cab, 4WD, std bed diesel GM trucks.

GVWR for the Denali is 10,000 lbs and curb weight is 7,208 for a stated payload of 2792; numbers work so assume that is correct.

GVRW for the Serria is 11,500 lbs and curb weight is 7,335 for a stated payload of 4,165, also the numbers work.

Likely with the Denali they went for a cusher ride at the sacrifice of capacity which also likely means lighter springs and also possibly a lighter differential which would account for the CW difference.

I think the listed 13,000 lb. tongue pull cap. for both trucks probably is in error given the affore mentioned numbers and the minimally 1,400 lb difference in 5th wheel capacity between the trucks.

Randy

This is from the options book for 2500/3500HD series trucks. Looks like a brake controller in a Denali to me

http://www.bigkcomputers.com/downloads/bc.jpg
http://www.bigkcomputers.com/downloads/bc1.jpg

So it does have it!
Wish the load capability was there; it would then be a no brainer for which truck to get as the Denali builds out at only a tad more than the Sierra, damn! Need the extra for our 5th wheel.

BTW, on the topic of capacities, I wonder if most people are aware that if they don't go with the 18" tires they are losing 660lbs of capacity, or should I say safety margine there.

Randy

you guys need to take the online configurators and published specs with a grain of salt. Half of them are wrong or too confusing to make sense of.

For all intents and purposes, a sierra denali HD is mechanically the same as any other chevy/gmc 2500HD crew cab/short bed and will carry everything a non-denali will.

Ben

you guys need to take the online configurators and published specs with a grain of salt. Half of them are wrong or too confusing to make sense of.

For all intents and purposes, a sierra denali HD is mechanically the same as any other chevy/gmc 2500HD crew cab/short bed and will carry everything a non-denali will.

Ben

Well it is stuff that is posted on their website. Also if you ask dealerships, they don't know anything either.

Most people assume their (automakers) website and publicized literature is going to be correct.

someone that has a denali just look at the tag in the door and see what it says or better yet put a pic of it on here!

Well it is stuff that is posted on their website. Also if you ask dealerships, they don't know anything either.

Most people assume their (automakers) website and publicized literature is going to be correct.
Thats where they screw up.lol!It's a real shame they can't trust it.

I agree with the above posts because the GM sales documents say the Denali can have the high idle option and that's a load of crap because you can't.

I haven't looked at the numbers. The numbers could be correct based on how they are calculated. Each vehicle has various options that effect the curb mass of the vehicle. In theory, every vehicle with a different option content should a different haul and tow rating. To simply things, GM uses EPA curb mass. EPA curb mass is defined as all the standard equipment plus any option content that is ordered on getter than 33 percent of the vehicles.

Summary, Denali has much more standard equipment than Sierra. Its EPA curb mass is going to be higher and thus haul and trailer capacity will be less than standard Sierra.

If you put a loaded LTZ Silverado on a scale and compared it to a Denali they will probably be very close in curb weight. Silverado will have a higher capacity because the option content of LTZ package is less than 33 percent and the capacity will be based on a EPA mass of a more base optioned Silverado.

There are some GVW and towing capacities standards by SAE coming I believe next year to put all the auto manufactures on the same page with the same tests to make every thing equal.

OK, for what it's worth, just talked to GM Corp. customer service and they gave the numbers:

2500HD Crew, std, 4WD, Duramax

Sierra----payload=2,792------5th wheel=16,700

Denali----payload=2,959------5th wheel=15,600

???????????
My head hurts

Randy

There is no possible way the denali truck is 700lbs lighter curb weight, unless they are using that with the gasser v8.

To add to the confusion, take a look at the 2011 Diesel supplement page 9-38 (the numbers that led to my original question):

The K2500 crew cab standard bed (not Denali configuration) shows a towing capability of 16,700 with a rated GCWR of 24,500

The same configuration with the Denali "trim" shows a towing capability of 15,600 with the same listed GCWR of 24,500

So, by this the Denali somehow gains 1,100 pounds because of the trim and the few items that are standard on it and optional on the others. Either that fake wood trim is made of lead or there are some math issues in Detroit. I could believe that the Denali could gain 1,100 pounds over the work truck configuration if the work truck were truly stripped but the work truck has standard items like A/C, the Allison auto instead of a lighter manual, etc. It isn't stripped like a early 90's work truck model.

There is no possible way the denali truck is 700lbs lighter curb weight, unless they are using that with the gasser v8.

sunroofs will consume alot of 700 lb difference.

This is from the options book for 2500/3500HD series trucks. Looks like a brake controller in a Denali to me

http://www.bigkcomputers.com/downloads/bc.jpg
http://www.bigkcomputers.com/downloads/bc1.jpg



DX58SO, NICE!

DX58SO, NICE!

Lol yeah just built up that Intel board with the i7 6 core processor @3.4ghz per core. You have a good eye lol

That is about the only thing you could have put in that pic that will catch my eye over a Denali HD..... lol

Sunroof....most of the 700 pound difference??

I didn't follow the sunroof difference either. It isn't standard in any model so it won't affect the listed load or towing capacity.

If it is over 33% option content on the Denali then it is included into the standard mass. Denali has larger standard wheel and tires, more mass. 50 lbs here, 100 lbs there and you will eventually get to 700 lbs range. A 500 lb range in option content is common for the majority of vehicles.

Not sure where you are getting the GVWR of 11500 from but all of the 2500HD's are rated at up to only 10k GVWR with the D/A

If it is over 33% option content on the Denali then it is included into the standard mass. Denali has larger standard wheel and tires, more mass. 50 lbs here, 100 lbs there and you will eventually get to 700 lbs range. A 500 lb range in option content is common for the majority of vehicles.

Seems everyone is assuming that the Denali is heavier CW but from the comic specs GM is putting out shows to be lighter. Honestly I think they are mixing and matching gasser's and diesel's numbers. The 2,959 payload that the customer service rep. gave me for the Diesel Denali, and that I have seen published several places, on most info turns out to be for the gas rig and it appears that 2,631 is the correct number. If the Sierra's 2,792 number is good then the Denali being 161lbs heavier is very reasonable.

None of that however would explain why the 5th wheel capacity for the Denali would be 1,100lbs less than the Sierra, and that is what really bugs me.

Surely there is some explaination for this.

Randy

Well I found out the reason('s) the Denali has lower capacities; payload is lower because a standardly equiped Denali is a bit heavier.

Now the bad; the Denali is rated as having 1,100lbs less 5th wheel capability because ALL Denali's have (will be?) been manufactured to meet California emissions standards, and that means the horsepower and torque have been cut. I suspect it's all in the ECM with less fueling in the maps; don't know yet but maybe next week, and will try to get some HP TQ numbers but am not optimistic----not the sort of thing you want getting out when trying to sell a premium truck.

Sorry but I just had to know.

Randy

Subcribing since I have been seriously considering a Denali.. I could see the capacity rating fluctuating between models due to weight/catagory standards. It boggles me why in the hell they would cut the H.P/TRQ though:confused: Since My next truck will remain stock:rolleyes::D I want all the factory (warrantied) power I can get....

I am not sure I would trust any of the information coming out at this point. On the GMC website Denali 2500HD section, if you look at the Specs and features section under engine/mechanical they specify the Denali at 765 lb/ft tq @ 1600 with a rated horsepower of 322 @4400 RPM. I don't think they have come out with a "special" Denali engine that develops maximum HP at 1000 RPM higher than the fuel cutoff on every other Dmax engine ever sold :) The same section of the chart refers to engine options for the regular cab which isn't even available in Denali trim.

On the first part of the Denali subsection the standard 397 / 765 numbers are given. I seriously doubt that the Denali engine is de-rated nor are the other engines sold in CA de-rated.

I hope the engineers have done a better job of paying attention to details during design than the marketing team is doing with information conveyance. I am not planning to order until spring and by that time MAYBE they will have their story straight.

I am not sure I would trust any of the information coming out at this point. On the GMC website Denali 2500HD section, if you look at the Specs and features section under engine/mechanical they specify the Denali at 765 lb/ft tq @ 1600 with a rated horsepower of 322 @4400 RPM. I don't think they have come out with a "special" Denali engine that develops maximum HP at 1000 RPM higher than the fuel cutoff on every other Dmax engine ever sold :) The same section of the chart refers to engine options for the regular cab which isn't even available in Denali trim.

On the first part of the Denali subsection the standard 397 / 765 numbers are given. I seriously doubt that the Denali engine is de-rated nor are the other engines sold in CA de-rated.

I hope the engineers have done a better job of paying attention to details during design than the marketing team is doing with information conveyance. I am not planning to order until spring and by that time MAYBE they will have their story straight.

What better explaination would there be for the lack of towing capacity? The info came from a reliable source and until proven different by GM I will accept it. I would still rather have the Denali if equal, but not detuned and thus substandard to the competion within the GM line.
I do not see why a reflash at dealerships outside of Ca. would be a problem; Ford just did the same thing to keep up with GM so government emissions registration documentation for production can't be that big of a problem or can it? Obama doesn't yet own Ford does he.

Randy

I don't know if this will help any but here is the text from the GMC Heavy Duty 2011 options book

"Maximum payload capacity includes weight of driver, passengers, optional equipment and cargo"

it goes on to say

"Maximum trailer weight ratings are calculated assuming a base vehicle, except for any option(s) necessary to achieve the rating, plus driver. The weight of other optional equipment, passengers and cargo will reduce the maximum trailer weight you vehicle can tow."

Here is a picture of the specs page for all 2500HD trim levels
http://www.bigkcomputers.com/downloads/hdspecs.jpg

I don't know if they're right. Just tryin to help :)

Kevin,

The chart helps and based upon that and the relative ratings between the two and four wheel drive versions I bet the correct Denali figure is 16,500 instead of 15,600 due to a transposition error. Note that the non-Denali 4WD long bed crew also has an otherwise unexplained loss of 5'th wheel towing capacity but the 2WD versions do not. At some point someone from the GMC division will hopefully offer an explanation and/or correction.

It seems in the GM world that a lot gets either literally or intellectually cut and pasted so an error that shows up in one place gets copied in many places. My 2001 2500HD owner's manual had one paragraph that was obviously copied from the earlier 6.5 diesel literature and was clearly not applicable to the Duramax.

Ya'll missed it; the Denali LML is DETUNED to California emission standards, end of mystery!

Randy

I know there are those that have already received there Denali HD's out there. Someone please look at their build sheet and let us know what set of emissions programming your truck has.

Ya'll missed it; the Denali LML is DETUNED to California emission standards, end of mystery!

Randy

Why would a Denali be detuned for California, but not an equivalent 2500 HD SLT short bed 4-wheel drive?

So somebody's saying that if you drag race both a Denali and a non-Denali, the non-Denali will win because the ECU is detuned?

There's got to be a dealer or tech on this forum to clear this up once and for all.

Why would a Denali be detuned for California, but not an equivalent 2500 HD SLT short bed 4-wheel drive?



Agreed, using that logic and based on the chart posted earlier: only the Denali 4WD is "CA detuned" but the 2WD is not and the poor non-Denali 4WD long bed crew also caught the California green flu. Assuming that there is a heavily detuned Dmax for CA then the towing capabilities for all the trucks would have to be reduced in the CA emissions version and I am sure GM wouldn't embrace that competitive disadvantage. They would also have a problem not noting this restriction in the brochures since misleading CA buyers wouldn't be viewed favorably in that state.

I used the contact GMC form to pose a question via email this morning and tried to succinctly explain the issue/questions. I will post any response I get from the mother ship.

Agreed, using that logic and based on the chart posted earlier: only the Denali 4WD is "CA detuned" but the 2WD is not and the poor non-Denali 4WD long bed crew also caught the California green flu. Assuming that there is a heavily detuned Dmax for CA then the towing capabilities for all the trucks would have to be reduced in the CA emissions version and I am sure GM wouldn't embrace that competitive disadvantage. They would also have a problem not noting this restriction in the brochures since misleading CA buyers wouldn't be viewed favorably in that state.

I used the contact GMC form to pose a question via email this morning and tried to succinctly explain the issue/questions. I will post any response I get from the mother ship.

I am also in contact with GM; both email and via phone, and am awaiting an answer on whether the ECM can be reflashed in Texas to the Sierra/Silverado tune. I pointed out via phone conversation with GM rep. that they are on shakey ground by publishing incorrect HP/TQ numbers in there advertizing materials; this drew a lenghty pause and then change of subject.
Randy

GMC support responded with yet another link: http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/vehicles/gmc/sierra_hd/2011.brand_gmc.tab1.html which shows Denali 2500HD rated for 16,800 5'th/gooseneck towing. It seems you can find an "official" GM document with about any tow rating you could want :(

Questions about engine power resulted in a second callback and the response was that the Denali has the same state emissions choices as any other Duramax equipped pickup. The only reduced power engines are the Van version used with a 6L90 and the model used with a chassis cab which has to meet federal "incomplete vehicle" emissions and received a 335 horse version with a different egr system. YF5 and NE1 vehicles are rated for the same towing capability as FE9

My local dealer supposedly has a couple of Denali trucks on the lot. I will stop by on the way home and take a look at the window sticker to see what emissions are specified. It appears the GMbuypower site has problems, you should be able to view the window sticker via the site and I used that in the past.

I think that the tow rating sheets GM has introduced contain errors related to numeric transposition, conversion from metric to english standard, along with some careless errors.

I hope you are right, but as you say their charts are really bad. Did you notice on the link you provided that the same truck in the Sierra trim was rated at 16,700 or 100lbs less than the Denali whose CW is more. Go figure. Wish they would get their sh*t straight.
Randy

I have attached the build sticker from the glove box and the sticker from the driver's door from my Denali 2500HD CCSB.

I have also looked at my window sticker concerning the questions posted. I'll try to answer as many questions as I can from looking at my vehicle.

I configured on GMC and then using NADA's car build website which is powered by Chrome. GMC's build program is also powered by Chrome but their consumer site is not. I found the detail level on the GMC site was behind NADA's. I would trust NADA's more based on my experience. I took my NADA build and we then configured the order on the dealer's site using my sheet.

Integrated brake (JL1) is standard on Denali and included in the HD trailer package (Z82).

Emissions on my vehicle is the FE9 federal package. YF5 which is CA emissions is not on my build sheet.

Sunroof (CF5) is not standard so I don't believe the standard weight ratings would be impacted by the roof selection. If that is true, seems it would apply to the SLT too.

Extendable camper mirrors (DPN) were not available until 30 days after the Denali package was released. I waited for them and ... roof marker lights were standard (U01) but I didn't want them, didn't believe the order system was right, and cancelled my sold order until GMC figured it out. Took about 7 days with my dealer speaking with the factory. U01 is now optional.

As for weight, my door sticker shows 10000 GVWR. I do not know what a 2500HD SLT CCSB sticker shows. I personally think the specs are wrong online and in brochures and I'm going to assume the 2500HD SLT fifth wheels weight applies to my Denali. Anyone want to tell me where to look to verify that, I'd be happy to check it out.

What did I miss?

H2Idaho,
Thanks for posting! This is very helpful.

Cadillac division has a couple of people who are members of a large CTS forum on the net and these two have prevented a number of issues and saved a number of sales. I understand that Ford is doing the same thing now in a number of forums. It would be nice if GM had someone from GMC or Chevy trucks to provide the same service here.

Ya'll missed it; the Denali LML is DETUNED to California emission standards, end of mystery!

Randy

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I would love to hear who your "reliable source" is.

Ben

Went out and looked at mine. For clarity its a 2011, Denali 3500 Dually 4WD. Built 08-10.
GVWR (driver door is 13,000), this is listed on sticker too.
No emissions shown on window sticker, but under hood passenger side the emissions sticker lists both CA and Federal emissions.

I know its an LML, while I'm not inclined to do a bunch of diggin, it is more reasonable to expect that marketing people educated in public schools can completely screw up simple math and proofreading skills than it is to assume GM is stupid enough to detune a motor on the sly and in the face of advertising to the contrary. If they did it, they WILL get their asses sued off.

Dane

PS: Towed my little bumper pull Toybox 26 ft with it this weekend. I am very pleased with the power, and the braking is even better. Engine brake is great, seamless. I know it ain't real heavy.

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. I would love to hear who your "reliable source" is.

Ben

GM parts.
And since that is the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard please be so kind to offer your explaination of why most GM product information shows the 5th wheel towing capacity of the Denali 1100 lbs less than Sierra or Silverado.

GM parts.
And since that is the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard please be so kind to offer your explaination of why most GM product information shows the 5th wheel towing capacity of the Denali 1100 lbs less than Sierra or Silverado.

for the most part, its typo's. And until I see someone respond in this thread who is from GM (and I dont mean your buddys uncle who knows an engineer there), im going to assume that the denali HD and 'regular' trucks are more or less equally capable. I mean just think about it...why the hell would GM even bother to make an edition of an HD truck that is less capable (of doing what HD trucks were designed to do in the first place) than the others? That makes no sense from a logistics point of view.

GM parts? GM Parts who/what???? The idiot behind the counter at your dealer?

Also my Denali 3500 does have high idle you get to it from the computer not from the cruise button. Just go in and turn it on. No this is not the high idle for cold start ups.

for the most part, its typo's. And until I see someone respond in this thread who is from GM (and I dont mean your buddys uncle who knows an engineer there), im going to assume that the denali HD and 'regular' trucks are more or less equally capable. I mean just think about it...why the hell would GM even bother to make an edition of an HD truck that is less capable (of doing what HD trucks were designed to do in the first place) than the others? That makes no sense from a logistics point of view.

GM parts? GM Parts who/what???? The idiot behind the counter at your dealer?

No actually it is the guys ex girlfriend, her name is Gertrude Myers and has a lawn mower parts supply store; she also has a couple of pristine Yugo's she has modified to tow 25k with bumber hitch.
Thanks for the input
Randy

Since I have a Denali HD on order, I too was wanting to know for sure what the HP was. I called my dealer this morning to verify.

All Denali's come with 397 HP and 765 torque.

The derated diesel is for the cab and chassis only as it considered an incomplete truck.

Does anyone know what the real Gross Combined Weight Rating (GCWR) is for the 2500HD SRW (Chevy or GMC)? The Chevy site is wrong as it lists the GCWR as 16,000# and the GMC web site does not even list the GCWR. Both sites list the Front Axle as 4400# and the Rear Axle as 6200# and the GVWR as 9500# - but no GCWR.

My point in this is IF you do not exceed the Front and Rear Axle ratings, the GVWR and the GCWR and you do not exceed the receiver, ball mount and ball ratings then you should be LEGAL. When you take the GCWR and subtract the ACTUAL weight of your SPECIFIC truck (with all of the stuff you have in/on it when you tow) then you should have the MAXIMUM weight of the trailer you can tow. This process eliminates all of the ASSUMPTIONS the factory uses when it establishes tow ratings. IF you do not exceed any of the ratings established by the manufacturer then why would it not be legal? Am I missing something here?

In my crosshairs. I hope I don't get buck fever

Does anyone know what the real Gross Combined Weight Rating (GCWR) is for the 2500HD SRW (Chevy or GMC)? The Chevy site is wrong as it lists the GCWR as 16,000# and the GMC web site does not even list the GCWR. Both sites list the Front Axle as 4400# and the Rear Axle as 6200# and the GVWR as 9500# - but no GCWR.

The 2011 Diesel supplement shows a 24,500 GCWR for all of the SRW Duramax equipped pickups. This is one of the few consistent numbers in the charts so I would tend to trust it. When GM used to publish a separate towing guide they did include the useful chart with GCWR based upon engine/transmission/axle combination. But there are obvious inconsistencies in every chart I have seen this year that would indicate there are one or more additional factors being used to calculate rated trailer weight.

There may be something related to weight distribution (only a GM engineer can tell us for sure) or it may be they outsourced table compilation to a provider with a limited grasp of basic English and basic math :) A number of earlier Ford pickups were sold that could never reach rated GCWR because any reasonable pin weight for that heavy a trailer would greatly exceed the rated GVWR of the tow vehicle. GM may be trying to avoid that scenario.

This is not quite what you all are talking about but something i noticed and has to do with tow rating on 2011 trucks...
On trucks with 18" wheels load range is 3525lb each tire.
On trucks with 20" wheels load range is 3195lb each tire.

My current truck with 265/75/16s is 3415 lb.