GMC Yukon vs Honda Pilot: Specs Compared

Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Honda Pilot burns about $2,650 of fuel annually against $3,250 for the GMC Yukon. That $600 yearly gap compounds to roughly $3,000 over five years and $4,800 over eight — often more than the price difference between two trims of the same vehicle, and the single largest running-cost line item separating these two.

City versus highway split: the GMC Yukon is the stronger commuter at 21 mpg city, while the Honda Pilot pulls ahead on the interstate at 27 mpg highway. If most of your driving is stop-and-go traffic the city figure is the one to weigh; for long-distance highway mileage the reverse is true, and the two vehicles effectively swap places depending on how you drive.

Powertrain choice: the GMC Yukon is recorded with 4 distinct engine configurations (3.0, SIDI, SIDI; Stop-Start), the Honda Pilot with 2 (SIDI, 3.5). Across 164 recorded GMC Yukon configurations and 43 for the Honda Pilot, the wider the engine spread the more the real-world fuel efficiency depends on which version you actually buy, so check the specific model year and drivetrain rather than the headline number.

Drivetrain and class: the GMC Yukon is offered with 4-Wheel Drive, Rear-Wheel Drive, the Honda Pilot with All-Wheel Drive, Front-Wheel Drive. All-wheel drive typically costs one to two mpg combined against the same vehicle in front- or rear-wheel drive, which is worth remembering when the gap between these two is small. The EPA classes them as Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD and Small Sport Utility Vehicle 2WD respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.

Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the Honda Pilot emits 388 g/mile of CO2 versus 437 g/mile for the GMC Yukon. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.