GMC Yukon vs Nissan Armada: Specs Compared

Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the GMC Yukon burns about $3,250 of fuel annually against $3,850 for the Nissan Armada. 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 and highway economy: the GMC Yukon leads in both cycles — 21 mpg city and 27 mpg highway against 16 and 20 mpg — so its fuel-efficiency advantage holds whether you commute in traffic or cover long highway miles.

Powertrain choice: the GMC Yukon is recorded with 4 distinct engine configurations (3.0, SIDI, SIDI; Stop-Start), the Nissan Armada with 4 (SIDI, SIDI; MDPV, SIDI; LDT). Across 164 recorded GMC Yukon configurations and 29 for the Nissan Armada, 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 Nissan Armada with Rear-Wheel Drive, 4-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 Standard Sport Utility Vehicle 4WD respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.

Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the GMC Yukon emits 437 g/mile of CO2 versus 497 g/mile for the Nissan Armada. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.