← New search

2007 GMC Yukon Denali Xl

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 2007 GMC Yukon Denali Xl do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 29.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Yukon Denali Xl years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

All reported categories

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

41 reports with mileage · 20 unknown

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Air Bags. Review the 21 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Structure. Review the 19 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Electrical System. Review the 8 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

1 crash reports2 fire reports6 injury reports

Electronic Stability Control (esc) complaints

4 reports
Clear category filter
230,000 miles · May 4, 2023
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Service Brakes, Hydraulic

The contact owns a 2007 GMC Yukon Denali XL. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the service stabili-trak and traction control warning lights illuminated. The contact then stated that an independent mechanic had previously replaced the brake sensor, fuses, solenoids, and several other unknown parts; ho…

Read full complaint

The contact owns a 2007 GMC Yukon Denali XL. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the service stabili-trak and traction control warning lights illuminated. The contact then stated that an independent mechanic had previously replaced the brake sensor, fuses, solenoids, and several other unknown parts; however, the failure recurred. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired by an independent mechanic or dealer. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 230,000.

NHTSA ODI #11520374

45,000 miles · Sep 12, 2017
Electronic Stability Control (esc)Engine

THE SERVICE STABILITRAK LIGHT COMES ON ALONG WITH THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAUSING THE TRUCK TO SHUT OFF OR NOT MOVE. THIS HAS HAPPENED WHILE AM ON THE FREEWAY, CITY STREET AND STOPPED AT A STOP LIGHT. I HAVE TOOK MY TRUCK IN FOR THE SAME PROBLEM MORE THEN FOUR TIMES AND SAME ISSUE KEEPS HAPPENING.

NHTSA ODI #11022860

89,010 miles · Mar 13, 2014
Electronic Stability Control (esc)EngineVehicle Speed Control

WHILE DRIVING IN THE CITY, MY TRUCK WAS DRIVING FINE. THEN THE STABILITRAK CAME ON. WHEN IT CAME ON THE ENGINE SLOW DOWN, AND ALMOST CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP WHILE DRIVING ON A MAJOR ROAD WHERE THE SPEED LIMIT IS 55. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER AND TURN THE VEHICLE OFF. I WAS ABLE TO GET IT TO START AND CALL THE GMC DEALER, TOLD THEM…

Read full complaint

WHILE DRIVING IN THE CITY, MY TRUCK WAS DRIVING FINE. THEN THE STABILITRAK CAME ON. WHEN IT CAME ON THE ENGINE SLOW DOWN, AND ALMOST CAME TO A COMPLETE STOP WHILE DRIVING ON A MAJOR ROAD WHERE THE SPEED LIMIT IS 55. I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER AND TURN THE VEHICLE OFF. I WAS ABLE TO GET IT TO START AND CALL THE GMC DEALER, TOLD THEM WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS, AND THEY ASKED COULD I BRING THE VEHICLE IN TO SEE WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS. AFTER THEY SERVICE THE VEHICLE, THEY SAID THAT THE STABILITRAK NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. I HADN'T EVEN HAD THE VEHICLE FOR A FULL YEAR. BEFORE I LEFT THE DEALER I ASKED COULD I STILL DRIVE THE VEHICLE, THEY SAID THAT I COULD. SO I CONTINUE TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE. ONE DAY WHILE DRIVE THE VEHICLE, IT MOVED FORWARD WHILE MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE AND SHUT OFF. I TRIED TO IMMEDIATELY START IT CAUSE I WAS BEHIND ANOTHER CAR AT A LIGHT. I WAS GLAD THAT IT DIDN'T HIT ANOTHER CAR. IT WOULD NOT START IMMEDIATELY. MAYBE TWO MINUTES IT STARTED AND WHEN I PUT IT IN DRIVE AND PRESS THE GAS IT TOOK OFF FAST. WHILE DRIVING, THE STABILITRAK LIGHT COMES ON AND THE ENGINE POWER IS GONE. IF I AM NOT ABLE TO PULL OVER, THE SPEED WILL DROP BELOW 20 MPH. SOMETIMES THE VEHICLE WILL TAKE OFF, WITH JUST A LITTLE BIT OF GAS. HELP AM SCARED THAT IT MIGHT TAKE OFF AND HIT SOMEONE OR SHUTOFF AND HIT SOMEONE. THIS IS A DANGEROUS PROBLEM, THAT I FEEL GMC SHOULD LOOK INTO BEFORE SOME DIES OR REALLY GET HURT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10569205

86,000 miles · Jul 25, 2013
Electronic Stability Control (esc)

I WAS DRIVING MY DENALI IN THE CITY THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED. THE TRUCK DROPPED IN SPEED AND LOST POWER. I NOTICED THAT THE CLUSTER OF LIGHTS IN MY DASH WENT OUT AND THE VEHICLE STRUGGLED TO MAINTAIN SPEED. A LITTLE BIT DOWN THE ROAD I PULLED OVER. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED OR WHAT TO DO. IT WOULDN'T SHIFT GEARS. I TRIED TO …

Read full complaint

I WAS DRIVING MY DENALI IN THE CITY THE FIRST TIME IT HAPPENED. THE TRUCK DROPPED IN SPEED AND LOST POWER. I NOTICED THAT THE CLUSTER OF LIGHTS IN MY DASH WENT OUT AND THE VEHICLE STRUGGLED TO MAINTAIN SPEED. A LITTLE BIT DOWN THE ROAD I PULLED OVER. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED OR WHAT TO DO. IT WOULDN'T SHIFT GEARS. I TRIED TO DRIVE IT TO A MECHANIC THAT WAS CLOSE BECAUSE I HAD NO HELP AVAILABLE. IT STRUGGLED TO MOVE SO I PULLED OVER AGAIN. I SAT ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD NOT KNOWING WHAT TO DO SO I TURNED IT OFF. AFTER SITTING FOR 10-15 MINUTES I STARTED IT. THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT WAS STILL ON BUT THE DASH WAS BACK TO NORMAL. I BEGAN TO DRIVE IT TO SEE IF WAS OK. IT SEEMED TO BE AT THE MOMENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A HOT TRANSMISSION ACCORDING TO THE WARNING LIGHTS. THIS WAS THE 1ST OF MANY TIMES THIS WOULD HAPPEN. SOMETIMES IN THE CITY IN THE MIDDLE OF TRAFFIC WHERE I COULDN'T PULL OVER AND SOMETIMES GOING 70MPH ON THE TOLL ROAD. EACH TIME THERE WAS A TERRIBLE DRAG IN THE ENGINE AND I WOULD LOOSE POWER. OFTEN IT WOULD JERK THE WHOLE VEHICLE AS IF I SLAMMED ON THE BRAKES. THIS IS DANGEROUS FRUSTRATING AND SCARY. I LIVE IN A CLIMATE WITH LOTS OF SNOW & ICE THEREFORE THIS IS EVEN MORE OF AN ISSUE BECAUSE IT CAUSES ME TO LOOSE CONTROL SOMETIMES. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE AND DANGEROUS!!!!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10531892

Official recalls

0

No recalls in this snapshot.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

1

EA10004 · Interior Door Handle Laceration Risk

Opened May 23, 2010 · Closed Jul 18, 2011

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Latches/locks/linkages; Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch; Structure; Structure:body; Structure:body:door ; Structure:body:door:hinge And Attachments

The investigated concern involved chrome plating on interior door handles that could peel or separate from the plastic base material.This de-lamination could result in a sharp edge and pose a risk of laceration.In some cases, consumers reported minor hand/skin lacerations.Of these reported injuries, the vast majority of injuries were to adults.Ninety percent of claims associated with interior door handle de-lamination were related to the front doors.In addition to the above Tahoe/Yukon vehicles, other GMT 900 series C/K vehicles (Avalanche, Escalade, Sierra, Silverado, and Suburban) have a trim level that utilizes the chrome plated interior door handles and were included in the analysis.The resultant population group had a total of 746 complaint reports with 309 injury incidents and 43,619 unique VIN regular warranty claims over a combined 451,745 vehicle population.The door handle supplier was changed in September 2006 with new tooling and process in place by October 2006.The base population prior to the September 2006 vendor change accounted for the bulk (or 89%) of all complaints and comparable injury reports and warranty claims.Due to the nature of the failure (thin chrome plating peeling off the door handle), only minor hand/skin laceration injuries similar to a paper cut were recorded.All but a few did not require professional medical treatment such as surgical or liquid sutures (i.e. stitches).Less than 10% of injury reports had specifically involved a 3-10 year old child.This was due to the fact that 90% of the claims were associated with door handles located in the front seating area (where the window glass panels usually have less solar tinting than rear window glass panels) where children are not normally seated. In July 2010, GM issued a Special Coverage Policy (SCP 09239) on the base vehicles to extend the warranty coverage to 10 years/100k miles.Recent data indicate that the base population complaint and injury reporting have subsided since the implementation of the SCP campaign.In June 2011, GM added the remaining interim population (Sep-Oct 2006) to the SCP.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Additional source detail variants (6)

Latches/locks/linkages:doors:latch

The investigated concern involved chrome plating on interior door handles that could peel or separate from the plastic base material.This de-lamination could result in a sharp edge and pose a risk of laceration.In some cases, consumers reported minor hand/skin lacerations.Of these reported injuries, the vast majority of injuries were to adults.Ninety percent of claims associated with interior door handle de-lamination were related to the front doors.In addition to the above Tahoe/Yukon vehicles, other GMT 900 series C/K vehicles (Avalanche, Escalade, Sierra, Silverado, and Suburban) have a trim level that utilizes the chrome plated interior door handles and were included in the analysis.The resultant population group had a total of 746 complaint reports with 309 injury incidents and 43,619 unique VIN regular warranty claims over a combined 451,745 vehicle population.The door handle supplier was changed in September 2006 with new tooling and process in place by October 2006.The base population prior to the September 2006 vendor change accounted for the bulk (or 89%) of all complaints and comparable injury reports and warranty claims.Due to the nature of the failure (thin chrome plating peeling off the door handle), only minor hand/skin laceration injuries similar to a paper cut were recorded.All but a few did not require professional medical treatment such as surgical or liquid sutures (i.e. stitches).Less than 10% of injury reports had specifically involved a 3-10 year old child.This was due to the fact that 90% of the claims were associated with door handles located in the front seating area (where the window glass panels usually have less solar tinting than rear window glass panels) where children are not normally seated. In July 2010, GM issued a Special Coverage Policy (SCP 09239) on the base vehicles to extend the warranty coverage to 10 years/100k miles.Recent data indicate that the base population complaint and injury reporting have subsided since the implementation of the SCP campaign.In June 2011, GM added the remaining interim population (Sep-Oct 2006) to the SCP.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Latches/locks/linkages

The investigated concern involved chrome plating on interior door handles that could peel or separate from the plastic base material.This de-lamination could result in a sharp edge and pose a risk of laceration.In some cases, consumers reported minor hand/skin lacerations.Of these reported injuries, the vast majority of injuries were to adults.Ninety percent of claims associated with interior door handle de-lamination were related to the front doors.In addition to the above Tahoe/Yukon vehicles, other GMT 900 series C/K vehicles (Avalanche, Escalade, Sierra, Silverado, and Suburban) have a trim level that utilizes the chrome plated interior door handles and were included in the analysis.The resultant population group had a total of 746 complaint reports with 309 injury incidents and 43,619 unique VIN regular warranty claims over a combined 451,745 vehicle population.The door handle supplier was changed in September 2006 with new tooling and process in place by October 2006.The base population prior to the September 2006 vendor change accounted for the bulk (or 89%) of all complaints and comparable injury reports and warranty claims.Due to the nature of the failure (thin chrome plating peeling off the door handle), only minor hand/skin laceration injuries similar to a paper cut were recorded.All but a few did not require professional medical treatment such as surgical or liquid sutures (i.e. stitches).Less than 10% of injury reports had specifically involved a 3-10 year old child.This was due to the fact that 90% of the claims were associated with door handles located in the front seating area (where the window glass panels usually have less solar tinting than rear window glass panels) where children are not normally seated. In July 2010, GM issued a Special Coverage Policy (SCP 09239) on the base vehicles to extend the warranty coverage to 10 years/100k miles.Recent data indicate that the base population complaint and injury reporting have subsided since the implementation of the SCP campaign.In June 2011, GM added the remaining interim population (Sep-Oct 2006) to the SCP.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body:door

The investigated concern involved chrome plating on interior door handles that could peel or separate from the plastic base material.This de-lamination could result in a sharp edge and pose a risk of laceration.In some cases, consumers reported minor hand/skin lacerations.Of these reported injuries, the vast majority of injuries were to adults.Ninety percent of claims associated with interior door handle de-lamination were related to the front doors.In addition to the above Tahoe/Yukon vehicles, other GMT 900 series C/K vehicles (Avalanche, Escalade, Sierra, Silverado, and Suburban) have a trim level that utilizes the chrome plated interior door handles and were included in the analysis.The resultant population group had a total of 746 complaint reports with 309 injury incidents and 43,619 unique VIN regular warranty claims over a combined 451,745 vehicle population.The door handle supplier was changed in September 2006 with new tooling and process in place by October 2006.The base population prior to the September 2006 vendor change accounted for the bulk (or 89%) of all complaints and comparable injury reports and warranty claims.Due to the nature of the failure (thin chrome plating peeling off the door handle), only minor hand/skin laceration injuries similar to a paper cut were recorded.All but a few did not require professional medical treatment such as surgical or liquid sutures (i.e. stitches).Less than 10% of injury reports had specifically involved a 3-10 year old child.This was due to the fact that 90% of the claims were associated with door handles located in the front seating area (where the window glass panels usually have less solar tinting than rear window glass panels) where children are not normally seated. In July 2010, GM issued a Special Coverage Policy (SCP 09239) on the base vehicles to extend the warranty coverage to 10 years/100k miles.Recent data indicate that the base population complaint and injury reporting have subsided since the implementation of the SCP campaign.In June 2011, GM added the remaining interim population (Sep-Oct 2006) to the SCP.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body:door:hinge And Attachments

The investigated concern involved chrome plating on interior door handles that could peel or separate from the plastic base material.This de-lamination could result in a sharp edge and pose a risk of laceration.In some cases, consumers reported minor hand/skin lacerations.Of these reported injuries, the vast majority of injuries were to adults.Ninety percent of claims associated with interior door handle de-lamination were related to the front doors.In addition to the above Tahoe/Yukon vehicles, other GMT 900 series C/K vehicles (Avalanche, Escalade, Sierra, Silverado, and Suburban) have a trim level that utilizes the chrome plated interior door handles and were included in the analysis.The resultant population group had a total of 746 complaint reports with 309 injury incidents and 43,619 unique VIN regular warranty claims over a combined 451,745 vehicle population.The door handle supplier was changed in September 2006 with new tooling and process in place by October 2006.The base population prior to the September 2006 vendor change accounted for the bulk (or 89%) of all complaints and comparable injury reports and warranty claims.Due to the nature of the failure (thin chrome plating peeling off the door handle), only minor hand/skin laceration injuries similar to a paper cut were recorded.All but a few did not require professional medical treatment such as surgical or liquid sutures (i.e. stitches).Less than 10% of injury reports had specifically involved a 3-10 year old child.This was due to the fact that 90% of the claims were associated with door handles located in the front seating area (where the window glass panels usually have less solar tinting than rear window glass panels) where children are not normally seated. In July 2010, GM issued a Special Coverage Policy (SCP 09239) on the base vehicles to extend the warranty coverage to 10 years/100k miles.Recent data indicate that the base population complaint and injury reporting have subsided since the implementation of the SCP campaign.In June 2011, GM added the remaining interim population (Sep-Oct 2006) to the SCP.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure:body

The investigated concern involved chrome plating on interior door handles that could peel or separate from the plastic base material.This de-lamination could result in a sharp edge and pose a risk of laceration.In some cases, consumers reported minor hand/skin lacerations.Of these reported injuries, the vast majority of injuries were to adults.Ninety percent of claims associated with interior door handle de-lamination were related to the front doors.In addition to the above Tahoe/Yukon vehicles, other GMT 900 series C/K vehicles (Avalanche, Escalade, Sierra, Silverado, and Suburban) have a trim level that utilizes the chrome plated interior door handles and were included in the analysis.The resultant population group had a total of 746 complaint reports with 309 injury incidents and 43,619 unique VIN regular warranty claims over a combined 451,745 vehicle population.The door handle supplier was changed in September 2006 with new tooling and process in place by October 2006.The base population prior to the September 2006 vendor change accounted for the bulk (or 89%) of all complaints and comparable injury reports and warranty claims.Due to the nature of the failure (thin chrome plating peeling off the door handle), only minor hand/skin laceration injuries similar to a paper cut were recorded.All but a few did not require professional medical treatment such as surgical or liquid sutures (i.e. stitches).Less than 10% of injury reports had specifically involved a 3-10 year old child.This was due to the fact that 90% of the claims were associated with door handles located in the front seating area (where the window glass panels usually have less solar tinting than rear window glass panels) where children are not normally seated. In July 2010, GM issued a Special Coverage Policy (SCP 09239) on the base vehicles to extend the warranty coverage to 10 years/100k miles.Recent data indicate that the base population complaint and injury reporting have subsided since the implementation of the SCP campaign.In June 2011, GM added the remaining interim population (Sep-Oct 2006) to the SCP.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

Structure

The investigated concern involved chrome plating on interior door handles that could peel or separate from the plastic base material.This de-lamination could result in a sharp edge and pose a risk of laceration.In some cases, consumers reported minor hand/skin lacerations.Of these reported injuries, the vast majority of injuries were to adults.Ninety percent of claims associated with interior door handle de-lamination were related to the front doors.In addition to the above Tahoe/Yukon vehicles, other GMT 900 series C/K vehicles (Avalanche, Escalade, Sierra, Silverado, and Suburban) have a trim level that utilizes the chrome plated interior door handles and were included in the analysis.The resultant population group had a total of 746 complaint reports with 309 injury incidents and 43,619 unique VIN regular warranty claims over a combined 451,745 vehicle population.The door handle supplier was changed in September 2006 with new tooling and process in place by October 2006.The base population prior to the September 2006 vendor change accounted for the bulk (or 89%) of all complaints and comparable injury reports and warranty claims.Due to the nature of the failure (thin chrome plating peeling off the door handle), only minor hand/skin laceration injuries similar to a paper cut were recorded.All but a few did not require professional medical treatment such as surgical or liquid sutures (i.e. stitches).Less than 10% of injury reports had specifically involved a 3-10 year old child.This was due to the fact that 90% of the claims were associated with door handles located in the front seating area (where the window glass panels usually have less solar tinting than rear window glass panels) where children are not normally seated. In July 2010, GM issued a Special Coverage Policy (SCP 09239) on the base vehicles to extend the warranty coverage to 10 years/100k miles.Recent data indicate that the base population complaint and injury reporting have subsided since the implementation of the SCP campaign.In June 2011, GM added the remaining interim population (Sep-Oct 2006) to the SCP.A safety-related defect has not been identified at this time and further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.Accordingly, this investigation is closed.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist.The agency will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.