beside the "hide your wallet when passing gas stations" part....

Actually, they often got better mileage than the 6.0.

I regret not getting the 8.1 when I ordered my 2001 2500HD.

Looking at a 2500 Avalanche, are you?

there was no 6.0 in the Avalanche, just the 5.3 or 8.1.

but yea, a 2500 popped up on the radar.

Nice! .

The 5.3 in the 1500s actually does pretty good for itself mpg-wise given all that it pulled around. The 6.0 was an extremely thirsty engine. I recall Silverado SS owners getting 8mpg. My father's LS6 Chevelle does better than that.

Didn't the GMT-800 Escalade EXT get the 6.0?

It's a shame they didn't continue the 2500 avalanche and replace the 8.1 with the duramax. That would be sweet.

yeah, 6.0 was the only engine for the EXT in that body.

The last of Chevy Big Block - works like a charm. Had it on one of company's 2500s. It had ~350,000 miles and still chugging.

The 6.0 was an extremely thirsty engine. I recall Silverado SS owners getting 8mpg.

dang, even my 1990 ss 454 got 10-12.

No doubt those 6.0s were pigs. Mine ran great but sucked fuel at an astonishing rate.

We had the 8.1 in the dually we used to pull the race car trailer. It was a huge trailer, and we hauled 4 cars in it - the 8.1 never broke a sweat.

Anything they are known for reliability wise?

No issues that I have ever heard of.

I remember doing a few crankshaft and cam position sensors under warranty, as well as some complaints about burning oil past the 100k mile mark, but that's about it.