1454

I'm not sure what this has/had to do with what I posted? This was about phone battery health.

If you're willing to do it yourself, you can always just buy one of any million wireless charging pads and retrofit it yourself. That being said, I don't use wireless charging for a variety of reasons. If you religiously upgrade, you won't be harmed by it. But wireless charging generates a lot of heat and will shorten your battery life over time. I'm not one of those "don't be lazy" people who constantly whines because people enjoy modern conveniences (like some here), but this is one of those that I prefer to just plug up when I get in. I might be one of the few here.

Well crap. Thank you sir.

I pay like 7.50 a month. I don't care about the OS stuff, so I told them I could get a viper plan for 6 (like my old car had) and they countered with this. It's worth it.

Sorry OP, mild thread jack. Newdude, are the 23's on VIP? I ask because I have comma in my 21 and I wanted to get a 23. I would rather stay in my 21 if the 23's are in fact, VIP as the encryption prevents the comma from communicating. I'll shut up now. Sorry OP.

They are useful for the lawyers. lulz

I specifically asked based on what was going on. Thanks for being a jerk about it.

Along the same lines, does anyone know of ARC shocks and stock ride high can be accomplished on a at4x? I'm considering the upgrade, but I hate the brown interior of the ultimate and I like the lack of chome on th at4x.

I have a friend looking to buy a new GMC and the dealers won't even really deal with him on negotiating. Is that common right now? He's wants to order an elevation w/ preferred package and they keep giving him push back on even discussing pricing. I get how things are right now, so I was wondering if others that have recently purchased have dealt with this?

Don't get me wrong, I don't believe the tech is remotely ready for mass market outside of select circumstances. Trucks they definitely aren't ready. But we still seem to be running headlong into poor policy. So, I guess we will see what shakes out in a few years.

Derail how? They are designing now for 2028 and beyond. So by making comments about 2035 being pure EV indicates the brand doesn't want ice anymore. "GM’s Mary Barra Has a Plan to Win the Electric Vehicle Race - The New York Times" https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/12/business/general-motors-mary-barra-electric-cars.html Personally, I believe it is stupid and cutting off one's nose to spite their face. But this is the new gm. But whatever. I'm not sure what you thought I was getting at, but by the companies public stance, and as I stated, I could be wrong, they don't seem to value ice anymore.

I went to tech school first for automotive technology, and then for a BSME. I didn't learn what I did from a message board. If you aren't under heavy load, cylinder pressures aren't enough to cause detonation. No manufacturer is going to sell a engine today that a slightly lower octane will cause them warranty work. But yes, you know more than everyone who has shown this isn't the case because someone posted a forum topic on "muh 87 causing detonation, omg."

I say this acknowledging I may be 100% wrong, but I have a hard time seeing the gas engine last in a gm vehicle past 2030 outside of super duties. I say this because if they were committed to the tech, they would have, imo, retried hybrid first before all ev. I think even Mary has stated much. Heck, Ford has a full hybrid and dodge has a mild hybrid. Again, I could be completely wrong. It just reads to me, given some of the comments they have made publicly, ice is dead.

I put 20k on my truck driving back and forth to Jersey from NC last year and saw between 20.5 and 21.5 regardless of 87 or 93. The only thing that gave me actual more mileage was using non ethanol fuel. Which inherently makes sense because ethanol is less energy dense. 88 gave a solid 22 mpg every trip.

They will not. Ever heard of knock sensor? Are you WOT at every chance? Towing? If not, then nothing will happen. Also, I assure I can afford 20 dollar a gallon gas if I wanted. That doesn't mean I will blatantly piss away 10 bucks a fill up if I'm not towing or drag racing my truck. But please, tell us all how you know more than everyone else.

I have/had the same problem with mine pre-refresh. The bezels around the vents and the ones at the side of the console got me. I wrapped the ones on the console.

From what I can tell, all it will do is disable cruise if you don't. I've played with it a few times to see where the limitations are.

I was curious about how stop-and-go were compared to the adaptive and how LKAS is on non-SC roads. For example, is the stop and go kinda jerky like the my trucks iteration, or is it smoother? Or, does the LKAS attempt to lane-center on non-SC roads, or is it fairly hands off like the current iteration? Meaning it nudges if you get close to the line, but is in no way a centering function outside of SC roads. EDIT: I know my truck doesn't have "stop-n-go" capability like the SC trucks are advertised, but it will slow to a stop and go if traffic doesn't stop for more than about 1 second. However, even on the 3rd bar setting, allowing it to come completely to a stop can be slightly uncomfortable with the current calibration of my adaptive cruise system. (2021 Silverado HC)

Gotcha. I didn't realize it still hadn't hit the roads in the new trucks yet. Thanks.

I'm curious how the trucks with Supercruise are on non-supercruise roads? Does it do better in stop and go than the current adaptive? I assume there has to be a couple of these in the wild by now.

Couldn't they still achieve that if they offered a larger tank as a option? but not standard?

I asked a while ago. I think the consensus is no. If it works, I would love to know.

Reach out to the CEO email. They were the most understanding. The dealer still didn't get in trouble for forcing me to come back 4 times for the exact same issue.

Really? For BSM? My truck has them, but I assumed it was like my last car and just a mirror glass replacement for a dealer added option.

Montana saw an increase in deadly car accidents from the removal of "reasonable and customary" laws to posted speed limits. The problem is more traffic less spread out. People think "oh yes, 70 does more damage" but refuse to look at the issues that are caused when you bunch up more people around a specific speed. What sounds good in sound bites rarely fixes actual problems. https://ww2.motorists.org/press/montana-no-speed-limit-safety-paradox/