asilverblazer

Agreed. My way may work for me, my circumstances, my lifestyle, my needs, my wants, my goals, etc. That doesn't make it right for someone else, with completely different circumstances, lifestyle, needs, wants, goals.

Life lessons are learned and taught from everybody. Not just the 'old guys', the 'college educated', the rich, etc. I had my say, take it or leave, but don't question it.

Nobody is denying anybody anything. There are multiple points of view being expressed, none are more valuable than the others. Questioning somebody's point of view (as tactfully as possible) to better understand their reasoning while also presenting another point of view is a pretty straight forward way of exploring a topic. If you don't want to respectfully engage, questions or challenges to your point of view a blog is probably more appropriate than a FORUM.

Is this a conversation or a lecture? I must be confused because I thought it was the first.

Looks like how the gaskets are made to me. If it were that lean a check engine light surely would have come up.

Cadillac is literally lost right now, they've built a 'performance', edgy persona over the last 2 decades that hasn't gotten them where they want to be (Beating the Germans) despite the practical conclusion that in many respects they can, have and are producing excellent sports sedans. It fundamentally misses the entire idea that nobody wants a Cadillac sports sedan, regardless of how good it is. Do they abandon the image they've spent the last 20 years building? Which the Escalade DOES not fit. I'd suggest they have to keep going, in particular one last vestige of 'luxury' Cadillac remains that has to go. The Cadillac script logo. Limit Cadillac to a more AMG specific competitor, performance focused only, with only the 'required level of luxury', necessary in that market. Specifically, avoiding any suggestion it is a luxury marque competitor like Rolls, Bentley, at the upper end and maybe even including the lowly Mercedes-Benz line (which still is generally regarded as a luxury car manufacturer, despite the higher offerings of Maybach.) If Cadillac were to abandon those luxury aspirations, look at the opportunity that opens up to Buick, which is also lost, in the American market. Premium over Chevrolet. But, since they only have SUV's or CUV's isn't that supposed to be where GMC is, what is professional grade anyways? Internationally, China, Buick is major luxury player. It could turn the American market upside down if they released something up market of Cadillac, as an American luxury car. Plus, they don't have to add the performance element in like Cadillac does to fit the image Cadillac has been building. Cadillac becomes performance oriented, (Why is there even an 'entry-level' model or trim in this echelon anyways?) with the CT#V, Escalade in V Trim only, Coupe V trim. Three models, one trim level. More appearance packages. Buick becomes the luxury line, similar to Cadillac, there are no entry level players here. More models could work, but more appearance options/packages. So much more breathing room for the brand when it isn't trapped between all the other lines, more premium than a Chevy (High Country?), Different from a GMC, but don't step on Cadillacs toes, which is more than happy to move down market into Buick territory with models like the XT-5. GMC can continue as an undefined professional alternative to Chevrolet, but the popularity of the AT4 series suggests it could become more off-road oriented. The professional grade thing also leaves opportunity here for fleet use. Chevrolet gets to remain the popular every man's car brand. (Controversially, if Corvette, moved to Cadillac in a very diplomatic fashion, where given the above it fit more neatly. No more ceiling for Camaro) Entry levels galore, limited appearance packages and options.

Cadillac is going to fail as long as they continue to try to be a better German sports sedan. If I want a Swiss wristwatch am I going to buy a Seiko? Nope. "I want a German sports sedan..." "Have you considered the Americans?" In case someone at Cadillac missed the memo - they aren't German.

I have a completely different take on Lutz. His products were for car people, not customers. They were TOO niche. I think he got lucky with one product (PT Cruiser) right at the retro styling craze. The rest I think of as disasters. The SSR, was it cool? Sure, did help GM, no. The HHR, was it cool? If you could get past obviously ripping off the PT cruiser, maybe, did it help GM, I might go so far as it was a small car at a time they desperately needed something in the category, and its coat tails success may have helped. Would not walking back any of those products made them sell more? Did changing out the 5.3 in the SSR to the 6.0 turn around its fate? Did adding the SS HHR get a turn around? I'm agree the ideas probably were watered down, but even attempts to liven them up didn't do anything. Cadillac ELR... Further considerations... Dodge Sidewinder (look familiar), Plymouth Prowler Car people don't buy cars - they build them - and certainly not with a minivan V-6, Prowler. Successes, Lambda SUV's, Malibu, Camaro (mainly because of the same retro craze, that died and Camaro began its slow death until they gave up on it too, the last generation sure could have used some game-changing styling rather than microwaving the same idea from 2007) Trax, Equinox, Trailblazer, Encore, Envista, Envision, Terrain, XT5... Completely insignificant, barley market relevant, game losing. To wit - name one thing any one of them is outclassing any competitor at? Performance, yawn; crash worthiness, IIHS doesn't think so, fuel efficiency not even with those tiny 3 cylinders, interiors, we have jet black, jet black or jet black, with your choice of screen location; exterior styling, ok some are moderately compelling, particularly the Buicks (what?), and low rent Chevrolets, XT5 is still stuck in the 2000's. Take away the full-size trucks and SUV's they're dead in a month. I guess that's "absolutely significant" and "game-changing."

Thanks for sharing, I suspected there was a story behind your (methods/desire/personality/upbringing) that shapes your thinking on the matter. (This is a compliment, but trying to be more succinct in my post it sounds insulting - please view it as the first.) More to the point at hand, if Pepper was destroyed in some way, you wouldn't be able to monetize or recover your efforts. At least, specifically to this one vehicle. Further, in a worst case scenario, what if every 6 years from the time you bought your first car to now your house was leveled by a tornado (see my location)? You would never have been able to 'not spend' what most do. Even in that worst case scenario, would you change your maintenance methods? (I'd bet a dime or candy bar and coke, your choice - that you wouldn't.) Double down - because you WANT to regardless.

We all COULD choose to keep our vehicles as long as you do, but I don't WANT to. I might WANT a newer one, a different color, a new 'feature', or simply get tired of the one I have. My needs might change, it might get wrecked. There are literally endless reasons why you might not keep a vehicle. Choosing what might be inefficient does not make it wrong or incorrect. A vehicle will always be a poor 'investment' and in the strictest manner of speaking; you have lost the least in your vehicle investments compared to everyone else (perhaps literally ). But vehicles are more to a lot of people than that, it's part of our lived experience, and we want that experience to be what we WANT it to be. If all a person wants is an appliance that transports them from point a to point b your model is most effective. I may want a vehicle that makes me happy in other ways, like noted above, style, features comfort, etc. That isn't about efficiency, it's about happiness, and you know what money can't buy? Reading journals about oil chemistry, lab reports, used oil analysis DOES NOT make me happy.

This was peak GM blunder IMO. They were busy finding solutions to problems that didn't exist. Wasting money on... HHR SSR Quadra-steer (not that it wasn't a good idea -but when you look at the products/markets they were ignoring at the time it was a bad investment) Envoy XUV Aztek (actually ahead of its time too, and in hindsight received way to harsh a reception especially in today's context of ugly cross overs - Juke, HR-V, Murano, all the weird angles and cuts they look wrecked from the factory) H2 H3 As noted, look at the rest of the lineup at GM Cavalier Malibu Monte Carlo Venture Deville (absolute 'standard of the world' here) Seville Catera Rember anything noteworthy from Buick or Oldsmobile at the time? Products/markets with literally no effort at all. Plus, what was looming right around the corner? Fuel prices about to skyrocket. Imagine if the money they wasted got re-distributed to be competitive in the small car market? They likely wouldn't have gone bankrupt. Literally, pouring money on the already most profitable models they had (some businessman somewhere looking at an excel sheet dreamed this up I'm sure), for a vastly diminished return. The same businessman looking at the same spreadsheet probably said something along the lines of "Why invest money in our least profitable models?" And no one replied with "To make them profitable." Were they too scared to try to compete with Toyota and Honda in those markets? Absolutely - so, they kept pumping out the crap to offset their CAFE numbers. GM was sooooo much better than gm.

Ok 2... I had them (and loved them) too. But now, the handles aren't hidden and they could fit adults, but not nearly as pleasantly as the crew cab. I didn't miss the extra bed length when I had a short bed crew cab, but the added flexibility of the larger cab was a plus. I remember when the crew cab short bed first came around in the early-mid 2000's they were awkward looking and now it's the other way around. Those little mini-doors look weird compared to the 'normal' ones. Mini-vans are under-rated - no conversion vans are underrated. It's a rolling living room. A new Explorer Conversion van, on a 1-ton chassis, now with 4x4 and a 6.6 gas V8. It is literally the private jet of the highway. Plus, they cost LESS than a smaller, less capable, less roomy, less, luxurious Suburban, Escalade, Yukon... Will I buy one - nope. (Explorer conversions do not age well)

ROI isn't a lie, and using a "standard" doesn't necessarily make one lazy, they may just have different priorities. As you acknowledge, it takes time, money and effort to obtain the data required to find one's perfect OCI. To what end though? The vehicle will NOT last forever, the engine may still run like a top, but the body will wear, the paint will fade, the vehicle WILL degrade. Its a haunted abandoned house with new wiring. Sure, the health of the engine is 'better'. You, who has much more experience in the field than most of us, have invested heavily to obtain that - what does your ROI look like? Are you keeping your vehicles forever where the longevity (beyond what the standard would/might/could/should/will/may and by what amount) will be realized? The general public however is different, including myself, I think we want our vehicle to last as long as most others, we'll likely get something new or different every 5-10 years, we want a reasonable amount of value for our vehicle that has been maintained (per standard), whether by trade-in, private sell, hand me down, etc. Given those general statements, will any of us (general public) realize the gains that you do through your methods - not likely. Very specifically, if you sold your truck, how much more money would you get for it compared to one exactly like it maintained per standard? Does that amount make it worthwhile to you (presumably yes), me (don't know, $500, no; a thousand maybe), Bob or whomever? Not an attack, criticism, etc, just another perspective.

Did you or did you NOT adjust the throttle cables? Was the throttle body removed during the repairs to the injectors? Don't go looking for new problems in new places - stay where you are working and messing with stuff.

I commented about it somewhere that on one hand it doesn't make sense to me to add all the manufacturing and parts complexity for what is essentially a smaller crew cab. Just drop it and not have to make all those extra parts. The flip side is that because it is so similar maybe it isn't that much more difficult to throw it in. I'm curious what the take rate is. Of course, there is always that 1 guy, I have to have the smaller crew cab for this minor reason...

Probably letting the throttle blade close too much.

The plot thickens. I'm a die-hard GM guy, and I even have a 6.2, earlier than the 'bad' ones. I wouldn't buy a 6.2 from 2021 through end of production. ?

Smoke color?

I doubt it. Stops on the throttle blade get moved?

The 10 speed is generally the same as whats found in a Ford - they were developed together. Yes. Non issue. If there was an internet concern I'd be looking at - it would be the main bearing failures. If applicable to this truck, does using a heavier oil, to alleviate potentially bad machining reassure you enough? All noted problems are magnified WAAAAY out of proportion on the internet.

Can anyone find the GM bulletin that stated the carbon build up was normal and does not affect performance? I KNOW there used to be one, but can't find it anymore. Meanwhile, I posted recently about mine having a BUNCH of miles on it and never pulling it, because of the above and no adverse issues otherwise. I probably will at some point just to see...

The cans should be pressurized enough to 'push' refrigerant in, especially when the system is under vacuum where it should 'pull' the refrigerant in. It is a careful sequence of operations to suck down the system and add refrigerant while maintaining the original vacuum and replacing it with only refrigerant. All while not allowing atmospheric air to enter. Having a digital scale handy to measure the refrigerant can before opening it and after to make sure the correct amount of refrigerant entered the system. Proper charge is determined by weight - not volume. Presumably, you are using the proper gauges and vacuum pump necessary.

Just did this on my 2016 Yukon Denali, I had to disconnect the battery to reset it as well. I didn't replace the thermostat - just the sensor.

The relay isn't powering the clutch because the computer is telling it not to. Likely because the refrigerant charge is low and is protecting the compressor. It will need a set of pressure gauges to confirm a low charge. Then the cause of the lost refrigerant would need to be found and repaired. Followed by vacuuming the system down and adding new (correct amount) refrigerant. If you have confirmed the refrigerant charge is correct, the only reason for the relay not to power the compressor is the relay itself is bad or bad wiring. In the case of the latter - you will have to manually trace the wires looking for faults. If you're lucky you might find something obvious like rodent damage. In any case, the likely problem is low charge.

Might consider adding bumpstops/jounce bumpers and upper control arm alignment cams (literally the only parts you aren't replacing and they are cheap). See previous post about lifetime warranty on parts. Moog used to be a good brand mixed opinions in the last 5-10 years. Greaseable parts where you can. Had a new sway bar link break before too. Other items to consider, you're going to be in deep enough that brake pads and rotors are right there, along with wheel bearings and cv-shafts. Any hint that they are worn would be a good time to replace them.