Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

They had me take it to another Dealer to check it out. They reprogramed it again they said there is a problem with the Active Fuel Management System the manager has one and he said his MPG has went down as well and customer are starting to come in and complaining. But I looked my truck up by VIN there was program issue before it left factory. This will make the 3rd time for reprogram now be understand if they have any problems when reprograming it can damage the ECM.

Service Manager told the AFM system is using more gas instead of less gas. So it comes down to the sensors now.

Posted (edited)

The 19 mpg's was a 40 degree day on the highway 70 mph with a 30mph sustained gusting to 50mph tail wind.

Edited by strike1st
Posted

My dlc shows a max of 35.1 mpg on the 25 mile average which is useless if you ask me. I do get considerably better MPG than what is reported here though. I hope you guys get it lined out and get the same.

Posted

My dlc shows a max of 35.1 mpg on the 25 mile average which is useless if you ask me. I do get considerably better MPG than what is reported here though. I hope you guys get it lined out and get the same.

Its starting to become a big issue now that people are seeing for themselves now as well.

Posted

This is the best I've seen so far. I had the cruise set at 55mph with a good 20mph tail wind. This is not typical for me. I've been averaging 16-17mpg throughout this cold winter. Now that it has warmed up I've been seeing 20mpg on interstate. Hopefully see 22mpg when we are off winter fuel and back to normal temps.

post-124685-0-25223200-1395182921_thumb.jpg

post-124685-0-25223200-1395182921_thumb.jpg

post-124685-0-25223200-1395182921_thumb.jpg

post-124685-0-25223200-1395182921_thumb.jpg

Posted

Had 1.5 hours of highway drive time home today. Averaged 20 MPG for the last 50 miles. Or at least that's what the truck was showing.

Crew Cab 4x4 with the 6.2

70-75 mph, 55 degrees, pretty much flat interstate roads on I-10.

I'm pretty impressed!

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted

Next time you do a fill-up, you may want to do a manual calculation and not trust the DIC reading. Many to include myself, have noticed the DIC MPG reporting to overstate by about 1 MPG higher than what it actually manually calculates out to.

Posted

Thats way better than i have averaged, but then again i'm driving up hills all day. haha I average about 16.5

Posted

Just did a 230 mile day trip to OKC and back-10-15 mph head wind going up, 5mph tail coming home. Diablo 91 octane tune, had about 120 miles on the tune so fuel trims had learning time.

 

I average 19.5 MPG running 75-80 MPH DOD is disabled Best was 22.5. Diablo tune is better than stock, TCM could use more work along with torque management. Data logging this afternoon, so I can get the files off to Lew.

Posted

Next time you do a fill-up, you may want to do a manual calculation and not trust the DIC reading. Many to include myself, have noticed the DIC MPG reporting to overstate by about 1 MPG higher than what it actually manually calculates out to.

 

This is true, mine can read as much as 1mpg off but it can read high or low.

Posted

Next time you do a fill-up, you may want to do a manual calculation and not trust the DIC reading. Many to include myself, have noticed the DIC MPG reporting to overstate by about 1 MPG higher than what it actually manually calculates out to.

 

I'm doing a hand calc on this tank and from here on out...but if the DIC is showing 1 mpg better than I'm actually getting...holy wah...I'm screwed.

Posted (edited)

Made a little trip up to KY yesterday about 500 miles overall. Running the E85 fuel now for a couple of tanks. It appears that it is not going to be as bad as I thought on the highway mileage. 2014 GMC Sierra CC SB SLT Z71 4x4 5.3 3.42 20" wheels. I will continue to buy the E85 I really like the feel of the increased HP and Torque it really messed up my first tank of E85 mpg my normally conservative driving was transformed into jack rabbit starts and tire barking. Now back to normal and mileage is just about right where the 10% ethanol 87 octane was at. Note I am tracking on the Fuelly site and it looks like the DIC is pretty accurate over the longer mileage ranges. I do not think the 25 and 50 ranges are far enough to be a true average but they are very good training guides for how to drive to get good overall fuel mileage if you pay attention.

Edited by MyFavTruck
Posted

I'm doing a hand calc on this tank and from here on out...but if the DIC is showing 1 mpg better than I'm actually getting...holy wah...I'm screwed.

You starting to see what am saying now. And I have been dealing with since the first update before fire recall

Posted

Next time you do a fill-up, you may want to do a manual calculation and not trust the DIC reading. Many to include myself, have noticed the DIC MPG reporting to overstate by about 1 MPG higher than what it actually manually calculates out to.

I have been tracking my mileage since day one. My first two tanks were very close by hand. The next 5 or so fill ups have all been off by approx 1 mpg. The computer adds an extra mpg somewhere everytime.

 

Highway or city does not seem to matter as well.

 

Stock 6.2L 3.55 gears 4x4

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 2,173 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...