Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Well, that's 0 for 2 so far. Not enough to gauge anything by for sure. But it seems to jive with what TJay was stating. The module needs replaced on pre '14 build trucks. So why is this PI a software deal only! :shakehead:

 

Hopefully from the engineers to the dealers, some info has been miscommunicated. Until this one becomes more definitive, I'm sitting this one out.

Posted

Other than the navigation which I love the radio is a piece of crap anyway. It's very slow, you have to turn up the volume 1/3 of the way to even hear it and I've got the Bose system. My wife has the non-Bose system in her Traverse and it sounds better then mine.

The radio reception is just par for the course. I don't think a software update is going to give you better reception.

Posted

Talked with GM rep today, they are going to consult with their engineers and get back in touch with me.

Posted

Had PI 1288 applied to the truck today.

Number of folders went from 5 to 3.

Skipping during poor HD reception eliminated.

Overall reception still bad. (uchanged)

I had been running with HD turned off and the reception was not good even then.

No change in overall quality.

Sorry guys

 

 

My bad - - number of folders (dots) is now down to two (2)

Posted

I believe this problem is only affecting the sierras and silverados. I took mine into the dealer for the radio problem and they gave me a Buick Enclave as a loaner. I had it over the weekend and went 150 miles one way out of town an it held the HD signal the whole time. I couldn't get more than 40 miles outside of town in my truck before it drops the HD signal and then goes to a very static filled analog signal. When I got my truck back the service manager said they couldn't find any problems with the radio or antenna. Apparently they disconnected and reconnected the components. I can now get 45 miles outside of town before I drop the HD signal. I hope they come up with a fix soon because I am not renewing my XM when my free trial expires.

Posted

 

I hope they come up with a fix soon because I am not renewing my XM when my free trial expires.

 

My XM reception has been fine from day 1. It's the rest of the radio that is crap.

Posted

I believe this problem is only affecting the sierras and silverados...

 

I rented a Buick Verano and everything worked flawlessly. Was very impressed with the radio. Drove over 300 miles and no issues with reception.

  • Like 1
Posted

This blows that the fix is not working. I'm sure a lot of us were hoping this would work and checking this thread a lot.

Posted

Hopefully dmd277 or hillrider will hear from Dealer after they contact the engineers. Since the TSB does not seem to cover early build radios (like I have), I am concerned about the bureaucracy requred to get it fixed since the engineers know there is a module replacement required for early builds, but this is not stated in the TSB. Is GM going to require all of us to write letters to get this resolved? I sure hope not.

Posted (edited)

This blows that the fix is not working. I'm sure a lot of us were hoping this would work and checking this thread a lot.

Yes, it does.

Edited by 14LTZZ71
Posted

This blows that the fix is not working. I'm sure a lot of us were hoping this would work and checking this thread a lot.

I agree

Posted

Just received a call from GM. The person that had been so helpful to try to fix the radio issue(since January) is no longer handling my concern. Nothing against the new person but I believe that I am back to square one. The new person had no knowledge of my concern other then it was a radio issue. I have lost all hope of having the radio reception repaired.

Posted

Ive been following this thread for a couple months now. What happened to all the progress that TJay74 was making with the engineers? Hopefully he can provide an update for us. Been a while since hes posted on this

Posted

Progress of TJay's efforts are in this thread. Have you read all the posts??

GM issued a service bulletin back on July 25th. It is PI 1288. It's a software update. Trouble is, seems it needed to be both a software and a mechanical update,as TJay posted that pre 2014 builds need the radio module replaced first,then the software update applied.

 

Those that have had the software update done,did NOT see any reception improvement. Hope GM gets this thing gets ironed out,and the proper procedure put into a new bulletin.

Posted

Sorry, I should have been more clear in my previous post. I was wondering if TJay had sent an email back the engineers he has been working with to see when the mechanical update would be available, after it was noticed that the update was software only. I really hope he's able to help out those of us with a 2013 build date. Anyone with a 2014 build date had the software update done? Results?

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • Just don't turn the steering wheel as much?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...