Jump to content

Radio Reception Issues

ace ventura

By ace ventura
in Troubleshooting & Recalls

Recommended Posts

Sierra-Z71 Enthusiast

Sierra-Z71

Posted
Posted

My Sierra is back in the shop for the radio reception as well as a long list of other items. It actually was worse the last time I got it back so we'll see in a day or two if they've gotten it figured out.

  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Sierra-Z71 Enthusiast

Sierra-Z71

Posted
Posted

I just picked my truck up yesterday and the bulletin basically states that gm thinks that it's because of the hd reception being weak. I have a 1997 buick that gets better reception than my 2014 sierra. I reiterated that it's both fm and hd and that I could be sitting in the stations parking lot and it wouldn't pick it up and still nothing because of the bulletin that gm has out now.

  • 2 weeks later...
Aznative Enthusiast

Aznative

Posted
Posted

I had my entire radio replaced about 5 months ago along with the update "service bulletin" radio was better and the HD never tried to come back on in the drop down selections on the LCD screen, everything was fine, radio reception was better because the HD option was off, now all of a sudden in the last two weeks I am getting the fade again on radio both AM and FM and when I hit the menu on LCD screen the HD is activating again on its own!! so I have to turn it off in order to have decent radio reception? have not had the truck in for warranty items in a while just service (although a new list of warranty items is growing again so I will have to have the dealer look at it again?)

  • 3 weeks later...
Chuck203 Enthusiast

Chuck203

Posted
Posted

GM offered me 1 year of Sirius for free since they can't fix their problem radio. Well that cost them about $60. I took it but I'm still leaning towards a lemon law suit since I have a list of things they can't fix.

bdavis004 New Member

bdavis004

Posted
Posted

TJay74, any word from the engineer from March? I tried the AntennaX solution recently.....meh. Nice looking antenna, but has an odd whistle at 40+. Excited if there's any kind of software update/fix. Thanks for your diligence in this issue for us guys.

TJay74 Senior Enthusiast

TJay74

Posted
Posted

Yeah, the engineer emailed me last week to say the time is to have validation finished by the end of Q2 and ready for customers Q3. That is all he would tell me, at first he was very receptive and now it takes pulling nails to get him to respond to me.

hery380 New Member

hery380

Posted
Posted

gm sucks my truck been to the dealer 3 times for poor fm reception on my 2014 silverado crew cab 4x4 ltz and they cant not fix the issue gm engineers tell the service department radio is working fine i was ready to go after market but gm tell me if i replace the radio my warranty is void and they don't have a solution ,well Monday i going to sue gm on small claims court i will never again buy any gm product worst truck ever

zacpalmer New Member

zacpalmer

Posted
Posted

Sad to read thru many of these posts. in my 2015 GMC Sierra SLT Crew Cab - Bose, Nav etc I am ALSO having issues with FM reception. I thought it was weird at first and kinda laughed it off - thinking it must have been a temporary issue. Well I finally have 1,000 miles on the truck and the reception is driving me bat shit crazy!

 

If GM did nothing for the 2014's what are the chance they will do a damn thing for the 2015's - I really ave no patience to take in in for service to get the run around like many on this forum have done (props to you all)

 

My MAIN concern is if this is an issue - something so simple as a RADIO - what other issues will arise in 3-5 years. I plan on driving this truck for a long time. It is my dream truck - that is a bit of a nightmare.

 

I'll be damned if I purchase XM Radio too - it cuts out and has flacky spots anyways - so it is no real improvement.

 

 

 

 

WLC Enthusiast

WLC

Posted
Posted

I had cars and trucks with three on the tree with better radios! My cheap (39.95) headphone set for noise reduction while mowing grass has better reception!

wm1584 New Member

wm1584

Posted
Posted

I have a 2014 as well and reported to dealer as everyone else has. Same response as well, bullington explaining how HD radio works and needs a strong signal.

I'm in a metropolitan large city and the signal strength is not an issue. GM please fix the obvious flaw.

WhiteMike Enthusiast

WhiteMike

Posted
Posted

If I wouldn't lose my shirt I would have sold my 2014 SLT yesterday. I understand new models have problems. But for G.M not to own up to their problems is what bothers me the most. The top of line 2014 SLT all have horrible A.M radio. It crackles and sounds awful. As I mentioned my $15.00 alarm clock radio sounds better.

 

I've absolutely had it. Tomorrow I plan to print off every single page of this entire thread, write a letter on my letterhead, and FedEx it overnight to the C.E.O desk. I doubt anything happens but I will try.

 

What else can we do???? Dealer received $ for truck. Dealer has tried 3x to fix the radio. From replacing speakers, playing with all connections and no fix. Banging my head against the wall.

TJay74 Senior Enthusiast

TJay74

Posted
Posted

ok peeps, slight update. Nothing major or earth shattering though.

 

Corp GM called me yesterday, advised me they are still aware of the issues with the radios on the 2014 trucks. The chief engineer I am working with is still actively involved and they are working with the supplier to get a corrective fix in place. GM is still pushing for a timeline of end of Q2 to have testing and validation done and to hopefully roll out fix sometime in Q3.

 

What that fix is at this point is unknown if it will be a software or hardware or both. I know from speaking with Chris on the board and with the GM engineers they wont be able to retro the 2015+ system into the 2014 trucks as there were hardware, software and CANBUs changes made that cant be implemented into the 2014 trucks.

 

Once I know more I will post an update.

chuckl1218 Senior Enthusiast

chuckl1218

Posted
Posted

ok peeps, slight update. Nothing major or earth shattering though.

 

Corp GM called me yesterday, advised me they are still aware of the issues with the radios on the 2014 trucks. The chief engineer I am working with is still actively involved and they are working with the supplier to get a corrective fix in place. GM is still pushing for a timeline of end of Q2 to have testing and validation done and to hopefully roll out fix sometime in Q3.

 

What that fix is at this point is unknown if it will be a software or hardware or both. I know from speaking with Chris on the board and with the GM engineers they wont be able to retro the 2015+ system into the 2014 trucks as there were hardware, software and CANBUs changes made that cant be implemented into the 2014 trucks.

 

Once I know more I will post an update.

Thanks Todd! We appreciate your efforts.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...