Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

It's a fully boxed frame, not c channels. That's one of the reasons they dip it in wax to properly cost the interior surfaces of the boxed frame.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry, I was describing my 2006 Silverado frame. A fully boxed frame is of course stiffer than a C channel frame, but most likely it also is a great contributor to vibration issues. A C channel frame has better ability to flex and to absorb road vibrations.

 

Anyway, here is a frame rust video clip I found:

 

 

 

Edited by pm26
Posted

It's a fully boxed frame, not c channels. That's one of the reasons they dip it in wax to properly cost the interior surfaces of the boxed frame.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They have used wax dipped since at least the GMT800's.

 

Front section has been a hydroformed tube since then as well.

Posted

Sorry, I was describing my 2006 Silverado frame. A fully boxed frame is of course stiffer than a C channel frame, but most likely it also is a great contributor to vibration issues. A C channel frame has better ability to flex and to absorb road vibrations.

 

Anyway, here is a frame rust video clip I found:

 

 

 

 

I never had any vibration issues with my 2007 fully boxed frame and my current 2014 doesn't have any vibration issues other than the tires occasionally depending on the temperature outside. That will go away for good when I replace the tires. The vibration issues people are having with these trucks are related to the drive train and the frame won't change those conditions if something is out of balance or a part is failing the rear differential. I'd rather have a stiffer frame than one that flexes any day of the week.

 

I personally don't have a problem with the wax coating if it's applied correctly. It was never an issue on my 2007. My dad's 2003 suburban barely has any rust on it because Chevy did a better job then of applying the wax and probably used a better product as well. Guys up north with heavily salted winter roads should worry more with their 2014 and up trucks but if you're around the Virginia latitude and south, you should be ok. It will be 20+ years before rust becomes a structural issue in these areas of the country and this truck will be long gone by the 10 year mark if that.

Posted

They have used wax dipped since at least the GMT800's.

 

Front section has been a hydroformed tube since then as well.

 

I think they've been using wax longer than that. Late 80's early 90's maybe? I feel like I read that somewhere I don't know for sure though.

Posted (edited)

The undercoating on my 15 is great, zero rust and the coating is durable...must have been an early build issue?

Edited by black00ta
Posted

So Frustrated!!!

My dealer painted two small patches in rear wheel wells and basically said there was no TSB.

Guess they figured I wouldn't check out the rest of the frame when I had a chance.

Now dealing with GM customer service...basically playing phone tag for a week.

 

I didn't order a rat rod!!!

So far VERY $HITTY service from GM

 

post-128748-0-48977200-1429621659_thumb.jpg

post-128748-0-34262600-1429621672_thumb.jpg

post-128748-0-48977200-1429621659_thumb.jpg

post-128748-0-34262600-1429621672_thumb.jpg

post-128748-0-48977200-1429621659_thumb.jpg

post-128748-0-34262600-1429621672_thumb.jpg

post-128748-0-48977200-1429621659_thumb.jpg

post-128748-0-34262600-1429621672_thumb.jpg

  • Like 1
Posted

The undercoating on my 15 is great, zero rust and the coating is durable...must have been an early build issue?

 

Most likely. I swear this is the last first edition vehicle I ever buy from any manufacturer. If it hasn't been out for at least a model year or 2, I'm walking away.

  • Like 3
Posted

My 10 month old truck GMC Sierra SLT 2014 frame is rusting fast.

 

Are those holes forming in the frame from the rust?

Posted

My 10 month old truck GMC Sierra SLT 2014 frame is rusting fast.

 

 

 

Are those holes forming in the frame from the rust?

 

Yeah, I would like to know if those are rust holes too. That's really concerning. What part of the frame is this, maybe a picture of it zoomed out.

Posted

I'm guessing over time we will have a recall on our hands similar to toyotas. Most likely there was a flaw in the dipping process and the frame company will have to pay for new frames for our trucks. My 2005 tacoma didnt look as bad as my 1 year old sierra, but it did have a rust hole through the frame near the catalytic converter. Dana Corp. went out of business because of the loss from replacing all the second gen tacoma frames I was told. On the plus side my 10 year old truck got a brand new frame, lower control arms, ball joints, brake lines and hardware out of the deal. It looked like a new truck before I sold it.

Posted (edited)

I have a 2003 Jeep Wrangler that I bought new. It has sat outside every day of it's life. It has 135,000 miles on it. The frame doesn't have a speck of rust on it! And that's after driving it through 13 shitty Pittsburgh winters! The 2013 Avalanche that I just traded with only 15,000 miles on it looked like it was 50 years old. Not just rust on the frame, but all the cables and fasteners and nuts and bolts. I liked that truck and lost a lot of money trading it in but looking under it made me sick. The wax coating on my 2015 Sierra seems different/better. Time will tell.

Edited by steelcity
Posted

I'm guessing over time we will have a recall on our hands similar to toyotas. Most likely there was a flaw in the dipping process and the frame company will have to pay for new frames for our trucks. My 2005 tacoma didnt look as bad as my 1 year old sierra, but it did have a rust hole through the frame near the catalytic converter. Dana Corp. went out of business because of the loss from replacing all the second gen tacoma frames I was told. On the plus side my 10 year old truck got a brand new frame, lower control arms, ball joints, brake lines and hardware out of the deal. It looked like a new truck before I sold it.

 

Unless these trucks start snapping in half like the Toyotas and GM's hand is forced by the government like they did to Toyota, I wouldn't expect much out of GM. They've demonstrated over and over again that they will do their best to get out of issuing a recall for things unless people start dying from it or it's a cheap easy fix like a software update. They've most likely addressed it on later builds as people have pointed out here with their 2015 wax coatings and us early adopters of the 2014's will be left out to dry.

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

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 2,716 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Yep, just a quick reference point.    My main point being I’d do a thousand other things before I’d pay 10k for a transmission.    Speaking in ignorance cause I don’t look at these trucks, what is it worth? 20k?
    • I think users are going to want to pick their monitored parameters, which parameters they want to see first.    It should probably start with baseline at a minimum and adjust to learned, but be able to overlay baseline for comparison.   A simple severity level would be able to determine what type of alerting is appropriate or user selectable.    Why not use the OBD port though?   I think a phone connection would be a good idea, push notifications type deal.   Number 1 issue is having data is useless if you don’t know what the data should be under normal conditions. 
    • I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 
    • Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...