Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 

is causing what...vibration issues, buffeting (pressure issue), or both?

 

Do you have the std size or XL? WHat trim pkg and wheel size.

 

Do you have the std size or XL? WHat trim pkg and wheel size?

 

My Yukon is an SLE that has 20 inch upgraded wheel, we bought a month ago after trading our 2008 Yukon SLE with no issues. I find it hard to belive it has to do with the roof i think its the torque converter. I own and have 1991 Pontiac Trans Am and the transmission felt like vibration has i went to accelrate the dealer replace the torque converter never had an issue again.

Posted

I find it hard to belive it has to do with the roof i think its the torque converter.

 

May very well have something to do with the torque converter, but early in the thread there are/were trucks that had interior roof crossbars separating from the roof. Fixing the crossbars independently didn't do anything, but you can't definitively rule that out as an agitator.

Posted (edited)

 

 

My Yukon is an SLE that has 20 inch upgraded wheel, we bought a month ago after trading our 2008 Yukon SLE with no issues. I find it hard to belive it has to do with the roof i think its the torque converter. I own and have 1991 Pontiac Trans Am and the transmission felt like vibration has i went to accelrate the dealer replace the torque converter never had an issue again.

 

 

I'm assuming you have the standard size?

 

I am sure the tranny/pwr train contributes some but I get the buffeting when putting truck in "N" and coasting at 40-50mph. This pretty much rules out motor mounts and anything pwr train related. I have the v4/v8 lugging/vibration issue as well but I'm not too concerned about that as I know that can be somewhat resolved with updates.

Edited by ajs800
Posted

Do you have the std size or XL? WHat trim pkg and wheel size.

 

Do you have the std size or XL? WHat trim pkg and wheel size?

 

Its the shortbase Yukon SLE with 20 inch wheels

Posted

 

May very well have something to do with the torque converter, but early in the thread there are/were trucks that had interior roof crossbars separating from the roof. Fixing the crossbars independently didn't do anything, but you can't definitively rule that out as an agitator.

 

I find it hard to believe it has to do with the roof I could be wrong but think you would hear at all speeds

Posted (edited)

 

I find it hard to believe it has to do with the roof I could be wrong but think you would hear at all speeds

 

I compare to other vehicles when you roll a single rear window down while moving...severe buffeting occurs with most vehicles at different speeds...but not at all speeds. This tends to be normal. My grand cherokee with only one rear window down has bad buffeting at approx 35-40mph up through 50 and then of course it's bad again at 65+. Most cars will do the same thing with only one window open near mid or rear of vehicle. All windows up and sunroof closed, never, unless you're driving a 15+ yukon / suburban.

 

However, being that some claim not to do it goes against the aero/design flaw idea. I could be wrong, but for ears to constantly pop and dizziness to occur, there's got to be a pressure issue within the cabin and not just a "noise" issue.

Edited by ajs800
Posted

true but I believe there are yukon/suburban/tahoe folks that have resolved the vibration issues but not the buffeting. As much as I'd like to think it's only a vibration issue, I'm afraid there's more to it. The buffeting is horrendous in our yukon xl at 43mph when on a very smooth newly paved road all while there are no vibrations present in the steering wheel, seat, doors, body, etc.

 

I believe both get resolved. Has anyone even tried the updates gm has posted?

Posted

To my knowledge, GM has never placed one of these problem vehicles in a wind tunnel. That would definitively determined if the problem is mechanical or induced by air flow around the vehicle (vibrating panels).

Posted

I could be wrong, but for ears to constantly pop and dizziness to occur, there's got to be a pressure issue within the cabin and not just a "noise" issue.

These trucks have an element of noise (larger engines, thinner metals, bigger wheels) and pressure (buttoned-up jelly tight compared to gen 2 and 3) that I believe is managed together, get rid of one and the other is unbearable. GM has been in the truck business too long not to know this, so the only thing to do would be to manage it. Gen 2 and 3 didn't have the noise or pressure (I actually owned 2, 3 and 4 at the same time), so with GM knowing about the increased noise and pressure in the new gen 4, what could they incorporate to manage it?

Posted (edited)

To my knowledge, GM has never placed one of these problem vehicles in a wind tunnel. That would definitively determined if the problem is mechanical or induced by air flow around the vehicle (vibrating panels).

 

I would like to think an engineer would have thought of this with some of the early buybacks, but you never do know. That would determine a lot, IMO. However, I would also think, at least one if not several engineers would have noticed these issues when field sampling/testing the design 2+years ago.

Edited by ajs800
Posted

Congratulations to GM! Not only can they misrepresent vehicle features, execute sloppy engineering and provide zero customer service, the Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade has won a spot on Consumer Reports 20 most unreliable vehicles. Way to go! At least they are consistent.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

Congratulations to GM! Not only can they misrepresent vehicle features, execute sloppy engineering and provide zero customer service, the Tahoe/Yukon/Escalade has won a spot on Consumer Reports 20 most unreliable vehicles. Way to go! At least they are consistent.

Hopefully, this is the type of publicity will force them to do something about these issues. All 3 2015 vehicle platforms made the list. This vehicle needs a redesign. I just hope the taxpayers won't have to pay the bill. Again.

 

http://www.newsday.com/classifieds/cars/consumer-reports-least-reliable-new-cars-include-the-fiat-500l-jeep-cherokee-and-nissan-pathfinder-1.11016600

Edited by jasondenali15
Posted

Man, there are some nice cars on this list. If it wasn’t for all the safety enhancements, you may be better off keeping what you have. But the fullsize SUV problems doesn’t surprise me, it’s been talked about this thread for close to 2 years. Although the Yukon and Tahoe mention things I’ll have to keep my eyes on, the XL versions and the Escalade mention engine and driveline vibration. This should be where dealers focus their attention when complaints come in about shaking and vibration.

 

Posted

 

I compare to other vehicles when you roll a single rear window down while moving...severe buffeting occurs with most vehicles at different speeds...but not at all speeds. This tends to be normal. My grand cherokee with only one rear window down has bad buffeting at approx 35-40mph up through 50 and then of course it's bad again at 65+. Most cars will do the same thing with only one window open near mid or rear of vehicle. All windows up and sunroof closed, never, unless you're driving a 15+ yukon / suburban.

 

However, being that some claim not to do it goes against the aero/design flaw idea. I could be wrong, but for ears to constantly pop and dizziness to occur, there's got to be a pressure issue within the cabin and not just a "noise" issue.

 

 

 

I think I may have uncovered why the vehicles may be making these noises is it possible with the new front end of these vehicles the bumper doesnt allow air to circulate since the lower part of the bumper is blocked. The previous generation SUV had the lower part of the bumper that allowed air to follow thru. I notice all large suv and trucks have the grill and cut out in the bumper to allow air circulation.

Posted

...is it possible with the new front end of these vehicles the bumper doesnt allow air to circulate since the lower part of the bumper is blocked. I notice all large suv and trucks have the grill and cut out in the bumper to allow air circulation.

 

Kind of not tracking with your post. The only opening in the front of my truck that allows air to circulate is the honeycomb grill, no other opening and the truck does not buffet. There is no cutout unless you happen to have tow hooks

 

The previous generation SUV had the lower part of the bumper that allowed air to follow thru.

 

That was Gen 3, the opening in the bumper was for exposed tow hooks and an opening for circular fog lights, don't think the engineers intended those openings for air flow.

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   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,633 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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. 😄
    • 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
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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...