Jump to content

2015 YUKON NOISE IN CABIN

FOURKNUCKLES
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Zip Senior Enthusiast

The Zip

Posted
Posted

But, having had several GM vehicles over the past thirty years and had vehicles with both dimensions I have learned that 20's are the way to go whether talking ride, wear, cost, you name it.

Yeah, same here, you're on point with this. I would think though as far as ride, if a manufacturer provided a 22 or more wheel for a truck, that size should have been tested for effectiveness and compensated to provide for a good ride? Don't seem to be the case with the GM truck line from PU to SUV, 22 inch wheels and larger may be aggravating some of the other issues going on with the truck line.

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

FOURKNUCKLES
FOURKNUCKLES

ANYONE ELSE HEARING LIKE A BUFFERING SOUND? MAKES YOUR EARS FEEL LIKE THE WINDOW IS DOWN, BUT IT IS NOT? I TOOK IT BACK TO THE DEALER, THEY HEARD IT. WE GOT IN ANOTHER 2015 YUKON XL AND HEARD THE

jer1346
jer1346

I've had my 2015 Yukon XL back for 1 day after it was in the shop for over 3 weeks (this time). The buffeting is the exact same, with no improvement whatsoever. I am having 500 cheap business cards p

FogDucker
FogDucker

Hi all,   I created an online survey to better quantify the issues surrounding our trucks. The goal is to get more accurate numbers. The survey is open to *everyone*, including those with no vibra

Posted Images

sh00ter Enthusiast

sh00ter

Posted
Posted

I've drive 4 different Denali XLs...all 4 wheel drive. Three of them had 22" tires & one had 20". All 4 of them had the buffeting & booming issue. Apparently, the size of the tires doesn't have any impact on the issue. The one with 20" tires was one I had special ordered but didn't take it because of the problem. I'm thinking about getting a Mercedez 450 GL instead.

Willyspu Enthusiast

Willyspu

Posted
Posted

Yeah, same here, you're on point with this. I would think though as far as ride, if a manufacturer provided a 22 or more wheel for a truck, that size should have been tested for effectiveness and compensated to provide for a good ride? Don't seem to be the case with the GM truck line from PU to SUV, 22 inch wheels and larger may be aggravating some of the other issues going on with the truck line.

 

As I see it the larger wheel size is really to keep up with current fashion. Big wheels with rubber band thin tires are in and that is what sells. And they ride like crap.

 

While the smaller and stiffer tire side walls help reduce roll in a sports car they are far from forgiving in ride quality. They just cannot absorb bumps and pot holes as well as tires with more sidewall.

 

If the overall diameter of the tire is the same (which they are on our vehicles) a 20" tire has more sidewall then a 22" and an 18" has more sidewall then a 20" wheel. The added sidewall material increases the "suspension" a tire can provide at the cost of high speed turning performance. I would not call our vehicles high speed performance vehicles so why use that tire and wheel combo?

 

I ordered my Suburban from the factory so I could get just the bells and whistles I wanted, and I ordered 18" wheels because the ride is superior to 20" or 22"'s. When I am making my 600 mile commute from CA to OR, I could careless what my tire/wheel combo looks like, I enjoy a comfortable ride.

Snoringbear Enthusiast

Snoringbear

Posted
Posted

Willyspu, no argument here. Guess 18" wheels have to be special ordered for typical 1500's these days? I haven't seen 18" wheels on a GM dealer lot on anything but serious work trucks in years and they had heavy duty 6 or 8 ply tires which would ride rough as a cobb. But, what you did was smart thinking for sure.

 

Btw, noticed in your member description "1956 Willys Wagon". My first car when in high school was a 1952 Willys Wagon. Mine was two wheel drive, three on tree with overdrive. with 6 cyl L head engine. Well, it wasn't a true L head; intake valves were overhead valve pushrod and exhaust valves were L head. Don't think I've ever seen this configuration since. Anyway, had a lot of good times with that vehicle :)

Chris M. Enthusiast

Chris M.

Posted
Posted

Willyspu, no argument here. Guess 18" wheels have to be special ordered for typical 1500's these days? I haven't seen 18" wheels on a GM dealer lot on anything but serious work trucks in years and they had heavy duty 6 or 8 ply tires which would ride rough as a cobb. But, what you did was smart thinking for sure.

 

My 2016 Tahoe has 18s, had them as it sat on the lot. I just hit 1000 miles and haven't had any of the problems described in the thread. I love it.

ateam_burb Enthusiast

ateam_burb

Posted
Posted

Hello All. Can someone who has had their vehicle recently serviced for the buffeting either post or PM me the latest service bulletin number their dealer is working off?

ajs800 Enthusiast

ajs800

Posted
Posted

I had the 20" Denali machine finish wheels and new Michelin Premier LTX tires installed last week and will say 99% of our buffeting issues are gone. I really wanted to stick with the 22s but didn't want to risk it. Even though it seems as though our roof bows may be detached, I'm not going to pursue having the roof TSB done at this time. Leaving for a 2,000 mile trip later this week and will really be able to test things out.

ajs800 Enthusiast

ajs800

Posted
Posted (edited)

Our yukon has the "shake" problem and is exactly how it is describe. The shake will be my new fix as I think I've eliminated 99% of the buffeting/pressure issue. Four different sets of wheels and tires later.

 

However, outside of the shake, i can't get over how rough these trucks ride (currently on a 1000k+ mile road trip) ... Very harsh and jerky jittery like. I dropped down to 20" wheels and still not satisfied with ride...almost like there's no suspension...hard as a rock where every bump is felt. I don't get it.

Edited by ajs800
Eric cova Enthusiast

Eric cova

Posted
Posted

i think GM made the new cars in MacDonald :tear: . i hate my Yukon so bad so i use the other car which i don't like too .

ateam_burb Enthusiast

ateam_burb

Posted
Posted

Our yukon has the "shake" problem and is exactly how it is describe. The shake will be my new fix as I think I've eliminated 99% of the buffeting/pressure issue. Four different sets of wheels and tires later.

 

However, outside of the shake, i can't get over how rough these trucks ride (currently on a 1000k+ mile road trip) ... Very harsh and jerky jittery like. I dropped down to 20" wheels and still not satisfied with ride...almost like there's no suspension...hard as a rock where every bump is felt. I don't get it.

 

ajs, there is a TSB for the rough ride if equipped with the magnetic ride suspension. My Suburban LTZ had the same issue and following the TSB my dealer replaced some of the suspension components (shocks and struts I think). It made a significant difference in the harshness over bumps. Yes, the feel is more disconnected from the road but it's a land yacht, not a sports car, so it works for me. Mine is a 2015i, and I was told the updated parts are standard on the 2016 models.

  • Like 1
cltsig Enthusiast

cltsig

Posted
Posted

Ateam_burb: Any idea what the TSB is? My 2016 Denali rides like a potato wagon, stiffer than any car I've ever owned or driven in 30 years of driving.

Weeves New Member

Weeves

Posted
Posted

This is so ridiculous. GM refuses to admit there's a problem.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=51iaMAbLQoY

Wow! I knew there was vibration/buffeting problem but I didn't think it was that severe. Makes me sick to my stomach thinking people drop hard earned money only to have issues like that.

  • Like 1
the blur Enthusiast

the blur

Posted
Posted (edited)

Any news on the 2017's ???

Or is GM going to let their reputation totally go down the drain ??

Edited by the blur

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • richard wysong
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By richard wysong · Posted

      I had an 88 K1500 with a 5.7 that had those symptoms, I know totally different, it ended up being the ECM. Once you get the fuel system fixed if it still runs lousy you may want to investigate that. it didn't set any codes, stalled ,ran rough at times etc
    • James Beyer
      Trading 7.3 (Godzilla) for G.M.C gas

      By James Beyer · Posted

      Congratulations Isttype, on your gmc. Really like my 2024 2500hd sle doublecab now with 85,500 miles.  I checked the oil today at 4800 miles since last oil change and barely reading on the stick.  I don't care if GM says it's Acceptable adding a quart every 2000 miles because that is 100% BS, It is not a 1966 Harley Shovelhead! Sounds like it's setting up a future failure like I had with my 1500 6.2l. Other than oil consumption problems, I really like the 6.6l gas and 10 speed is really nice.  Towed a light 4000 pound trailer last week and averaged 14 mpg.  I was pretty impressive that a 7300 pound gas truck did 14mpg towing, Later-
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Long Term Cold Cycle Limited Testing   Back to the 1990's and XOM's million mile test. Since then there have been others and there will be more. Schaeffer's, AMSOIL to name two. Of these Schaeffer's is the stand alone which I will explain in a bit later.    http://papers.sae.org/600190/:   http://papers.sae.org/850215/:   Up to 75% of  engine wear occurs on cold starts. These two links (above) provide the technical reasons for engine wear. In a nut shell, and by a large margin, cylinder wear is what takes out most motors and even with a pre-oiling system that part of the engine is dry enough on cold starts and cold warm up to pierce Stribeck.   So when you put a motor, or a car, on a dyno for a million miles stopping only for oil changes, (yes fuel is uninterrupted) or break down maintenance, you are depriving the test of the most important part of it's wear cycle. Yes a million is then a pretty easy walk even for a mineral oil under those conditions.    How about cleanliness during the long test cycles? Same thing. Varnishes that stick rings and insulate parts are laid down by repetitive 'heat cycles'. It's the cool down the precipitates the varnishes. These long runs also hinder acidic attack caused by cold start richness and less than optimal cold start ring sealing. They hinder water formation and enhance breathing of the crankcase; the petri dish of acid formation, the first step in sludge formation, amalgamation and precipitation. These motors are also monitored and controlled for water and oil temperatures to within the "normal operating range".      https://www.swri.org/sites/default/files/sequence-iiih-test.pdf Note the test sequence in some boutique oils literature for testing, API IIIH, is not the standard used for the ILSAC G7 testing. Does that mean it is irrelevant? No, not as used. As used as a 'visual guide' it makes it's point. The G7 weighted piston deposit minimum is lower.      Back to Schaeffer's. That was a cyclical test of an engine in fleet service and not a dyno mule and if you saw the video it was not mirror clean but wear was low.    There are oils like BioSyn and other 'Renewable" source oils that taught cleanliness and have proven themselves in fleet testing. Havoline an other example.    The newest ILSAC G-7 test prioritize cleanliness, LSPI mitigation and fuel economy OVER WEAR. In comparison Porsche C30 Specification Verses ILSAC G-7 Specification below:      Some will balk that this graph isn't apples to apples and I will challenge that in that this graph represent the SPECIFICATION and not the any One Oil Performance.   It is absolutely possible to minimize wear, maximize cleanliness and mitigate LSPI etc., It just isn't cheap and currently I see none that are not walking toward profit over performance.     
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      I don't think you will need a split, separate product, etc., the OBD port should be able to deliver everything you need. Since your device would be plugged into it all the time, it wouldn't miss anything.    Hardware in this case will be the easiest part of your project - ELM 327 devices will already deliver all the data you need. Reporting/software is where your advantage/marketability is.
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      I do too. I’ll never be stuck again 😂

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...