Jump to content

FINALLY! Some movement on the dangerous headlights on the '14


Recommended Posts

Posted

Knock off the pissing match guys. Next time I have to come here I'm locking this and not hiding the posts of people who can't play nice.

Why did you delete my post? I wasn't arguing with anybody. All I said was that it's illegal to modify DOT headlights. What happened after that?

 

Please unhide my post.

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

Why did you delete my post? I wasn't arguing with anybody. All I said was that it's illegal to modify DOT headlights. What happened after that?

 

Please unhide my post.

I made a comment based on another thread where another member said we didn't know what we were talking about saying it was illegal. A few people chimed in and that thread got locked. I came back to this thread and mentioned after your post yesterday that your response would have no effect in explaining why light modification might be illegal, I posted links of a vendor and a light specialist that verified exactly as you had said. The Mods decided it needed to be deleted. I don't know what subsequent post was made, I found it easier to just add that person to the ignore list.
Posted

Why did you delete my post? I wasn't arguing with anybody. All I said was that it's illegal to modify DOT headlights. What happened after that?

 

Please unhide my post.

 

I purged the thread of everything related to the thread drift. End of story.

Posted

I purged the thread of everything related to the thread drift. End of story.

Ok, that's fine. But the drift started with post #48 where somebody incorrectly stated that it is legal to make modifications to your lights. I was just trying to not let misinformation spread.

Posted

There is a post on carcomplaints.com where someone said GM replaced his 2015 headlights with 2016 headlights.

 

Does anyone know if this guy is on this forum? I'd like to find out exactly how he went about it. Almost makes me think there is a silent recall or something, if GM is willing to do this on a case by case basis.

 

Here is a link to the posting:

 

http://www.carcomplaints.com/GMC/Sierra_1500/2014/lights/terrible_headlights_poor_visibility.shtml#66

Posted

There is a post on carcomplaints.com where someone said GM replaced his 2015 headlights with 2016 headlights.

 

Does anyone know if this guy is on this forum? I'd like to find out exactly how he went about it. Almost makes me think there is a silent recall or something, if GM is willing to do this on a case by case basis.

 

Here is a link to the posting:

 

http://www.carcomplaints.com/GMC/Sierra_1500/2014/lights/terrible_headlights_poor_visibility.shtml#66

I'm not putting a lot of weight on this....I really think some troll is blowing smoke....not the person here who posted it, but the original person stating the dealer did the retro

Posted

I'm not putting a lot of weight on this....I really think some troll is blowing smoke....not the person here who posted it, but the original person stating the dealer did the retro

 

 

It is possible not that I am confirming or have proof. There are posts on here about people that have swapped to 2016 already so technology works. I have also seen cases where 'the squeaky wheel get greased', I even had an aunt that would get all sorts of free junk mostly so she would go away and stop complaining.

 

I do know it would not be as easy on anything below an SLT though as the wiring harness on 1SA and SLE have a 5 pin connection. The SLT and 2016 have a 7 pin connection. This means the headlight and DRL would not be functional and only the headlamp would. That being said I have converted my 5pin to a 7 pin with the GEN5DIY harness so it is also possible just takes more. I cannot see them swapping out the OEM entire harness on those trims but seems like would require a whole lot, perhaps I am wrong.

Posted

I'm not putting a lot of weight on this....I really think some troll is blowing smoke....not the person here who posted it, but the original person stating the dealer did the retro

No smoke, it was done in Michigan, but don't get excited as from what I've found out is GM has no plans to do much if anything for us.

 

The "executive" rep at GM that I was dealing with basically told me the tsb with the BCM update & bulb swap was their solution for 2104's & the '15's that weren't already done before leaving the factory.

 

Unless the lawsuit gets traction, we will most likely need to do our own upgrade to have properly performing headlights.

Posted

I think it is a pipe dream to think that any settlement, if there ever is one, would be to upgrade the headlights beyond what GM has already done with respect to the lights and software upgrade to the BCM.

 

Does one really think that the purpose of this is to win a verdict from a Federal court mandating GM to install upgraded lighting for a model year vehicle that was in full conformance with Federal DOT regulations and NHSTA certification for that model year? This does not concern a faulty component or defect, the vehicles remain in full compliance with the requirements at the time of original certification. This is the same premise as trying to get a manufacturer of a '63 Chevy to install seat belts in their '63 due to safety claims because the standard was changed and they were made mandatory in the '64 model year.

 

Here's my take on this....."Your honor... (GMs attorneys to a Federal judge in Federal court)......the model year vehicle meets all Federal requirements and was in full compliance with all applicable Federal regulations related to vehicle lighting, receiving Federal certification by the certifying Federal Agency at the time of release for distribution and continues to meet these regulations and remain in full compliance with the original certification for release". Verdict: case dismissed.

 

Rather, my opinion is that the purpose of this exercise is not to win by verdict in court, but to force some type of nuisance settlement so GM will find it more expeditious and less expensive in the long run to pay the complainant's legal fees and throw a bone to the class action complainants rather than spend time, effort and risk bad publicity and reduce trade in values for the model line. And aside from any reimbursements for legal fees, any bone thrown to owners will be more of a move toward a win-win situation for GM.

 

Here's my timeline prediction:

 

For winning a court battle in the plaintiff's favor to include an upgrade to '16+ lighting - The 12th of Never.

 

For an out-of-court settlement paying all legal fees and a monetary assistance offer coupon toward a new vehicle purchase - Two to three years.

Posted

Would like to get a contact number for Subzero LED in California. Wanted to talk to them about the Projector swap out that was done for Alpine Truck Life.

Posted

I got mine by way of a friend of a friend.

 

However there is a vendor out there that sells them but I do not support nor am obligated to endorse them in anyway. You can attempt to google it but I cannot post a direct link.

 

* can even give a hint and to look up the manufacturer part no/code: and then google that name with it. Subzero normally does only local jobs but that other vendor has pretty bad reviews which is why I got someone in CA to go right to source. I did not use them so will not recommend them

Posted

Wow, what ever happened to personal responsibility? Instead of crying about GM building a truck with sorry lights shouldn't you be mad at yourself for spending $50k on a truck and not making sure you like it? It's not like it's in shrink wrap or hid away and you couldn't check it out.

 

Lawyers get rich and trucks cost more because of this kind of law suit. Ridiculous.

Posted

Raise your hand if you had the opportunity to test drive your vehicle at night.

 

 

I still love my truck but I fixed my lights. Not everyone is as capable or has the cashflow to do it. GM should reach out out those people IMO $500 repair is worth $5000 in loyalty. They ended up replacing all of our towing bar/attachments which is a large heavy piece and from what I was told that was not cheap to do and real pain because of the size and logistics, still they did it because it was a safety issue; this should fall under same category.

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...