Jump to content

2016 console lid with powermat swap

clayface

Recommended Posts

clayface Enthusiast

clayface

Posted
Posted

The more I look at this and compare to my console lid, the more it looks like a match. Would this directly bolt in with my 2014 Silverado bench seat console lid? I'd love to add wireless charging, and this is cheaper and cleaner than brand motions option. http://m.ebay.com/itm/401130622095

Zach2275 Enthusiast

Zach2275

Posted
Posted

I'd be interested in doing this as well. There has to be a harness that you would need as well though

NIXONRIDE Enthusiast

NIXONRIDE

Posted
Posted

Not sure but it states 30 day returns...so order it up and try it out, worst case it doesn't work and you can send it back

LTZDaddy Enthusiast

LTZDaddy

Posted
Posted

Can't say I would recommend the OEM charger unless you have a Galaxy S6 and then probably without a case on it.

 

I bought a brand new S7 Edge on July 4th thinking it would work with the brand new truck that I was getting the next week...WRONG!!!!!! :(

 

There are plenty of threads out there about how the charger doesn't work with various phones.

 

Although... I ***CAN*** get it to work with my S7 Edge providing the sun is in the west, I take the case off, turn it around and have it face the back of the truck, push it ever so slightly up onto the rear lip, put my left index finger in my right ear, hold my right leg up, (while I use my left leg for the gas pedal), face the east, don't go over ANY bumps... and touch my right ear with my tongue!!!! LOL

 

I kid you not!![emoji15]

 

Had the tech try and get it to work and he couldn't. Then he popped his S6 (non edge, no case), on the console and HIS charged, so I was then informed "It works".

 

Me thinks NOT. :(

 

Something about the newer phones needing a stronger charger.

 

I know I can get my S7 to charge in the Samsung charger in a thin case, and in a REALLY bulky Otter Box. Even upside down!

 

 

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

pgamboa Senior Enthusiast

pgamboa

Posted
Posted

What a bummer. Sounds either very gimmicky or Chevy didn't consider charging requirements for newer phones. I have an iPhone 6S+ which requires 2.1amps to charge adequately. Which this wouldn't work for.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

f8l vnm Senior Enthusiast

f8l vnm

Posted
Posted

GM was one of the first to introduce this. Great thinking but I don't think they thought about it that much. It's a pos system that don't work. I've tried apple and Samsung phones. I got 2% charged for a 2 hour drive.

Silvern Sentry Enthusiast

Silvern Sentry

Posted
Posted

"Does not ship to Canada" :bs: It is a scam obviously

 

The persons store does seem to have a lot of ACdelco and OEM stuff though. Could be legit but I am always paranoid of ebay lol

 

 

I would check out this person mod where they just added wireless charging to a stock console lid themselves. Looks easy and straight forward but I think you sacrifice a USB slot. (Protip: there is another USB in glovebox many people do not know about)

http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/topic/169848-3-coil-wireless-charger-install-in-2015-sierra-denali/

 

*Careful of 30 day return policies on Auto Parts they almost always carry a restock fee of 20% or more.

TJay74 Senior Enthusiast

TJay74

Posted
Posted

You do realize that GM cant control wireless charging. The standard is not really set on it yet, example is the first gen of Samsung wireless charging phones and pads couldn't handle a fast charge like the plugged in cable provided, now on the S7 and up they fast charge on wireless just as if it was plugged into the cord.

 

The standard is ever changing, no way for the manufactures to keep up with it.

clayface Enthusiast

clayface

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Yeah the more I look, the more I'm going to go the diy route. If the charger bugs out, it's cheap enough to replace it.

Abearclaw Enthusiast

Abearclaw

Posted
Posted

Just like the sun glass holder above. Way too small.

Right?! Who the hell tested that thing out and was like yup, it works... Lol [emoji849]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...