Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I like the capless system , but there should be a door latch from the inside ! I was tired everytime I would fill up at full service only and have someone undo the cap and let go and let it hit paint like a mini battering ram  , I had paint scratches every where , I'm guilty myself 

Posted

2 inch black plastic pipe cap from Homey’s or Lowe’s. Fits over the top perfectly and keeps dust, ice, water, and all other associated road crap out of the fill tube. 

Posted

Seems that other GM vehicles have a sealed door to keep out the weather but why not Silverdo? Even states so on GM website "

"The doors are designed to assure the system will remain airtight through years of use."

  https://my.chevrolet.com/learnAbout/capless-fuel-filler/2017/Silverado 1500

 Sounds to me that someone dropped the ball and let this feature out?

Posted

Well, I'm not sure everyone is understanding the mechanics of this system. There are 2 flaps or fuel doors on both the GMC Sierra and Chev Silverado pickups. The inner flap is not that visible.

Seems like there is a lot of speculation and disbelief on the design and function. No, there is no physical cap that you turn to remove because GM has more confidence in this newer system. If you want a locking door then install one if you are worried about tampering. Otherwise it appears to me to be a pretty good improvement overall.

Posted (edited)

Yes they may be two flappers but it still doesnt keep junk from getting into the system when fueling. Again why do the other GM vehicles have a door that seals

Edited by Orlando8
Posted

WTF is wrong with a cap. This is no improvement. There's shit on the flap everytime I fill up, just try to tell me some of that crap isn't going into the tank... Some little troll in there wiping it down?, stupid ass design.

Posted

Ok, so you have a picture. Was there a noticeable problem with performance so far? Just a lot of complaining before any proven results.

Posted

It definitely different. It didn’t really like it at first, but there are two seals as mentioned. We just had a major snow storm with 16.8” of snow and 60 mph wind gusts. Nothing got under my fuel door. It is what it is and not much you can do about it. Someone on eBay sells little plug type caps. When/If I ever have a problem with it, I’ll address it then


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted
8 minutes ago, Loco-diablo said:

It definitely different. It didn’t really like it at first, but there are two seals as mentioned. We just had a major snow storm with 16.8” of snow and 60 mph wind gusts. Nothing got under my fuel door. It is what it is and not much you can do about it. Someone on eBay sells little plug type caps. When/If I ever have a problem with it, I’ll address it then


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thx for the clarification.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

Posted

but how do two seals help? Something gets past the first seal when fueling it will fall past the second seal into the tank

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

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,803 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • 2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
    • Just don't turn the steering wheel as much?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...