Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
On 5/18/2020 at 11:49 AM, jguzek said:

Glad to hear GM came through. Amazing this is not a safety recall for everyone

I also had my rear window assembly replaced last week under the service bulletin. (parts were on back order for several weeks).

GM eventually came through for me as well, but man!, did they make it hard.



Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk
 

Hello, I just have the exact same issue on my 2016 Sierra Denali, the bulletin that you mentioned applies only for US, my GMC is from Mexico, do you know of there's a bulletin for this cases in Mexico?

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted
Just now, braka1172 said:

Truckwindow.jpg

Just happened to my 2014 Silverado this past week.  I did a little (and I do mean little) searching on the internet to see if this was a common thing because I had never heard of anything like this happening and it took me 10 seconds to find that there was a recall in Canada for this issue but not in the U.S.. I called GM and was told that it was not a recall issue here and there wasn't anything they could do. I then filed a complaint with the BBB and within an hour I got a call back from GM saying take it to the dealer to have it looked at. Since then I got an estimate from the dealer saying it would cost a little over $1500 to replace the window with no explanation as to what caused the window to explode in the first place and the same line about there being no recall under the VIN and the truck was out of warranty. The cost was to come out of my pocket and I would still have to work with GM to see if I could get reimbursed for any of the cost. This seems to me a good case for a class action lawsuit against GM since they don't seem to admit there is a problem here in the US or that it's not just a certain chain of VIN's this is happening to.

Posted (edited)

2015 slt here. My driver rear window exploded last Saturday while driving home that evening. Sounded like a gun shot, my wife looked around the back seat but couldn’t see anything wrong, I kept driving. Got home out of the rain and checked it out in the garage, noticed the entire driver window was being held together by tint. Didn’t smell or see smoke. Did use defrost initially to clear fog off side mirrors, but I do not know if it was still on when this occurred. It happened about 15 minutes after we started driving. 

0D675BF4-CE4E-436C-A930-0514BC2B4203.jpeg

36EC8DA4-956E-422B-AA4C-94C5F17DF97F.jpeg

Edited by Skeeter McSkeet
Posted

I've been following this topic since it began. It was worrisome because my younger son rides with me frequently and sits in the right rear seat in a booster seat. And now, my grandson who lives with me and his mom often rides in a rear facing seat mounted on left rear seat. The shattering rear windows seem to happen on either side. I followed the advice mid thread about pulling the #10 fuse a couple years back to stop this from happening. I didn't want to risk injuring my son or grandson. Especially since when using remote start when cold out, the rear window defrost would automatically come on. I like that the mirror defrost will still work though. I think it sucks that there was a recall but only covered certain areas and not all the trucks that suffered from this defect. Rear window defrost is a nice feature especially up north but not worth the risk. And honestly, I haven't missed it at all. Until my truck qualifies for the fix, the fuse won't be going back in...

Posted
1 hour ago, mikeyk101 said:

I've been following this topic since it began. It was worrisome because my younger son rides with me frequently and sits in the right rear seat in a booster seat. And now, my grandson who lives with me and his mom often rides in a rear facing seat mounted on left rear seat. The shattering rear windows seem to happen on either side. I followed the advice mid thread about pulling the #10 fuse a couple years back to stop this from happening. I didn't want to risk injuring my son or grandson. Especially since when using remote start when cold out, the rear window defrost would automatically come on. I like that the mirror defrost will still work though. I think it sucks that there was a recall but only covered certain areas and not all the trucks that suffered from this defect. Rear window defrost is a nice feature especially up north but not worth the risk. And honestly, I haven't missed it at all. Until my truck qualifies for the fix, the fuse won't be going back in...

Yea man I wish I would have seen this topic, I would have pulled the fuse too.  I live in West Virginia, defrost is needed fairly often here, no idea how we did not get included for the fix.  I'm going through insurance as I have no other option to get it fixed immediately.  Warranties have all been expired.   Currently just looking for who to contact to try and start the conversation to get reimbursed.  These so called local gm reps seem to be unicorns.  

  • Sad 1
Posted

@Skeeter McSkeet I would call 866-790-5600 which is GM themselves and report the problem. I am going through it right now and working with them and the dealership. I'm still waiting to hear on if they will cover the cost but the more of us that call in the more attention this issue gets. Maybe then GM will see that this is a bigger issue than they are willing to admit at the moment. Don't know if it helps but I'm speaking to a Rep named Lavonda and she seems to be pretty helpful at the moment. 

  • Like 1
  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

Update: Well looks like GM wants to stick their head in the sand yet again and the only thing they are willing to do is refund the cost of the repair off of a New truck. I received a call from a woman claiming to be "Upper Management" this morning and the way she spoke to me just got under my skin. The rep I had been speaking to since this whole thing began had been very polite and seemed pretty concerned but this woman just took an attitude like how dare you claim the GM might have a defect. 

  • Sad 1
  • 1 month later...
Posted
On 1/20/2023 at 12:33 PM, braka1172 said:

Update: Well looks like GM wants to stick their head in the sand yet again and the only thing they are willing to do is refund the cost of the repair off of a New truck. I received a call from a woman claiming to be "Upper Management" this morning and the way she spoke to me just got under my skin. The rep I had been speaking to since this whole thing began had been very polite and seemed pretty concerned but this woman just took an attitude like how dare you claim the GM might have a defect. 

I had about the same experience. GM told me they don't do refunds for warranty claims, and that since my truck is now repaired and in normal working condition there is nothing to file a claim about.  I went though the dealer locally first, they saw nothing as far as tsb's or recalls and recommended going through insurance. 

 

I was told by GM that I should have let my truck sit as is until they had someone check it out, an estimator of sorts I presume.  Personally I was out of all warranties and I needed the truck in working order ASAP as we only have two vehicles and the wife needs hers for work travel.  I was not willing to rent anything either. 

 

So for anyone reading this now and seeing all the cryptic posts about going through GM earlier in this thread with no real helpful info....IF your truck was not one of the VIN's listed to get this fix done, you need to call GM and complain/file a claim prior to doing any sort of repair.  Use any 800 number you can find for GM and say you want to file a complaint, they'll transfer you to the right place.   

 

The representative on the phone knew exactly of the issue I was referring to, knew the bulletin number, knew of the countless ones having issues that did not receive the fix for their VIN, knew they were at fault but refused to help me..this was after being very polite and taking down all my info on a 25 minute phone call...turned into a jekyll/hyde scenario because she turned into a straight up b!tch the last few minutes.  

 

I will be writing a letter to GM to complain just to vent.  

 

 

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

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 473 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • 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.         
    • 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. 
    • 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. 
    • 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...