Jump to content

Chevy To Adjust Colorado ZR2 Airbags To Prevent Off-Road Deployment

Gorehamj

Recommended Posts

Gorehamj Senior Enthusiast

Gorehamj

Posted
Posted

colorado zr2 airbag deployed Joe Finn looking at drivers entrance.jpg

 

John Goreham
Contributing Writer, GM-Trucks.com
11-8-2018

 

General Motors made an unusual request today of GM-Trucks.com. Our contact at the Chevy Truck department asked us to report that GM is launching a new campaign to adjust the sensitivity of the airbags in the Chevy Colorado ZR2. This is a refreshing change from the industry standard practice of soft-pedaling recalls and product programs. Here is the unedited information we were asked to convey:

 

As you are aware, there have been reports of Colorado ZR2 owners whose roof-mounted side airbags deployed while off-roading. Upon learning of this issue, Chevrolet took immediate action to understand the root cause and create a solution. Today, we notified Chevrolet dealers of a customer-satisfaction initiative to recalibrate the thresholds for the roof-mounted side airbags for ZR2 owners. The updated calibration is available as of today, and will be installed free of charge the next time the customers takes their ZR2 to a Chevrolet dealer. There have been 11 reports of Colorado ZR2 owners whose roof-mounted side airbags deployed while off-roading.  Chevrolet is working to reimburse those ZR2 customers for the cost of repair, provided the event data was available to confirm the incident. We are incredibly proud of the ZR2 and the off-road capability it offers, and are encouraged to see customers are using the truck as intended. If customers have questions, they should contact their local dealer or Chevrolet Customer Assistance at 800-833-2438

 

GM-Trucks.com readers may recall that in May we covered the news that owners were beginning to report that the airbags in their Colorado trucks were deploying while off-roading (and not in a crash). You can read the prior full report here and see more images. Our reporting leaned heavily on images and reports from GM-Truck.com member Joe F. Since Joe's information was made available, other owners have also reported the same problem. We will do our best to get new information from Joe F. and how he is reimbursed. 

 

Our thanks to GM for asking us to be involved in disseminating this important product update program.  

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted

Sucks it took 11 trucks to get to this point, but at least they thoroughly examined them and came up with a solution.  Kudos GM.

j-ten-ner Senior Enthusiast

j-ten-ner

Posted
Posted

It's certainly a step in the right direction.
How many reports will it take to address the (e.g.g.) flaking coating on the frames?

Maybe it's taken care of on the new model. The hope dies last.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

rkj__ Enthusiast

rkj__

Posted
Posted

I’m happy to see GM responding to the issue.

 

Unfortunately, the ZR-2’s reputation has taken a bit of a beating as a result of the issue.

 

It’s amazing how much 11 instances of a problem, among thousands of trucks sold can get people talking. Base on how people were talking, I assumed there would have been more instances that were simply not being reported through the media.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

I hope they don't use "lack of data" to burn owners who had the overly sensitive airbags deploy.

rkj__ Enthusiast

rkj__

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Sterling Hess said:

Wonder if they will extend the re-calibration to the Sierra/Silverados as well? I had mine deploy off roading on my 2015 Sierra....

Right now, the recall is only on ZR2 trucks, not other Colorado and Canyon trucks.  It's been well documented that the issue has occurred on non ZR2 trucks as well. 

 

Could you describe what was happening when the bags went off in your Sierra?  How fast were you driving?  Were there any significant angles involved?  Or was the truck simply jostling slightly going over some bumps?

Sterling Hess Enthusiast

Sterling Hess

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, rkj__ said:

Right now, the recall is only on ZR2 trucks, not other Colorado and Canyon trucks.  It's been well documented that the issue has occurred on non ZR2 trucks as well. 

 

Could you describe what was happening when the bags went off in your Sierra?  How fast were you driving?  Were there any significant angles involved?  Or was the truck simply jostling slightly going over some bumps?

GM took the truck and repaired it so the manufacture knows everything. It had 800 miles on it. They fixed everything but basically said don't off road it like that. :/ But it was on a slight sideways slope, and was bumpy, Speed was maybe 10-15 mph? it was 3 years ago. A same year Ram and my older Avalanche with side bags had no issue with the same run. Imho the rollover sensor was too sensitive, but far as I know no changes have been made. 

rkj__ Enthusiast

rkj__

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, Sterling Hess said:

GM took the truck and repaired it so the manufacture knows everything. It had 800 miles on it. They fixed everything but basically said don't off road it like that. :/ But it was on a slight sideways slope, and was bumpy, Speed was maybe 10-15 mph? it was 3 years ago. A same year Ram and my older Avalanche with side bags had no issue with the same run. Imho the rollover sensor was too sensitive, but far as I know no changes have been made. 

I think this is why side by side ATVs now exist.  You used to be able to take a pickup truck off road, without worrying about it imploding, and self inflicting thousands of dollars of damage.  These days, so much on road safety tech and sensor driven traction management systems are being packed into trucks, taking them off road seems to make less and less sense. 

Sterling Hess Enthusiast

Sterling Hess

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, rkj__ said:

I think this is why side by side ATVs now exist.  You used to be able to tack a pickup truck off road, without worrying about it imploding, and self inflicting thousands of dollars of damage.  These days, so much on road safety tech and sensor driven traction management systems are being packed into trucks, taking them off road seems to make less and less sense. 

I agree, the older trucks lack of safety features were better for offroading...I have 2 seat RZR I can put in the bed to offroad and beat up. It sucks when you break your daily driver haha. 

  • 11 months later...

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

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Another JR
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By Another JR · Posted

      Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • newdude
      Gas fill door

      By newdude · Posted

      Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • newdude
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By newdude · Posted

      No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...