Jump to content

Rear window leak

Demon
 Share

Recommended Posts

RadBrad Enthusiast

RadBrad

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Z71RAD88 said:

 

Well, there goes that. I was hoping the 21's would be fixed. 

Yup, My guess is if it is not fixed in the 2022 redesign, it probably wont be fixed until a complete remodel.  Maybe GM actually has tried to fix, and cannot fix it...like someone else mentioned, the GM Shake, the brake vacuum pumps, the air conditioning condensers etc. of the 2014-2018 models...

Edited by RadBrad
Missed word
  • Like 1
  • Replies 3.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Rocz3cqg
Rocz3cqg

Sliding Glass or / and Stop Light Module reported Leaking Situation             Contacts

ShamrockShooter
ShamrockShooter

Well my 2019 early build leaker was replaced with 2020 hopefully not leaker. No signs of an leaks on the window or headliner of the 2020 so fingers crossed. Very impressed with the 10 speed after th

Thomcat
Thomcat

No leaker here so can't do a 100% verification, but the problem seems to be with the spoiler design, regardless of weather the sealer leaks or not, and any cracks in the trim make it worse.  

Posted Images

Z71RAD88 Enthusiast

Z71RAD88

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, RadBrad said:

Yup, My guess is if it is not fixed in the 2022 redesign, it probably wont be fixed until a complete remodel.  Maybe GM actually has tried to fix, and cannot fix it...like someone else mentioned, the GM Shake, the brake vacuum pumps, the air conditioning condensers etc. of the 2014-2018 models...

I think someone else here made a hint that it's body flex causing the leak as GM took too much "meat" out of the cab to make it as light as possible, which if you look at the HD models, very few ( I think one member) had the leaking window issue. But it doesn't seem to be nearly as widespread on the HD trucks. 

 

Well, I'm glad I wasn't overly aggressive in pursuing a 2021. I guess I'll have to look at Ridgelines now. Ha ha...never. 

  • Like 1
RadBrad Enthusiast

RadBrad

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Z71RAD88 said:

I think someone else here made a hint that it's body flex causing the leak as GM took too much "meat" out of the cab to make it as light as possible, which if you look at the HD models, very few ( I think one member) had the leaking window issue. But it doesn't seem to be nearly as widespread on the HD trucks. 

 

Well, I'm glad I wasn't overly aggressive in pursuing a 2021. I guess I'll have to look at Ridgelines now. Ha ha...never. 

Yea that does make sense, I think the silly spoiler could have something to do with it as well...we might not ever really find out lol

OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted

I just think it has to be a deeper problem. If it’s only a bad window design (as GM initially thought almost 2 years ago), the revisions would have fixed it if it was fixable. But as we see, making the plastic frame thicker and whatever else they have supposedly tried does nothing if the cab around it is twisting / flexing on bumps. The window frame is still the weak link and would break no matter what.

 

I think this flex issue also coincides with the “popping” roof thing that some people complain of, as well as the reviews from car mags who have beaten up on these trucks for having a “noodle-y” structure.

 

From Car & Driver:

Our frustration with the Silverado is rooted in its ride and the noodly feel of the structure. Chevy followed its crosstown rival down the aluminum road only a short way, stamping the hood, doors, and tailgate from aluminum. The body and box are still steel. Chevy manages to undercut the Ford by 90 pounds just the same, though after driving the Silverado, we wished Chevy had put a little more beef into its structure. Those 22-inch wheels are the hammers, and the body is a dulcimer string. This truck shakes and vibrates so much that, bombing down a rough road, we expected to get a call from OnStar asking if we'd been in an accident.

 

HDs are fairing a lot better which makes sense since they weren’t designed with only light weight and fuel economy in mind.

 

And of course the fixed rear windows don’t leak because they use one solid piece of glass that actually adds some stability to the cab. Just as the windshield is considered a part of the structure.

 

Not hard to connect the dots.

  • Like 3
Z71RAD88 Enthusiast

Z71RAD88

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

I just think it has to be a deeper problem. If it’s only a bad window design (as GM initially thought almost 2 years ago), the revisions would have fixed it if it was fixable. But as we see, making the plastic frame thicker and whatever else they have supposedly tried does nothing if the cab around it is twisting / flexing on bumps. The window frame is still the weak link and would break no matter what.

 

I think this flex issue also coincides with the “popping” roof thing that some people complain of, as well as the reviews from car mags who have beaten up on these trucks for having a “noodle-y” structure.

 

From Car & Driver:

Our frustration with the Silverado is rooted in its ride and the noodly feel of the structure. Chevy followed its crosstown rival down the aluminum road only a short way, stamping the hood, doors, and tailgate from aluminum. The body and box are still steel. Chevy manages to undercut the Ford by 90 pounds just the same, though after driving the Silverado, we wished Chevy had put a little more beef into its structure. Those 22-inch wheels are the hammers, and the body is a dulcimer string. This truck shakes and vibrates so much that, bombing down a rough road, we expected to get a call from OnStar asking if we'd been in an accident.

 

HDs are fairing a lot better which makes sense since they weren’t designed with only light weight and fuel economy in mind.

 

And of course the fixed rear windows don’t leak because they use one solid piece of glass that actually adds some stability to the cab. Just as the windshield is considered a part of the structure.

 

Not hard to connect the dots.

 

Yup. Well said. 

RadBrad Enthusiast

RadBrad

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

I just think it has to be a deeper problem. If it’s only a bad window design (as GM initially thought almost 2 years ago), the revisions would have fixed it if it was fixable. But as we see, making the plastic frame thicker and whatever else they have supposedly tried does nothing if the cab around it is twisting / flexing on bumps. The window frame is still the weak link and would break no matter what.

 

I think this flex issue also coincides with the “popping” roof thing that some people complain of, as well as the reviews from car mags who have beaten up on these trucks for having a “noodle-y” structure.

 

From Car & Driver:

Our frustration with the Silverado is rooted in its ride and the noodly feel of the structure. Chevy followed its crosstown rival down the aluminum road only a short way, stamping the hood, doors, and tailgate from aluminum. The body and box are still steel. Chevy manages to undercut the Ford by 90 pounds just the same, though after driving the Silverado, we wished Chevy had put a little more beef into its structure. Those 22-inch wheels are the hammers, and the body is a dulcimer string. This truck shakes and vibrates so much that, bombing down a rough road, we expected to get a call from OnStar asking if we'd been in an accident.

 

HDs are fairing a lot better which makes sense since they weren’t designed with only light weight and fuel economy in mind.

 

And of course the fixed rear windows don’t leak because they use one solid piece of glass that actually adds some stability to the cab. Just as the windshield is considered a part of the structure.

 

Not hard to connect the dots.

Totally agree with all of that...my 2016 and 2018 felt much connected to the road over rough surfaces.  These new models do feel like they are jumpy over any type of bumps.  Thanks for the C&D impression.

econometrics Senior Enthusiast

econometrics

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, RadBrad said:

Totally agree with all of that...my 2016 and 2018 felt much connected to the road over rough surfaces.  These new models do feel like they are jumpy over any type of bumps.  Thanks for the C&D impression.

I didn't own a K2, but I can tell you the T1 is about as planted of a vehicle as I've driven. The jumpiness that C&D describes has everything to do with the CRAP shocks that GM puts on these trucks. Swap them out, and you'll experience an incredibly better handling machine. 

 

Anyway... not at all surprised that the 2021's are leaking. There have been ZERO substantive changes on these trucks. As someone above said, if this is not solved for 2022, we will have to endure it until the next platform redesign... probably in 2025 or something. 

  • Like 3
OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted

The poor ride definitely exacerbated the flex in the structure, at least in the eyes of that reviewer. But it’s still two separate issues.

 

Personally, I do not think my 19 is that bad. The max trailering package and Bilsteins really help. Also, GM did use new springs for the 2020MY to address some of the ride issues.
 

My ‘16 still felt more secure over rough crossings and didn’t have that rattling feeling throughout the cabin. It was probably close to the same weight as my 19 since it had less options. But it felt much heavier and more solid.

  • Like 1
paui4m Enthusiast

paui4m

Posted
Posted

Got mine back tonight after 24hrs of adhesive curing and a new window seal.

It was allegedly run through multiple water tests and no leaking so we'll see how long it lasts. 

Truck was definitely soaked when I picked it up. 

 

If it recurs, I am pursuing the solid rear window path. 

 

On a more positive note my Lomax cover arrived today and I get to install that this weekend.....

DSW1519 Enthusiast

DSW1519

Posted
Posted

My 21is built and being shipped now. Bummed to see this is still an issue with the 21s. I'm going to try the weather strip as jrodpic suggested and hope that will be enough to prevent leaks. Honestly when mine starts leaking I think I will go the solid window route and just be done with it. Disappointing gm hasn't resolved this yet


Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

Palytoxin Enthusiast

Palytoxin

Posted
Posted

Glad I double checked this thread. I have been looking at a 21 Sierra 1500 AT4, but I am going to pass for now. Can't stomach the thought of buying something with known leaking issues, especially for this price. 

Cpl_Punishment Senior Enthusiast

Cpl_Punishment

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, RadBrad said:

Yup, My guess is if it is not fixed in the 2022 redesign, it probably wont be fixed until a complete remodel.  Maybe GM actually has tried to fix, and cannot fix it...like someone else mentioned, the GM Shake, the brake vacuum pumps, the air conditioning condensers etc. of the 2014-2018 models...

My thoughts exactly. I suspect they're going to have to redesign the whole rear end of the cab to try to come up with something where the window frame won't be susceptible to cracking. 

Duramaxsky Enthusiast

Duramaxsky

Posted
Posted

I have been checking mine every rain. Everything from mist to heavy rain. No leaks. I have the longer cab. It seems these are all the shorter crew cab. Is that correct? Maybe a difference in how they flex?

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

Blue5.3l Enthusiast

Blue5.3l

Posted
Posted

If you switched to a solid window from a slider is it still a possibility to have rear defrost? Safelite shows it would be around $400 to have a tinted solid window with defrost installed. I would imagine all would be needed is to pull the fuse for the slider function to not work. 

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      Thanks - I wasn't quite caffeinated this morning. 2:1 makes sense, turning the crankshaft 360 degrees will turn the cam 180 degrees, and had I done that, the cam's dot would be at 6 and the crank's at 12 again.   I went ahead and took the sprocket off anyway, aligned everything dot-to-dot including the balance shaft just for s&g. I'm glad I did because I discovered no Loctite on the timing sprocket bolts. Maybe it's not required, but at only 20 ft-lb torque spec, those bolts aren't in there very tight. Cleaned and reassembled with some thread locker and torqued.   A general observation: Less is more with RTV. If a little doesn't stop a leak, a LOT probably won't, either. RTV is thinly veiled revenge, in a tube...      
    • richard wysong
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By richard wysong · Posted

      The timing marks are ok, that is #1, you can turn it over until they line up and it won't change anything, the crankshaft turns twice for every camshaft revolution, I have always set up SB Chevs as your pic shows using a straight edge
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      Someone's been here before.... There is a receipt for a 3-piece timing set, purchased earlier this year.   Is this picture something, or, nothing?   I have the timing cover off and my crank is perfectly TDC and the keyed gear's locating mark is dead on 12 o'clock.   The cam gear locating mark is also at 12 o'clock. Now, I'm not an expert, but all the install guides say the two locating marks should meet and be perfectly aligned when installing a timing set. The mark on the crank should be dead on 12:00 and the cam gear's mark should be dead on 6:00, and both marks should be perfectly vertically aligned.   I believe the timing gear is keyed or has a dowel that ensures it can only be installed on the cam in one position, so I have to believe the cam is out of phase somehow. At the very least, with a triangular bolt pattern, it can only be installed in one of 3 different positions.   Before I pulled the front cover, the truck was running alright, no service engine soon lights except an occasional P0172 / rich condition. Timing -16 timing at idle (should be +16), and total -35% fuel trim, two conditions I haven't been able to figure out.   In related news, my injector tested pretty well, wasn't leaking, but I had it rebuilt anyway, and it's on it's way back to me.         Along with this discovery, the good and bad:   Good: The oil pan seal appears undamaged.   Bad: -The timing cover has been reused, and the positioning dowels have been broken. That could explain some of the leaking. -Some kind of white paste or grease was used to try to seal the oil pan seal and timing cover (since wiped off..). -Then, someone globbed silicone all over the front of the cover and also buried the ckp sensor in it. But, they didn't put any inside the cover or use RTV to try to seal the oil pan seal with the timing cover (good).
    • Grumpy Bear
      PF63 Oil Filters Going Away?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      The guy that owns K&P filters last I checked in with him has over 300,000 miles on his Dodge base Hemi using his own 35 micron absolute stainless mesh filter from its first oil change.    The GM study I've posted a dozen times shows the relationship in engine life based in multiples of base units, not miles or years. That is the base unit is the number of miles the motor ran using the reference filter efficiency.    The above two paragraphs dismantle anecdotal arguments IF one changes oil often enough to prevent particle formation and the motor is in otherwise good shape. That is not full of silica (no air filter) or suffering a metallurgical issue that is not part of the lubrication discussion. Poor heat treat in example.   Data from UOA's I've reviewed from more than a few engines can show remarkably broad variations in oil cleanliness using the exact same filter over the course of an engines life.     Lastly there is the common sense of it. Wear debris WILL circulate the engine BEFORE it ever sees a filter in route to that filter and WILL harm the pump which NEVER sees filtered oil.    Alpha question then becomes, given the facts, how long do you believe is a reasonable service life from a vehicle you are certain you will not pass down? That is the junk yard will be it's resting place when you're done with it? (the moral issue most don't care about).    Omega question is then how diligent are you prepared to be in general mechanical, air & oil maintenance? Preventing particulates and keeping them sufficiently dilute; preventing the precursors from generation, amalgamation and precipitation.    If I get a good look at the engine bay of a vehicle I have a fair idea of the owners commitment to the inside of the power train. That 30 micron WIX is still more efficient than a sieve.                 
    • Tyler Gibbs
      PF63 Oil Filters Going Away?

      By Tyler Gibbs · Posted

      It also depends on what criteria someone is using for “best” when talking filters.  Are we going off best efficiency?   Best quality/QC?  Etc. because the two may not mutually exclusive.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...