Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Same issue with my 2019.  Purchased February 2019,  have had noise since the first week Around 1000 miles.  New drivers side axle and whole new front assembly.  Still have the noise.  I have been in a loaner truck for 3 plus weeks now

Posted

That sucks ! I reached out to GM a couple weeks ago and still no fix yet. I am just gonna stay on them , all this money I am paying and I have to drive hearing noises. At this rate I should've kept my 2012 Silverado !

Posted

Same issue here 2019 silverado rst with the 5.3l my dealership keep trying say its rocks in my tire even after i said its forsure not rocks when i brought it in, ill have to show them that document when i go to pick it up today   

 

Posted

Really , is this under the lemon law? Are you gonna buy another one? I am ready to scream with mine , so tired of hearing the damn front end noise. I wish the the thing would just break where it won't drive at this point. Good luck 

Posted

Negotiated a deal with GM.  I am buying a new Silverado.   I understand that there are 2 different front axle assemblies.   I had them check the new VIN to make sure it doesn't have the same front end as the truck I have had problems with 

  • Thanks 1
Posted

Can you post the reason and cause from GM plz it may help settle our issues as well, my dealership is saying this is first time they hearing of this issue even after i gave them the service report id# 

Posted

Axel made by American axle is supposed to be the problem.   Someone should be able to check by the VIN to see which axle is in the truck 

  • 1 month later...
Posted
On ‎11‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 11:51 AM, Aycock1987 said:

Maybe this forum can help me.

 

I purchased my 2019 Silverado last month. It currently has 900 miles on it. From day one, I noticed a rotating clicking noise coming from the front... I did a couple of tests of my own and found out that it only makes this noise in 2X4. Whenever I put it in 4X4, the noise quits... once I take it out of 4X4, the noise stays gone for a while but eventually returns after driving it for a while.

 

I took it to the dealership and they put it on the rack and spun the driver-side front tire.... found out that the click was coming from that area. The dealership replaced the Front Differential with a new one (did not replace the CV) but the noise is still present.

 

Can anyone help me diagnose this?

 

Posted

My dealer says that my 2019 Silverado RST needs a slinger, seal and ring (assume snap ring) on the diff to fix the LF squeak noise in 2WD only.  They found a bulletin, ordered parts and will fix next week (I hope)

Posted
47 minutes ago, Old Dale said:

My dealer says that my 2019 Silverado RST needs a slinger, seal and ring (assume snap ring) on the diff to fix the LF squeak noise in 2WD only.  They found a bulletin, ordered parts and will fix next week (I hope)

Can you ask for the bulletin number when you drop off your truck my dealership still saying no fix for the problem yet (lakewood chev in edmonton AB sucks)

Posted

There’s already a thread on this. I’ve had the fix done and the noise came right back. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. I’m dealing with gm execs. Having the engineer come to look at my truck so they could figure out why. Get it done if you want to help the cause. But tbh, it doesn’t work


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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

  • 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...