Jump to content

2014-2016 Brake Recall Soon? - Vacuum Pump Failure

ShamrockShooter

By ShamrockShooter
in Troubleshooting & Recalls

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

paumat
paumat

Once the lawyers get involved, a recall is more likely to be issued if there has been property damage and/or personal injury as a result of the failures. My guess is that if it does turn into a recall

paumat
paumat

If a recall comes, you’d be reimbursed if you have receipts, I think.   my point was that in a recall, Gm is paying for it, so the cost to them would be whatever the pump costs them plus an

ShamrockShooter
ShamrockShooter

My invoice says they measured the vacuum pump at 3 where it was supposed to be like 27. If you give them the tsb number and tell them the brakes get hard after repeated slow speed stops that should b

StepUpChev New Member

StepUpChev

Posted
Posted

I just bought a 2016 with a warranty block. They performed the recall but the fix didn't remedy the situation. They are classing the actual changing of parts "warrenty" work and aren't willing to move forward and help. Looks like im gonna keep taking this further up as it's a huge safety issue. I see that someone got the recall done and parts replaced and it eased still an issue. Check this out. 

 

https://www.carcomplaints.com/news/2018/gm-brake-vacuum-pump-failures-lawsuit.shtml

 

 

 

EPIC CAJUN Enthusiast

EPIC CAJUN

Posted
Posted

I had my pump replaced through an extended warranty plan in February when it went out.  I almost drove through my garage wall when the pump decided to shit the bed.  

 

 

  • 3 months later...
jwhitesides Enthusiast

jwhitesides

Posted
Posted

I dropped my 2014 Silverado off this morning to have oil change and the software recall performed. I was just informed that they where unable to perform the recall as they don't have the part in stock.

 

So I asked the question that I understood that this was a "software upgrade" and that this shouldn't "require a part". The technician stated that initially that was the case but has now VERY recently changed and they will need to replace the vacuum pump and it is out of stock. This may not be the case for all years and models but IS the case for my 2014 Silverado 5.3L

jonny24 Enthusiast

jonny24

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, jwhitesides said:

I dropped my 2014 Silverado off this morning to have oil change and the software recall performed. I was just informed that they where unable to perform the recall as they don't have the part in stock.

 

So I asked the question that I understood that this was a "software upgrade" and that this shouldn't "require a part". The technician stated that initially that was the case but has now VERY recently changed and they will need to replace the vacuum pump and it is out of stock. This may not be the case for all years and models but IS the case for my 2014 Silverado 5.3L

So I just had the software update done for this on Wednesday. They never mentioned anything about a pump. Does this mean my truck will show up as having had it done and I'm SOL if this issue crops up? (never experienced that hard braking)

jwhitesides Enthusiast

jwhitesides

Posted
Posted
On 1/10/2020 at 1:32 PM, jonny24 said:

So I just had the software update done for this on Wednesday. They never mentioned anything about a pump. Does this mean my truck will show up as having had it done and I'm SOL if this issue crops up? (never experienced that hard braking)

IDK. I just know that on my truck they have a vacuum pump on order.

Dontbuychevy New Member

Dontbuychevy

Posted
Posted

I was involved in (2) accidents from this issue. After the second one I received a letter saying to bring my truck in for repair. Sure enough (I have paper work to prove) the dealer determined my booster was operating below the pressure threshold and was replaced at no cost by the dealer. 
 

gm then played shady phone games with me lying to me saying ESIS, who “handles gm claims” was a 3rd party with no ties to gm only to later find out they work for gm. Either way they sent an inspector out who inspected every aspect of my truck for about 7 hours, they were trying to come back with proof that when I rear ended someone the brake was not being pressed. They can see if the air bag almost goes off. The inspection came back with nothing and Esis eventually offered me a laughable “settlement” which was “not an admission of guilt however an act of good faith by gm to repair my vehicle.”

 

Needless to say this has been going on for over a year, I’m not sure my truck is safe to drive and I do 110 miles a day. This whole thing has caused me severe stress and anxiety and I hope none of you have to deal with this. Luckily no one was seriously injured, but one party involved had a neck injury. Gm is a disgrace. 

  • 10 months later...
Bash74 Enthusiast

Bash74

Posted
Posted
No one else has had these problems??
Probably not enough for people to comment. Plus just just because booster fails it doesn't mean there are no brakes so people can still stop.

Sent from my SM-G975U1 using Tapatalk

  • 2 months later...
Lspoo19 Enthusiast

Lspoo19

Posted
Posted

I just got my vacuum pump replaced today at the dealer. 2016 Silverado with 42k on it. I think they’ve seen enough of these they didn’t question me at all on it

  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...
sourdough44 Enthusiast

sourdough44

Posted
Posted

 Sorry just a bit dated on this thread, but like related.

 

  I have a 2017 Silverado, 71k miles, well cared for. My brakes have been acting up at low speeds, last 4+ weeks or so. I have a good code reader, shows ‘Electronic Brake Control Module’, code C0800-5A.

 

  This truck doesn’t currently have any recalls active. I have an appointment tomorrow afternoon, I don’t plan to throw the checkbook at the issue. I think it should of been taken care of.

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

    • Aimatdeer
      Ac not keeping up

      By Aimatdeer · Posted

      Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • CamGTP
      Gas Prices

      By CamGTP · Posted

      Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Atlas
      Gas Prices

      By Atlas · Posted

      Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      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?
    • scotthvac.net
      2022-24 halogen - led grille swap

      By scotthvac.net · Posted

      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

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...