Jump to content

GM Stepping Up on Brake Issue

2017Darkness
 Share

Recommended Posts

paumat Enthusiast

paumat

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, GANDERCHICKEN said:

THIS IS A COMPLETE JOKE.  ON OCTOBER 3RD 2019, I WAS PULLING INTO MY GARAGE, THANK GOD I WASNT GOING VERY FAST AND HAD NO WARNING, NO DASH LIGHTS, NOTHING!!! STEPPED ON MY BRAKES AND HAD NOTHING.  I HAD TO LITERALLY STAND ON THEM TO GET MY PICKUP STOPPED BEFORE RUNNING THROUGH MY GARAGE.  I RECIEVED NO INDICATION OR MAIL STATING THIS WAS A ISSUE IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR.  THAT BEING SAID MY PICKUP NOW HAS 81,000 MILES ON IT.  CAN I OR WILL I GET NOW THAT IM OVER THE MILEAGE CRITERIA AND I WOULD HAVE BEEN WITHIN THE CRITERIA IN APRIL?  WHAT IF I HAD TO COME TO A STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN? NO CHANCE!!! I WOULD HIT THEM AND I'D BE GETTING SUED OVER A BS APPLICATION THAT THE GM WONT OWN UP TO.  WHERE THE  HELL DOES 72,000 MILES COME FROM?  THATS ABOUT THE ODDEST MILEAGE CRITERIA I HAVE EVER COME ACROSS.  IM PURSUING THIS ISSUE WITH GM AND WILL SEE WHAT HAPPENS.  MIGHT HAVE TO GET A LAWYER INVOLVED AS WELL.  I CANT BELIEVE A COMPANY OF THIS SIZE WONT HELP THE CUSTOMERS OUT THAT MAKE THEIR COMPANY A SUCCESSFUL ONE.

They’ll do the reprogramming since that is a recall. If the vacuum pump is shot, you wouldn’t be covered unless you can get a goodwill repair.  Personally, I think the reprogramming is a temp fix to get people in excess of the extended warranty timeframe — it looks like they’re doing something about it and it’s millions of dollars cheaper than replacing the pump. 

Edited by paumat
  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

2017Darkness
2017Darkness

Well, here it is: N182202780 - Special Coverage Adjustment - Brake Assist Decreased Due to Vacuum Loss GLOBAL SAFETY FIELD INVESTIGATIONS DCS5013 URGENT - DISTRIBUTE IMMEDI

Grjfer
Grjfer

Call my dealer today, to inquire about the extended service period. They referred me to GM. I called GM and they referred me back to the dealer. I hope this isn't a series of run around.  

Jglew82
Jglew82

If you deactivate AFM and tune for it then that's probably possible, but a better route is to use the electric vacuum pump like the Vettes have. The thoughts behind implementing the vacuum pump was du

Sierra Dan Senior Enthusiast

Sierra Dan

Posted
Posted

The 72k mile cap is a joke. Especially for us early 14 and 15 owners who are/were

already disqualified when this recall bulletin was issued due to 4-5 years of racked up mileage.

 

  • 1 month later...
krunch Enthusiast

krunch

Posted
Posted

Hey all, I am in Canada, I have a 2016 Silverado, and just got a letter today. First I’ve heard of this issue! While I think the failure should be addressed better, the letter I just got says the warranty on the pump is now 10 years or 240,000 kilometers, (almost 150,000 miles). Anyone else get this new letter?

flyingfool Senior Enthusiast

flyingfool

Posted
Posted (edited)

I would just recommend everyone leave your truck in M5 mode when using the vehicle this way you dont flip over to V4 mode and loose brake vacuum.

 

I wonder what GM is reprogramming to cover up with software fix.  only thing I can imagine is they are reducing the ability of the truck to enter v4 mode......v4 mode doesnt allow the engine to produce manifold vacuum and thus no brake booster.. I'm not interested in giving up v4 ability by tuning it out.. wish i could get more details on the software...

 

anychance I can save the origional software to a file on my laptop using the GMtech2  clone interface before I go to the dealer and they wipe it out and reinstall thier file?

Edited by flyingfool
Diverjer Enthusiast

Diverjer

Posted
Posted

I also received a letter today from GM.  They said if this condition occurs on your 2014 Chevrolet Silverado within 10 years or 150,000 miles which ever occurs first the condition will be repaired at no cost. 

I am thinking this is more of a problem than they think or want to admit.  Maybe I need to go in and tell them this thing isn't stopping at slow speeds, darn near went through the Kwik Shop store front window. 

Capt Bob Enthusiast

Capt Bob

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, flyingfool said:

any chance I can delete the vac pump and install the Hydro booster from the 2500/3500 model trucks?

Is your steering hydraulic? That's where the hydro boost system gets its power, from the power steering pump.

flyingfool Senior Enthusiast

flyingfool

Posted
Posted (edited)

ahh that's right, make sense since they still use the old 6.0  motor and not the new 6.2 DI motor on the 2500 trucks.  just brainstorming out loud ..

but still , will a steering pump bolt up to the 5.3-6.2 motors?

Edited by flyingfool
jwhitesides Enthusiast

jwhitesides

Posted
Posted

I have received this letter for both my 2014 Silverado  w/ 100K and my wife's 2015 Tahoe w/ 75K for the "software" update. I have not had the brake experiences on either vehicle that are mentioned but am now nervous about it. Should I push the issue to replace the vacuum pump? I am reading others have the software update performed and either never having the issue before and experiencing it after the software update or having the issue before and after. Either way the software update is not addressing the issue.

  • Like 1
kwOH Enthusiast

kwOH

Posted
Posted
I have received this letter for both my 2014 Silverado  w/ 100K and my wife's 2015 Tahoe w/ 75K for the "software" update. I have not had the brake experiences on either vehicle that are mentioned but am now nervous about it. Should I push the issue to replace the vacuum pump? I am reading others have the software update performed and either never having the issue before and experiencing it after the software update or having the issue before and after. Either way the software update is not addressing the issue.

I never had a problem, with my 14 Silverado, and I took it in about a month ago to have it recalibrated, and still haven’t had a problem.
  • Like 1
Spurshot Senior Enthusiast

Spurshot

Posted
Posted (edited)

I've encountered this problem over the years.  The last time, my wife and I thought we were going to hit a stopped car.  I had both feet on the brake pedal and was pulling on the steering wheel to stop.  And I have 6 piston Wilwood 14.25 brakes in the front.  Clearly the vacuum assist was deficient when I needed it.  I just received my recall letter recently.   I'm wondering if the dealer will question/refuse service due to my Wilwoods.  Only way to tell is to go in.   

 

Prior to this I had also thought about installing a pump and hydra-vac from a 2500.  

Edited by Spurshot
flyingfool Senior Enthusiast

flyingfool

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Spurshot said:

I'

 

Prior to this I had also thought about installing a pump and hydra-vac from a 2500.  

i had the same thought because I've seen a couple ford Bronco guys ditch thier vac boosted brakes in favor of hydro-boost.  i do have a 2500HD sierra with this set up and it's rock solid.  

Edited by flyingfool
  • 10 months later...
Michael Wesley New Member

Michael Wesley

Posted
Posted

So I am out of warranty for my 2015 GMC Sierra. I currently have 173000 miles on my work truck, and the warranty cuts off the repair at 150000. Someone please explain how a manufacturer defect is going to be my $600 problem to get repaired. Is there way around this? Class action lawsuit? 

mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Michael Wesley said:

So I am out of warranty for my 2015 GMC Sierra. I currently have 173000 miles on my work truck, and the warranty cuts off the repair at 150000. Someone please explain how a manufacturer defect is going to be my $600 problem to get repaired. Is there way around this? Class action lawsuit? 

How did you get to 173k with AFM and original vacuum pump?

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

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • 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 agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      I went to the county a few years back to dispute my property taxes. To do that I hired an appraiser and a lawyer. The County Assessor wished to argue that the homes in my neighborhood the appraiser used were all 'distressed properties" and not representative of the "Market Average".    My response was," Of the 50 homes in our subdivision 43 of them were "distressed properties" under bank foreclosure and as such "Distressed IS the market". Lawyer about choked on his coffee and handed the Assessor the 'receipts'.    I won that case on the evidence provided by the Lawyer and the Appraiser.    We have the same thing going on here. My statements were based on the GOVERNMENTS NATIONAL DATA and yours on local markets in areas of your interest. They are both correct....   Thing is, this divergence was based on NATIONAL and not on LOCAL. I think you even understand that. But like you said, we are both stubborn and hardheaded.    I do not see any advantage to disengagement.  But that said we can step back to compose ourselves. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...