Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

If the part is 12571609 then is is very much available my dealer has it in stock and also checked and said more than 100 available. If he didn't have it on the self he said they have it in a hour or really 20 minutes depending on traffic. I didn't search your area but I would guess if they really wanted it they can call gm warehouse and have it at least on the next shipment heading your way. Gm online has it and even selling it on amazon at a discount. If I was you i would be lighting a fire under some a55es. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, newdude said:

The VLOM is the problem.  Backordered.  Newest # is 12688229.  The issue with it, is that its coming from plant 075 Pontiac MI.  Pontiac re-did their computer systems in the end of May/beginning of June and they pretty much wiped the whole plant.  They have TRUCKLOADS of parts they have yet to process, and are so far behind its not funny.  GM keeps giving dealers the runaround too as to when they will have the plant fully operational as well.    

 

I doubt they had issues with the pushrod per my post and 1SLOW.

 

 

oh pontiac is one city over from me. let me see what that part number shows.

Posted (edited)

that number says discontinued on gmpartsgaint. 

 

just called they do have truck full but issue is they switched computers and it is causing ordering issues. seems like a stupid issue. My contact said best you can do is have the service rep get a approval to have one shipped or sold back to gm and mailed. I would guess this is what they are doing for you, minus the gm service rep. 

Edited by 1SLOW1500
Posted
4 hours ago, Dean "Deano" Rappleye said:

Good news and bad news...the good news is that SPAC found a pushrod and it's on its way.  The bad news is that they're going through the same process for the manifold and they have not located one yet.  Remember the good old days, when GM and dealers had plenty of spare parts to service the vehicles they had sold?

 

PM sent. 

Posted
On ‎6‎/‎29‎/‎2019 at 10:52 AM, Dean "Deano" Rappleye said:

He (dealer service writer) said the parts were not available anywhere in the US...told me some mumbo-jumbo about there being a special team at GM that scours around to find out-of-stock parts and gets them to the dealer quickly when possible.  It sounds like I'm being lied to???  I mean, it's inconceivable with the number of 6.2l motors running around out there that they wouldn't have plenty of replacement parts.

 

What dealership in Everett are you dealing with?

Posted

Bent pushrod caused by failed AFM lifter? 

 

Wish my 2018 had 5yr 100k powertrain instead of 5 yr 60k. I’m currently at 8k miles and it’s 1.5 years old so I’ll prob be ok lol. 

 

 

Posted

The plot sickens...they replaced the pushrod, lifters and VLOM, and the noise is still happening!  No explanation, no ETA for repairs, they'll just tear apart the engine until they find something.  My faith in Chevrolet is seriously shaken...

Posted
19 hours ago, Dean "Deano" Rappleye said:

The plot sickens...they replaced the pushrod, lifters and VLOM, and the noise is still happening!  No explanation, no ETA for repairs, they'll just tear apart the engine until they find something.  My faith in Chevrolet is seriously shaken...

How were your brakes working before this happened.

 

Wonder if your noise is from the vacuum pump?

Posted

Honestly they should just swap the engine out and tag yours for gm inspection. I mean a engine swap is a few hours and good to go also gm will know it wasn't the mechanic.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Posted

Today's update...dealer called this morning.  Their latest theory is that when they put the head back together after replacing the pushrod, lifters, and VLOM, the head gasket they used was faulty.  They're going to try to put a new one in today to see if that fixes things.  The mechanic was "95% sure" this would fix the problem, but then again, he was pretty sure about his original pushrod diagnosis.  Also, they are working with Chevrolet to get me a rental that I can pull my travel trailer with for my upcoming vacation.  The catch is that they'll only pay rental fees for a GM product, and while Enterprise has GM vehicles in their fleet, there isn't one available locally, so the probably won't pay...which is total bullshit.  Getting soooooo tired of this...I like what 1SLOW1500 said, that they should just put in a new engine and take mine for failure analysis. 

  • Like 1
Posted

I hope they get it right for you! Ive already had a push rod on #1 replaced and lifter replaced on #7 (15 6.2) at around 38k miles.  Im at 50k now and its got a knock again but mostly after it was warmed up them turned off and sits for about 20 minutes.  Still have warranty so gonna get it in soon. 

 

I also wonder if its the vacuum pump.

Posted

It just gets worse and worse...they replaced the gasket, and now there's a coolant leak.  They're going to replace the gasket again.  It's starting to look like their mechanic doesn't know what he/she is doing, and is just stabbing in the dark.

  • Sad 1

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

    • Batteries don’t always show signs of a few years ago my vehicle started fine in the morning and took me to work. After work the battery was completely dead and I needed a jump. No, I didn’t leave anything on and the battery was only a couple months old. It was replaced under warranty. 
    • AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • If his battery was that bad I would think it would have been showing signs before this that were ignored. Stinks that it happened the way it did in rush hour traffic, but this seems like a pretty fringe scenario. I don't mind it that bad and never turn it off. The only slight annoyance for me is the slight delay between brake to gas, but I have gotten used to it and figure if it can save a little gas why not.
    • That is a good correction. I think “severity” was probably the wrong word for what I meant. What I really mean is closer to event priority, relevance, and actionability — not “this code is severe” or “replace this part.” I agree that a truck can have a lot of trivial or historical communication codes, and if the product starts pushing alerts for every stored or low-value event, people will ignore it very quickly. So the alert logic would need to be filtered. For example, I would not want a random old communication code to generate a push notification by itself. A useful alert would probably need to be based on things like: - new vs historical - active vs stored - repeated vs one-time - duration of the event - whether it happened near the driver-marked symptom - whether it happened together with voltage drop, reset, bus-off, misfire, oil-pressure change, etc. - whether the same pattern repeats under similar conditions So instead of saying “severity,” maybe the product should organize events by affected system and priority. For example: Misfire event: Show misfire counts / roughness first, then fuel trims, RPM/load, DFM/AFM state if available, coolant/oil temp, voltage, and related DTCs. Oil-pressure event: Show oil pressure first, but only in context — RPM, load, oil temperature, coolant temperature, DFM/AFM state if available, voltage, and baseline comparison. Communication event: Show which module/network/message dropped, whether voltage dropped, whether the recorder reset, whether it was active or historical, and whether it repeated. Voltage/reset event: Show battery voltage, crank/wake/sleep state, module reset, communication dropouts, and what came back online first. That also solves the display-order problem you mentioned. The main report should not always show the same fixed list first. It should show the system that appears abnormal first, and then the supporting values for that system. I also agree that the truck already has an oil pressure gauge and MIL. The point would not be to duplicate those. The value would be in showing what else was happening before and after the warning or symptom. For example, if the MIL comes on for a misfire, the truck already told the driver there is a problem. The useful part would be: - which cylinder or bank looked abnormal first - whether it happened after an AFM/DFM transition - whether fuel trims were already moving - whether oil pressure or voltage changed at the same time - whether the same pattern happened previously without a MIL On the OBD port point, I think you may be right for a consumer-facing version. OBD is much easier for the average owner: - easier install - easier removal - inside the cabin - easier phone connection - easier data download - easier to include a pass-through port for another scanner OBD is also the right place for DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration information, Mode 6, and normal scan-tool parameters. The reason I was looking at ECM-side recording is that some events may be gone by the time someone plugs in a scanner, and some powertrain-side network evidence may not be available the same way through the DLC. But I agree that if an OBD-based version can capture enough useful evidence for most owners, that is probably the cleaner consumer product. Maybe the split is: - OBD/DLC version for most consumers - ECM-side version only if it proves it adds evidence that the OBD version cannot get - shop/pro version if deeper powertrain-side event evidence is actually useful So I would not want to force the inline approach if the OBD workflow solves most of the real-world problem. Your last point is probably the key product requirement: the report should be specific to the system showing the abnormality. Not “here are 50 parameters.” More like: “Misfire-related event detected. Here are the misfire/fuel/DFM/context values.” or “Oil-pressure-related event detected. Here is oil pressure compared with RPM/load/temp/baseline.” or “Communication event detected. Here is what dropped, when, and whether voltage/reset happened first.” That is a much better way to think about the report.
    • It was all part of the tiny bit of fuel savings it goes towards what was mandated by the government. Much like cylinder deactivation. That was relaxed by the recent administration. All that doesn’t help the individual buyer. But as a whole helps the manufacturer to try to reach the previous ridiculous past mileage per gallon mandate. So yes it was mandated and added cost to the vehicle. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...