Jump to content

DFM disable yet?

Robwcormack

Recommended Posts

Thomcat Senior Enthusiast

Thomcat

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, Robwcormack said:

Because of the proven issues AFM has caused, and because I have corsa exhaust and it sounds like ass when DFM kicks in.  I really dont care about the fuel economy.  I didnt buy a truck with a 6.2 for gas mileage 

Previous problematic issues with AFM have nothing to do with DFM operation and likely the '19s are clearing out the last of them. First AFMs introduced in my '07 model year Avalanche had oil burning issues associated with poor valve cover/PCV valve, LOMA manifold design and oil discharge valve in the sump. Discussed in length on the Avalanche forums. Seems that improper location of the PCV valve takeoff and discharge spray from the latter onto colder running AFM cylinders clogged and froze the oil control rings on the pistons allowing oil into the combustion chambers and all related oil burning problems. Likely aggravated by that engine killing DIC because its algorithm in calculating oil changes did not compensate with more frequent changes to reduce, not eliminate, the amount of dirt  in the oil sprayed on the walls.  Valve cover redesign in '08-'09 eliminated the PCV valve problem and post 1/11 modifications to the AFM discharge valve shrouded its horizontal ports redirecting all oil downward into the sump and not onto the AFM cylinder walls.

 

DFM is a totally different animal relying on electronic control complexity rather than mechanical control complexity to control cylinder deactivation. No more intermediate LOMA manifold in the engine valley feeding the AFM  half of the engine cylinders using a combo of half traditional lifters and half collapsible AFM lifters. DFM eliminates the AFM's Achilles heel, LOMA manifold and discharge valve, entirely substituting individual oil control valves for each cylinder mounted directly in the block and collapsible lifters on all cylinders. So now the ECU is in control of the oil feed to all cylinder lifters instead of the former AFM concept with the ECU controlling the LOMA which controlled oil feed to only the AFM cylinders.

 

https://gm-techlink.com/?p=11880

 

My guess is that with the more advanced and less mechanically complex DFM available, GM will be clearing out the last of their older AFM engines with the exception of the V6 and new 2.7turbo which remains AFM.  Must be a reason why they chose to continue the AFM approach over later DFM on a newly introduced engine design....might have to do with the engine balance or harmonics to specific rpms for 4 cyls. which differ from those for I6, V6 and V8s.

J-man67 Senior Enthusiast

J-man67

Posted
Posted

Amazing information! Thanks for sharing that!

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

Robwcormack Enthusiast

Robwcormack

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Thomcat said:

Previous problematic issues with AFM have nothing to do with DFM operation and likely the '19s are clearing out the last of them. First AFMs introduced in my '07 model year Avalanche had oil burning issues associated with poor valve cover/PCV valve, LOMA manifold design and oil discharge valve in the sump. Discussed in length on the Avalanche forums. Seems that improper location of the PCV valve takeoff and discharge spray from the latter onto colder running AFM cylinders clogged and froze the oil control rings on the pistons allowing oil into the combustion chambers and all related oil burning problems. Likely aggravated by that engine killing DIC because its algorithm in calculating oil changes did not compensate with more frequent changes to reduce, not eliminate, the amount of dirt  in the oil sprayed on the walls.  Valve cover redesign in '08-'09 eliminated the PCV valve problem and post 1/11 modifications to the AFM discharge valve shrouded its horizontal ports redirecting all oil downward into the sump and not onto the AFM cylinder walls.

 

DFM is a totally different animal relying on electronic control complexity rather than mechanical control complexity to control cylinder deactivation. No more intermediate LOMA manifold in the engine valley feeding the AFM  half of the engine cylinders using a combo of half traditional lifters and half collapsible AFM lifters. DFM eliminates the AFM's Achilles heel, LOMA manifold and discharge valve, entirely substituting individual oil control valves for each cylinder mounted directly in the block and collapsible lifters on all cylinders. So now the ECU is in control of the oil feed to all cylinder lifters instead of the former AFM concept with the ECU controlling the LOMA which controlled oil feed to only the AFM cylinders.

 

https://gm-techlink.com/?p=11880

 

My guess is that with the more advanced and less mechanically complex DFM available, GM will be clearing out the last of their older AFM engines with the exception of the V6 and new 2.7turbo which remains AFM.  Must be a reason why they chose to continue the AFM approach over later DFM on a newly introduced engine design....might have to do with the engine balance or harmonics to specific rpms for 4 cyls. which differ from those for I6, V6 and V8s.

Wow!  I know for a fact that the service techs at my local dealership don't even know all this stuff.  Hell I had to tell the guy it had DFM and not AFM and he tried to tell me it was the exact same thing.  I knew it wasnt, but I certainly didnt know the details like this.  Very good info.  At the same time, it seems like just more that can go wrong if it doesn't work properly when if I didnt have it I wouldn't have to worry with those problems.  It blows my mind that this "feature" isnt optional, similar to the ECO button in many vehicles.  If I want to use it and save gas, that's great, but if I don't I should have the option not to.  

Zach-91 Enthusiast

Zach-91

Posted
Posted

This video goes into a little more detail about how the system works. Pretty neat stuff. Scary that there are so many moving parts but neat from an engineering standpoint. Coming from a 2015 (5.3 6spd) silverado with AFM to my 19 (5.3 8spd) with DFM there is a night and day difference in drive ability. Weird shifting aside, the lag and jump between afm activating was miserable. I had a diablosport lew tune the entire time I owned the truck to make it more enjoyable/driveable. On the new 19, there is a little delay in the time you step on the pedal and the power comes in but it is smooth. I can't feel the disabled cylinders like you could on afm  

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Chuck FB
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I certainly could be wrong but I hear of pickups far newer than that 2007 cutoff which may not be going to the wrecker but are having engine work done and be that a reman engine or new engine or trying to repair the existing engine. Some of it would be design issues as per the cylinder deactivation system that GM has and one of those lifters wiping out the cam and the question of oil changes moving the needle or not on that whole mess, or in the case of Ford pickup engines that have the long timing chains and wearing them out and the roller followers and phasers and some of that certainly goes back to oil change intervals. But in those various cases the truck has all sorts of life left in it and so the unfortunate owner and may be original owner or used market owner that is pouring money into repairs so the truck is not seeing the salvage yard yet but damage is happening by infrequent oil changes. A friends son had bought a 2018 I think it is half ton GM and it had some sort of extended or used dealer warranty on it and of course the lifter issue bites and its rattling and so the dealer had to swallow the bill and was at least 7000.00 and I think they only replaced what they felt they had to replace so yeah, I can see that being a ticking time bomb in the not too distant future. Would frequent oil changes cure all these engineering "marvels", probably not but some engine designs have shown that they do much better if the oil is changed a lot more often then if the manufacturer service claims are followed. New trucks cost so much that there is an incentive to keep the existing truck on the road by repairing. 
    • davester
      Tranmission stays in Low

      By davester · Posted

      get a good code reader, and find out what problems the truck has noticed by reading codes. cheap ones can only get basic engine codes, you may want to get one that can get codes from all the computers in your truck.
    • asilverblazer
      OCI, not when but why?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      This is sort of my point, salvage yards aren't overflowing with all these 'poorly' maintained trucks - excellent/good/servicable condition otherwise, salvaged only as a result of a bad engine from poor oil change regiment.    In my area, there are no 2007 to newer gm trucks/suvs in any salvage yards. A few are in the 'recyclers' with very obvious reasons for being there - wrecked.
    • asilverblazer
      Stabilitrak conversion to Z71

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      Stabilitrack was a stability control, traction control system, that functioned independently from the transfer case.   Z-71 has nothing to do with the transfer case or differential.   If it does have an AWD system, my memory recalls this being specific to the Denali trim, converting won't be as simple as swapping out mechanical parts like differentials and transfer cases. It will require reprogramming at a minimum. Long story short, not likely worth it.   Pulling a fuse, may disable the AWD system, it might also prevent any other transfer case functions.   However, the AWD case was generally based on the same transfer case you refer to in the 2006 Suburban. If it still has a 4-High and 4-Low where the transfer case locks and splits power 50-50 front to rear, what are you gaining by changing anything? A true-rear wheel drive only, what good will that serve? Not enough to go through the trouble of changing out all the parts.    Generally, all the factory systems will handle a 33" tire and re-gearing. Probably a 35" tire too, if you aren't driving like a caveman. If 35" tires are in the plan...   If you do plan on driving like a caveman or are fully committed to 35" tires, an entire re-think of the build is probably in order. Starting with square one, an IFS front end isn't going to be the best starting point for 35's and caveman driving. 
    • PunchT37
      Oil Consumption

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      1/2 qt over full ain`t gonna hurt $h!t. Most times, a whole qt won`t either. Most have windage trays now. As long as the crank isn`t slapping itself in the oil, it`s not the end of the world.   We used to overfill 1 qt at the track, at race time. Better to have it over full than having the pan sucked dry at 6500 rpm`s.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...