Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

It's out there. Beta testers have units, I am one of these and have had a great experience with the device so far. I believe they intended on going to the production phase but covid has slowed things down.

 

Posted
1 hour ago, Hueless said:

It's out there. Beta testers have units, I am one of these and have had a great experience with the device so far. I believe they intended on going to the production phase but covid has slowed things down.

 

I’ve read that DFM is more elaborate than AFM. Is it true you have to change the internals of the motor if you’re going to delete DFM? Right now range only offers AFM which is a completely different system. Just wondering.

 

Posted

I don't get the hate for the DFM, I personally love being able to tool around at 21mpg and have the power there when I need it. I haven't put enough miles on it to really develop a hate for it

Posted

I've only got 2,000 miles on my 2020, and to this point, it has been seamless with no issues or detectable hesitations. I work in the business, and I know GM put in a lot of effort to correct the shortcomings of AFM.  Time will tell I suppose. 

Posted

What is the beef with DFM/AFM? I drive my truck and don’t notice anything. It doesn’t even tell you how many cylinders are working at any given time.

The ONLY reason I have heard that makes sense to me is it could be trouble long term.

There’s a plate with solenoids that are pressurized off of oil pressure. If the solenoids fail or there’s an issue with oil pressure, well there you go- a good way to burn off a cylinder or head..block..whatever. It’s just one more part in the system that can go wrong in a mechanical system. When this was explained to me, I can see why you’d want to disable it.

Now with regard to the aftermarket solutions to disable- is this controlled by software or is a physical mod required that voids warranty?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted

I emailed range and they said the RA003 will work with AFM and DFM trucks! 
I’m guessing this will void the warranty, but is it possible to turn DFM back on if I needed dealer work and be ok? My truck only has 580 miles on it lol

Posted
15 hours ago, 175vTrailbossLT said:

What is the beef with DFM/AFM? I drive my truck and don’t notice anything. It doesn’t even tell you how many cylinders are working at any given time.

The ONLY reason I have heard that makes sense to me is it could be trouble long term.

There’s a plate with solenoids that are pressurized off of oil pressure. If the solenoids fail or there’s an issue with oil pressure, well there you go- a good way to burn off a cylinder or head..block..whatever. It’s just one more part in the system that can go wrong in a mechanical system. When this was explained to me, I can see why you’d want to disable it.

Now with regard to the aftermarket solutions to disable- is this controlled by software or is a physical mod required that voids warranty?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Early AFM systems developed oil burning problems caused by the discharge oil spray in the sump on nearby cylinders clogging the oil rings.In addition there were problems with the collapsible lifters of time oil problems at 60K+ and lifters at around 100K miles. Solenoids were never the problem, in fact the LOMA manifold with its own screen clogging problems, exclusive to AFM engines also uses them for the 4 AFM cylinders. Post 1/11 AFM production has addressed these problems with modified valve cover, modified PCV system, baffle over the AFM oil discharge valve, and a new gen of collapsible lifters less prone to damage caused dirty oil. Later volume increase of 5.3l sump capacity from 6 to 8 qts has also helped to extend oil life.

 

Here's my .02 opinion, take it for what it is worth. Had AFMs on my 3 Avalanches and '16 Silverado and by comparison the DFM system is totally seamless. I used the Range device in my '07 Avalanche because it had the early system with valve cover, lifter, PCV and AFM discharge problems. Never used it on the later ones nor will I use one on the '19 DFM because as far as I'm concerned there is no long term data on the new DFM system, talking years not accelerated studies, on use of a defeat device vs. use without one. Got to figure it has to be pulled periodically whenever car is taken for service, State inspections, grabbing codes for the EL, etc. Dealer spots it and no more electrical warranty.

 

The AFM and DFM engines are designed for operation on a varying number of cylinders and the solenoids along with the collapsible lifters are designed to flex thousand of times during each drive cycle. So I'd like to know what the effects would be of keeping the oil control solenoids idle or maybe worse open under constant voltage for an extended period....heat buildup?, varnish deposits inside tappets?....and what happens to collapsible lifters that remain in the one position for very long periods when the device is removed for inspection or service and they expand/collapse and jamb with accumulated varnish buildup in a static area? And what of variability of vehicle builds and that any particular gizmo will play friendly with each and every module programming in your particular vehicle as equipped ?.

 

I don't know and I don't think GM knows either since a DFM engine is barely 2 years old plus was not designed for usage in that manner......but I don't have to because system works just fine as is, plenty of pep and seamless operation.......and it makes no sense to fix something that isn't broken.

  • Like 4
Posted

Just installed a catback on my 2020 and don’t really notice at cruising speeds as far as the jake brake sound. I notice it around town more but interstate it’s miles ahead of the AFM system. 

Posted
Early AFM systems developed oil burning problems caused by the discharge oil spray in the sump on nearby cylinders clogging the oil rings.In addition there were problems with the collapsible lifters of time oil problems at 60K+ and lifters at around 100K miles. Solenoids were never the problem, in fact the LOMA manifold with its own screen clogging problems, exclusive to AFM engines also uses them for the 4 AFM cylinders. Post 1/11 AFM production has addressed these problems with modified valve cover, modified PCV system, baffle over the AFM oil discharge valve, and a new gen of collapsible lifters less prone to damage caused dirty oil. Later volume increase of 5.3l sump capacity from 6 to 8 qts has also helped to extend oil life.
 
Here's my .02 opinion, take it for what it is worth. Had AFMs on my 3 Avalanches and '16 Silverado and by comparison the DFM system is totally seamless. I used the Range device in my '07 Avalanche because it had the early system with valve cover, lifter, PCV and AFM discharge problems. Never used it on the later ones nor will I use one on the '19 DFM because as far as I'm concerned there is no long term data on the new DFM system, talking years not accelerated studies, on use of a defeat device vs. use without one. Got to figure it has to be pulled periodically whenever car is taken for service, State inspections, grabbing codes for the EL, etc. Dealer spots it and no more electrical warranty.
 
The AFM and DFM engines are designed for operation on a varying number of cylinders and the solenoids along with the collapsible lifters are designed to flex thousand of times during each drive cycle. So I'd like to know what the effects would be of keeping the oil control solenoids idle or maybe worse open under constant voltage for an extended period....heat buildup?, varnish deposits inside tappets?....and what happens to collapsible lifters that remain in the one position for very long periods when the device is removed for inspection or service and they expand/collapse and jamb with accumulated varnish buildup in a static area? And what of variability of vehicle builds and that any particular gizmo will play friendly with each and every module programming in your particular vehicle as equipped ?.
 
I don't know and I don't think GM knows either since a DFM engine is barely 2 years old plus was not designed for usage in that manner......but I don't have to because system works just fine as is, plenty of pep and seamless operation.......and it makes no sense to fix something that isn't broken.

Great response thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • 1 year later...
Posted

Chevrolet did void our warranty because a previous owner had used the Range AFM/DFM disabler even though it is no longer on the truck they could tell. The void not only covers the drivetrain but ANYTHING on the vehicle including new parts and new work meaning if we pay them to fix a windshield wiper motor and it breaks again before we get off the lot they will NOT honor its warranty. However this is totally NOT legal and we will do our best to get this reversed but so far our warranty is VOID!! Just so you know!!

Posted
10 minutes ago, G.Cramer said:

Chevrolet did void our warranty because a previous owner had used the Range AFM/DFM disabler even though it is no longer on the truck they could tell. The void not only covers the drivetrain but ANYTHING on the vehicle including new parts and new work meaning if we pay them to fix a windshield wiper motor and it breaks again before we get off the lot they will NOT honor its warranty. However this is totally NOT legal and we will do our best to get this reversed but so far our warranty is VOID!! Just so you know!!

BS.  They are inviting a lawsuit.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • 5 months later...
Posted (edited)
On 5/16/2021 at 1:14 PM, G.Cramer said:

Chevrolet did void our warranty because a previous owner had used the Range AFM/DFM disabler even though it is no longer on the truck they could tell. The void not only covers the drivetrain but ANYTHING on the vehicle including new parts and new work meaning if we pay them to fix a windshield wiper motor and it breaks again before we get off the lot they will NOT honor its warranty. However this is totally NOT legal and we will do our best to get this reversed but so far our warranty is VOID!! Just so you know!!

 

According to the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975, a manufacturer can only deny warranty coverage if it can demonstrate that a non-original equipment part or related service caused a defect to occur to the original product.

 

Read the following link provided. A manufacturer can NOT "void" a warranty for any reason. The can only attempt to deny a warranty claim, but they bear the burden of proof.

 

As lapoolboy stated: they are inviting a lawsuit.

 

https://www.autoanything.com/resources/magnuson-moss-warranty-act-explained/

Edited by ManicFury
  • Like 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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,972
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Whit.the.COB
    Newest Member
    Whit.the.COB
    Joined
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,201 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Yep! This should be a pin somewhere as @pgamboa really dives into all of this. Thanks for reposting the link!
    • I did the new thermostat after doing a 'flip' for a year. Runs as cool one way as the other in the summer but in the winter there is a bit of a floor. Yellow with the new 70 C thermostat. My data over the life of the unit to date. Still need more cooler. Anyway that floor helped both winter fuel economy and shift quality in the winter. I found it a good balance.       
    • Evan Williams Bottled in Bond   So pouring the last of a bottle of Evan Williams Black label last night I set off the the state store for a refill only to be denied the by an empty shelf. Rats.    What the did have was a bottle of Evan Williams Bottled in Bond. 100 proof. Hum, a few bucks more but a known distiller. Lets have a swing at it. ( I have before )    Cracked it open and pour a serving over ice. Hum.... more heat, yes. More alcohol naturally. But the barreling not the proof brings the taste and this one came up short.    Oh is was familiar but the heat ran the barrel over like a Peterbilt runs over a squirrel. Could use a heavier toasting of the oak me thinks or perhaps a longer barreling. Who knows. But what I can say is ice or a water back isn't the answer. What kills one kills them both. Sad. It is a pleasant drink....if you have little to compare it to.  
    • I've had exactly one set of Bridgestone. Lasted five year and 125,000 miles and had I known better 15oK would have been a cake walk. I would have bought a like set had they not tripled in price since the first set. I removed them at said mileage with 5/32" remaining in dead even wear all four. They were fuel efficient, quite, comfortable and predictable.    Early on I got a very good alignment checked at least once a year, sometimes twice; kept the tires properly inflated, balanced and rotated. And I've found that many a tire issue can be avoided with great maintenance practices. Lot's of tire dealers will do rotation and balance (simple) for free for as long as you own the tire they sold you so no excuse not to.    Bead prep, alloy integrity and stem health have a huge impact on inflation stability. There are more mountings done poorly that perfectly. Finding a good tire guy is gold and as important as finding a tire you like.    That 3X price increase now two sets of "other tires' later is starting look like a bargain.      Bad maintenance kills more tires than bad tires. 
    • Atlas, you kill me As aggravating as a project like this can be you have been unable to hide your fascination with learning and using that angst against this beast like a Ninjitsu Master. It amuses you, admit it now.      BTW, love your writing style. 😉       
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...