Jump to content

DFM disable?

Jmccracken1214
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hueless Enthusiast

Hueless

Posted
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.

 

Orlick82 New Member

Orlick82

Posted
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.

 

RST-stan Enthusiast

RST-stan

Posted
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

chadman Enthusiast

chadman

Posted
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. 

175vTrailbossLT Enthusiast

175vTrailbossLT

Posted
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

Jmccracken1214 Enthusiast

Jmccracken1214

Posted
  • Author
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

Thomcat Senior Enthusiast

Thomcat

Posted
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
Sierra50BMG Enthusiast

Sierra50BMG

Posted
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. 

175vTrailbossLT Enthusiast

175vTrailbossLT

Posted
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...
G.Cramer New Member

G.Cramer

Posted
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!!

lapoolboy Senior Enthusiast

lapoolboy

Posted
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...
ManicFury New Member

ManicFury

Posted
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • AlVeron
      Manufactuer's Defect - Paint Failure - Cherry Red High Country 2021 Suburban

      By AlVeron · Posted

      This is NOT impact damage nor neglect. There were previous class action lawsuits because of such paint preparation st GM manufacturing plant. Not just the Cherry Red Color. This paint is applied in three processes to obtain the desired color.  The manufacturer will cover for 36 months or 36k miles only. That rust is actually corrosion because of the paint process failure. Corrosion is covered for 100,100 miles or a certain months. However their corrosion doesn't include this type. Go figure. Clearly manufacturer knew from previous paint issues. This started 3 weeks ago out of the blue.  
    • richard wysong
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By richard wysong · Posted

      Is it time to put a piece of tape over the CEL? 
    • davester
      2015 Silverado 3500 right rear turn indicator failure

      By davester · Posted

      consider doing electrical testing?  I would guess some power or ground wire/connection has a problem.   alldata.com has wiring diagrams, connector pinouts and diagnostic procedures you can use to find where the problem is.
    • davester
      My First Project and GMC has me stumped

      By davester · Posted

      can you tell if the reader is actually trying to get codes, and the pcm is reporting none, or is your reader just silently failing because it's not communicating with the pcm?
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      Any joy with this truck seems to be short-lived.   The CEL for P0172 ("bank 1" too rich) is now "intermittent".   I'm not sure where to check, or re-check, and my energy to keep chasing problems with junk is wearing thin. The P0172 seems to set as I'm coming to a stop, completely off the throttle, when fully warm. At least, that's what it's done the 3? times it's set.   Everything appears normal on the scanner EXCEPT long term fuel trim. There's only one bank on this vehicle because it's an OBD 1.5 with only one upstream O2 sensor. At idle, it's around -16.4% and will dip to -18% occasionally at idle or off-throttle. LTFT approaches 0 when throttle is held at 2500rpm. Short term appears normal, much closer to zero all the time. The LTFT tells me the engine is running rich at idle but compensating at higher load. But, why?   The EVAP purge valve doesn't appear to be leaking/sucking fuel vapor continuously. Is it sticking just as I come to a stop and the engine is choking on fuel vapor and sets the P0172? But that doesn't explain the persistently negative LTFT. Disconnecting the purge valve doesn't seem to make any difference.   I suppose that leaves another dang issue with the fuel injector. A leaking fuel pressure regulator, a new leak in the spider, or a leaking fuel injector/poppet valve I didn't see, or a small crack in one of the spider legs.   The vacuum line leading to the fuel pressure regulator doesn't have raw fuel in it. It doesn't even smell like fuel when it's pulled off, not until you suck air through it, then you can tell it leads to a fuel component. I'd consider that normal? Nothing is signaling this is a FPR issue from the outside, at least.   The oil smells like fuel but it's not building volume. I've noticed most oil in most engines smells like fuel to some degree so it's hard to say if the smell is an issue or not. Or if the engine just still smells like fuel because the crankcase was full of it a few hundred miles ago. But it's been changed twice since that original issue of the leaking fuel line dumping fuel into the intake.   Patience is running very thin. Every win seems to be accompanied by two steps backwards, or another issue that leads to removing at least the top half of the intake manifold. Enough! LOL

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...