Jump to content

Letter from GMC today re rough trans & hesitation on 6.2L engines

Linecapt

By Linecapt
in Engines & Drivetrain

 Share

Recommended Posts

Linecapt Enthusiast

Linecapt

Posted
Posted (edited)

I got a letter in the mail today from GMC regarding my 2016 Sierra with the 6.2L engine that "may have a condition that affects the electrical connection to the transmission oil temperature sensor.  If this condition occurs, rough transmission shifts or hesitation during acceleration may occur.  Additionally, the Malfunction Indicator Light (Check Engine Light) would illuminate and a diagnostic trouble code related to the temperature sensor would set."  They're extending protection to 10 years or 120000 miles.  

 

Has anyone else with the 6.2L engine received this letter?  Does anyone think this relates to what everyone always complained about, the rough shifts and the hesitations that we've long complained of?  

Edited by Linecapt
M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted

lol, don't all of the transmissions do this? Of course that is if you drive your truck, and don't let your truck drive you.

mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted
On 9/2/2020 at 6:09 PM, Linecapt said:

I got a letter in the mail today from GMC regarding my 2016 Sierra with the 6.2L engine that "may have a condition that affects the electrical connection to the transmission oil temperature sensor.  If this condition occurs, rough transmission shifts or hesitation during acceleration may occur.  Additionally, the Malfunction Indicator Light (Check Engine Light) would illuminate and a diagnostic trouble code related to the temperature sensor would set."  They're extending protection to 10 years or 120000 miles.  

 

Has anyone else with the 6.2L engine received this letter?  Does anyone think this relates to what everyone always complained about, the rough shifts and the hesitations that we've long complained of?  

I have surmised that from the beginning the junk wiring harnesses on 2015-2016 on 5.3/6.2 8L90 Transmissions along with the super fancy 6 pin MAF sensors that are so sensitive to Dry,Humid air and their corresponding densities and temperatures.....Got a Crap 8L90?  Drive it in the rain and report back....Yeah, it's coupled with Hygroscopic oil which amplified the drive-ability issues.   GM can't figure out what day the trans drives better astonishing.....but hey?  nobody listens to me....................

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, mookdoc6 said:

I have surmised that from the beginning the junk wiring harnesses on 2015-2016 on 5.3/6.2 8L90 Transmissions along with the super fancy 6 pin MAF sensors that are so sensitive to Dry,Humid air and their corresponding densities and temperatures.....Got a Crap 8L90?  Drive it in the rain and report back....Yeah, it's coupled with Hygroscopic oil which amplified the drive-ability issues.   GM can't figure out what day the trans drives better astonishing.....but hey?  nobody listens to me....................

You sound like my dad. His favorite is, "But hey don't listen to me, I'm just a dummy". You two should meet. :) 

  • Like 1
martha3065 Enthusiast

martha3065

Posted
Posted



 Does anyone think this relates to what everyone always complained about, the rough shifts and the hesitations that we've long complained of?  


I doubt it is the cause of all the complaints. Mine has had those symptoms since nearly new, as does a buddy's. Probably gets worse under this condition. I do think this is the same issue members have posted on here: https://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/index.php?/topic/224729-Money-Light-on-8-Speed,-P0700+P0711
Ltz4 me? Enthusiast

Ltz4 me?

Posted
Posted

Mine was just fixed b/c of this code on a 16' Silverado 5.3l 8speed m5u tranny.

While the pan was dropped I had them completely drain all bad fluid completely, new tranny filter, new best blue label Mobil 1, new 2 piece wiring harness, transmission relearn.

We will see...it did start shifting really.bad when check engine light came on,( po711)

Transmission temperature sensor was verify ok by the ohm reading taken.

If I can I'm flipping my pill to reduce the oil temperature ( I'm regularly seeing 185-195deg.f)

Z45 Senior Enthusiast

Z45

Posted
Posted

185-195ºF is NORMAL operating temp for an automatic transmission.  It runs at peak efficiency at those temps as its DESIGNED to do.  I don't understand why people fell this is bad, its not. Its paranoia.     

  • Haha 1
mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted
On 9/4/2020 at 8:10 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

You sound like my dad. His favorite is, "But hey don't listen to me, I'm just a dummy". You two should meet. :) 

Your pops is probably pretty neat guy and holding up well at his age.  Most of my knowledge base is from people of that generation...I reckon there is not much of substance I have learned from the younger folks.  they can put an "APP" on my phone but that's about all...............

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
CadillacLuke24 Enthusiast

CadillacLuke24

Posted
Posted
On 9/5/2020 at 7:05 PM, Ltz4 me? said:

Mine was just fixed b/c of this code on a 16' Silverado 5.3l 8speed m5u tranny.

While the pan was dropped I had them completely drain all bad fluid completely, new tranny filter, new best blue label Mobil 1, new 2 piece wiring harness, transmission relearn.

We will see...it did start shifting really.bad when check engine light came on,( po711)

Transmission temperature sensor was verify ok by the ohm reading taken.

If I can I'm flipping my pill to reduce the oil temperature ( I'm regularly seeing 185-195deg.f)

Do you have a part number for the new 2-piece wiring harness?

midwestdenaliguy Enthusiast

midwestdenaliguy

Posted
Posted
On 9/13/2020 at 5:17 AM, CadillacLuke24 said:

Do you have a part number for the new 2-piece wiring harness?

Just posted the details of the special coverage that extends the warranty on this issue. Includes part # for harness: 

 

STurner15 Enthusiast

STurner15

Posted
Posted

Got my letter in the mail and took it in immediately. 74k miles 6.2L. They flush the trans with new fluid and replace seals etc etc. have about 20-30miles on the truck now and it seems to run better. But I got a flush around 65k and it worked for a little while... so I am hoping this harness and flush works.... for a .. little while.... longer...

  • 2 weeks later...
flyingfool Senior Enthusiast

flyingfool

Posted
Posted
On 9/6/2020 at 3:23 AM, elcamino said:

185-195ºF is NORMAL operating temp for an automatic transmission.  It runs at peak efficiency at those temps as its DESIGNED to do.  I don't understand why people fell this is bad, its not. Its paranoia.     

sure, back when a transmission was all mechanical, they could take the heat...  but now they put delicate plastics, seals,  platic check balls and a tcu in the hot boiling transpan.. yeah that will make it reliable, sure!

 

 

  • 1 month later...
lucas287 Enthusiast

lucas287

Posted
Posted
On 10/30/2020 at 9:24 AM, STurner15 said:

so far so good on my end. added a couple pounds to low end gears shift pressures. smooth and solid still.

Did you do this in HPtuners? If so what table(s) did you change? I'm always tinkering here and there with my tune. 

  • 2 weeks later...

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

    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      I hope to high heaven this is wrong. My Chevy farm trucks frame is lasting way longer than a newer Nissan Titan XD I got for a steal, and it only pulls trailers. A decade younger and it's frame is already way rustier than the waxed Chevy I drive across longs and ditches. Also, hasn't Ford been having tones of troubles with rusted frames? 
    • Coastie05
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Coastie05 · Posted

      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. 
    • Jake87
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jake87 · Posted

      AFM is confirmed in the Corvette engine, so I'm assuming the higher volume trucks will get it as well
    • NDKoze
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By NDKoze · Posted

      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.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      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.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...