Jump to content
  • Sign up for FREE! Become a GM-Trucks.com Member Today!

    In 20 seconds you can become part of the worlds largest and oldest community discussing General Motors, Chevrolet and GMC branded pickups, crossovers, and SUVs. From buying research to owner support, join 1.5 MILLION GM Truck Enthusiasts every month who use GM-Trucks.com as a daily part of their ownership experience. 

Dresari702

V4 mode, make it activate more often?

Recommended Posts

So I have searched Google a ton, with no luck.  I am curious: has anyone tried to tune their truck in such a way to get the AFM to engage more often?   There's tons of solutions for a full AFM delete.  I wanna know if it's possible to go the opposite way; and increase the tolerances on whatever parameters the ECU monitors (engine loading, throttle position, etc...) To trigger V4 mode?   I don't have a great need to actually do this....I'm more curious than anything....

Edited by Dresari702
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dresari702 said:

So I have searched Google a ton, with no luck.  I am curious: has anyone tried to tune their truck in such a way to get the AFM to engage more often?   There's tons of solutions for a full AFM delete.  I wanna know if it's possible to go the opposite way; and increase the tolerances on whatever parameters the ECU monitors (engine loading, throttle position, etc...) To trigger V4 mode?   I don't have a great need to actually do this....I'm more curious than anything....

Yes, in the archives of the old Avalanche forums, the guys back then used HP Tuners to tweak the vacuum settings so AFM would stay on longer.  There were some other things that they did that are lost to me now, interesting stuff.  They were getting 25 MPG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DiabloSport Marathon for GM_Marathon_wLogo

ENHANCED FUEL ECONOMY

The DiabloSport Marathon Module helps you get better fuel mileage by enabling your V8 engine to behave like a four-cylinder engine when cruising, while still allowing for full V8 power when you need it.

*  Easy installation. Just plug into the OBDII port under the dash and drive.

*  Compatible with GM vehicles built from 2005 to current that feature Active Fuel Management (AFM).

*  Enables vehicles with AFM to drop cylinders in order to suit the driver’s power requirements, while conserving fuel.

*  Saves fuel by allowing the vehicle to stay in 4-cylinder mode 80% of the time as opposed to only 35% from the factory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s a reason they don’t stay in V-4 long. I believe I read in the pre 14 models there was a oil consumption problem. I believe in the later models they time out. I’d read up on it first before I try that.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the third, and last time I will posted this link. 

 

https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-10/documents/2016-01-0662-fuel-eff-map-2014-6cyl-gm-eco-tec-4.3l-eng-cyl-deac_0.pdf

 

It is a load based system and always has been. You want it on longer? Reduce the load or extend the parameters. The Marathon is a device that will extend parameters. Range has a like device. 

 

I played with engine coolant and lubrication and driving techniques to keep mine on much longer than intended and with good results. I have 130 K on the motor. It is a post 2013 K2 Ecotec3 and it uses NO oil and has NO operational issues. 

 

While this link of the mapping for the 4.3 is very much alike for the 5.3 and 6.2. Do I need a disclaimer now? Ya know, your results may vary? Well yea! :crackup:

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Range V8 module to cancel AFM was actually invented by the Range engineers after they posted their Range gas saver module on the net.  Their name Range was from this gas saver module--as in how much added range you could get from a tank of fuel.  The gas saver module was designed to keep an AFM vehicle in V4 mode as long as possible.  They didn't sell too many of those, but several people asked them to produce the V8 module to help with the infamous AFM oil usage and lifter problems, and they probably have sold many thousands of the V8 modules.    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/26/2020 at 4:29 PM, MaverickZ71 said:

The Range V8 module to cancel AFM was actually invented by the Range engineers after they posted their Range gas saver module on the net.  Their name Range was from this gas saver module--as in how much added range you could get from a tank of fuel.  The gas saver module was designed to keep an AFM vehicle in V4 mode as long as possible.  They didn't sell too many of those, but several people asked them to produce the V8 module to help with the infamous AFM oil usage and lifter problems, and they probably have sold many thousands of the V8 modules.    

Which was true through 2013. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Which was true through 2013. 

Yes, indubitably.  

 

BUT GM keeps changing the name of the system, possibly in an effort to hide any potential problems from new buyers.  Whether they call it Displacement on Demand, Active Fuel Management,  Dynamic Fuel Management, or whatever they will call it in the future, nobody can deny the complicated systems have not had their problems.  My GM service manager refuses to own one.  And Lord knows how many powertrain tunes/modules have been sold to turn the cylinder deactivation feature OFF.  

 

GM is not totally alone in this, as Honda's and FCA's similar systems have had some problems, perhaps not as widespread, too.  However, in GM's case, from posts on this very website, we do know that with each new generation of truck and SUV, like with the 2014-2018 models, it is suggested that "the new ones have all of the bugs worked out!" and then we see continued posts of failed lifters, ruined cams, oil-fouled spark plugs, and such.  Having lived the AFM nightmare personally, I may be a pessimist on the subject, but I wouldn't be surprised if, in 2028, we're reading that "they had problems up to 2026, but the new ones have the bugs worked out!"  Us GM fans needing a reliable, problem-free vehicle can only hope.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, indubitably.  
 
BUT GM keeps changing the name of the system, possibly in an effort to hide any potential problems from new buyers.  Whether they call it Displacement on Demand, Active Fuel Management,  Dynamic Fuel Management, or whatever they will call it in the future, nobody can deny the complicated systems have not had their problems.  My GM service manager refuses to own one.  And Lord knows how many powertrain tunes/modules have been sold to turn the cylinder deactivation feature OFF.  
 
GM is not totally alone in this, as Honda's and FCA's similar systems have had some problems, perhaps not as widespread, too.  However, in GM's case, from posts on this very website, we do know that with each new generation of truck and SUV, like with the 2014-2018 models, it is suggested that "the new ones have all of the bugs worked out!" and then we see continued posts of failed lifters, ruined cams, oil-fouled spark plugs, and such.  Having lived the AFM nightmare personally, I may be a pessimist on the subject, but I wouldn't be surprised if, in 2028, we're reading that "they had problems up to 2026, but the new ones have the bugs worked out!"  Us GM fans needing a reliable, problem-free vehicle can only hope.  

My father in law had the Honda SUV. At around 100K miles it started using oil and throwing lights. I wasn’t visiting at the time so couldn’t check it out. He did what any loyal Honda owner did. Bought a smaller Honda SUV. I used to drive him crazy pointing out when it dropped cylinders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, MaverickZ71 said:

 

...it is suggested that "the new ones have all of the bugs worked out!" and then we see continued posts of failed lifters, ruined cams, oil-fouled spark plugs, and such.  Having lived the AFM nightmare personally, I may be a pessimist on the subject, but I wouldn't be surprised if, in 2028, we're reading that "they had problems up to 2026, but the new ones have the bugs worked out!"  Us GM fans needing a reliable, problem-free vehicle can only hope.  

You may indeed be a pessimist but it seems your doubts are earned.

 

When Nissan was Datsun and Datsun was absolute junk Americans ran that company right out of the USA and it took them decades to get a foothold here again. That is what happens when a 'few failures' becomes 'the normal outcome'. Yugo, Fiat an few others had this experience. Almost happened to Harley Davidson. In my marketing classes that was called economic voting. When a product no longer gives an equivalent value to it's cost; consumers vote it out of business buying something other or living without. 

 

There is a reason this platform continues. The success rate is out performing the failure rate by what the market sees as an acceptable risk rate. More engines and transmissions are trouble free than have failed without satisfactory abatement. 

 

You my friend are the seed of an economic vote against GM. Burnt to a crisp you vote no!. If enough joint you then GM, or at least that product line, goes bye-bye.  Each buyer cast his vote.  You are still a minority in that vote.

 

I do see a dangerous trend though in the way GM abates what claims it does get. Your reputation can force a no vote too. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can spend quite a bit of time listing failures of GM and Ford. There’s a reason Hyundai, Honda, and others have gained their market share. GM routinely has second place challenge by Ram. The rear drive platform with that company continues to thrive. Ask Toyota Tundra owners when ask longevity is why they buy. Most people who have failures usually buy the same brand. The reason is they’re upside down. And buying the same brand is the only option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By ls5454ss
      Hey all.  So, my father's 2017 Silverado (base level cluster) shows if the truck is in 8 cyl or 4 cyl AFM mode in the DIC.  However, I cannot seem to find any way to tell what AFM mode I am in on my 2020 Sierra 1500 with the base level cluster/DIC.  Does anyone have any clue how you can tell what mode the truck is running in?  The main reason I'm asking is because I want to get one of the Range AFM disablers, and I'd like to see, live, if it ever switches in to 4 cyl mode.
       
      Thanks in advance for any help you can provide
    • By Dgs000
      2007 Silverado 5.3 V8 with AFM with 180,000 miles
       
      Truck had lifter ticking sound and white smoke upon every start up which would go away after a few minutes, no check engine light
       
      Replacement list :
      - headgasket
      - valve gaskets
      - upgraded drivers side valve cover
      - valve stem seals
      - intake manifold gasket
      - exhaust manifold gasket
      - 8 new afm lifters
      - 8 new non-afm lifters
      - head gasket bolts
      - engine coolant temperature sensor
      - spark plugs
      - spark plug wires
      - fuel injectors
      - water pump
      - thermostat
      - cam sensor
      - crank sensor
       
      After completion of engine reassembly no longer had white smoke upon start up and no ticking sound but flashing check engine light code p0300.
      Code p0300 was for cylinder #1, #4, & #7
       
      Moved coil packs between cylinder #1 and #2 to see if coil packs was bad but no change. Set engine at TDC before installing the rocker arms. 
       
      All bolts have been properly torque and no parts have been left unplugged or uninstall.
       
      Any possible advice would be helpful 
    • By TheStug
      Hello,
       
      2012 Silverado 4X4  Ext Cab LC9 with 101k miles.
       
      As the title states, I have a unique situation. The cab and bed are entirely off of my truck (T-bone damage), thus I thought this would be a good time to do a DOD delete as well as any other recommended upgrades or repairs WHILE THE CAB AND BED ARE OFF! I haven't looked at too many kits yet (Scoggin Dickeys, Texas Speed, WS6Store, etc) and still figuring what I need/don't need. Definitely would like to put in a mild performance cam if it isn't too much extra.
       
      I'm new to these trucks, so I don't know all the weak spots other than the DOD system. Basically, I'm interested in bulletproofing the system much like 6.0 powerstroke owners had to do.
       
      I just heard about the oil pickup o-ring. WTH! Wow GM.... Worth it to do this at the same time as the DOD probably. Something about a AFM plate in the oil pan? But I'm open to your input. What else? something about timing chain guides??? I vaguely remember something about a fuel system issue being pretty common as well?
       
      Sorry if I am all over the place. SO many questions right now. I just got the cab off yesterday and pretty much planning on ordering what I need by the end of this week
       
      Be doing all the work myself
       
      Thanks!
    • By EDeller
      On Sunday March 8th I was driving my Sierra home from my parents-in law. I pulled out from a stop sign and was just getting up to speed when there was a loud bang followed by loss of power, Loud ticking noise,  vibrations and a sulfur smell coming from the exhaust. I knew this was lifters instantly as it Happened to me in August of 2018, a short 11,000 miles ago. So, I took it in to my dealer who ran diagnostics and gave me the news That I would need lifters replaced yet again. Unfortunately, my power train warranty ran out December of 2019, so they told me I would owe a balance of $2900+ tax. Of course I was very upset with this news as I would have imagined the dealer would talk to GM and get this issue sorted out.. I mean it was only a few months over a year and less than 11,000 miles since they replacedall of the lifters and the cam shaft. I contacted GM myself and over the course of the last week have been working with the dealer and trying to talk to someone at GM who could help. Finally I reached a “senior analyst” who is apparently the top tier of customer assistance and she told me there was absolutely nothing they can do and I am responsible for the entire bill. I insisted that GM must know about the issues this engine has By now and should acknowledge and help their clients, but she offered no help.
       
      How can I trust this engine again? I have read many posts people have put on this forum alone with this issue of failing lifters. How can anyone be expected to pay this much for an issue that is derived likely from GMs design of the afm system? Especially after we pay $50,000+ for the truck to begin with! I do not pretend to be an Mechanical or financial expert,  but I feel I have been severely wronged in this situation. I have no choice but to eat this cost and sell the truck before the lifters have a chance to fail again.

      I would suggest anyone doing research considering buying one of these trucks (I believe Sierra and Silverado 14-18 at least) that has the active fuel management system to rethink it. I would also go out on a limb and suggest my friends with 14-15 year Silverado and Sierras (with expired powertrain warranty’s) to consider selling them before the lifters fail on yours and you are stuck with a $3000-$5000 bill. Good luck all. 
    • By BlackBearPerf
      Time to get out and data log!
       
      If you have any questions about the tunes we offer, for example, our Scan Cable Tune, or the AutoCal, please let us know!
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    226,901
    Total Topics
    2,424,914
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    219,217
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    xerimus@outlook.com
    Newest Member
    [email protected]
    Joined
  • Who's Online   103 Members, 0 Anonymous, 2,910 Guests (See full list)



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.