Jump to content

HitchMate Grab Handle By Heininger - Anybody Use One?

Anacortes Army Guy
 Share

Recommended Posts

Anacortes Army Guy Enthusiast

Anacortes Army Guy

Posted
Posted

I'm trying to make it easier getting in and out of my truck's bed, and while the Putco bed rails provide some help, I think this HitchMate Grab Handle would be better.  Plus, I like that it can double as a "retriever thingy" for items in the bed beyond my reach from the tailgate.  Anybody try one of these and can offer an opinion as to how useful it in?  Thanks ahead of time for your thoughts.  Here's their promotional video:

 

 

Anacortes Army Guy Enthusiast

Anacortes Army Guy

Posted
  • Author
Posted
9 hours ago, Mora84 said:

Check this out. And it's OEM 

 

 

I replied to the wrong thread, but unfortunately it appears this handle, which I like the functionality of, uses the same mounting holes that my bedrails use, so it's not an option for me.

Mac-427 Enthusiast

Mac-427

Posted
Posted (edited)

I have a GM accessories folding hard cover on my 2020 Silverado 1500.  Will the GM tail gate handle work with if I flip open the first section of the hard cover.

Edited by Mac-427
WeGone Enthusiast

WeGone

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Mac-427 said:

I have a GM accessories folding hard cover on my 2020 Silverado 1500.  Will the GM tail gate handle work with if I flip open the first section of the hard cover.

 

Mine works with the BakFlip MX4 hard folding cover.

Anacortes Army Guy Enthusiast

Anacortes Army Guy

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

On 10/7/2021 at 9:23 AM, Mac-427 said:

I went ahead and ordered the Heinginer handle and some Plasti Dip to coat it in rubber before I use it.  Best price was at Lowes with free shipping at $66 with my veterans discount.  I'm going to Plasti Dip it with this stuff from Amazon before I let it touch my truck.  Performix 12219 Plasti Dip Clear - 22 oz. Dip Can

I too am concerned about possible abrasion issues with the truck's painted surface on the side of the tailgate opening, but I think I'm going to go with bicycling handlebar tape instead of some type of liquid coating.

Transient Senior Enthusiast

Transient

Posted
Posted

My concern is the home of the tailgate.  I use to have the GM Accessories gap filler, and it caused the plastic bushing to crack and the tailgate was sliding out every time I would open out close it.  This grab handle looks like it could put stress on the hinge and damage it.  I did end up installing the GM handle for a different reason, but very glad I did.  

Mac-427 Enthusiast

Mac-427

Posted
Posted
On 10/8/2021 at 8:21 PM, Transient said:

My concern is the home of the tailgate.  I use to have the GM Accessories gap filler, and it caused the plastic bushing to crack and the tailgate was sliding out every time I would open out close it.  This grab handle looks like it could put stress on the hinge and damage it.  I did end up installing the GM handle for a different reason, but very glad I did.  

I had exactly the same problem with the gap filler.  Ended up throwing it in the trash.

 

Mac-427 Enthusiast

Mac-427

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 10/7/2021 at 8:20 AM, Mac-427 said:

I have a GM accessories folding hard cover on my 2020 Silverado 1500.  Will the GM tail gate handle work with if I flip open the first section of the hard cover.

Finally figured out that the GM handle will work for me so I'm going to take the Heininger back to Lowes when I get it.  Just ordered the GM handle.  It will come in next week.

Edited by Mac-427
J2Jones Enthusiast

J2Jones

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Mac-427 said:

I had exactly the same problem with the gap filler.  Ended up throwing it in the trash.

 

 

On 10/8/2021 at 9:21 PM, Transient said:

My concern is the home of the tailgate.  I use to have the GM Accessories gap filler, and it caused the plastic bushing to crack and the tailgate was sliding out every time I would open out close it.  This grab handle looks like it could put stress on the hinge and damage it.  I did end up installing the GM handle for a different reason, but very glad I did.  

 

OK now I'm nervous because I have the gap filler too.  I'm not sure i understand what it caused to be damaged.  Can one of you add some details and/or maybe a pic so I can keep on the lookout for issues.

 

Transient Senior Enthusiast

Transient

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, J2Jones said:

 

 

OK now I'm nervous because I have the gap filler too.  I'm not sure i understand what it caused to be damaged.  Can one of you add some details and/or maybe a pic so I can keep on the lookout for issues.

 

When the tailgate would open the gap filler would rub against the edge of the truck bed, applying pressure on the tailgate's mounting points.  The weaker side is the right side where the tailgate has a plastic bushing inside the hinge.  The design is such that if you need to remove the tailgate, the right side is where you first remove the tailgate.  The bushing would crack and the tailgate would come out of the hinge while lower or raising.  I had to push the tailgate in every time I opened or closed it. 

Steve Martin Enthusiast

Steve Martin

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Mac-427 said:

Finally figured out that the GM handle will work for me so I'm going to take the Heininger back to Lowes when I get it.  Just ordered the GM handle.  It will come in next week.

you ordered from dealer?  If so, how much are they charging?  Also, does the hardware come with it?  Any part number(s)?

Mac-427 Enthusiast

Mac-427

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Steve Martin said:

you ordered from dealer?  If so, how much are they charging?  Also, does the hardware come with it?  Any part number(s)?

I used part # gm 84532302 but it's a little confusing because the part # has changed several times.  I paid $162 for mine because I bought it through my buddy's body shop.

 

https://www.gmpartsoutlet.com/p/GMC__Sierra-1500/HANDLE/75806054/84532302.html?partner=googlebase_adwords&kwd=&origin=pla&partnerDevice=c&userLocation=9027200&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIl-DawcTD8wIVP2xvBB0gMwQrEAQYAiABEgIk9PD_BwE

Edited by Mac-427
Mac-427 Enthusiast

Mac-427

Posted
Posted

I got my GM assist handle today.  The part number is 84726114 and it is described as an "F-HANDLE." I checked fit and the holes in my truck bed line up, but two of them are unthreaded.  I'm going to hit the hardware store tomorrow but would appreciate knowing what to use on the unthreaded holes to secure the handle.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,640 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...