Jump to content

AFM/DFM Class action suit...finally

putz173
 Share

Recommended Posts

voided3 Enthusiast

voided3

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, CamGTP said:

I think we are on thread 3 or 4 about this now lol

Yeah, it has been circulating a lot. While it gives me some hope that GM will do something about it, the reality is our '21 Silverado will probably need a 2nd set of equally bad replacement lifters before they A) actually issue a recall and B) actually have parts inventory to perform said recall.

 

I have a feeling that it's too big of a problem for them to fully address for current owners and they don't view it as a safety issue, so they're just going to let everyone run to failure and repair as-needed. Especially if the vehicle is out of warranty, lifter repairs are a huge revenue stream for the dealer service departments and I'm sure they'd rather make money than lose money doing it for free.

 

I'd rather have a carbureted 350 V8 that makes 200 HP in my truck than the L84 5.3 at this point. I can't wait to trade it in.

Edited by voided3
WeGone Enthusiast

WeGone

Posted
Posted

I would love to see GM respond with at least a 100k mile drive train warranty to those effected. I don't see GM doing anything but fixing the ones that fail under warranty. A lawsuit will take years to migrate through the system and the engines/owners effected will have cycled through by the time its over.   

voided3 Enthusiast

voided3

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, WeGone said:

I would love to see GM respond with at least a 100k mile drive train warranty to those effected. I don't see GM doing anything but fixing the ones that fail under warranty. A lawsuit will take years to migrate through the system and the engines/owners effected will have cycled through by the time its over.   

That's the current escalation measure for those affected. Our truck got the extended component coverage on the engine (6 years, 100,000 miles) as one of the lucky early lifter failure recipients.

WeGone Enthusiast

WeGone

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, voided3 said:

That's the current escalation measure for those affected. Our truck got the extended component coverage on the engine (6 years, 100,000 miles) as one of the lucky early lifter failure recipients.

 Cool That's the least GM should do for you. This should be offered no questions to ALL effected trucks that fit into the TSB date range.. Unfortunately I made it by just days with a build date of 3/21/21.  

Nutmeg Enthusiast

Nutmeg

Posted
Posted

A extended warranty is probably the best we will get. To me there is a design failure in the DFM lifters. My thoughts are they discontinued DFM due to this failure as they try to plan the next step, while still being able to put product out. For me it would be nice if they replaced the lifters with a standard design and made corrections to the oiling system. It is such a shame they are destroying their reputation for dependable motors but the government is forcing their hand with the fleet fuel standards.

voided3 Enthusiast

voided3

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Nutmeg said:

A extended warranty is probably the best we will get. To me there is a design failure in the DFM lifters. My thoughts are they discontinued DFM due to this failure as they try to plan the next step, while still being able to put product out. For me it would be nice if they replaced the lifters with a standard design and made corrections to the oiling system. It is such a shame they are destroying their reputation for dependable motors but the government is forcing their hand with the fleet fuel standards.

Completely agree, but they'll probably never deactivate DFM on existing vehicles as that's tampering with emissions control systems.

 

I honestly think if there were two identical L84 5.3 V8s, one with DFM and one with regular lifters like what they use in the 6.6 L8T gas V8, a 1 MPG gain could be easily had solely via an ECU retune on the engine with regular lifters. Even if it required 89 octane, it would be so much better.

Silverado4x4 Senior Enthusiast

Silverado4x4

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Nutmeg said:

A extended warranty is probably the best we will get. To me there is a design failure in the DFM lifters. My thoughts are they discontinued DFM due to this failure as they try to plan the next step, while still being able to put product out. For me it would be nice if they replaced the lifters with a standard design and made corrections to the oiling system. It is such a shame they are destroying their reputation for dependable motors but the government is forcing their hand with the fleet fuel standards.

They didn't discontinue DFM due to this failure it was discontinued due to no chips to activate the DFM the motor still has all the components in the motor for DFM it just won't engage due to no chip. 

WeGone Enthusiast

WeGone

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, voided3 said:

Completely agree, but they'll probably never deactivate DFM on existing vehicles as that's tampering with emissions control systems.

 

 

What does DFM have to do with emissions? It is for fuel mileage improvements.

 

If this statement were true they would not be able to sell new trucks without the chip to run it as it is disabled and from my understanding will never be re-enabled on these trucks.

Edited by WeGone
Silverado4x4 Senior Enthusiast

Silverado4x4

Posted
Posted (edited)

I was reading online today that this guy was a GM mechanic an GM is now saying the lifter failure may be the cause of the auto/start stop system that when the motor stops oil is going back into the crank and on restart the oil has to pumped back up again for lubrication. Don't ask where I found it because I know ill never be able to find the page again, kind of make some since. Without the chip it also disables DFM along with start/stop. :dunno:

Edited by Silverado4x4
voided3 Enthusiast

voided3

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Silverado4x4 said:

I was reading online today that this guy was a GM mechanic an GM is now saying the lifter failure may be the cause of the auto/start stop system that when the motor stops oil is going back into the crank and on restart the oil has to pumped back up again for lubrication. Don't ask where I found it because I know ill never be able to find the page again, kind of make some since. Without the chip it also disables DFM along with start/stop. :dunno:

Makes sense, losing oil pressure never is a good thing and I can't stand auto start/stop. I've always manually disabled auto start/stop on our truck from day one and the lifters still prematurely failed at 585 miles (though primarily due to manufacturing defect). Prior to 2019, the 5.3 and 6.2 didn't have auto start/stop, either, and that generation also runs into lifter failures after a few years of normal use.

 

We also have a Mini Countryman with auto start/stop and mercifully on that car when you turn it off, it stays off for good for every subsequent ignition cycle. It has a little 1.5 liter 3-cylinder turbo and I can only imagine what favors losing oil pressure at every red light does for the turbo, hence why I disable it on that car, too.

M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted

These lawsuits are a waist of peoples time and money... except the lawyers I guess...

 

GM knows how to manage these things by now 🤨 I imagine they'll soon start suing people, for suing them and win.

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

    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      While waiting for parts I have been working on installing the AC compressor, new accumulator, and orifice tube. Also changed out the high side ball valve (original). The orifice tube that was in there wasn't too bad. Slightly dirty, a little bit of junk, but not blocked. Glad I changed it out.   The accumulator, which should have been a 5 minute job, may have just burned $50. Put some PAG in it, wrote the date and mileage on the side, fresh o-rings and gooey'd up the threads and rings with Nylog. Got everything connected and snugged and was going to vacuum down the system, and....   My manifold gauge won't fit on the port. It's not an R12 service port. It LOOKS like an R134 service port but the diameter is a hair too large. There's a sticker on the accumulator that says it's designed to be used with R12 and R134a systems only. So it's not R1234yf. Even if I reduced the diameter slightly with a file, the shoulder on the port is too large so the quick-connect valve won't lock on. I'm stumped. It's going back, and 50/50 on if they'll give me a refund.   Also, I did a fuel pressure test.... Key on, the gauge spikes to about 60psi and quickly bleeds off, like 2psi per second. The fuel isn't going into the plenum, no smell, starts fine, so I'm guessing there's a bad check valve in the pump and the fuel is just draining back into the tank. oh, hell. But, it shouldn't be a problem, pump primes just fine and the truck starts right up. It just means I can't really ever use fuel pressure to verify a leak at the injector or intake.
    • No F-bdy Bs
      SERCICE ESC message?

      By No F-bdy Bs · Posted

      Got this yesterday out of nowhere. Truck is a 25',6.6 gasser with 8k miles.  Only semi anomaly is that the truck had been sitting, uncranked for 6 days. Elec Stability Control showed immediately upon cranking, not while driving. No drivability issues, just the message. Battery didn't seem to be weak when cranking over.  I drove it, killed it, let it sit a few hrs with no avail.  Truck is 100% stock. No damage. 
    • newdude
      on-wheel cellphone control: 2026 1500 WT (2.7L 4WD std cab)

      By newdude · Posted

      This can be done.  It is not cheap and requires an instrument cluster swap with custom programming, new steering wheel with the controls on it, and a special jumper harness.   The cluster upgrade - 12.3” Digital Cluster Upgrade – 2022.5–2026 Silverado / Sierra (T1 Refresh Pickup) - WAMS   The wheel upgrade - Steering Wheel Upgrade Kit – 2022.5–2026 Silverado / Sierra (T1 Refresh Pickup) - WAMS   The column harness upgrade - 2019 - 2026 Silverado / Sierra: Steering Wheel LIN Bus Harness - Harness Dr. - DIY Done Right     The problem with doing all of this?  You pretty much can't have any programming done to your truck that involves the cluster ever again.  The dealer won't be able to program the cluster as GM's system will only pull data for the cluster the truck came with.  So it would be advised also to turn off over the air updates.   TLDR;  Should have bought an LT double cab?  You'd have a power seat, the wheel controls, the cluster, all things that you've been seeking in your various posts so far about your new WT regular cab.  
    • dna9656
      New to Me 2010 SLE (Quirks, Issues)

      By dna9656 · Posted

      I was unaware of that, thanks for updating me.
    • newdude
      2026 TurboMax L3B 2.7L: AFM/DFM present/disablable? [2026 Silverado 1500WT: 4WD RC RB 2.7L]3GCNKAEK9TG345558

      By newdude · Posted

      Yes.  The 2.7 Turbomax has Active Fuel Management.  It is NOT the same as the V8s.  Totally different system.     Here is an article from GM when the 2.7 came out explaining the cylinder deactivation and the valve lift system.  Starts at the section called "SCS Valvetrain":   New Turbocharged 2.7L 4-Cylinder Engine Powers Full-Size Trucks – TechLink         This is an internet myth going around.  It was alleged that some 5.3s had this mystical 8th digit of the VIN as an "E" which somehow meant it had a new one year only 5.3 that didn't have DFM.  The writer of said article and the person that made the claim conveniently can't count because they posted the VIN.  The 8th digit was a "D" which meant its still the 5.3 with DFM.  The 9th digit of the VIN was an "E" and the 9th digit isn't the engine code.  At all.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...