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

    • Gkistler
      2015 Sierra Denali L86 cyl 5 misfire at idle

      By Gkistler · Posted

      Hi friends - first time poster. I have a 2015 sierra Denali with 150k miles, I’m the second owner and she’s given me 75k of great service. I run a pulse AFM disable device. Starting Thursday when I exited the freeway after a short local ride it started idling rough, with an obvious misfire shake and was down on low end power.  I got it home and hooked it up to my scannner and found no codes but in live data a pretty bad misfire on cylinder 5. I replaced the coil, plug and wire with all new OE replacements (Delphi gn10165 coil, acdelco wire and 41-168 plug). It’s still behaving the same way after firing the parts cannon at it.   I know cyl 5 is a non AFM cylinder so I am not thinking this is AFM related but I’m kinda at a loss. injector? Bent pushrod? It’s running too well over 1k rpm to suggest those IMO. Has anyone chase this issue before and what was it? Any suggestions? 
    • zibzer2
      Pulsating Noise 4Cyl Mode

      By zibzer2 · Posted

      2017 Silverado L83 5.3l 6speed transmission Hello, not a new member but havent posted in a while and my old signup info isnt working so had to create a new account. anyways, I have an issue with my truck and hope someone can spread some light on whats happening: -when it goes to 4cyl mode it makes a clunk sound (but not when coasting or going downhill) -when in 4 cyl mode and under load it makes a load pulsating sound (not a tick). -goes away completely when in M5 gear or when plugging in an AFM delete. Im guessing it is one of 2 things but im not convinced of either to be honest. 1. lifter stuck in v8 mode 2. torque converter shudder realistically it doesn't seem like the TC as there is no physical vibration , and it never happens in v8 mode. but maybe? and wouldnt a lifter make a sound whether with load or not? any ideas let me know please. thank you!  
    • Chuck FB
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      Which has made me wonder with the various engine failures of a few brands in the last few years, is it sub par materials such as lifters etc causing failures, or bearing clearances on the crank etc or perhaps bad designing of an engine physically or causing too much load on the components due to the hp/torque they can push out of them. Or is the oil viscosity and additive package of current oils or a lack of oil flow by an oil pump not able to supply sufficient oil at idle or under high load at low rpm. Or is it every item I listed that combined together has pushed the limits so far to the left that there is hardly a margin of safety left and add in some fuel dilution and too long of an OCI and premature engine failure is the result ?. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      He is not saying that an SAE *W20 will have more viscosity than a *W40 due to MORE VII polymers. He is saying that although multiple *W40 may post in the PDS the same or similar 100 C and 150 C viscosities that the blenders choice of modifier TYPE and AMOUNT to get his chosen base to grade will not give identical real world viscosities in shear and at temperature. All will pass the SII test but not all will pass the 100 C HTHS (unpublished value) testing the blender does and relies on to get the required by law "percentage improvement' referenced to his last great work.    Tis the problem with the lie. Once told others are required to support it. 
    • PunchT37
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      I have a `25, 1500 that auto sets on incline. Never knew that at first. I have the electronic shifter. Just think if it didn`t do that? Unlike a mechanical shift that you can muscle out of park, how would you get this thing out? That would be a problem.   What I found out later is, I don`t have to push the button to release. Just put it in gear.   Setting parameters? Don`t know if it`s possible.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...