Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, shanemoon said:

Did you miss the part where that’s not what I said at all?

 

I never said that reflash was the solution. I said that they had to reflash to fix the issue that you took it in for service. That service procedure requires replacement of the camera assembly, which requires a reflash. 

So you almost certainly gave them permission to reflash when you took it in. Which is also permission to bring the trucks BCM back to its factory spec. 
I’m sorry that you don’t understand that. But this has been the case for software mods on vehicles for decades. 

 

Void warranty can also be for the fact that they cannot perform the warranty service because of a modification. 
 

Sounds like you’re a real treat to work with and that everyone else is always at fault except yourself. 
Being upfront, honest, admitting ignorance and some fault will get you much further in a lot of situations than being a hard ass. And also not getting angry at people who literally have no control over what their company policies are also helps. No one wants to help someone who is a pain to work with. 
 

Good luck in life. 👍🏼

Yes, I'm always the person that is a problem.  Your sleuthing skills are phenomenal.  You should become a detective.  Your skills for knowing everything are phenomenal given that you think 1 unrelated modification can void a whole warranty.

 

You still don't seem to understand the repair procedure they performed.  They didn't replace the camera assembly.  They checked the bezel, then performed a reflash.  Reflash didn't fix the problem, so they did a 2nd reflash.  The 2nd reflash didn't work, so GM told them to swap tailgates.  Swapping the tailgate from an in stock unit worked, so they were preparing to order a new tailgate, paint it, etc.  Before they ordered the replacement tailgate a 2nd tech suggested replacing the bezel.  They replaced it, and it was better.  Therefore, GM's repair procedure is wrong to begin with.  It's a hardware problem, not a software problem. 

 

Speaking of, have you looked at the individual parts to that whole assembly?  Flaws all over.  Room for the camera to adjust in its bracket.  It's not clipped into the bracket.  Only the bracket mounts to the bezel.  The camera has a little wiggle room while in the bracket. The bracket itself does not fully encompass the camera on the sides.  And then there's the bezel itself where at the very top center above the tailgate release button is lacking plastic that reinforces the edges, which all other edges have.  Look at one when you get a chance to see if it's straight.  I saw a slight curve at that location, which could also play a roll in the crooked camera.  One thing GM could've done different that would've helped the bezel assembly was to use 1 bolt on each side instead of a clip, like the ones used on interior trim and the grille.  As it is now, there are only 2 bolts for the bezel.  They are at the bottom center.

 

Oh, btw, the body control module is on the driver's side.  The module I sent to MVI for the programming was on the passenger side.  Yet, another thing you got wrong. 

 

You know the difference between a "hard ass" and somebody who sticks to their guns?  One word -- perspective.  My life is wonderful due to sticking to my guns. 

Edited by Transient
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Transient said:

Yes, I'm always the person that is a problem.  Your sleuthing skills are phenomenal.  You should become a detective.  Your skills for knowing everything are phenomenal given that you think 1 unrelated modification can void a whole warranty.

 

You still don't seem to understand the repair procedure they performed.  They didn't replace the camera assembly.  They checked the bezel, then performed a reflash.  Reflash didn't fix the problem, so they did a 2nd reflash.  The 2nd reflash didn't work, so GM told them to swap tailgates.  Swapping the tailgate from an in stock unit worked, so they were preparing to order a new tailgate, paint it, etc.  Before they ordered the replacement tailgate a 2nd tech suggested replacing the bezel.  They replaced it, and it was better.  Therefore, GM's repair procedure is wrong to begin with.  It's a hardware problem, not a software problem. 

 

Speaking of, have you looked at the individual parts to that whole assembly?  Flaws all over.  Room for the camera to adjust in its bracket.  It's not clipped into the bracket.  Only the bracket mounts to the bezel.  The camera has a little wiggle room while in the bracket. The bracket itself does not fully encompass the camera on the sides.  And then there's the bezel itself where at the very top center above the tailgate release button is lacking plastic that reinforces the edges, which all other edges have.  Look at one when you get a chance to see if it's straight.  I saw a slight curve at that location, which could also play a roll in the crooked camera.  One thing GM could've done different that would've helped the bezel assembly was to use 1 bolt on each side instead of a clip, like the ones used on interior trim and the grille.  As it is now, there are only 2 bolts for the bezel.  They are at the bottom center.

 

Oh, btw, the body control module is on the driver's side.  The module I sent to MVI for the programming was on the passenger side.  Yet, another thing you got wrong. 

 

You know the difference between a "hard ass" and somebody who sticks to their guns?  One word -- perspective.  My life is wonderful due to sticking to my guns. 

Hahaha. Your delusion is laughable. 
You have some serious issues. Most of this topic is people telling you that you are the issue.

But again, they must all be wrong. As I’m sure is always the case in your life. 
 

Everything you said is besides the point. The point is that a reflash was necessary and that will factory reset your truck. But here you go just still trying to justify some stupid argument that has no merit to what you came here to flame and rant about. 
 

Like others have said, done with this. Good luck with your life. This type of attitude will get you real far in life. 

Edited by shanemoon
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, shanemoon said:

Hahaha. Your delusion is laughable. 
You have some serious issues. Most of this topic is people telling you that you are the issue.

But again, they must all be wrong. As I’m sure is always the case in your life. 
 

Everything you said is besides the point. The point is that a reflash was necessary and that will factory reset your truck. But here you go just still trying to justify some stupid argument that has no merit to what you came here to flame and rant about. 
 

Like others have said, done with this. Good luck with your life. This type of attitude will get you real far in life. 

Everybody can believe what they want.  They are only sharing opinions, on that matter.  Last I checked, I managed to get my point across without hurling an insult.  Bottom line to it all, theft is theft.  You haven't disputed that.

 

And again, my life is just fine.  It's none of your business, so quit referring to it.  You have never walked in my shoes, so stop pretending you're better than others.  You don't know me, and have no actual references to make about my life.  You're only trying to place yourself on a pedestal without merit.  You placed those statements here for everybody to see on your own. 

Edited by Transient
Posted

Another thread that turns into a argument due to ego's. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted

Interesting perspective.  I do support the idea that you should be able to modify your software.  I purchased a similar upgrade (new HMI) for my 2014. I also had a problem with my OnStar right before I got rid of it.  I told the service writer that I had upgraded my HMI to IO6 and to not reflash as my original HMI was in the glove compartment if needed for troubleshooting.  I did pay the hour of shop time to swap the module but I avoided your issues.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

I find it's usually more constructive to concentrate on how to fix an issue rather than whose fault the issue is.

If this were the dirtiest I ever got done over a vehicle I'd be smiling. My advice would be to look for a solution from the aftermarket company. Sounds like they are willing to help but like everyone else are drowning in back orders. While it's unremarkable of GM to not fix the problem, frankly they are an OEM who returned your OEM part to OEM specifications. Not trying to throw salt on a wound if I'm stating the obvious, but that's their job. When I crossed over into aftermarket tunes and BCM programming in my other vehicles I break up with the dealer, and it's to avoid problems like the one you are in.

Honestly the factory nav is pretty doo doo, I use a proclip mount and Google or Waze on my phone. 

Edited by Truckboattruck
  • Like 3
Posted
On 2/3/2022 at 2:24 PM, newdude said:

 

 

When GM offered their own factory nav upgrade for 2019 and 2020 for IOS radio (which they then discontinued not even 2 months into 2020 MY), they gave you an SD card and an authorization code.  GM would issue the reprogramming of the necessary modules to make it happen.

 

2021, the option never existed.  The IOS radio also changes part #s for 2021 as well and 95% likely don't have the ability to upgrade from GM to factory navigation.

 

GM isn't in the wrong here.  GM's systems issue programming updates and software #s based directly from the options your VIN presents with.  Truck is a 2021 with IOS radio and w/o nav, that's the programming the radio receives.  

 

I get that MVI uses OE radios for the swap, but GM has NO indication that your VIN was upgraded to have factory nav, so all the cal files issued are as the truck was built.

 

All I can say at this point?  Pay the $75 and see if the dealer can call GM Techline and try to bring it back.  Or, try to keep a cool head and see if the dealer is willing to split or eat the $75 to see if anything can be done.  Or, move on and use Apple Carplay/Android auto and Google maps, Waze, etc.  10x better than factory nav.  

 

GM didn't "steal" it from you, the dealer didn't "steal" it either.  You went in with an issue, the truck was reprogrammed with the latest factory calibrations which means no nav.  

 

Honestly TechLine will usually help you if you are nice to them but they will charge you no matter what!

 

I am with everybody else on this, GM dealer did nothing wrong. Should have mentioned it to them but then your original concern would not have been fixed possibly

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
On 2/5/2022 at 3:36 PM, shanemoon said:

That is not theft. You took it in and almost certainly gave them permission to reflash by doing so. 
What it is is a void of warranty…so you’d be lucky that they don’t just say, “sorry we can’t work on the BCM of your car any longer” and leave you to figure it out. 

Some of you need to look up https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act

 

Also, he did nothing wrong. Gm should honor this. 

 

Further, is really pathetic this is even a discussion. Customer service via some of these companies are abysmal and has been seriously second guessing buying anything else from them. How is it that as crap of a company as tesla is that they can handle software issues and fixes in a much more orderly fashion than GM? Don't get me started on what can't be fixed on these things due to a complete lack of foresight ok upper managements part. 

 

There is zero reason this should have even been an aftermarket solution. If gm had any intelligence at all working for them, they would have monetized this from the start for themselves. Further, after having  my own nightmarish incident twice from two separate dealers, it seems gm dealers are some of the absolute worst in the world. 

Edited by 1454
Posted
5 minutes ago, 1454 said:

Some of you need to look up https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson–Moss_Warranty_Act

 

Also, he did nothing wrong. Gm should honor this. 

 

Further, is really pathetic this is even a discussion. Customer service via some of these companies are abysmal and has been seriously second guessing buying anything else from them. How is it that as crap of a company as tesla is that they an handle software issues and fixes in a much more orderly fashion than GM? Don't get me started on what can't be fixed on these things due to a complete lack of foresight ok upper managements part. 

You’re hilariously wrong. Read my other response. But sure dude. 

Posted
1 minute ago, shanemoon said:

You’re hilariously wrong. Read my other response. But sure dude. 

OK, ego. You don't even understand the act and they have to prove the change caused the failure, they can't just void his warranty. But please, let me know how you know so much as you have clearly shown in this thread. You are just another who can't listen to reason because you are a fanatic of x company. 

 

There is a reason this company required a massive bailout in the past, and as long as crap like this happens it will happen again in the future. 

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, 1454 said:

OK, ego. You don't even understand the act and they have to prove the change caused the failure, they can't just void his warranty. But please, let me know how you know so much as you have clearly shown in this thread. You are just another who can't listen to reason because you are a fanatic of x company. 

 

There is a reason this company required a massive bailout in the past, and as long as crap like this happens it will happen again in the future. 

As I already said. Warranty can also be “void” or unrepairable due to modifications. So in this case. A reflash is required to do the repair. So either it gets reflashed or the warranty is void for this specific case because it cannot be done because the customer won’t allow a reflash. GM is not at any fault. As I mentioned, it has been known for decades that aftermarket software on vehicles can and will be wiped in many instances if taken in for warranty service and the service requires a reflash. The dealer is only able to return software to its factory or dealer installed state. This is basic stuff…..
 

But yes, please go on with spouting some act that you read about on a Wikipedia page trying to make yourself look smart like you know something. 

Also you mentioned Tesla. I guess you haven’t heard that Tesla literally black lists cars that have aftermarket software on them so that they will not receive any future software updates? Lol you’re so hilariously misinformed. 
I am no fanatic of GM. I’ve owned my truck for 1 year and have never owned another GM before. What I am is a person who uses common sense and doesn’t just go around blaming people and flaming an entire company because of one issue out of their control. 

 

As I said, people like this cannot ever be told anything except what they believe. Even if they have dozens of other people telling them that they’re wrong. 
 

Done with this. Good luck in life guys. 

Edited by shanemoon
Posted
17 minutes ago, shanemoon said:

As I already said. Warranty can also be “void” or unrepairable due to modifications. So in this case. A reflash is required to do the repair. So either it gets reflashed or the warranty is void for this specific case because it cannot be done because the customer won’t allow a reflash. GM is not at any fault. As I mentioned, it has been known for decades that aftermarket software on vehicles can and will be wiped in many instances if taken in for warranty service and the service requires a reflash. The dealer is only able to return software to its factory or dealer installed state. This is basic stuff…..
 

But yes, please go on with spouting some act that you read about on a Wikipedia page trying to make yourself look smart like you know something. 

Also you mentioned Tesla. I guess you haven’t heard that Tesla literally black lists cars that have aftermarket software on them so that they will not receive any future software updates? Lol you’re so hilariously misinformed. 
I am no fanatic of GM. I’ve owned my truck for 1 year and have never owned another GM before. What I am is a person who uses common sense and doesn’t just go around blaming people and flaming an entire company because of one issue out of their control. 

 

As I said, people like this cannot ever be told anything except what they believe. Even if they have dozens of other people telling them that they’re wrong. 
 

Done with this. Good luck in life guys. 

There is no such thing as common sense, and the fact that you think you have it despite having zero clue about how MM works, proves you shouldn't be in this conversation. 

 

Further, tesla also monetizes stuff exactly like this so you don't have to go an aftermarket route. Also, the idiot parts changers at the dealer should have checked the hardware due to being off angle before moving to software. There was literally zero reason for them to reflash the truck. You clearly have never worked in the industry or you would know that. Any tech that isn't a complete mouthbreather would have checked the hardware given it would have been the likely cause. The software never comes into play unless there is a motor that tilts the camera. 

 

Lastly, for mm to not apply, the "aftermarket" solution would have to cause the problem he was having. It didn't. This would be like putting 35s on the truck and gm saying we have to trash those because we put crappy lifters in your motor. A doesn't equal B in any way, shape or form. 

Posted

Free lawyers come with that MM Act? You can say GM has to do this or that but it will go to court most likely.

Posted
13 hours ago, Truckboattruck said:

I find it's usually more constructive to concentrate on how to fix an issue rather than whose fault the issue is.

 

Here's a thought worth thinking. 

:idiot:

 

 

  • Like 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...