Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, 6.2ZR2 said:

Did they replace the collision alert camera?

That is what fixed mine, the unit up in the mirror.

Yes. Didn't fix mine. They said that they can't erase the fault codes so maybe that's the reason it's not enabling the features. I'm sure they'll figure it out on Monday.

Posted

I know when they did mine it took them a long time to get it reset and properly calibrated. They had to drive it almost 50 miles to finally get it.

Good luck and I hope they get it fixed.

Posted
1 minute ago, 6.2ZR2 said:

I know when they did mine it took them a long time to get it reset and properly calibrated. They had to drive it almost 50 miles to finally get it.

Good luck and I hope they get it fixed.

Interesting... They drove mine for 4 miles only... Checked in with 9202m and it left the shop with 9206. 🤔

Posted

The second time it happened was just a day after I got it back. When I pulled the fuse, I can see tool marks on the fuse spade, so it had been pulled a few times before I looked at it. And yes, it can be the fuse. If the space tolerances are off, it will briefly lose power to those devices and throw a code. By pulling the fuse and repeating, you're essentially resetting the devices and clearing the code. I have a code reader and can see there are no codes. If the camera is defective, it wouldn't work intermittently, unless it's losing power. As far as the dealership is concerned, never trust these people. I had a 2015 Jeep Wrangler Ruby that would throw a check engine code if you were on a steep incline traveling at a 65 mph and it pops into passing gear. Long story short, they replaced the heads on the jeep and did a few other things that was simply absurd. I spoke with the mechanic and asked why would he do all that work, when it's nothing more than the ECM that needs a software update. He said that Chrysler, who owned Jeepbat that time, instructed them to do work sobthat the customer would think they were at least doing something. My grandfather was a master mechanic for Ford, so these are tactics used to make the customer happy to a certain extent. Don't trust these guys, they get paid every time you bring the truck in and make money off warranties. I'm about to make another trip to San Francisco, so if something happenes, it'll happen on this trip. 

Posted

It works on the 2022's refresh? 

The reason I ask is when I got my ZR2 I hooked our scanners up which work previous models doesn't communicate with it. 

We were told GM has changed everything with the refresh and hasn't started releasing it yet.

If there is something out there I would like to know.

 

Posted

Unfortunately, I am having the same issue with my 2022 Silverado LTZ Z71.  Amber Front Collision light is on and LKA will not turn on.  Will try the fuse option and let you know what happens.

Posted

Just left dealer and they said it was “cornea”/camera and are trying to figure out part number to replace and then order. Hope this is the fix 

Posted
9 minutes ago, JGoose11 said:

Just left dealer and they said it was “cornea”/camera and are trying to figure out part number to replace and then order. Hope this is the fix 

From the experience of others on this post, it continues to happen. At the moment, there isn't a recall for the fuse block, which is what I believe to be the issue. After tweeking the a couple of the spades on the fuse itself, I've not experiences any issues. It happened 3 times prior and one of those times was just a day out of the shop. I'm not going to allow them to replace anything until we get the missing chips. They get paid by GM every time you take it in. Doesn't matter if it fixes anything or not. Even the guy you check in with at the dealer makes commissions from it. Don't trust them at all!

Posted
2 hours ago, Slo said:

Unfortunately, I am having the same issue with my 2022 Silverado LTZ Z71.  Amber Front Collision light is on and LKA will not turn on.  Will try the fuse option and let you know what happens.

Didn't work for me so heading to dealer soon.

Posted

Well as it turns out there was an error in the calibration the first time they did it… a different tech recalibrated it today and it works fine. 
 

Yeah yeah, I’m on my way to get gas 🤣9344E00B-6ACA-477F-B5FA-2625BB8E63E2.thumb.jpeg.d6ebc07568d603d7723fa3e921b5eb6b.jpeg

Posted
7 hours ago, Slo said:

Unfortunately, I am having the same issue with my 2022 Silverado LTZ Z71.  Amber Front Collision light is on and LKA will not turn on.  Will try the fuse option and let you know what happens.

Pull it and prior to putting it back, slightly bend 2 of the 3 spades so it makes a tight fit. The metal expands with heat and contracts with cooler temps. I think this is what's causing the issue. 

Posted
4 hours ago, Manny Man said:

Well as it turns out there was an error in the calibration the first time they did it… a different tech recalibrated it today and it works fine. 
 

Yeah yeah, I’m on my way to get gas 🤣9344E00B-6ACA-477F-B5FA-2625BB8E63E2.thumb.jpeg.d6ebc07568d603d7723fa3e921b5eb6b.jpeg

Keep us posted!

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
  • 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, 1,694 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • 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. 😄
    • 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
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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...