Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 hours ago, TonyTumm said:

 

GM failed me every step of the way on this one. I was paying for a truck I was afraid to use as a truck.

This is exactly where I’m at. I made a huge mistake by buying 2 brand new trucks (Tahoe & Silverado Trailboss) at the same time. I can’t believe I’m saying this but I should have bought one Chevy and one Dodge. Then at least I wouldn’t have both affected by the same flaws.

 I really is said. Both my wife and I really do love our vehicles but we are afraid to drive them any real distance knowing that it may cost us thousands of dollars if it breaks down. Even though hey are under warranty.

 

Posted
On 5/22/2025 at 1:12 PM, Debra Hall said:

What sucks is we have a multi week road trip planned in 2 weeks and it's not looking like I'm going to have my tow vehicle for our trailer.  First Chevy purchase and so far not impressed.   

I feel this. I had always owned Fords, bought a '23 Sierra 3500 Denali Duramax 7 weeks ago. 5 weeks ago I got the P0700/P0747, while 3-states away. Truck is still down at the dealership. Had received one valve body already, but it "failed to calibrate" and the truck would not shift out of first gear. Still waiting on another to arrive. Nothing like buying a truck and it then being in the shop longer than you've had it in your possession, since purchase. Have thousands in rental receipts I'm waiting on GM to reimburse me for, but need to "wait for my repairs to complete", which again we have no ETA for since the parts are on back order. GM has lost any future business from me.

Posted

I did not realize that the Allison transmissions we’re having problems. 

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • This video may not be the exact content for the joke thread but its a lot of laughs so here it is, I've only watched a portion of it so far but if anyone is looking for some light hearted good soap box driving action, its here. As a note in the upper left of the screen it shows the number out of 100 to refer back to any particular vehicle for comment !.    https://www.facebook.com/reel/1351928276956715
    • 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.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...