Jump to content

3.0 Duramax timing chain stretch and low end knock

Edward1978
 Share

Recommended Posts

Edward1978 New Member

Edward1978

Posted
Posted

Have enjoyed this engine but I’m at a loss today. 2020 Silverado with 114k miles,  engine began running rough, developed a knock and “Service Def System” reduced power popped up. Dealer pulled codes and got a P0016 and determined engine timing is off possibly due to a stretched timing chain jumping a sprocket. The timing chain is located at the back of the engine and is an engine out process. Fingers crossed the knock is related and doesn’t require a complete engine. Am I just the unlucky one or is this becoming common as these motors age? 

Silverado4x4 Senior Enthusiast

Silverado4x4

Posted
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, Edward1978 said:

Have enjoyed this engine but I’m at a loss today. 2020 Silverado with 114k miles,  engine began running rough, developed a knock and “Service Def System” reduced power popped up. Dealer pulled codes and got a P0016 and determined engine timing is off possibly due to a stretched timing chain jumping a sprocket. The timing chain is located at the back of the engine and is an engine out process. Fingers crossed the knock is related and doesn’t require a complete engine. Am I just the unlucky one or is this becoming common as these motors age? 

GM specifies oil pump belt replacement at 150,000 miles and serviced at 100,000 miles, the tranny has to come out to get to the belt, stupid design. Your not alone. It can be done with the engine in. As far as the chain most likely that's what it did. I know they had a TSB problem with the timing sprocket on some motors.

Edited by Silverado4x4
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted (edited)

I've seen some reports of timing chains on these.  Not a whole lot, but there are reports of it. 

 

Per the service manual, its an engine out job for it, but I've seen GM techs who've done them pull the cab and transmission instead of the engine.  

 

So long as no valves hit pistons, it would need chains, tensioners, guides.  It would also be prime opportunity for the oil pump belt to be tossed on as well.

 

All the chains are in the rear in the 3.0 Duramax, as is the oil pump belt. 

Edited by newdude
Jay P Enthusiast

Jay P

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Silverado4x4 said:

GM specifies oil pump belt replacement at 150,000 miles and serviced at 100,000 miles, the tranny has to come out to get to the belt, stupid design. Your not alone. It can be done with the engine in. As far as the chain most likely that's what it did. I know they had a TSB problem with the timing sprocket on some motors.

The newer LM2/LZ0s specify 200k for the oil pump belt and since nothing related has changed that would apply to the earlier models also. If it was mine I would replace it if the engine is apart for the timing chains.

Screenshot 2024-05-22 at 11.52.51.png

Edited by Jay P
  • 3 months later...
Broberts New Member

Broberts

Posted
Posted

My 2020 just got this report today. Took it in for reduced engine power and lot's of codes. Stretched chains and manifold gaskets is what I was told with some of the parts on backorder. Truck has 92k... It's not time for the pump belt but definitely gonna ask if it can be taken care of while engine/transmission are separated. 

  • 1 month later...
njodell New Member

njodell

Posted
Posted

My 2020 with 56K miles....just popped the p016 code....look it up.  Thankfully, I have 4 to 5 months of warranty left.  I'll be getting rid of this, going back to gas.  Lifetime GM guy....new Fords suck as well..may have to look at a tundra for the 1st time ever.  Meanwhile....I'll be minimum 1month without a ride.  I am pissed....GM....would design this sh#$ motor.  Love the mileage....oil pump belt, timing chain.....back of the engine....mind boggling...  

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

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      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. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      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
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      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.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      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.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      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...