Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

CURRENT MILEAGE - 37,750

 

I'm hoping this forum will steer me to where I need to be with regard to the same/similar issue with my brake pad monitor issue.

 

Since the purchase of my 2021 Trail Boss LT in August of '21, I've been bringing my truck to the dealer for 5k intermittent oil changes regularly.  Simply for peace of mind and documentation of quality care for the vehicle.  With the cost of oil and filters, its worth it to me to take it there vs DIY like I used to.  I'm not as nimble as I once was 😉   I mention this here because I feel its important for anyone reading this, to know the level of care I've demonstrated since taking ownership of my truck.

 

 Id also like to mention, that over the many years of vehicle ownership, I've always prided myself with getting longer than normal wear out of my sets of brakes!

 

 

Now that I've mentioned all of that, let me get to the important part.  Not long after my 35k service, I had a message pop up on the gauge cluster verifying that i "replaced rear brake pads?" ........ummmm no, that wasn't done as I'm still on the original brakes..... 35k miles would NEVER in my history of owning ANY vehicle, been a point to be concerned about brake changes.  It seemed to happen a few more times soon after that but only when I used the electronic parking brake.  So I'm thinking, ok, ill have the service peeps take care of that when I arrive for my next oil change at 40k.  Just this past weekend, I happened to get a blowout (unpatchable gouge) so I brought the truck in for a full set of new tires as the factory tires were not looking their best, I was already looking for a new set anyway.  So while there at the tire shop, I asked the tech if I could just take a quick peek at the brake pads and rotors on all four.  What I found next blew my doors off!  My front pads had about 65% and looked symmetrically worn (aka NORMAL).  Then we stepped to the rears.....WHOA!   The REAR INNER pads were almost down to the metal on the pad itself!  AND, both right and left sides of the rears were SYMMETRCALLY WORN!  The outer pads on the rears were also low, AND also symmetrically worn, but not nearly as low as the inners.  If it were only one caliper and it seemed to be an isolated issue, I could live with that but when I realized how evenly the inner rears were both worn, that spoke volumes to me.  The tech advised that I get them replaced ASAP.  So i left the tire shop with 4 new tires and a raised stress level! First thing I did after that was Googled "2021 Silverado Brake Issues".....that lead me here to the GM Forum.

 

I immediately called my local Chevy dealer for appt to get brakes replaced and explained what had taken place up that point.  I asked the svc advisor if he's ever heard of this happening and to my surprise, he said no. This concerns me because now it seems like its going to be an uphill battle to get help on the matter with Chevy backing their product as a warrantable issue.  I couldn't find any recalls related to this but I did see some articles here on the forum.  I'm asking for any advice or direction from ANYONE with similar brake issues to help me out.

 

Thanks in advance everyone

Posted

This is not the 1st post I have seen where the rear brakes were worn out before the front brakes. With that said GM defines the brake pads as a wear item and won't cover them as warranty. Yes I agree that the rear pads should not have that much wear as for the mileage you have.

Posted
6 hours ago, Rob Pob said:

 

CURRENT MILEAGE - 37,750

 

I'm hoping this forum will steer me to where I need to be with regard to the same/similar issue with my brake pad monitor issue.

 

Since the purchase of my 2021 Trail Boss LT in August of '21, I've been bringing my truck to the dealer for 5k intermittent oil changes regularly.  Simply for peace of mind and documentation of quality care for the vehicle.  With the cost of oil and filters, its worth it to me to take it there vs DIY like I used to.  I'm not as nimble as I once was 😉   I mention this here because I feel its important for anyone reading this, to know the level of care I've demonstrated since taking ownership of my truck.

 

 Id also like to mention, that over the many years of vehicle ownership, I've always prided myself with getting longer than normal wear out of my sets of brakes!

 

 

Now that I've mentioned all of that, let me get to the important part.  Not long after my 35k service, I had a message pop up on the gauge cluster verifying that i "replaced rear brake pads?" ........ummmm no, that wasn't done as I'm still on the original brakes..... 35k miles would NEVER in my history of owning ANY vehicle, been a point to be concerned about brake changes.  It seemed to happen a few more times soon after that but only when I used the electronic parking brake.  So I'm thinking, ok, ill have the service peeps take care of that when I arrive for my next oil change at 40k.  Just this past weekend, I happened to get a blowout (unpatchable gouge) so I brought the truck in for a full set of new tires as the factory tires were not looking their best, I was already looking for a new set anyway.  So while there at the tire shop, I asked the tech if I could just take a quick peek at the brake pads and rotors on all four.  What I found next blew my doors off!  My front pads had about 65% and looked symmetrically worn (aka NORMAL).  Then we stepped to the rears.....WHOA!   The REAR INNER pads were almost down to the metal on the pad itself!  AND, both right and left sides of the rears were SYMMETRCALLY WORN!  The outer pads on the rears were also low, AND also symmetrically worn, but not nearly as low as the inners.  If it were only one caliper and it seemed to be an isolated issue, I could live with that but when I realized how evenly the inner rears were both worn, that spoke volumes to me.  The tech advised that I get them replaced ASAP.  So i left the tire shop with 4 new tires and a raised stress level! First thing I did after that was Googled "2021 Silverado Brake Issues".....that lead me here to the GM Forum.

 

I immediately called my local Chevy dealer for appt to get brakes replaced and explained what had taken place up that point.  I asked the svc advisor if he's ever heard of this happening and to my surprise, he said no. This concerns me because now it seems like its going to be an uphill battle to get help on the matter with Chevy backing their product as a warrantable issue.  I couldn't find any recalls related to this but I did see some articles here on the forum.  I'm asking for any advice or direction from ANYONE with similar brake issues to help me out.

 

Thanks in advance everyone

37,000 miles on a 2021? I don't think you have any chance at all for a warranty claim. As 2016 Sierra Owner pointed out brakes are a wear item.

Posted

while it is a wear item its not wearing properly. there is a lot of posts on this problem, including myself. my 2014 went almost 90k miles before the brakes needed replacement. my 2020 went 55k and the rear brakes were shot due to the inner pad wearing much faster than the outer, and just like Rob the truck was being serviced by gm and they said nothing. my truck went from saying 77% to service brakes in a week, and that when i discovered the rear inner pads where gone. this is a safety issue for people 

Posted
On 5/7/2025 at 2:26 PM, Rob Pob said:

 

I immediately called my local Chevy dealer for appt to get brakes replaced and explained what had taken place up that point.  I asked the svc advisor if he's ever heard of this happening and to my surprise, he said no. This concerns me because now it seems like its going to be an uphill battle to get help on the matter with Chevy backing their product as a warrantable issue.  I couldn't find any recalls related to this but I did see some articles here on the forum.  I'm asking for any advice or direction from ANYONE with similar brake issues to help me out.

 

Thanks in advance everyone

 

 

Brakes are only under 3/36.  And they only warranty rotors for that whole time.  

 

TLDR, its your brakes.  These trucks need the rears lubed once or twice a year otherwise they will wear prematurely.  Simple as that.  

Posted

if the brakes need lubed once or twice, then why doesn't the dealer let us know that. they don't because they will make more money when you have to replace everything. simple as that

Posted

This is a feature that was poorly/cheaply designed, simple. 

  • Thanks 1
Posted
2 hours ago, silveradosid said:

if the brakes need lubed once or twice, then why doesn't the dealer let us know that. they don't because they will make more money when you have to replace everything. simple as that

 

You are always so cynical.

 

 

They make money doing the brake service too. 

 

It's been my experience that at least some do suggest it, but the service is often refused.

Probably leads to not asking as often.  

 

I've been let know by both GM dealers and by independents. 

Including yesterday by the shop (not a that I had doing a winter/summer tire swap. 

 

 

Posted
On 5/7/2025 at 9:29 PM, Bikerjon said:

37,000 miles on a 2021? I don't think you have any chance at all for a warranty claim. As 2016 Sierra Owner pointed out brakes are a wear item.

I’m not sure if you misunderstood my post or if it didn’t make sense the way I wrote it, but I wasn’t trying to get my brake pads replaced under warranty. I was simply trying to point out what seems to be a defect from the manufacturer. I’m more bothered by the fact that at my 35,000 mile oil change, they didn’t identify the problem, nor did they during any of my dealer service oil changes. It’s clearly a GM problem and I’m shocked that everyone here that’s aware of it whether you’re an owner or a technician that works on these trucks allows this and we all become complacent about it. I’m not done with this as I’ve created a case file number and I’ll be pursuing it further. I’ll post up to let anyone know that’s interested my findings and results.

Posted

No, you were perfectly clear, and I agree with your concern. I would expect that the pad wear sensor should have triggered.

 

As for "I asked the svc advisor if he's ever heard of this happening and to my surprise, he said no."I just dropped mine at the dealership this morning to have the "shuddering transmission" checked out, and I told him that the forum is overflowing with horror stories about valve bodies being on backorder and trucks being in the shop for months. The service advisor said that the 1500 have not been an issue and that he had personally only seen two 1500s but over ten HDs (non-Allison Allisons). I call BS on these dealerships.

Posted
7 hours ago, 23NSBLTZ said:

No, you were perfectly clear, and I agree with your concern. I would expect that the pad wear sensor should have triggered.

 

As for "I asked the svc advisor if he's ever heard of this happening and to my surprise, he said no."I just dropped mine at the dealership this morning to have the "shuddering transmission" checked out, and I told him that the forum is overflowing with horror stories about valve bodies being on backorder and trucks being in the shop for months. The service advisor said that the 1500 have not been an issue and that he had personally only seen two 1500s but over ten HDs (non-Allison Allisons). I call BS on these dealerships.

Your Service Advisor is uninformed, an idiot or a liar.

Posted
On 5/7/2025 at 2:26 PM, Rob Pob said:

This concerns me because now it seems like its going to be an uphill battle to get help on the matter with Chevy backing their product as a warrantable issue.

 

This is why I made the comment on brake pads being a non warranty item. Other than replacing the pads it's about all you can do at this time. Replace the pads and have them inspected at each oil change for abnormal wear. If they happen to be wearing out as they did. Then they can diagnose the problem.

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

    • 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.  
    • Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...