Jump to content

Failed Lower Control Arm Bushings

tjonesdfw
 Share

Recommended Posts

tjonesdfw Enthusiast

tjonesdfw

Posted
Posted

Dealer says the lower control arm bushings are shot on both sides of our 1500 Denali, with visible play at approximately 65,000 miles.  Truck has rarely seen some VERY light dirt and or gravel road use, but is primarily highway driven.  No lift, level, and factory size/rated tires.  Thankfully the GMPP warranty is covering the $2,300 repair, but can't believe bushings are shot this soon.  Is this common on '19-'25 trucks?  

  • Sad 1
davester Senior Enthusiast

davester

Posted
Posted

I'm on 3 other GM truck forums besides this one, and yours is the first mention of those bushing needing to be replaced that I can recall reading about having a problem.

  • Like 2
tjonesdfw Enthusiast

tjonesdfw

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, davester said:

I'm on 3 other GM truck forums besides this one, and yours is the first mention of those bushing needing to be replaced that I can recall reading about having a problem.

I haven’t really seen it anywhere either other than one mention by a user here in an unrelated topic, saying he had front end bushings go out really early.   The dealer says it’s rare but they have seen it a few times.  I still can’t get a clear answer from the advisor whether it’s the lower ball joints or the actual bushings.  Either way, to have visible play in them at approximately 65,000 miles still seems unacceptable, especially for a 1/2 ton truck that’s not abused or worked hard. Not exactly confidence inspiring and adds to a very long list of warranty issues we’ve had.   

Edited by tjonesdfw
misspelled word
BIGDOGx Senior Enthusiast

BIGDOGx

Posted
Posted (edited)

These things are washing machines today, they are designed to fail now. Been driving GM trucks for the better part of 3 decades now and never once have I had to change control arm bushings.

 

Crazy it cost over 2 grand to replace a lower control arm as the whole thing is sold as 1 assembly today. 166$ for a lower control arm W/bushings and ball joint, and that is for a AC-Delco replacement one.

 

Control Arm

 

 

Edited by BIGDOGx
  • Like 2
tjonesdfw Enthusiast

tjonesdfw

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, BIGDOGx said:

These things are washing machines today, they are designed to fail now. Been driving GM trucks for the better part of 3 decades now and never once have I had to change control arm bushings.

 

Crazy it cost over 2 grand to replace a lower control arm as the whole thing is sold as 1 assembly today. 166$ for a lower control arm W/bushings and ball joint, and that is for a AC-Delco replacement one.

 

Control Arm

 

 

Agreed... absolutely everything seems designed to fail and be disposable.  I'm not sure if they've manufactured the lower control arm to be unserviceable now, or if the book just tells the dealer its easier and faster to replace the arms instead of pressing bushings out and in.  

 

I was shocked at the $2,300 price to replace two control arms too.  Guess I just got my money's worth from my GMPP warranty.  Unfortunately the extended warranty won't pay for the other $4,000+ worth of repairs this pile of junk needs.  

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted (edited)

Definitely not a common failure that I've seen.  Sounds like it might be the ball joints though and they worded it wrong?  

Edited by newdude
tjonesdfw Enthusiast

tjonesdfw

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, newdude said:

Definitely not a common failure that I've seen.  Sounds like it might be the ball joints though and they worded it wrong?  

Thats what I wondered too, but can’t get very good info from the dealer.  Do these trucks eat lower ball joints this quickly? 

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, tjonesdfw said:

Thats what I wondered too, but can’t get very good info from the dealer.  Do these trucks eat lower ball joints this quickly? 

 

 

Not really unless you've got bad roads or are lifted or leveled.  

  • Thanks 1
Z45 Senior Enthusiast

Z45

Posted
Posted (edited)

Planned obsolescence is the practice of designing or programming a product with a shortened lifespan to deliberately increase consumption and profit by encouraging consumers to replace it sooner.

 

With the bean counters firmly in charge, carmakers, and much of American industry, lost their single-minded focus on product excellence and their competitive advantage.

Edited by Z45
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
tjonesdfw Enthusiast

tjonesdfw

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 9/3/2025 at 4:21 PM, newdude said:

Definitely not a common failure that I've seen.  Sounds like it might be the ball joints though and they worded it wrong?  

It was definitely the lower ball joints.  Still surprised those failed at 65,000 on a pavement driven Denali without a lift or level and stock tires.  When I picked it up, they said 2 of the alignment pins had "come apart from the frame and were loose."  They recommended having them re-welded to the frame.  Is that really necessary, or is there another way to repair?

swathdiver Senior Enthusiast

swathdiver

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, tjonesdfw said:

It was definitely the lower ball joints.  Still surprised those failed at 65,000 on a pavement driven Denali without a lift or level and stock tires.  When I picked it up, they said 2 of the alignment pins had "come apart from the frame and were loose."  They recommended having them re-welded to the frame.  Is that really necessary, or is there another way to repair?

Gotta Stop Doing This:

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • 4 months later...
Alan Fulwood New Member

Alan Fulwood

Posted
Posted
On 9/6/2025 at 4:03 PM, tjonesdfw said:

It was definitely the lower ball joints.  Still surprised those failed at 65,000 on a pavement driven Denali without a lift or level and stock tires.  When I picked it up, they said 2 of the alignment pins had "come apart from the frame and were loose."  They recommended having them re-welded to the frame.  Is that really necessary, or is there another way to repair?


Got 46k miles on my Denali 1500 4wd Duramax and it is the same thing. Truck spent its first 22k miles in Canada before I purchased it. I baby it and do minimal gravel and trail for hunting only. 4 wheel alignment had camber of 5 degrees both sides and caster off as well. They adjusted lower control arms and such to adapt but it still wouldn’t get it in normal

tolerances. So having to replace arms. 

 

tjonesdfw Enthusiast

tjonesdfw

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 1/28/2026 at 12:41 PM, Alan Fulwood said:


Got 46k miles on my Denali 1500 4wd Duramax and it is the same thing. Truck spent its first 22k miles in Canada before I purchased it. I baby it and do minimal gravel and trail for hunting only. 4 wheel alignment had camber of 5 degrees both sides and caster off as well. They adjusted lower control arms and such to adapt but it still wouldn’t get it in normal

tolerances. So having to replace arms. 

 

Pretty pathetic durability for ball joints on a half ton truck if you ask me.  I spend most days on a smooth tollway or interstate, and spent very little time on gravel and chip and seal roads before mine failed.  Then to have to replace the arms because they didn't make the ball joint serviceable is just icing on the cake.  

Edited by tjonesdfw

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

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      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. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      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.  
    • Another JR
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By Another JR · Posted

      Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • newdude
      Gas fill door

      By newdude · Posted

      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.  
    • newdude
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By newdude · Posted

      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...