NEWS FLASH!!! Toyota Recall!! Don't you love it!!!

[Dave@Moon]

When I went from my nice, safe (and much cheaper) 4 door pickup to a Prius last year my insurance <span style="font-style: italic">dropped</span> by $200. The fact of the matter is that SUV drivers are as big a threat to themselves as they are to everyone else. Their passenger fatality/injury rate as a group is often slightly worse than large and mid-size cars.

According to the most recent NHSTA data available, almost 1/4 of all SUV passenger fatalities occurred with no collision at all, not with another vehicle or object. Almost all of these are rollovers at speed, which is the saftey Achilles Heal of these things. These fatalities (almost non-existant outside of SUV's) account for 10% of all traffic fatalities, and they <span style="font-style: italic">do not</span> include the even more serious rollovers that result from collision.

Also the fatality rate per million mile traveled is less than 1/2 of what it was 30 years ago, in spite of the fact that the average vehicle weighs 600 lbs. more today than it did in 1975 (due to the presence of all these mega-SUVs). Obviously there aren't a lot of people getting crushed like bugs in spite of the (real) danger. All those bells, whistles, and air bags must be doing something! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

The overall rate for small cars is worse, and the huge mega-SUV's are one of the "safest" cocoons to be in in a wreck, but the differences are <span style="font-style: italic">not</span> as dramatic as you might expect (<span style="font-style: italic">In fact mini-vans and large cars are safer than anything!)</span>:

<span style="font-weight: bold">Driver fatalities per billion vehicle miles: </span>

Very small cars 11.56

Small cars 7.85

Compact pickups 6.82

Midsize SUVs 6.73

Small SUVs 5.68

Midsize cars 5.26

Large pickups 4.07

Large SUVs 3.79

Large cars 3.30

Minivans 2.76

-- NHTSA 2003, as quoted in USA Today

Yes, typical driver types skew the data, for small cars (Corvette, VW GTI, etc.) as well as mini-vans. And by the way, there isn't one class in that table that is exclusively American anyway. There's at least 2 <span style="font-style: italic">"damn dirty Jap cars"</span> in every single category.

<span style="font-weight: bold">And on that note:</span>

As for the foolishness of still trying fight WWII in this arena, that's just mainly plain racisim. It's been more than thirty years since I've heard <span style="font-style: italic">anyone</span> say they're boycotting German or Italian cars because of what happened to them, their uncle, or some other person in 1944. <span style="font-weight: bold">[color:"red"]Porsche/Audi/VW/BMW/Ferarri/etc. owners <span style="font-style: italic">never</span> hear that crap.</span> <span style="font-style: italic">"Damn dirty Jap car"</span> drivers <span style="font-weight: bold">still</span> hear it all the time. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

As for the economic cover story for that attitude, I grew up in Pittsburgh in an all-union family, and my (union) dad switched to Japanese cars after three unbelievable lemons in a row (1974 Ford Van, 1976 Dodge Aspen, 1977 Buick Estate Wagon--all new purchases). I was in college by then, and I remember him getting grief for it from people then. He always said the same thing: <span style="font-style: italic">"I've spent the last 20 years working in television and computer research for Westinghouse."</span>, and then he'd point to the invariable Sony in the room.

Have you checked the back of the monitor you're reading this on? <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

They buy our stuff, we buy theirs. That's how it's supposed to work. They don't fight fair that way and we need to fix that, but the right way. Punishing ourselves won't do it.

[Mrbuick714]

"Nobody but a gentleman COULD insult me,and he WOULDN'T "

[Ron Green]

Update; Follow up on my posts above.

Having called the GM customer service number in the back of the owners manual as suggested, I actually went up the chain of authority above the dealer and GM has heard my side of the paint chipping issue.

We had a civil conversation and GM stated they would call back the next day and they did at exactly the time they stated. The GM certified warranty does cover chipping paint according to them however in my case they ruled in their favor stating that the paint was chipping due to "neglect."

The had no rebuttal for why my other Bonneville and other vehicles are not chipping. I guess the 2,000 miles driven on sunny days and with storage in my climate controlled shop was just to hard on the newer vehicle. Oh well move on. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

[Reatta Man]

If you fought it (in court) you would win. But it would cost you more than you paid for the car!

GM knows it, and is betting you will "shut up and go away." The sad thing is, there is no proceedure to prevent paint from chipping after a car is painted. The prevention takes place in the prep work before the car is painted. To prove that, we all know there is no wax or polish you can use to prevent chipping; otherwise it would be a maintenance item in the owner's manual.

And GM wonders why their market share continues to slide? You had one bad dealing with them, and now hundreds, if not thousands of people will know about it due to this forum. And, of course, let's not forget the message your car sends when people see it sitting in the parking lot with chipping paint.....

[Guest John Chapman]

Jim,

I don't know how far you want to push this. One approach would be:

1. Write a demand letter (http://www.lawdepot.com/contracts/demand/?pid=google-gdemnd_us-demand_c) to GM requesting to correct the problem and including statements about the failed paint system in writing from reputable repair people

2. If GM doesn't respond, have it repaired

3. File in small claims court to recover cost of repairs and decreased value of the vehicle because it has had body repair

4. No way GM will go to court, it simply costs too much to have a rep attend.

Good luck!

JMC

[Ron Green]

John,

I am the one having issues with GM and have given up as I have a few friends who will fix it. It will be to time consuming to fight as I have found out with the courts on another case of tenant verses landlord.

When GM called it was almost like a rehearsed answer. When they gave me the neglect response it was evident that they didn't listen and absorb my side of the story. My vehicles are on a preventive maintenance program and my climate controlled shop at least in cleanliness probably rivals Roger Penske's.

Try giving your vehicle two coats of wax which I did to the car after buying. Now put a piece of masking tape on it for a few seconds and peel it off. Even with bad paint chances are the fresh wax will make it to slippery to pull any paint. This is GM's test method for paint issues the tape test.

Off to Dover for the Grand National with the Pontiac. Return home and reload with the Amphicar to a trip to Canada to meet up with other Amphicars. Wife is not to trilled with back to back car functions, oh well.

[55PackardGuy]

Ron,

It might just take a letter:

When you write GM, tell them that you will pursue this in Small Claims Court, and they may very likely pay just based on the threat. Also, it helps to tell them you plan to notify your State Attorney General's Office. (A quick way to do this is just cc you GM letter to the Attorney General's office.) I did this with a claim against an "extended warrantee" company. (They were refusing to pay based on "neglect" too.) Let's just say I got a nice phone call from them soon after, and they settled. That's one of the most satisfying checks you'll ever cash. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[Guest bkazmer]

there is a "real" lab method called tape test. It involves scoring a checkerboard on the painted surface, applying a specified type of tape, and removing it. The test result is how many little squares of paint lift off. Obviously doing it on the car defaces the paint job regardless of result, but if you are going to paint it anyway...

[Dosmo]

This isn't about Buicks - 3 weeks ago I traded a 2004 Impala that I bought in Sept. 2004 - it was a program car with 30,000 miles - it was a fairly good car for a while, but shortly after purchase, it developed two noises in the right front - a popping, cracking sound and a sort of roaring noise that was not a wheel bearing - at 42000 miles, an actual wheel bearing went out and I got it replaced - at 57000 miles, the roaring was getting worse - took it back to my mechanic, who replaced another wheel bearing - after he replaced the bearing and I picked car up, the popping cracking sound was absolutely horrible, like something was getting ready to fall out - talked to mechanic about it - he suggested an alignment shop - I took it to a different shop than the one he recommended and they couldn't find the problem, but they could hear it - said the only thing they knew to do was start taking stuff apart to see if they could find the problem - I told them to forget it and to do nothing else - I picked the car up and traded it 2 hours later for a 2003 Toyota Avalon with 96000 miles on it

There is NO comparison in the two cars - this car is so quiet in operation it is like riding on air - I have bought my LAST GM car and probably my LAST Ford or Chrysler vehicle also - I've been reading the posts from those who fought in WWII, and I guess I can understand their feelings - but the way I look at it, our domestic manufacturers have let us down - they have been putting out absolute crap, because they are counting on those loyal buyers to keep purchasing the junk they are supplying to the dealerships

I suggest you go drive a Toyota and compare it honestly to ANY GM make, including and ESPECIALLY Cadillac - and I'm sorry I disagree, but Buick is in no way a superior car to Toyota

Sorry to make anyone mad, but I've had it with GM

[Guest my3buicks]

seems the mags are not quite agreeing with you any more, they are all favorably compairing and often choosing the Lucerne over the Avalon - although, maybe instead of trying GM's bottem of the line, you should have tried an upper end car.

[Dosmo]

I'll take back the statement that Buick is not superior to Toyota. I shouldn't say that, as I haven't owned or ridden in one. You're right, 3Buicks, the magazines have quite a bit of praise for the Lucerne. Could be that GM is really turning things around with its upper end cars.

Because if they don't, they're going to find themselves on the same path as Studebaker, Hudson, Packard, Kaiser-Frazer, etc. I've owned the following GM products in my lifetime: 59 & 60 Pontiac, 63 Buick Special, 73 Chevy Malibu, 79 Chevy pickup, 72 Chevy Van, 80 Buick Regal, 89 GMC Suburban, 85 Cadillac Eldorado and lastly the 2004 Impala.

Suffice it to say, the Impala was my least favorite of any of these. To begin with, I'm not a FWD fan, I much prefer rear wheel drive. Every American FWD car I've ridden (with the exception of the 85 Caddy) has the same roaring noise in the drivetrain. The cars aren't quiet at all and they are annoying to ride in.

I've ridden in a 91 Honda Accord, 2002 Accord, 99 Nissan Maxima - all of these cars are whisper quiet, just like the Avalon I bought. I've also ridden in a Ford Tempo, Ford Escort, Dodge Omni - the last 3 cars were '80s models, perhaps they've improved - I hope so. They just ride and sound and even look like cheap cars.

I am unconvinced that GM has turned it around. As I stated earlier, I think all of our domestic makes have let us down because they thought we'd never turn our backs on them - so, they tried to take advantage of that - tried to sell us what they thought we should have, not what we wanted. As hard as it is to swallow, the Jap makes give more people what they want - this is why they have made such dramatic inroads in the domestic market. This will just keep on happening at the expense of more and more sales from GM, Ford & Chrysler unless they wake up and turn it around. I'm afraid they've lost my business for good. I just believe I get more bang for the buck with an import - some may say I'm a traitor for buying Japanese, I just call it informed shopping

[Guest my3buicks]

It's not "informed" shopping if you blindly buy without actually getting in vehicles of all makes and driving them. As you will quickly see here, opinions run rampant, and unfortunately, even those that are supposed to give us unbiased reports, tend to sneak in thier bias. I challenge you to take a trip to a Buick dealer and drive a new Lucerne and see if you are still so sure you will "never" buy another GM.

[Guest John Chapman]

Got to agree...

Owing to changing family dynamics we had to purchase a car that would more easily allow putting an elderly parent in/out of the passenger side. The trusty '95 Camry is just too low. Nearly pulled the trigger on a 2005 Rendevous with 800 miles on it. Looked some more, and ended up purchasing a 2001 Lexus RX 300 with just over 87,000 miles showing. This car is as solid as a vault and drives far better than the almost new Rendevous and was $6K less. Our V6 Camry, at 195K miles still runs like a watch, uses no oil, is quiet, and powerful. I really hate to see it go after 12 years of faithful service... it's part of the family. It has never failed to start or go when needed. Not even a flat! I anticipate the RX 300 will give at least another 100K miles of service.

In the search, I looked at six used Rendevous, all with less than 60K miles on them, and frankly, they do not wear well. Interiors were beginning to look...er, used and there were a lot of squeaks and rattles, panels that didn't fit quite right anymore, and notable wear in the drive train. Every one of these cars had clean Carfax histories, and several were Certified, so I was looking at the best of the bunch.

Cheers,

JMC

[Reatta Man]

John,

Please don't compare the Rendezvous with the Buicks of legend. It is a profit-maker for GM that they are churning out of their plant in Mexico. It is a $30,000 car made in a factory by people that make $1.50 per hour, literally.

I don't consider it to be a real Buick in the same way that many Buick fans don't consider the Skyhawk and other cheap mini-Buicks of the 1980's to be in the same class with other 'real' Buicks.

As for the Impala, I own a LOADED 2003 Impala LS with 40,000 miles that looks and feels brand new, and has not been in the shop except for a recall on the intake manifold gaskets in 2003. Ditto with my 2003 Silverado. My wife (who is extremely critical of cars that don't work well) was shocked the other day when she asked how long I expected to keep the Impala and I told her until it had 150K-200K miles. Her suprise? "Why get rid of it that soon?"

And, as far as Toyota (you know, Lexus?) being the only car to be solid after 100K+ miles, I would invite you to come to San Antonio and take a ride in my 2000 Ultra that has 140,000 miles on it, and has only needed a wheel bearing outside of routine maintenance.

And yes, the Lucerne and Lacrosse/Allure seem to be huge hits for Buick.

Now all we need GM to do is give Buick a decent affordable convertible and figure out how to keep the paint from peeling off of their 'certified' used cars.

Joe

[Guest John Chapman]

Joe,

While I agree with your sentiment, it does say BUICK on it, which to me means that BUICK is responsible for the vehicle and contents.

An ongoing problem with the big three is the shoddy choice of interior materials and design. It doesn't take an overly critical eye to see that the interior fit/finish and design of the DeVille, Lucerne, and the LaCrosse do not reach the same standards as competing Toyota products. I have been pleasantly surprised by how well done the interiors of the new Impala and Malibu appear. Time will tell if material quality holds up.

I'd certainly concede that all is not perfect in the Toyota world as is clearly evident by a visit to the Toyota and Lexus owners forums. On average, though, they do a much better job of producing consistent quality.

As far as the wage rate, it has no bearing on the quality produced, with both GM and Ford Mexico operations consistently being rated as among the highest quality standards in the world. What remains is that you can beautifully assemble parts of inferior quality and design and you get beautifully assembled automobiles that don't stand the test of time. Sorta like putting lipstick on a pig.

Cheers,

JMC

[Guest Skyking]

Well, I guess I've been wasting my money on American cars all my life!

1983 Oldsmobile Delta 88.........traded at 140,000 miles..ONLY PROBLEM- waterpump

1989 Lebaron convertible.........gave to my son at 130,000 miles...NO PROBLEMS-it's still going strong @140,000 miles with all original parts including exhaust system

2000 Dodge Ram V6.........clock just turned 120,000 miles and drives & looks new.

2000 Buick Century.......bought used at 52,000, now has 73,000 miles, looks & rides new

Check back in forum at Toyota verses Century........I still says it blows the Toy away!

[Mrbuick714]

Final note on Pious resale value. Advertized in a paper with a ciculation of 250000.six weekends of three days each. A total of 4500000 issues went out. A TOTAL of TWO replies were recieved/ (The dealersaid "probably tire kickers" As I stated before,the dealer.who only sells quality cars, said he got two with one deal,his first AND his LAST. The car was "dumeped" at auction.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Final note on Pious resale value. Advertized in a paper with a ciculation of 250000.six weekends of three days each. A total of 4500000 issues went out. A TOTAL of TWO replies were recieved/ (The dealersaid "probably tire kickers" As I stated before,the dealer.who only sells quality cars, said he got two with one deal,his first AND his LAST. The car was "dumeped" at auction. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A very large newspaper ran the ad for SIX weekends to try to sell his 05 low mileage hybrid and got a total of TWO phone calls. It was literally dumped at auction at a disappointing price. (P S,there is another at auction this week) </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The hybrid here was advertized for four weeks with almost no response. It was "dumped"at auction at a poor price. The owner got two hybrids for one price his first and his last ! </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You should consider resale. One here has been in the want ads for five weeks, and almost no replies. The same dealer had a Buick which sold in hours! </div></div>

How many more times are you going to post this fiction, and how many versions have you got? <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Used Prius prices like new

Market strong for used Prius hybrids, other gas-electric cars

Gotta-have-it-now buyers pay premium for used Prius

[Mrbuick714]

Differing dates different figures. Last post,supposedly final, but lots of people want know where it is now. Interstingly.a 57 Buick owner bought it. Who all want to find out where it is now?

[Reatta Man]

You keep thinking anyone in this BUICK fourm gives a flip about little electric TOYota cars. Between this and insulting members in several other forums, you just don't get it.

You would probably agree with the columnist in the New York Times that compared General Motors to crack dealers.

Go chill out, take a pill, meditate, call your therapist or something.....we just don't care about how much your little toy car is worth or how much mileage you get with it.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Between this and insulting members in several other forums, you just don't get it. </div></div>

<span style="font-weight: bold">You've</span> been insulted <span style="font-style: italic">once</span>, Joe, when you were encouraging people for days in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence to do something that would've ruined their cars (by claiming it was possible).

No one else has been insulted, or even personally characterized as you seem to do with every post ("<span style="font-style: italic">You would probably agree with the columnist in the New York Times that compared General Motors to crack dealers.</span>"). Not once, not ever. Remember? <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I do get it.

[Reatta Man]

We'll see if you get it. Meanwhile, I wouldn't make any bets on how long it will be before you are telling us how great your little toy car is.

[55PackardGuy]

Well, the way I see it, if you like your car you like it--and if you want to tell others you like it, you take your chances that they won't agree. I don't see Dave getting all defensive about the Prius, just telling his experiences and knowledge of the car. Personally, I'd recommend to anybody who's going to be doing daily driving in the next 20 years to get used to cars (and trucks) like the Prius, or stop buying new cars. I appreciate getting some information on what the driving experience is like for owners of hybrids, and if they had a 30-mpg hybrid pickup in the size and capacity of my current '96 Dakota, I'd be in the market for one. But probably not if it was a Toyota. Just personal preference, bias, loyalty, call-it-what-you-will. I don't bash Americans who do buy Toyotas, though, sometimes their neighbors are building 'em! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Just some thoughts...

[Dave@Moon]

It's not the Prius, Guy. Joe has developed some kind of personal thing to vent here. The topic he chooses is probably only a convenient excuse, and it changes regularly. If you read his posts over the last year or so about 1/2 relate to trying to discredit me in some way, either directly, through an intermediary, or by frivilously baiting a discussion. He may mean the things he says, but it doesn't matter.

It could be worse. Right now on another forum there's an unknown poster sending annonymous harassing emails to another <span style="font-style: italic">and his wife.</span> The moderators are hot on it now that the victim made it known (unfortunately he allowed it to progress for weeks hoping it would stop), and I believe they we've seen the last of that person on that forum.

Some people just don't know what to take seriously.

p.s. I'll bet you don't have to wait more than 2 or 3 years for that hybrid pickup! <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

[NTX5467]

I tend to concur, Guy, we KNOW where things are going and they most probably will be to some "hybrid" of some sort.

In today's commentary, Ed Wallace mentioned his experience with a new Lexus hybrid vehicle. He noted that it was running "on the battery" up to 22mph and then the gas motor took over. He noted fuel economy at "running with traffic" and also at a steady 60mph, over the same route. He also mentioned that when the batteries got powerful enough (whether he's meaning total capacity or what, I'm not sure), then the vehicles could operate "on the battery" at speeds up to 35mph. When the speed capabilities of being "pure electric drive" were raised to that amount, he opined, then real fuel savings and such would increase as complete trips would be done on electricity rather than a combination of electricity and fossil fuels. Seems like the Ford reps claimed that their Escape hybrid (uses electricity only under 30mph) had run something like 450 miles in Manhattan traffic?

So, it appears to me that hybrids can be a variable situation as to who they "work best for". Unfortunately for now, there's still some decently formidable competition from newer gasoline or diesel fueled vehicles at a lesser purchase price--key words, "for now". How well they can work for various people can also depend upon which "control" system they might use and whether the main engine is gas or diesel. And, of course, how "the money" issues might play out for each individual owner.

It might be neat to drive something "older" for daily use (to work and such), but the reality as I see it is that what you drive "daily" needs to be new enough to be able to be "disposable" should some catastrophy happen to the vehicle or new enough-but not old enough-to be able to buy parts from the salvage yard. I've seen "collectible" vehicles wasted by happenings in daily traffic or sudden weather changes. Plus the newer vehicle will most probably pollute less and get better fuel economy than the older one, at least by "the numbers" attributed to the federal standards that might have been in force at the time the older vehicle was produced.

For now, I suspect the hybrid technology is still a little evolutionary until a common architecture for the controls are finalized and licensed to "everybody". Of course, when they happen to become more "cost effective" with "known technology at the local repair shop", that will most probably the the "tipping point" which will lead toward greater numbers being sold to new vehicle purchasers. And . . . GM's in the hunt on hybrids on their transit busses, which can also relate to future light and medium duty truck chassis vehicles. When that "tipping point" might happen, I suspect, is still several years into the future, but it's coming.

Respectfully,

NTX5467

[Robberbach]

I truly have purchased my last GM vehicle. I bought a 2003 Z71 Silverado that has piston slap. Well GM calls it carbon build up. When you first start it it knocks for about thirty seconds. According to GM service bulletin this is NORMAL. The dealer assured me that having the carbon removed , via top engine clean, would remedy my problem. They could not understand why I was not happy that it didn't. I talked to the service writer and told him what the problem was, and all he could do was refer me to a GM service bulletin. I talked to the service manager, and he told me " he'd heard a million of these engines do that, and there was nothing wrong with that" I also talked to his boss who told me he'd get with GM and find out what he could and get back to me. and also they would refund my money for the top engine clean. That was two months ago, to date haven't seen a word or check from them. Put me down as not buying another GM product....... I emailed and did the run around with Chevy service corporate, They're hiding behind their service bulletin, which has held up in court. I can understand why GM wouldn't want to correct my problem, and fix the other million in my area of the country as this would probably break them. Just my .02

[Reatta Man]

Wow....guess I'm a celebrity. I now have my own cyber stalker. Maybe Dave should list "stalker" under his occupation next to housewife.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> GM's in the hunt on hybrids on their transit busses, which can also relate to future light and medium duty truck chassis vehicles. </div></div>

GM will introduces a full-hybrid Silverado in 2008. Click on the link to see undisguised spy photos. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> The same driveline will be available on Tahoes and Yukons for for 2007 models this fall.

Toyota is also expected to introduce a full-hybrid Tundra at the same time. It's a total redesign like the Silverado. The pre-porduction model was on display at various car shows this year. I saw it at the Concours d'Elegance at Ault Park.

[NTX5467]

A few days ago, I ran across some posts on www.bobistheoilguy.com forums which stated that certain brands of motor oil could lessen the noise you reference. Seems like Castrol Start-up was the one mentioned, by owners of similar vehicles that had tried it and it seemed to work for them. It MIGHT be worth a try to check out those posts and see if it might help in your situation.

I've also heard of some other brands of vehicles having similar noise issues, in recent history, not to mention other internal problems that were far worse than a noise, with all due respect.

At the dealership level, the "holy grail" is the service/technical bulletin from the manufacturer. IF you want to get paid for the warranty work done, THEIR procedures must be followed as THEY are the ones paying the bill. The TSB might not please everybody or fully address their complaints/issues, but that's what defines the rules that the dealer has to play by.

Respectfully,

NTX5467

[Reatta Man]

Robberbach,

The problem you are referring to is called piston slap. It was common to trucks in the 2000-2002 range, but yours is the first I have heard of in the 2003 model year. Some have suggested it is caused by the pistons having very short side skirts, allowing too much side-to-side movement. There is a part number for a replacement piston that GM has installed in some engines, but I recall you really have to fight with GM to get them to install them. I'm sorry you are having to do this; I have long believed for every $1,000 they save on repairs, they get $10,000 in bad publicity from unhappy owners such as yourself.

There is a very lengthy discussion at edmunds.com's town hall forum about this problem. You can also go to www.pistonslap.com for more info. In that forum, you'll see that Ford and Chrysler also have had piston slap problems in some of their trucks.

As for this being your last GM, just remember that several other manufacturers have had major recalls on their trucks for various design flaws, including Toyota and Nissan. So, writing off Chevy/GMC because of your problem means eventually you will have to write off every make of truck in the world because all of them have had problems, if you are going to apply that logic to all brands, not just the domestic ones.

Personally, for what it is worth, I have a 2003 Silverado that was made in December 2002 with the 4.8 V-8 that has been flawless in its's performance. Unless it is totalled in some sort of accident or stolen, I expect to keep it virtually forever.

One repair shop owner that owns several of these trucks and does a lot of GM work states that 10W-30 synthetic will take care of the noise. I believe in and use synthetic oil in everything I own, but wouldn't recommend using it just to hide a noise; I would also want the noise fixed.

Good luck.

Joe

[Robberbach]

Thanks NTX5467, I have been to the piston slap site, and have read up on the problem. What really gets me is the dealers and GM's attitude about the problem. They won't come out and admit to the problem, so they don't have to fix it. I really like the truck and will probably drive it until the wheels fall off. But I will look at other manufactures when I'm ready to buy the next time. In the last thirty years I have driven mainly GM products, with one Dodge, and one Ford in there. I would really like to buy American, but I want the best quality and service for my dollar.

[NTX5467]

I inquired with one of our heavy line engine techs, this morning, to see if we were seeing as many issues with the noise as we used to. He replied that GM, about a year or so ago, made some changes such that the current LS1/LS2 V-8s had different crankshafts, rods, and pistons in them. I'm not sure how different they might be (I haven't talked to my machine shop associate that would see the things a dealership tech might not, as of yet), but the issues seem to have been lessened. I also suspect that other manufacturers have made changes to address customer concerns, in the orientation of continuous improvement.

Take care,

NTX5467

[55PackardGuy]

I asked this question about Chevy V8's before, but here it is again:

Is it possible that there is an engineering bias against offset wrist pins at Chevrolet? Reason I ask is, pins offset to the "thrust" side of the piston have been used by many manufacturers to decrease side forces and "slap." I'm just learning about this offset business, but it seems the sbc had been notorious for slap LONG before 2002-2003! Could center placement of pins be a reason for this?

Also, regarding the short piston skirts, a certain amount of this is necessary for clearance of crankshaft counterweights, but my guess is that the newer designs shave off the skirt more than necessary to clear in order to reduce reciprocating weight a bit and gain an eensy amount of extra economy. Anybody with me on this? Or is it too obscure/speculative?

[Reatta Man]

Guy,

I have heard other people much more knowledgable in engine design that I am advance the idea that the short skirts were intentional in order to save on weight. It makes sense, and I can also see the bean-counters salivating because it probably saves three cents per engine, or some other ridiculous money arguement.

While I personally like the idea of lower reciprocating weight causing less vibration and a higher reving engine, everything you do in engineering a product has trade-offs. This one seems to have several, from causing the piston slap to ticking off a LOT of owners, and possibly scaring off other potential owners.

While this flaw doesn't make the engines blow up, this logic (or lack thereof) almost sounds as ridiculous as Ford's Cost Benefit Analysis in the late '70's that led them to believe it wasn't worth improving their fuel systems (for about $1.98 per car) on certain vehicles because the accountants analyzed the costs of being sued vs. the cost of improving the cars and preventing the loss of life was not cost-effective. Once the documentation of their bean counting, assesing the value of lives lost vs. potential court settlements came to life in several depositions, the coldheartedness of their arguement was stunning.

I suspect that during some lawsuit in the future (or it may have already happened) some sharp lawyer is going to find a report by an obscure engineer that proved GM management knew of the problem but decided it wasn't cost-effective to fix it. And then, BAM! There go another 100,000 buyers to Ford, Chrysler or Toyota!

Don't you just love living in a world where money drives everything for some companies?

Joe

[NTX5467]

The earlier "cold start knock" on the SBC was not piston-related. As soon as oil pressure rose, it went away. The TSB mentioned using one oil change of Mobil 1 and the "new" PF1218 or PF454 oil filter (which I seem to recall now had an anti-drainback valve in it. I wondered about the Mobil 1 deal until I ran across a mention in the www.bobistheoilguy.com forum that the base stock of Mobil 1 was configured to clean out some oil-related deposits (as in the oil galleys!), so then it made sense to me.

The newer LS1 engine family is NOT the only GM engine family to have shorter skirt pistons, and the other ones have had no noise issues.

In an early article on the LS1 SBC engine, it mentioned that one of the main issues in the design was to take friction out of the motor. It noted several architectural relationships (i.e., cam and lifter angles) that would do that by squaring everything up with all angles basically (as I perceive) at 90 degrees rather than some of the other angles in the orig SBC design.

Another item could also be piston pin offset in the piston. In the old Chrysler Direct Connection Race Manual (back when it was 1300+ pages rather than several books as it now is), the section on the Chrysler LA engine noted that by swapping sides with the pistons (negating the existing .040" piston pin offset), it was worth about 25 or so horsepower, but with an increase in piston noise.

Now . . . if you look around at the engines of the past several years, it appears that Chrysler Group and GMPowertrain are the only two "real" engine programs in North America, which are producing larger V-8 engines with power, torque, and better fuel economy. Ford is still trying, but as in the "old days", relying on superchargers to get the job done, or 3 valve cylinder heads (with GM and Chrysler Group getting similar results with just 2 valves/cylinder). Now, if you were the higher-up operative in GM and had given instructions to have your higher performance V-8s have great power, great fuel economy for the power output, and great throttle response, you would expect that to happen.

So, throttle response and ultimate power and fuel economy are related to the "weight" of the rotating mass inside the engine. If it takes less fuel to make it happen, the more power gets to the flywheel. The easier way to make this happen is to decrease internal friction in the motor (by design rather than just bearing diameters or widths), which would also include the lower tension and thinner piston rings (which were high level race-only items in the 1980s). Lighter pistons are a key player too as they can also lead to lighter weight connecting rods and less bob weight on the crankshaft. You see where this is going?

Now, let's say that lessening the piston offset (from what it normally would be) will also free up some power and fuel efficiency, that might be a gamble of sorts, BUT if you get advertising bragging rights to "highest fuel economy in the class", it can become an acceptable judgment call to lessen or "0" the piston offset. So you do all of your testing and EPA certifications with that powerful and fuel efficient combination . . . which might lock it in and possibly can't be changed without filing more papers, especially if it might be determined that to change it would hurt the prior "numbers". So, until some other refinements can be made which would counteract putting a little more piston pin offset in the piston, things are pretty much locked in on the earlier design - - - OR enough money was accumulated to fund the change . . . who knows.

In almost every automotive design, there's going to be some "cost benefit trade-off", whether it's better seat fabrics, Michelin tires or otherwise, or a window regulator that will never break or one that will have a projected warranty rate of 10%. Everything's a compromise, even for the "don't break" import brands. There's X$$$ to spend to assemble the vehicle and it still be price competitive with other similar vehicles, it's where the money is spent that makes the difference in many aspects of the vehicle (i.e., put it in the engine/powertrain design, put it where the customer can see it, combinations thereof).

In the case of pistons, it could also be that the alloy "shrunk" with use, but not enough to cause engine failure or longevity issues. Most production engines with cast pistons are usually in the .002" (or less) clearance range, forged pistons usually went to .004" clearance range, but many engines would tolerate up to .008" and not fail. Of course, these were the old "slipper skirt" pistons.

I do know of a run of a major manufacturer's piston for the Ford 351C V-8 used in the early Panteras having shrinkage issues. They'd spec correctly when assembled, but after several hundred miles, the engine would get piston noise whether warm or cold. I know that they warrantied three different sets of pistons for that reason--after they finally admitted to the issue. Considering the large lots that GM or others would purchase such things, not to mention the lead time in getting them, another judgment call could well have been made to use existing stock. I also know that there were numerous part number changes in the pistons, so they were trying to adequately address the issue rather than just "let it sit".

Whether the possible added fuel economy and few extra horsepower (and advertising bragging rights thereof!) were more important than a small percentage of noise complaints is something that could be discussed for quite some time, with no clearcut answer.

My machine shop associate worked for a Chevy dealer in the early 1970s. Every so often, a daughter would get a new Z-28 for high school graduation (the ones with the ORIGINAL LT-1 350 V-8, forged pistons, etc.). Some would come in with piston noise complaints. The engines were built with premium internal pieces, so they could be legal for many events where "stock" parts had to be used. But in the case of the daughters and their new Z-28s, the criteria of use was different so he said they put in normal cast pistons in place of the forged ones. It quietened things down (due to the tighter clearances the cast pistons used) and everybody was happn.

I also remember that in 1969, Chevy light truck 350 V-8s had piston clearance specs of .004", whereas the similar car 350 V-8 has the normal .002" (approx) clearance. There was some piston noise when cold. When I was first told of the difference, I thought "BullFEATHERS!", but then I verified it in a MOTOR Manual. Reason I was told, "The harder you run then, the looser you set them up". Car engines might run quick, but they would not be called upon to do the same things a light truck engine would do (i.e., haul full rated loads for hours down the road). For what it's worth . . .

I haven't found a place to check the later model GM piston issues in the aftermarket, to see what's out there, just yet. That might be a new project . . .

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[Reatta Man]

NTX,

Your detailed response was very interesting reading, especially from the perspective of learning the 'inside thinking' of a major manufacturer that they often never intend nor want the general public to know about.

The real problem(s) all seem to lead to one common factor: manufacturers either don't do the extensive durability testing they used to do years ago, or they are too eager to rush a product to market because it makes a budget or timeline goal. Or, perhaps, the problem seems to be both.

Years ago, when a manufacturer (even in the bad old days of sloppy quality control) would bring an incredibly good engine design to market, and it would stand the test of time for decades. They would design in and incorporate into the assembly line some engineering upgrades, but they often got it to market pretty good the first time. For example, if we had modern "API SJ" or synthetic oils in the 1950's and 1960's, we would have a lot more Chrysler slant sixes and 318s, Chevy 283s and 327s, and Ford 289s and 351s still running around, because they were great engines when new and stood up well.

It seems like the last great engine that has come out of Detroit has been the Chevy small block in its' latest revised form, and the Buick 3.8. Unfortunately as these engines are replaced with 'new technology' engines, those 'new is always better' designs often don't stand the test of time and mileage.

The bottom line is this: if I were buying a new Buick today, I would probably opt for the older 3.8 engine in its' Series III configuration, rather than one of the newer engines that are being used in the top-of-the line models.

Joe

[55PackardGuy]

I enjoyed NTX's response, too, and would in-a-nutshell describe it as: engineering is all about tradeoffs. Therefore, some people who love saying "She's got forged slugs" will allow for a little more piston noise, and others will say "I hate that racket." Reatta Man, you make a good point about tried-and-true engines, and this is one reason I think we have a lot of "legendary" American designed and built automobile engines--and their later brethren based on them. A lot of thought went into making them. It's also a reason that automotive writers bemoan all those "old-fashioned pushrod engines" in modern U.S. cars--often, what they're saying makes little sense when you see how well those "old-fashioned" engines stand up against the supposedly cutting-edge designs when you look at the numbers--often beating them in power, durablility AND economy!

I think, in general, Ford has done much more experimenting with newer designs in their bread-and-butter engines than either GM or Chrysler in recent years. In some ways, they have been pretty successful, especially with the 4.6 and 5.4 litre V8s which I have driven (also owned a 4.6 T-Bird) and been pretty impressed with. They had their "teething problems" though... remember all those '90s 4.6's blowing blue smoke? I heard it was valve guide problems. Seeing all those smoky Crown Vic taxis around town was one reason I traded the 'bird with about 60K on it.

It seems that when Chrysler wants to get more "modern" with engines, they farm it out to Mister-Bitchy. Again, with pretty good results from what I've heard.

Can't understand NTX's comment about only GM and Chrysler really having an engine division--does Ford farm out their designs? They seem to have the biggest stable of new ones with the "modular" V6/V8/V10 overhead cam engine line.

[Mrbuick714]

Rumors are that honda has dropped the hybrid

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Rumors are that honda has dropped the hybrid </div></div>

Honda (finally) retired the Insight. They (and the rest of the world) are <span style="font-weight: bold">far</span> from dropping hybrids. In the Insight's case it's being set aside to build a more practical vehicle. It may be a hybrid Fit or (hopefully) a car more like the Prius designed around the drivetrain to take better advantage of the technology than the current crop of retro-fits. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Honda Insight: The Once and Future Mileage King

-----

BTW It turns out that out of almost 1 million Toyotas worldwide that had the recalled steering shaft, 30 had failed with no injuries. All 1 million were recalled with no government prompt anywhere.

The only U.S. car line that had the bad (outsourced) part was the Prius. My car was in and out in less than 1 1/2 hours.

If every car recall were so conscientiously conducted car companies wouldn't need P.R. firms. <img src="http://forums.aaca.org/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[Mrbuick714]

Keith,the fellow just before me at the barber shop had put a new battery in his "economy" car Thirty three hundred dollars. As I have always said"Before you buy economy,make sure you can afford it".