You sure tend to talk alot about things you just don't know about. Just about everything you said in this thread was incorrect and WAG's.killerbee said:
.
Anybody seen this video????
I just came across this video on streetfire.....I realize that lly's overheat, but I never dreamed it would be this bad. Not to count this idiot behind the wheel not stopping and at least doing something about it, or even letting the truck cool off. I just cant believe that someone would keep driving arrogantly just to prove a point. :nunu: And the idiot wonders why it went into limp mode.....http://videos.streetfire.net/category/Trucks^^Offroad/1/b108e8c2-25df-4054-8090-98af013f4333.htm
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 87 Posts
.
This is the better approach, what would you like to know? Most of it is likely already posted on my forum, but we can cover it here as well.TheBac said:I would like to get an explanation of the video, so we don't get any info incorrect or jump to any incorrect conclusions. My own opinion is that TxC was trying to max out the load on the truck to show GM that it could not handle what they advertise, and that somehow, somewhere, some person would load it and drive it exactly like that setup, and O/H would result.
Hey...he got GM to pony up in the end. Thats something most of us could not do.
.
Parameters were a load claimed by GM as capable of being towed at freeway speeds. This means stay under 22,000 GCWR while keeping the rest of the ratings legit. The reality is that legally, according to the DOT here in Texas, I can tow even more than that, but the goal was to nail GM for their own claims. We did however let the judge know that legally the truck could tow way more.TheBac said:Just what parameters you used and why? Were you trying to show to GM that the truck could not do what it was advertised to do, at max weight, max wind resistance, low fuel, etc....
in other words...that someone out there in Texas JUST MIGHT have this happen to them, and the truck should not be a worry to them?
We can do this without sniping at one another.
It was not my original intent to sue them. They forced me to do that by denying warranty. So, it wasn't just to prove anything at all really, until the battle lines were drawn by them.
But once it came down to it, well, you know yourself I am very well armed to press an overheat case. I knew more about the cooling system than the engineer at the hearing did. At one point in the hearing, which was over 8 hours long, they even agreed to the judge to stipulate that when I spoke about the cooling system that it would be correct info and they would not challenge it. This came about after I went way in depth many times about the cooling system and had corrected their engineers testimony.
.
They were unhappy with my load. The engineer said that he found it "interesting" that I loaded the truck on there backwards. He stated that it would create tremendous drag, which I expected because the day before at the dealership I told the whole GM group including their attorney that the drag is what they keep missing, that it is what causes most LLY's to overheat, or is the primary cause as high drag makes the truck work a crapload just to maintain speed, much less climb any hill. But, since they mention only weight in the literature, thats what the judge used as the standard, and I was under the max weight.TheBac said:I would assume then that GM did not refute anything that was in your video as incorrect information? They watched it and the engineers all agreed that the truck should be able to do what you portrayed without overheating? Makes me think that GM couldn't figure out what was really causing the problems either.
Well, congrats to you for taking on GM and winning.
Contrary to what has been posted about it, I initially had the truck up close to the front of the trailer. My objective was to simulate a heavy high drag RV without buying one. So, I installed a flipover GN hitch and rented a trailer and rented that truck. But when I scaled it it was over on the rear axle and GVWR, so I was forced to move it back.
See, GM took their time and held the truck all the way to winter, a total of 7 months the truck was down, then gave it back to me 30 days before hearing and they bragged I would not be able to overheat it. With only the receiver hitch on the truck and cold weather, they figured they had it won.
Well, the temps were in the 50's and 60's constantly, but I watched the 10 day forecast closely and we had a small last heat wave that got us into the upper 80's lower 90's which is hot for October. So it had to be then, or never. I scrambled to get a load and threw what you see together in 3 days.
I had neat things for the trial, like the original brochure that shows the truck pulling a huge RV. I also had damaging things like PI's and TSB's and mappings of the temp gauge that showed they moved the alarms way high.
I did not sue them under the Lemon Law or anything like that. We sued under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act, that they sold a product that they stated would do a certain thing, which was tow 22,000 lbs at freeway speeds. They incorrectly defended under breach of warranty and Lemon Law, I got a nice chuckle at the end when they said in their closing that we had not met up with the burden of proof of breach of warranty because they were only given ONE chance to fix the truck, and that I had not met the requirements of the Lemon Law either for the same reason. When they were done stating that we had not met the requirements for those things, my attorney then stated that we waive all claims under everything that they listed, and that we assert our claims under blah blah blah staute sections blabbity blah blah etc etc of the DTPA.
Originally all I wanted was the first blown engine fixed under warranty, but I mentioned the word "overheating" and they threw up shields. THEN they refused warranty. THEN I said fine, if you won't fix it, then buy it back. They said no, no buyback. THEN I sued, and they refused to work on the truck at all for over four months, it sat in one spot at my place and never moved. THEN we threatened to sue under breach of warranty, and they then agreed to fix the truck. THEN they kept it for three months fixing it. It doesn't take three months to put in a new engine, they were stalling for winter.
Its a little known fact, but a friend of mine joined the lawsuit with his Duramax, but he didn't go all the way like I did. He settled for $6500 and dropped out of the suit, he was in the process of getting a new house and had a new baby on the way so he needed the money.
.
Thanks, I really appreciate that, but like many have said, it was a total PITA to do it. Most people can't afford to have a $700 a month truck sit broken for 7 months. Many people cannot take off work to have meetings or collect documents or spend two days towing around Uhauls on flatbed GN's like I did for 1300 miles across Texas.Bouncer said:I'll give you one thing man, you stood up for yourself and won. That's more than most would ever attempt to do. Congrats!
I will say that anyone can win against GM for the LLY overheating, but make sure you have your ducks in a row and be ready to outlast them. I can help anyone wanting to undertake such an endeavor, I know exactly how to smoke them over this. We were always several steps ahead of them at hearing. Always.
Would I do it again? Knowing the outcome helps of course, but if my truck had not had a blown engine from overheating then I doubt it. It was a real hassle.
But, now that it is over, I feel good about it! :usflag
.
LOL ok, we can play. Why did it blow up when it overheated LOL!killerbee said:You forgot to tell us why your engine blew up. What were you doing when it overheated?
You already know (when it overheated) what caused it to blow up, it is well known, but I will cover it anyway.
Same thing you and others have done so many times, overheating the truck under load, trying to determine why it overheated, collecting information. This was also covered at the hearing, I admitted to the judge that I was overheating the truck on purpose, seeing how much load would cause it to overheat, and had done so many times. I told the judge that there were many Duramax owners out there working on this problem in various ways, and I even mentioned PUSU. I also covered cold air intakes and told them I had created one and tested to see if it would stop overheating long long before GM came up with the idea. I even showed emails from 2 years ago when I first gave GM Powertrain hard data and results on cold air intakes influence on overheating.
Muhahahaha yes the truth works great!
Problem for GM was that even though the truck was puking coolant, they had me drive it to them. Since it was puking about a gallon a minute, it was empty of coolant quickly. I argued with them that they should send a flatbed for it, but they insisted that if it was driveable to drive it in. So I did. Then they had me drive it home after they refused to work on it. Then they had me drive it to them when they agreed to repair it, even though I again requested a flatbed come get it. GM's own actions removed their ability to say one way or the other that *I* had caused the heads to warp, because they had me drive the truck over 20 miles with NO COOLANT which their own engineer testified will warp the heads quickly. LOL
.
Actually, as I described in the earlier post, I wasn't pulling ANYTHING when it "blew up" originally. The parts diagnosis from GM, of which they had many many very nice large pictures of and detailed testimony of the analysis of the failure, was that the truck was driven extensively without coolant, which is what caused the heads to warp and that cause it to be termed "blew up". The heads were warped so bad that it was obvious with a straight edge, no need to do anything else. Otherwise it originally only had a very minor blown head gasket, which they did a good job of showing too. Had they chosen to come get it the first time i called them, it would have been a head gasket repair and off I would have gone.killerbee said:I wasn't clear, I'm sorry. How much weight were you pulling when it blew up? Camper, boat...? No doubt you had to describe your load. Or am I assuming too much?
The engineer said it was poor judgement on the part of customer service to have not sent the flatbed for the truck once I told them it was puking coolant. Then they got all defensive when I mentioned "overheating" and had me drive it two more times with no coolant.
So when it came down to it, they accepted the likely blame for the engine being "blown up". Since I was claiming overheating, they thought it best to toss the original motor instead of replacing just the heads, they bragged big time that I would not be able to overheat the new one once they were done with it.
But, when pushed and when all the conditions came together, it overheated as expected. I have hours and hours of other footage that the judge got to see that showed when the temperature was lower outside that the truck would NOT overheat, but that the fan would run like crazy and that the temp would hold steady up high in the 230* range or more for mile after mile. As the temperature rose outside, every degree added outside was also added to the peak temp the engine would reach, until finally I had high enough temperature AND a good long uphill. Game Over.
I am working on getting more video out of the truck in the milder temps without the hills, it shows a very marginal cooling system that has a very thin line of defense called the engine fan.
.
Not exactly, GM to this day still denies there is a problem with LLY's overheating. Even though they have PI's and TSB's and have bought back countless trucks and paid cash hush money to who knows how many owners, they deny the problem exists.dieseldummy said:Heck, at least they admit there is a problem. How many of us poor saps with the 6.5 just got the finger from GM...
At the hearing they claimed my truck was the first LLY Duramax that they had EVER heard of that overheated. It pissed me off, but then we just whipped out all the GM documents that discussed overheating and possible fixes for it. Every last document of course was dated well before I brought my truck in for repair, and my attorney did a great job of explaining and getting their engineer to explain that it is a long process of many customer complaints, testing and feedback that causes repair documents to be generated to the dealers. They don't just all of a sudden issue TSB's, they first have lots of complaints and they look at it and then send out what the think the fix is in the TSB to all the service departments.
To be honest, they made themselve look stupid trying to take that tack of there not being a problem, the judge even was incredulous :shrug: at that since they had so many internal documents talking about it.
We expected them to deny the overheating issue in the LLY trucks, that has been the stand they have taken for over two years now. Admitting it would put them on the hook to fix all the LLY trucks, they don't want to do that, so they take on each person case by case.
.
Because I told them the truck overheated when worked hard. They denied that LLY's overheat ever, denied warranty to repair the engine, and folded up their tents and ran away leaving me with a dead engine.killerbee said:then how is this connected to overheating LLY's, and that video of load induced ECT rise? :shrug:
So we went to war, since YES they do overheat, and overheating is what caused the original blown head gasket. Basically they tried to screw me, and they ended up getting the shaft over it.
Had they just fixed the darned truck the first time when I called them to pick it up, I would not have sued. I would have taken the truck repaired and moved on. But they take a hard line when you mention overheating.
ALL LLY's overheat. Period. Anyone can beat them in court on this if they want. You all paid big $$$$ for a machine touted to be a tow master, "get the bigger trailer", "built like a rock" and all that mumbo jumbo. If it can't perform as advertised, then you shouldn't have to pay full price for it. Thats called reduced value, that what the objective of our suit was.
.
As another asside, it was NOT Rick D Lance on the phone in the video as you wrongly are insinuating. It was another Dmax owner who overheats towing his RV up long grades in high outside temps. But not knowing who it was sure didn't stop you from asserting publicly here on this board for all the world to see that neither Rick nor his son have any common sense. WTF????? :shrug:killerbee said:An aside: without names, you heard the voice of the guy on the cell phone. As a professional driver he is the king of overheating the Dmax, even LB7's. His motto is "time is money", with the record for the most TPS experience past 90%. So when his overloaded son was on the side of a hill puking, his advice to him was "just put it to the wood, if it's going to overheat, it's going to overheat". Thus his son overheated 6 times on the same grade that afternoon. I wouldn't want to be spreading that story around... My point is not to berate, but point out, common sense somewhat prevails for those that acknowledge the limitations in the physical world around them.
I dunno who has less common sense, the man that pushes his truck to overheating because it is supposed to tow a certain load without issue, or the idiot who comments about someone else when he doesn't know who it is he is commenting about. :damnit
The point of your spew above was to insult Rick, nothing else, mission accomplished, congrats to you! :Thumbup:
.
They might have tested it with above max weight. I am sure they did. You are missing the same thing they missed: wind dragTheBac said:You'd think that GM would have tested the LLY with over-max weight and under extreme conditions to make sure it worked as advertised.
As for a recall, look at what just happened to Toyota and the "oil sludge" issues in their 99-02 vehicles. Customers won the class-action suit against Toyota for engine repairs. Assuming its the head design thats mainly causing the issues (programming, inadeq. cooling system, air intake, etc helping...), think if GM had to have a new head design made up for all of the O/H LLYs....talk about huge costs. We all know the bean-counters decided that its cheaper to weather a few lawsuits than pay everybody affected....
A bit-off-topic, but with EFI out now, can you look at the programming differences in the power levels between the LLY and LB7 and see if there's something there? Did anyone try running LB7-type programming (and power levels) in an O/H LLY to see what happens?
GM usually tows flat trailers with concrete blocks and such on them for testing, or aerodynamic round nose horse trailers and such that are not tall. They don't test with 13' tall 8' wide RV's that I know of. If someone has seen otherwise, speak up.
The wind drag causes much more power to be used to maintain speed than the weight does. This is why there are so many differences between owners on whether LLY's overheat, that and terrain of course. It takes way less power to pull a flat trailer with a bobcat on it weighing 12,000 pounds up a grade at 60 MPH than it does to pull a full frontal RV weighing the same 12,000 pounds.
So the RV guy overheats, the equipment towing guy maybe just gets a little hot, but claims he is "not an overheater". Of course he claims that, he doesn't WANT to be a dreaded "overheater". But put a high drag load behind his truck and he will overheat the same as the other guy.
.
Steering shaft is the same deal, it would cost them way too much $$$ to design a new shaft solution then bring in all fullsize trucks, tahoes, suburbans, yukons, escalades etc etc built since like 1999 or whenever the exact start of the production of this shaft was. So they keep it on a case by case basis.TheBac said:Well, that goes back to the bean-counters. Say it costs $5K in shop time and parts to fix a few hundred thousand vehicles (LLY in 04-05's)...then its in GMs best interests to just whether the occasional person with gumption to sue them. Cheaper that way.
Most people would give up wayyyy before it gets to court, and just sell the truck to some other unsuspecting person.
Give you another example. The instrument clusters in the 2003-04 trucks are starting to screw up due to bad stepper motors. This would affect ALL GM trucks, not just diesels. Now, start to add up all those Tahoes, Yukons, Escalades (you get the picture)......just recalling them would be an incredible expense, not to mention clusters wouldnt be available. There are TSBs and historys behind this now. GM would rather "keep it quiet" and have to repay the occasional stubborn person. They like to see most people just give up and pay $360 for a new cluster or $120 for someone outside GM to fix it, than have to go through a huge recall.
As with everything to do with GM, it all comes down to money. Never whats right.
The overheating costs way more per truck than the shaft to rectify, they will never recall the trucks to fix them.
.
It could easily be a class action suit. However, class action lawsuits take a lot of time and money to press. I have the money, I don't have the time. I have 3 attorneys, the one that handled this case is a board certified consumer law attorney. He handles cases in federal court all the time. He advised me that I could get big damages in federal court if we proved the overheating defect, but that it would likely take two years or more to get to trial. I told him I wanted the fastest resolution we could get, so we sued in a lesser way.Bouncer said:Could this not become large enough for a class action lawsuit against GM? I am a Dodge guy myself and just reading this thread, but it appears to me that it is a obvious problem and GM is only dealing with it as they come instead of doing some sort of recall which would be the proper thing to do.
However, if they had balked at paying the judgement, and they acted like they might in the end since they were ordered to pay within 30 days and took all 30 to pay up, then we were ready to file the federal case. He already had it drafted up in case. GM decided to just let it go and move on, I would say thats a good decision on their part.
If they had not paid, we would be talking about the Class Action LLY Duramax Overheating case that would be in progress right now.
.
Ok, thats funny, and what you said is true, but not if you take into account the entire point of the video was to show in court that the truck will overheat if worked hard. If you slow down, or let off, or stop, it won't overheat, and you will not win your overheat case. Make sense?diesel dan said:I just came across this video on streetfire.....I realize that lly's overheat, but I never dreamed it would be this bad. Not to count this idiot behind the wheel not stopping and at least doing something about it, or even letting the truck cool off. I just cant believe that someone would keep driving arrogantly just to prove a point. :nunu: And the idiot wonders why it went into limp mode.....http://videos.streetfire.net/category/Trucks^^Offroad/1/b108e8c2-25df-4054-8090-98af013f4333.htm
Also, I didn't wonder why it went into limp mode, I knew exactly why. I was very low on fuel and was done video'ing already. But as I crested the hill right before that, it limped, so I grabbed the camera, played it to the hilt, and added it to the overheat video especially since it also allowed me to get in conversation with another Dmax owner talking about problems with his truck. Since I was so low on fuel it likely briefly uncovered the fuel pickup and threw the 1093. It wasn't because of the overheating or the fuel temp or anything else. But it was useful for painting a picture of a POS truck for a judge. :Thumbup:
If you still don't want to believe that someone would keep driving arrogantly to prove a point, I have over 30,000+ excellent reasons why. LOL
.
Differences, original versus new:cooksvillewildc said:A question for TXChristopher:
Did you notice much of a difference between your original engine (with OEM intake) and the one GM replaced (with the GM CAI) with respect to thier ability to withstand overheating?
How would you characterize the new '06 GM CAI versus stock.
Besides tuning and CAI, did GM upgrade/change anything else with respect to the engine/cooling system on your truck?
-M
As you know, I have very extensively tested and measured the overheat mechanism in the LLY. So immediately after they gave it back to me, I immediately ran up a bunch of miles to get beyond recommended break in points quoted in the GM manuals, changed the oil to eliminate the break in oil, then went straight to testing and measuring the new engine to see where it stood.
I found that it was equal to my original engine in initial rate of climb of ECT up to about 245* or so, at which point the newer engine, supposedly immune to overheat according to GM, actually did develop an advantage. It presented a very slow, deliberate increase in ECT beyond 245* with a longer and longer interval between each successive degree of ECT rise. However testing revealed peak engine temp was still reliant on ambient temperature, so I knew I could still overheat it but that my normal test load which was my boat, and my test route, the Fred Hartman Bridge, would be incapable of overheating it. That combo lacked both sufficient load and especially duration to get the job done in a way that would be "acceptable" to present in a court setting. The initial testing and graphs are covered in "Angle of Attack" at my site.
I haven't had time to verify programming play completely yet, but I am highly suspect by the way the truck behaves that they are defueling more heavily above 244* to try to prevent overheat and I also denoted some play in the boost, as in boost possibly missing. I have put that project on the back burner though in favor of the Fan Damn and steering shaft and the possible Smart Clutch projects.
06 intake:
The stock intake cannot be compared really as it has no engineering thought as to IAT consequence whatsoever. The 06 intake beats stock hands down for IAT control, although when I focused testing on it I found it was less efficient than the TxC CAI in keeping IAT under control in all but the worst conditions. I did not get a chance to look exclusively at the 06 intake during heavy tow testing but from the data collected in the final 1300 miles of overheat testing I will admit that it may outperform the TxC CAI under extended peak heavy tow strain. I need more testing to see the exact differences between the two. Therefore I am designing a second version of the TxC CAI that will get comfortably below the 06 intake performance no matter the conditions. A good bit of the new engines resistance at temps over 240* is attributable to IAT control, but its not enough as we already know.
Anything else:
I verified that they moved my "Engine Coolant Hot" alarm up way high and eliminated its audible tone. As far as cooling system changes, I cannot say as of yet since I have not dug off into it enough to say with certainty. It was the same rad and intercooler, I know as I marked them before giving them the truck. Later I may do a more in depth inspection to try to ascertain if they made any other "unmentioned" changes. :Thumbup:
If I missed anything ask more/again
On Edit: I forgot to mention, at hearing they denied making any software or programming changes to the truck. I was ready for that and we nailed them pretty good on that too.
Make no mistake, GM does not give a rats azz about the truth or the facts, to them it is a straight business deal which involves $$$$ and they will do what they can to win, upstanding in nature or not.
.
Exact models affected by steering shaft issue:TxChristopher said:Steering shaft is the same deal, it would cost them way too much $$$ to design a new shaft solution then bring in all fullsize trucks, tahoes, suburbans, yukons, escalades etc etc built since like 1999 or whenever the exact start of the production of this shaft was. So they keep it on a case by case basis.
The overheating costs way more per truck than the shaft to rectify, they will never recall the trucks to fix them.
.
2002-2006 Cadillac Escalade Models
1999-2006 Chevrolet Silverado Models
2000-2006 Chevrolet Suburban, Tahoe Models
2002-2006 Chevrolet Avalanche
1999-2006 GMC Sierra Models
2000-2006 GMC Yukon, Yukon XL Models
2003-2006 HUMMER H2
Even if it were only $100 to fix per truck, you could see why they would not want to do a recall. It would be huge $$$$$
Same thing with the overheating, they won't be fixing the fleet, don't hold your breath waiting for it! :damnit
.
I have never said I didn't like the Duramax or that it sucked or was inferior, the discussion has been about the video and lawsuit. I think they are great trucks, the one in the video is still here and we enjoy it every day. :woot:killerbee said:It is probably the toughest thermal platform on the light/medium duty consumer use market! It will let you get away with a lot of poor choices, repeatedly. From a engineering testers perspective, I LOVE it.
There is only a small minority of people that combine the conditions necessary to overtask the cooling system. Cooling capacity is easy to fix for the few who want to pull other trucks around the planet, or any other commercial use. I gratefully accept its limitations in deference to the failings of other similar platforms that can't hold a candle to this kind of thermal cycling abuse.
Anyone considering that this video shows the duramax in a bad light, I disagree, when i see it, I am seeing it at its very best.
Any vehicle can be overheated, at any time of year, given the right combination of stress factors, beit artificially induced, naturally induced, or otherwise tampered with.
For those interested, I am developing (for 6 months now) an EFI tun that makes the overheat cycle impossible to replicate. It is not intended to replace cooling system expansion options, like the TD-EOC, but to give a 75-100 HP gain to a tow vehicle that also makes it immune to overheat.
The best part about it, is when it is released, it will be FREE to TD-EOC users!
This is just one of many improvements that I feel should encourage anyone who see's this thread and thinks: my pathetic truck has a "reduced value". Do not believe it. The DMAX is the best consumer grade diesel motor option in the marketplace, period, all things considered. That includes the LLY. Many of those that experienced this issue, no longer do. It is easy, and relatively inexpensive to fix. My fan and ECT gauge has been AWOL for a year now, that includes 90 summer days of 110 degree weather.
Not sure what the insinuation is when you talk about the truck being overheated "artificially" or via "tampering" and that part showed poor judgement in being included in your statement. :damnit
I too can make a tune (spelled with an "e") that will not overheat, its easy to do. However the point is to be able to utilize the power the engine is supposed to have, not to cut it back. The only way to do it electronically is to defuel more and/or decrease boost, both of which will cut power tremendously. The owners can already do that via the right foot, and be crawling up a hill. Thats not what people want, they want to use the power they paid for to run up that hill better than the gasser next to them. Adding electronic controls that take away your power is not the proper solution, cooling capacity addition is.
My fan and ECT gauge are AWOL just like yours is in hot weather, and my truck has no cooling improvements at all. Try to go tow instead of running empty like you always have with your own truck, then report your fan activity. Empty reports are of no use to the overheating Duramax owner.
I keep waiting for your first COMPLETELY constructive post in this thread, maybe I have hopes too high.
.
I am not expecting it to run at 100% forever, but 5 to 6 minutes is far from forever. I take issue with your assessment of cooling systems too, I have run them at 100% and a properly designed system will dissipate 100% of the heat it produces no matter how long it runs at 100%. If not the designers either cut corners or miscalculated.444turbodiesel said:I'm late into this, but coming from a HD background I don't understand why it's a surprise to anyone when a light duty truck overheats when pushed to it's limits for lengthy periods. The cooling systems on light duty trucks are not designed for 100% engine duty cycle, then again the engines in LD trucks aren't rated for 100% duty cycle use either (unlike the derated MD versions). If you want to run on the floorboard for unlimited periods (100% duty cycle) you're going to need a bigger truck; by that I mean a truck rated for MORE than you're pulling. Just because the truck is rated to 22K, that doesn't mean it is designed for commercial towing at that weight or that it is capable of maintaining the posted speed limit in all conditions. You don't see class 8 trucks maintaining the speed limit when they are loaded to 80K, why on earth would you expect a little pick up to do it?
As far as the load in the video, towing a high cube box truck on a trailer, the drag from wind resistance is the bigger problem than the weight. The fact that you're loaded to the CGW limit and pushing the wind at 60-65mph puts you well over the duty cycle limit of both your engine and cooling system. A fifth wheel trailer of equal weight would give much different results. In addition, we don't know what the Dodge in the video was grossing or what mods might have been done to his truck to pull the load he had (most 12V Dodges I've seen have been modded to outpull just about anything new out there; and the fact he's pulling a Jeep behind his 5r leads me to believe he's a motorhead)
I've towed high cube box trucks on (class 8) drop-deck trailers plenty of times, the effects of wind drag are alarming. Even though I was well below my CGWR of 120K, maintaining the speed limit on even slight grades required as much throttle as a full load and engine temps were the same as if pulling a max load as well. Pulling an over-weight, over-dimension load would easily overheat my 525hp Cummins if I was foolish enough to keep it floored to try to maintain speed 100% of the time, even though the load was under my truck's designed (120,000#) weight limit the additional drag from the over-dimension put even my Kenworth's cooling system over it's duty cycle design limit.
Don't fool yourself into thinking just because you got a settlement that GM is wrong, they (all major corporations) often pay settlements when the cost of continued litigation reaches a certain point.
My suggestion would be if your planning to tow commercially at or near 22K, find a larger truck.
I didn't get a settlement, they lost in court and were ORDERED to pay. Big difference.
.
It was right at $30,500 I wish it were $35k! They were not capable of dragging it out long enough or running me off, and they were not capable of winning, nor would they desire more attention over this than need be.444turbodiesel said:No cooling system in a LD truck will dissapate all engine heat at 100% duty cycle in ALL conditions. Ambient temperature, road speed, airflow through the radiator are all very important variables. Not to mention the condition of the cooling system itself, as well as the transmission's condition (most overheat issues start in the auto transmission) LD trucks are rated to tow under ideal conditions with X% margin for error/extreme conditions. GM might not have allowed enough margin for the extreme condition you threw at it, but 99.999% of owners aren't going to deliberately abuse (the load in question could have certainly been considered abuse, and that's without mentioning how far over the limit you were on the rear hitchoke: ) and overheat their trucks just to prove a point.
If you had the same results pulling a 5th wheel while grossing 18K or less, I'd say you had a serious beef, but not with the load in the video.
If GM wanted to waste more litigation $$$ they could have certainly appealed the decision (and won, or drug it out long enough to run you off), they let you have $35K just to cut losses. The only thing you won was the battle of persistance; if there was truly a design flaw, lawyers would be flocking to make a class action suit out of it.
It was a gooseneck, not a rear hitch. I was way under capacity according the the Texas Department of Transportation. I can go 26k and be legal, as in legal by real laws, but I stayed under GM's 22k limit set for the truck so they wouldn't cry about it.
We told them if they wanted to appeal to go ahead, we would file a class action suit. They declined. There was another guy that joined my suit by the way, he accepted a $6500 settlement and I continued on to hearing. If they appealed, we had a federal case ready to go, they will not risk a District Judge ruling that they take ALL the trucks back and fix them, which if a Federal Court District Judge orders that they would be forced to do even if they appealed. It may scare YOU to take on a big company, it doesn't bother ME a bit, especially when the evidence is all on my side. My lawyer wanted to make it a bigger case, but I instructed him to get me the fastest resolution, so he did. If someone wants to make a big case I can hook them up with my attorney, but it takes two years to get in front of a federal judge, so be ready to wait.
It wasn't to prove a point, it was to display the flaw, and yes, there is a flaw in the LLY cooling system. You don't have to load it like I did for the problem to show up, plenty overheat with 12k RV's out back. I don't have huge mountains within 1,000 miles and I don't have an RV so I created a load that compensated for my lack of mountains and them dragging their feet into winter where the highest temp available was very low 90's for two days.
I have an 06 GMC Canyon that I loaded to TWICE its tow capacity and ran it at 100% for over 30 minutes in 95* heat to compare to the Duramax. Results: The highest temp I could manage was 214* which I achieved by cheating it, driving it like nobody would in the real world, which meant flooring it from 20 mph up to 70 mph then slamming on the brakes straight back to 20 mph to take away the cooling of the airflow and the water pump and fan rpm. Doing this repeatedly BARELY got it to 214*. Otherwise floored forever it maintained 203*-205* and never skipped a beat. It never even went to its clutch fan the entire time, it had plenty of thermal capacity to spare. The Duramax towing the exact same load I can get to 240* in 5 minutes. You telling me a Canyon can out tow a Duramax? So the statement about an LD truck not being able to have more cooling than heat output is flat out incorrect, because some do.
.
There was not a single measurement of that load that made it over dimension. It was less than 14' tall which is the legal limit and less than 8 feet wide, and the GCWR was under 22k as set by GM and way under the 26k set by the state. The trailer had two 10k axles so it was way under limits. Every aspect of the load was legal both by state laws and by the ratings GM sets. They were provided with certified scale tickets and I had pictures and video of the truck being scaled. I actually was forced to move the uhaul back on the trailer because it initially put me over on the GVWR and the rear axle rating, it was much closer to the truck at first. I was concerned the state boys might stop me and weigh me and I didn't wanna hassle with tickets.444turbodiesel said:....... Pulling an over-weight, over-dimension load would easily overheat my 525hp Cummins if I was foolish enough to keep it floored to try to maintain speed 100% of the time, even though the load was under my truck's designed (120,000#) weight limit the additional drag from the over-dimension put even my Kenworth's cooling system over it's duty cycle design limit.
I wouldn't have wasted my time giving them such an easy out as the load being illegitimate.
.
1 - 20 of 87 Posts
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
The Diesel Garage
A forum community dedicated to Diesel engine owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about performance, builds, ecodiesel, towing capacity, modifications, classifieds, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Diode Dynamics
18 Replies
juliana grace
6 Replies
Jasong
6 Replies
Recommended Communities
