Last post on Jul 19, 2013 at 2:41 PM
You are in the Chevrolet Suburban & Tahoe
What is this discussion about?
Chevrolet Suburban, Chevrolet Tahoe, Chevrolet Silverado 1500 SS, SUV
#193 of 198 Re: Frustrated Tahoe Owner [prontohr]
Dec 21, 2012 (9:46 am)
Good for you. We also did the same thing with ours. We dumped it!!!!We went with a 2013 Dodge Durango Citadel with the V-8, This vehicle is GREAT and best of all, it does not shake!! Go figure?? We will NEVER buy another GM vehicle ever again! I might dump my chevy p/u next year and grab a RAM. Good luck with your next buy.
#194 of 198 Re: Vibration in V4 [chadfromftown]
Apr 11, 2013 (10:01 am)
Chad, I believe you have the source of the issue pinned. I have a 2010 Tahoe LTZ and have been fighting with Chevy since last Fall about the vibration and intolerable driving experience. While I have no doubt that there may be other issues with these vehicles given what I've read there is almost certainly a vibration issue stemming from the Cylinder Deactivation System. Based upon my experience (driving and in dealing with Chevy) and independent research/consultation the tire-related "fixes" seem to be a somkescreen for the true problem BECAUSE THIS ISSUE CANNOT TRULY BE FIXED! It is an engineering/design flaw that purportedly allows for better fuel economy but causes the vehicle to drive horribly. The only "fix" (which is what was proposed to me Round 1 with Chevy) was a reprogramming of the vehicle. But the details are purposely scarce when you inquire for an explanation of what this process entails and why it needs to be done. However, when i was told that this "fix" would be coupled with a MANDATORY RELEASE because it "COULD" result in poorer fuel economy I absolutely refused. I am not an enginer nor a mechanic but common sense tells me that they will be deactivating (or significantly liniting its function...likely in the lower gears where it is more discernable, with the worst vibration?) this improperly functioning feature because it does not and has never worked correctly. So the runaround continues on into month 6! And the farther up the foodchain you get the less competent the people apparently are at Chevy - granted that part of it is that the District Managers/Specialists are towing the company line and running interference to keep you in the dark as to the true issue...AND HOPE YOU GO AWAY (its a numbers game for Chevy...$$$...for an incurable issue of this magnitude). I have consulted with a friend who manages Tahoe/Suburban fleet vehicles and this is a commonly know problem for those in the "inner circle". So it is not that no one knows how to fix this problem, it is that THERE IS NO FIX and Chevy doesnt want you to know it. I am onto Round 2 of this pathetic debacle and will not be going away. If what I have found out independently is correct then I have purchased an expensive SUV that was not the vehicle it was represented to be! I wonder what the NHTSA would have to say about this (or what may be already going on behind closed doors and what is already known about this problem with the vehicles) but unless you put up with the intolerable functioning of this defective system, it is reprogrammed and the published MPGs are inaccurate and their CAFE numbers are skewed, perhaps making them non-compliant. THIS IS NOT THE VEHICLE THAT I PURCHASED AND IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T APPEAR THAT THIS PROBLEM CAN BE PROPERLY REMEDIED! For those of you experiencing this problem, the next time you drive switch the instrument display to the current/real time MPG tracking mode (where it shows the switching from 4 to 8 cylinders) and you will notice that the vibration and hesitation (pedal response...and the lag) will occur when it shows the engine is swithing from one to the other. But apparently covering up this issue and cramming a "solution" down your throat COUPLED WITH A WAIVER for the poorer econony that will invariably result is acceptable to Chevy. Shameful! Lets not also forget that there was/is a recall (ehr, "Customer Satisfaction Program" - my apologies, Chevy, for calling it what it is) for some sort of a gasket to be installed due to "excessive vibration" casuing cracking (I believe it was on the transmission casing?) - either way, they abolsutley know of this issue and all of this just seems to be consistent with the smoke and mirros strategy to keep the consumer in the dark. I will post updates on my ongoing efforts because I am not going to do what they want and just go away. Every day I drive this Tahoe I am reminded of my awful decision to take the Toyota conquest cash. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles my Tahoe has but I would take my wife's almost 10 year Sequoia any day over my Tahoe. 10 years and NO ISSUES - just brakes, tires and battery...so it IS possible to make a sound SUV. Chevy/GM just havent figured it out I guess and they are resistent every step of the way to address the shortcomings on their Tahoes, etc. I just wanted to buy American...
#195 of 198 Re: Vibration in V4 [toyotanotchevy]
Apr 11, 2013 (10:37 am)
Well my wife and I just got done dealing with GM - We live in NY and have bought GM products for over 25 years. We have never owned anything but GM cars/trucks. We bought a 2010 Tahoe LT - This was our 3rd. Tahoe - We noticed that the truck had a vibration from the day we took delivery. The dealer told us that is was the tires and that they could not replace them until we had 500 miles on them. They claimed it was because they had flat spots. It never went away. They replaced them, it never went away. They replace the wheels and tire - it never went away. Was offered a buy back but that was a joke, had to buy from only one dealer that GM picked, that dealer low balled the trade value. We know this because we took it to a different GM dealer and they offered about 6K more then the other. Filed complaint with BBB. BBB sent independent tech. to test. They came back with - don't feel vibration but there seems to be a misfire. Went to Local deal to address (keep in mind that all we want it the truck fixed) go figure! Anyway was told by local dealer that they could not touch the truck because of us filing a complaint with BBB. GM head office said that was untrue. Anyway had hearing lost (big surprise) We dumped it with only 9,000 miles on it and really didn't take a beating on trade. Bought for the first time a Dodge, My wife went with the Durango Citadel and She LOVES IT. NO MORE GM for us. Now I need to dump my truck.
#196 of 198 Re: to 68mustang [schooners]
Jul 18, 2013 (5:39 am)
Hi my name is kathy and I just purchased a 2011 tahoe ltz and I have taken it back to the dealship 6 times in less than 6 months for vibration and they also told me to replace the tires. let me know if you find out anything please. thanks so much
#197 of 198 Re: to 68mustang [zastry]
Jul 18, 2013 (9:49 am)
I am sorry to hear that you have purchased the Tahoe "shaker" My advice to you is keep your receipts, watch your miles and file a complaint with General Motors and the BBB. Not sure what your laws are in your state, we live in New York. We had to use the BBB first before we could move forward in any court filings; we filed that complaint with them, the BBB and no big surprise we lost with the BBB. We knew that going into it. We kept our truck under 12,000 miles as required per the NY Lemon Law. We had several sets of tires put on to include different wheels (OEM) and we also drove several different Tahoe’s, which some had a shaking issue greater than ours. The Corvette Tech that drove with us, couldn't believe how much the truck shook, he told us that New Tires would not fix it. Ours came with a set of Goodyear’s. Once we filed with the BBB, we had issues getting our truck even serviced at the dealer that included warranty work. We looked at retaining a Lawyer and suing, but when we looked at the fine print from the law firm, we decided not to move forward. We sold our 2011 truck and bought a 2013 Dodge Durango Citadel. My wife loves it! The sad part is GM lost a good customer; we will never buy another GM vehicle again. We trade about every 2 to 3 years and have been doing that with the same deal for over 25 years. We haven't looked back. Good Luck!
#198 of 198 Update on my post from April 11th
Jul 19, 2013 (2:41 pm)
Since my post on the prior page from 4/11 I have since restarted discussions with Chevy and then gone ahead with the "reprogramming" of my Tahoe, as I felt that I had truly and finally identified the source of the vibration despite Chevy's smoke and mirrors tactics. With no other options and Chevy clearly trying to make this a "battle of attrition", I thought this would prove my point BUT I REFUSED TO SIGN THE WAIVER. By limiting/changing the function of the fuel saving cylinder deactivation system the fuel economy was obviously going to be reduced (according to Chevy's propaganda "it could"), they needed to cover their backsides so I held the line and said no. Really? So you either have a system that actually increases fuel economy as advertised (and causes the vehicle to drive terribly) or the system is a sham because if you modify it the economy will change! Either way, this is inexcusable and actionable. Anyway, I have had the "reprogramming" done and the driving experience has become somewhat better but because the system was not completely disabled the vibration is still there. This has conclusively confirmed what Chevy would not fess up to: there is an inherent problem with this system! Again, the instances of vibration are absolutely keyed to this system engaging and disengaging. So now I have a very expensive SUV that drives only tolerably now which certainly better than what it was before but still completely unacceptable. The kicker is that, although a much smaller sampling, I have been tracking my fuel economy since the reprogramming and I have lost about 1 mpg in fuel economy. I have pics of my dash from when I left the dealer lot after the work was done to prove the before and after mpg and will continue to track this. I know Chevy will continue to blow smoke when I raise this issue again with them and say: see, told you so; there is a reason you wanted a waiver signed and a reason for this SUV to be advertised the way it was with fuel saving technology...and because of the flawed design what I said would necessarily happen has happened". Not to mention that I still hate driving my Tahoe because of how it still performs even with the reprogramming. So now I still have an expensive vehicle that I dislike, but that is marginally better than before, BUT IS NOT THE VEHICLE IT WAS ADVERTISED TO BE THAT I BOUGHT, BASED IN LARGE PART UPON THOSE REPRESENTATIONS. It seems that these problems are widespread which would indicate serious design/engineering flaws that Chevy has to know of - I am certainly not the only one experiencing issues and not the only one getting blown off in various shameful ways by Chevy. There are so many things wrong here that it has the making of a broader class action. This should pique the curiosity of both state and federal officials. These vehicle do not work as advertised and consumers are getting a raw deal and so is the environment as Chevy's CAFE #s are skewed and not what they appear to be...perhaps their fleet is not even compliant if actuals are used for the huge numbers of these SUVs on the roads. Good reason to give people the runaround and steer them away from the true problem by blaming the tires to drag out the process and leave people without straightforward recourse. I will continue the fight for what is right and will not just go away as Chevy wants me to. I know Chevy reps monitor these boards to try and play damage control so I formally welcome someone form Chevy to contact me to discuss this mess. If anyone does step up to do what is right and legitimately address this serious issue I can only hope that they are more "skilled" than the "District Rep" that I have had the unfortunate privilege of being stuck with twice....despite my warning to not pass my follow-up Service Request file back onto him again.