- #305 of 389
-
Re: colorado misfire [tdb1272]
by dmathews3
-
Feb 12, 2009 (3:49 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: tdb1272 (Feb 11, 2009 5:16 pm)
So because you didn't take it in it is GM's fault. Do you think they put the light on there just to look pretty? The head problem has been a known issue for a couple years at least but nothing would have been done unless it reared its head. For most of us this wasn't a problem. Why not get a Toyota truck next time as they have been quietly buying them back due to rusting frames. So you see no ones truck/vehicle is without problems. There are just to many parts to not have something go wrong. Admit, it was your thoughtlessness that is costing you the money so suck it up and get it fixed and take it as an expensive lesson, when the light comes on get it to the dealer. 
|
- #306 of 389
-
Re: colorado misfire [dmathews3]
by leadfoot4
-
Feb 12, 2009 (4:24 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: dmathews3 (Feb 12, 2009 3:49 am)
"D", that's a bit cold......but true. When the light goes on, 99.9% of the time, it's for a legitimate reason. Putting off a trip to the dealer for a few days is one thing, because sometimes a light will set for something simple like a loose gas cap, and it will clear the code after a few starts. But 3 MONTHS?? That's foolish.
|
- #307 of 389
-
Re: p0506 [leadfoot4]
by jwebbo
-
Feb 12, 2009 (12:32 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: leadfoot4 (Jan 29, 2009 4:08 am)
Where would I find this letter as I am having check engine light problems with my 06 colorado and dealer tells me it is cylinder misfire and needs new cylinder head.
truck has 54,000 miles
|
- #308 of 389
-
Re: colorado misfire [leadfoot4]
by dmathews3
-
Feb 12, 2009 (2:01 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: leadfoot4 (Feb 12, 2009 4:24 am)
Why was that a bit cold. Someone needs to take the person aside and explain the facts of life so to speak. When you wait 3 months you lose a lot of respect here and need someone to tell it like it is.
|
- #309 of 389
-
Re: colorado misfire [dmathews3]
by tdb1272
-
Feb 12, 2009 (5:16 pm)
-
|
|
Replying to: dmathews3 (Feb 12, 2009 2:01 pm)
i guess your right. The days of working on your own vehicle are over. Working 6 days a week sometimes 12 hours a day leaves sunday to do maintenance on vehicles. Why wouldn't everyone want to pay $90 to the dealer to tell you whats wrong when they will do it at auto zone for free. Last time i checked there wasnt' a CEL code that puts out a cylinder head defect from the manufacturer warning. i should realisticly get another 100000 out of that truck without major engine problems. Why shouldn't i expect a company thats been in business better than 70 years to stand by their product without loopholing out of responsibility. I guess with all that taxpayer bailout money , they just don't really have to give a hoot. Bad business decisions should not be rewarded so bad business decisions can continue to be made. Lets reward them so they can continue with business as usual. 6000 miles doesn't remove responsibility for poor quality parts that they supposedly have taken responsibility for.
|
- #310 of 389
-
Re: colorado misfire [tdb1272]
by dmathews3
-
Feb 13, 2009 (5:08 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: tdb1272 (Feb 12, 2009 5:16 pm)
They did take responsibility for the problem. They gave everybody 100K on the problem and since most people only drive 12K or less you are talking about 8 years which is the life of a vehicle so to speak. Yes the person who drives ungodly miles a year could get screwed so to speak but just think of those out there that also got their engine repaired that may not even have had that certain problem but the bottom line is you still dropped the ball by not going to the dealer in a reasonable amount of time. I have found GM steps up to the plate on problems like these a lot better than most any other auto company. Look how long Ford put off fixing the cruise control problem. I also hang out on some of the Toyota forums as I have a friend that thinks they are the best out there even though he has had many GM vehicles in the past and never had a problem with any of them. You should see how they whine over there and all Toyota tells them is thats the way it was designed or it runs as it is supposed to or how the people on their big truck had to raise so much h e - - in order to get Toyota to buy back their trucks because the frames were rusting making them dangerous or how the government forced them to fix the problem of them hesitating when stepping on the gas and a couple of people were killed. The little truck people have the same rust problem and they don't want to do anything about it. Honda is the same, they came out a couple years ago with a Accord hybrid and no one would buy it as it was a piece of cra- so they discontinued it. I could go on and on but like I said above the bottom line is you waited to long and now you gotta pay. You could take it to someone else instead of Chevy and get it fixed a whole lot cheaper as this fix isn't rocket science and don't need fancy computer stuff to fix it.
|
- #311 of 389
-
Re: p0506 [jwebbo]
by leadfoot4
-
Feb 14, 2009 (4:49 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: jwebbo (Feb 12, 2009 12:32 pm)
"jweebo", GM sent the letter to all "original owners" back in August of 2007. That is when I received mine. As I previously mentioned, somebody has already posted a copy of it in one of the Canyon/Colorado discussions here on this site. I believe it was about a year ago, so if you look back, you should be able to find it.
|
- #312 of 389
-
re/"getting screwed"...
by leadfoot4
-
Feb 14, 2009 (4:57 am)
-
|
With respect to GM's "additional warranty" on the Canyon/Colorado cylinder head, I too, am in a position to "get screwed" because I have the opposite problem....I don't put a lot of miles on my truck, so the 7 years will expire LONG before I ever reach 100,000 miles.
My truck is primarily a winter vehicle for me, and as such, I wasn't putting a lot of miles on it to begin with. However, I retired last year, and instead of driving it 50 miles a day, back and forth to work, I probably now drive it 50 miles a week.
My truck was 4 years old last month, and just turned 26,000 miles. It may get another 4-5000 miles before it hits the 7 year mark....What warranty then?????
|
- #313 of 389
-
Re: colorado misfire [dmathews3]
by leadfoot4
-
Feb 14, 2009 (5:00 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: dmathews3 (Feb 12, 2009 2:01 pm)
It was "cold" only in that most people have a hard time accepting reality, these days, and want a little "schmoozing" before you hit them between the eyes with the truth....
|
- #314 of 389
-
Re: re/"getting screwed"... [leadfoot4]
by dmathews3
-
Feb 14, 2009 (7:27 am)
-
|
|
Replying to: leadfoot4 (Feb 14, 2009 4:57 am)
I understand your problem but they have to draw the line somewhere and I believe that is a fair number. Someone always gets screwed and someone always comes out the winner. Considering the amount of people here on these sites there haven't been very many with the problem so your chances of it happening to you are slim. Put $10 a week into the bank for the next 3 years or until you get rid of it and you will either have money to pay for the repair or a nice extra downpayment on your next GM truck.
|
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Pickups 
