Shake or Vibration Issues

[pm26]

So in summary, because it is a truck, it can be made from substandard quality materials, without anything resembling quality control, it can vibrate and whine, burn oil, have crappy lights, harborfreight quality gadgets, peeling paint, and it should definitely cost more than my first house. Got it.

[Snoringbear]

"So in summary, because it is a truck, it can be made from substandard quality materials, without anything resembling quality control, it can vibrate and whine, burn oil, have crappy lights, harborfreight quality gadgets, peeling paint, and it should definitely cost more than my first house. Got it. "

 

Wow, 7,168 posts. Do you have a job? Hope you're self employed and you're not pissing away your employers time screwing around on this blog. Just saying, nothing personal

[Newell33]

Haha... Whenever someone says "nothing personal," it's usually personal.

[Jesse Davidson]

Must be hard to be brand loyal then? The only thing I am loyal to is my wallet and I let it decide what I buy, not what symbol is on the grill. If this truck gives me any more grief than the vibrations I get at 70+ then I will be very open to try to let someone else earn my money.

D*mn skippy haha. My money goes where I feel it will best serve me. F*ck Brand Loyalty

 

 

You think after three years with no solution for the vibrators your problem is going to be fixed by your dealer? Go back to page one and start reading, good luck. The new GM has one goal and one goal only, PROFIT, nothing else matters.

ding ding ding we have a winner

 

Hey, this guy is tight with his dealer so I am sure it will get fixed!

My family knows the owner of my dealer and it hasn't helped me worth a sh*t

 

"Now multiply the number of legitimate vibrations on this thread by the 99% of Silverado owners who don't know this Forum even exists and you'll have a figure more relevant."

 

I understand your point. But, statistically that's not necessary. And, even if GM should be receptive to a recall which of the numerous hypothetical causes stated in this thread would you suggest?

statistics are statistics, you can't factor some things just because they benefit your point of view and not the ones that go against you. as far as a recall on the vibration, i don't give a flying f*ck what they say its for, I just want the f*cking thing fixed

"Bottom line is that there will be no fix until it costs GM enough in lost customers. All this endless thread does is go over the same ground and when someone new comes on with the vibration, the theories cycle over and over again."

 

Agree about this endless thread. Some folks on this thread really know how to pound sand for sure. I went to the trouble to do a little googling about Ford and Ram. Found that they each have a blog with threads similar to this one. And, observed much the same mix of problems including vibration. So, what to do? Don't know. But, at the risk of being repetitive, I'll just say that there are way too many variables running through this thread to arrive at any conclusions especially when considering that a good number of the subject trucks have gone through after market tinkering and such. Then, it's also my perception that some of these posters may be first time truck buyers and just because they paid $40k ~ $50 or more they think it should ride like a car of similar value - which is unrealistic. You can dress up a truck to look like a prom queen but when you undress it you will still find a truck underneath. Probably not the greatest analogy but it's the best I can do, ha ha !!!

I at a minimum expect my truck not to drive like one of those old school vibrating beds hahaha shaking us all over the f*cking place

[Snoringbear]

"Haha... Whenever someone says "nothing personal," it's usually personal."

 

No, actually, I don't have anything personal in this discussion. Just enjoying lurking mostly. And, I have no vested interest either. In fact, I had 2,000 shares (roughly $50,000) of GM stock from my 401K turn into dust when it became Government Motors. So, if anything, I have a right to be a GM hater. I suppose I'm somewhat biased though because I have not as yet had any of the problems discussed here. BUT, I must say it DOES ride like a TRUCK ....

[DALaws]

Well I have some good news and bad news about my truck vibrations. Good news is that my truck has a significantly less vibration at speed. The bad news is my truck has significantly less vibration. For some reason, my Wife always got frisky after riding in my truck. Now that it vibrates less, not so much.

[abominable z71]

Again, it's NOT a "Road Force Balance". It's a measurement of the Road Force Variation. And weights will NOT correct it. As I explained before, only indexing the tires on the wheels may potentially reduce it, if the wheels also have some RFV. If not, new tires is the on,y option.

 

After the RFV is checked/corrected is the mass balancing done, with weights for correction.

 

That said, I too am still thinking about this. I did some more reading and it looks like the science part is still sound - properly dynamically balanced will also be statically balanced. The problem is that most balance machines are set up with some kind of threshold of acceptance, where the if the residual dynamics unbalance is below it, the machine simply reports "0 correction required". This gives the false sense that the residual is 0 - but it's not. Still, not a big deal. Unless, the residual is more on one plane than the other. Or, they end up on the same side of the tire. Then, they add up to some unacceptable static unbalance. Looks like this is what the article was on about.

 

Now, I also found that at least one other tire balance machine manufacturers is advertising a feature on their high end models that has a special algorithm that optimizes the dynamic and static residual unbalance. They even take a pot-shot at their competitors that focus on weight reduction as part of this problem. Guess what.... Hunter advertises their machines have some kind of "weight optimizing" algorithm to ensure the least amount of weight is used and save the tire shop money over the course of the year!

 

Hmmm. Starting to see a problem here, maybe? Since all these trucks have been done on the Hunter GSP9700 (or the GM branded equivalent), I'm wondering if there may be something to this.

 

Like is said - next person to take your vehicle to the dealer for another round of Road Force and balance, ask them to measure the status unbalance after they are all done and report it to you.

 

First chance I get, I'm taking my 22's to a shop and have them checked.

Yeah hunter calls it smart weight, but you can turn that feature off. I request it when I have mine done. At the shop where I have mine done the owner let me get up close and personal with the machine and explained the smart weight feature and it does exactly what you suspect and widens the acceptable margin for unresolved dynamic balance. But its a machine like any other and non-detect doesn't mean the same thing as not there but even a static balancer is going to have it's resolution thresh hold and a small imbalance still has to create a large enough moment to overcome bearing friction. All in all it's still an interesting experiment. I think everyone calls it a road force balance because 99 percent of the time its accompanied by a balance but I get what you're saying the force variation cannot be balanced out this is true for any tire vibration second order or higher. The real fact of the matter is numerous trucks do not vibrate and of the non vibrators you can't tell me they all have tires with less than 15 lbs of force variation and perfect dynamic and static balance, there is something else wrong with the ones that shake.

Edited February 17, 2016 by abominable z71

[abominable z71]

"Haha... Whenever someone says "nothing personal," it's usually personal."

 

No, actually, I don't have anything personal in this discussion. Just enjoying lurking mostly. And, I have no vested interest either. In fact, I had 2,000 shares (roughly $50,000) of GM stock from my 401K turn into dust when it became Government Motors. So, if anything, I have a right to be a GM hater. I suppose I'm somewhat biased though because I have not as yet had any of the problems discussed here. BUT, I must say it DOES ride like a TRUCK ....

There is riding like a truck and feeling the road and there is vibration. So either this road I was on when I took these readings was perfectly imperfect or something is vibrating at 40 Hz.

 

[Snoringbear]

"There is riding like a truck and feeling the road and there is vibration. So either this road I was on when I took these readings was perfectly imperfect or something is vibrating at 40 Hz."

 

Ask DALaws if you can borrow his wife to go for a ride. Maybe that will make things better for you

[pm26]

Wow, 7,168 posts. Do you have a job? Hope you're self employed and you're not pissing away your employers time screwing around on this blog. Just saying, nothing personal

I joined this forum in 2005, not in 2015.

[LongrangeLauber]

I joined this forum in 2005, not in 2015.

Some people just don't look hard enough lol. I know some guys in the k2 section have more posts than I do and they joined last year or year before while I've been a member since 2011

Edited February 17, 2016 by rdnckhntr94

[Wrench589]

There is riding like a truck and feeling the road and there is vibration. So either this road I was on when I took these readings was perfectly imperfect or something is vibrating at 40 Hz.

 

vibration analysis.png

I've played around with this program a little. Nice little program. Not so sure about the "PSD" units as I'm used to dealing with raw vibration units such as in/s or g's. In fact, we normally look at in/s units at lower frequencies because g's tend to be lower at lower frequencies so get a better signal to noise ratio. I think the PSD unit tries to normalize that somehow, so maybe not so bad.

 

That said, my concern with readings from this program is that the phone is simply resting on something and is not secured to it. It is important the the sensor be tightly bonded to the surface of the item being measured or errors will be introduced into the readings. Now, this is more critical at higher frequencies, but I'm still leery of it at lower frequencies like 40.

[polarys425]

I have to admit, there's a lot of "entertainment" value in this thread from all the keyboard engineers. Various claims of cheap parts, cheap tires, poor QC, only being profit minded, calls for a recall (and a recall of just exactly what remains to be seen, kinda hard to do a recall without both an identifiable problem and a fix) etc. A lot of people here aren't thinking this through at all.

 

 

Anyone who thinks GM isn't working on this is just plain stupid. If there was an easy fix, there'd be a TSB in a heart beat. If you really think about this for a moment, you'll begin to realize that the core problem is these trucks are OVER engineered. Yes, I said it. Frame stiffness being number one, In trying to achieve ever increasing tow ratings. It has created an environment in which everything has to be perfect. Tires, wheels, all rotational parts and assemblies. Ever increasing unsprung weights with increased wheel and tire sizes, etc. It's very likely, that this will require some sort of vibration dampening system. Whether that can be an add-on, or if it requires integration into a new frame/truck design, who knows.

 

Tires are a big part of this, it's obvious that getting perfect tires from several tire manufacturers is a difficult task. And even tires that start out "perfect" can change with mileage if there is irregularities in the rubber compound causing them to wear unevenly. The sad reality is, all the parts are made by humans, or by input from humans, and are only as good as the effort put in by those humans on any given day. Remember this when you don't give it your "all" in your own job.

[paxtonman]

And have the keyboard engineers accomplished less than the GM engineers in 3 years? 3 Years to fix their #1 selling vehicle. How hard are THEY working?

Edited February 18, 2016 by paxtonman

[Wrench589]

I have to admit, there's a lot of "entertainment" value in this thread from all the keyboard engineers. Various claims of cheap parts, cheap tires, poor QC, only being profit minded, calls for a recall (and a recall of just exactly what remains to be seen, kinda hard to do a recall without both an identifiable problem and a fix) etc. A lot of people here aren't thinking this through at all.

 

 

Anyone who thinks GM isn't working on this is just plain stupid. If there was an easy fix, there'd be a TSB in a heart beat. If you really think about this for a moment, you'll begin to realize that the core problem is these trucks are OVER engineered. Yes, I said it. Frame stiffness being number one, In trying to achieve ever increasing tow ratings. It has created an environment in which everything has to be perfect. Tires, wheels, all rotational parts and assemblies. Ever increasing unsprung weights with increased wheel and tire sizes, etc. It's very likely, that this will require some sort of vibration dampening system. Whether that can be an add-on, or if it requires integration into a new frame/truck design, who knows.

 

Tires are a big part of this, it's obvious that getting perfect tires from several tire manufacturers is a difficult task. And even tires that start out "perfect" can change with mileage if there is irregularities in the rubber compound causing them to wear unevenly. The sad reality is, all the parts are made by humans, or by input from humans, and are only as good as the effort put in by those humans on any given day. Remember this when you don't give it your "all" in your own job.

Yea, these vehicles are definitely not "over engineered". That's just plain silly. Let's face it, if they were engineered properly, all the issues would have been addressed. If making the frame stiffer creates a problem, proper engineering would design out the problem. Lots of vehicles have been re-designed with stiffer chassis and did not exhibit such a sensitivity as these trucks from GM.

 

It's clear that these vehicles are "under engineered". There are many potential,reasons why this happened. No point speculating here. Bottom line is GM did not do a thorough enough job engineering ALL the parameters that needed to engineered. That's on them, not the people on this forum that just want a vehicle that rides atbleastbas smooth as the previous generation!! And if GM's excuse is that "well, we had to make the frame stiffer to give it higher payload and towing capacities to keep up with our competitors because all you stupid customers buy on brochure ratings", then all I have to say to GM is "really, that's all you got? Pathetic. GM, you are big boys. Out your big boy pants on, and do your jobs and quit whining like little girls". (No offence to the ladies I the crowd).