wabinpcfl

Why hasn't the Corvette Forum generated a class action suite against GM for not stocking critical components on 2002 - 2004 corvettes? The EBCM is a critical safety component that controls the anti-lock brakes, active steering control and traction control. This is a hazard to highway safety in that if a corvette driver isn't careful about acceleration, he will lose control of the vehicle and have an accident. Yes I know about ASBFixer and will have to remove the EBCM and send it off. But why isn't GM having the EBCM manufactured or pay for the price of having it repaired by ABSFixer?

knewblewkorvette

I "think" car manufacturers are only required to maintain parts for ten years after the car model stops.
Also, I think the ECBM is still available for the 02 -04 model, if you have the previous years of the C5, your out of luck for a new one.

Smoken1

Why do you need a new one?

Crosis

Exactly. GM is obeying federal law and that makes them immune from lawsuits of this sort. Also, these cars are two generations old. How long do you think GM needs to provide free parts or service? Should 66 mustang owners sue Ford for the rusting bodies too? We are fans of aging cars. We have to be reasonable and understand it takes more than gas money to run a car.

JR-01

A couple years ago EBCMs for my '01 were plentiful, I bought a new one on Amazon for $500. I recently did a search and every vendor is out of stock. So I guess for '01 you have to repair your old one.

wabinpcfl

I would have thought that the DOT and NHTSA would have insisted that GM continue to stock EBCM since they do control all of the things that keep a corvette on the straight and narrow (i.e. Active Handling, Anti-lock brakes and Traction Control). That module is a highway safety item. If you don't think so, disable the EBCM on your corvette and then step on the gas pedal. If you don't wreck your corvette, your a very lucky person.

JR-01

My EBCM was not working for 3 months and I drove it without a problem. It wasn't that long before the C5 that no cars had active handling, ABS, and traction control.

wabinpcfl

What does a safey item like an EBCM have to do with a rusting body in a 1966 Mustang. Did the rusting body prevent an accident? Did a rusting body cause an accident? A disabled EBCM will cause an accident or an out of control situation since it control 3 distinct items, Active Handling, Anti-lock Brakes and Traction Control. So again what is the comparison of rust versus an EBCM?

JR-01

Rusting Mustang uni-bodies were definitely a safety concern. I had to junk a couple of them even though they ran fine. They had lost structural integrity.

rrwirsi

Rusting bodies can be repaired. Costly but doable. If the GM does not want to produce the EBCM's for all years (an important part for safety) after 10 years , then the law should be change to force them to allow 3rd parties to manufacture it aftermarket. Anyone with Trump ties?????

knewblewkorvette

My 91 Talon TsiAWD has none of those features.
I bet if you ask, you can find several people on this forum driving with a bad EBCM. Last year mine was acting up (my 02), had the ABS and TC lights on with codes. Drove fine.
I unhooked the battery this winter to do some interior LED mods and now no ABS/TC lights or codes. Weird, but I like.
Now if I could figure out my other car problem

Gordy M

In 2001 I bought a new Z06 and I had a cell phone that I really liked with big easy to read numbers. Within 10 years the analog cell phone cannot be used, repaired or replaced. the ECBM can no longer be replaced by GM but can be used or repaired. However when I wanted to have the car handle at its most extreme performance, I tuned off the nannies because they are a hindrance to optimal performance. You can drive you car without an ECBM and it will handle like my old 64 Fuel Injected Corvette but even better. Step up to the plate and replace if you lack driving skills or learn how to drive better.

ArmchairArchitect

Aside from legalities, the RIGHT thing to do, especially for owners of your flagship vehicle, is to allow aftermarket companies to produce the part. Either give them the schematics/manufacturing instructions, or license it out for a nominal fee.

Just another example of how GM doesn't care about their loyal customers.

capevettes

Not sure the aftermarket has an interest in "tooling up" to produce a part for which there is very little demand. Same thing has happened to the C4's. I can get parts for my 61 or 65 a heck of alot easier than for my 97.

stockC5

ArmchairArchitect

The days of needing to "tool up" to make parts are over...almost everything can be made on demand/3D-printed these days.

Especially for an expensive part I'm sure there is at least one company willing to make these if they had the manufacturing specs/instructions.

usgecko

Congratulations on totally missing the point of the original poster. Your inane analogy of a cellphone has absolutely nothing to do with part of a car which could (and seems to have from other posts I've seen) be a potential safety issue. Was your cellphone a safety issue - no. So, epic fail on the attempt at making an analogy. Further congratulations on your prowess as a driver, and your attempt to belittle the original poster because in your mind he clearly doesn't have the "Right Stuff".

jcgunn

Are there states where a bad EBCM will cause the vehicle to fail a required inspection?

jframe

After 30 years of dealership parts work, I can without a doubt say that carmakers are NOT required to manufacture replacement parts for any set length of time. I have heard that story for years. They only make them as long as it is PROFITABLE to make them. Like any other business.

grampi50

I don't think they should provide them for free, but they could certainly make them available to purchase, or make the specs available so an aftermarket company could produce them...to stop producing them AND keeping its design a secret is just plain wrong!