Front Trunk Hood Warning System Recall August 18 2020
08-26-2020, 10:22 AM
#341
Actually, if you read an earlier post, I suspect electrical voltage surge or decreased during initial starts caused by the alternator regulator unable to handle the loads PROPERLY 100% of the time! Something I am very familiar with!
08-26-2020, 10:24 AM
#342
08-26-2020, 10:29 AM
#343
Race Director
Member Since: Aug 2019
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 10,174
Received 11,773 Likes
on
4,693 Posts
BTW, your story keeps changing and you're losing credibility by the second. So one story says it's voltage spike on start up and then your other story says you were actually backing up when the hatch popped. So the car had to be running for some period of time before backing up, yet you're saying the voltage spike is on start up. Can't have it both ways.
Last edited by Phil1098; 08-26-2020 at 10:52 AM.
08-26-2020, 11:04 AM
#344
Story has not changed, you are __ to understand.
The battery alternator relationship is NOT linear and fluctuates over the initial startup, but i didn't expect you to know that so i dumbed it down slightly. Apparently not enough, find another to ague with attempting to force to your opinion. I'm sure that there is a news station waiting for you to apply. If you want a spit second by split second, go find another to argue with.
I'm outa here - adios.
The battery alternator relationship is NOT linear and fluctuates over the initial startup, but i didn't expect you to know that so i dumbed it down slightly. Apparently not enough, find another to ague with attempting to force to your opinion. I'm sure that there is a news station waiting for you to apply. If you want a spit second by split second, go find another to argue with.
I'm outa here - adios.
08-26-2020, 11:44 AM
#345
Correct. Just because Tadge says this software update fixes the fob opening the frunk before starting the car doesn’t mean it didn’t fix other issues that were found possibly relating to rogue electrical signals popping the frunk in a car that was already in drive and/or moving.
As indicated by the more than one example from members on this forum, the car was already moving without any warning chimes and the frunk popped open. Tadge, Jeremy, and even you tubers have shown the fob does not work to open the frunk when the vehicle is in drive, so if this update only fixed the fob, then it didn’t fix what caused those other incidents.
If we don’t see any more openings, what it does mean is GM most likely fixed another electrical fault and can stick to their user error story.
They do this constantly - just look at LS7 engine failures and they finally came out and said they found the problem but it only affected certain years and a very small percentage of engines (10%). They claimed that by cherry picking a very specific data set of warranty repairs between a certain time period. All data can be manipulated to say what you want it to say. GM says the LS7 machining error was fixed and no more problems yet there are countless owners of vehicles (both Corvette & Camaro) after this “fix” that have the exact same engine failure. GM sticks to their story that is was only between certain years, identified & fixed.
Same thing here. They’re claiming the frunk was already opened before the owners drove away & that they “inadvertently” opened the frunk with the fob and “didn’t notice”. If that is the “problem” they identified and changing the operation of the fob fixes that “problem” then they can stick to their claim. But anyone with any research background knows it’s near impossible to prove user error unless you actually witness the scenario occur.
As indicated by the more than one example from members on this forum, the car was already moving without any warning chimes and the frunk popped open. Tadge, Jeremy, and even you tubers have shown the fob does not work to open the frunk when the vehicle is in drive, so if this update only fixed the fob, then it didn’t fix what caused those other incidents.
If we don’t see any more openings, what it does mean is GM most likely fixed another electrical fault and can stick to their user error story.
They do this constantly - just look at LS7 engine failures and they finally came out and said they found the problem but it only affected certain years and a very small percentage of engines (10%). They claimed that by cherry picking a very specific data set of warranty repairs between a certain time period. All data can be manipulated to say what you want it to say. GM says the LS7 machining error was fixed and no more problems yet there are countless owners of vehicles (both Corvette & Camaro) after this “fix” that have the exact same engine failure. GM sticks to their story that is was only between certain years, identified & fixed.
Same thing here. They’re claiming the frunk was already opened before the owners drove away & that they “inadvertently” opened the frunk with the fob and “didn’t notice”. If that is the “problem” they identified and changing the operation of the fob fixes that “problem” then they can stick to their claim. But anyone with any research background knows it’s near impossible to prove user error unless you actually witness the scenario occur.
08-26-2020, 11:47 AM
#346
Race Director
Member Since: Nov 2017
Location: Prosper TX/Austin TX
Posts: 11,073
Received 9,002 Likes
on
4,334 Posts
2020 C6 of the Year Winner - Modified
FWIW, it's NOT 7- even if it's 50 out of 7000 cars. Also those where it happened worked fine for many starts after! Forum reports show there were <10/12 had hoods that flew up. That has to be compared to 5+ million times a C8 was started and the hood did NOT fly up. With 7000+ C8 out, some out many months, that is probably how many were started and driven without a hood flying up! Probably more who saw the hood was up from dash warnings or visually and shut it.
SIDEBAR
Not saying it was not a potentially series issue as NOT knowing what caused the hood to open and folks not to see it. In fact if GM had not issued their "Suspenders" fix (as I expected they would) to their existing "Belt" hood's open warnings, I would have installed a Tether when I picked up my C8 (built last week.) Like the idea they installed the max 26 mph speed if opened and provided an improved FOB button open sequence to reduce "pocket call" inadvertent activation.
However, 1) as suspected, with the Lab work and research GM has no doubt done to identify the reason, 2) Jeremy's great analysis of one video where the owner believed it was NOT Open before he drove but showed in fact it was and 3) every one that was reported to fly open, occurred at a low speed one would expect a light weight C8 hood to fly up if driven - I'm not installing a Tether. Frankly the Forum has a way of creating hysteria over whatever! Fortunately, most C8 buyers don't read it or some of us who do - understand!
To Each Their Own!
SIDEBAR
Not saying it was not a potentially series issue as NOT knowing what caused the hood to open and folks not to see it. In fact if GM had not issued their "Suspenders" fix (as I expected they would) to their existing "Belt" hood's open warnings, I would have installed a Tether when I picked up my C8 (built last week.) Like the idea they installed the max 26 mph speed if opened and provided an improved FOB button open sequence to reduce "pocket call" inadvertent activation.
However, 1) as suspected, with the Lab work and research GM has no doubt done to identify the reason, 2) Jeremy's great analysis of one video where the owner believed it was NOT Open before he drove but showed in fact it was and 3) every one that was reported to fly open, occurred at a low speed one would expect a light weight C8 hood to fly up if driven - I'm not installing a Tether. Frankly the Forum has a way of creating hysteria over whatever! Fortunately, most C8 buyers don't read it or some of us who do - understand!
To Each Their Own!
2. As I clearly explained in the other threads, Jeremy’s “analysis” didn’t actually prove anything and there were several flaws in his methodology.
3. As I pointed out it is safe to assume the issue was much larger and could possibly affect a larger % of vehicles based on the fact that GM put a hold on deliveries of all cars when the current reported incidence is only .17% of cars produced.
4. If there was a bigger issue they aren’t saying and are sticking to the customer error mantra.
08-26-2020, 12:32 PM
#347
E-Ray, 3LZ, ZER, LIFT
Member Since: Sep 2007
Location: NE South Carolina
Posts: 29,692
Received 9,683 Likes
on
6,670 Posts
^^^
All I was saying the is Forum has had <12 incidences if a flying hood. A fair comparison, IMO, is not with 7000 cars it's the number of times a C8 was started and driven and the hood DID NOT fly up. IF you have a C8 your decision on what to do. I decided NOT to install the planned Tether with the GM changes.
All I was saying the is Forum has had <12 incidences if a flying hood. A fair comparison, IMO, is not with 7000 cars it's the number of times a C8 was started and driven and the hood DID NOT fly up. IF you have a C8 your decision on what to do. I decided NOT to install the planned Tether with the GM changes.
Last edited by JerryU; 08-26-2020 at 12:36 PM.
08-26-2020, 12:50 PM
#348
Le Mans Master
^^^
All I was saying the is Forum has had <12 incidences if a flying hood. A fair comparison, IMO, is not with 7000 cars it's the number of times a C8 was started and driven and the hood DID NOT fly up. IF you have a C8 your decision on what to do. I decided NOT to install the planned Tether with the GM changes.
All I was saying the is Forum has had <12 incidences if a flying hood. A fair comparison, IMO, is not with 7000 cars it's the number of times a C8 was started and driven and the hood DID NOT fly up. IF you have a C8 your decision on what to do. I decided NOT to install the planned Tether with the GM changes.
Look how many times have Teslas and McLarens been started and driven without their hoods coming up.
08-26-2020, 01:20 PM
#349
It's even worse. What he keeps saying (over and over on multiple threads here) is it's not the number of cars, it is the number of times they are started and driven without a problem. So he is essentially arguing if a C8 has been driven 100 times, and on the 101st drive, driver hears or sees no hood latch warning, the hood flies up, blinds the driver, and damages the car, but it's no big deal because it almost never happens.
By that logic, no safety defect ever identified qualifies as a big deal.
By that logic, no safety defect ever identified qualifies as a big deal.
Last edited by Foosh; 08-26-2020 at 01:53 PM.
08-26-2020, 01:45 PM
#350
Race Director
Member Since: Aug 2019
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 10,174
Received 11,773 Likes
on
4,693 Posts
Story has not changed, you are __ to understand.
The battery alternator relationship is NOT linear and fluctuates over the initial startup, but i didn't expect you to know that so i dumbed it down slightly. Apparently not enough, find another to ague with attempting to force to your opinion. I'm sure that there is a news station waiting for you to apply. If you want a spit second by split second, go find another to argue with.
I'm outa here - adios.
The battery alternator relationship is NOT linear and fluctuates over the initial startup, but i didn't expect you to know that so i dumbed it down slightly. Apparently not enough, find another to ague with attempting to force to your opinion. I'm sure that there is a news station waiting for you to apply. If you want a spit second by split second, go find another to argue with.
I'm outa here - adios.
). You can lose the condescending BS attitude also, I've been working on cars for over 45 years so don't think you're the only one with any experience on here.I find it funny how you need to dumb it down for me, yet it was you passing bad intel telling everyone if you pulled fuse 18 you can NEVER use your frunk. I pointed out I use mine all the time and use the cable under the dash to open it. To which you said, oh, I haven't even looked for the cable. Talk about needing to dumb it down, RTFM.
Last edited by Phil1098; 08-26-2020 at 01:51 PM.
08-26-2020, 02:36 PM
#351
E-Ray, 3LZ, ZER, LIFT
Member Since: Sep 2007
Location: NE South Carolina
Posts: 29,692
Received 9,683 Likes
on
6,670 Posts
You can compare what you wish BUT it's NOT ~12 cars out of 7000, IMO. I don't know why all reported flew up BUT sure looks they were open before driving. Have no idea why CJ8's truck opened. GM "fixes" are designed to decrease chances of a car being driven with the hood open with increased warnings and limit speeds to 26 mph. Their change to the FOB open button operation should help prevent inadvertent opening via that possible means.
If you don't believe that then add a Tether. Your choice. I decided not to use one!
Frankly don't care about Tesla's, McLaren's, or the 2 million Corvairs that had the same two step latch without a manually reach in and unlock the safety latch.
BOTTON LINE
MY ONLY MESSAGE: I'm sufficiently confident to NOT use a planned C8 Tether. You do what you want with your C8! All other words just present my logic, don't ask anyone to accept it!
Last edited by JerryU; 08-26-2020 at 03:12 PM.
08-26-2020, 02:49 PM
#352
Drifting
UPDATED n FIXED..
Bought new Red Z51 over weekend and dealer fixed and updated software for hood latch... Goad to hear GM came thru quickly with it and now can pick up my new C8. 👍
The following users liked this post:
JerryU (08-26-2020)
