• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

GM to cut Chevy, GMC powertrain warranty

C

cabri

Diamond Member
GM to cut Chevy, GMC powertrain warranty to 60,000 miles

General Motors Co <GM.N> said on Thursday it plans to cut its powertrain warranty on Chevrolet and GMC vehicles for the 2016 model year because the offer was not a strong enough selling point.

The five-year, 100,000-mile powertrain coverage, in place for nearly a decade, will be reduced to five years and 60,000 miles for the 2016 models, GM said.

&#8220;We talked to our customers and learned that free scheduled maintenance and warranty coverage do not rank high as a reason to purchase a vehicle among buyers of non-luxury brands," GM said in a statement.

...
Click to expand...

May not be a selling point; but it could become a rejection point.

Implies that one knows that the competition product is better than compared to yours.
you must be making an inferior product that you can not stand behind it.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I bought my Jeep when they had the lifetime powertrain warranty. So I still have that. I did the 5 year required inspection for it as well.

They did away with it in 2010, I think?
Click to expand...

Correct - per Chrysler web site 2006-2009 for original owners

Regretfully, I got both my Jeeps from fleet resales
 
Problem they may also have seen is some think a longer warranty means something is wrong. When Hyundai first came to the US and was using mostly Mitsubishi powertrains they had to do the 100k warranty to sell cars.

For me I rather have a lower price. Most major drivetrain issues will pop up well before 100k.
 
What is the average miles driven/year? Seems that 12k-15k is pretty typical so this appears to be on the low end. Not sure it's a big deal if it keeps price down as an extended warranty is always available directly through Chevrolet (GMEPP not the older GMPP).
 
KentState said:
What is the average miles driven/year? Seems that 12k-15k is pretty typical so this appears to be on the low end. Not sure it's a big deal if it keeps price down as an extended warranty is always available directly through Chevrolet (GMEPP not the older GMPP).
Click to expand...

This is probably true.

Unless you are a high-mileage driver, this probably isn't a 'huge' deal. I suspect this is just part of the almighty goal of continuing to hit lower-price points. For better or worse, depending on your situation/viewpoint.
 
Not liking this because the DI engines are having coking problems, and no manufacturer has really figured out how to solve the problem yet.
 
heymrdj said:
Not liking this because the DI engines are having coking problems, and no manufacturer has really figured out how to solve the problem yet.
Click to expand...



What GM cars are having DI problems? I have not seen any major issues from GM. I drive a CTS and looked into the 3.6L DI motor and could not find anyone with any major problems like those of Audi/vw, bmw, 2.5L Lexus, etc...
 
Jimzz said:
What GM cars are having DI problems? I have not seen any major issues from GM. I drive a CTS and looked into the 3.6L DI motor and could not find anyone with any major problems like those of Audi/vw, bmw, 2.5L Lexus, etc...
Click to expand...

I'm mainly looking at 1500s. The new V6 and V8 are insanely powerful in terms of power per liter compared to other truck's. But some ~25k mile teardowns at GM authority are showing some insane coking.
 
Jimzz said:
Problem they may also have seen is some think a longer warranty means something is wrong. When Hyundai first came to the US and was using mostly Mitsubishi powertrains they had to do the 100k warranty to sell cars.

For me I rather have a lower price. Most major drivetrain issues will pop up well before 100k.
Click to expand...


I think the hyundai example was more along the lines of they were a new to market manufacturer so people didn't know if the cars were reliable or not. having a longer warranty was the manufacturer saying, we build a good product and we will prove it is good by offering a 100k mile warranty.

Personally I don't care about the warranty. I'm not buying a GM vehicle if they had a 1 yr or lifetime warranty. I buy based on my perceived quality of car for the money I pay and the warranty doesn't factor in to my decision making .... unless I am have first narrowed my decision down two vehicles that otherwise are equal in my mind. At the point I may use the warranty as a decision maker.
 
heymrdj said:
in terms of power per liter
Click to expand...

This metric does not translate in to anything at all in the real world. It doesn't mean better fuel efficiency. It doesn't mean more power per engine weight. It doesn't mean more power in a physically smaller engine. It really means absolutely nothing.
 
Ferzerp said:
This metric does not translate in to anything at all in the real world. It doesn't mean better fuel efficiency. It doesn't mean more power per engine weight. It doesn't mean more power in a physically smaller engine. It really means absolutely nothing.
Click to expand...

it means what it sounds like it means. Their 5.3 is better than the ford 5.0l and the 5.7 hemi and the 5.7l Toyota. In terms of NA TRUCK V8 engines, the larger the liter the worse fuel economy they generally get.

truck engines don't generally care about the reasonable weight of the engine, or physical size. Power per liter is a generally reliable way to look at NA truck engines.
 
The new V6 and V8 are insanely powerful in terms of power per liter compared to other truck's.
Click to expand...

5.3L 355hp Silverado
5.7L 395hp Ram
5.0L 385hp F-150

4.3L 285hp Silverado
3.6L 305hp Ram
3.5L 282hp F-150

Looks like Ford is well out in front in the hp/liter category with the V8, and Ram is in front with the V6. GM is well to rear in hp/l with their V6.

Not sure why you'd think GM was leading...
 
LTC8K6 said:
5.3L 355hp Silverado
5.7L 395hp Ram
5.0L 385hp F-150

4.3L 285hp Silverado
3.6L 305hp Ram
3.5L 282hp F-150

Looks like Ford is well out in front in the hp/liter category with the V8, and Ram is in front with the V6. GM is well to rear in hp/l with their V6.

Not sure why you'd think GM was leading...
Click to expand...

I didn't realize the 5.0 had been bumped up this year, it was a 360hp/380tq engine. 395/410 for the 5.7 RAM, 381/401 for Toyota 5.7, and the Chevy 5.3 in truck form on rated fuel is 380/416. The ecoboost on rated fuel still outclasses all of them, but I'm mainly looking at NA engines in this comparison.

SparkyJJO said:
Power per liter is ricer math.
Click to expand...

Look at heavy haul where you're taxed based on the Liters of your engine and your EPA class. The power per liter is absolutely the most important metric in some of these cases. Even if you drink more fuel to make it, it can be cheaper than the guzzler/environment taxes!
 
A GM spokesman said the change will not result in a material financial impact.
Click to expand...

So, is it saving money or not then? Seems like a bunch of corporate double speak to me. My take, warranty claims are costing them too much money and it isn't a big factor in buying decisions so they are cutting the warranty.

Bonus for them, dealers are happy when repairs that previous were covered under a warranty can now be charged to the customer for big bucks.

-KeithP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top