GMC Terrain, Equinox, and SRX Forum banner

1 - 20 of 37 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
My wife was mentioning that our 2010 Nox was starting to idle rough at times so we took it in and a new fuel pump was required and installed.

Here's hoping that GM has this problem solved because I wouldn't want to have this problem outside warranty. It runs about $800 - $1000 for the job including oil change & taxes.

Also it won't look good for GM since it will tarnish their new found success and bring back memories of things like the 3.4L manifold gasket/head gasket failures.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
Did the dealership determine it needed a new fuel pump due to codes thrown?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
2010Nox said:
My wife was mentioning that our 2010 Nox was starting to idle rough at times so we took it in and a new fuel pump was required and installed.

Here's hoping that GM has this problem solved because I wouldn't want to have this problem outside warranty. It runs about $800 - $1000 for the job including oil change & taxes.

Also it won't look good for GM since it will tarnish their new found success and bring back memories of things like the 3.4L manifold gasket/head gasket failures.
How many miles did you have when it failed? I'm up to 21,000 on my '10. No problem yet.
Wonder if this problem could be covered on the extended emissions equipment warranty?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,696 Posts
Hard to believe. Highly unusual for a fuel pump to die that soon. 600,000 miles on 4 of my cars (each bought new) and NEVER a fuel pump failure.

Anything's possible, I guess ... but if I had to bet, a bad fuel pump would be the LAST thing I'd bet on for a vehicle as new as yours ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
698 Posts
Colt Hero said:
Hard to believe. Highly unusual for a fuel pump to die that soon. 600,000 miles on 4 of my cars (each bought new) and NEVER a fuel pump failure.

Anything's possible, I guess ... but if I had to bet, a bad fuel pump would be the LAST thing I'd bet on for a vehicle as new as yours ...
The OP is referring to his lift pump. How many of your vehicles had fuel systems that injected fuel at upwards of 2,500 psi? DI is still a bit rare in mainstream vehicles... the 2.4 DI hasn't been around for too long.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
978 Posts
Colt Hero said:
Hard to believe. Highly unusual for a fuel pump to die that soon. 600,000 miles on 4 of my cars (each bought new) and NEVER a fuel pump failure.

Anything's possible, I guess ... but if I had to bet, a bad fuel pump would be the LAST thing I'd bet on for a vehicle as new as yours ...

This posters "technical comments", although he means well...has no bearing on HPFP systems

Speaking one's opinion is one thing...but please compare apples to apples
These are NOT your '80 Plymouth Champ, '80 Dodge Colt, '89 Plymouth Colt, '97 Taurus Wagon or '02 Chevy Impala

The HPFP is a relatively small but well recognized issue by GM (there are Technical Service bulletins)
and well recognized on this and other Forums
(relatively small meaning total number of failures vs. number of vehicles on the road)

Here is a bulletin...

PIP4783: Engine Run-On Rough Running And SES Light With A P0172 DTC - (Mar 31, 2010)


Subject: Engine Run-On, Rough Running, and SES Light with a P0172 DTC


Models: 2010 Chevrolet Equinox

2010 GMC Terrain

with 2.4L Engine (RPO LAF)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following diagnosis might be helpful if the vehicle exhibits the symptom(s) described in this PI.

Condition/Concern:
Some customers may complain of rough running, engine run-on for a few seconds, and a SES light due with a P0172 DTC stored. In most cases, the crankcase will have obvious fuel contamination.

This may be a result of the high pressure fuel pump leaking fuel into the crankcase when the plunger is depressed.

Recommendation/Instructions:
If this concern is encountered, perform SI diagnosis and repair as necessary. If SI diagnosis does not isolate the cause of this concern, check the low side fuel pressure leakdown with a mechanical gauge as outlined in SI Fuel System Diagnosis. If fuel pressure leakdown is present with the J37287 Fuel Line Shut-off Adapter installed and closed, follow the SI Fuel Pump Replacement Procedure to replace the high pressure fuel pump. Also change the engine oil and filter to complete the repairs.[/color]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
341 Posts
MOCHANOX said:
This posters "technical comments", although he means well...has no bearing on HPFP systems

Speaking one's opinion is one thing...but please compare apples to apples
These are NOT your '80 Plymouth Champ, '80 Dodge Colt, '89 Plymouth Colt, '97 Taurus Wagon or '02 Chevy Impala
Thanks Mocha - I was thinking the same thing with the cliché mentality of, "Well... it's been working for me, so??" :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,696 Posts
Sorry I didn't use the correct terminology. "Lift pump" failure is rare on a vehicle this new.

But if you want to be an apologist for GM and say this failure is OK because "we know about it", it's new technology, and after all - it's 2500 psi, then go ahead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
978 Posts
Colt Hero said:
But if you want to be an apologist for GM...
Now wait a minute...

2010Nox said:
My wife was mentioning that our 2010 Nox was starting to idle rough at times so we took it in and a new fuel pump was required and installed.

Here's hoping that GM has this problem solved because I wouldn't want to have this problem outside warranty. It runs about $800 - $1000 for the job including oil change & taxes.

Also it won't look good for GM since it will tarnish their new found success and bring back memories of things like the 3.4L manifold gasket/head gasket failures.
ems1 said:
How many miles did you have when it failed? I'm up to 21,000 on my '10. No problem yet.
Wonder if this problem could be covered on the extended emissions equipment warranty?
Terrain said:
The OP is referring to his lift pump. How many of your vehicles had fuel systems that injected fuel at upwards of 2,500 psi? DI is still a bit rare in mainstream vehicles... the 2.4 DI hasn't been around for too long.
TerrainLem said:
Thanks Mocha - I was thinking the same thing with the cliché mentality of, "Well... it's been working for me, so??" :D
I don't see a single apology anywhere...and I'm not quoting myself 'cause I know I didn't...
Rhetorical, but anybody else see an apology on behalf of GM? How about just a plain ol apology?

The point is...
YOUR posts (both of them) are ill-conceived...
trying to compare Ol Skool carbs and TBI to Direct Injection...
then attempting to push away the "calling you out" by asserting someone else is an apologist for GM

In fact, the OP's symptom should float the fuel pump into the top 3 items to check on a DI engine,
especially considering the vehicle is as new as his...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
NoobNox said:
Did the dealership determine it needed a new fuel pump due to codes thrown?
No it began to idle rough and we took it in. I was already suspecting the HP pump and I was right.

The tech said it probably would of thrown a code if we kept driving it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
ems1 said:
How many miles did you have when it failed? I'm up to 21,000 on my '10. No problem yet.
Wonder if this problem could be covered on the extended emissions equipment warranty?
27,000 kms (17,000 mi.), and it's covered under all GM warranties. If yours hasn't happened yet it probably will. Make sure they inspect it before your warranty runs out.

I was told that GM has solved the problem with the HP fuel pump and I suspect no 2012's will suffer from this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
I don't think anyone is being a GM apologist or trying to say they have no responsibility because DI is new, but it really is a new technology for all the carmakers since the hardware and precise computer controls are so different from what we know as "fuel injection". Compared to port injection which has a psi around 60...DI ranges from 2200-2500 psi and is injected directly into the cylinder head instead of an intake port. There are other complexities such as higher compression ratios and precise cam phasing as well, and even the legendary German engineers at Audi/VW have had issues with direct injection.

I haven't had any issues that I'm aware of on my 2010 I4, but I'll certainly keep an eye on things and get the system thoroughly checked out before the warranty expires.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,772 Posts
2010Nox said:
My wife was mentioning that our 2010 Nox was starting to idle rough at times so we took it in and a new fuel pump was required and installed.

Here's hoping that GM has this problem solved because I wouldn't want to have this problem outside warranty. It runs about $800 - $1000 for the job including oil change & taxes.

Also it won't look good for GM since it will tarnish their new found success and bring back memories of things like the 3.4L manifold gasket/head gasket failures.
I am glad to hear that the issue has been resolved. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions or concerns. Thank you.

Tricia, GM Customer Service.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,696 Posts
MOCHANOX:

When people try explaining this failure away by saying things like, "...well, it's new technology", or "you know ... it's 2500 psi ... nothing like those OLD pumps" - THAT'S making an apology for GM. Look it up in the dictionary if you must.

It's a fuel pump. People don't give a **** about the technology. "High Pressure", "Low Pressure", "Medium Pressure" ... IT DOESN'T MATTER. All they care about is that SOMETHING is pumping fuel from the tank to the engine so that the vehicle runs. If you're gonna turn a historically reliable part into an unreliable part because of your "Direct Injection" design, then keep your "Direct Injection" car and give me something more reliable (with less weight, better fuel economy, and a cost more in line with the vehicle's capabilities thank you...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
977 Posts
Seems like some people just like posting all the tech talk about DI engines. The tech tech means little when you are having problems with a vehicle that is contaninating your oil, affecting mileage or causing gas fumes to enter the passenger compartment. These technologies need to be properly tested before they go into production. I do not know how preilent the fuel pump failures are (I'm sure GM does)

I had a Saturn VUE with a CVT tranny (GM's first and probably last). The trannies had several failures. A class action suit was started and GM made some offers to pay for repairs or money towards a new vehilces . GM settled the class action suit but it was transfered to the "old GM" so you would have file a claim with the bankruptcy court to obtain any compensation. GM did give me a $5000 credit towards a GM vehilce when my VTi failed (GM's name for the CVT). The only reson GM responded in anyway was due to customer pressure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
978 Posts
Colt Hero
When you reply to a thread and assert a level of knowledge as to nature of the failure you better give a darn about the technology and have a much better grasp of it so your response is relevent instead of iconoclastic

Colt Hero said:
...All they care about is that SOMETHING is pumping fuel from the tank to the engine...
This is a prime example of your lack of knowledge...speaking of looking something up (and please do NOT use a dictionary), you need to do some basic reading about fuel injection / direct injection

Regarding Tech Talk
Tech talk means EVERYTHING when it comes to having problems or perceived problems.

Tech talk means EVERYTHING when it comes to basic maintenance requirements.

How many folks post about wind noise and buffeting with the rear windows down or partially down. That issue alone is covered in the owner manual yet seldom read and often misunderstood.
Afftecting many car lines for Fuel Efficient aerodynamics yet complained about constantly.

This is just one "techie" item to illustrate the point...if you aren't up to understanding at least an overview of updated engineering...or choose to ignore it completely...

then you are going to continue to post inappropriate replys, and be totally clueless to how things reallllllly operate.

I am in total agreement that "technologies need to be properly tested before they go into production"

But you know what...here we are as consumers...we bought (or leased) it...we better understand how to deal with it...and learn to recognize issues as they arise

What good would this forum be without the exchange of information that is occurring

What...we should just talk about what color yours is vs. mine
How much or little chrome yours has vs. mine
What size tires mine has vs. yours

A forum like that would fold in about 2 months

Feel sorry for the masses that don't have a clue-or-take the time to search out forums that offer significant information designed to educate the owner and influence in a positive manner his or her abilities to deal with new tech and it "burps and farts"...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
978 Posts
Colt Hero said:
then keep your "Direct Injection" car and give me something more reliable (with less weight, better fuel economy, and a cost more in line with the vehicle's capabilities thank you...)
I'll trade you 4 Dodge Colts for your Nox. You're obviously done with it and need to trade out of it anyway...lemme know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
Colt Hero said:
MOCHANOX:

When people try explaining this failure away by saying things like, "...well, it's new technology", or "you know ... it's 2500 psi ... nothing like those OLD pumps" - THAT'S making an apology for GM. Look it up in the dictionary if you must.

It's a fuel pump. People don't give a **** about the technology. "High Pressure", "Low Pressure", "Medium Pressure" ... IT DOESN'T MATTER. All they care about is that SOMETHING is pumping fuel from the tank to the engine so that the vehicle runs. If you're gonna turn a historically reliable part into an unreliable part because of your "Direct Injection" design, then keep your "Direct Injection" car and give me something more reliable (with less weight, better fuel economy, and a cost more in line with the vehicle's capabilities thank you...)
Some of us really do "give a **** about the technology"...especially when the result is more power and better fuel economy. You may or may not have better reliability going back to the old port fuel injection, but you surely won't get better gas mileage along with a free bump in horsepower.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
341 Posts
MOCHANOX said:
Colt Hero
When you reply to a thread and assert a level of knowledge as to nature of the failure you better give a darn about the technology and have a much better grasp of it so your response is relevent instead of [size=10pt]iconoclastic[/color][/size]




**** Mocha! I had to go to Merriam Webster online to hear how to pronounce that word haha! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
977 Posts
Technolongy is great when it is reliable and it works. If it's not reliable it's useless. We don't know if there is a problem with the design or the QC of the fuel pump. Hopefully if it is a QC or design problem GM will step up and fix the problem.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
Top