Posts tagged: GMC Envoy

'04 F150

Question:

And soon around 2006,  the Tundra will be built deep in the heart of Texas, in San Antonio. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> > Funny thing about those crash test results. The Toyota Tundra had some of the > > best crash test result. However, it has by far the worst injury loss rating of > > any full size 4WD pickup and is worse than a Ford F150 2WD by a significant > > margin. It has to make you wonder whether those test actually mean anything. > > IIHS gives the Tundra high marks in all crash evaluations, despite it poor real > > wrld history….. > > It has always been my opinion that the Japanese car markers are very good at > > meeting very specific targets while entirely ignoring the underlying goal of > > the requirments. > Isn’t the Tundra built at the NUMMI (GM/Toyota joint venture) plant in > California? > No, the Tundra is built in Kentucky. The Matrix and Pontiac Vibe are built in > California. > Ed

Response:

> > Funny thing about those crash test results. The Toyota Tundra had some of the > best crash test result. However, it has by far the worst injury loss rating of > any full size 4WD pickup and is worse than a Ford F150 2WD by a significant > margin. It has to make you wonder whether those test actually mean anything. > IIHS gives the Tundra high marks in all crash evaluations, despite it poor real > wrld history….. > It has always been my opinion that the Japanese car markers are very good at > meeting very specific targets while entirely ignoring the underlying goal of > the requirments. > Isn’t the Tundra built at the NUMMI (GM/Toyota joint venture) plant in > California?

No, the Tundra is built in Kentucky. The Matrix and Pontiac Vibe are built in California. Ed

Response:

Funny thing about those crash test results. The Toyota Tundra had some of the best crash test result. However, it has by far the worst injury loss rating of any full size 4WD pickup and is worse than a Ford F150 2WD by a significant margin. It has to make you wonder whether those test actually mean anything. IIHS gives the Tundra high marks in all crash evaluations, despite it poor real wrld history….. It has always been my opinion that the Japanese car markers are very good at meeting very specific targets while entirely ignoring the underlying goal of the requirments. see http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ictl/ictl_4wd_pickup.htm and http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ictl/ictl_2wd_pickup.htm Ed – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > The big question is how well the ‘04 F-150 extended cab version will do at > this web site,  http://www.hwysafety.org/ > because the ‘03 and earlier models did poorly. Ford did a good job with the > ‘02 Explorer, hopefully they did their homework with the F-150. > wth

Response:

> Funny thing about those crash test results. The Toyota Tundra had some of the > best crash test result. However, it has by far the worst injury loss rating of > any full size 4WD pickup and is worse than a Ford F150 2WD by a significant > margin. It has to make you wonder whether those test actually mean anything. > IIHS gives the Tundra high marks in all crash evaluations, despite it poor real > wrld history….. > It has always been my opinion that the Japanese car markers are very good at > meeting very specific targets while entirely ignoring the underlying goal of > the requirments.

Isn’t the Tundra built at the NUMMI (GM/Toyota joint venture) plant in California? — Dan 1992 Sport 4.0L 4×4

Response:

Looking from the front, they remind me of the SportTrac….. and that leaves me with mixed emotions. I almost forgot… the grille goes with the hood, a la Dodge… — Jim Warman

Response:

The big question is how well the ‘04 F-150 extended cab version will do at this web site,  http://www.hwysafety.org/ because the ‘03 and earlier models did poorly. Ford did a good job with the ‘02 Explorer, hopefully they did their homework with the F-150. wth

Response:

> (snip) Ford did a good job with the > ‘02 Explorer (snip).

You got that right.  The IIHS (the same site as hwysafety) has the Explorer as a "Best Pick". http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/summary_midsuv.htm http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0125.htm At a restaurant the other night, we overheard some older man tell his friends that "Buick has an all-new [sic] SUV coming out, so we’re going to take a look at it next week.  I think it’s called the Rainier."  His wife said something like "we heard it’s going to be the best."  I was trying to hold back from banging on the table laughing.  The wife was begging me not to say anything. People amaze me.  Aside from a new grill, ugly old-folks Buick interior, and rear signals changed from amber to red, the Rainier is a now-recycled Bravada, right down to the tubby-ugly rear end, rubbery steering, high sensitivity to crosswinds, solid rear axle that hops all over the place in bumpy turns… And then there are the IIHS’ tests: http://www.iihs.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0119.htm Add this to Edmunds’ test of the Explorer (1 versus 4 for the TrailBlazer), and Consumer Reports’ pick of the Explorer (1 versus 4 for the Envoy), and you have to wonder if people *bother* researching how they’re going to spend their money—especially this *much* money. If I had told this uninformed OF about this, he probably would have said, "but the Buick won’t roll over."  So I didn’t bother.  Go buy the POS Oldsmobuick without looking at anything else. To quote a line from "The Money Pit," "I hopa you choke."  <snicker>

Response:

From Richard    Our local dealer got some in this week.  They are BIG, but I still kinda like the ‘01 body style better at least for the SuperCrews.  But of course it could grow on me……. /Richard

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Like I’d mentioned some time ago, I’d write about my first impressions of > the new F150…… > We got 3 in on Thursday. I had some big jobs on the go so I didn’t get to > PDI any of them though I took the time to take a hard stare. All ours are > 4WD (2WD are remarkable when we do see them in any pick up). > There are a vast number of unique manufacturing techniques (for the Ford > half ton, anyway)….. starting with the boxed frame….. right from front > to back. While it appears to have a lot of torsional strength, it is going > to be a real challenged to properly install a fifth wheel hitch on the > contoured rear clip….. the frame material itself is much thinner than > conventional frames and this will add to the heaache. I’ll be interested in > seeing how Reese, DSP, et al handle this. > Sticking with the frame, the upper rear shock mounts are outboard of the > frame rails…… It’s no secret that getting the shocks closer to the > wheels improves their control. In this case, the upper shock mount is > attached to a tubular crossmember. Looks strong enough for most cases but I > think a shock that is overly agressive (or roads that are overly agressive) > may have an effect. Time will tell. > Moving to the front end, the torsion bars are gone… coil over shocks with > big honkin’ bushings look like they can handle most anything we’re going to > see. The rack and pinion steering is a welcome idea. Upper control arms look > like cast iron and lowers look like aluminum or another light coloured > metal. Provisions for cmaber/caster adjustments appear to be at the lower > control arms though the adjusters aren’t factory installed. It finishes off > with a cast crossmember at the bottom. Looks good. > Fuel filter looks easy to get at though relatively unprotected from mud – a > big thing in our area. We’ll likley have to spend some time cleaning the > connections for filter replacement. The rest of the undercarriage is pretty > sanitary and looks like it should be fairly easy to work on – getting rid of > those torsion bars is going to reduce labour costs for a lot of things > underneath. > Engine compartment looks good… at first look, the plugs are easier to get > at (5.4 three valve) and the valve covers are metal. Air filter is in a > little drawer…. should take almost 30 seconds to change. > The interior… well, what can I say….. I think I’ll go in tomorrow so I > can take one for a spin…. The chairs are the most comfortable I have seen > in a pick up. The quarter windows actually roll down. Driivers chair is a > study in ergonomics. The whiote face gauges are really retro….. don’t know > if that will wear off with time, but they are easy to read. Console shift > isn’t available in all models…. bummer 8^( > Heading back outside, short people are going to have a lot of fun…. at six > foot with long arms, I have a real struggle to touch the floor of the box > while standing on the ground….. the "lift over" is about as high as I have > ever seen. A torsion bar in the tailgate makes it a real treat to open and > close (and the gate is still easily removed and installed)… light as a > feather. This is a tall truck and many parkades might be out of the > question….. the 18 inch wheels seem to suit it well but will take some > getting used to for this ol’ dawg. That 300hp engine has a bunch of torque > where it counts….. it’s almost too easy to light up the back tires if you > get rambunctious. > One thing I better mention before I forget….. looks like a class 3 or > better hitch at the back and it is part of the bumper….. nice touch and > looks good. > First impression is a big thumbs up….. if’n ya got nuthin’ to do Satruday, > go down to the dealer and take one for a spin….. > — > Jim Warman

Response:

Like I’d mentioned some time ago, I’d write about my first impressions of the new F150…… We got 3 in on Thursday. I had some big jobs on the go so I didn’t get to PDI any of them though I took the time to take a hard stare. All ours are 4WD (2WD are remarkable when we do see them in any pick up). There are a vast number of unique manufacturing techniques (for the Ford half ton, anyway)….. starting with the boxed frame….. right from front to back. While it appears to have a lot of torsional strength, it is going to be a real challenged to properly install a fifth wheel hitch on the contoured rear clip….. the frame material itself is much thinner than conventional frames and this will add to the heaache. I’ll be interested in seeing how Reese, DSP, et al handle this. Sticking with the frame, the upper rear shock mounts are outboard of the frame rails…… It’s no secret that getting the shocks closer to the wheels improves their control. In this case, the upper shock mount is attached to a tubular crossmember. Looks strong enough for most cases but I think a shock that is overly agressive (or roads that are overly agressive) may have an effect. Time will tell. Moving to the front end, the torsion bars are gone… coil over shocks with big honkin’ bushings look like they can handle most anything we’re going to see. The rack and pinion steering is a welcome idea. Upper control arms look like cast iron and lowers look like aluminum or another light coloured metal. Provisions for cmaber/caster adjustments appear to be at the lower control arms though the adjusters aren’t factory installed. It finishes off with a cast crossmember at the bottom. Looks good. Fuel filter looks easy to get at though relatively unprotected from mud – a big thing in our area. We’ll likley have to spend some time cleaning the connections for filter replacement. The rest of the undercarriage is pretty sanitary and looks like it should be fairly easy to work on – getting rid of those torsion bars is going to reduce labour costs for a lot of things underneath. Engine compartment looks good… at first look, the plugs are easier to get at (5.4 three valve) and the valve covers are metal. Air filter is in a little drawer…. should take almost 30 seconds to change. The interior… well, what can I say….. I think I’ll go in tomorrow so I can take one for a spin…. The chairs are the most comfortable I have seen in a pick up. The quarter windows actually roll down. Driivers chair is a study in ergonomics. The whiote face gauges are really retro….. don’t know if that will wear off with time, but they are easy to read. Console shift isn’t available in all models…. bummer 8^( Heading back outside, short people are going to have a lot of fun…. at six foot with long arms, I have a real struggle to touch the floor of the box while standing on the ground….. the "lift over" is about as high as I have ever seen. A torsion bar in the tailgate makes it a real treat to open and close (and the gate is still easily removed and installed)… light as a feather. This is a tall truck and many parkades might be out of the question….. the 18 inch wheels seem to suit it well but will take some getting used to for this ol’ dawg. That 300hp engine has a bunch of torque where it counts….. it’s almost too easy to light up the back tires if you get rambunctious. One thing I better mention before I forget….. looks like a class 3 or better hitch at the back and it is part of the bumper….. nice touch and looks good. First impression is a big thumbs up….. if’n ya got nuthin’ to do Satruday, go down to the dealer and take one for a spin….. — Jim Warman

Response:

help plz..Brake lights do not work now

Question:

2001 Trail Blazer My brake lights have quit working and was wondering if anyone can help me get them to work again. I have checked the fuse  and the blubs. Thanks for any replies

Response:

I don’t know if this is the case with yours, but it may be:     The brake lights in my truck are also my rear turn signals. So if I put my left turn signal on, that’s my left brake light. The same goes for the right. So if you put your left or right turn signal on (don’t forget to put the key to accessory), do the lights flash?     Try the 4-way/hazzard lights for the same reason.     I had a problem with my turn signals (front&back), parking lights, 4-way/hazzard, and stop lights all were blowing their fuses — but not the bulbs. It ended up being the trailer light harness was corroded and shorted out. Just some odd ideas — it’s a newer truck so I would be suprised if it was corrosion — unless you were playing with something ;) -Joe

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> 2001 Trail Blazer > My brake lights have quit working and was wondering if anyone can help > me get them to work again. > I have checked the fuse  and the blubs. > Thanks for any replies

Response:

>2001 Trail Blazer >My brake lights have quit working and was wondering if anyone can help >me get them to work again. >I have checked the fuse  and the blubs. >Thanks for any replies

Got under 36000 miles on it?  If so, take it to the dealer and let them change the boards that the bulbs mount in.  We’ve seen quite a bit of problem with these. — Old Crow ‘82 FLTC 92" Shovel ‘Pearl’ TOMKAT, SENS, BS#133, DOF#51, MAMBM ASE Certified Master Auto Tech + L1 Chevy Certified Master Tech

Response:

Sorry all , here some more info Also  the turn signals work and the Haz flashers work. When stepping on the brakes the light on top the truck above the back windshield works as it should.

Response:

The boards you are talking about are they in the taillight assembly, called the service center and had to set an appointment because they have never heard of this before and may need time to figure it out. No, over 36000 miles. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->2001 Trail Blazer >My brake lights have quit working and was wondering if anyone can help >me get them to work again. >I have checked the fuse  and the blubs. >Thanks for any replies >Got under 36000 miles on it?  If so, take it to the dealer and let >them change the boards that the bulbs mount in.  We’ve seen quite a >bit of problem with these.

Response:

sounds like  a problem ive heard of with the  turn signal/multifunction switch.  Not a cheap proposition unfortunately

Response:

>The boards you are talking about are they in the taillight assembly, >called the service center and had to set an appointment because they >have never heard of this before and may need time to figure it out.

Yes. After you remove the tail light from the truck, you have to unscrew the board from the back fo the tail light.  It has the bulbs pushed into it.   I don’t know why, but apparently the contacts are loosing tension and creating bad connections. The new ones look the same, but are supposed to be a new design.   Here’s a copy of the bullitin:    Document ID# 1341275     Info – Tail Lamp Circuit Board Now Available for Service Use #03-08-42-006 – (06/05/2003) Tail Lamp Circuit Board Now Available For Service Use 2002-2003 Chevrolet TrailBlazer, TrailBlazer EXT 2002-2003 GMC Envoy, Envoy XL 2002-2003 Oldsmobile Bravada The tail lamp circuit board is now available for service use. Previously, the entire tail lamp assembly had to be replaced if the tail lamp circuit board needed replacement. If normal diagnosis of a vehicle leads to a failed tail lamp bulb, inspect the bulb socket to ensure proper fit of the bulb into the socket. If the bulb is found to be loose, or if the circuit board has failed, it is now possible to obtain just the tail lamp circuit board from GMSPO. Previously, the only way to replace the tail lamp bulb circuit board was to order the entire rear tail lamp assembly. The preferred tail lamp bulb to use is now supplied by Sylvania, P/N 12450108. Please note that the tail lamp bulb may have been provided by various suppliers in the past. Technicians are to replace the tail lamp circuit board using the following procedure: Remove the tail lamp assembly from the vehicle. Refer to the Tail Lamp Replacement procedure in SI (Document ID #730408). Remove the tail lamp circuit board from the tail lamp assembly. Inspect for loose tail lamp bulbs in the tail lamp circuit board. Replace the tail lamp bulb and the tail lamp circuit board if necessary. Refer to the Tail Lamp Bulb Replacement procedure in SI (Document ID #743430). Install the tail lamp circuit board. Refer to the Tail Lamp Bulb Replacement procedure in SI (Document ID #743430). Install the tail lamp assembly. Refer to the Tail Lamp Replacement procedure in SI (Document ID #730408). Verify the operation of the tail lamps. Parts Information Part Number  Description  Qty 16525938  Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-Chevrolet  1 16525964  Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-GMC  1 16525952  Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-Oldsmobile  1 12450108  Bulb-3157  1 — Old Crow ‘82 FLTC 92" Shovel ‘Pearl’ TOMKAT, SENS, BS#133, DOF#51, MAMBM ASE Certified Master Auto Tech + L1 Chevy Certified Master Tech

Response:

Old Crow There is no board on this 2001 Trail Blazer just sockets where the blubs fix into. The 2001 TB is like the old  Blazer befroe the body change maybe that is the problem – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->The boards you are talking about are they in the taillight assembly, >called the service center and had to set an appointment because they >have never heard of this before and may need time to figure it out. >Yes. After you remove the tail light from the truck, you have to >unscrew the board from the back fo the tail light.  It has the bulbs >pushed into it.   >I don’t know why, but apparently the contacts are loosing tension and >creating bad connections. The new ones look the same, but are supposed >to be a new design.   >Here’s a copy of the bullitin: >   Document ID# 1341275     >Info – Tail Lamp Circuit Board Now Available for Service Use >#03-08-42-006 – (06/05/2003) >Tail Lamp Circuit Board Now Available For Service Use >2002-2003 Chevrolet TrailBlazer, TrailBlazer EXT >2002-2003 GMC Envoy, Envoy XL >2002-2003 Oldsmobile Bravada >The tail lamp circuit board is now available for service use. >Previously, the entire tail lamp assembly had to be replaced if the >tail lamp circuit board needed replacement. >If normal diagnosis of a vehicle leads to a failed tail lamp bulb, >inspect the bulb socket to ensure proper fit of the bulb into the >socket. If the bulb is found to be loose, or if the circuit board has >failed, it is now possible to obtain just the tail lamp circuit board >from GMSPO. >Previously, the only way to replace the tail lamp bulb circuit board >was to order the entire rear tail lamp assembly. The preferred tail >lamp bulb to use is now supplied by Sylvania, P/N 12450108. Please >note that the tail lamp bulb may have been provided by various >suppliers in the past. Technicians are to replace the tail lamp >circuit board using the following procedure: >Remove the tail lamp assembly from the vehicle. Refer to the Tail Lamp >Replacement procedure in SI (Document ID #730408). >Remove the tail lamp circuit board from the tail lamp assembly. >Inspect for loose tail lamp bulbs in the tail lamp circuit board. >Replace the tail lamp bulb and the tail lamp circuit board if >necessary. Refer to the Tail Lamp Bulb Replacement procedure in SI >(Document ID #743430). >Install the tail lamp circuit board. Refer to the Tail Lamp Bulb >Replacement procedure in SI (Document ID #743430). >Install the tail lamp assembly. Refer to the Tail Lamp Replacement >procedure in SI (Document ID #730408). >Verify the operation of the tail lamps. >Parts Information >Part Number > Description > Qty >16525938 > Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-Chevrolet > 1 >16525964 > Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-GMC > 1 >16525952 > Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-Oldsmobile > 1 >12450108 > Bulb-3157 > 1

Response:

Also check your Hitch and make sure that the problems doesn’t have something to do with it. Could be a short in plug or something like that.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Old Crow > There is no board on this 2001 Trail Blazer just sockets where the > blubs fix into. > The 2001 TB is like the old  Blazer befroe the body change maybe that > is the problem >>The boards you are talking about are they in the taillight assembly, >>called the service center and had to set an appointment because they >>have never heard of this before and may need time to figure it out. >Yes. After you remove the tail light from the truck, you have to >unscrew the board from the back fo the tail light.  It has the bulbs >pushed into it. >I don’t know why, but apparently the contacts are loosing tension and >creating bad connections. The new ones look the same, but are supposed >to be a new design. >Here’s a copy of the bullitin: >   Document ID# 1341275 —– >Info – Tail Lamp Circuit Board Now Available for Service Use >#03-08-42-006 – (06/05/2003) >Tail Lamp Circuit Board Now Available For Service Use >2002-2003 Chevrolet TrailBlazer, TrailBlazer EXT >2002-2003 GMC Envoy, Envoy XL >2002-2003 Oldsmobile Bravada >The tail lamp circuit board is now available for service use. >Previously, the entire tail lamp assembly had to be replaced if the >tail lamp circuit board needed replacement. >If normal diagnosis of a vehicle leads to a failed tail lamp bulb, >inspect the bulb socket to ensure proper fit of the bulb into the >socket. If the bulb is found to be loose, or if the circuit board has >failed, it is now possible to obtain just the tail lamp circuit board >from GMSPO. >Previously, the only way to replace the tail lamp bulb circuit board >was to order the entire rear tail lamp assembly. The preferred tail >lamp bulb to use is now supplied by Sylvania, P/N 12450108. Please >note that the tail lamp bulb may have been provided by various >suppliers in the past. Technicians are to replace the tail lamp >circuit board using the following procedure: >Remove the tail lamp assembly from the vehicle. Refer to the Tail Lamp >Replacement procedure in SI (Document ID #730408). >Remove the tail lamp circuit board from the tail lamp assembly. >Inspect for loose tail lamp bulbs in the tail lamp circuit board. >Replace the tail lamp bulb and the tail lamp circuit board if >necessary. Refer to the Tail Lamp Bulb Replacement procedure in SI >(Document ID #743430). >Install the tail lamp circuit board. Refer to the Tail Lamp Bulb >Replacement procedure in SI (Document ID #743430). >Install the tail lamp assembly. Refer to the Tail Lamp Replacement >procedure in SI (Document ID #730408). >Verify the operation of the tail lamps. >Parts Information >Part Number > Description > Qty >16525938 > Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-Chevrolet > 1 >16525964 > Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-GMC > 1 >16525952 > Board, Tail Lamp Circuit-Oldsmobile > 1 >12450108 > Bulb-3157 > 1

Response:

probably the big fuse for the stop lamps, I think it was hidden in glove box on the S10 blazers and underhood for C/K trucks

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> 2001 Trail Blazer > My brake lights have quit working and was wondering if anyone can help > me get them to work again. > I have checked the fuse  and the blubs. > Thanks for any replies

Response:

I have the same problem. If you find a fix please let me know.                      thanks

Response:

GMC ENVOY

Question:

Seriously thinking of buying the new ENVOY XUV.  Anyone have the Envoy SLE or SLT.  I want to hear your impressions of it in terms of reliability, which engine to go for, comforts etc. Thanks in advance

Response:

I have a 2003 Envoy SLT.  Love the comfort, power, looks. But it’s been in to the dealer more times than I care to admit.  I’m very disappointed in GM’s lack of responsibility and their follow-through.  I have an intermittant problem that GM admits is a wide-spread problem but they won’t tell me 1) what the exact problem is or 2) when a fix will be available. The truck has a "stutter" or "hiccup" when stopped (tranny in drive) at a stop light/sign for over 30 seconds.  GM sent me a letter upping my tranny warranty to 100,000 miles and considered the issue closed. We had to escalate the issue to the BBB. Other problems I’ve had:   A/C blowing warm air (fixed), rear license plate gasket shrinks (repeat), wind noise from front doors (dealers says it’s normal), headliner sags at rear of sunroof (fixed), external temp sensor not working (fixed). – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Seriously thinking of buying the new ENVOY XUV.  Anyone have the Envoy SLE > or SLT.  I want to hear your impressions of it in terms of reliability, > which engine to go for, comforts etc. > Thanks in advance

Response:

A/C blowing warm air (fixed), rear license plate > gasket shrinks (repeat), wind noise from front doors (dealers says it’s > normal), headliner sags at rear of sunroof (fixed), external temp sensor not > working (fixed).

Every single one of these issues are with the early first year Envoy/Bravada/TB.  These have all been remedied, and no ’03s should have any of these issues.

Response:

Have the 2003 for last two month with 4.2 l I6. So far not bad except that the rear seats do not fold flatly, as they did in my old blazer. I think this is due to fact that the ON STAR and vehicle computer (and Fuses), are mounted under back seat, as well as the jack.  I have to look more closely there. BTW, this is my first encounter with ON STAR and I think it sucks. I have some GPS running with my PC navigating before that way and of course I have the cell phone, so I am not impressed with this. Ziggie. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Seriously thinking of buying the new ENVOY XUV.  Anyone have the Envoy SLE > or SLT.  I want to hear your impressions of it in terms of reliability, > which engine to go for, comforts etc. > Thanks in advance

Response:

> But it’s been in to the dealer more times than I care to admit.

I have an ‘03 and absolutely love it. And believe me, I am not an easy person when it comes to vehicles. Prior to the Envoy, I had three Lexus cars, three Hondas, an Acura, a Mitsubishi, and another GMC. (Jimmy…BIG mistake for me.) I bought my Envoy in November and have had only two problems with it. The power seat memory switch (or connector) is bad, and the service engine light came on two days into ownership. (The dealer didn’t tighten the fuel cap when they filled it with fuel for my drive-off.) When I test drove the vehicle, it was on a whim. I was so impressed with the quiet interior, I was hooked. I then test drove a Honda Pilot, Acura MDX, Toyota 4Runner, and Toyota Highlander. Needless to say, I’m driving the Envoy. I’ll agree that I find OnStar nearly worthless for me. I’ll use it for traffic conditions. For navigation, however, there is no comparision between a true navigation system (as I have in my Acura) and OnStar’s advisors. It’s really lame, actually. I guess the ’04s have true navigation. I have to say that a) I’m glad I didn’t get the ‘02…but that I really am impressed with the ‘03 I bought. If I could change a few things, I would put a higher quality finish on the dash materials (I don’t like the cheap plastic on the top.), have true navigation, and have auto-up power windows.   Joel

Response:

My ‘03 SLT has the shrinking rear license plate gasket problem (build date 10/02).  Other than that I’m completely satisfied with the vehicle. 16 mpg average city and highway over 4,000 miles.

Response:

I guess I’m just unlucky then… mine is an ‘03.   I’ve owned several GM vehicles and have been very pleased.  But our experience with this one has been disappointing and frustrating.  No one at the dealer or the GM Customer Serivce Center gives us any indication that they care to fix the tranny problem. A simple "Yes, we know we have a wide-spread problem and are ACTIVELY working on a fix." is what I expected.  Not the "Here’s a letter extending your tranny warranty; case closed.  Don’t call us back.  Escalate to the Better Business Bureau if you care to."  that we received.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > A/C blowing warm air (fixed), rear license plate > gasket shrinks (repeat), wind noise from front doors (dealers says it’s > normal), headliner sags at rear of sunroof (fixed), external temp sensor > not > working (fixed). > Every single one of these issues are with the early first year > Envoy/Bravada/TB.  These have all been remedied, and no ’03s should have any > of these issues.

Response:

thanks guys.  appreciate all your information.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Have the 2003 for last two month with 4.2 l I6. > So far not bad except that the rear seats do not fold flatly, as they did in > my old blazer. > I think this is due to fact that the ON STAR and vehicle computer (and > Fuses), are mounted under back seat, as well as the jack.  I have to look > more closely there. > BTW, this is my first encounter with ON STAR and I think it sucks. > I have some GPS running with my PC navigating before that way and of course > I have the cell phone, so I am not impressed with this. > Ziggie. > Seriously thinking of buying the new ENVOY XUV.  Anyone have the Envoy SLE > or SLT.  I want to hear your impressions of it in terms of reliability, > which engine to go for, comforts etc. > Thanks in advance

Response:

Seeking Comments re New 2003 Envoy

Question:

Hi! I’m serioiusly considering a new 2003 Envoy as my next vehicle, and expect to move forward within the next 2 weeks. I’d appreciate any reasonable comments about the merits and potential trouble spots of the Envoy (not the XL).. Thanks! Ant.

Response:

If you live in the snowbelt then I’d suggest getting the locking differential. Issues other Envoy owners seem to have:  excessive wind noise from front doors (dealers say it’s normal), roof rack wind noise (TSB regarding placement of rails helps alleviate this),  engine cylinder sleeve problems on 2001 models (GM extended the warranty for some 2001 models). And be sure to test-drive the final vehicle you choose… we test drove several from the dealer inventory, but purchased one they had transferred from another dealer.  We didn’t test that one; and regret it.  (It has a "stutter" or "hiccup" at idle in drive when at a stoplight for over 30 seconds).  I’m disappointed that GM isn’t taking responsibility for the problem.  It’s in the BBB hands now.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Hi! > I’m serioiusly considering a new 2003 Envoy as my next vehicle, > and expect to move forward within the next 2 weeks. > I’d appreciate any reasonable comments about the merits and potential > trouble spots of the Envoy (not the XL).. > Thanks! > Ant.

Response:

2002 ENVOY

Question:

As usual, a very informative and helpful post!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Mike Levy"wrote > I’d like to see how they rig THAT wire.  That fan clutch is filled > with a fluid that changes viscosity with temperature.  HOW will a > software update do ANYTHING to adjust the fan clutch… > This is probably because you have not seen what "these" > fan clutch’s look like.  This is a different beast then what > you are probably used to.  It in fact has wiring connections > to the fan/fan clutch assembly.  In fact, you can unscrew > the fan clutch and fan assembly from the water pump > like any other vehicle, but you can’t get the fan out as > it’s hard wired to shroud assembly. > Here is a blurb from the service manual on how it works: > The purpose of the electro-viscous (EV) fan clutch is to maintain powertrain > cooling requirements. The powertrain control module (PCM) monitors the > following sensors to regulate the fan speed; >   a.. Engine coolant temperature sensor >   b.. A/C refrigerant pressure sensor >   c.. Vehicle speed sensor >   d.. Intake air temperature sensor >   e.. Transmission fluid temperature sensor >   f.. Ambient air temperature sensor > The PCM controls the electro-viscous fan clutch engagement. The PCM > regulates a 12-volt pulse width modulated signal (PWM) to the cooling fan > relay. The PWM signal determines the ON time of the relay. As the commanded > state of the fan clutch increases, so does the ON time of the relay. This ON > time directly effects the amount of time the solenoid, which is internal to > the fan clutch, is energized. When the solenoid in the fan clutch is > energized, it opens the spring loaded valve and allows fluid to flow from > the storage chamber to the fluid coupling of the cooling fan clutch, > increasing the fan speed. When the solenoid is de-energized, the spring > loaded valve closes, and blocks the path of the fluid to the fluid coupling > of the fan clutch, reducing fan speed. > The fan has the ability to create a feedback signal, so the PCM has an > actual fan speed input. This is done with a hall effect sensor internal to > the fan clutch. The PCM supplies a 5-volt reference and a low reference to > the hall effect sensor. The hall effect sensor returns a signal pulse > through the cooling fan speed signal circuit in response to the reluctor > track passing by the magnetic field of the hall effect sensor. > The PCM commands the cooling fan to 100% under the following conditions: >   a.. Engine coolant temperature exceeds approximately 129

Ford Motor Corp. – 100 Years of Mediocrity

Question:

With all the latest brew-haha about the big 100 year anniversary of Ford on the telly lately, I’ve gotten to the point where I just had to post a legitimate rebuttal to all the Ford lovers out there who think they’re sh*t doesn’t stink, and that they’re cars are The Bomb.  First off the name, it is a acronym (look that up if you have not heard of this word) and it stands for several thing, but first off the Classic: Found On Road Dead. It is a true fact.  It is a well known fact that over 85% of ALL Ford car and truck models have had major recalls in the past, includin: Contour, Fpcus, Pinto, Lincoln cars, Probe, Taurus, Sable and Escape, Rangar, and of course the F150!!!  These cars are just plain dangerous, plain and simple.  I would *never* allow my family to drive these, because of their dangerousness and bad repuataion. Second, they are all over priced.  It is almost universally accepted that a Ford will be around 20% more expensive than a similar Chevy or evan an import like Toyota.  On top of that to mainatain them is *WAY* More expensive than a better built brand, such as Chevrolet.  You won’t see me in a Ford dealer offfice any time soon. Third, they don’t seem to perform as well as other cars and trucks in their class.  A Shelby Mustang versus a Viper?  Please.  The Shelby is a looser every time.  (Driver Returns on Foot.)  And it is a well known fact that a Chevy S10 is a bettter off road vehcle than any of the Ford trucks.  You can look that one up too if you don’t think so – it’s a documented fact. Ford tough? I don’t think so… The words Ford and Reliability do not belong in the same sentence together. Yeah, they run and they will last for a while, not as long as certain other companies, but they are not reliable in the aspect that they run for a long time. And how good they run is a different story. They break down and suffer major problems where HUGE maintenance is required after very few years… sometimes even months. Not to mention the fact that they fall apart like there’s no tomorrow. And tough??? I’m sorry, but there’s a better word for them… WEAK. On the whole and to summarise, I am tired of Ford blaring their own horn (that’s a joke – look it up all you Ford Owner) because quite frankly I don’t know how they managed to stay in business for 100 years without brainwashing.

Response:

Who asked you? Learn your place twit. SMC   With all the latest brew-haha about the big 100 year anniversary of Ford on the telly lately, I’ve gotten to the point where I just had to post a legitimate rebuttal to all the Ford lovers out there who think they’re sh*t doesn’t stink, and that they’re cars are The Bomb.  First off the name, it is a acronym (look that up if you have not heard of this word) and it stands for several thing, but first off the Classic:   Found   On   Road Dead.   It is a true fact.  It is a well known fact that over 85% of ALL Ford car and truck models have had major recalls in the past, includin: Contour, Fpcus, Pinto, Lincoln cars, Probe, Taurus, Sable and Escape, Rangar, and of course the F150!!!  These cars are just plain dangerous, plain and simple.  I would *never* allow my family to drive these, because of their dangerousness and bad repuataion.   Second, they are all over priced.  It is almost universally accepted that a Ford will be around 20% more expensive than a similar Chevy or evan an import like Toyota.  On top of that to mainatain them is *WAY* More expensive than a better built brand, such as Chevrolet.  You won’t see me in a Ford dealer offfice any time soon.   Third, they don’t seem to perform as well as other cars and trucks in their class.  A Shelby Mustang versus a Viper?  Please.  The Shelby is a looser every time.  (Driver Returns on Foot.)  And it is a well known fact that a Chevy S10 is a bettter off road vehcle than any of the Ford trucks.  You can look that one up too if you don’t think so – it’s a documented fact.   Ford tough? I don’t think so… The words Ford and Reliability do not belong in the same sentence together. Yeah, they run and they will last for a while, not as long as certain other companies, but they are not reliable in the aspect that they run for a long time. And how good they run is a different story. They break down and suffer major problems where HUGE maintenance is required after very few years… sometimes even months. Not to mention the fact that they fall apart like there’s no tomorrow. And tough??? I’m sorry, but there’s a better word for them… WEAK.   On the whole and to summarise, I am tired of Ford blaring their own horn (that’s a joke – look it up all you Ford Owner) because quite frankly I don’t know how they managed to stay in business for 100 years without brainwashing.

Response:

[SNIP!] This is a public service announcement:                       ______                      /                          .’ PLEASE `.                    |  DO NOT  |      _____                        |  |     `. …. _/                        |  |      ,’.,’-’                        |  |     /../                        |  |   ,’.,’                        |  |  /../                      . |  | /..’                    ._|  |/_/,                    ___ |  | ___                      . `–’ .                       .    . Thank you.   ____    _                   _      _   _   _  |  _  | |   ___    _ __   | | __ | | | | | |  | |_) | | |  / _  | ‘_  | |/ / | | | | | |  |  __/  | | | (_) | | | | | |   <  |_| |_| |_|  |_|     |_|  ___/  |_| |_| |_|_ (_) (_) (_)

Response:

> Ford tough? I don’t think so… The words Ford and Reliability do not > belong in the same sentence together. Yeah, they run and they will last > for a while, not as long as certain other companies, but they are not > reliable in the aspect that they run for a long time. And how good they > run is a different story. They break down and suffer major problems > where HUGE maintenance is required after very few years… sometimes > even months. Not to mention the fact that they fall apart like there’s > no tomorrow. And tough??? I’m sorry, but there’s a better word for > them… WEAK.

Tell that to the funky-ford I ran over the other day with my 35 year old ford truck.  Hardly even scratched my bumper. True, one ford running over another ford, is considered cruel and unusual punishment in most states, but after I ran over him, he said, ouch, that really hurt, you bastard. Proof that the word "WEAK" will depend on the overall weight and body mass of the vehicle run upon. My truck never breaks down. It runs forever and ever and ever and ever. When is my "HUGE maintenance" due on this vehicle? After I pass go and collect $200?  I don’t won’t to miss it. BTW, I also have a chevy car. It also runs forever, and ever and ever and ever. But it’s exterior sheet metal covering is starting to rust away due the the inferior paint products originally applied to said vehicle. I want a rebate. MK

Response:

<snip> How about you learn to spell before trying to start a debate?

Response:

First of all, your grammar shows a lack of education. Secondly, there are NO legitimate acronyms for Ford. What your have there are ‘backronyms, which are devised by people who don’t have a life. Hope this helps. —   With all the latest brew-haha about the big 100 year anniversary of Ford on the telly lately, I’ve gotten to the point where I just had to post a legitimate rebuttal to all the Ford lovers out there who think they’re sh*t doesn’t stink, and that they’re cars are The Bomb.  First off the name, it is a acronym (look that up if you have not heard of this word) and it stands for several thing, but first off the Classic:   Found   On   Road Dead.   It is a true fact.  It is a well known fact that over 85% of ALL Ford car and truck models have had major recalls in the past, includin: Contour, Fpcus, Pinto, Lincoln cars, Probe, Taurus, Sable and Escape, Rangar, and of course the F150!!!  These cars are just plain dangerous, plain and simple.  I would *never* allow my family to drive these, because of their dangerousness and bad repuataion.   Second, they are all over priced.  It is almost universally accepted that a Ford will be around 20% more expensive than a similar Chevy or evan an import like Toyota.  On top of that to mainatain them is *WAY* More expensive than a better built brand, such as Chevrolet.  You won’t see me in a Ford dealer offfice any time soon.   Third, they don’t seem to perform as well as other cars and trucks in their class.  A Shelby Mustang versus a Viper?  Please.  The Shelby is a looser every time.  (Driver Returns on Foot.)  And it is a well known fact that a Chevy S10 is a bettter off road vehcle than any of the Ford trucks.  You can look that one up too if you don’t think so – it’s a documented fact.   Ford tough? I don’t think so… The words Ford and Reliability do not belong in the same sentence together. Yeah, they run and they will last for a while, not as long as certain other companies, but they are not reliable in the aspect that they run for a long time. And how good they run is a different story. They break down and suffer major problems where HUGE maintenance is required after very few years… sometimes even months. Not to mention the fact that they fall apart like there’s no tomorrow. And tough??? I’m sorry, but there’s a better word for them… WEAK.   On the whole and to summarise, I am tired of Ford blaring their own horn (that’s a joke – look it up all you Ford Owner) because quite frankly I don’t know how they managed to stay in business for 100 years without brainwashing.

Response:

Classic?  Never heard it before.  "Fix Or Repair Daily" yes but not yours. But then there is "If you can’t afFORD a Dodge, dodge a Ford" and so on.  FIAT – Fix It Again, Tony, etc. Ron Beckett Emu Plains, Australia 1995 Range Rover HSE 4.6 Litre V8 1994 Ford Probe 2.5L V6 1971 Hillman Hunter Royal 660 – see mine at http://www.hillman.org.au/auscars.htm#hunter 1990 Honda CBR1000F Motor Bike see mine at http://cbr1000.racing.gs/pictures/ron_threequarter.jpg 1995 Vespa PX200E Motor Scooter "Ford Sucks" First off the name, it is a acronym (look that up if you have not heard of this word) and it stands for several thing, but first off the Classic: Found On Road Dead.

Response:

Can hear every valve rattle on long extended trips. — Steve Remove the not dot from my address to abuse my email box

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Classic?  Never heard it before.  "Fix Or Repair Daily" yes but not yours. > But then there is "If you can’t afFORD a Dodge, dodge a Ford" and so on. >  FIAT – Fix It Again, Tony, etc. > Ron Beckett > Emu Plains, Australia > 1995 Range Rover HSE 4.6 Litre V8 > 1994 Ford Probe 2.5L V6 > 1971 Hillman Hunter Royal 660 – see mine at > http://www.hillman.org.au/auscars.htm#hunter > 1990 Honda CBR1000F Motor Bike see mine at > http://cbr1000.racing.gs/pictures/ron_threequarter.jpg > 1995 Vespa PX200E Motor Scooter > "Ford Sucks" > First off the name, it is a acronym (look that up if you have not heard of > this word) and it stands for several thing, but first off the Classic: > Found > On > Road Dead.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > snipped for any real content

Response:

I have two Fords… (yes I know this is a troll, but I’m bored) One is a 1967 Galaxie 500 with a 289. That went 200,000 miles before a major failure. That failure was a rocker stud which I broke when I was changing a bent pushrod (I was playing a little too hard). Overall not bad for 200,000 miles and 36 years of service. That was the only time it ever left me walking. The other is a 1968 Ford Galaxie 500 302 with 93,000 miles. That thing has been abused to no end. Before my great grandmother gave it to me my uncle drove it for ~7 years. In those 7 years he ran it on 87 octane so it would always knock, ping and diesel… He put nothing into it except for when things stopped working from lack of maintenance, the thing rarely had more than 2-3 quarts of oil in it, had no working front brakes, and the list goes on and on. It’s only major failure was when the timing chain slipped a tooth about 2 years ago. I’m 99% sure that was from him running 87 octane in it for all those years. The one thing my uncle did for the car was to paint it last year before it started rusting. Original paint lasting 34 years isn’t bad. When I got the car I spent maybe $250 on parts and two weekends to make the car both road-worthy and perform great. In any case, old cars were built to last. Quality stuff that was over-engineered. That goes for all old (domestic) cars, Ford/Lincoln/Mercury, GM and Mopar. Hell, I even see some AMC cars still on the road, two old guys around here drive Ambassadors which look to be in great condition. In any case, most any car will last long as offer tens of years of reliable service so long as you maintain it and take care of it. If you don’t want to be stuck on the side of the road, preventative maintenance over the life of the vehicle is key. So Mr. Sucks, if you prefer not to be blocked from posting usenet through your ISP (Mindspring/Earthlink) then I recommend you apologize, or at least make some decent arguments. In any case, I have reported this knumbskull for trolling and suggest others do as well.     Cory

With all the latest brew-haha about the big 100 year anniversary of Ford on the telly lately, I’ve gotten to the point where I just had to post a legitimate rebuttal to all the Ford lovers out there who think they’re sh*t doesn’t stink, and that they’re cars are The Bomb.  First off the name, it is a acronym (look that up if you have not heard of this word) and it stands for several thing, but first off the Classic: Found On Road Dead. It is a true fact.  It is a well known fact that over 85% of ALL Ford car and truck models have had major recalls in the past, includin: Contour, Fpcus, Pinto, Lincoln cars, Probe, Taurus, Sable and Escape, Rangar, and of course the F150!!!  These cars are just plain dangerous, plain and simple. I would *never* allow my family to drive these, because of their dangerousness and bad repuataion. Second, they are all over priced.  It is almost universally accepted that a Ford will be around 20% more expensive than a similar Chevy or evan an import like Toyota.  On top of that to mainatain them is *WAY* More expensive than a better built brand, such as Chevrolet.  You won’t see me in a Ford dealer offfice any time soon. Third, they don’t seem to perform as well as other cars and trucks in their class.  A Shelby Mustang versus a Viper?  Please.  The Shelby is a looser every time.  (Driver Returns on Foot.)  And it is a well known fact that a Chevy S10 is a bettter off road vehcle than any of the Ford trucks.  You can look that one up too if you don’t think so – it’s a documented fact. Ford tough? I don’t think so… The words Ford and Reliability do not belong in the same sentence together. Yeah, they run and they will last for a while, not as long as certain other companies, but they are not reliable in the aspect that they run for a long time. And how good they run is a different story. They break down and suffer major problems where HUGE maintenance is required after very few years… sometimes even months. Not to mention the fact that they fall apart like there’s no tomorrow. And tough??? I’m sorry, but there’s a better word for them… WEAK. On the whole and to summarise, I am tired of Ford blaring their own horn (that’s a joke – look it up all you Ford Owner) because quite frankly I don’t know how they managed to stay in business for 100 years without brainwashing.

Response:

Q: How do you double the value of a Chevy? A: Put gas in it. Q: How is a golf ball different from a Chevy? A: You can drive a golf ball 200 yards. Q: Why are there sidewalks beside streets? A: So Chevy owners have a safe place to walk home. Q: How much wood could a GM truck haul if a GM truck could haul wood? A: As much as the Ford towing it. Q. Whats the difference between a Chevy and a Tampon? A. A tampon comes with its own tow rope Q. Why do Chevys have magnetized bumpers A. To pick up the parts that fall off other Chevys Q. How do you make a Chevy accelerate 0-60 mph in less than 15 seconds? A. Push it off a cliff. Q. What is found on the last two pages of every Chevy’s owners manual? A. The bus schedule. Q. What did the auto parts counterman say when the customer said, "I’ll take a set of wiper blades for my Chevy"? A. Sounds like a fair trade. Q. What do you call a Chevy at the top of a hill? A. A miracle? Q. What do you call two Chevy’s at the top of a hill? A. A mirage. Q. What do you call a Chevy with brakes? A. Customized. Q. How do you make a Chevy go faster down hill? A. Turn the engine off. Q. Why don’t Chevy’s sustain much damage in front end collisions? A. The tow truck takes most of the impact. Q. What do you call Chevy passengers? A. Shock absorbers. Q. How do you improve the appearance of a Chevy? A. Park it between two Fords Q. Whats the difference between a Chevy and a shopping cart? A. A shopping cart is easier to push. Q. Why did GM put heaters in the tailgates of their new trucks? A. To keep their hands warm when they are pushing the truck into the shop Q. Why are the new GM trucks more aerodynamic? A. So they will save the Fords gas when the Ford tows them away. Q. What did the Ford say to the Chevy? A. Would you like a tow home? Q. How can they improve the new Chevy truck? A. Put a Ford engine in it. Q. Why did the chicken cross the road? A. To push his Chevy into the shop Q. Why didn’t the chicken cross the road? A. Because his Silverado got stuck. Q. Why are the Chevy dealerships giving away a dog with every purchase A. So the owners have someone to walk home with. CHEVROLET= Constantly Having Every Vehicle Recalled Over Lousy Engineering Techniques CHEVROLET= Can Hear Every Valve Rattle On Long Extended Trips. CHEVROLET= Cheap, Hardly Efficient, Virtually Runs On Luck Every Time. CHEVROLET= Cracked Heads, Every Valve Rattles, Oil Leaks Every Time. CHEVROLET= Can Hear Every Valve Rattle, Oil Leaks, Engine Ticks. CHEVROLET= Cheap Heavy Equipment, Very Rusty, Overly Loved, Eventually Towed CHEVY= Cheapest Heap Ever Visioned Yet GMC= Garage Man’s Companion GMC= Garbage Manufacturing Company GMC= Gotta Mechanic Coming GMC= Gay Mans Chariot GM= General Mistake GM= Glued Metal GM – Mark of Ignorance A man pulled up next to a little girl walking home from school and said "If you get in, I’ll give you a lollypop." The girl kept walking. Following along slowly, the man said "Come on and get in the car with me and I’ll give you two lolly pops." She kept her eyes on the sidewalk and continued on her way. The man said "Get in with me and I’ll give you this whole bag of lollypops!" Finally, the girl turned and said "Look daddy, YOU bought the Chevy, YOU ride in it!!!" Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. If it wasn’t for our Chevy’s, our tools would rust. From the past 10 years, about 95% of Chevy trucks are still on the road. The rest made it home. Have you seen the new speed limit signs? They say "Speed limit 65, Chevys-do the best you can" Thats not a leak, my Chevy’s just marking its territory. Buy a Chevy and you buy the best. Drive the first mile and walk the rest. I could never keep a Chevy under me, I was always under the Chevy. Speed Kills, Drive a Chevy and live forever. You can Ford a stream, you can Dodge a stream, but a Chevy will sit and rust in a stream. A Texan was talking big in a bar one night about how much money he had, how many women he had been with and how much land he owned. A young man, growing tired of all the big talk finally asked the Texan, "Just how much land do you actually own"? The Texan tipped back his cowboy hat and said to the young man " Well sonny let me put it to ya like this, I can get in my pickup at sunrise, drive all day long, skip lunch and still not get to the other side of my property by sundown". The young man shot back quickly, " Oh yeah, I know what you mean, I used to own a Chevy truck too"! Here I sit brokenhearted Wishing that my Chevy started But it didn’t so thats a wrap "Chevy, built like a rock and runs like one too."

Response:

Acronym for Ford  First On Race Day   First of all, your grammar shows a lack of education. Secondly, there are NO legitimate acronyms for Ford. What your have there are ‘backronyms, which are devised by people who don’t have a life.   Hope this helps.   —     With all the latest brew-haha about the big 100 year anniversary of Ford on the telly lately, I’ve gotten to the point where I just had to post a legitimate rebuttal to all the Ford lovers out there who think they’re sh*t doesn’t stink, and that they’re cars are The Bomb.  First off the name, it is a acronym (look that up if you have not heard of this word) and it stands for several thing, but first off the Classic:     Found     On     Road Dead.     It is a true fact.  It is a well known fact that over 85% of ALL Ford car and truck models have had major recalls in the past, includin: Contour, Fpcus, Pinto, Lincoln cars, Probe, Taurus, Sable and Escape, Rangar, and of course the F150!!!  These cars are just plain dangerous, plain and simple.  I would *never* allow my family to drive these, because of their dangerousness and bad repuataion.     Second, they are all over priced.  It is almost universally accepted that a Ford will be around 20% more expensive than a similar Chevy or evan an import like Toyota.  On top of that to mainatain them is *WAY* More expensive than a better built brand, such as Chevrolet.  You won’t see me in a Ford dealer offfice any time soon.     Third, they don’t seem to perform as well as other cars and trucks in their class.  A Shelby Mustang versus a Viper?  Please.  The Shelby is a looser every time.  (Driver Returns on Foot.)  And it is a well known fact that a Chevy S10 is a bettter off road vehcle than any of the Ford trucks.  You can look that one up too if you don’t think so – it’s a documented fact.     Ford tough? I don’t think so… The words Ford and Reliability do not belong in the same sentence together. Yeah, they run and they will last for a while, not as long as certain other companies, but they are not reliable in the aspect that they run for a long time. And how good they run is a different story. They break down and suffer major problems where HUGE maintenance is required after very few years… sometimes even months. Not to mention the fact that they fall apart like there’s no tomorrow. And tough??? I’m sorry, but there’s a better word for them… WEAK.     On the whole and to summarise, I am tired of Ford blaring their own horn (that’s a joke – look it up all you Ford Owner) because quite frankly I don’t know how they managed to stay in business for 100 years without brainwashing.

Response:

Listen to the kid!!!! Boy are you cocky!!!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I have two Fords… (yes I know this is a troll, but I’m bored) > One is a 1967 Galaxie 500 with a 289. That went 200,000 miles before a major > failure. That failure was a rocker stud which I broke when I was changing a > bent pushrod (I was playing a little too hard). Overall not bad for 200,000 > miles and 36 years of service. That was the only time it ever left me > walking. > The other is a 1968 Ford Galaxie 500 302 with 93,000 miles. That thing has > been abused to no end. Before my great grandmother gave it to me my uncle > drove it for ~7 years. In those 7 years he ran it on 87 octane so it would > always knock, ping and diesel… He put nothing into it except for when > things stopped working from lack of maintenance, the thing rarely had more > than 2-3 quarts of oil in it, had no working front brakes, and the list goes > on and on. It’s only major failure was when the timing chain slipped a tooth > about 2 years ago. I’m 99% sure that was from him running 87 octane in it > for all those years. The one thing my uncle did for the car was to paint it > last year before it started rusting. Original paint lasting 34 years isn’t > bad. > When I got the car I spent maybe $250 on parts and two weekends to make the > car both road-worthy and perform great. > In any case, old cars were built to last. Quality stuff that was > over-engineered. That goes for all old (domestic) cars, > Ford/Lincoln/Mercury, GM and Mopar. Hell, I even see some AMC cars still on > the road, two old guys around here drive Ambassadors which look to be in > great condition. In any case, most any car will last long as offer tens of > years of reliable service so long as you maintain it and take care of it. If > you don’t want to be stuck on the side of the road, preventative maintenance > over the life of the vehicle is key. > So Mr. Sucks, if you prefer not to be blocked from posting usenet through > your ISP (Mindspring/Earthlink) then I recommend you apologize, or at least > make some decent arguments. In any case, I have reported this knumbskull for > trolling and suggest others do as well. >     Cory > With all the latest brew-haha about the big 100 year anniversary of Ford on > the telly lately, I’ve gotten to the point where I just had to post a > legitimate rebuttal to all the Ford lovers out there who think they’re sh*t > doesn’t stink, and that they’re cars are The Bomb.  First off the name, it > is a acronym (look that up if you have not heard of this word) and it stands > for several thing, but first off the Classic: > Found > On > Road Dead. > It is a true fact.  It is a well known fact that over 85% of ALL Ford car > and truck models have had major recalls in the past, includin: Contour, > Fpcus, Pinto, Lincoln cars, Probe, Taurus, Sable and Escape, Rangar, and of > course the F150!!!  These cars are just plain dangerous, plain and simple. > I would *never* allow my family to drive these, because of their > dangerousness and bad repuataion. > Second, they are all over priced.  It is almost universally accepted that a > Ford will be around 20% more expensive than a similar Chevy or evan an > import like Toyota.  On top of that to mainatain them is *WAY* More > expensive than a better built brand, such as Chevrolet.  You won’t see me in > a Ford dealer offfice any time soon. > Third, they don’t seem to perform as well as other cars and trucks in their > class.  A Shelby Mustang versus a Viper?  Please.  The Shelby is a looser > every time.  (Driver Returns on Foot.)  And it is a well known fact that a > Chevy S10 is a bettter off road vehcle than any of the Ford trucks.  You can > look that one up too if you don’t think so – it’s a documented fact. > Ford tough? I don’t think so… The words Ford and Reliability do not belong > in the same sentence together. Yeah, they run and they will last for a > while, not as long as certain other companies, but they are not reliable in > the aspect that they run for a long time. And how good they run is a > different story. They break down and suffer major problems where HUGE > maintenance is required after very few years… sometimes even months. Not > to mention the fact that they fall apart like there’s no tomorrow. And > tough??? I’m sorry, but there’s a better word for them… WEAK. > On the whole and to summarise, I am tired of Ford blaring their own horn > (that’s a joke – look it up all you Ford Owner) because quite frankly I > don’t know how they managed to stay in business for 100 years without > brainwashing.

Response:

Not if Nascar has their way   Acronym for Ford  First On Race Day

Response:

> Third, they don’t seem to perform as well as other cars and trucks in

their class. Funny, I seem to recall Consumer Reports ranking the Explorer above the Pathfinder, 4Runner, Envoy (eeewww), Durnago, and Grand Cherokee, as well as ranking the V6 XLT as the third-best SUV of any size. > And it is a well known fact that a Chevy S10 is a bettter off road vehcle

than any of the Ford trucks WHAT???  OMG, I just fell off my chair laughing. The *S10*?  That homely, FUGLY, P-O-S was a cut-and-paste job consisting of the rear axle from the *VEGA* and the front suspension of the mid-70s *MALIBU*.  There are no truck parts in that drooping-rear-ended piece of junk, let alone the archaic pushrod *car* engines that were cobbled from thrown-away designs from the 40s and 50s. The S10 is arguably the most embarrassing vehicle ever produced by GM, from its tubby, tippy-rear-end appearance to the hideous, HEE-HAW front end. FUGLY.  UG-FUG-FUG- U G L Y.  Every one I see looks like the rear end is about the scrape the ground, with its wheels a foot inside the fender openings.  FUGLY.  Oh, and read anyone’s test of the Shite-10.  Last place. Sorry. Yeah, this *idiot* is a troll, but if he falls for Chitty’s advertising, *he* is the gullible idiot, not anyone who buys a Ford. And, speaking as someone who is not brand-loyal but has owned five brand-new Fords, I’ve never had any trouble. <still laughing my arse off> The *S10*?  LOL…OMG, give me a minute…  My sides are splitting…

Response:

> Acronym for Ford  First On Race Day

You got that right.  More NASCAR wins to date than any other brand, despite whatever Chitty says. Facts are facts.

Response:

HoHum…. you’ve managed to get several people crossposting in HTML…. are you happy yet? Let me guess…. you did something real stupid and broke something that is hard to break…. the warranty clerk caught it and said you have to pay….. Or maybe your ex-girlfriend bought a Ford and it turned out to be better than your Honda…. Or maybe you don’t have a life (or an ex-girlfriend) and the only way you can people to talk to you is to piss them off….. I’ve had mosquitos bother me more than you… — Jim Warman managed to stay in business for 100 years without brainwashing.

Response:

>Hell, I even see some AMC cars still on > the road, two old guys around here drive Ambassadors which look to be in > great condition.

Hell yeah! I’ve got a 77 gremlin, still running strong! The one thing I had to change: the water pump…and that was after the previous owner ran it without coolant for 10K…not bad at all… – Nick

Response:

I had to spell that one out! 8-0 Ron

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Can hear every valve rattle on long extended trips.

Response:

As long as you don’t try to claim its a better 4WD than a Range Rover 8-) In Australia, 4WD magazines have repeatedly given the Explorer the thumbs down as an off-road vehicle and one that has real handling and ride problems. Ron Beckett Emu Plains, Australia 1995 Range Rover HSE 4.6 Litre V8 1994 Ford Probe 2.5L V6 1971 Hillman Hunter Royal 660 – see mine at http://www.hillman.org.au/auscars.htm#hunter 1990 Honda CBR1000F Motor Bike see mine at http://cbr1000.racing.gs/pictures/ron_threequarter.jpg 1995 Vespa PX200E Motor Scooter "JonnyCab

First-time SUV buyer looking for some advice on Trailblazer

Question:

Hi , >> The Trailblazer is a major disappointment in the >> quality dept. Frankly, if I could do it again, I wouldn’t. >>[more snippage] >> Spike

What happened? I drive a 2002 Trailblazer (bought in Germany) and it is of excellent quality. Not a single flaw (besides windnoise from the side mirrors). What have been your problems so far? Do I have to expect trouble? Andreas

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Thanks for reading my post. >My wife and I are looking at mid-size SUV vehicles for their extra >cargo capacity and the ability to carry our two dogs.  We currently >drive a Toyota RAV4, but its a little tight with all our camping gear >and the two dogs.  I’m looking for some info and advice on a couple >things.  First, I’d like some input on the handling/traction of the >2-wheel drive Trailblazer in snow or slick conditions.  I’m concerned >about fishtailing as my wife will be the main driver and we live in >the wintry northeast.  I’m not sure if I want to spend the extra $$$ >to go for the 4-wheel drive.  Also, Chevy offers traction control on >the 2-wheel drive model for 2003.  Does anyone have experience with >that??  Does it prevent fishtailing? >I am also concerned with "real-world" fuel economy (not those >theoretical EPA figures).  Please let me know what kind of average >mpgs your getting and if you’ve got 4-wheel or 2-wheel drive. >I appreciate any advice you all can offer.  Hopefully, I’ll be able to >return the favor some day after we’ve made an intelligent decision on >an SUV. >J&S

Why not just get a 2wd Isuzu Asender. It’s basically a trailblazer rebadged under the Isuzu name. It’s cheaper than a Trailblazer. During winter months just put 3 or 4  60 lbs bags of sand in the back . Hell thats what I do with my s10 4×2 pickup and that bitch goes through anything during winter.

Response:

Of course, if I had a few more Gs to throw at my truck, I’d have gone with a Tahoe, hands down. I just saw a Black 2002 Yukon SLT go for 26,500 on eBay, 14,000 miles on it. Give up a few more G’s for what now? Bush – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> >[John's original Q snipped] >> I just sold my 2000 Grand Cherokee and bought a ‘03 TrailBlazer (4×4) a >month >> ago. My daughter-in-law has an ‘02 2WD TrailBlazer. >> First, [snipped] >> Secondly, my comparison between the TB and JGC might interest you. The >> TrailBlazer has a much more powerful engine, a better shifting trans, a >real >> frame, a better on-road ride, and is more comfortable than the JGC. (The >Jeep’s >> excessively wide trans tunnel makes for a small and offset footbox, and is >a >> major problem for my feet and legs.) >> However, the Jeep has far better steering, far better stereo, and, >(believe it >> or not), far better quality. The Trailblazer is a major disappointment in >the >> quality dept. Frankly, if I could do it again, I wouldn’t. >>[more snippage] >> Spike >It sounds like you made some good points, but if you had to do it again, of >all the SUV’s which would you be happier with? >Craig >Tough call. Despite the TrailBlazer’s poor quality, I do appreciate the >driveline and best-in-class frame. The Jeep GC was out, the Ford Exp is too >’soft’… Some days I think I should have looked harder at the Durango SLT. >Of course, if I had a few more Gs to throw at my truck, I’d have gone with a >Tahoe, hands down.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >[John's original Q snipped] > I just sold my 2000 Grand Cherokee and bought a ‘03 TrailBlazer (4×4) a >month > ago. My daughter-in-law has an ‘02 2WD TrailBlazer. > First, [snipped] > Secondly, my comparison between the TB and JGC might interest you. The > TrailBlazer has a much more powerful engine, a better shifting trans, a >real > frame, a better on-road ride, and is more comfortable than the JGC. (The >Jeep’s > excessively wide trans tunnel makes for a small and offset footbox, and is >a > major problem for my feet and legs.) > However, the Jeep has far better steering, far better stereo, and, >(believe it > or not), far better quality. The Trailblazer is a major disappointment in >the > quality dept. Frankly, if I could do it again, I wouldn’t. >[more snippage] > Spike >It sounds like you made some good points, but if you had to do it again, of >all the SUV’s which would you be happier with? >Craig

Tough call. Despite the TrailBlazer’s poor quality, I do appreciate the driveline and best-in-class frame. The Jeep GC was out, the Ford Exp is too ’soft’… Some days I think I should have looked harder at the Durango SLT. Of course, if I had a few more Gs to throw at my truck, I’d have gone with a Tahoe, hands down.

Response:

> However, the Jeep has far better steering, far better stereo, and, (believe it > or not), far better quality. The Trailblazer is a major disappointment in the > quality dept. Frankly, if I could do it again, I wouldn’t.

It sounds like you made some good points, but if you had to do it again, off all the SUV’s which would you be happier with? Craig

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> [snippage] >My wife and I are looking at mid-size SUV vehicles >I’m looking for some info and advice on a couple >things.  First, I’d like some input on the handling/traction of the >2-wheel drive Trailblazer in snow or slick conditions. >I’m not sure if I want to spend the extra $$$ >to go for the 4-wheel drive.  Also, Chevy offers traction control on >the 2-wheel drive model for 2003.  Does anyone have experience with >that??  Does it prevent fishtailing? > John, > I just sold my 2000 Grand Cherokee and bought a ‘03 TrailBlazer (4×4) a month > ago. My daughter-in-law has an ‘02 2WD TrailBlazer. > First, as an earlier poster already mentioned, the 2WD will be a major > liability at resale. (I too learned this the hard way with a ‘75 C5.) Assuming > you’re going to finance it, you might find the additional cost for 4×4 isn’t as > hard on the monthly payment as you think, especially with 0% financing. (Around > $35/mo more?) > Secondly, my comparison between the TB and JGC might interest you. The > TrailBlazer has a much more powerful engine, a better shifting trans, a real > frame, a better on-road ride, and is more comfortable than the JGC. (The Jeep’s > excessively wide trans tunnel makes for a small and offset footbox, and is a > major problem for my feet and legs.) > However, the Jeep has far better steering, far better stereo, and, (believe it > or not), far better quality. The Trailblazer is a major disappointment in the > quality dept. Frankly, if I could do it again, I wouldn’t. > Since the earlier poster also made mention of axle ratios: I have the std 3.42 > gears, and since I do a lot of x-way driving, I’m happy with them. If you’re > interested in installing oversize tires or need to do some meaningful towing, I > would drop down to a 3.73 > If you still decide on a 2wd TrailBlazer, I’d give you the same advise I gave > my daughter-in-law… Get the optional limited slip differential. Here in my > area, (1 hr N of Detroit), at least 1/2 the 2WDs on my local dealer lots are so > equipped. > Spike

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Thanks for reading my post. > My wife and I are looking at mid-size SUV vehicles for their extra > cargo capacity and the ability to carry our two dogs.  We currently > drive a Toyota RAV4, but its a little tight with all our camping gear > and the two dogs.  I’m looking for some info and advice on a couple > things.  First, I’d like some input on the handling/traction of the > 2-wheel drive Trailblazer in snow or slick conditions.  I’m concerned > about fishtailing as my wife will be the main driver and we live in > the wintry northeast.  I’m not sure if I want to spend the extra $$$ > to go for the 4-wheel drive.  Also, Chevy offers traction control on > the 2-wheel drive model for 2003.  Does anyone have experience with > that??  Does it prevent fishtailing? > I am also concerned with "real-world" fuel economy (not those > theoretical EPA figures).  Please let me know what kind of average > mpgs your getting and if you’ve got 4-wheel or 2-wheel drive. > I appreciate any advice you all can offer.  Hopefully, I’ll be able to > return the favor some day after we’ve made an intelligent decision on > an SUV. > J&S

If economy and cost are primary concern an SUV is a waste of money. A minivan would better suit your needs. Most are also in either FWD or AWD configuration and will handle far better in New England winter weather than a RWD vehicle. Vans also have far more cargo capacity than your typical SUV; the downfall will be having to limit the stuff you bring on trips to what you can carry, not what you can pack into the gaping maw of a minivan. Do not buy a 2WD SUV; the depreciation will soak you badly. -TW In the land where you buy your vehicle for your needs, not to be cool.

Response:

[snippage] >My wife and I are looking at mid-size SUV vehicles >I’m looking for some info and advice on a couple >things.  First, I’d like some input on the handling/traction of the >2-wheel drive Trailblazer in snow or slick conditions. >I’m not sure if I want to spend the extra $$$ >to go for the 4-wheel drive.  Also, Chevy offers traction control on >the 2-wheel drive model for 2003.  Does anyone have experience with >that??  Does it prevent fishtailing?

John, I just sold my 2000 Grand Cherokee and bought a ‘03 TrailBlazer (4×4) a month ago. My daughter-in-law has an ‘02 2WD TrailBlazer. First, as an earlier poster already mentioned, the 2WD will be a major liability at resale. (I too learned this the hard way with a ‘75 C5.) Assuming you’re going to finance it, you might find the additional cost for 4×4 isn’t as hard on the monthly payment as you think, especially with 0% financing. (Around $35/mo more?) Secondly, my comparison between the TB and JGC might interest you. The TrailBlazer has a much more powerful engine, a better shifting trans, a real frame, a better on-road ride, and is more comfortable than the JGC. (The Jeep’s excessively wide trans tunnel makes for a small and offset footbox, and is a major problem for my feet and legs.) However, the Jeep has far better steering, far better stereo, and, (believe it or not), far better quality. The Trailblazer is a major disappointment in the quality dept. Frankly, if I could do it again, I wouldn’t. Since the earlier poster also made mention of axle ratios: I have the std 3.42 gears, and since I do a lot of x-way driving, I’m happy with them. If you’re interested in installing oversize tires or need to do some meaningful towing, I would drop down to a 3.73 If you still decide on a 2wd TrailBlazer, I’d give you the same advise I gave my daughter-in-law… Get the optional limited slip differential. Here in my area, (1 hr N of Detroit), at least 1/2 the 2WDs on my local dealer lots are so equipped. Spike

Response:

I drive an Envoy, same chassis but a GMC. Some observations: 1) I’ve read good posts about the traction control. The feature works by braking a spinning wheel. If you get into deep snow, I doubt it will work. 2) Consider your resale value. I once owned a 2wd Blazer in snow country. Never Again. Nobody wanted it. I took a bath on trade-in 3) The triplets (Bravada, TrailBlazer, Envoy) are not known for gas mileage. I have gotten as high as 21 but average about 19 on highway at 70MPH. Around town sucks. 4) I bought the 3.42 rear-end to improve my mileage. That was a mistake. I have my foot so far into the throttle to get it moving I lose any gain the gear provides on highway speeds. 3.73 is a better choice. 5) Depending on the options you buy, consider one of the other brands also. I compared TrailBlazer and Envoy. The GMC was less expensive with more features. Hope this helps. They’re great cars but not perfect Paul P

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Thanks for reading my post. > My wife and I are looking at mid-size SUV vehicles for their extra > cargo capacity and the ability to carry our two dogs.  We currently > drive a Toyota RAV4, but its a little tight with all our camping gear > and the two dogs.  I’m looking for some info and advice on a couple > things.  First, I’d like some input on the handling/traction of the > 2-wheel drive Trailblazer in snow or slick conditions.  I’m concerned > about fishtailing as my wife will be the main driver and we live in > the wintry northeast.  I’m not sure if I want to spend the extra $$$ > to go for the 4-wheel drive.  Also, Chevy offers traction control on > the 2-wheel drive model for 2003.  Does anyone have experience with > that??  Does it prevent fishtailing? > I am also concerned with "real-world" fuel economy (not those > theoretical EPA figures).  Please let me know what kind of average > mpgs your getting and if you’ve got 4-wheel or 2-wheel drive. > I appreciate any advice you all can offer.  Hopefully, I’ll be able to > return the favor some day after we’ve made an intelligent decision on > an SUV. > J&S

Response:

Thanks for reading my post. My wife and I are looking at mid-size SUV vehicles for their extra cargo capacity and the ability to carry our two dogs.  We currently drive a Toyota RAV4, but its a little tight with all our camping gear and the two dogs.  I’m looking for some info and advice on a couple things.  First, I’d like some input on the handling/traction of the 2-wheel drive Trailblazer in snow or slick conditions.  I’m concerned about fishtailing as my wife will be the main driver and we live in the wintry northeast.  I’m not sure if I want to spend the extra $$$ to go for the 4-wheel drive.  Also, Chevy offers traction control on the 2-wheel drive model for 2003.  Does anyone have experience with that??  Does it prevent fishtailing? I am also concerned with "real-world" fuel economy (not those theoretical EPA figures).  Please let me know what kind of average mpgs your getting and if you’ve got 4-wheel or 2-wheel drive. I appreciate any advice you all can offer.  Hopefully, I’ll be able to return the favor some day after we’ve made an intelligent decision on an SUV. J&S

Response:

Exhaust Tip, Dual Outlet

Question:

I am looking for an outlet tip to replace the stock Butt-Ugly exhaust tip on my GMC Envoy. I’ve found the Corsa tips but they are a little too pricey for my liking. Does anyone know of other tips that could be mounted to this vehicle Thanks, Paul P

Response:

> I am looking for an outlet tip to replace the stock Butt-Ugly exhaust tip on > my GMC Envoy. > I’ve found the Corsa tips but they are a little too pricey for my liking. > Does anyone know of other tips that could be mounted to this vehicle > Thanks, > Paul P

Paul, Pretty much any tip with the same ID as the OD of your pipe will work. There are a bajillion on the market. Doc

Response:

Summit Racing

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I am looking for an outlet tip to replace the stock Butt-Ugly exhaust tip on > my GMC Envoy. > I’ve found the Corsa tips but they are a little too pricey for my liking. > Does anyone know of other tips that could be mounted to this vehicle > Thanks, > Paul P

Response:

Diagnostics on 2003 Envoy?

Question:

I don’t think they have any features like that, you need a scan tool. It’s rather silly they don’t, especially on vehicles with a display that would be perfectly good for showing such things.. — Robert Hancock      Saskatoon, SK, Canada Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Yeah, I was referring to on-board diags that would display in the DIC.   I > thought you could do it on the new Envoy too. > My ‘91 Olds had great on-board diags that you got into by holding the "off" > and "warm" buttons on the climate control.   It was really helpful. > Thanks anyway. > Actually for COMPLETE diagnostics you’d need a Vetronix Tech 2 like the GM > dealerships use. An OBD II scan tool would give you generic OBD II codes > and > parameters for engine and transmission only. > As far as built-in diagnostics on the Envoy, I am not aware of any. I > assume > that you’re referring to something that could read out codes through the > driver information center, instrument cluster, HVAC control head, or > similar? > Roger > > For complete diagnostics you need an OBD11 scanner. > > > Anyone know how to enter diagnostics on the 2003 Envoy? > > —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– > > http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > > —–==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

Actually for COMPLETE diagnostics you’d need a Vetronix Tech 2 like the GM dealerships use. An OBD II scan tool would give you generic OBD II codes and parameters for engine and transmission only. As far as built-in diagnostics on the Envoy, I am not aware of any. I assume that you’re referring to something that could read out codes through the driver information center, instrument cluster, HVAC control head, or similar? Roger – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> For complete diagnostics you need an OBD11 scanner. > Anyone know how to enter diagnostics on the 2003 Envoy? > —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– > http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > —–==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

Yeah, I was referring to on-board diags that would display in the DIC.   I thought you could do it on the new Envoy too. My ‘91 Olds had great on-board diags that you got into by holding the "off" and "warm" buttons on the climate control.   It was really helpful. Thanks anyway. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Actually for COMPLETE diagnostics you’d need a Vetronix Tech 2 like the GM > dealerships use. An OBD II scan tool would give you generic OBD II codes and > parameters for engine and transmission only. > As far as built-in diagnostics on the Envoy, I am not aware of any. I assume > that you’re referring to something that could read out codes through the > driver information center, instrument cluster, HVAC control head, or > similar? > Roger > For complete diagnostics you need an OBD11 scanner. > > Anyone know how to enter diagnostics on the 2003 Envoy? > —–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– > http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! > —–==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

Anyone know how to enter diagnostics on the 2003 Envoy?

Response:

For complete diagnostics you need an OBD11 scanner.

> Anyone know how to enter diagnostics on the 2003 Envoy?

—–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

'95 Chev Tahoe ABS wheel speed sensors

Question:

Thanks to all – very useful information!

“Jacko” wrote: Problem is that they tell me that I need the complete hub with sensor for C$350+ !! They also did not clean sensor or check it’s ground, so it is possible sensor is OK. However, if I could get just the sensor then replacing it is no big deal, but I need to find a part number and source. You description of your problem may indicate what is currently a pretty common problem with the front wheel speed sensors on the GM trucks. One of the wheel speeds sensor signals drops out at a low speed and you get ABS activation even when you aren’t on a slippery surface. No ABS lights appear. There is a TSB on this problem. I’ll include the body of it below…perhaps this will fix your problem. Note that it may fix it without replacing the sensor..which obviously is good for the old wallet. Antilock Brake (ABS) Activation At Low Speeds (Clean Wheel Speed Sensor Mounting Surface) #02-05-25-006A – (11/26/2002) Antilock Brake (ABS) Activation At Low Speeds (Clean Wheel Speed Sensor Mounting Surface) 1999-2000 Cadillac Escalade 1995-1999 Chevrolet Silverado (Old Style) 1995-2000 Chevrolet Suburban, Tahoe (Old Style) 1995-2003 Chevrolet Astro Van, Blazer, S10 1995-1999 GMC Sierra (Old Style) 1995-2000 GMC Yukon, Yukon XL (Old Style) 1995-2001 GMC Envoy, Jimmy 1995-2003 GMC Safari Van, Sonoma 1995-2001 Oldsmobile Bravada This bulletin is being revised to change model information. Please discard Corporate Bulletin Number 02-05-25-006 (Section 05 — Brakes). Condition Some customers may comment on ABS activation at low speeds, usually below 8 km/h (5 mph). Upon investigation, the technician will find no DTCs set. Cause The cause of this condition may be an increased air gap between the wheel speed sensor and the hub reluctor ring due to rust and debris built up on the sensor mounting surface. Correction Measure AC voltage and clean wheel speed sensor mounting surfaces. 1.. Raise the vehicle on a hoist. 2.. Disconnect both the front wheel speed sensor harness connectors. 3.. Place a DVM across the terminals of each sensor connector. 4.. Rotate the wheel with hand speed and measure the ACmV’s. The reading should be at least 350 ACmV’s. 5.. If the reading is between 200 and 350 ACmV’s, remove the wheel, caliper and rotor in order to gain access to the speed sensor. 6.. Remove the wheel speed sensor and plug the hole to prevent debris from falling into the hub during service. 7.. Clean the speed sensor mounting surface on the hub to remove rust and corrosion. Important Make sure that the sensor sits flat on the hub. If the sensor flange is distorted, replace the sensor. 8.. Apply a thin layer of bearing grease to the hub surface prior to sensor installation. 9.. Install either the original sensor or a new one in the hub and secure the sensor. Ensure that the sensor is seated flush against the hub. 10.. Install the rotor, the caliper and the wheel. 11.. Place the DVM across the sensor terminals and recheck the voltage while rotating the wheel by hand. The voltage should now read at least 350 ACmV’s. Ian

Response:

I found this link on the Web on how to fix Wheel Speed Sensors :) http://www.careersnet.org/automotive/Vale%20HS/auto%20info/Auntie%20L… rama.ppt Jack O

Not offhand, no. Were you getting a message from the ABS control module that this particular sensor was shot? No – There was no message that I noticed – Maybe a light that I did not recognise, but not sure. Indication was fast pulsing when brake pedal was lightly applied – went away if brakes were put on hard. Dealer checked it and found that one sensor appeared faulty – however, I have checked it and sensor shows a resistance. Jack O

Response:

It’s a Halleffect device, therefore no resistance. There is a semiconductor in there. Yes, the part is available and yes it can be replaced. You’d be pretty screwed if they made em’ so they couldn’t be fixed! I took the old sensor out – I checked for open circuit, but there is resistance there – Anyone know what the resistance of the wheel sensor should be (‘95 Chev Tahoe 4×4)? Jack O

Response:

Oh I forgot to add that there is a resistor there, but just for the ECM or PCM to see that there is an electrical connection to the sensor.

It’s a Halleffect device, therefore no resistance. There is a semiconductor in there. Yes, the part is available and yes it can be replaced. You’d be pretty screwed if they made em’ so they couldn’t be fixed! I took the old sensor out – I checked for open circuit, but there is resistance there – Anyone know what the resistance of the wheel sensor should be (‘95 Chev Tahoe 4×4)? Jack O

Response:

Not offhand, no. Were you getting a message from the ABS control module that this particular sensor was shot? No – There was no message that I noticed – Maybe a light that I did not recognise, but not sure. Indication was fast pulsing when brake pedal was lightly applied – went away if brakes were put on hard. Dealer checked it and found that one sensor appeared faulty – however, I have checked it and sensor shows a resistance. Jack O

Jack, The majority of sensors show resistance, that’s the way most of them Anywho, if the dealer ran a diagnostic scan on it and found the sensor to be bad, put your DMM away and just replace it. Regards, Doc

Response:

“”Doc”" wrote Jack, The majority of sensors show resistance, that’s the way most of them Anywho, if the dealer ran a diagnostic scan on it and found the sensor to be bad, put your DMM away and just replace it.

Problem is that they tell me that I need the complete hub with sensor for C$350+ !! They also did not clean sensor or check it’s ground, so it is possible sensor is OK. However, if I could get just the sensor then replacing it is no big deal, but I need to find a part number and source.

Response:

“”Doc”" wrote Jack, The majority of sensors show resistance, that’s the way most of them measuring. Anywho, if the dealer ran a diagnostic scan on it and found the sensor to be bad, put your DMM away and just replace it. Problem is that they tell me that I need the complete hub with sensor for C$350+ !! They also did not clean sensor or check it’s ground, so it is possible sensor is OK. However, if I could get just the sensor then replacing it is no big deal, but I need to find a part number and source.

Ouch! Try www.gmpartsdirect.com Regards, Doc

Response:

“Jacko” wrote: Problem is that they tell me that I need the complete hub with sensor for C$350+ !! They also did not clean sensor or check it’s ground, so it is possible sensor is OK. However, if I could get just the sensor then replacing it is no big deal, but I need to find a part number and source.

Your description of your problem may indicate what is currently a pretty common problem with the front wheel speed sensors on the GM trucks. One of the wheel speeds sensor signals drops out at a low speed and you get ABS activation even when you aren’t on a slippery surface. No ABS lights appear. There is a TSB on this problem. I’ll include the body of it below…perhaps this will fix your problem. Note that it may fix it without replacing the sensor..which obviously is good for the old wallet. Antilock Brake (ABS) Activation At Low Speeds (Clean Wheel Speed Sensor Mounting Surface) #02-05-25-006A – (11/26/2002) Antilock Brake (ABS) Activation At Low Speeds (Clean Wheel Speed Sensor Mounting Surface) 1999-2000 Cadillac Escalade 1995-1999 Chevrolet Silverado (Old Style) 1995-2000 Chevrolet Suburban, Tahoe (Old Style) 1995-2003 Chevrolet Astro Van, Blazer, S10 1995-1999 GMC Sierra (Old Style) 1995-2000 GMC Yukon, Yukon XL (Old Style) 1995-2001 GMC Envoy, Jimmy 1995-2003 GMC Safari Van, Sonoma 1995-2001 Oldsmobile Bravada This bulletin is being revised to change model information. Please discard Corporate Bulletin Number 02-05-25-006 (Section 05 — Brakes). Condition Some customers may comment on ABS activation at low speeds, usually below 8 km/h (5 mph). Upon investigation, the technician will find no DTCs set. Cause The cause of this condition may be an increased air gap between the wheel speed sensor and the hub reluctor ring due to rust and debris built up on the sensor mounting surface. Correction Measure AC voltage and clean wheel speed sensor mounting surfaces. 1.. Raise the vehicle on a hoist. 2.. Disconnect both the front wheel speed sensor harness connectors. 3.. Place a DVM across the terminals of each sensor connector. 4.. Rotate the wheel with hand speed and measure the ACmV’s. The reading should be at least 350 ACmV’s. 5.. If the reading is between 200 and 350 ACmV’s, remove the wheel, caliper and rotor in order to gain access to the speed sensor. 6.. Remove the wheel speed sensor and plug the hole to prevent debris from falling into the hub during service. 7.. Clean the speed sensor mounting surface on the hub to remove rust and corrosion. Important Make sure that the sensor sits flat on the hub. If the sensor flange is distorted, replace the sensor. 8.. Apply a thin layer of bearing grease to the hub surface prior to sensor installation. 9.. Install either the original sensor or a new one in the hub and secure the sensor. Ensure that the sensor is seated flush against the hub. 10.. Install the rotor, the caliper and the wheel. 11.. Place the DVM across the sensor terminals and recheck the voltage while rotating the wheel by hand. The voltage should now read at least 350 ACmV’s. Ian

Response:

Yes, the part is available and yes it can be replaced. You’d be pretty screwed if they made em’ so they couldn’t be fixed! I took the old sensor out – I checked for open circuit, but there is resistance there – Anyone know what the resistance of the wheel sensor should be (‘95 Chev Tahoe 4×4)? Jack O

Not offhand, no. Were you getting a message from the ABS control module that this particular sensor was shot? Regards, Doc

Response:

Not offhand, no. Were you getting a message from the ABS control module that this particular sensor was shot?

No – There was no message that I noticed – Maybe a light that I did not recognise, but not sure. Indication was fast pulsing when brake pedal was lightly applied – went away if brakes were put on hard. Dealer checked it and found that one sensor appeared faulty – however, I have checked it and sensor shows a resistance. Jack O

Response:

Does anyone know if it is possible to change one of the front wheel ABS speed sensors on a ‘95 Chev Tahoe 4X4? Is this part available from GM? Jack O

Response:

Does anyone know if it is possible to change one of the front wheel ABS speed sensors on a ‘95 Chev Tahoe 4X4? Is this part available from GM? Jack O

Yes, the part is available and yes it can be replaced. You’d be pretty screwed if they made em’ so they couldn’t be fixed! g Doc

Response:

Does anyone know if it is possible to change one of the front wheel ABS speed sensors on a ‘95 Chev Tahoe 4X4? Is this part available from GM? Jack O Yes, the part is available and yes it can be replaced. You’d be pretty screwed if they made em’ so they couldn’t be fixed! g

Doc, Do have a part number or some other reference? I was told that I had to buy the complete wheelhub – Cost about C$350! Jack O

Response:

Yes, the part is available and yes it can be replaced. You’d be pretty screwed if they made em’ so they couldn’t be fixed!

I took the old sensor out – I checked for open circuit, but there is resistance there – Anyone know what the resistance of the wheel sensor should be (‘95 Chev Tahoe 4×4)? Jack O

Response: