GM: Possible pitfalls could derail rebound

Page 2 of 6  
Mike Marlow wrote:


well, let's be honest here, a Corrado was unreliable from the start. It's not a typical "import" it's practically an "affordable" exotic. The experimental, not-ready-for-prime-time supercharger that needs rebuilt every 80K miles or less is just the tip of the iceberg.

Then why all the stories about intake gaskets etc? I've never had to replace any engine gasket on any VW (except for the oil pan gasket on the Corrado when I did the rod bearings.) And I've never heard of any "typical" problem that results in oil/coolant mixing as a matter of course on any VW. (they did have an oil/water oil cooler on some performance models that supposedly could allow this to happen, but I've never heard of any failing without a lot of miles and/or neglect.)

It still has that typical German car thing where it's always worth fixing - the basic mechanicals just keep going and going, everything is rebuildable (yeah, for a price) even though it's the cheap ass ghetto Porsche I can't imagine ever saying "man, my car's 20 years old... I better get a new one before this one leaves me stranded."

Well, to be fair, most of the problems I have with the car are ergonomic, so they're not going to be counted as "defects." It still makes me hate the car with a passion, however. Only 7K more miles to go until I can get something different!
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The intake gasket debacle only applies to the 3.1L and 3.4L engines. GM has produced more than just those two engines over the years. It does represent one of the greater disappointments from GM in that they had many years to make good on that design and instead foisted it on the public for way too long.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
If one does a search they will discover, gasket problems like, the previous pealing paint problems, were caused by the US government, not by any of the domestic or import vehicle manufactures, or the gasket and paint manufactures that made the paint or gaskets.
The government in its infinite wisdom chose to ban the use of asbestos and certain paint processes on dates certain, without allowing the gasket and paint manufactures sufficient time to develop suitable replacement materials with field testing. The result was the buyers were left to do the field tests in the vehicles they purchased. The result was buyers blamed the manufactures that use two of the four gasket material that were not up to the task. Those that used the one that failed early on were covered by the vehicle, manufactures warranty but those that used the other mater that failed around 70K had to wait until Ford litigation with the gasket manufactures was settled out of court to get relief.
Unfortunately many still blame the vehicle manufactures, not the environuts for those problems because the vehicles they bought were NOT made in the US and were still using asbestose

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

FORD didn't have the problem. Chrysler didn't have the problem.
And GM let the problem drag on for....... HOW MANY YEARS ?
So much for GM engineering/manufacturing expertise.
And GM owners are STILL being screwed by the failed manifold gasket problem !
<rj>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You obviously did not do a search, since you don't know what you are talking about.. Ford did indeed have a "problem" as well as all the others that made cars in the US, Chrysler Toyota and Honda. It was Ford, who started the litigation against the gasket manufacturers that led to the out of court settlement and the resulting extended warranties by GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota and Honda for gasket related problems. LOL


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

And that sir, is what turned me from being a died in the wool GM bigot after 35 years of owning GM vehicles. The manner in which GM continued to foist their design flaws on the consumer just got to be unacceptable.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You just don't get it do you? It was not a design flaw. I was a material failure. According to the out of court settlement with Ford the gasket manufacturers agreed the failure of gaskets, after asbestos was removed, was a result of the gasket manufactures not meeting the design specs of the gasket made for the various vehicle manufactures.
The resulting settlement led to extended warranties being issued by the various manufactures including GM, by which the gasket manufactures would pay 80% of the cost and the vehicle manufacturer 20% of the cost of repairs directly relate to gasket failures including engine failures. If for some reason your particular vehicle was not repaired it would have to be that it was beyond the 100K, ten year, extension of the warranty.
If you owned one of the Toyota or other maufacturers vehicle on which the gasket had failed you would now be mad a Toyota etc. for the wrong reason just as you are mad a GM for the wrong reason. The person you should be pissed off at is your Congressmen who voted to ban asbestos, on a date certain, rather than allowing the gasket manufactures time to field test the alternative materials. ;)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're the one who does not get it Mike. When the problems first surfaced, they were a materials problem. Over 10 years later, when GM continues to have the same problem for lack of a design improvement, it's a design flaw.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You appear to be a bit slow but you certainly are entitled to your own opinion however your information is not correct. The basic design of gaskets has been the same for years. Except for configuring a gasket for individual application the basic way to build the gasket has not changed in years, the only thing that has changed is the material used in gaskets. If you doubt that take a look at the head gasket on a prewar car. The head gaskets that failed did not have a change in the way they were built, the "design" as you call it did not change and the specifications did not change before asbestos or after asbestos when the were made with alternate materials.. The same gasket worked fine with asbestos and two of the four material used after asbestos was ban, did not work, it's that simple. The vehicle manufactures had no control over the material the gasket manufacturer used to meet their specs. If you still do not understand that's your problem

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mike - you have continued to demonstrate your ignorance on this point for months now. The gasket issue at hand is not a head gasket issue. It's not an asbestos issue. It's the issue with the intake manifold gaskets. The aftermarket succeeded in supplying a superior gasket, while GM was still shoving the same old stock into their 3.1's and 3.4's. They had over a decade to make good on that particular problem and simply did not. Take your repeated carping of the same old tired line - which is irrelevant by the way, and tell it to the wall.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ya right LOL

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Perfect. Can't deal with the facts, can you Mike? No problem - as one prolifically rhetorical poster is known to say - you're entitled to your opinion.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ya right LOL

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Duh you continue to demonstrate you don't know what you are talking about, a gasket, is a gasket and my reference has been to gaskets of all types and the MATERIALS used in their construction. I previously referred to some worked and some did not, dummy
contrary to what you choose to believe GM had a recall on the intake manifolds as well, if your vehicle did not qualify because of mileage of age that your problem.
Newer intake manifolds do not requires the heat resistance of the gaskets of old. Intake manifolds today contain air, not the fuel mix that needed to be kept heated when engines used carburetors. Why any sensible person would judge how all the renditions of a vehicle of a particular brand, albeit it good or bad, by one that they may have owned is somewhat foolish at best, in any event. Why are you always disparaging GM in a GM NG if you no longer buy GM products, is the better question one might ask LOL

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Mike - your repeated attempts to sound informed on this are an utter failure. GM did not experience head gasket failures. If this were a materials problem of the sort you keep babbling about, they would have. But - they did not. They experienced intake gasket problems because they continued to use the same gasket desing for over 10 years despite the near 100% failure rate of these gaskets. It is not a materials problem.

I might not be informed on the matter of a recall but I do not remember any recall on the 3.1 and 3.4 for intake gaskets. Please provide proof of this statement. These manifold gaskets failed anywhere from 20,000 miles on up, and GM did not universally stand behind them. At best, owners with 40,000 miles were sometimes fortunate enough to get a Goodwill contribution out of GM, but even that was not a warranty - did not cover the costs, and was dependent upon the dealer persuading GM to do so.

What do you call newer? This was a problem throughout the life of the 60 degree engine. It most certainly was true of the newer engines. 3.1 and 3.4 engines built right up to the end suffered this gasket failure.

Mike - you continue to throw out irrelevant points. Please do some research on the GM intake gasket problems. You'll make yourself look less foolish.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You keep presenting the same convaluted opinion. I'm not going to continue banter back and force with you over the same subject, you are free to believe whatever you choose. What you choose to believe is wrong. As I posted before, when I owned my fleet service business we submit many a claim to every manufacturer the made cars in the US for several years. They all were paid under warranty or extended warranties for defected gaskets and covered the claims we submitted. If you had a complaint and could not collect it has to be that you were outside the warranty or extended warranty time and mileage parameters. What I have presented are facts not opinions, if you want to continue to believe otherwise that up to you...

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You are even slower than I realized. Look up the definition of the word gasket and get back to us dummy. LOL

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If your reading comprehension wasn't so low you would see that GASKET MATERIALS is exactly what I WAS TALKING ABOUT. Is english not your fisrst language ??

Can you try it again in english, retard.

Well make up your mind, are you talking intakes or gaskets. Or are you so senile that you don't remember what you were talking about ? In your post, which I replied to, YOU were talking about gaskets. My reply was on the topic of gaskets. NOW, YOU are talking about intakes. Pay attention to your own posts, moron.

See above, the topic is GASKETS, not intakes. Pay attention to the subject, you are off topic again.
> Why any sensible person would

Jumping to conclusions again, Einstein ?? Or just pulling shit out of your ass, as usual ? I work on cars everyday, been doing it for about 25 years. When I make a comment on this gasket problem my comments come from hands on experience. Like you have been told by most people here before, GM has a gasket problem that has gone on now for ten years or so, that is a fact that you choose to ignore. The problem affects tens of thousand of vehicles, not just one, moron. So you see I am not judging things by one vehicle, eh Einstein. And on the engines affected by this gasket problem, EVERY SINGLE VEHICLE is affected, usually MULTIPLE TIMES. So for the customer this gets to be an EXPENSIVE REPEAT REPAIR.
> Why are you always disparaging GM in a GM NG
Show me were I am disparaging GM ! I am simply stating facts, you do now what facts are, don't you....... nevermind.

How did you jump to that conclusion ?
The better question would be why are you here defending GM, you're a Ford man. Every time someone mentions this GM gasket problem you come in here and try to cover it up like it didn't exist. In fact, you come in here to defend GM anytime someone posts about a large scale problem with a GM vehicle. You make yourself look like a fool because everyone here knows these are real problems. If you don't like what GM related info gets posted in a GM newsgroup you can always go to the Ford newsgroup.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.