Some 2016 GM models cut powertrain warranty from 100K to 60K miles

[Tiki]

Never owned a GM with less than 60K miles 12 years, 5 different GMs, less than $1500 in maintenance. But I digress..

 

[07Burb]

Never owned a GM with less than 60K miles 12 years, 5 different GMs, less than $1500 in maintenance. But I digress..

my thoughts too. 156k on the burb, 167k on the '98 and maintenance costs are pretty minimal mostly. Have bad the burb for almost 5 years (50k miles) and only one significant issue since that time which cost about $1500 to get right again. Other than that just routine oil changes and rocking it.

 

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

The 5 year/100K was never an issue for me for a coupla reasons... 1) I very seldom keep a car past 3 years.. and 2) if I did keep it past 3 years it was a car that I didn't drive enough to ever hit the 100K miles anyway.. thus I was wasting miles on one and years on another. In terms of powertrain I think that 5/60 is the norm.. and the 100K most likely has done little to sell cars.

Will this get them off the hook past 60K??? Well yeah. But isn't that fair since no other manufacturer of its size or even 5 below offer anything similar.

Interesting thing is that some manufacturers need it.. and they should KEEP the 100K thing. GM is consistently rated in the top of dependability studies with most issues having more to do with customer error in using certain new technologies than anything else. Cadillac for instance lost points due to CUE. I hardly see it as a dependability issue, but some will automatically see it as a device that doesn't work.. because they don't kno how to operate it


Seriously I personally don't kno anyone who feels as tho GM vehicles need a 100,000 mile warranty and Ford, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, BMW etc don't. I always thought that having a 100K warranty could be construed to the world that "we have inferior quality, thus we need this guarantee." As it stands most of GM's divisional dependability has been doing well on the charts for several years. Why should they be offering a warranty any more disadvantaged for them than Toyota who is about equal in some regards in problems per car or BMW who is far above them in terms of issues. Looking at these charts, yeah.. there is a certain unnamed two manufactures that absolutely NEED to give their customers a few thousand more over 100K

---------- Post added at 10:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:05 PM ----------

and I can't believe that someone here is considering a Range Rover over a Yukon.. even if that Yukon.. twice over... gave them an issue. Again.. had mine since July.. no issues.

 

[motorwerks]

While the Yukon is a nice vehicle, go and sit inside a new Range Rover. Look CAREFULLY at all of the fit and finish, panel gaps, paint finish, materials, headliner, etc. They're perfect. Then drive the RR...it's raw silence...like silk.

Look carefully at the paint finish of the GM trucks...they're quite ****** in comparison. Runs, dirt, orange peel, etc.

Admittedly, the RR is an order of magnitude nicer than any GM item. However, look at the price! They're 50% more.

 

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

While the Yukon is a nice vehicle, go and sit inside a new Range Rover. Look CAREFULLY at all of the fit and finish, panel gaps, paint finish, materials, headliner, etc. They're perfect. Then drive the RR...it's raw silence...like silk.

Look carefully at the paint finish of the GM trucks...they're quite ****** in comparison. Runs, dirt, orange peel, etc.

Admittedly, the RR is an order of magnitude nicer than any GM item. However, look at the price! They're 50% more.

Yes the Range Rover is nice.. especially when compared to a Yukon or Tahoe, but I can't say the same when U bring in the Escalade. Not to mention at even 20-30% more than the Cadillac I simply do not see them as worth it after experiencing (via GF) all the issues that plague the vehicle overall. RRovers have been known to have serious tranny/engine issues. Electrical problems... leave U stranded kinda stuff. I don;t see that as luxury.

Their is a poster who had issue with two Yukons that gave an audible sound that cause him headaches. One built in June 2014, and the other built in November of 2014. GM was obviously aware of the issue and put out service bulletins to address the issue. My vehicle was built in May of 2014 and outside of the roof rack rattling and me having to simply put rubber in between the rails and the brace, as opposed to taking into the dealer.. my truck has been mostly without issue... OH.. I did have to get my wheels balanced.

 

[krzyd]

I've probably owned about 20 different GM vehicles, mostly trucks/suv's. All of those vehicles had in excess of 150k miles before I got rid of them, I've yet to lose an engine, and I've lost one transmission at 30k on a truck. That's a pretty good track record as far as I'm concerned.

 

[OR VietVet]

At 62 years of age I have owned nothing but GM products and Harleys my whole life, mostly new, except for a Toyota 4runner for about 6 months and I owned a Ford truck one time that I bought new on the Ford employee plan, brother works for Ford.

Only one trans failure in a 79 Chevy truck and never a blown motor. I was in the automotive/light truck repair industry for 35 years. I took care of all the maintenance and most repairs myself. I never over worked myself doing that. If I buy new I buy the General. If I buy used I buy the General. Being on the right forums sure helps with pattern problems.

I can't say owning GM has ever been a problem where I would buy something else.

 

[guy from norcal]

This only solidifies the issues with GM as a whole. My next new vehicle will not be made by GM. I'm out.

x2 on that brother !

next suv is the Qx80

 

[fire1]

---------- Post added at 10:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:29 AM ----------

Love my ute, but I don't ever plan on owning a GM product with more than 60K miles on it--they've just given me even less confidence in their product.

How did you level off the rear end and take away the rake? Thanks.. Jim

 

[Lyon]

GM's claim is that the 100,000 mile warranty isn't a significant selling factor and it costs them money. Not only does it result in more warranty claims but it also requires them to account for more warranty reserve when computing income.

I'm not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing but it costs GM money to do it and they're not really seeing an increase in sales because of it. It makes sense for them to bring their warranties in line with other manufacturers. Also, having a longer warranty seems to be taken as something of an agreement with the perception of needing to allay fears of subpar quality. Despite the anecdotal evidence from a few folks here regarding one model, GM seems to be hitting the industry average for reliability.