# GM Axes 100,000 Powertrain Warranty



## Dvan5693 (Jul 8, 2014)

Not exactly the way to persuade buyers, especially after a year of recalls. Now some vehicles will have 5/60,000 and only two free scheduled maintenance visits. 

http://blog.caranddriver.com/wait-w...rain-warranties-just-got-40000-miles-shorter/


----------



## neile300c (Jul 8, 2014)

that's interesting... They kept the 5 years, but just lowered the mileage.


----------



## cruze2011white (Feb 2, 2011)

Probably also its been harder for dealerships to sell extend warranties and now they will have the opportunity.


----------



## UlyssesSG (Apr 5, 2011)

.
Bad juju. Cheapens the brand and suggests the powertrain isn't durable. Decontenting by any other name or method is still decontenting.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

When I bought my Pontiac Transport the warranty was 5 years/50,000 miles, but that was bumper to bumper. I had a bearing failure at 49,995 miles and it was covered. I think GM's bean counters have gotten too much power again, which is what brought down Pontiac and Saturn, and eventually contributed to GM's bankruptcy.


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

As UlyssesSG said, this move to me cheapens the brand and makes it look like Chevrolet powertrains aren't as reliable today as they were in 2007 when GM first moved to the 5/100k warranty.
Are they saying:


> Through research, we have determined that when purchasing a new vehicle, included maintenance and warranty rank low on the list of reasons why consumers consider a particular brand over another,” Chevrolet vice president Brian Sweeney and GMC vice president Duncan Aldred said in the memo. “As a result, we have benchmarked our competitors, reviewed our current offerings and have concluded the following modifications to align closely with our customers’ needs and expectations"


or are they saying:


> Through research, we have determined that we are paying way too much on powertrain warranty claims, and are reducing the warranty duration in order to save us money.


A recurring theme on we see on this forum is people dealing with dealership service departments that don't know how to properly fix issues as is. And now they want to reduce reduce the warranty as well? Sounds to me like _New_ GM is becoming more and more like the _Old_ GM every day.


----------



## blk88verde (Apr 30, 2011)

*For 2016 GM reduces Power Train Warranty to 60,000 miles for Chevy & GMC*

GM is revising the Power Train Warranty on 2016 Chevy's and GMC's - just saw this, here is the link: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-cut-chevy-gmc-powertrain-warranty-60-000-143947688--finance.html


----------



## BowtieGuy (Jan 4, 2013)

Apparently a big issue today.

http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/9-ge...-100-000-powertrain-warranty.html#post1738737


----------



## blk88verde (Apr 30, 2011)

> Bad juju. Cheapens the brand and suggests the powertrain isn't durable. Decontenting by any other name or method is still decontenting. :frown:


 Yeah, agree. However others like Honda only have a 3yr/36,000 power train warranty and this does not seem to affect sales.


----------



## Eddy Cruze (Jan 10, 2014)

I remember my Turbo Dodge Plymouth 86 Mitsubishi Colt only came with a 2 Year-24K warranty. If you plan on keeping your G.M. unit the GMPP will be the way to go although I'm sure the price will rise. Not a classy move from G.M.?


----------



## carbon02 (Feb 25, 2011)

blk88verde said:


> Bad juju. Cheapens the brand and suggests the powertrain isn't durable. Decontenting by any other name or method is still decontenting.Yeah, agree.
> 
> However others like Honda only have a 3yr/36,000 power train warranty and this does not seem to affect sales.


I agree looks like cheapening of the brand. Rather than stating that warranty term and services aren't important evaluation factors to customers, they should have mentioned something about XX% of customers do not exceed the 5 year/60K, and based on market research most manufacturers outside of Hyundai are at or below the 5 year/60K right?

I was really considering a Nissan Altima as a second car. The 2010 Altima has been flawless, no smells, noises, or leaks.. That car has a transmission warranty of 10+ years and 100,000+ miles. I now noticed that they are only 5 year /60K. 

I wonder if the new GM philosophy is to have extended failure warranties (Like our water pump warranty, battery cable, ect.) instead of having the entire powertrain covered? 


As for the service visits, I'm not sure they have much of a value. $40 per visit for a gas engine and you can get an oil change and rotation. (Ok maybe you need a GM service coupon, but they are easy to find.)

GM still doesn't have the old reputation of quality that some of the import brands have. (If this perceived quality is still there in todays vehicles I don't know.) 

I think new vehicle sales are at a high right now. They take it away for potential profits, possibly to add it back latter.. Who knows.. 

The public impression of the Cruze long term reliability seems less than average, based on the public online reviews I've read. 

GM is trying to implement new technology in their vehicles, which I like. I couldn't believe the latest version Altima family still uses the 2.5L dinosaur era engine mounted to the same old CVT with a different program. Maybe that's a good thing, but then I guess I'll buy a used one, as essentially their big model redesign was essentially like a 2015 bumper on a Cruze. 

Time will tell how this warranty effects sales.


----------



## blk88verde (Apr 30, 2011)

The Premium Brands (Cadillac and Buick) keep the 100k miles warranty. The same 2.0 Turbo is in the Malibu, the Regal and the ATS. GM is looking to differentiate the Premium from the Standard (cheaper) brands.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

I'm sorry, if my car didn't have the warranty it did, I would probably be driving a fusion and if I were buying a 2015+ I would've bought Mazda because they have 5 yr unlimited mileage. 

Gm is definitely going in the wrong direction, they need to start offering unlimited mileage warranties or people will start buying other brands. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## 14rs (Feb 19, 2015)

I've bought a new GM vehicle every two years for the last 6, part of that is obviously I am a fan of their products but the longer warranty was always a factor as well. I will be seriously considering a competitors product if this warranty changes, funny how not long ago they ran all those advertisements claiming the competitions warranty was junk and yet here they go doing the same! I just sent an email to GM and I suggest everybody else do the same let them know this affects us customers and maybe they will pull their heads out of their asses!!


----------



## brian v (Dec 25, 2011)

Why would they ( GM ) Pull they're Heads out of they're asses ?

That's where all the Money is .. LOL.

Am I speaking to the wrong crowd ? Maybe I am . Dependant upon if you's guys have ever changed a transmission out or not . resealed Main seals or not . swapped motors out with in 45 minute time period .

Shoot if me IT needs a part I'll find IT a new Part and swap IT out ..in 60.000 miles Ill swap out the timing belt maybe sooner . with 31.000 miles Nick can tell me with these cold ambient air temps IT's hard as a rock .. whom knows whom cares ..

Speculations with out a clue are purely speculations and create even more Rhetoric ..

Whom here now takes they're vehichle to be repaired to a dealership after the warranty period runs out ?


----------



## ChevyMgr (Oct 27, 2010)

money_man said:


> I'm sorry, if my car didn't have the warranty it did, I would probably be driving a fusion and if I were buying a 2015+ I would've bought Mazda because they have 5 yr unlimited mileage.
> 
> Gm is definitely going in the wrong direction, they need to start offering unlimited mileage warranties or people will start buying other brands.
> 
> ...


I have not heard or read that Mazda has 5 year unlimited mile warranty. My neighbors 2015 Mazda6 only has 5/60K powertrain, which is what GM is now offering on 2016 Chevys.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

I'm trying to post this **** image but it keeps saying to big. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

Found a link instead. 

http://www.mazdaunlimited.ca/


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## ChevyMgr (Oct 27, 2010)

I'm sure GM will be lowering the sticker price on all 2016's to compensate for this tragic loss of 40,000 miles of warranty and two oil changes.


----------



## ChevyMgr (Oct 27, 2010)

money_man said:


> Found a link instead.
> 
> Mazda Unlimited | Warranty Program | Mazda Canada
> 
> ...


Oh, I'm in Texas, this is for Canada.


----------



## UlyssesSG (Apr 5, 2011)

*Automotive News*

.
Automotive News P.M. Newscast:
_*Why GM's Reducing Warranty*_
GM move warranted? Readers react.


click image to see podcast​


----------



## NickD (Dec 10, 2011)

Assume our 100K mile warranty is still good. Rate I am driving this thing, would be lucky to hit 50K miles in the next 21 months.

But something to think about before buying another. Kia is greatly improved, 60K bumper to bumper, GM should copy them.


----------



## UlyssesSG (Apr 5, 2011)

money_man said:


> I'm trying to post this **** image but it keeps saying to big.
> 
> Sent from the sexy electrician



click image to enlarge​


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

blk88verde said:


> However others like Honda only have a 3yr/36,000 power train warranty and this does not seem to affect sales.


Yah-but - Honda is perceived as being reliable. As in, you don't need a warranty. I don't think the public has that same perception for Chevy.

Or as my mother would have said "If I need your extended warranty, then I don't want to buy it!"

I have a feeling that for many new car buyers, they don't keep it long enough for the 5/100K to be much of a factor. At best, it's resell value. But if it's a trade-in, then even that doesn't matter as much since they're not the ones trying to pitch the next buyer.

As for "We will reinvest the savings we will realize into other retail programs that our customers have told us they value more than these.” Uh, OK. Like what? Tell us, and maybe we'll buy their line. Lowering the price so you could get a higher trim model for the same price would probably do it. Or stocking it with options. Yes, I do think there are productive places they could put the savings, but without saying what, it just sounds like so much hot air. All the public sees is "take" with no "give". Bad move.


----------



## Dvan5693 (Jul 8, 2014)

Eddy Cruze said:


> I remember my Turbo Dodge Plymouth 86 Mitsubishi Colt only came with a 2 Year-24K warranty. If you plan on keeping your G.M. unit the GMPP will be the way to go although I'm sure the price will rise. Not a classy move from G.M.?


Maybe even cheapen it? One can hope. 



blk88verde said:


> The Premium Brands (Cadillac and Buick) keep the 100k miles warranty. The same 2.0 Turbo is in the Malibu, the Regal and the ATS. GM is looking to differentiate the Premium from the Standard (cheaper) brands.


Cadillac nor Buick have a 5 year 100k Warranty. They both posses a 6 year/70k Warranty. 



UlyssesSG said:


> click image to enlarge​


Wonder why this isn't available in the US?


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Dvan5693 said:


> Wonder why this isn't available in the US?


What country is it offered in? The "problem" with the US is it's so fregging BIG. We can rack up a ton of miles. If you're playing Vegas odds makers (and that's what a warranty/insurance policy is), it messes things up.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

It's here in Canada. And the mazda's are flying off the shelves because of it as well. I have two friends who just bought mazda 3's because of it in the last 2 months. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## bowtieblue (May 26, 2014)

This doesn't really bother me as I’ve never kept a new car longer than 60K miles anyway. They’re at least staying competitive with Ford, Honda, Mazda, Toyota, and others. Some brands don't even go to 60K. Longer standard warranties don't necessarily mean better quality or reliability; it's more of a marketing tool. If they can put the money to better use in other ways, I’m all for it. I'd be curious to know exactly what those "other ways" will be, though.


----------



## ChevyMgr (Oct 27, 2010)

bowtieblue said:


> I'd be curious to know exactly what those "other ways" will be, though.


Paying for recalls.


----------



## Vetterin (Mar 27, 2011)

As a stockholder and a personal friend of Mr. Wonderful, all I want is to "make more money" and if this helps bring money to the bottom line, I'm all in favor of it!


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

Kinda lame. It was definitely a selling point for me.

Of my 3 cars over 200,000 miles, actual powertrain issues were never something I had - the transmissions and engines all lasted the life of the cars. The rest of the car tends to fall apart around the powertrain. 

Then again, none were as complicated as cars are now, with sensors and electronics controlling every little thing under the hood. But those aren't covered under powertrain anyway.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

I was going to upgrade to a Sierra in 2017 but I'm on the fence now. I'll be waiting to see gm's next move. Would be nice if the price of their vehicles came down a bit. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## UlyssesSG (Apr 5, 2011)

money_man said:


> It's here in Canada. And the mazda's are flying off the shelves because of it as well. I have two friends who just bought mazda 3's because of it in the last 2 months.


Little wonder, the Mazda3 is an excellent car and offers an enjoyable _driver-centric_ motoring experience. The unlimited warranty is a bonus and says that Mazda Canada believes in the quality and durability of their product line. Others may think differently, but, for me, a vehicle's bumper-to-bumper and powertrain warranties do influence my purchase decisions.

click image for 5-door easter egg​


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

As much as I love GM and have always owned GM vehicles, this is actually a deal breaker for me. I will be considering other competitive options when it comes time for us to purchase a new vehicle. I was planning on getting a Canyon/Colorado next year, but if it doesn't have a 100k mile warranty, I guarantee you that I will be purchasing a Tacoma instead.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

jblackburn said:


> Then again, none were as complicated as cars are now, with sensors and electronics controlling every little thing under the hood. But those aren't covered under powertrain anyway.


Yeah, we could sure sure a IT (Information Technology) warranty.


----------



## UlyssesSG (Apr 5, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> As much as I love GM and have always owned GM vehicles, this is actually a deal breaker for me. I will be considering other competitive options when it comes time for us to purchase a new vehicle.


*Ditto here.
*


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

XtremeRevolution said:


> As much as I love GM and have always owned GM vehicles, this is actually a deal breaker for me. I will be considering other competitive options when it comes time for us to purchase a new vehicle. I was planning on getting a Canyon/Colorado next year, but if it doesn't have a 100k mile warranty, I guarantee you that I will be purchasing a Tacoma instead.



I'm with you on this one.... Lets say I was looking at a new cruze, focus, and corolla the only difference currently is the 100K warranty coverage GM offers over the others 60K. Without that difference I have one more reason to not choose the GM car.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

Yup, makes it an easy choice for me. Ford has a 120k km warranty


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

blk88verde said:


> Yeah, agree. However others like Honda only have a 3yr/36,000 power train warranty and this does not seem to affect sales.


Just to be clear, Current Generation Hondas have a 5 year/60,000 mile power train warranty. The 3 year/36,000 mile warranty is the B2B sort. And no, it doesn't affect sales, never has.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

spacedout said:


> I'm with you on this one.... Lets say I was looking at a new cruze, focus, and corolla the only difference currently is the 100K warranty coverage GM offers over the others 60K. Without that difference I have one more reason to not choose the GM car.


Yup. Part of the reason I choose my cruze over competitors. If the cruze didn't have this warranty I promise you I'd be in a focus st


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## Daisy81 (Jun 17, 2012)

No offense but stop needing the recalls if you want to save money. Don't cut the warranty to pay for the recalls. This had better be reversed or I will be rethinking my next vehicle purchase in the next few years.


----------



## Daisy81 (Jun 17, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> As much as I love GM and have always owned GM vehicles, this is actually a deal breaker for me. I will be considering other competitive options when it comes time for us to purchase a new vehicle. I was planning on getting a Canyon/Colorado next year, but if it doesn't have a 100k mile warranty, I guarantee you that I will be purchasing a Tacoma instead.


Don't buy a Toyota truck it's junk. The Silverado is very nice but in protest I would buy the Ford F-150 over the Tacoma.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

mods: how about a thread merge?


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> As much as I love GM and have always owned GM vehicles, this is actually a deal breaker for me. I will be considering other competitive options when it comes time for us to purchase a new vehicle. I was planning on getting a Canyon/Colorado next year, but if it doesn't have a 100k mile warranty, I guarantee you that I will be purchasing a Tacoma instead.


Tacoma:
Basic: 36 months/36,000 miles (all components other than normal wear and maintenance items).
Powertrain: 60 months/60,000 miles (engine, transmission/transaxle, drive system, seatbelts and airbags).

So Chevy is just matching it. And unless you average over 1,000 miles per month, the 100K doesn't make a difference.

So why are you saying that it will make you by a Toyota?


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

jblackburn said:


> Kinda lame. It was definitely a selling point for me.
> 
> Of my 3 cars over 200,000 miles, actual powertrain issues were never something I had - the transmissions and engines all lasted the life of the cars. The rest of the car tends to fall apart around the powertrain.
> 
> Then again, none were as complicated as cars are now, with sensors and electronics controlling every little thing under the hood. But those aren't covered under powertrain anyway.


eggsactly


----------



## bowtieblue (May 26, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> As much as I love GM and have always owned GM vehicles, this is actually a deal breaker for me. I will be considering other competitive options when it comes time for us to purchase a new vehicle. I was planning on getting a Canyon/Colorado next year, but if it doesn't have a 100k mile warranty, I guarantee you that I will be purchasing a Tacoma instead.


Just because it's no longer "standard" doesn't mean it's disappearing completely. I assume that an extended warranty will be available for those who still want the 100K mile coverage. The Canyon/Colorado could still be a better buy or choice.

I see this more as taking something that was standard and making it an option. Perhaps in doing so they will make the price of the vehicles cheaper so that people who don't use the warranty beyond 60K won't have to pay for it but those that do use it can still get it as an option.


----------



## UlyssesSG (Apr 5, 2011)

bowtieblue said:


> I see this more as taking something that was standard and making it an option. Perhaps in doing so they will make the price of the vehicles cheaper so that people who don't use the warranty beyond 60K won't have to pay for it but those that do use it can still get it as an option.


The naive optimist in me would like to believe this, but the pragmatist the world has forced me to become doesn't believe this is GM's motivation .. not for a second.


----------



## jsusanka (Jan 31, 2011)

I don't know it doesn't make a difference for me because I put less than 10,000 to 15,000 miles on our cars. Our 2007 Mazda hasn't been perfect either. The 2.3 Liter has had problems too. We have been bitten by the motor mount issue. The same right front motor mount has lasted four years and we are on our third one. They fought tooth and nail to try to not to cover it but fortunately it was in black and white on their powertrain warranty. The second time it failed we were outside the 5 years and I made a case with Mazda and they ended up covering it again. They actually did the right thing but if I didn't raise a stink about it we would of paid for it when they know they had a design problem with that mount. Why you have to fight to have it covered when they know themselves they had a problem with the mount is beyond me. Fess up to it and do what is right. Why do I have to open a case. 

This does seem to be a PR blunder though for GM. It just doesn't look very good at face value. I had the sensor leak on the water outlet of my cruze and had to pay for it because the sensor isn't covered even though it is in the water outlet. So again a manufacturer splitting hairs when they could of done the right thing and covered it since it was in the water outlet and that is in black and white in the powertrain warranty. I just hope I don't have to replace a sensor every four years. It isn't listed in the preventive maintenance as to it needing replacing every four years so really they should of covered it IMO. The sensor wasn't bad it was just leaking. I think they need to redesign the water outlet personally. Why they made that plastic and have so many lines meeting there is beyond me. It is obvious that is where a lot of the coolant smell comes from and I think using plastic there is just plain stupid.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

I think this issue is moot. I started buying new cars in 1977 and have driven every one of them over 100,000 miles. Not a single one has had any power train issues during our ownership. The only car that required power train warranty work was an '83 Civic with a weepy thermostat gasket about a month into ownership. Of course I'm ignoring the '86 Ford that had constant repairs during its short warranty period (12 months/12,000 miles), but that was a lemon and predated the Ohio Lemon Law. It had about 10,000 miles on the clock when I traded it in.


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

bowtieblue said:


> Just because it's no longer "standard" doesn't mean it's disappearing completely. I assume that an extended warranty will be available for those who still want the 100K mile coverage. The Canyon/Colorado could still be a better buy or choice.
> 
> I see this more as taking something that was standard and making it an option. Perhaps in doing so they will make the price of the vehicles cheaper so that people who don't use the warranty beyond 60K won't have to pay for it but those that do use it can still get it as an option.


yeah,

i checked out honda and toyota before i bought my cruze, didnt want to buy a honda or toyota cuz the dealer is 2hr rounder urther away and their warrantys were much less than the big 3, and the extended warranty pricing was too high to consider.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Daisy81 said:


> Don't buy a Toyota truck it's junk. The Silverado is very nice but in protest I would buy the Ford F-150 over the Tacoma.





ChevyGuy said:


> Tacoma:
> Basic: 36 months/36,000 miles (all components other than normal wear and maintenance items).
> Powertrain: 60 months/60,000 miles (engine, transmission/transaxle, drive system, seatbelts and airbags).
> 
> ...


Because I actually trust the Toyota. Let's be realistic. I love my cruze but the front shocks have been replaced twice because of a TSB, my valve cover got replaced, a water pump failure is guaranteed, people are losing bearings on the m32, there was a bad batch of pistons, my flywheel makes clunking noises occasionally, I had the hvac box replaced due to the smell, the drums weren't adjusted correctly, the turbo feed line is guaranteed to leak, the washer nozzles leaked and had to be replaced, the trunk switch is bad and I need to replace it, the rear tail light leaks water, the OE MTF was ****, the oil pan may leak by 150k, and we're at 46k miles. All in all I attribute most of those problems to petty issues that have since been worked out with redesigned parts and do not affect the long-term reliability of the vehicle, but a drop to 60k miles would make me feel uneasy. I am GM's biggest advocate for the Cruze and I freakin love this car but I'm not blind. It has not been a problem-free experience and the only reason I'm ok with it is because most of these issues were covered under warranty and I have been committed to driving till the body rots out.

On the other side, my father has put 180k hard miles hauling loads and sitting in heavy traffic in his Tacoma and the only reason he has changed any fluids other than engine oil is because I told him to. The only thing that truck has needed is brakes. Once. The head up DIC doesn't work and that's it. GM cannot promise me that level of reliability on the Canyon because their track record still isn't that great, so I have to take a leap of faith and hope it will be as reliable as a Tacoma. That leap of faith is that much harder when the warranty gets cut. 

GM engineering is phenomenal but it is always the bean counters that screw something up. This news is a perfect example of this and that scares me away from other GM products. I thought GM was past this, but this decision is a step in the wrong direction. Toyota could get away with it because their Camry, corolla, and Tacoma have an excellent track record, but GM hasn't built that level of confidence yet and cutting the warranty is not helping.

Full size trucks are the only GM vehicles I might buy without caring much about the warranty, but even there, the stuck piston rings on the 5.3 are also making me nervous. I have friends with that issue in their trucks and I would be livid if I was having that problem out of warranty. Those trucks are not cheap. I can't afford to buy a vehicle that will give me problems like that.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Because I actually trust the Toyota. Let's be realistic.


Quick question - what year into a generation are we comparing? The '12 Cruze is only a second-year. I'll bet the design was finalized before the all the lessons came in from the first year. What year in a "run" are you comparing it against?


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

ChevyGuy said:


> Quick question - what year into a generation are we comparing? The '12 Cruze is only a second-year. I'll bet the design was finalized before the all the lessons came in from the first year. What year in a "run" are you comparing it against?


4th year production run on that Tacoma, 2nd year on the Cruze. All in all not that enormous of an issue, and GM still hasn't figured out (or doesn't care) why our water pumps and valve covers keep going out I don't even think GM will give the Cruze a chance to have the kinks worked out. The Cruze got a useless and unsightly facelift for 2015 and we're expected to have new engine choices and who knows what else for 2016 unless I'm mistaken.

Honest question. Say I cloned myself and bought a Tacoma and a Canyon, right now, and had my clone follow me everywhere and do exactly what I'm doing, but in the Tacoma instead of the Canyon. Which one of them do you think would need more frequent service?


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

> Because I actually trust the Toyota. Let's be realistic.


Eh. Tacos have their fair share of common problems too. Typical of Toyota in later years, the 4.0 V6 is a workhorse of an engine, but they have cheaped out on quality that they used to be known for.

Torque converter flex lockup is becoming a common problem among 07+ Toyotas. Seems to be an issue among the Taco, Tundra, FJ, 4Runner, and 4-cyl Camry. They've issued tons of TSBs for these models, but never seem to fix the real issue.

Suspension problems are very common among Toyotas - these trucks included (rear leaf springs).

Water pumps are prone to leaking after a few years. Oh, and the frames still rot away. Interior rattles are VERY common.

Sure, they have a better reliability record than GM (especially Lexus), but their technology/platform in most cars they sell is almost a decade old. And just as you see Cruze owners with no problems, you'll also find Toyota owners that have had tons of problems.

While the upcoming 3.5 V6 in the Tacoma is going to be an absolutely fantastic engine, they are also releasing a brand-new 6-speed transmission with it. Expect it to have teething issues, as they all have when they were first released. Heck, they've been making the current U760E since 2009, and just issued a series of recalls up to and including 2014 models because torque converters kept blowing up.

If I were to buy another Toyota, it would be a used one. Our Camry has turned me off from the brand - we've had the thing in for at least 4 transmission/engine related issues, as well as suspension and interior rattles. And the sad thing is - they're quite common. This just didn't happen in the 90s-early 2000's models.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

jblackburn said:


> Eh. Tacos have their fair share of common problems too. Typical of Toyota in later years, the 4.0 V6 is a workhorse of an engine, but they have cheaped out on quality that they used to be known for.
> 
> Torque converter flex lockup is becoming a common problem among 07+ Toyotas. Seems to be an issue among the Taco, Tundra, and 4-cyl Camry. They've issued tons of TSBs for these models, but never seem to fix the real issue.
> 
> ...


I admit I may have GM in a negative light at this moment due to this news. Their 100k mile warranty was one of my favorite talking points in promoting these cars to other people.


----------



## Daisy81 (Jun 17, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Because I actually trust the Toyota. Let's be realistic. I love my cruze but the front shocks have been replaced twice because of a TSB, my valve cover got replaced, a water pump failure is guaranteed, people are losing bearings on the m32, there was a bad batch of pistons, my flywheel makes clunking noises occasionally, I had the hvac box replaced due to the smell, the drums weren't adjusted correctly, the turbo feed line is guaranteed to leak, the washer nozzles leaked and had to be replaced, the trunk switch is bad and I need to replace it, the rear tail light leaks water, the OE MTF was ****, the oil pan may leak by 150k, and we're at 46k miles. All in all I attribute most of those problems to petty issues that have since been worked out with redesigned parts and do not affect the long-term reliability of the vehicle, but a drop to 60k miles would make me feel uneasy. I am GM's biggest advocate for the Cruze and I freakin love this car but I'm not blind. It has not been a problem-free experience and the only reason I'm ok with it is because most of these issues were covered under warranty and I have been committed to driving till the body rots out.
> 
> On the other side, my father has put 180k hard miles hauling loads and sitting in heavy traffic in his Tacoma and the only reason he has changed any fluids other than engine oil is because I told him to. The only thing that truck has needed is brakes. Once. The head up DIC doesn't work and that's it. GM cannot promise me that level of reliability on the Canyon because their track record still isn't that great, so I have to take a leap of faith and hope it will be as reliable as a Tacoma. That leap of faith is that much harder when the warranty gets cut.
> 
> ...


If there is anything GM can do it is make trucks. I have a 2014 v6 regular cab long bed Chevy Silverado WT2 RWD with the limited slip differential. I bought it back when the new generation was released and I have no regrets well except that it isn't a 2500HD but we really don't need a truck with that kind of capability at this time.

You should view these videos to get an idea of why you should buy a Chevy Truck or maybe a Ford but certainly not a toyota.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZz3xly3HUA&spfreload=10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knsXYDHzhWs&spfreload=10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUgOiGEkpms&spfreload=10 this video you can really see how crappy the Toyota is and you can see in this case the Ford is also very nice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKMQjm7i2Jw&spfreload=10 this video is the heavy duty ford compared to chevy to give an idea between ford and chevy

I strongly suggest you not buy a Tacoma.


----------



## neirfin (Oct 18, 2012)

maybe in another 10 years GM will fold, everyone will get fired, and they will rebuild again, and the 2025 electric cruze will have a 100k warranty. until that happens, my goals are set on an unlimited mileage 10 year battery warranty and tesla, and i hope they can produce a 30k electric car that can go 500 miles without charging in the next few years.


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Daisy81 said:


> If there is anything GM can do it is make trucks. I have a 2014 v6 regular cab long bed Chevy Silverado WT2 RWD with the limited slip differential. I bought it back when the new generation was released and I have no regrets well except that it isn't a 2500HD but we really don't need a truck with that kind of capability at this time.
> 
> You should view these videos to get an idea of why you should buy a Chevy Truck or maybe a Ford but certainly not a toyota.
> 
> ...


I never considered the Tundra. The Tacoma is a different class vehicle and cannot be compared with the full size Silverado. The Big 3 know how to make fantastic full size pickups, but the Tacoma has dominated the light and medium pickup market for 30 years now. The comparison is not between the Silverado and the Tacoma, but between the Canyon/Colorado and the Tacoma.


----------



## Daisy81 (Jun 17, 2012)

XtremeRevolution said:


> I never considered the Tundra. The Tacoma is a different class vehicle and cannot be compared with the full size Silverado. The Big 3 know how to make fantastic full size pickups, but the Tacoma has dominated the light and medium pickup market for 30 years now. The comparison is not between the Silverado and the Tacoma, but between the Canyon/Colorado and the Tacoma.


If the higher end model is built that poorly do you think the smaller cheaper one is built to hold up better?


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Honest question. Say I cloned myself and bought a Tacoma and a Canyon, right now, and had my clone follow me everywhere and do exactly what I'm doing, but in the Tacoma instead of the Canyon. Which one of them do you think would need more frequent service?


I don't have any stats, but I can tell you what public _perception _is. The big question, is it accurate?


----------



## UlyssesSG (Apr 5, 2011)

[HR][/HR]
Automotive News analysis and commentary about GM Powertrain Warranty revisions.

*GM to cut Chevy, GMC powertrain warranty to 60,000 miles from 100,000*
Extended offerings weren't enough of a draw; free maintenance also scaled back


[HR][/HR] Source: Automotive News


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

So then extend it further to 120k miles. Or make it unlimited, then people would flock to gm in groves. 

They should have one warranty if they're going to stick to this scale back and that should be 5 year 60k miles bumper to bumper. 

In all honesty, you shouldn't have to deal with problems on a 5 year old car. If this would cost them a lot of money than maybe it's time to up their quality on everything and not just full size trucks. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

money_man said:


> They should have one warranty if they're going to stick to this scale back and that should be 5 year 60k miles bumper to bumper.
> 
> In all honesty, you shouldn't have to deal with problems on a 5 year old car. If this would cost them a lot of money than maybe it's time to up their quality on everything and not just full size trucks.


It would be a super smart move for any manufacture to come out with longer than a 3year/36K bumper to bumper warranty, since most people take a 5-6 year loan when purchasing a new car. Would be nice to have no worries at all when having to still make a car payment. 

GM doesn't make as much profit on their cars as they do trucks, the markup for those is ridiculous. They can afford to better engineer your trucks when you overcharge for the most popular equipped trucks. Take a look at the starting price of a colorado, its only about $20K, however load that thing up and it turns into almost $40K. Silverado is the same, starts at $25K and maxes out at more than $50K. THERE IS NO FREAKING WAY THOSE OPTIONS EQUAL DOUBLE THE COST.


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

A view on the Tacoma reliability issue:

Toyota Tacoma Problems | CarComplaints.com


----------



## bowtieblue (May 26, 2014)

UlyssesSG said:


> The naive optimist in me would like to believe this, but the pragmatist the world has forced me to become doesn't believe this is GM's motivation .. not for a second.


 I have no idea what GM plans to do with the "savings" but I think some here are making too big of a deal about the warranty change. Just because the 100K mile coverage is no longer _standard_ doesn't mean it won't be _available_ or that GM vehicles still won't be a good value versus the competition. For some to rule GM vehicles out because of this seems to be a bit of an overreaction.

It's marketing. I guess time will tell if it's a good move or not.


----------



## Vetterin (Mar 27, 2011)

Since the average miles driven by all motorists is now 13,476 per year, that warranty will still cover the majority of drivers over the course of 5 years. Now add to that the number of drivers that don't even keep a car for 100,000 miles......


----------



## carbon02 (Feb 25, 2011)

XtremeRevolution said:


> Toyota could get away with it because their Camry, corolla, and Tacoma have an excellent track record, but GM hasn't built that level of confidence yet and cutting the warranty is not helping.


Couldn't agree more. To a certain extent Nissan is in the same category. No new thrills in engineering, but being told to play it safe to protect the excellent track record. 

How long will GM owners be willing to address issues on their own, to actually find solutions? Thanks to this forum I've addressed everything without going in to a dealer, but I shouldn't have issues at all within the first 36,000 miles, and I've had coolant level smell issues like everyone else. 

When I bought the car I was historically driving more than 18,000 miles per year, and I planned on that warranty. Things have changed, and it turns out that currently I'll be under the 60K miles in 5 years. Who knows what the future will bring after this Cruze. I'm staying positive, and not selling out tomorrow, but my issues between the Cruze, and two Oldsmobile Intrigues which died due to slipping transmission issues P1811 fixed twice and still failed, doesn't give me a good taste of GM in my future.

I'm guessing prices will fall due to demand, partially due to warranty, and partially due to small car demand, such that I'll still consider GM if they are running significant discounts at the time vs. their competitors.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

Vetterin said:


> Since the average miles driven by all motorists is now 13,476 per year, that warranty will still cover the majority of drivers over the course of 5 years. Now add to that the number of drivers that don't even keep a car for 100,000 miles......


Yeah, it's a race to 36K or 3 years for me at this point. Unless circumstances change drastically, I will be nowhere near the 100K mark at 5 years.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

> To a certain extent Nissan is in the same category. No new thrills in engineering, but being told to play it safe to protect the excellent track record.


Nissan doesn't exactly have a great track record with their CVT transmissions...especially paired with V6 engines...

The engines are old technology - older than most of Toyota's, and at least in their cars, are still competitive enough. The VQ engines are still very, very good. Their current trucks are very long in the tooth, though - think it took others stepping up with redesigns to finally get them to push out a new Frontier and Titan.


----------



## Slammed2014Eco (Feb 13, 2014)

UlyssesSG said:


> .
> Bad juju. Cheapens the brand and suggests the powertrain isn't durable. Decontenting by any other name or method is still decontenting.


I agree with you on that one, **** even kia has a 100k warranty...


----------



## Slammed2014Eco (Feb 13, 2014)

jblackburn said:


> Nissan doesn't exactly have a great track record with their CVT transmissions...especially paired with V6 engines...
> 
> The engines are old technology - older than most of Toyota's, and at least in their cars, are still competitive enough. The VQ engines are still very, very good. Their current trucks are very long in the tooth, though - think it took others stepping up with redesigns to finally get them to push out a new Frontier and Titan.


What motor is the titan running now? I'm surprised they aren't running a VQ37 in them like the FX35 was using the VQ35 from the G35 Infiniti. The VQ37 is a monster


----------



## XtremeRevolution (Jan 19, 2012)

Daisy81 said:


> If the higher end model is built that poorly do you think the smaller cheaper one is built to hold up better?


In this particular case, we would be comparing identical class vehicles. A midsize truck to another midsize truck. GM has stated the Tacoma is its #1 competition with the new Colorado/Canyon. 



ChevyGuy said:


> I don't have any stats, but I can tell you what public _perception _is. The big question, is it accurate?


It was correct. Whether or not it still is always remains to be seen. At this rate, I'll end up with a Silverado if GM can cut me a deal during truck month.


----------



## Slammed2014Eco (Feb 13, 2014)

XtremeRevolution said:


> It was correct. Whether or not it still is always remains to be seen. At this rate, I'll end up with a Silverado if GM can cut me a deal during truck month.


You and me both lol


----------



## 14rs (Feb 19, 2015)

So got a reply from GM Canada they said the warranties are not changing here as it is a competitive advantage.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Vetterin said:


> Since the average miles driven by all motorists is now 13,476 per year, that warranty will still cover the majority of drivers over the course of 5 years. Now add to that the number of drivers that don't even keep a car for 100,000 miles......


Some quick calculations suggests that people with a daily commute of under 35 miles won't be affected at all. The question is will they do the match to figure that out.

But the big issue here is the letter is all "take" and only vague lip service to "give". Of course the reaction will be negative.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

14rs said:


> So got a reply from GM Canada they said the warranties are not changing here as it is a competitive advantage.


Oh yeah!!! 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

Slammed2014Eco said:


> I agree with you on that one, **** even kia has a 100k warranty...


Since Kia is the new kid on the block, I think they have to.

But the real scary part of this is that Chevy thinks they are saving money. If the cars were reliable, they wouldn't be saving much of anything. Just how many are dying between 60K and 100K? :blink:


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

ChevyGuy said:


> Since Kia is the new kid on the block, I think they have to.
> 
> But the real scary part of this is that Chevy thinks they are saving money. If the cars were reliable, they wouldn't be saving much of anything. Just how many are dying between 60K and 100K? :blink:


This is what I've been wondering. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## UlyssesSG (Apr 5, 2011)

14rs said:


> So got a reply from GM Canada they said the warranties are not changing here as it is a competitive advantage.


*Precisely.

*Listening to GM trying to spin the rationale for the abridged Powertrain Warranty is akin to listening to Hillary Clinton attempting to explain why she circumvented the federal government's secure State Department email system in favour of the borderline illegal private server she used to conduct business. Let's see a private mail server she controlled both physically and virtually, registered to a fictitious party and located in her New York home .. nah, nothing going on there.

Nobody with a touch of sense believes Madame Hillary nor do they believe GM's nonsensical explanation. Sorry to say, but in GM's case it's all about charging more for less.


----------



## XtremeAaron (Jan 22, 2012)

With both axle seals replaced today (2nd one for the right), good luck GM.


----------



## dhpnet (Mar 2, 2014)

This is super bad timing for GM. Their PR department must be going crazy with this decision. Especially after recalling almost every GM car on the road last year. 

My first thought with the 5/100K warranty was that it should really be 8/100K. The average person drives around 12K per year. When I bought my Cruze I thought that the powertrain warranty was really a 60K warranty because I would probably never go over that in 5 years. But GM shouldn't be reducing warranties right now. They should raise it to a 7/100K or 8/100K instead. That would be more interesting to the average Cruze buyer.


----------



## Vetterin (Mar 27, 2011)

jblackburn said:


> Yeah, it's a race to 36K or 3 years for me at this point. Unless circumstances change drastically, I will be nowhere near the 100K mark at 5 years.


I have been buying new cars since 1971 and this Cruze just might be the only one I will still have after 100,000 miles (and that's only because of my 75 mile daily commute).


----------



## neile300c (Jul 8, 2014)

maybe they are trying to increase sales of the 15's.


----------



## bowtieblue (May 26, 2014)

ChevyGuy said:


> But the real scary part of this is that Chevy thinks they are saving money. If the cars were reliable, they wouldn't be saving much of anything. Just how many are dying between 60K and 100K? :blink:


I wonder how much $$ GM factors into the cost of each car for the 60K+ portion of the warranty. Whether it's used or not, it's still factored in as part of the price. Chevrolet sold more than 2 million vehicles in the U.S. last year. GMC sold over 500K. If GM was factoring in even just $400 per vehicle and could eliminate that cost, it would result in an annual "savings" of over $1 billion.


----------



## ChevyGuy (Dec 13, 2014)

bowtieblue said:


> If GM was factoring in even just $400 per vehicle and could eliminate that cost, it would result in an annual "savings" of over $1 billion.


That's all well and good, but there's a zillion ways to cost-cut your way to bankruptcy. Time will tell if this is one of them.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

The years don't matter. I need higher mileage. I hate limiting my driving just because I'm trying to keep my warranty for the proper duration. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## bowtieblue (May 26, 2014)

ChevyGuy said:


> That's all well and good, but there's a zillion ways to cost-cut your way to bankruptcy. Time will tell if this is one of them.


GM's research apparently showed that there's better ways for them to spend money than having a standard powertrain warranty beyond 60K. Any changes like this will always have a negative reaction by some but may be the right thing long term. Time will tell. Again, it's not like a 60K+ powertrain warranty won't still be an option for those who want it. A longer _standard_ warranty does not necessarily mean higher quality or reliability.


----------



## mr overkill (Dec 1, 2013)

XtremeRevolution said:


> As much as I love GM and have always owned GM vehicles, this is actually a deal breaker for me. I will be considering other competitive options when it comes time for us to purchase a new vehicle. I was planning on getting a Canyon/Colorado next year, but if it doesn't have a 100k mile warranty, I guarantee you that I will be purchasing a Tacoma instead.


As some of you might know im a mopar man and me buying the cruze was well hard lol but i was actually thinking of buying a 2016 2500 silverado instead of a ram 2500 well this made my decision a little bit easier


----------



## neile300c (Jul 8, 2014)

I guess the good news is that my 14 is covered to 100k


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

neile300c said:


> I guess the good news is that my 14 is covered to 100k


Me too 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

money_man said:


> The years don't matter. I need higher mileage. I hate limiting my driving just because I'm trying to keep my warranty for the proper duration.
> 
> 
> Sent from the sexy electrician


I agree. I've found that mileage doesn't have much to do with repair needs until I get around 150,000. Years on the other hand will cause problems even on a "low mileage" car.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

Yessir. The automotive industry needs to start making some radical changes like an unlimited mileage warranty for 5 years. That warranty should be bumper to bumper. 

The extended warranty should begin after that warranty is complete. So in the case of current bumper to bumper warranties, why does my gmpp warranty overlap the current bumper to bumper? It shouldn't, it should add to the end of the b2b term. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## Diesel Dan (May 18, 2013)

Vetterin said:


> Since the average miles driven by all motorists is now 13,476 per year, that warranty will still cover the majority of drivers over the course of 5 years. Now add to that the number of drivers that don't even keep a car for 100,000 miles......


If it was that simple they would keep the 100K warranty as a sales tool.
Why not drop the transferable part? 
Do a little research into 3.6L timing chain failures and see how many fail after 60K.

Whether right or wrong Toyota and Honda have a greater perception of powertrain quality and the 100K warranty is what GM needs to earn conquest sales.


----------



## dhpnet (Mar 2, 2014)

I am sure they did the numbers a hundred different ways, and they probably also did some surveys and focus groups. In the end they must have determined that the difference between 60K and 100K was costing more than it was worth. 

Anyone who drives over 60K in 5 years is reducing the resale value more with high mileage than the value of the warranty anyway. And, if GM uses a little bit of the money saved to add a few new standard features in the future, that would be nice as well. I would trade those 40K miles of warranty that I will never use for a some better features on my next Cruze.


----------



## money_man (Feb 25, 2014)

dhpnet said:


> I am sure they did the numbers a hundred different ways, and they probably also did some surveys and focus groups. In the end they must have determined that the difference between 60K and 100K was costing more than it was worth.
> 
> Anyone who drives over 60K in 5 years is reducing the resale value more with high mileage than the value of the warranty anyway. And, if GM uses a little bit of the money saved to add a few new standard features in the future, that would be nice as well. I would trade those 40K miles of warranty that I will never use for a some better features on my next Cruze.


You're assuming they're going to give you anything at all. When the history of business shows it will just be used to line ceo's pockets and hand out huge bonuses. The little guys will always get the shaft. 


Sent from the sexy electrician


----------



## soup070 (Jan 21, 2012)

blk88verde said:


> Yeah, agree. However others like Honda only have a 3yr/36,000 power train warranty and this does not seem to affect sales.


There's reason Honda's sales are not hurt buy only a 3/36 is because for the most Honda's reliably is much better than the domestic 3. It's all about trust if you believe and know that it's going to be reliable why do you need a warranty? The problem with lowering GMs power train warranty it that I still don't trust having 40k less insurance. I have 81k on my 2012 Eco and have had a few power train issues past 60k. One was a PCV valve twice and I think I have a CV going out including the water pump and two non powertrain issues with D door and trunk switchs. 

GM management is just doing this to line their pocket books of maintance issues that could arise. The reason why hyundui had a 10/100k for years because it wasn't thought to be up to the same reliability as the other Asian auto makers. If GM trusted their products they would (because of their known recalls and issues) raise the warranty to 200k. Check the reliability standards of the domestic 3 and they just aren't anywhere near the reliability standards as most Asian automakers. GM keeps losing my future support, while Subaru and Toyota keep gaining it. 

Also, I hear "I never keep my car past 60k". Well then why doesn't GM make it a nontransferable warranty past 60k? Or maybe they want they want you fear repairs past 60k and then get you to buy another GM car? Their accountants are hard at work, turning GM back to its pre-Government Motors programs. Before 2009 they only had a 5/60k and when they thought they would loss everything tried to gain our trust with the 5/100k warranty and now they are reverting back to their old screw over the customer way.


----------



## dhpnet (Mar 2, 2014)

money_man said:


> You're assuming they're going to give you anything at all. When the history of business shows it will just be used to line ceo's pockets and hand out huge bonuses. The little guys will always get the shaft.


The profit motive is very powerful, and GM has fallen into that trap a few times before. However, if General Motors continues to focus on profits and greed over quality and trust, then they have big problems coming. 

Competition and knowledge are also very powerful. Unlike the 1970s, there is plenty of competition today, and we now can have near perfect knowledge with the Internet. The only thing we are currently missing is accountability. I personally think that the laws need to be changed so that executives can be held accountable for certain immoral actions. That is something we can change. 

Right now I like GM cars, and I have faith that GM wants to produce great products with good value. If this is not true, then it will become evident over time, and we will all switch to other brands that deserve our business more. I want GM to succeed, but I will switch to a different brand in a heartbeat if it become obvious that the company is going back to the old greed and profit mentality. 

As Steve Jobs said, "if you focus on making really great products, then the profits will follow." All of the car makers need to take a lesson from Silicon Valley companies. In fact, they should all probably move their corporate headquarters out of the old rust belt and into more innovative places like Boston or SF.


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

dhpnet said:


> As Steve Jobs said, "if you focus on making really great products, then the profits will follow." All of the car makers need to take a lesson from Silicon Valley companies. In fact, they should all probably move their corporate headquarters out of the old rust belt and into more innovative places like Boston or SF.


so ship all the car making jobs to china where they put nets around the factory to keep workers from killing themselves?


----------

