GM.com - Warning of what to expect now under ACL Warranty now Holden is gone.

[Skylarking]

... noise on startup is not really considered a "defect"...

That’s GM‘s and Holden‘s view but even if in their twisted reality it is not a defect, it is clearly not as demonstrated.

Why is this important? Because from ACCC’s website

Products must be of acceptable quality, that is:​

• safe, lasting, with no faults
• look acceptable
• do all the things someone would normally expect them to do.

Acceptable quality takes into account what would normally be expected for the type of product and cost.​

Products must:​

• match descriptions made by the salesperson, on packaging and labels, and in promotions or advertising
• match any demonstration model or sample you asked for
  
  
• be fit for the purpose the business told you it would be fit for and for any purpose that you made known to the business before purchasing
• come with full title and ownership
• not carry any hidden debts or extra charges
• come with undisturbed possession, so no one has a right to take the goods away or prevent you from using them
• meet any extra promises made about performance, condition and quality, such as life time guarantees and money back offers
• have spare parts and repair facilities available for a reasonable time after purchase unless you were told otherwise.

When I test drove a LS3, it was rather quiet when started, made no noise, no clatter and didn’t sound like an old diesel. If what was delivered turned into a clattering diesel, then not only is it not as demonstrated, it is also not durable. I do have concerns about whether my LS3 will develope such clatter or the lifters/pushrods or it’s injectors will shite themselves.

It’s not a good situation for any LS3 owner for GM/H to be playing such games... and they need to be held to account but the problem is that no assets are left and Pty Ltd is just that, the owners of it don’t have to do anything if they loose in court.. just close the last office and be done with it... GMSV, well that’s an entirely different legal entity and can start with a clean slate...

Really, had I known all the engineering and business shitfuckery that GM was involved with, I’d given Holden a wide bearth.

Sometimes I think I need to dump my MSE while the market is up because of said shitefuckery and those unexplored grenades within the engine. But them I go for a long drive

 

[Fu Manchu]

I can’t help but be drawn to this example which, although a different car, ends up drawing a similar result. Most importantly, using data and correct procedures to diagnose major a mechanical fault without having to tear down the engine. There is no doubt this could also be carried out on any GM just the same. There is a lot of evidence based data here. This ends up being a buggered set of rings and was not what the technician (a really really good one at that) was expecting.
Hardly a spanner turned to get an absolute answer.

Maybe this business could even be worth contacting. Would speed things up and provide substantiating evidence for you

 

[Skylarking]

... I will be seeking legal opinion soon and access to what happened behind GM Holden's closed doors re this claim (allege there is serious smoke residue on GM Holden).

Effort may be better spent getting a skilled engineering assessment of your LS3 which will necessitate a strip down.

If you try and get access to Holden’s internal docs related to your case, you’ll probably find it won’t be so revealing as the juicy stuff about failure rates won’t be within your file, nor will any head office smoking smoking gun memo that requires all HCC staff to deny all LS3 claims. Any stuff related to failure rates will be classes as commercial info and you won’t be able to access such.

Just focus on what you know and can show... selling dealer fobbed you off so you thought it was just you and lived with it for a while. Then the noise got too much and you realised you’d been fobbed off, so as is your right under the manufacturers warranty, you went to another dealer who found the engine needed disassembly to verify this known piston slap defect and in their view this would show you needed a new engine.

Just remember, a defect doesn’t need to be something that leads to catastrophic engine failure, it just needs to be something that an average consumer would consider unacceptable and would result in them not buying the product if such was known at the time prior to their purchase (of this product with a latent defect)...

 

[stooge]

That’s GM‘s and Holden‘s view but even if in their twisted reality it is not a defect, it is clearly not as demonstrated.

Why is this important? Because from ACCC’s website

Products must be of acceptable quality, that is:​

• safe, lasting, with no faults
• look acceptable
• do all the things someone would normally expect them to do.

Acceptable quality takes into account what would normally be expected for the type of product and cost.​

Products must:​

• match descriptions made by the salesperson, on packaging and labels, and in promotions or advertising
• match any demonstration model or sample you asked for
  
  
• be fit for the purpose the business told you it would be fit for and for any purpose that you made known to the business before purchasing
• come with full title and ownership
• not carry any hidden debts or extra charges
• come with undisturbed possession, so no one has a right to take the goods away or prevent you from using them
• meet any extra promises made about performance, condition and quality, such as life time guarantees and money back offers
• have spare parts and repair facilities available for a reasonable time after purchase unless you were told otherwise.

When I test drove a LS3, it was rather quiet when started, made no noise, no clatter and didn’t sound like an old diesel. If what was delivered turned into a clattering diesel, then not only is it not as demonstrated, it is also not durable. I do have concerns about whether my LS3 will develope such clatter or the lifters/pushrods or it’s injectors will shite themselves.

It’s not a good situation for any LS3 owner for GM/H to be playing such games... and they need to be held to account but the problem is that no assets are left and Pty Ltd is just that, the owners of it don’t have to do anything if they loose in court.. just close the last office and be done with it... GMSV, well that’s an entirely different legal entity and can start with a clean slate...

Really, had I known all the engineering and business shitfuckery that GM was involved with, I’d given Holden a wide bearth.

Sometimes I think I need to dump my MSE while the market is up because of said shitefuckery and those unexplored grenades within the engine. But them I go for a long drive

"When the customer drove the demonstrator model the sound was present"

That is all they need to claim and you know they will because in their twisted reality they all do it as it is "characteristic" of the ls3.

We are talking about a company that gets away with many defects with the accc asleep at the wheel.
Qcat and acl did not help the majority of people with colorados that consumed half the engines oil capacity as they claimed it was "characteristic" of that engine even after people could prove that the same engines in other colorados did not do it.

Not a single customer was informed of this usage on purchase before or after the problem was found and even after the thicker oil recall was issued.
They fixed the problem on the manufacturing side but continued to sell the defective ones until they had none left.

Lets hope the people overseeing the ops case have brains and can see through gms bullsh!t

 

[Skylarking]

I can’t help but be drawn to this example which, although a different car, ends up drawing a similar result. Most importantly, using data and correct procedures to diagnose major a mechanical fault without having to tear down the engine. There is no doubt this could also be carried out on any GM just the same. There is a lot of evidence based data here. This ends up being a buggered set of rings and was not what the technician (a really really good one at that) was expecting.
Hardly a spanner turned to get an absolute answer.

Maybe this business could even be worth contacting. Would speed things up and provide substantiating evidence for you

Really interesting video but piston slap won’t result in pressure leaks or other issues that can be seen from broken rings or worn valve seats and such... The slap can possibly be isolated to specific cylinders which is a plus but it’s not much more than what your ears will tell you. In early cases it’s just an unacceptable noise we are dealing with (that will causes wear and will require an engine rebuild or replacement well before what most would normally be consider acceptable mileage).

Regardless, where do you find experts like that, since he’s not your normal mechanic and he says he “came over” (to the shop) @ 23:47 which implies he’s a smart gun for hire...

 

[Skylarking]

"When the customer drove the demonstrator model the sound was present"

That is all they need to claim and you know they will because in their twisted reality they all do it as it is "characteristic" of the ls3.

And all the buyer needs to say is that the demonstrator didn’t exhibit this defect because either it may have been warmed up prior to his drive or not all engines exhibit this defect.

He could also offer affidavits and/or testimony from other LS3 owners that their vehicles don’t exhibit such a defect. And though it’s from another jurisdiction, I’d get the court references and docs from the New Zealand case where an LSE owner was awarded a full purchase price refund as evidence that other jurisdictions have acknowledged this piston slap defect.

It’s really sad people are put through such crap by a manufacturer that knows there is an issue by virtue of having replaced other LS3 engines in Australia (as we known). Some forum members may be willing to provide their personal details and engine replacement situations via PM to the OP. Surely any judge can’t be so miopic as to ignore such facts because a multinational said something with a straight face that we know to be bullshite.

The critical thing is one needs a well reasoned argument and evidence that a QCAT can’t ignore.

Interested how this progresses.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Get John Cadogan on it

 

[Skylarking]

Get John Cadogan on it

Hahaha, he‘ll say in his style he warned people to avoid Holden years ago...

Normally it could be worth dropping him, current affairs, etc an email to him but in this case there is no reputation for Holden to protect... Holden simply doesn’t give a shite

 

[Fu Manchu]

Really interesting video but piston slap won’t result in pressure leaks or other issues that can be seen from broken rings or worn valve seats and such... The slap can possibly be isolated to specific cylinders which is a plus but it’s not much more than what your ears will tell you. In early cases it’s just an unacceptable noise we are dealing with (that will causes wear and will require an engine rebuild or replacement well before what most would normally be consider acceptable mileage).

Regardless, where do you find experts like that, since he’s not your normal mechanic and he says he “came over” (to the shop) @ 23:47 which implies he’s a smart gun for hire...

No no. I get that, but surely this kind of diagnostic pathway would be used to prove piston slap without opening the motor.
True. Where would you find this guys skills? He is a gun for hire so to speak. He developed the software he is using from what I’ve made of his instructional videos.

 

[chrisp]

I wonder if Holden/GM will offer a settlement at the door of the courtroom? “We fit a new LS3 to your car, just sign this confidentially agreement“?