By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Has anyone had any luck with GM buying back a triplet because of the wandering mirror issue? I have a relative that has a Trailblazer and after visting the service department at least 1/2 dozen times, the mirror still behaves incorrectly almost causing them to have an accident on the freeway.
In a nut shell, they are pretty upset with this issue and want to pursue GM buying back the vehicle due to the safety nature of the wandering mirrors?
Has anyone been able to get GM to get involved in this without having to consult an attorney? I am guessing that they will probably need to meet with the GM regional rep first to give it one last try, then they can pursue GM buy back. Anyone have any ideas, questions, comments or suggestions? Please give me your feedback.
Thanks!
IExplore2000
Has ANYBODY had their mirrors fixed?
It is frustrating to buy a vehicle that was supposed to have a feature that it does not. And then the "feature" turns out to be detrimental to the operation of the vehicle!
Mazda bought back early RX-8s recently because they didn't have as much horsepower as they initially claimed. They sent a letter giving the customer the option of $500 and free service or complete buy-back.
So far I have had everything possible done to my mirrors that include having the engineer comeing down and replacing them himself. But two weeks after he came down they started screwing up again and I told my dealer that I have absolutly had it. He is now pushing to get something going so that I can get out of my 03 Trailblazer LTZ without getting killed by depreciation.
The only problem is that GM doesn't feel as though the wandering mirrors are enough to warrent a buyback. What I have been told is that what they might do is a trade assist where they basicly buy the vehicle back but instead of cash the money they give has to be used towards another Chevrolet.
But so far I have had no satisfaction. The regional rep had told me that all that they will do for me at this time is pay the first two payments when I trade out of my Trailblazer or an extended warrenty. And yesterday I called GM directly to start a complaint about my vehicle and that I want out of it and he basicly told me that there really is nothing that they can do at this time other than performing a "clean sweep" on the mirrors that involves moving the glass all they way to the left, and then all the way to the right because the way the mirrors are designed they allow a lot of grit and dirt inside of them. So I have decided that the only way to get out of my Trailblazer and you may want to try this as well, is that I am going to call GM and complain more and more every time my mirrors screw up until it gets to the point that they are going to help me out or they are just going to tell me to screw. And once they do I then go to the state with a lemon law case but the problem with that is it can sometimes take up to 6 months to get your money.
Hope this helps and sorry for such a long post.
The highest trans. cooler out temp. I've seen was on that stretch of I-15 south of Salt Lake City. A long steady climb and the trans. torque converter unlocked, outside temps in the mid 90s. Again engine temp. never above 3/4 and trans. temp. peaked at 200F. Normally runs in the 140-160 range.
I'd say if you are seeing near red line temps at idle for 35 mins. at 105 ambient there may not be anything wrong, however you'd be wise to check. Can you partially cover the radiator to induce higher idle temps. to see if the fan is engaging?
As far as overheating, I go to Lake Havasu, AZ quite often in the hot months (115+ quite often) and haven't had any overheating problems while towing a 21' boat.
I guess I should have said it IS a leased vehicle, but I'm buying the 2004 for less payments. Have a friend who is buying out the lease for his wife!!!
And thanks Jimmyp1...I can and wanted too.
I normally don't keep a vehicle much over 3 years anyway; and like I said..friend wanted the vehicle for his wife!!!!!
The behavior is as follows:
1) Place key in ignition and passenger mirror will sometimes "wiggle" even when the setting has never been tapered with? NO other remotes used except for driver #1, therefore the mirrors are never adjusted manually.
2) When vehicle is running, put SUV in reverse and passenger side mirror tilts downward. Place car back in Drive and mirror will attempt to reposition itself, and maybe 5 time out of 10, it will land in the correct position? Usually when it positions itself incorrectly, it's pointing too far to the left. This poses a safety hazard because sometimes you don't know/recognize this until you need to take a peek at the mirror.. sometimes it causes misjudgment.
This briefly describes the characteristics centering around the wandering mirror problem. I did suggest to my family member that they should pursue the next steps through the GM service department (i.e. contacting the regional rep, etc.).
I honestly think that simply "shutting off" this function and not using this feature is not the correct answer for a vehicle that cost well over $30K. I equate this to:
a) Having a navigation system that does not navigate
b) Having a 5 speed automatic transmission that only uses 3 gears? Do you simply drive it and ignore the problem? "Ahh.. it's moving forward, that's all that counts!"
c) Having a 6-disc CD changer that only uses 3 discs? "Well.. it plays, so why bother with it?"
d) Having heated seats that only work in temperatures ABOVE 75 degrees!
For me, the tilting mirrors were a key selling point on my Envoy because curb-side parking is a common thing in my city and it definitely helps me keep my rims off of the curb. You see... different features hold different values for each individuals. Ideally, GM should put extra effort in researching this issue in hopes of coming up with a resolution. I do know that other GM vehicles have the curb-side assist feature (Tahoe, Denali, Escalade, etc). I wonder if they are also having the same problem??
Thanks for listening!
IExplore2000
For the last 2 years, I've had the features shut-off because they don't work correctly. I've been watching and waiting for a definitive fix, or even a recall.
I KNOW other cars (GM, even!) have these features and they work successfully.
my 2 cents
Also I do know that this wandering problem seems only to affect the trailblazer, envoy, and bravada because my father has an 03 Silverado and my uncle has an 03 tahoe and has no problems with their mirrors.
And by the way, my mirrors have been replaced and still wander
Actuator replaced and no more problems in 9 or more months.
I do not use the reverse curb assist but my wife does. Mirrors always come back.
Entire drivers memory system works fine.
No offense to anyone intended, but I side with Fiscuss in his opinion that a side view mirror issue should not be the cause of an accident.
The mirrors absolutely play a role in safe driving, but a Best Practice for lane changing should involve a quick glance over the shoulder.
It was not too many years ago that the right side mirror was a sports package option that many cars did not have
Called Onstar for error codes etc. No information available but tech offered to connect me to the tech service group. I had already arrived at my destination by then so declined the offer.
Driving home tonight, and same event with the switch lights. Onstar again could not diagnose but connected me directly to Chey would opened a case file, called my dealer and got me in immediately. Was already 6:30 PM
Dealer tried to diagnose but found no data but replaced the switch as a possible concern.
Now true I could have called the dealer and had an appointment tonight anyway, but I forgot too.
Was nice to get what I felt to be Caring Service from Onstar, Chevy and my dealer.
BTW: Chevy has already requested permission to contact me again on tues to verify I am satisfied with the repair
So I guess I can say.
"Yes sir, I was in a hurry and wasn't paying attention. That's why I changed lanes and ran into the car next to me. But really, it's because my automatic mirrors were in the wrong place."
Thanks, I'll make sure I use that excuse the next time.
The mirrors on my TB need to be adjusted every time it is driven. That sucks.
Also, I will bet you another $10 that IF there were any potential problems on tilting mirrors for LEXUS, BMW and many other import manufacturers, that the problem had been addressed and corrected. I'm sorry, but GM has had over 2 years to address this concern, I cannot offer any sympathy here on the part of GM. Why pay the engineers big bucks if they cannot solve the problem at hand?
For my $40K+, the feature had better work within specs, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for GM not resolving this issue by now (in addition to many others). Come on guys and gals.. GM has had MORE than enough time to iron out these issues that has plagued the triplets from day one. Some of you fail to realize that GM has specialty engineers that "specialize" in the technology behind the triplets, so why can they not resolve an issue as simple as wandering mirrors? If it were me, they should offer an incentive for those who can correct the problem.. you know.. include this as a metric in performance evaluation. That would probably light a fire under their "butts" to diligently work on resolving these issues.
Lastly, no matter how you look at it, we all have probably taken a driver's ed course before in our lifetime, but these "rigs" are not as easy to park as the econobox Chevy's that we used during MY driver's ed course. I am also a fairly good curb parker myself, but find this feature quite handy, especially when encountering a curb that is actually TALLER than my running boards. The feature helps save from wear and tear. Safety is always compromised when you cannot adequately see out of your mirrors in the correct fashion intended.. oh and lets not forget blind spots! I've almost hit several cars changing lanes by simply "glancing" to the side when making a lane change. Blind spots do exist in the triplets.
Anyone else care to rave about how we should pat GM on the back for this inoperable feature and having the ability to simply IGNORE this function by turning the mirrors OFF? Be my guest! IF that's the case, then maybe GM should pull the same stunt Mazda did with the RX-8? Send me a check for $5000 and I will gladly pretend as if this feature did not exist on my Envoy!
There's hope for those of you who like to go off the pavement every now and then....
I purchased an Envoy in February of 2003. From day one I have had problems. I requested a buyback in July just before 6 months of ownership (I am GMS and was considering trading at the 6 month mark but the dealer said the best they could do was $21k -- msrp was $35.5k so a trade was out of the question). The vehicle probably had 9,000 miles on it then and had been in the shop over 30 days, all of which were for major problems (leaks, 4x4 not working, dead computer, etc).
So anyway they finally agree to buy it back. They tell us MSRP to MSRP and no charge for mileage since problems were from day 1. They don't care what incentives you got or GM Card $ you used or what you paid. Well, this works to my disadvantage because I was looking at a Yukon. GMS to GMS is about $2000 better than MSRP to MSRP on a well equipped Yukon when compared to my Envoy.
So we start looking at comparably priced cars/trucks since a Yukon is out of our league now. Test drive the 2004 Grand Prix -- don't like it. I traded a 1998 Grand Prix on my Envoy which I loved and was trouble free for 98k miles (should have kept it). Test drove a Vibe. Cheap and clunky but probably reliable and would get a lot of $ back from GM. They won't allow me to have a Bonneville GXP or GTO. I have a Silverado as my other vehicle so don't really want a Sierra or Canyon. I hate Grand Am's. I've spent 40 days with one as a loaner at this point and that's too much. So we look outside Pontiac-GMC (this dealer). Find we like the Avalanche. It's an option. Find we love the Saab 9-3. We decide that's what we want. Now GM wants to do a repurchase so they'd give me what I paid, subtract for mileage at 20 cents per mile, put my GM card earnings back on my card (was 5% when I cashed in now it's 1% for employees so I'd lose there), and of course they'd want the rebate $ back.
Is it normal for them to do this on a buyback? How do they normally work?
It seems the GM rep wants me to stick with this dealership. I have NO CONFIDENCE in this dealer. 4 times they have changed my oil and 3 times I've had to take it back for them to clean up their sloppy mess they didn't wipe up on the skid plates.
Ideas? Thoughts? Suggestions?
Over the last 3 weeks I've had a problem with the service 4wd light coming on. The first time they reprogrammed it. The second time (a week later) they replaced the transfer case control module. The third time (a week later) they did another software update and said there was a bug in the system that there was no fix for and I may see this problem again.
This is what finally pushed the rep over the edge and allow buyback of the vehicle.
Has anyone heard of this problem? This problem alone makes me not want another Envoy.
Ok.. maybe not just one thing, but IMOP, your modification definitely takes away from the look/sleekness of the design. I think that it even screams "GRAMPA.. CAN YOU SEE OUR TRAILER BEHIND US??" Ever thought about installing smaller mirrors? :-)
IExplore2000
Any smaller and I might as well leave them off. These are 3" dia., big enough to see easily especially the passenger side mirror from the driver's seat.
Anyway, I like them. And I do like to see what's behind as well as on both sides of me when going down the road. A lot less head turning. And, changing lanes into another vehicle in a blind spot these mirrors reveal will take away more than the look of sleekness! Highly recommended. And I think they would be handy on those fancy automatic mirrors too.
I learned Defensive Driving techniques way back in the 60's. I consider being cautious on the road with others a complement- Thanks!
Our driver's ed car was a Suburban, so the Envoy is a snap to park compared to that! On a serious note, I agree with virtually everything you say. However, I find that my stress level is much lower if I only worry about what I can control. I would love for my mirrors to work properly and agree that GM should be able to fix it. But, for whatever reason, they can't. So, I choose to turn the feature off and forget about it. The really sad thing is that there are problems on the 2002, 2003, and probably the 2004 models. What on earth could be causing it is beyond me, but there is no use to exchange it for a newer model than my 2002. If you can get $5000 for it let me know, I'd settle for that too!
By the way, they increase your mileage when backing up, mostly due to the aerodynamic design of the rounded mirror.
Frank
Oh, BTW, I just read about all the problems Mercedes is having with the electronics on their new cars. They have had to buy many back and have taken a big hit on their quality surveys. Must be the Chrysler influence.
GAM
Frank
Thanks!
BTW, Motor Trend just name the VW the SUV of the year. They should be ashamed. They said it was the best value. Since when is a $50,000,2-3/4 ton
VW a value? It has less interior room than the Triplets and get HORRIBLE gas mileage. VW's quality has sucked lately too. I'd take the Lexus RX330 over the VW any day!
GAM
Regarding the comments on this board pertaining to GM engineers' lack of responsiveness to triplet-related issues, I will say this as a mechanical engineer myself. A whole, whole lot of the problem is what is known as Big Company Syndrome. It can take forever to get certain design changes pushed through in large corporations. I work for a company that is actually a bit larger than Ford or GM, and you simply would not believe some of the resistance that you meet whenever you attempt to change a product that you are responsible for as an engineer. A lot of it has to do with EBIT(Earnings Before Interest and Taxes). For example, let's say that an engineer wants to make a change to a part that is made with a progressive stamping die. The faulty part is failing in the field, causing major customer complaints. Okay, but certain executives won't sign off on the purchase of new tooling for the stamping die to make better parts, because the expense will cut into their EBIT numbers. Then they won't get as large of a bonus as they had planned for. Get the picture? Most engineers want, and try, to do the right thing to get design changes pushed through their employers' systems. But in many, many cases, they simply cannot get these types of improvements signed off on internally. Or, they will often here this from there very own engineering management:
"Well sure the product will be improved if we go to that material instead, but it's just too costly of a change. The customer won't be willing to pay extra for a material upgrade such as the one you're proposing here." The exact same reasoning also prevents a lot of engineers from being able to do the right thing to start with! Big companies are willing to do things over, and over, and over again--thinking they're saving big bucks. But they're not willing to do things right the first time. Instead, they end up hacking their customers off so badly in many cases that they will never return.
Another thing that can lead to a lack of engineering responsiveness is known as 'Analysis Paralysis'. Some engineers will analyze a new design proposal to death and NEVER, EVER make a decision in a timely fashion. They're afraid to take a chance on their employers spending big bucks on new dies, molds or automatic assembly machines if their new concept doesn't work properly in the field. A lot of designs that pass artificial test simulations with flying colors fail in real world applications--as we all know as motor vehicle owners and operators.
Ron M.
Frank
Buy the way Frank I wouldn’t set foot in a Wal-mart either the whole frigging building could fall on your head.
Host, tell us a happy motoring story would you.
How about a story about the Envoy XUV (Pittsburgh Post Gazette)? Anyone want a sliding rear roof?
Or perhaps you mean this kind of Happy Motoring?
Steve, Host
Don't know if anyone has read this month's issue of Motor Trend, but they summed up their one-year long term testing with the 2002 Envoy SLT!
They gave it very favorable reviews and mentioned that during their duration, the vehicle has been trouble free. I think that's wonderful! Although, towards the end of the article, it shows a bunch of recalls. Oh well.. glad it survived their testing! Check it out.. page 164..
Just my two-cents!
Thanks!
IExplore2000