That 8-speed is carried over to the updated revised 2023 Colorado/Canyon. Apparently, the 8-speed was significantly improved.
As always, "we'll see" .
As always, "we'll see" .
GM 8 Speed Automatic-Lawsuit
- Thread starter PontiacHO
- Start date
I really didn't care for the 8 Speed behind the LGX 3.6 in either the CTS or XT5 my family had leased
Rumble stripping sensations, weird shudders, always in the wrong gear
The new 9 Speed is a little better, but I was plenty disappointed with a 2023 XT5 I drove it in
Maybe they've done some stuff to it
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2022
- Messages
- 716
GM's 8 speed doesn't have anything in common with the ZF 8 speed used by FCA/Stellantis.
But interesting, when I compare reviews on the Ford 10 speed vs the GM 10 speed, it's basically Ford hardware and shared with GM but tuned differently by each company; the GM is much better liked on the forums it seems, at least that's what I've been seeing. Ford is still clunky, GM is smooth.
Oh okay..I thought the GM 8 speed was licensed by ZF. NVM.
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2012
- Messages
- 3,597
The 10L in my Dad's 2022 Silverado seems decent, shifts quick. But with only 4k on the clock, time will tell. I was not a fan of the 6L in his '16 Silverado with the 4.3 AFM V6, it was doggy and gutless.
I did try on 8-speed automatic in a TrailBoss... hated it. I need to have confidence in my trans and that did not have it. When I drove that truck with that trans I remember saying out loud with the salesman in the cab "OK now do something, are you going to shift or what are you going to do?" Of course rhetorically talking to the tans.
...meanwhile the old 4L60 and 4L80's get the job done, you know when to expect them to shift, and they have been beyond figured out by now. Not necessarily on this board, but man do the 4L60 get unnecessary amounts of ridicule. Mostly from the ">150k, never serviced, then handed to a 16 y/o kid and HAMMERED on" crowd.
I did try on 8-speed automatic in a TrailBoss... hated it. I need to have confidence in my trans and that did not have it. When I drove that truck with that trans I remember saying out loud with the salesman in the cab "OK now do something, are you going to shift or what are you going to do?" Of course rhetorically talking to the tans.
...meanwhile the old 4L60 and 4L80's get the job done, you know when to expect them to shift, and they have been beyond figured out by now. Not necessarily on this board, but man do the 4L60 get unnecessary amounts of ridicule. Mostly from the ">150k, never serviced, then handed to a 16 y/o kid and HAMMERED on" crowd.
The 6L80E/6L90E has great potential, Most 6L80E calibrations are trash while 6L90E calibrations are usually a pretty good basepoint for a custom tune.
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2021
- Messages
- 507
It’s a shame what GM has done to folks . They knew there was a design Flaw with their transmission but yet they kept pushing them out to the customers and letting the Dealership deal with the problems. Staying loyal to a brand makes no senses if you get treated this way
The only complaint I have with the 8 speed after 5k in my 22 Silverado is the first 1-2 shift when cold. Half the time it feels like it's not going to shift then bangs into gear. My understanding is because the fluid pump isn't big enough and can't make up for the pressure bleed off. After that it shifts great. I've actually been pretty pleased with it so far. I find the shifts to be where I want them and very quick. I was nervous to buy the truck with this transmission but I like it more than I expected.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Our 10 speed is smoother than the beloved 850RE (8) in my Jeep
There is some good stuff in the legal doc. For those that don't want to read the whole thing, here's some interesting bits:
(Bold highlights mine)
The plaintiffs allege that the pervasive commonality of the alleged defects is illustrated byGM’s own warranty service statistics. The plaintiffs say that GM established target defect rates for the class models ranging from 5 to 9.8 “Incidents Per Thousand Vehicles” (“IPTV”). Those rates correspond to between 0.5% and 0.98% — less than 1% of vehicles sold for all models. However, a February 2018 warranty data analysis produced by GM showed that predicted warranty service rates for various models exceeded 155 IPTV (15.5%) within 60,000 miles of service, with a predicted “repeat claims rate” of 8%. A follow-up analysis in August 2018 found that the actual service rate was 25% within 32 months after sale. Another GM analysis in 2019 found that the observed IPTV for class vehicles was 30-fold higher than the target defect rate established for Model Year 2023 and later vehicles with the new Gen 2 design. GM’s engineer Tim Anguish testified that the warranty claim rate for class vehicles eventually exceeded 50%.
........
The plaintiffs’ expert, Alice Wachs, reviewed warranty service data produced by GM through discovery and predicted that warranty claim rates among 8L-equipped class models eventually would range from 61% to 100% for various models within the expected vehicle lifetime of 10 years or 120,000 miles. Wachs also reported that a similar review conducted internally by GM predicted future warranty claim rates matching her figures.Case 2:19-cv-11044-DML-DRG ECF No. 284, PageID.20403 Filed 03/20/23 Page 9 of 106-10-
.........
Finally, the plaintiffs’ expert William McVea conducted an engineering review of the transmission design that included review of GM correspondence about the design and problems exhibited by it, inspections of class vehicles owned by some of the named plaintiffs, and teardowns of several exemplar transmissions supplied by the defendant. He concluded that an inappropriate combination of ATF and clutch friction material in the “Torque Converter Clutch” (“TCC”)assembly, as well as defects in the design or function of certain valve components, contributed to both the “shudder” and “harsh shift” issues. McVea opined that, due to the defective design, the problems would be expected to occur inevitably in all class vehicles sold.
............
McVea cited internal GM documents from the defendant’s study of the transmission problem that showed that GM selected an ATF designated as “212B” and a friction material known as “LuK WFP6300.” Other documents showed that GM’s engineers found this combination to be problematic because the 212B fluid was unusually sensitive to moisture, and because the WFP6300 material had poor friction characteristics....... McVea cited GM presentations highlighting the inappropriate combination, noting that the fluid selected originally was intended to be used with a “carbon fiber” friction material, but the fluid was not changed when GM decided, in 2012, to switch to the “paper based” WFP6300 material, ostensibly citing a $2 per unit savings due to a discount from the supplier that had proposed to produce both the clutch material and torque converter assemblies. Ibid. The problematic combination was referred to contemporaneously by GM engineer Randy Melanson as “the worst friction system we got, and it’s only going to get worse with mileage, no matter what we do.”
................................
(Bold highlights mine)
The plaintiffs allege that the pervasive commonality of the alleged defects is illustrated byGM’s own warranty service statistics. The plaintiffs say that GM established target defect rates for the class models ranging from 5 to 9.8 “Incidents Per Thousand Vehicles” (“IPTV”). Those rates correspond to between 0.5% and 0.98% — less than 1% of vehicles sold for all models. However, a February 2018 warranty data analysis produced by GM showed that predicted warranty service rates for various models exceeded 155 IPTV (15.5%) within 60,000 miles of service, with a predicted “repeat claims rate” of 8%. A follow-up analysis in August 2018 found that the actual service rate was 25% within 32 months after sale. Another GM analysis in 2019 found that the observed IPTV for class vehicles was 30-fold higher than the target defect rate established for Model Year 2023 and later vehicles with the new Gen 2 design. GM’s engineer Tim Anguish testified that the warranty claim rate for class vehicles eventually exceeded 50%.
........
The plaintiffs’ expert, Alice Wachs, reviewed warranty service data produced by GM through discovery and predicted that warranty claim rates among 8L-equipped class models eventually would range from 61% to 100% for various models within the expected vehicle lifetime of 10 years or 120,000 miles. Wachs also reported that a similar review conducted internally by GM predicted future warranty claim rates matching her figures.Case 2:19-cv-11044-DML-DRG ECF No. 284, PageID.20403 Filed 03/20/23 Page 9 of 106-10-
.........
Finally, the plaintiffs’ expert William McVea conducted an engineering review of the transmission design that included review of GM correspondence about the design and problems exhibited by it, inspections of class vehicles owned by some of the named plaintiffs, and teardowns of several exemplar transmissions supplied by the defendant. He concluded that an inappropriate combination of ATF and clutch friction material in the “Torque Converter Clutch” (“TCC”)assembly, as well as defects in the design or function of certain valve components, contributed to both the “shudder” and “harsh shift” issues. McVea opined that, due to the defective design, the problems would be expected to occur inevitably in all class vehicles sold.
............
McVea cited internal GM documents from the defendant’s study of the transmission problem that showed that GM selected an ATF designated as “212B” and a friction material known as “LuK WFP6300.” Other documents showed that GM’s engineers found this combination to be problematic because the 212B fluid was unusually sensitive to moisture, and because the WFP6300 material had poor friction characteristics....... McVea cited GM presentations highlighting the inappropriate combination, noting that the fluid selected originally was intended to be used with a “carbon fiber” friction material, but the fluid was not changed when GM decided, in 2012, to switch to the “paper based” WFP6300 material, ostensibly citing a $2 per unit savings due to a discount from the supplier that had proposed to produce both the clutch material and torque converter assemblies. Ibid. The problematic combination was referred to contemporaneously by GM engineer Randy Melanson as “the worst friction system we got, and it’s only going to get worse with mileage, no matter what we do.”
................................
To me, the $2 per unit savings thing really sticks out.
Engineers come up with a solid design, and then the beancounters/marketing people destroy it to save $2 per unit, and cause the company to lose who knows how much money.
I think about this every time I argue with someone about our 10R80's that Ford says 'don't change the fluid until 150k'.
And they reply 'The engineers know what they're doing!!!', maybe, but everyone else involved might not.
I also read that as, if you have one of the transmissions described in the lawsuit, maybe some preventative rebuilding might be in order. Or at least, as I believe @clinebarger has mentioned, replacing the torque converter preventatively.
Engineers come up with a solid design, and then the beancounters/marketing people destroy it to save $2 per unit, and cause the company to lose who knows how much money.
I think about this every time I argue with someone about our 10R80's that Ford says 'don't change the fluid until 150k'.
And they reply 'The engineers know what they're doing!!!', maybe, but everyone else involved might not.
I also read that as, if you have one of the transmissions described in the lawsuit, maybe some preventative rebuilding might be in order. Or at least, as I believe @clinebarger has mentioned, replacing the torque converter preventatively.
Last edited:
And use a Billet Front Cover TC with Twin Hi-Energy Frictions (Blended Carbon Matrix). The real messed up part.....GM was one of the first to adopt Hi-Energy Friction Technology......It's WHAT enabled the 4L60E warranty failure rates to plummet. They KNOW it works!
Slow night at work, so I've gone down the rabbit hole. Ran across the unredacted emails between GM engineers. It looks like they were attempting to throw Mobil under the bus for crap fluid, until one engineer, mentioned in the class action, sent an email that pretty much said 'nope, this is mostly our fault'
Another unsealed GM document that discusses changes made to the 8L 'Gen 2's'
Another unsealed GM document that discusses changes made to the 8L 'Gen 2's'
Last edited:
The law firm has a master list of unsealed exhibits.
Nerd out at will:
More fun GM communications:
Nerd out at will:
More fun GM communications:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2023
- Messages
- 125
I agree... and I wonder if delivering defective transmissions with more gears than most folks will ever need, is a way to keep the "ooh look, 10 speeds.. I need that truck" buyer interested rather than thinking about reliability for the consumer.
When I initially heard about 10 speed auto's, my first thought was we're going to be hearing about class action lawsuits over these mega gear tranny's lol. I'm old school... I believe in the KISS approach
Plus I hate always seeing the consumers paying to be used as beta testers
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2023
- Messages
- 125
Exactly
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2022
- Messages
- 716
I agree... and I wonder if delivering defective transmissions with more gears than most folks will ever need, is a way to keep the "ooh look, 10 speeds.. I need that truck" buyer interested rather than thinking about reliability for the consumer.
When I initially heard about 10 speed auto's, my first thought was we're going to be hearing about class action lawsuits over these mega gear tranny's lol. I'm old school... I believe in the KISS approach
Plus I hate always seeing the consumers paying to be used as beta testers
The problem isn't the gear count (8 or 10 gears). The problem is cost cutting.
The ZF 8 speed is probably the worlds best 8 speed transmission, used heavily by chrysler products and all the way to expensive exotic european cars. It's buttery smooth, and can handle a beating. It's proof that the issue isn't the gear count, it's just poor engineering or cost cutting found all over car manufacturers these days.
You may think 5 or 6 gears is enough, until you've pulled a heavy load with an 8 or 10 speed at which point you will quickly change your mind (I did anyway).
A high gear count allows you to have a super deep first gear for off the line power, a super tall gear for cruising unloaded on the freeway and minimizing MPG, and a bunch of gears in between so that you're only a few hundred RPMs away every time from the next gear. Instead of lugging or screaming up a hill, you're now always at the best RPM.
Especially useful on diesels with a very narrow power band. The more gears you have, the more you're always able to put down peak power.
Test drive a cummins with a 6 speed vs a duramax with a 10. The duramax has less power and torque on paper, but feels much better and stronger while towing because the cummins doesn't have the same ability to sit at peak power.
I agree. Jury is still out on longevity, but the 10 speeds allow smaller engines to do some pretty amazing things if you ask me.
I never thought I would tow a 6000-pound camper with a 4-cylinder truck, but I do it every other weekend off and the truck never complains, never bogs, will run 70+ on the highway, and not think twice, pulls through the north GA mountains with ease and in general is a pretty nice ride.
Could you do that with a 4 or 6-speed? Maybe? I don't think it would be nearly as effortless though.
A couple of random thoughts.
Why didn't they upgrade the friction material in the converter? Seems like an easy fix and not to bad to do as a running change. Seems like fixing the fluid and the converter would have at least helped with the deaths. I didn't see any mention of them doing it until the Gen2 unit they are releasing for 2023.
I'm pretty sure 10 speed was shipping in the 2018 range, why not abandon the 8 speed all together or even just temporarily?
Is imagine testing and integration would have a lot to do with it. Maybe they figured they'd find a way out so no need to work on a backup plan (10 speeds for all).
It is interesting how the different divisions handled it. The Caddy guys threw a fit. The Vette guys just programmed out TCC lockup in the lower 4-5 gears and shipped it. The truck guys apparently just sent it.
I don't know why, but it is a fascinating story to me of how a giant company can work and still shoot itself in the foot. Probably happens all of the time.
Why didn't they upgrade the friction material in the converter? Seems like an easy fix and not to bad to do as a running change. Seems like fixing the fluid and the converter would have at least helped with the deaths. I didn't see any mention of them doing it until the Gen2 unit they are releasing for 2023.
I'm pretty sure 10 speed was shipping in the 2018 range, why not abandon the 8 speed all together or even just temporarily?
Is imagine testing and integration would have a lot to do with it. Maybe they figured they'd find a way out so no need to work on a backup plan (10 speeds for all).
It is interesting how the different divisions handled it. The Caddy guys threw a fit. The Vette guys just programmed out TCC lockup in the lower 4-5 gears and shipped it. The truck guys apparently just sent it.
I don't know why, but it is a fascinating story to me of how a giant company can work and still shoot itself in the foot. Probably happens all of the time.
Similar threads
