Front tires falling off the H2?

[JDLarue]

And as far as GM issuing a recall? Hell, it took 'em years to recall those gas tanks that were breaking open during a crash and starting the trucks on fire. Took a few people burning to death and alot of negative publicity before they did anything. How about the Ford Pinto and Ford Crown vics. How many people fryed before Ford recalled those gas tanks. Sorry, I don't have alot of faith in parts recalls. If it costs them money, they're not going to want to do it.

[f5fstop]

Originally Posted by JDLarue

And as far as GM issuing a recall? Hell, it took 'em years to recall those gas tanks that were breaking open during a crash and starting the trucks on fire. Took a few people burning to death and alot of negative publicity before they did anything. How about the Ford Pinto and Ford Crown vics. How many people fryed before Ford recalled those gas tanks. Sorry, I don't have alot of faith in parts recalls. If it costs them money, they're not going to want to do it.

Give me a break. If you look at statistics, inside the rail fuel tanks were more likely to catch fire in Fords and Chryslers. To this day, outside the rail fuel tanks are used on quite a few other vehicles, some without even frame rails.
The one large lawsuit that GM is still appealing had a kid, broadsided by a truck at excessive speeds, and he was proven dead before he burned.
Let's all face it, these vehicles use fuel, fuel is explosive and burns. Any accident can cause a fire.
To add some irony to the issue. GM has been sued for not having side saddle tanks on the outside of the frame. The suits make it known that if the tanks had been outside the rails, the damage to the rear would not have caused the axles to loosen and hit the tank and cause a leakage. All were at extremely high speed rear collisions where the axle was separated and slammed into the inside fuel tank. In one, the truck tailgate was actually inside the rear of the cab.

So, did GM have some fuel tanks that exploded under severe collisions? Yes. Was it more likely that a Ford in the same year would have a fuel fire? Yes. Statistics in court proved that issue. However, a jury full of people making a decision against a large manufacturer (note: Big Pockets), and a set of parents who just lost their son, makes for a large decision. Be it right or wrong.

Working with accident investigators for quite a few years, I have learned never believe the customer, and things are not what they appear to be. Why do you think GM installed the first "black box?" To get crash data to show what the driver was doing. So when the person said they were pressing the brakes, the data recorder proved the accelerator was pressed, not the brakes.

Could a few spindles have broken on their own? Yes, they are man made. Could it have had an impact in the side with a curb a few days earlier, and then fall off? Sure. However, even NHTSA's investigation, up until they lost the documentation, was not going anywhere. One thing is for sure, proof is not needed for NHTSA to issue a request for a recall. (NHTSA cannot force a recall, only the courts. They suggest, the manufacturer either follows suit, or ends up in court. Ford fought the ignition switch recall in court.) Let's not forget Toyota's trouble in Japan about not issuing recalls when required. They just got in a lot of trouble over this issue in Japan.

So, let's just wait until GM gets done resubmitting the paperwork, and see what NHTSA comes across with, before condemning the company.

[Dug]

JD. It could be that someone forgot to put lug nuts on or someone overtightened them (causing them to snap) when putting on bigger tires or something.

[PARAGON]

There is something like 30 incidents in the inquiry. 85% of them were situations where there was an MVA that subsequently caused the front tire to separate in some form from the truck.

It's not all that entirely uncommon. Even in racing vehicles they use straps to contain the parts upon separation.

Nearly all had been determined to be deformed due to a high impact through either the MVA or those that were not initially in a MVA striking a curb or something the like. Turning at moderate speed and driving the wheel into a curb, or even the stupid thing of jumping a 8K lb truck.

It must also be said that quite a few of those 30 or so were GM test mules that were included in the inquiry.

[KenP]

Originally Posted by PARAGON

There is something like 30 incidents in the inquiry. 85% of them were situations where there was an MVA that subsequently caused the front tire to separate in some form from the truck.

It's not all that entirely uncommon. Even in racing vehicles they use straps to contain the parts upon separation.

Nearly all had been determined to be deformed due to a high impact through either the MVA or those that were not initially in a MVA striking a curb or something the like. Turning at moderate speed and driving the wheel into a curb, or even the stupid thing of jumping a 8K lb truck.

It must also be said that quite a few of those 30 or so were GM test mules that were included in the inquiry.

Oh hell, we're selling the truck. No way are we keeping a truck that GM beat on and lost a few tires.

[lennyrebel]

Originally Posted by JDLarue

And as far as GM issuing a recall? Hell, it took 'em years to recall those gas tanks that were breaking open during a crash and starting the trucks on fire. Took a few people burning to death and alot of negative publicity before they did anything. How about the Ford Pinto and Ford Crown vics. How many people fryed before Ford recalled those gas tanks. Sorry, I don't have alot of faith in parts recalls. If it costs them money, they're not going to want to do it.

And if you'll recall it took NBC to remove the fuel cap insert a rag and detonate an explosive in the tank to duplicate the feat. And GM had to threaten to sue them before they owned up to what they did. It only happened on rare side impacts to ten year old trucks. For God sakes I remember when all the pickups had the tanks behind the seats and you could hear the fuel sloshing. I suppose you want to recall Model A Fords that had the fuel tanks at the cowl in front of windshield. I guess its part of the American consumer mentality ,sue for everything and everybody should be totally isolated and protected from cradle to grave. Never take a risk and blame the Gov'mt or GM or someone for everything that happens, Heaven help it if you had to grow up and be responsible for yourself. Ligten up and live a little-you might even enjoy it. The Rebel

[f5fstop]

Originally Posted by lennyrebel

And if you'll recall it took NBC to remove the fuel cap insert a rag and detonate an explosive in the tank to duplicate the feat. And GM had to threaten to sue them before they owned up to what they did. It only happened on rare side impacts to ten year old trucks. For God sakes I remember when all the pickups had the tanks behind the seats and you could hear the fuel sloshing. I suppose you want to recall Model A Fords that had the fuel tanks at the cowl in front of windshield. I guess its part of the American consumer mentality ,sue for everything and everybody should be totally isolated and protected from cradle to grave. Never take a risk and blame the Gov'mt or GM or someone for everything that happens, Heaven help it if you had to grow up and be responsible for yourself. Ligten up and live a little-you might even enjoy it. The Rebel

Good point, I had forgot about that TV show that defamed GM. Someday, we will run on water