Certainly one of the predominant reasons to purchase a brand new automobile is knowing that parts will probably be available if a repair is required. And while that is normally the case, John Rice’s 2024 Chevy Silverado ZR2 has develop into a notable exception, reports WGME.
In a Facebook post, Rice said that he had only owned his truck for just a few months when, in November 2024, he was involved in a crash on a dust road. The truck went off to J&T Autobody in Fryeburg, Maine, which expected it to be fixed in about ten days. While tearing down the truck, the shop discovered that the predominant wiring harness was damaged and needed to get replaced. It’s fairly common for extra damage to be found after the teardown and repair has begun, and the shop has been helping Rice as much as possible through this ordeal.
A latest harness arrived in January 2025, just for the repair shop to find that two of the connectors were flawed and would not plug into the truck properly. In line with Rice’s breakdown of the events, the brand new harness was “One Off” (referring to the connectors), and a unique harness needed to be ordered. This process played out a further five times over the course of the 12 months, the last of which Rice said in one other post was overseen by GM CEO Mary Barra’s “Executive Motion Team”. Every time, the wiring harness that was presupposed to plug into the practically latest truck didn’t fit. The Silverado stays in pieces on the shop today.
Stuck with no truck
To make matters worse, Chevy seems unwilling to think about alternatives to supplying a brand new, correct alternative wiring harness. Rice suggested a workaround that Chevy reportedly rejected. From WGME:
“Send me a schematic and a print, and we’ll make the harness. No. Cannot try this,” Rice said. “If we found one in a junk yard, that was totaled for some reason, and took the harness out and put it within the vehicle — that voids the warranty. Cannot do it.”
While GM is currently covering half of Rice’s monthly payments on the truck, he’s still paying for a truck he cannot drive. The manufacturer is requiring the repair to make use of only a harness it provides, and it has been unable to offer the right harness. The Executive Motion Team will now not consult with Rice because he has filed a criticism against GM with the Latest Hampshire Attorney General’s Office. WGME didn’t get a reply to a request for comment from GM, but The Drive did, kind of. An unidentified GM spokesperson said:
“Thanks for bringing this to our attention. We’ve reached out to the shopper and are looking into this matter. We hope to unravel this as quickly as possible.”
I am unable to help but wonder, is it a diesel thing?
No reports I’ve seen have said specifically which plugs on the wiring harness aren’t matching up, but I’m wondering if the difficulty might need something to do with 2024 being the primary 12 months the SIlverado ZR2 was available with GM’s 3.0-liter inline-6 Duramax diesel engine? This is only speculation, but Rice said that the harness was “one-off” in reference to the plugs. Could his Silverado ZR2 diesel have such a singular configuration, between the engine and other options that he chosen, that Chevy has been unable to duplicate it?
One comment on our 2024 Chevy Silverado ZR2 diesel review mentioned one other issue where Chevy didn’t appear to have the option to provide the right alternative parts. Goose wrote:
After hearing in regards to the nightmare it was for my coworker to have Chevy fix his 2017 2500 Duramax with lower than 50k miles this past summer, I’m never buying a contemporary diesel. The DPF and another emissions stuff went kaput and Chevy couldn’t locate the parts to interchange/fix it under warranty. They refused to make use of non-OEM parts that were compliant with the EPA. In addition they would not use used OEM parts to get the truck at the least operational until latest parts could possibly be found. It ended up sitting on the dealer for five+ months in limp mode unfixed and no movement from Chevy to get it fixed. Chevy was only willing to supply him some “deals” to purchase a brand new truck (laughably low trade-in of $25k the truck since it was non-op regardless that it was otherwise flawless plus $5k off most any fullsize truck/SUV)
Much of this sounds just like Rice’s experience. The predominant exception is that Chevy has refused to purchase the truck back. It is a repair from crash damage, not a failed warranty repair, so the Lemon Law doesn’t apply. That leaves Rice stuck with an almost-new truck that he still cannot drive, greater than a 12 months after it initially went to the shop.
This Article First Appeared At www.jalopnik.com
