Front tires falling off the H2?

[JDLarue]

I'm new to this forum so I'm sorry for asking sooooooo many questions. I've had my H2 for 3 1/2 years and this is the only place I've found that the people seem to know what the hell they're talking about, so I'm hoping you guys will be patient with a newbie. You just can't get any definitive answers from the dealerships so I'm trying to pick the brains of guys that have more knowledge than me.

That being said, I've got another question: What is the suspension part that's breaking and causing the front wheels to fall off some H2's? Is it the tie rods? Is there an after-market product that can be installed to prevent it? For instance a Fabtech part?

[Dug]

Your probably hearing about the tie rod ends that owners replace with a beefed up tie rod. This part breaking would cause the tire to swing all the way right or left .

The front tires do not fall off H2's.

[timgco]

As long as you don't have Pewter, you should be fine. It seems only the pewter truck have the front tires fall off.

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by Dug

Your probably hearing about the tie rod ends that owners replace with a beefed up tie rod. This part breaking would cause the tire to swing all the way right or left .

The front tires do not fall off H2's.

Actually, I don't think that's true. I heard cases that tires were coming completely coming off the trucks. I can't remember why but I know I heard a lot of crap from friends.

Mark

[ROADCAPT]

No tire I have heard of fallin off however as metioned above the tie rods are a week link and the Fabtec ones are the reccomended ones, do a tie rod search on this thread and you should find the part number if someone does not chime in soon.

Be Safe

[KenP]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

Actually, I don't think that's true. I heard cases that tires were coming completely coming off the trucks. I can't remember why but I know I heard a lot of crap from friends.

Mark

You're correct. Early model H2's. I can't find the discussion about it, but it didn't happen often so there wasn't a recall. I think the A-arm cracked, but not 100% sure what it was.

Tie rods do bend when offroad sometimes. Excessive wheel spin and sudden traction don't mix.

Unless you're H2Rocks, then they just bend for the hell of it.

[devilsfan]

There were, what, 3 trucks total that this happened to?

Definitely something to be looked into, but this came out in 2003. If GM hasn't issued a bulletin or recall on the issue by now, I wouldn't worry about it.

Stacy

[OrangeCrush]

Originally Posted by ROADCAPT

No tire I have heard of fallin off however as metioned above the tie rods are a week link and the Fabtec ones are the reccomended ones, do a tie rod search on this thread and you should find the part number if someone does not chime in soon.

Be Safe

And THAT is the reason why you're a Hummer Novice...



Mark

[Dug]

Originally Posted by OrangeCrush

Actually, I don't think that's true. I heard cases that tires were coming completely coming off the trucks. I can't remember why but I know I heard a lot of crap from friends.

Mark

IF you heard of tires coming completely off. It would take some doing for that to happen. The upper A arm , lower A arm, & axle shaft would have to completely shear off. So.... its my opinion that there is no suspension part that fails on hummers and makes the front tire fall off.

[Big Z]

Originally Posted by Dug

IF you heard of tires coming completely off. It would take some doing for that to happen. The upper A arm , lower A arm, & axle shaft would have to completely shear off. So.... its my opinion that there is no suspension part that fails on hummers and makes the front tire fall off.

Well, I was one of the ones, that had the front diff replaced. Had the circumstances been different...I have NO DOUBT!!...The wheel could have been ripped off!

[KenP]

Originally Posted by PhilD

It was an issue caused by cracks in the spindles. As far as I understand it is still being investigated by NTSB.

BINGO!!! Thanks Phil for the trip down "Search" Memory Lane.

[f5fstop]

Last I heard....
GM relates the cause to hard impacts to the side of the tire, which is normal, since spindles are not designed to take hard impacts to the side. These could be caused by slamming a curb while sliding sideways, etc. Not privy to this information, so can't say, just what I have heard.
In addition, last I read in the paper was the NHTSA has lost all the 941 Forms GM submitted on this subject, and was requested GM resubmit the information for their investigation.

[JDLarue]

Well, somewhere in this forum I came across a pic of a yellow H2 that was sitting on the suspension with the tire and wheel lying on the ground about 20 ft. away. Whoever it was said his wheel and tire came of while driving.

[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.