manualtrans2.4

* Looking for owners of flex fuel capable 5-speed manuals with same or similar problem to mine. GM response has been very poor and unhelpful. *

2010 HHR 2LT 5-speed manual flex fuel
Bought new. To date, code P0172 (rich fuel trim) has thrown 7 (seven) times, the first at 2681 miles not long after purchase. Running rich & misreading alcohol anywhere from 37% to 65% each time. A mileage disaster, I have been paying @ 25% more in gas than necessary. Dealership(s) and GM have been confused from the start and some poor responses in the mix. The most recent GM TAC response is "No Fix" and to advise no slow stopdown shifting and engine breaking. Will provide more info if others are having same code P0172 issue with their flex manuals. If you have not ad the problem, you may encounter it at some point. Prompt replies very much appreciated.

firemangeorge

P0172 is a too rich fuel trouble code.

Don't limit it to folks with standard transmissions. Ask for any HHR owners that have had this code/problem.

Lucky

I do noy have a flex fuel car but I have worked on them. In 2000 when I worked for a dodge dealer we had some caravans that would think it was running on ethanol when if fact it had regular unleaded fuel. They would run very poor and rich. Chrysler did come up with a fix by changing the PCM program (reflash) until the flash came out all we could do is reset the PCM by unhooking the battery for 10 min. Then it would be ok for awhile.

donbrew

Check the exhaust flex pipe. If the 2 HO2 sensors don't agree on the correct difference, the computer will think "too rich" or "too lean". If there is an exhaust leak that will lead to an imbalance.

manualtrans2.4

Member Lucky, correct -- my car does not believe that it has E85, not gas. Astonishing that manual flex fuels by any company have ever had this issue, but more so that it is still happening after Chrysler's issue 13 years ago that you kindly described.

As of at least June 2010 (no one will provide actual date GM knew about the problem) TAC at GM has had an internal PI unavailable (yes, unavail) to the public indicating that my problem pertains to the 5-speed manual flex fuel capable HHR. There is a "shifting concern." If the car is in "breaking during fuel composition reset, the ECU will acquire incorrect fuel composition." There is "No Fix." I was advised not to downshift on slow stops and to push in clutch when coming up off gas. No engine breaking. These are unaaceptable responses to a software issue. And anyway, the starting slow stop mph means different things to different people and the computer. No one can say from which mph or gear to begin slow stop. No one can guarantee that not downshifting only pertains to slow stops, not all downshifting (that would be interesting). No one knows how long the reset take and what it involves. Is it a specific number of miles, pull ups off gas/depressing clutch, or times car is driven (ie, one trip so turn on/off once or multiple trips)? And what about necessary sudden stops and hills? The computer will not be pleased. Notwithstanding, GM's recommendations are still no guarantee and cannot be done 100% of the time anyway.

The first time code P0172 went off was a few months after the 2010 purchase. I was initially told it must be bad gas (checked fine each time). At a subsequent visit, the MAF sensor was replaced. I was only told about the "clutch concern" in June 2012 at code event #6. A few weeks ago, at the end of Feb 2013, was code event #7. Obviously, without a software update by GM, there will be a code event #8 and on and on.

As you can well imagine, I am angry and frustrated. I have always driven manuals and expect to drive in all of the normal, appropriate variables. Including downshifting when I desire or when it is needed. It is unacceptable that TAC and corporate are not taking responsibility for their long software problem requiring long overdue software update, but instead making the driver try and outwit the computer.

Any additional information from the board would be very much appreciated.

donbrew

Did you take your failed emissions read out to the dealer? There is a Federal Emissions Warranty. I think the GM fine print even goes farther than the Feds.

manualtrans2.4

note - My car has only been to my mechanic for inspection and emissions, never for code or other issues.

Thanks for your reply. I just recently became aware of the 8 yrs / 80,000 mi. warranty. The dealership that I use now said that it "does not apply to a programming issue, but my read is that it *is* covered. Re: letting the previous dealership know it failed emissions (I told GM, too).... minutes after it failed, paper in hand, I called that dealership so that my mechanic (not GM affiliated) and I could discuss it. My.mechanic's guess was that - although the light was now off - behind the computer scenes there was info that was not yet cleared that caused it to fail. The dealership service person who took the call was irritable and condescending to both of us. But let me backtrack, days earlier, the dealership noticed the car was due for inspection and emissions in a couple of days so offered to do it. I declined. Too expensive at dealerships for those basics so I use my mechanic. During the subsequent emissions failure phone call , my mechanic and I were offered little help and I was told something to the effect - when you use other places this is what you get. As I pieced this all together, these questions came to mind: 1) If I'd allowed the dealership to do the emissions test, would the code have needed to be *reprogrammed* to wipe it clear as opposed to a simple reset? Yes -- reprogramming was required for it to pass anywhere. A reset does not truly clear it out - thus emissions failure. 2) Did the dealership know that it would fail if it was sent off not properly cleared out? Yes, otherwise, why was it sent off reset and not reprogrammed?

To completely clear out the background stuff making it fail, my mechanic suggested driving it for @ 20 miles at a sustained 50 mph ++. The only way that I could see to effect this was to get on the distant highway at about 11 pm that night - and even then there was a fair amount of traffic causing slowdowns. Returned home very late and annoyed since I had to work the next day. Waste of time and even more gas money. Car passed emissions next day.

Snoopy

You keep referring to YOUR MECHANIC. Is he a GM Certified Technician, at a GM dealership, or aftermarket?

Initially, at the 2600 mile point and shortly thereafter, what HAS BEEN DONE to the car to remedy the problems? Who did the adjustments/repairs.

manualtrans2.4

Sorry for any confusion, I will also edit my previous posts to offer more clarification where needed. Anyway, the car has *only* been to my mechanic for inspection and emissions. It failed emissions for the first time and only time at the most recent test described in my previous post. For each of the 7 code events and unrelated issues it has *only* gone to the dealership (I switched to a different one after 3rd, then 6th event). As per an earlier post on this thread, the only part replaced early on (event #3) was the MAF sensor. Not because there was proof it was faulty, but as advised by GM's TAC as a try and see. And I had been insisting from event #1 to replace it - or something. New MAF did not solve anything. Gas has been tested many times in case bad - it is always fine at under 10%. Per TAC instructions, dealership keeps testing various things ---- fuel trim, 02 readings etc. All test fine each time. But alcohol content readings are always wildly incorrect. At code events 6 & #7, TAC said problem only exists with 5-speed trans and no fix for it (!). They put the problem in my lap saying that perhaps not engine braking or downshifting on slow stops will help. I say unacceptable response - plus, it is not even possible 100% of the time in the real world. Perhaps automatic drivers should have to clap their hands, turn on their high beams or some nonsense everytime they slow stop. I keep insisting for another replacement of *some*thing* and more importantly, a software update since they say it is the manuals. If it just my car - again, f-i-x it. GM says no fix avail (for me or anyone, GM??). I say then install a computer chip that will force the car to only recognize gas, not E85 since I will never use E85 anyway. GM says that would change the design of the car and void my warranty (but w/the ignition recall, they were replaced with modified ones, right?). I say, but yet you want to take away perfectly reasonable, appropriate manual driving methods that you do not even know causes the code instead of taking responsibility for the problem. IMO : GM's TAC has *no clue* what is wrong with the car and no incentive to fix it. The car is no longer made - so GM does not care; it is a manual - so there are few of them; *and* a manual flex - so fewer still.

Snoopy

2 words for you..........

Law yer !!!

Admitted fault by GM, no fix, Lemon Law.