Hi guys,

About two weeks ago the "check engine light" on my 2005 Trailblazer
(33,000 miles) came on. I quickly took it to a local dealer to have it
checked out. I was told there was a problem with the coil & plug on
cylinder #5 which were replaced. They also lightened my wallet for the
30,000 mile service.

After getting it back we drove it around for two days and our guess what
light came on again. Back to the dealer on the 21st. Once again it was
quickly diagnosed as an engine misfire on cylinder #5.

Further checking revealed little or no compression on said cylinder #5.
They have now taken the head off for repair and it is rather iffy on
when I get it back - perhaps after Labor Day.

In the mean time I'm driving a 2006 Tahoe courtesy of GM, but this
really bites as I had planned to drive from LA to El Paso this weekend
for vacation. I'm allowed 150 miles per day on the rental from GM, so
any long trip is out of the question.

Has anyone else had any issues with the 4200 Vortec engine that required
a head job at just 33,000 miles???

Oh for the simplicity of my '69 Chevy C-10 that I can do anything I care
to on the engine without fear.

Regards,

Boo fn hoo

Lyle Rawlins wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> About two weeks ago the "check engine light" on my 2005 Trailblazer
> (33,000 miles) came on. I quickly took it to a local dealer to have it
> checked out. I was told there was a problem with the coil & plug on
> cylinder #5 which were replaced. They also lightened my wallet for the
> 30,000 mile service.
>
> After getting it back we drove it around for two days and our guess what
> light came on again. Back to the dealer on the 21st. Once again it was
> quickly diagnosed as an engine misfire on cylinder #5.
>
> Further checking revealed little or no compression on said cylinder #5.
> They have now taken the head off for repair and it is rather iffy on
> when I get it back - perhaps after Labor Day.
>
> In the mean time I'm driving a 2006 Tahoe courtesy of GM, but this
> really bites as I had planned to drive from LA to El Paso this weekend
> for vacation. I'm allowed 150 miles per day on the rental from GM, so
> any long trip is out of the question.
>
> Has anyone else had any issues with the 4200 Vortec engine that required
> a head job at just 33,000 miles???
>
> Oh for the simplicity of my '69 Chevy C-10 that I can do anything I care
> to on the engine without fear.
>
> Regards,

Lyle Rawlins <lrawlins@mac.com> wrote:

>Hi guys,
>
>About two weeks ago the "check engine light" on my 2005 Trailblazer
>(33,000 miles) came on. I quickly took it to a local dealer to have it
>checked out. I was told there was a problem with the coil & plug on
>cylinder #5 which were replaced. They also lightened my wallet for the
>30,000 mile service.
>
>After getting it back we drove it around for two days and our guess what
>light came on again. Back to the dealer on the 21st. Once again it was
>quickly diagnosed as an engine misfire on cylinder #5.
>
>Further checking revealed little or no compression on said cylinder #5.
>They have now taken the head off for repair and it is rather iffy on
>when I get it back - perhaps after Labor Day.
>
>In the mean time I'm driving a 2006 Tahoe courtesy of GM, but this
>really bites as I had planned to drive from LA to El Paso this weekend
>for vacation. I'm allowed 150 miles per day on the rental from GM, so
>any long trip is out of the question.
>
>Has anyone else had any issues with the 4200 Vortec engine that required
>a head job at just 33,000 miles???
>
>Oh for the simplicity of my '69 Chevy C-10 that I can do anything I care
>to on the engine without fear.
>
>Regards,

Did the dealer tell what happened (did it toast a valve or ??).

Bill Bowen

Gee, I suppose that the Consumer Reports reliability rating on the
Trailblazer "Worse Than Average" might have been a clue before
purchasing. I know that it is popular on usenet to disregard Consumer
Reports, but they do provide the only real data which is available to
the public.

John

"John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:sMaJg.38824$NF3.31370@trnddc05...
> Gee, I suppose that the Consumer Reports reliability rating on the
> Trailblazer "Worse Than Average" might have been a clue before
> purchasing. I know that it is popular on usenet to disregard Consumer
> Reports, but they do provide the only real data which is available to
> the public.
>

Why did CR give it this rating? Was it for this reason? If so, I would
expect the same out of other GM vehicles equipped with the same motor.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

This is troubling to me, since my father just bought a GMC Envoy, and it is
basically the same truck with different trim.
Roy
"Mike Marlow" <mmarlow@alltel.net> wrote in message
news:5a34$44f55ece$471fbb8f$19452@ALLTEL.NET...
>
> "John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:sMaJg.38824$NF3.31370@trnddc05...
>> Gee, I suppose that the Consumer Reports reliability rating on the
>> Trailblazer "Worse Than Average" might have been a clue before
>> purchasing. I know that it is popular on usenet to disregard Consumer
>> Reports, but they do provide the only real data which is available to
>> the public.
>>
>
> Why did CR give it this rating? Was it for this reason? If so, I would
> expect the same out of other GM vehicles equipped with the same motor.
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net
>
>

"ROY BRAGG" wrote

> This is troubling to me, since my father just bought a GMC Envoy, and it
> is basically the same truck with different trim.

I wouldn't worry about it. We've had all of about 5-6 of these engines
apart "ever" in the years that it's been out. They are a great engine.
A bit of a disposable engine, but we have almost "no" problems with
them.

Ian

Mike Marlow wrote:
> "John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:sMaJg.38824$NF3.31370@trnddc05...
>> Gee, I suppose that the Consumer Reports reliability rating on the
>> Trailblazer "Worse Than Average" might have been a clue before
>> purchasing. I know that it is popular on usenet to disregard Consumer
>> Reports, but they do provide the only real data which is available to
>> the public.
>>
>
> Why did CR give it this rating? Was it for this reason? If so, I would
> expect the same out of other GM vehicles equipped with the same motor.
>
Duh! Because it's not Japanese.

Thanks for the reply, it eases my fears greatly.
Roy
"shiden_kai" <V-L-M@hotma1l.com> wrote in message
news:88pJg.497618$IK3.287835@pd7tw1no...
>
> "ROY BRAGG" wrote
>
>> This is troubling to me, since my father just bought a GMC Envoy, and it
>> is basically the same truck with different trim.
>
> I wouldn't worry about it. We've had all of about 5-6 of these engines
> apart "ever" in the years that it's been out. They are a great engine.
> A bit of a disposable engine, but we have almost "no" problems with
> them.
>
> Ian
>

"Rob" <rdg@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:2qidnYme4Jl_MWrZnZ2dnUVZ_tudnZ2d@adelphia.com ...
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> "John Horner" <jthorner@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:sMaJg.38824$NF3.31370@trnddc05...
>>> Gee, I suppose that the Consumer Reports reliability rating on the
>>> Trailblazer "Worse Than Average" might have been a clue before
>>> purchasing. I know that it is popular on usenet to disregard Consumer
>>> Reports, but they do provide the only real data which is available to
>>> the public.
>>>
>>
>> Why did CR give it this rating? Was it for this reason? If so, I would
>> expect the same out of other GM vehicles equipped with the same motor.
>>
> Duh! Because it's not Japanese.
It was mostly stuff to do with accessories and trim, etc. The "engine
mechanical" catagory has not been a trouble spot in the surveys for
Envoy/TrailBlazer et. al. with the 4200 engine.

The reliabilty data in CR have nothing to do with any pro-Japanese bias the
editors may have. The reliabilty information is from surveys completed by
car owners. You can accuse CR of being pro-Japanese in their tests, but I
don't particularly buy that either. If you drive and closely look at all
the cars on the US market, you are likely to find that Camrys and Accords
(and many other Japanese vehicles) really are made better, and in equivalent
trim and power train, drive better than the Chevy or Ford counterparts.
That said, many GM products work well enough, and are a better value, which
is why I bought a Chevy Malibu Maxx.