6.2L or Duramax reliability

[Polo08816]

When they talk about the efficiency of a diesel car, for some reason they always compare liters to liters. But at the same time, they forget to mention that AdBlue must be poured into a diesel engine, I don’t know how in the USA, but in Russia it adds another 1.5 liters to fuel consumption in money terms. Plus, more expensive maintenance, in particular for a diesel engine, it is necessary to change the air filter more often, and it is imperative to change the fuel filter through maintenance.
Again, diesel is more expensive oil. Well, the price is initially a little more expensive for a diesel engine than for a 6.2 engine. When I compared when buying my Yukon, I got a diesel engine savings of about 4 thousand dollars for 3 years of ownership and 150 thousand kilometers. $ 4,000 is with an initial investment in the purchase of $ 150 thousand. I figured that I was ready to overpay $ 4,000 to get a more dynamic engine than a diesel engine.

The repairs are much more expensive than a naturally aspirated engine. Also, when diesels fail, they fail catastrophically. Just google "CP4 pump failure" for examples of how a high pressure fuel pump (on an HD) can take out an entire engine along with it.

 

[Vladimir2306]

The repairs are much more expensive than a naturally aspirated engine. Also, when diesels fail, they fail catastrophically. Just google "CP4 pump failure" for examples of how a high pressure fuel pump (on an HD) can take out an entire engine along with it.

Yes, and it is also

 

[jthoske]

Yep, I'm sure... I have 23K on mine and have put 3 jugs in it besides the factory fill. 3/4 full right now. It may not be quite 10K, but it for sure is 7K+...DEF is a non issue for me. 1st warning....dump 2.5 and motor on !

I have 4200 miles in mine currently. The DEF gauge was half empty so I just poured 2.5gallons into it for the first time since buying it. Gauge says full now.

$10/4000 miles = $.0025/mi for DEF

 

[Eusibius2]

Finally went ahead with a Denali XL 6.2L. Black color, well-optioned. The advice here was really valuable and I am looking forward to contributing as I learn more about the vehicle! Will try to post some pics over the weekend

Congrats! Enjoy the new rig and send pics when you get a chance.

 

[Vladimir2306]

Finally went ahead with a Denali XL 6.2L. Black color, well-optioned. The advice here was really valuable and I am looking forward to contributing as I learn more about the vehicle! Will try to post some pics over the weekend

Congratulations. 6.2 is a great choice)

 

[avalonandl]

Finally went ahead with a Denali XL 6.2L. Black color, well-optioned. The advice here was really valuable and I am looking forward to contributing as I learn more about the vehicle! Will try to post some pics over the weekend

Remember to run Premium

Good choice....6.2 are the bomb...

 

[EdTom]

I’m seriously thinking about ordering a 2024 Tahoe next month. The engine is the big question now. I’ve owned every generation since they’ve come out. All have had 5.3’s and all have been reliable. The comment I want to share is this for whatever it’s worth. I recently asked the service manager at my longtime Chevy dealership which engine he’d go with. His answer was the 5.3. He based that on doing basically around town driving. He also stated and I agree that the new 10 speed transmission made a big difference with that engine. That said, personally I’m still undecided.

 

[jmzvet]

I have the 5.3 in my 21 Trail Boss. It’s more than capable.
Has more HP/TQ than I need.
I tow a 3500lb boat and occasionally use 4wd. I use it like most 1/2 Ton truck buyers use their trucks.
I also have a 3.0 Duramax in my 23 Yukon but Denali. Absolutely love the Diesel/ 10 spd transmission combo

 

[DuraYuk]

The repairs are much more expensive than a naturally aspirated engine. Also, when diesels fail, they fail catastrophically. Just google "CP4 pump failure" for examples of how a high pressure fuel pump (on an HD) can take out an entire engine along with it.

Cp4 isn't uses in lm2. Uses denso hp4. Im gonna say many don't understand diesel. It's not some alien tech. It's just as simple as gasser. Parts are a little more expensive. But nothing catastrophic about diesel failures. No need for false scare tactics. For the record the lm2 also has a longer warranty then a gas gm. At 5 years 100k powertrain.

 

[steiny93]

Cp4 isn't uses in lm2. Uses denso hp4. Im gonna say many don't understand diesel. It's not some alien tech. It's just as simple as gasser. Parts are a little more expensive. But nothing catastrophic about diesel failures. No need for false scare tactics. For the record the lm2 also has a longer warranty then a gas gm. At 5 years 100k powertrain.

This part

It's just as simple as gasser

isn't true at all when you factor in the emissions being forced upon the baby diesels.

The above isn't scare tactics, these baby diesels are full of costly bits and when they fail they are expensive.

My wife's denali just has the turbo replaced (under warranty); with warranty $0, without $2100. My ecoDiesel has had SCR's replaced twice; I believe those were $1800 each visit.

Warranty is the friend of a baby diesel.

 

[DuraYuk]

This part

isn't true at all when you factor in the emissions being forced upon the baby diesels.

The above isn't scare tactics, these baby diesels are full of costly bits and when they fail they are expensive.

My wife's denali just has the turbo replaced (under warranty); with warranty $0, without $2100. My ecoDiesel has had SCR's replaced twice; I believe those were $1800 each visit.

Warranty is the friend of a baby diesel.

The same is true of gas engines. You had a problem. Turbos are not a diesel only trait, and a very low failure point in the lm2. What about lifters in the v8s? That is a costly repair outside of warranty. What about catalytic converters (some diesels dont have them and those that do don't fail with the regularity that gas ones do)? The list goes on and on. Diesel emissions components are not complex. The parts are not any more cost prohibitive when compared to their gasoline counterparts. And in most cases last longer.

 

[steiny93]

The same is true of gas engines. You had a problem. Turbos are not a diesel only trait, and a very low failure point in the lm2. What about lifters in the v8s? That is a costly repair outside of warranty. What about catalytic converters (some diesels dont have them and those that do don't fail with the regularity that gas ones do)? The list goes on and on. Diesel emissions components are not complex. The parts are not any more cost prohibitive when compared to their gasoline counterparts. And in most cases last longer.

We are comparing the 6.2 vs the 3.0 (no turbo on the gaser).
The diesel emissions are more complex (regens, def injection, egr's that are cooled); none of which are on the gasers.
Lifters in the v8, they are a wash to a SCR replacement in regard to cost. Ditto to a belt replace in the diesel at 200k, except it's guaranteed in the diesel.

I like the baby diesels (I have a pair of them) but lets not be complete fan boys here.

 

[DuraYuk]

We are comparing the 6.2 vs the 3.0 (no turbo on the gaser).
The diesel emissions are more complex (regens, def injection, egr's that are cooled); none of which are on the gasers.
Lifters in the v8, they are a wash to a SCR replacement in regard to cost. Ditto to a belt replace in the diesel at 200k, except it's guaranteed in the diesel.

I like the baby diesels (I have a pair of them) but lets not be complete fan boys here.

6.2 v8s are grenading in some lifter failures. So outside that warranty that has huge negative side. Im not just talking lm2. Diesels in general are no more expensive then gassers. Spark plugs and coils are also another failure point on gassers. Scr? Child's play https://dieselforum.org/selective-catalytic-reduction-scr

Not many lm2's stranded. But tons of 6.2s stranded and immobile for months.

Emmission controls on diesels are not some extreme cost. Def is a simple injector. A simple tank and level sensor. Same with particulate filter. These components will fail early if they do under warranty.

I just find it funny how it's supposed to be expensive. Simple machines with simple components. Similar to mechanics who charge more or won't work on European cars. Fake stereotypes.

It all comes down to fuel cost. Up north and west diesel fuel is more expensive. And most gas techs won't touch a diesel so qualified labor is potentially harder to locate.

 

[steiny93]

6.2 v8s are grenading in some lifter failures. So outside that warranty that has huge negative side. Im not just talking lm2. Diesels in general are no more expensive then gassers. Spark plugs and coils are also another failure point on gassers. Scr? Child's play https://dieselforum.org/selective-catalytic-reduction-scr

Not many lm2's stranded. But tons of 6.2s stranded and immobile for months.

Emmission controls on diesels are not some extreme cost. Def is a simple injector. A simple tank and level sensor. Same with particulate filter. These components will fail early if they do under warranty.

I just find it funny how it's supposed to be expensive. Simple machines with simple components. Similar to mechanics who charge more or won't work on European cars. Fake stereotypes.

It all comes down to fuel cost. Up north and west diesel fuel is more expensive. And most gas techs won't touch a diesel so qualified labor is potentially harder to locate.

GMC would disagree with you.
6.2's engine assembly from GM is $4297, the diesel is $5294. The engines are absolutely more expensive (per GM 23%). My local dealers have a higher labor rate for diesel tech's.
I'm not sure how you can argue that the diesel option isn't more expensive, even GMC thinks they are.

Considering the 2 baby diesels I currently own they both have had multiple thousand dollar repairs to either engine or emission system (covered under warranty).
Considering the last 10 5.3'a & 6.2's I own or have owned; if I add up all their warranty claims I didn't have any engine or emission repair costs.

I'm gonna agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Vladimir2306]

6.2 v8s are grenading in some lifter failures. So outside that warranty that has huge negative side. Im not just talking lm2. Diesels in general are no more expensive then gassers. Spark plugs and coils are also another failure point on gassers. Scr? Child's play https://dieselforum.org/selective-catalytic-reduction-scr

Not many lm2's stranded. But tons of 6.2s stranded and immobile for months.

Emmission controls on diesels are not some extreme cost. Def is a simple injector. A simple tank and level sensor. Same with particulate filter. These components will fail early if they do under warranty.

I just find it funny how it's supposed to be expensive. Simple machines with simple components. Similar to mechanics who charge more or won't work on European cars. Fake stereotypes.

It all comes down to fuel cost. Up north and west diesel fuel is more expensive. And most gas techs won't touch a diesel so qualified labor is potentially harder to locate.

DEF is not a simple injector, it's still a somewhat more complicated system. and unfortunately on many passenger cars, not only on GM, this thing makes the owner brains. And most often the level sensor fails. It would seem a funny detail, but it most often comes complete with a pump, and its repair is expensive. Because otherwise it blocks the engine. Therefore, most often, owners of diesel cars turn off DEF and drive without it, smelling worse than a tractor for the whole district.

 

[DuraYuk]

GMC would disagree with you.
6.2's engine assembly from GM is $4297, the diesel is $5294. The engines are absolutely more expensive (per GM 23%). My local dealers have a higher labor rate for diesel tech's.
I'm not sure how you can argue that the diesel option isn't more expensive, even GMC thinks they are.

Considering the 2 baby diesels I currently own they both have had multiple thousand dollar repairs to either engine or emission system (covered under warranty).
Considering the last 10 5.3'a & 6.2's I own or have owned; if I add up all their warranty claims I didn't have any engine or emission repair costs.

I'm gonna agree to disagree on this one.

No worries. You seem to be in the minority with issues in regard to your lm2. I do remember some of you posts. Id imagine there was some misdiagnosing involved. Engine cost is irrelevant if one blows up consistently and another doesn't.

 

[DuraYuk]

DEF is not a simple injector, it's still a somewhat more complicated system. and unfortunately on many passenger cars, not only on GM, this thing makes the owner brains. And most often the level sensor fails. It would seem a funny detail, but it most often comes complete with a pump, and its repair is expensive. Because otherwise it blocks the engine. Therefore, most often, owners of diesel cars turn off DEF and drive without it, smelling worse than a tractor for the whole district.

It's a pretty simple system. And in the states defeating diesel emmissions can land you in hot water really quickly..

 

[Polo08816]

GMC would disagree with you.
6.2's engine assembly from GM is $4297, the diesel is $5294. The engines are absolutely more expensive (per GM 23%). My local dealers have a higher labor rate for diesel tech's.
I'm not sure how you can argue that the diesel option isn't more expensive, even GMC thinks they are.

Considering the 2 baby diesels I currently own they both have had multiple thousand dollar repairs to either engine or emission system (covered under warranty).
Considering the last 10 5.3'a & 6.2's I own or have owned; if I add up all their warranty claims I didn't have any engine or emission repair costs.

I'm gonna agree to disagree on this one.

Those costs are just for the long or short block right? It doesn't include the other components like the turbos, emissions systems, etc. that the diesel powertrain would require.

I think at the end of the day, I don't think many people are going to agree with the "turbocharged diesel powertrains are as simple as naturally aspirated gasoline powertrains" theory.

...which is to say, I agree with you.

 

[DuraYuk]

Those costs are just for the long or short block right? It doesn't include the other components like the turbos, emissions systems, etc. that the diesel powertrain would require.

I think at the end of the day, I don't think many people are going to agree with the "turbocharged diesel powertrains are as simple as naturally aspirated gasoline powertrains" theory.

...which is to say, I agree with you.

You may disagree but the reality is a diesel trades some gas specific components for some diesel specific components. Those diesel parts are simpler and more robust. Emissions components seem like a boogey man but are largely over hyped when the systems are pretty simple.

And in terms of this post the 6.2 being a pushrod v8 should be very simple and reliable. But the current track record of blown motors and spun bearings and failed lifters paints a picture to the contrary. OP already made their choice so we are just pissing in the wind.

Goodish discussion tho.

 

[Polo08816]

You may disagree but the reality is a diesel trades some gas specific components for some diesel specific components. Those diesel parts are simpler and more robust. Emissions components seem like a boogey man but are largely over hyped when the systems are pretty simple.

And in terms of this post the 6.2 being a pushrod v8 should be very simple and reliable. But the current track record of blown motors and spun bearings and failed lifters paints a picture to the contrary. OP already made their choice so we are just pissing in the wind.

Goodish discussion tho.

I think there's a bit of minimization going on here. I don't think you can characterize a turbo charged diesel powertrain as, "Oh, we just substituted (but did NOT add) some components around from this naturally aspirated gas powertrain for this turbocharged diesel powertrain." I don't think the majority of the people following this thread would agree with that either.

GM simply f'd up the design and execution of the 6.2L V8 gas engine. There's no way that should be less reliable than the current 3.5 EcoBoost but alas, it is. Heck, it's arguably less reliable than the current Ford's DOHC 5.0 Coyote engine. Don't get me wrong, Ford has had their fair share of problems on their 3.5EB and 5.0 Coyote through the years, but those are largely reliable powertrains at the moment. Because the 6.2L V8 is primarily a GM f up, that doesn't mean that turbocharged diesel powertrains are just as simple as naturally aspirated gas engines (or even turbocharged gas engines).