BREAKING: GM is officially recalling the L87

[Vladimir2306]

Vald did you get the Yukon back on the road yet?

Not yet, the new engine has arrived from machining, now it is washed, cleaned, and assembly begins, checking all gaps and puffs

 

[mummer43]

Post #802 references reading engine build date.

Got it, thanks.

 

[WalleyeMikeIII]

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2025/RCMN-25V274-8462.pdf

GM sent letter to dealers telling them they are going to need a PicoScope for the 000 Recall Inspection Procedure....
Can't wait to see the final procedure published...going to be interesting.

 

[Scarey]

That’s a borascope? This whole thing is a very fine tolerance miss. Won’t be able to measure parts, guess they are just looking for damage of from out of tolerance parts. Not preemptively looking for the out of tollernce part that leads to damage.
Interesting to say the least!

 

[WalleyeMikeIII]

That’s a borascope? This whole thing is a very fine tolerance miss. Won’t be able to measure parts, guess they are just looking for damage of from out of tolerance parts. Not preemptively looking for the out of tollernce part that leads to damage.
Interesting to say the least!

No, it is an Oscilloscope...

 

[Scarey]

No, it is an Oscilloscope...

O interesting. Not familiar. Guessing it measures frequency of vibration?

 

[WalleyeMikeIII]

O interesting. Not familiar. Guessing it measures frequency of vibration?

Oscilloscope is an electronics diagnostics tool, lets the user capture and observe electrical signals on the screen (This particular PicoScope is a custom one for GM, you can search for it on the internet)

For this issue, could be used for a host of inspection procedures...my guess is it will have something to do w/ the cam and crank position sensor relationships. But could be vibration or something else too. Bulletin also mentioned a special wiring harness..
My point of posting was to let the community know it looks like they are getting some work done on the inspection procedure, if they are advising dealers to have the proper tools on hand for when they finally release the procedure.

 

[BADRIDES]

Oscilloscope is an electronics diagnostics tool, lets the user capture and observe electrical signals on the screen (This particular PicoScope is a custom one for GM, you can search for it on the internet) For this issue, could be used for a host of inspection procedures...my guess is it will have something to do w/ the cam and crank position sensor relationships. But could be vibration or something else too. Bulletin also mentioned a special wiring harness..
My point of posting was to let the community know it looks like they are getting some work done on the inspection procedure, if they are advising dealers to have the proper tools on hand for when they finally release the procedure.

We already have that tool on hand but I'm telling you we have already had meetings about this with the some GM insiders and its still gonna be a long road to hold. Your bigger dealerships are gonna get parts first. It's also gonna be based on who files claims for engines or parts first

 

[jfoj]

CH-51450-SCOPE-B Diagnostic Oscilloscope GM-51450-SCOPE-B

CH-51450-SCOPE-B Diagnostic Oscilloscope GM-51450-SCOPE-B The PicoScope oscilloscope can be used to diagnose any approved electrical circuit, in the service bay or on the road. It uses extremely high capture rates and digital storage technologies to allow

www.freedomracing.com

PicoScope Automotive Oscilloscope Kits | PicoScope

PicoScope is a powerful automotive diagnostic tool that gives you detailed insights into your vehicle’s systems.

www.picoauto.com

Yea, this will be interesting. This was a 10 year old special tool that dealers are supposed to have. Pico Scopes are pretty good if you know how to use them. I just wonder how many dealers still have the Pico Scope on hand and if it works. If not, they need to order one. Wonder if there will be a run on these, the link above shows no stock, I am guessing the actual one GM is referencing has been superseded a few times in 10 years.

I think this "Inspection" procedure will be growing and I am betting GM will want the dealers to save what ever info from the "Inspection" so if the engine fails down the line, GM will claim it was fine at the time of "Inspection". A big CYA in case someone gets hurt in the future would be my guess. A bit skeptical that you can really give a Go/No Go to an engine that may only be slightly hurt, but maybe there will be something interesting that comes up.

 

[jfoj]

While we as the Internet community do not know exactly what went wrong with these 6.2l engines, based on GM's comments in the recall documents and others that are in the know, it seems the crankshaft final polishing may have been a major factor in these failures. To run thin engine oil, the surface finish has to be very smooth otherwise problems will occur.

I do not expect these "Inspections" to begin before mid June and this is if the dealers have all the items they need. With the numbers that need to be "Inspected" I am expecting this to take quite a while. Will be interested to see if the 0W40 oil is still a fix.

If I has a vehicle in this recall window, I would strongly consider 0W40 now until the time of the "Inspection". Who knows how sensitive the "Inspection" will actually be and if you have 0W40 in the engine at the time of "Inspection" will if mask what GM is supposedly looking for.

We will be discussing this for years to come.

 

[vcode]

I’m not betting on your prediction. These things are all going down inside of 200k.

There is absolutely no reason to believe that engines with correctly manufactured parts and proper maintenance won't make it to 200K miles. None. There is no evidence of a 100% part defect rate....

 

[CAPantherFan]

While we as the Internet community do not know exactly what went wrong with these 6.2l engines, based on GM's comments in the recall documents and others that are in the know, it seems the crankshaft final polishing may have been a major factor in these failures. To run thin engine oil, the surface finish has to be very smooth otherwise problems will occur.

I do not expect these "Inspections" to begin before mid June and this is if the dealers have all the items they need. With the numbers that need to be "Inspected" I am expecting this to take quite a while. Will be interested to see if the 0W40 oil is still a fix.

If I has a vehicle in this recall window, I would strongly consider 0W40 now until the time of the "Inspection". Who knows how sensitive the "Inspection" will actually be and if you have 0W40 in the engine at the time of "Inspection" will if mask what GM is supposedly looking for.

We will be discussing this for years to come.

Oh hey look, a new lawsuit.

GM Truck Owners With 'Fixed' 6.2L V8s Sue Over Reduced Fuel Economy

Owners with repaired or replaced 6.2-liter GM V8s say their fuel economy could tank after the fix. Now, they're suing.

www.thedrive.com

Turns out running thicker oil ruins fuel mileage. So even if our engines are fixed the mileage gonna go to crap.

 

[Scarey]

“We will be discussing this for years to come”
Feels like we have been discussing this for years.

 

[jfoj]

Only the lawyers will get rich with any of these lawsuits. You'll get a $500 discount coupon on your next GM purchase!

I'm not worried about my fuel economy, I'm worried about my engine not failing. This give a new meaning to Range Anxiety, how many miles before the engine fails!

 

[JTGZ71]

Not that anyone asked, but I had my oil changed to 0W-40 today. I have been on the fence about this for awhile, but after reading everything here, watching the videos with the motor oil geek guy, etc., I decided there probably wasn't much downside. We have a 4-5 hour each way trip coming up for the holiday weekend, and I'm certainly not feeling supremely confident about that, but maybe this gives me a tiny bit more peace of mind.

 

[Scarey]

Oh hey look, a new lawsuit.

GM Truck Owners With 'Fixed' 6.2L V8s Sue Over Reduced Fuel Economy

Owners with repaired or replaced 6.2-liter GM V8s say their fuel economy could tank after the fix. Now, they're suing.

www.thedrive.com

Turns out running thicker oil ruins fuel mileage. So even if our engines are fixed the mileage gonna go to crap.

Totally see that. Gm has to change/recall 6.2 so nobody gets killed then sues. Now the fix, we don’t get the mpg we bought, and then, gm gets finned for not meeting their fleet mpg average. I think gm has worked themselves into a pickle trying Togo cheap.

 

[Blackcar]

Oh hey look, a new lawsuit.

GM Truck Owners With 'Fixed' 6.2L V8s Sue Over Reduced Fuel Economy

Owners with repaired or replaced 6.2-liter GM V8s say their fuel economy could tank after the fix. Now, they're suing.

www.thedrive.com

Turns out running thicker oil ruins fuel mileage. So even if our engines are fixed the mileage gonna go to crap.

These vehicles aren't getting the MPG city and highway that's on window sticker anyway.

 

[Kaminski]

Interesting new video out. If to be believed, it is an issue with crankshafts AND wrist pins. Two points for possible failure.

 

[Vladimir2306]

Interesting new video out. If to be believed, it is an issue with crankshafts AND wrist pins. Two points for possible failure.

My God, what nonsense)) open my topic where I show in detail the new L87 engine disassembled by mechanics. GM, is trying to find the culprit by the suppliers, but the engine itself is assembled terribly.the engine is assembled poorly, not only the crankshaft, but the whole engine is assembled so that it is already all in seizures new from the box

 

[vcode]

Oh hey look, a new lawsuit.

GM Truck Owners With 'Fixed' 6.2L V8s Sue Over Reduced Fuel Economy

Owners with repaired or replaced 6.2-liter GM V8s say their fuel economy could tank after the fix. Now, they're suing.

www.thedrive.com

Turns out running thicker oil ruins fuel mileage. So even if our engines are fixed the mileage gonna go to crap.

This reeks of a frivolous lawsuit. How much has mileage actually decreased? 0.5 mpg? Nobody bought the 6.2L for the fuel economy. And if they were really concerned, why didn't they just get the 5.3L then? Total BS.