BREAKING: GM is officially recalling the L87

[PPK_]

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....

i don't know.. i just got done purchasing an SLT truck.. i went through iseecars to see what was for sale.. with high miles.. at 25k you get 30% 6.2s... at 100k you get 10% 6.2s for sale. At 150k i got 22 5.3s and no 6.2s.

I did a duramax. And i looked around at many years... going back to 2014. i do not the the 6.2s last much more than 125k or so. On the other hand there were a lot duramax for sale at 100k. They only have a few years to get there too.

You can't make a lot of what is for sale.. although i think it does not make me think a 6.2 is on my list.

 

[blanchard7684]

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.

I'm not defending the lawsuit...for sure lawsuits are expensive related to the small difference in gas milage 0w40 will cost.

But...

the 5.3 and 6.2 get virtually identical fuel mileage on an average basis (or the EPA drive cycle). In many normal driving scenarios the 6.2 easily outpaces the 5.3 in fuel mileage due to the substantially higher torque.

 

[Marky Dissod]

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.

Had I a vehicle in this recall window, I'd figure out how to get the engine replaced.

'I can has new 6.2L?'

 

[Blackcar]

i don't know.. i just got done purchasing an SLT truck.. i went through iseecars to see what was for sale.. with high miles.. at 25k you get 30% 6.2s... at 100k you get 10% 6.2s for sale. At 150k i got 22 5.3s and no 6.2s.

I did a duramax. And i looked around at many years... going back to 2014. i do not the the 6.2s last much more than 125k or so. On the other hand there were a lot duramax for sale at 100k. They only have a few years to get there too.

You can't make a lot of what is for sale.. although i think it does not make me think a 6.2 is on my list.

I might be mistaken but SLT came with 5.3 and 6.2 was optional I don't remember when 6.2 was offered as option which might be why you see numbers as they are.

 

[PPK_]

I might be mistaken but SLT came with 5.3 and 6.2 was optional I don't remember when 6.2 was offered as option which might be why you see numbers as they are.

No.. i only looked at hp… no selection of any trims was made…

 

[BacDoc]

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

This is similar to another poster who put a facebook link with mechanic who found missing wrist pins

 

[Vladimir2306]

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

I will add more. If the crankshaft had been changed in the second half of 24 and 25, then the part number would have changed. And it remained the same. So the video is complete nonsense, as well as like a pass to GM, to give credibility to this video))
Moreover, the crankshaft from L87 has the same part number as the crankshaft from L86))

 

[jfoj]

I will add more. If the crankshaft had been changed in the second half of 24 and 25, then the part number would have changed. And it remained the same. So the video is complete nonsense, as well as like a pass to GM, to give credibility to this video))
Moreover, the crankshaft from L87 has the same part number as the crankshaft from L86))

Vladimir,

You clearly do not understand the issue with the crankshaft, it is not a different part. Same casting, same finishing process, just the finishing process had some errors that have now supposedly been corrected and addressed. Should GM maybe have changed the part number to eliminate confusion on old and new stock?? This has many ripple effects and the decision to not change the part number may have been the correct approach.

The problem with the crankshaft was the final finishing of the crankshaft, the machining and micro polishing of the crankshaft journals. Additionally there may have been debris that what not properly cleaned out of the crankshaft oiling holes or just poor final cleaning of the crankshaft before final installation. This is a process problem with the end machining and preparation of the raw crank forging. The final process of the crank manufacturing process would not necessarily require a part number change.

Additionally GM had outsource the crankshaft manufacturing to Mexico quite some time ago and probably due to the crank final machining, finishing and clean up, GM brought either the complete crank foundry work or at least the final crank machining, polishing and cleaning back to the US at the plant mentioned in the video.

If's fine if you do not agree with the video, but you clearly do not understand the failures that have been outlined with the 6.2l via the NHTSA documents and other information that is available. While the information out there may be a bit vague and not 100% complete, for people that fully understand the details of the machining requirements and have spent time in parts factories and engine assembly plants it is pretty clear what likely went wrong in the final machining, polishing and cleaning of the crankshaft.

I expect the problem it really 2 parts, partial blame of the foundry and machine work in Mexico and partial blame on the GM engine assembly plant because usually the final crank polishing and clean up is addressed just before the installation of the crank during engine assembly. But in this case GM may have chosen to outsource the final crank polishing and cleaning 100% to Mexico, which is general is a very bad idea. We may never know 100% where things went wrong, but likely is was a bad management decision that was a financial decision, not a quality decision. Additionally GM probably relied too much on automated final engine testing for Quality Control purposes rather than actually pulling a random statistical engine an perform a full tear down and inspection and provide feedback and make changes and improvements as necessary.

Now GM and the entire customer base a suffering from a few bad decisions that were for the most part 100% financially motivated. This entire situation will cost GM Billions in the long run as well as a loss of customer confidence and loyalty. GM has also had a really bad start to the entire recall as well and how the information has been released. I realize they needed to have a Stop Sale on all new, demo and used inventory because dealers cannot legally sell vehicles that have outstanding Recalls, but GM also screwed up big time on the way this entire mess has been communicated.

 

[Vladimir2306]

Vladimir,

You clearly do not understand the issue with the crankshaft, it is not a different part. Same casting, same finishing process, just the finishing process had some errors that have now supposedly been corrected and addressed. Should GM maybe have changed the part number to eliminate confusion on old and new stock?? This has many ripple effects and the decision to not change the part number may have been the correct approach.

The problem with the crankshaft was the final finishing of the crankshaft, the machining and micro polishing of the crankshaft journals. Additionally there may have been debris that what not properly cleaned out of the crankshaft oiling holes or just poor final cleaning of the crankshaft before final installation. This is a process problem with the end machining and preparation of the raw crank forging. The final process of the crank manufacturing process would not necessarily require a part number change.

Additionally GM had outsource the crankshaft manufacturing to Mexico quite some time ago and probably due to the crank final machining, finishing and clean up, GM brought either the complete crank foundry work or at least the final crank machining, polishing and cleaning back to the US at the plant mentioned in the video.

If's fine if you do not agree with the video, but you clearly do not understand the failures that have been outlined with the 6.2l via the NHTSA documents and other information that is available. While the information out there may be a bit vague and not 100% complete, for people that fully understand the details of the machining requirements and have spent time in parts factories and engine assembly plants it is pretty clear what likely went wrong in the final machining, polishing and cleaning of the crankshaft.

I expect the problem it really 2 parts, partial blame of the foundry and machine work in Mexico and partial blame on the GM engine assembly plant because usually the final crank polishing and clean up is addressed just before the installation of the crank during engine assembly. But in this case GM may have chosen to outsource the final crank polishing and cleaning 100% to Mexico, which is general is a very bad idea. We may never know 100% where things went wrong, but likely is was a bad management decision that was a financial decision, not a quality decision. Additionally GM probably relied too much on automated final engine testing for Quality Control purposes rather than actually pulling a random statistical engine an perform a full tear down and inspection and provide feedback and make changes and improvements as necessary.

Now GM and the entire customer base a suffering from a few bad decisions that were for the most part 100% financially motivated. This entire situation will cost GM Billions in the long run as well as a loss of customer confidence and loyalty. GM has also had a really bad start to the entire recall as well and how the information has been released. I realize they needed to have a Stop Sale on all new, demo and used inventory because dealers cannot legally sell vehicles that have outstanding Recalls, but GM also screwed up big time on the way this entire mess has been communicated.

Man, you don't seem to understand what you're writing. If the supplier or the place of production changes, then the part goes under a different model number. No one produces parts under the same model number in different factories. The same inserts from L86 and L87 are the same, but they are made from different suppliers and have two different model numbers. but they are interchangeable. The crankshaft is the same, but at the same time the L86 crankshaft did not break the liners, also working at 0-20, and for some reason it breaks on the L87. You don't have to be a detective to put these facts together.

Yes, I disagree with this video, because unlike most people on this forum, I see the engine open, and not just watching it with the hood open. At the same time, when I advise people to check the liners by opening the oil pan, it is not difficult and not very expensive. And for sure there is a service that can do this, and it will immediately be seen whether there is wear on the liners and crankshaft or not, They tell me, Dude, no one here will do this. And you keep running from topic to topic with your ideas on oil pollution, and 0-20 oil.

First of all, drive on 0-40 oil, as much as I drove on 0-20 oil, then we'll discuss it.

 

[Kaminski]

Picoscope procedure bulletin and FAQ. In order to see the documents, right hold and open in new tab then download.

 

[2015TahoePPV]

Is anyone else waiting for the market to get flooded with buildable 6.2L cores for cheap?

 

[Scarey]

Thank you, now we know how this works.
If in suspect vin date pool.
1. Engine seized….new engine
2. P16 code………….new engine
3. Pico test ,knock sensor? Fail…….new engine
Pass all three…..0-40 oil

All based on your vin recall notification. Interestingly I fall in the suspect engine build date but pass the vin checks.

Read between the lines…if you’re not in the vin test you stay with 0-20. If your in the vin test and pass you get 0-40. It appears 0-40 is a better oil but gm won’t budge on declaring for everybody for fear of losing their fleet mpg. GM still trying to cheap out.

 

[vcode]

Man, you don't seem to understand what you're writing. If the supplier or the place of production changes, then the part goes under a different model number. No one produces parts under the same model number in different factories. The same inserts from L86 and L87 are the same, but they are made from different suppliers and have two different model numbers. but they are interchangeable. The crankshaft is the same, but at the same time the L86 crankshaft did not break the liners, also working at 0-20, and for some reason it breaks on the L87. You don't have to be a detective to put these facts together.

Yes, I disagree with this video, because unlike most people on this forum, I see the engine open, and not just watching it with the hood open. At the same time, when I advise people to check the liners by opening the oil pan, it is not difficult and not very expensive. And for sure there is a service that can do this, and it will immediately be seen whether there is wear on the liners and crankshaft or not, They tell me, Dude, no one here will do this. And you keep running from topic to topic with your ideas on oil pollution, and 0-20 oil.

First of all, drive on 0-40 oil, as much as I drove on 0-20 oil, then we'll discuss it.

We built parts in different locations and never changed the part number. The print is the print and it didn't matter where the part came from. We closed a plant and shifted production to another plant. Why would we change part numbers? We also purchased parts from different manufacturers. We didn't change the part number by vendor. That would be a nightmare.

 

[jfoj]

Man, you don't seem to understand what you're writing. If the supplier or the place of production changes, then the part goes under a different model number. No one produces parts under the same model number in different factories. The same inserts from L86 and L87 are the same, but they are made from different suppliers and have two different model numbers. but they are interchangeable. The crankshaft is the same, but at the same time the L86 crankshaft did not break the liners, also working at 0-20, and for some reason it breaks on the L87. You don't have to be a detective to put these facts together.

Yes, I disagree with this video, because unlike most people on this forum, I see the engine open, and not just watching it with the hood open. At the same time, when I advise people to check the liners by opening the oil pan, it is not difficult and not very expensive. And for sure there is a service that can do this, and it will immediately be seen whether there is wear on the liners and crankshaft or not, They tell me, Dude, no one here will do this. And you keep running from topic to topic with your ideas on oil pollution, and 0-20 oil.

First of all, drive on 0-40 oil, as much as I drove on 0-20 oil, then we'll discuss it.

I fully understand what I am writing and what I am talking about. Part numbers do not need to change because of a part build moved to a different plant. The 6.2l crank either missed a finishing process and/or the finishing process was wrong. So the exact same part casting and part number has now had the final machining/finishing corrected, no need for a part number change here. Nothing other than the proper final finishing has been corrected.

The bearings were not the problem, the 0W20 along with the incorrect final machine/finishing on the crank was the problem. Then possibly add some debris or poor final clean up, you have yourself a lot of problems.

As for the 0W40, this is what GM even stated they would put in the engines that "Pass Inspection", but we will need to wait and see if this is still the road they plan on going down.

I am running 0W40 in my engine and I will continue to run 0W40 in my engine. The only MINOR negative effect of running 0W40 is a very slight hit to fuel economy and a very slight hit to parasitic drag that will effectively reduce the total horsepower by a very small amount.

I do not care about a very minor hit in fuel economy or horsepower, I am only concerned about longevity and reliability. I will not spend $10,000-$15,000 USD in extra fuel over the life of the vehicle running 0W40, but I will clearly spend around this amount on an engine replacement outside of the Powertrain Warranty.

 

[JTGZ71]

Picoscope procedure bulletin and FAQ. In order to see the documents, right hold and open in new tab then download.

The FAQs indicate that there may be warning signs prior to engine failure ("knocking, banging, or other unusual engine noises", CEL, no-start, abnormal shifting, etc.). But in general, it doesn't seem like people are reporting experiencing any of these signs? Or, are they ignoring them?

 

[jfoj]

I have not heard anyone that has had an engine failure indicate the presence of either a Low Oil Pressure or High Oil Temperature warning. Few indicated they heard any noises or knocking before a failure.

 

[Vladimir2306]

Я полностью понимаю, что пишу и о чем говорю. Номера деталей не нужно менять из-за того, что сборка детали перенесена на другой завод. Коленвал 6,2 л либо пропустил процесс отделки, либо процесс отделки был неправильным. Таким образом, точно такая же отливка детали и номер детали теперь прошли окончательную обработку/отделку, нет необходимости менять номер детали здесь. Ничего, кроме надлежащей окончательной отделки, не было исправлено.

Проблема была не в подшипниках, а в 0W20 вместе с неправильной окончательной машиной/финишной обработкой коленвала. Затем, возможно, добавьте немного мусора или плохую окончательную очистку, и у вас будет много проблем.

Что касается 0W40, то GM даже заявила, что будет заливать его в двигатели, «прошедшие проверку», но нам нужно подождать и посмотреть, по-прежнему ли они планируют идти по этому пути.

Я использую 0W40 в своем двигателе и буду продолжать использовать 0W40 в своем двигателе. Единственный НЕЗНАЧИТЕЛЬНЫЙ отрицательный эффект использования 0W40 — это очень небольшое влияние на экономию топлива и очень небольшое влияние на паразитное сопротивление, которое фактически снизит общую мощность на очень небольшую величину.

Меня не волнует совсем незначительное снижение экономии топлива или мощности, меня волнует только долговечность и надежность. Я не буду тратить 10 000–15 000 долларов США на дополнительное топливо в течение срока службы автомобиля, работающего на 0W40, но я определенно потрачу около этой суммы на замену двигателя за пределами гарантии на силовой агрегат.

Хорошо, скажем по-другому. Знаете ли вы разницу между шатунными подшипниками в L86 и L87?

 

[mummer43]

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.

When can we expect to
see the final recall remedy?

 

[Scarey]

When can we expect to
see the final recall remedy?

Look at post #950 above. That looks pretty official

 

[nomech]

I have always bookmarked the manual for the vehicle I own and save a PDF copy to my desktop.

I have a 2025 but still following this thread.

This is what I have bookmarked

Site Maintenance

How do I know if this version is always updated by GM? Is there a revision number I should be checking and comparing?