BREAKING: GM is officially recalling the L87

[blanchard7684]

Nope, I’m not starting that debate…only stating my intentions…

No worries I’m just joking around.

 

[Antonm]

You realize John-Q-Public is likely to follow the manufacturer recommendation over @jfoj or any other internet forum member, right?
Not saying you are wrong, but "everyone" is mostly John-Q-Public, and that guy isn't on TahoeYukon Forum...just sayin...

@WalleyeMikeIII is on here, and even tried to get my dealer to swap me to 0W40, and got told "not yet." Given the situation, and the relative cost of an engine, my curent powertrain warranty status (in effect)...and the sensitivity of this recall...I am going to follow GM instructions to the letter, at least until the inspection is done. At which time I am swapping to 0W40 if my engine passes. If it fails and gets a replacement, GM says 0W20.

Now, I wonder about people that have a service contract...ever dove deep into the wording there? Virtually all of them have a clause saying something similar to: if you don't follow the manufacturer recommended maintenance schedule and use manufacturer recommended fluids, your service contract provider is not obligated to pay for your repairs.

However, you do make a solid argument that if you went w/ 0W-40, maybe your odds of repairs are not so good.

Man, this whole thing really just stinks.

My hope for my future is:
1) I pass the picoscope test
2) I get 0W-40 cap and oil change
3) I happily run 0W40 forever more (or at least until my trade in date, which is hopefully sometime past 2028

FWIW, here is the excerpt on maintenance from the GMEPP sample contract:
View attachment 458825

The whole voiding or warranty is another example of mis-information. At least here in the US, there is a law that says the manufactures can't do that, its called the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (link below to a google search of it if you want more information).

It was basically started by the SEMA group (Specialty Equipment Market Association) back in the day because manufactures voiding warranties for aftermarket parts was hurting their businesses, so they got together and lobbied for the law (now is just a show in Vegas every year with a bunch of bro-trucks that don't have front driveshafts).

Google Search

...

 

[WalleyeMikeIII]

A manufacturer can deny a warranty claim for using the incorrect oil (ie: wrong specification, like using 0-40 when 20w-50 is specified, if the failure is oil related.) You can’t deny a claim for using Penzoil 0-20 instead of Delco.

A warranty cannot be “voided,” only denied. Now, a vehicle service contract, on the other hand…is not a warranty, it’s an agreement between the contract buyer and seller, and if you violate the terms, they can refuse to make a payment. It would fall outside the Magnason-Moss.

 

[2024 White Tahoe]

A manufacturer can deny a warranty claim for using the incorrect oil (ie: wrong specification, like using 0-40 when 20w-50 is specified, if the failure is oil related.) You can’t deny a claim for using Penzoil 0-20 instead of Delco.

A warranty cannot be “voided,” only denied. Now, a vehicle service contract, on the other hand…is not a warranty, it’s an agreement between the contract buyer and seller, and if you violate the terms, they can refuse to make a payment. It would fall outside the Magnason-Moss.

One thing some people don’t realize when they assert that the manufacturers can’t deny warranty repairs when non-oem aftermarket parts or fluid are used (such as the wrong oil) is that if a dealer blocks your warranty (not a service contract) - the block goes in the manufacturer’s nationwide computer system.

Then, the customer must bring a legal action against the manufacturer and dealer for denying warranty coverage. The legal action is expensive and time consuming, and the customer must prove in court that the manufacturer is wrong.

Good luck with that.

 

[2024 White Tahoe]

At least Ford seems to caught their issue and issued the recall pretty quick compared to GM.

Ford has also issued a safety recall involving the 3.5 liter V-6 engine for the potential of catching fire.

The engine cap plugs (also called freeze plugs) were installed incorrectly and leak oil, causing a fire.

The repair is to remove the engine for repair, and on the pickup truck - the body must be removed: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2025/RCLRPT-25V198-1837.PDF

 

[Fless]

The engine cap plugs (also called freeze plugs) were installed incorrectly and leak oil, causing a fire.

They are called "cup" plugs.

 

[Antonm]

One thing some people don’t realize when they assert that the manufacturers can’t deny warranty repairs when non-oem aftermarket parts or fluid are used (such as the wrong oil) is that if a dealer blocks your warranty (not a service contract) - the block goes in the manufacturer’s nationwide computer system.

Then, the customer must bring a legal action against the manufacturer and dealer for denying warranty coverage. The legal action is expensive and time consuming, and the customer must prove in court that the manufacturer is wrong.

Good luck with that.

Nope, the burden of proof is on the manufacturer, not the consumer.

They may (likely will) try to bully ,lie to, or mislead uninformed sheepeople into believing otherwise, but the Magnuson-Moss Warranty act is a law.

Its like dump trucks with those silly signs that say "not responsible for broken windshields", you can't deny responsibility with a sign (if you could I would have a sticker on my truck that says "not responsible for car crashes, stay clear 10 miles" then just rear end all the slow *** drivers on the road and push them out the damn way).

And a manufacture can not deny warranty for using an non recommend oil , they have to prove it caused the damage, you don't have to prove it didn't, they have to prove it did, that's literally what the federal law says. And since most blood sucking lawyers are more than happy to tack their legal fees onto the "damages" that require restitution (especially when suing a company that has some money, because that's really what lawyers care about, they don't give to sh!ts about justice and right or wrong, only money). And GM's corparate lawyers know this too, so they'll settle out of court with legal fee included pretty darn quick (probably with an NDA tacked on too)
...

 

[vcode]

If you would engage your brain and actually read the post you quoted before opening your mouth, then you'd see that I did in fact address exactly what you so sarcastically are trying to point out with your silly "gottcha" question.

Here, I'll post it again below for you.

"Can an 0W20 oil work,,,, under ideal conditions it certainly can and has been. Anything other that perfect / ideal conditions the 0W40 oil will provide more/ better protection"

Also in the post you quoted was another statement that is also equally true,,, it went "Pretty basic if you have even the slightest clue, which a lot of the loudest voices in this thread do not have."
...

0W20 doesn't need ideal conditions to work. That is 100% pure speculation on your part.

 

[viven44]

Ok, we are not discussing 0W-20 as a whole, including quoting big numbers on all kinds of engines 0W-20 oil is used in... and it doesn't add much value to this discussion on DFM 6.2L or its problems. People are reading this thread for DFM 6.2L facts and that is why I think most of us are talking about what is right for DFM 6.2Ls.....

5% failure rate (50,000 DPPM) on an engine isn't also a normal defectivity level in the Auto industry, and that is the kind of defectivity that screams incompetence and WILL shut down a factory. If this was true, no one should be doing business with that company that made these crankshafts... but that isn't happening, apparently, they are a well-known supplier.... defectivity likely contributed to some early failures, but the bulk were likely still baseline marginality on 0W-20.... GM supposedly addressed this aspect... but don't trust them after they failed 3 times since 2022...

"manufacturing and quality issues were identified at intermittent periods within the suspect build period"

How did they deduce this ?

"from teardowns of field engines and data from a study of new, unused crankshafts."
"intermittent periods" ... "suspect build period"... from field engines that had ran a while ... how did they find manufacturing sediment in the crankshaft oil galleries ??? And what sample size did they have on ununsed crankshaft to tie back and guess into manufacturing data... Now, that is speculation...

On DFM 6.2s, there is no speculation.... 0W-20 is the most terrible oil that anyone could be using on DFM 6.2Ls today knowing what we know today on other demanding 6.2L applications. Perhaps 2025 and newer engines included..... we don't have any real world data yet on 2025 vehicles... yet.

 

[PPV_2018]

Nope, the burden of proof is on the manufacturer, not the consumer.

They may (likely will) try to bully ,lie to, or mislead uninformed sheepeople into believing otherwise, but the Magnuson-Moss Warranty act is a law.

Its like dump trucks with those silly signs that say "not responsible for broken windshields", you can't deny responsibility with a sign (if you could I would have a sticker on my truck that says "not responsible for car crashes, stay clear 10 miles" then just rear end all the slow *** drivers on the road and push them out the damn way).

And a manufacture can not deny warranty for using an non recommend oil , they have to prove it caused the damage, you don't have to prove it didn't, they have to prove it did, that's literally what the federal law says. And since most blood sucking lawyers are more than happy to tack their legal fees onto the "damages" that require restitution (especially when suing a company that has some money, because that's really what lawyers care about, they don't give to sh!ts about justice and right or wrong, only money). And GM's corparate lawyers know this too, so they'll settle out of court with legal fee included pretty darn quick (probably with an NDA tacked on too)
...

i pretty much agree with everything here but,

signs in “circumstances” could release liability whereas it otherwise may exist. Besides, written contracts and agreements are valid, regardless of the content, so long as they are not in violation of the law — because illegal contracts are not enforceable , or at least, they’re not “supposed” to be

your dump truck example seems plausible that the dump truck would be liable for your broken windshield, except that you’d have to flag down the driver, and get their information, and then the burden of proof that they cracked your windshield would fall on you which would probably be incredibly difficult to prove (read: if you didn’t have a dashcam then forget it).

So in that sense, the sign, though not having any legal leg to stand on, would probably deter most people from attempting to file claim against them in the first place (which is probably the end goal).

 

[23Seven]

LOL, they haven't used 5W30 for over a decade now.

My last Chevy Truck was a 2003 5.3 Silverado would you like to guess what viscosity that uses Mr.SmartGuy?

 

[23Seven]

Skimming through the last few pages of this thread (I haven't been keeping up with it), but man,,,there is sure a lot of disinformation (some of it Russian disinformation) in it..

There is no instance , no environment, no set of operating conditions where an 0W20 oil outperforms / protects the engine better than an 0W40 oil,,,, not a single one.

Literally anything the 0W20 oil does, any lubrication or protection it provides, the 0W40 does at least equally as well or better in 100% of use cases.

Can an 0W20 oil work,,,, under ideal conditions it certainly can and has been. Anything other that perfect / ideal conditions the 0W40 oil will provide more/ better protection

Can 0W40 cause any issues if used in place of an 0W20,,, nope, absolutely not. The one and only downside to 0W40 is a very, very slight reduction in fuel economy, that's it, nothing else.

0W20 oil was and is spec'd by GM for one reason,,,, CAFE standards. If they don't meet the standards set by our tree hugging government , then they get fined/ taxed. GM is a business, and all business's are in business to make money, so they do whatever they can to meet the standards/ not pay fines or taxes.

Its not a hard concept, and not hard academically to understand. Pretty basic if you have even the slightest clue, which a lot of the loudest voices in this thread do not have.
...

Exactly Right! Basic stuff sir!

 

[Vladimir2306]

Skimming through the last few pages of this thread (I haven't been keeping up with it), but man,,,there is sure a lot of disinformation (some of it Russian disinformation) in it..

There is no instance , no environment, no set of operating conditions where an 0W20 oil outperforms / protects the engine better than an 0W40 oil,,,, not a single one.

Literally anything the 0W20 oil does, any lubrication or protection it provides, the 0W40 does at least equally as well or better in 100% of use cases.

Can an 0W20 oil work,,,, under ideal conditions it certainly can and has been. Anything other that perfect / ideal conditions the 0W40 oil will provide more/ better protection

Can 0W40 cause any issues if used in place of an 0W20,,, nope, absolutely not. The one and only downside to 0W40 is a very, very slight reduction in fuel economy, that's it, nothing else.

0W20 oil was and is spec'd by GM for one reason,,,, CAFE standards. If they don't meet the standards set by our tree hugging government , then they get fined/ taxed. GM is a business, and all business's are in business to make money, so they do whatever they can to meet the standards/ not pay fines or taxes.

Its not a hard concept, and not hard academically to understand. Pretty basic if you have even the slightest clue, which a lot of the loudest voices in this thread do not have.
...

The classic way to communicate on forums is to throw a loud phrase without sufficient justification. It's generally funny about Russian disinformation, so I'm telling you things that, as we found out here, 99.9% of the forum participants haven't even seen, or have seen only on YouTube. And it doesn't matter where this information comes from, from the USA, Russia or Africa.Now about oil 0-40, in fact, you said it right, but I'll ask the questions a little differently.In a normally assembled engine, oil 0-20 does all the same things as oil 0-40. Can oil 0-20 cause any problems in an engine that was designed for oil 0-20 and assembled with high quality? Absolutely not. And my words are confirmed by the absence of global problems on engines such as L84 and L86, of which there are a lot assembled, and they run on 0-20 oil, without any problems.Can oil 0-40 give any advantages over oil 0-20, I emphasize, in a normally assembled engine? Absolutely not.At the same time, yes, oil 0-20 provides better fuel efficiency compared to oil 0-40.It turns out that in a normally assembled serviceable engine, oil 0-20 is better than 0-40, because they are similar in characteristics, they do their job efficiently, giving fuel efficiency.But when the engine is faulty, that's when it needs to be repaired, rather than pouring thicker oil into it. Trying to heal engine problems with thick oil is not a cure, not a fix, it's about the same as trying to tape up a hole in the roof. It's not dripping at the moment, but it's still a temporary measure.

 

[Vladimir2306]

@WalleyeMikeIII

Understand that GM has engines with the exact same lifters speced to run on even 5W30 and 0W40 engine oil. GM has also speced any non replacement engines in the recall window to operate on 0W40 oil.

Most of the lifter problems are not due to oil type, they are due to crappy design, long oil change intervals and the roller bearings on the lifters failing more so due to 0W20 oil.

The sooner most people realize that 0W20 oil is not for your/our engine long term reliability, the better off everyone will be.

In various forums around the world, there are always people who consider themselves smarter than engine developers, and advise everyone to pour oil that is not recommended by the manufacturer. The only problem is that the manufacturer is responsible for the warranty, and to repair the engine if the recommended oil is used, and such advisers will remain advisers. None of them will ever take responsibility for their advice, lol.

 

[Vladimir2306]

Come on, the normal oil topic is 0-40 better than 0-20, as the advisers say here, but what's there to be modest about, let's pour 0-60, it's probably even better than 0-20 My God, reading these tips, apparently from old people, I remember the advice of my grandparents when it was necessary to urinate on the wound. And to bring down the child's temperature, they wiped him with vodka. Thank God technology is moving forward.

 

[2024 White Tahoe]

They are called "cup" plugs.

You are correct. Thanks for the correction. My typing or autocorrect error.

 

[GMCnewbee]

Wow! 150 pages and I have learned about rubbing vodka on myself to reduce fever, pee on a wound, and that the world cannot agree on what oil is and what oil does. I think I am going to start my "6.2 Survivor" thread. I like my odds. if 3% failure is believed, or even 5%, then I have a 95% chance of survival. I'll take those odds.

I do not want to dismiss the very real LOSS OF PROPULSION issue. If it happens to you it is a very big deal. I guess this discussion is about how to avoid that from happening. Is that what we are talking about here?

 

[Vladimir2306]

Wow! 150 pages and I have learned about rubbing vodka on myself to reduce fever, pee on a wound, and that the world cannot agree on what oil is and what oil does. I think I am going to start my "6.2 Survivor" thread. I like my odds. if 3% failure is believed, or even 5%, then I have a 95% chance of survival. I'll take those odds.

I do not want to dismiss the very real LOSS OF PROPULSION issue. If it happens to you it is a very big deal. I guess this discussion is about how to avoid that from happening. Is that what we are talking about here?

I already wrote above how to avoid this) replace the connecting rod bearings with red ones from L86, but it is easier for people to write 150 pages about what fools those are who chose 0-20 oil, than to actually prevent engine failure

 

[2017sltXL]

My last Chevy Truck was a 2003 5.3 Silverado would you like to guess what viscosity that uses Mr.SmartGuy?

Same weight my 2001 Yukon used, 5W30.
That said, he didn't say they have not used it for over two decades ago, but a decade ago.
I know maff is hard for people and I'm not a huge fan, but over a decade ago would put us back around 2013.
What baffles me the most is the fact nobody seems to discuss the fact that a 20 weight oil shears down to around a 10 weight before you even reach your OCI.
Why not run distilled water at that point.

 

[23Seven]

Same weight my 2001 Yukon used, 5W30.
That said, he didn't say they have not used it for over two decades ago, but a decade ago.
I know maff is hard for people and I'm not a huge fan, but over a decade ago would put us back around 2013.
What baffles me the most is the fact nobody seems to discuss the fact that a 20 weight oil shears down to around a 10 weight before you even reach your OCI.
Why not run distilled water at that point.

I was pointing out that my last Chevy Small Block did in fact use 5-30 because of the fact he was laughing at me like I didn’t know the right oil for my truck. I never said if it was 10 or 20 years old just that I was use to putting 5-30 in it. The less smart a$$ response would have been answering a question with another question like “What was your last vehicle”. He just wanted to be a wise guy so I called him out.