BREAKING: GM is officially recalling the L87

[DunzoDenali]

https://www.tahoeyukonforum.com/threads/the-thing-you-hate-most-today.35254/page-2292#post-1965646

Now wondering if my wife NEW engine is proper.

2022 denali - I had a bad engine (failed) replaced with a bad engine (bandaid-ed), now under recall and I'm hearing the replacement engines are going to have the same part number?? anyone heard similar?

 

[DunzoDenali]

I like your logic. It would be some reassurance that GM is trying to do the right thing.

I've been told all component coverage is non-transferable now. Sounds like they have no confidence, to me.

 

[ENTX]

I am curious how many GM vehicle owners will now say they have had enough and will get rid of their entire GM inventory at home or at work, no matter what years, or will just get rid of anything newer than 2020 or get rid of just their 6.2 engine vehicles.

I am expecting some rants on here about doing what I asked about here.

IMO, GM got it right with the GMT800 series. Anything newer, again IMO, is buying trouble(s).

Probably not many, at least among the people with Tahoes/Suburbans. I've got a 2023 Suburban and there is really no alternative except the Expedition but when I was doing research (pre-purchase) I got an impression that Ford had a bunch of own issues so it's not significantly better quality-wise.

Edit: I purchased an extended warranty that should last me till 110k miles to mitigate quality issues.

 

[Scarey]

Boom

https://gmauthority.com/blog/2025/05/should-you-use-0w-40-oil-in-your-non-recalled-gm-6-2l-l87-engine/

They can’t recommend it for everybody because it would threaten their very complicated mpg fleet numbers. I’m guessing the 6.2s that under recall, recommend 0-40, anre excluded from messing with their fleet numbers. From all the forum dialog, utubes and gm recall recommendations it’s clear to me 0-40 is a better choice for my L87.

 

[cornicekurt]

Until someone (GM, really) can say that there is a "max mileage" failure threshold after which a '21-'24 6.2 is no longer in danger of failing, then I think that establishing a "failure rate" based only on the engines that have ALREADY failed -- as though no more will fail -- is short-sighted at best.

If it could be said that all of these failures occurred under 5000 miles, say, and that if you're beyond that mileage you're in the clear, then a lot fewer of us in this thread would be concerned. But, as far as I'm concerned, that "failure rate" is nothing more than "the current failure rate," and has the potential to grow wildly.

Agreed. The mileage on these failures is all over the place. They’ll either extend the warranty out to 150 replace all of the motors

 

[DunzoDenali]

That's a lot of unnecessary stuff. The fix is in now get it fixed. For those that didn't know now they know. Problems are always on the radar of manufacturers. Every warranty issue is documented and followed. They see patterns emerge. They than take action.

Theres no secret. Manufacturers would recall much quicker these days because it preserves brand reputation.

No one is hiding it takes data to act upon.

 

[Antonm]

Not that this thread hasn't already gone off the deep end,,, but its also possible the oversized lifter bore issue (GM has an engine replacement TSB for that one too on these same engines) is contributing to the situation.

The lifter bore issue is an oversized bore, that oversized bore bleeds off oil/ oil pressure from the oil supply galley and just drains it back to the oil pan. With the thin 0W20 oil more oil / oil pressure would bleed off through that oversized bore compared to a thicker 0W40 oil.

So with an oversized lifter bore less oil would be getting to the rod bearings and its not like there was lot of safety margin with 0W20 to begin with, but using a thicker oil would help this situation as well.

Maybe GM is using one band-aid to cover two wounds on the same engine,,, or,,, maybe all the oversized lifter bore engines have already failed and been replaced IDK. But as far as I know the oversized lifter bore issue was unique to the 6.2 and not shared with the 5.3 and it is the 6.2 that is having failures of pressurized oil supplied bearings.
...

 

[22BlackDenali]

I am curious how many GM vehicle owners will now say they have had enough and will get rid of their entire GM inventory at home or at work, no matter what years, or will just get rid of anything newer than 2020 or get rid of just their 6.2 engine vehicles.

I am expecting some rants on here about doing what I asked about here.

IMO, GM got it right with the GMT800 series. Anything newer, again IMO, is buying trouble(s).

I wish I liked any of the other large family haulers that can tow. I feel like none are reliable with the cafe stds discussed. I do have my dealer pricing a Tahoe with baby Duramax for me....If GM offered me a deal on a new one with Duramax I would take it. Especially to get me out of this crap and not have to worry about if it's safe to take my family on vacation this Summer with large boat in tow.

 

[OR VietVet]

I wish I liked any of the other large family haulers that can tow. I feel like none are reliable with the cafe stds discussed. I do have my dealer pricing a Tahoe with baby Duramax for me....If GM offered me a deal on a new one with Duramax I would take it. Especially to get me out of this crap and not have to worry about if it's safe to take my family on vacation this Summer with large boat in tow.

What would keep you from buying a GMT800 2500 series Suburban with a 6.0 or 8.1 engine?

 

[23Seven]

This is exactly what I wrote about: switching from 0-20 oil to 0-40 oil on your own will result in loss of warranty.

I called and the service advisor said that since my VIN is not yet showing for a recall that if I came down to pay $245 for an oil change they would in fact put 0W-40 in it. I asked about changing it on my own and he said to put 0W-40 in it. Any getting an oil change from a dealership own their own will get 0W-40 moving forward.