BREAKING: GM is officially recalling the L87

[Vladimir2306]

Because the majority of people that are performing oil analysis usually overly maintain their vehicles themselves and likely drive them in a way they will not likely dilute the oil as much. Also not everyone lives in areas where the a Winter temps are generally at or below freezing for much if the season.

Thus, at temperatures above zero, the evaporation of fuel from oil occurs even faster

 

[Vladimir2306]

@Vladimir2306

Has your 6.2l ever been opened up? Bearing replaced or other internal engine work performed?

Question about your trailer, looks like a twin jet ski trailer. Did you have 2 jet skis on the trailer when the failure occurred? Trying to get an idea of weight you were hauling. I also see a car top carrier and I assume you had the cargo area fairly full? Probably about 4,000 with trailer with 2 jetskia a with cargo and family members?

No, I only did regular maintenance. Nothing else changed. When I was driving, my trailer had a total weight of 1.1-1.2 tons. Which is much lower than the maximum weight for a trailer, for which my Yukon is designed

 

[GMCChevy]

All we know is that if/when the failure happens on a 21-24 built engine its catastrophic and isn't progressive

and

GM believes that the thicker oil will prevent this catastrophic event from happening

so, this whole oil debate is pointless, for your own safety just switch to 0W-40 on the 6.2L as GM has said that's the way to go on most if not all of the engines manufactured from 21-24 and still on the road... all the 0W-20 believers apparently know more than GM

That there are engines before and after the range of ones in the recall that are still running 0W-20 shows that there is an issue with parts like GM stated. The thicker oil is more the cheapest thing they could do to delay the inevitable. If I had one of of those engines I'd want it fixed not a band aid to keep it on the road till GM could wash their hands of it.

 

[viven44]

All this is, is a mis manufactured bearing inside the motor/potential debris. Thats it.

If you are going to summarize it for all of us and end the discussion (which I think is a futile exercise), why don't you try to be factually accurate.

The bearing is not the issue; that exact bearing part # is in use on all LS engines for more than a decade.... the crankshaft on the 6.2L was not manufactured correctly (or at least that’s what GM claims).

 

[BADRIDES]

This thread has gone in a bunch of different directions but I will ask the question here rather than start a new one. Has GM issued an official remedy yet? Im taking my 24 Yukon in for service in on 5/23 and the service manager led me to believe that I will have to pay for the 0W40 oil unless there is an official remedy by then. Has anyone else had any communication with their service department or received any more definitive information?

See post #739 and no the fix has not gone into place yet.

 

[Stbentoak]

@Vladimir2306

Has your 6.2l ever been opened up? Bearing replaced or other internal engine work performed?

Question about your trailer, looks like a twin jet ski trailer. Did you have 2 jet skis on the trailer when the failure occurred? Trying to get an idea of weight you were hauling. I also see a car top carrier and I assume you had the cargo area fairly full? Probably about 4,000 with trailer with 2 jetskia a with cargo and family members?

2 Jet ski's and some people and stuff? Hell, My daughters 1.5L Bronco sport could do that! I just pulled a 6500# 28' Tritoon with a 400 on the back last week and hardly knew it was there....

 

[WalleyeMikeIII]

All we know is that if/when the failure happens on a 21-24 built engine its catastrophic and isn't progressive

and

GM believes that the thicker oil will prevent this catastrophic event from happening

so, this whole oil debate is pointless, for your own safety just switch to 0W-40 on the 6.2L as GM has said that's the way to go on most if not all of the engines manufactured from 21-24 and still on the road... all the 0W-20 believers apparently know more than GM

we know more than that. GM stated in the safety recall it has 2 root causes:
1) Rod bearing damage from sediment on connecting rods and in crankshaft oil galleys
2) Out of specification crankshaft dimensions and machining

See here.

Let me make it easy for you all, page 4

It is not that difficult to imagine journals out of tolerance causing this...

 

[Big Mama]

I stayed away from a 6.2 for my Sierra but really wanted it for towing. Makes me want to go get one.

 

[Marky Dissod]

All we know is that
1. if/when the failure happens on a 21-24 built 6.2L L87 engine, its catastrophic and isn't progressive
AND
2. GM believes that the thicker oil will prevent this catastrophic event from happening

2. More likely that GM thinks the thicker oil will DELAY this catastrophe til after 150,000 miles.
The number of these engines that fail before 200,000 miles will be either telling or damning.

 

[WalleyeMikeIII]

2. More likely that GM thinks the thicker oil will DELAY this catastrophe til after 150,000 miles.
The number of these engines that fail before 200,000 miles will be either telling or damning.

I believe they are not trying to limp past warranty..they recalled it as a safety issue…so until we see the final print of the N*000 TSB/recall notice, we are all just speculating. Gotta hold out till they publish that.