Jump to content

2015 Silverado 5.3 repeat lifter failure. Please help

Tj Rae

By Tj Rae
in Troubleshooting & Recalls

 Share

Recommended Posts

Tj Rae New Member

Tj Rae

Posted
Posted

97k miles on a truck that has had perfect upkeep since bringing it off the lot, I found a stuck lifter about a week ago on #6 intake. No surprise that I happened, I was bummed but not shocked. I did the entire job myself as per GMs tsb, with all dealership oem parts, new guides and all new lifters across the bank. Cam looked perfect, bore looked untouched only real damage was tiny bit on the end of the pushrod smacking the rocker. Reassembled the motor and put maybe a .5 hour on the motor before I now a have a repeat failure in the same bore, I'm now halfway through the job again and I don't want to do this a third time. Any idea what could be causing it? 

Mikeiser New Member

Mikeiser

Posted
Posted

Same boat here. Halfway through my second time replacing exhaust lifter cylinder 8. Except my lifter both times were damaged. Cam was OK weird enough. Doesn't seem to be oil starved. My suspicion is the lifter bore is not perfect anymore, causing the lifter to hang and get obliterated by the cam lobe.

I read somewhere an engine shop can insert brass repair sleeves but I'm not ready to remove the motor yet.

Or maybe the cam lobe is worn just enough into an aggressive enough ramp profile to hurt the lifter. I noticed my second failure began after I passed a slow driver on a two lane road(aggressive acceleration).

It's all speculation for me since I don't have the tools to measure the lifter bore and haven't found anyone else besides you experiencing this.

Mikeiser New Member

Mikeiser

Posted
Posted

I don't think that's a recommended practice anymore. I know Comp Cams and I think Crane Cams put out literature stating priming lifters could potentially over preload them, if that makes sense. 

What I ended up doing was removing the 2 fuses for the injectors and turned the engine over for 5 seconds at a time, a couple of times, to prime the oil system.

 

Anyways, I ended up honing the lifter bore gently, cleaned it up with a rag dabbed in 10w30 and repeated 3 times till the bore was polished nicely. I test fitted the new lifter from AC Delco and it slipped in with a hair of resistance like the other non-dod lifters. 

 

30 miles on it and no luck. I can hear ticking above 2k rpm still. I probably need to replace the cam at this point. Or buy a long block when I save the funds.

 

A little history:

AFM lifters replaced under PO(I don't have the printout of that, it'd be nice to see if it has any related info).

88k miles, bent pushrod, lifter replaced on cylinder 8 exhaust at dealership. 

150k miles, lifter destroyed, pushrod replaced on cylinder 8 exhaust.

164k miles, lifter destroyed, pushrod replaced on cylinder 8 exhaust. 

T-Town-Z Enthusiast

T-Town-Z

Posted
Posted

I'm at 138K and on the 2nd failure of the #7 AFM lifter.  First time was at 55K, about 4 years ago, when GM paid for it.  This time is on my dime.   Not having the dealership do it this time, it's at a shop with plans to do a full DOD delete cam and lifter job as long as there is no other damage found. 

It really is aggravating buying a vehicle new, doing all the right maintenance and still having these kind of breakdowns ! 

diyer2 Senior Enthusiast

diyer2

Posted
Posted

1 question.

How often did you change the oil?

Mikeiser New Member

Mikeiser

Posted
Posted

I always went off the DIC. When I bought the truck I replaced everything but the brake and radiator fluid with Amsoil religiously. 

I have my suspicions the PO drove the truck like he stole it. Had the transmission replaced at 126k miles when the pump went to pieces inside of it.

T-Town-Z Enthusiast

T-Town-Z

Posted
Posted
On 7/8/2021 at 9:27 PM, Mikeiser said:

Same boat here. Halfway through my second time replacing exhaust lifter cylinder 8. Except my lifter both times were damaged. Cam was OK weird enough. Doesn't seem to be oil starved. My suspicion is the lifter bore is not perfect anymore, causing the lifter to hang and get obliterated by the cam lobe.

I read somewhere an engine shop can insert brass repair sleeves but I'm not ready to remove the motor yet.

Or maybe the cam lobe is worn just enough into an aggressive enough ramp profile to hurt the lifter. I noticed my second failure began after I passed a slow driver on a two lane road(aggressive acceleration).

It's all speculation for me since I don't have the tools to measure the lifter bore and haven't found anyone else besides you experiencing this.

My first indication that something was not right, was about 4 times before it completely failed, when I went to heavily accelerate and pass someone on the highway, when it downshifted it did like a double backfire, stumbled, then regained itself and went.  The last time when it finally failed it did the double backfire sound, then I heard a bang, the engine started vibrating and lost power and the check engine light as well as traction control light came on.  Additionally the engine made a rapping/tapping sound the rest of the way to work.

The guy working on it said the AFM lifter failed internally but my cam looked okay visually.  Going with the full DOD delete cam and lifter swap now.  Hopefully it never becomes an issue again !

  • 2 weeks later...
Mikeiser New Member

Mikeiser

Posted
Posted

Yeah my buddy had that same rumble under the same circumstances when the engine goes from v4 to v8 too quick. I got off the phone with Christian Brothers Auto to have a Jasper engine installed. They apparently had to talk to GM engineers sometimes and learned that their own engineers drive other brands because the 2015-2019 engines are quite the headache.

Anyways, it'll run 9k to replace the motor.

T-Town-Z Enthusiast

T-Town-Z

Posted
Posted

$9K really sucks to spend on something this "new".   I just got my truck back and cost $3500 for a full DOD delete cam, lifters, labor, plus a street tune afterward. 

It really aggravates me that GM keeps building this garbage !

dgstarr63 Enthusiast

dgstarr63

Posted
Posted

My 1962 Impala SS with 327 V8 has 103000 miles and 59 years old. It has never had an engine failure of any kind.  Why can't GM build cars like that anymore?

  • Like 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, dgstarr63 said:

My 1962 Impala SS with 327 V8 has 103000 miles and 59 years old. It has never had an engine failure of any kind.  Why can't GM build cars like that anymore?

 

My 2015 Chevy 262 just turned 146,000 tonight running better now than it did new. They do build them like that. 

 

BTW, did you have this in storage for alike 40 years or something? :crackup:327 is a GREAT motor. 😉 

 

For the rest of you, remember before ya all start whining this isn't a 5.3 that they use the exact same valve gear and VLOM solenoids, oil pumps etc. Same motor platforms. Even the same ECU. 

  • Like 1
T-Town-Z Enthusiast

T-Town-Z

Posted
Posted

Hey Grumpy,  I guess you're one of the the lucky ones that hasn't had any major problems come up. 

I've previously purchased new trucks in 96, 01, 03 & 05.   They all needed a few repairs, but not any high dollar expenses like my 2014 has had.

Even with all the proper maintenance, my #7 AFM lifter went out at 55K, but fortunately the dealer covered it under power-train warranty, but would have been over $2500 if I had to pay it.  This spring, the A/C condenser failed.  That was $1100 out of pocket.  A month ago the #7 AFM lifter failed again, even though the AFM has been turned off the past 40K miles.  It cost me $3500 out of pocket for a DOD delete cam & lifter job.  

Yes, these new trucks are high tech, fuel efficient, and powerful.   What I don't understand is, if GM see's repeated reliability issues, why keep building it the same way with the same parts ?   They should't wait till the next major redesign in 10 years to fix it.  Not everyone's AFM parts are failing, but there are enough owners with bad ones that you would think it should get their attention.   It's not a good way to maintain brand loyalty !

  • Like 2
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
On 7/15/2021 at 6:57 PM, T-Town-Z said:

My first indication that something was not right, was about 4 times before it completely failed, when I went to heavily accelerate and pass someone on the highway, when it downshifted it did like a double backfire, stumbled, then regained itself and went.  The last time when it finally failed it did the double backfire sound, then I heard a bang, the engine started vibrating and lost power and the check engine light as well as traction control light came on.  Additionally the engine made a rapping/tapping sound the rest of the way to work.

The guy working on it said the AFM lifter failed internally but my cam looked okay visually.  Going with the full DOD delete cam and lifter swap now.  Hopefully it never becomes an issue again !

 

Just a guess. Oil aeration. 

  • Like 1
KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, T-Town-Z said:

Hey Grumpy,  I guess you're one of the the lucky ones that hasn't had any major problems come up. 

I've previously purchased new trucks in 96, 01, 03 & 05.   They all needed a few repairs, but not any high dollar expenses like my 2014 has had.

Even with all the proper maintenance, my #7 AFM lifter went out at 55K, but fortunately the dealer covered it under power-train warranty, but would have been over $2500 if I had to pay it.  This spring, the A/C condenser failed.  That was $1100 out of pocket.  A month ago the #7 AFM lifter failed again, even though the AFM has been turned off the past 40K miles.  It cost me $3500 out of pocket for a DOD delete cam & lifter job.  

Yes, these new trucks are high tech, fuel efficient, and powerful.   What I don't understand is, if GM see's repeated reliability issues, why keep building it the same way with the same parts ?   They should't wait till the next major redesign in 10 years to fix it.  Not everyone's AFM parts are failing, but there are enough owners with bad ones that you would think it should get their attention.   It's not a good way to maintain brand loyalty !

They did change the cylinder deactivation after 2014. And added it to the 6.2. Some of those failed before they left the lot. I haven’t had a problem with my new vehicles but one. It was covered under warranty. This is all for a couple miles per gallon in a controlled environment. 

  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...