Jump to content

Lifter Failure Question

NorthernX31
 Share

Recommended Posts

NorthernX31 Enthusiast

NorthernX31

Posted
Posted

I have a 2020 SLE 5.3 with roughly 75k kms on it. I've been hearing a lot about imminent lifter failure and am wondering if this is just specific to a batch of trucks or if it will likely happen to me.  I have read a few posts on here but was curious if there's anything listing how many members have had a failure and at what milage it has happened. Any info you can shed on this will be appreciated.

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Grumpy Bear
Grumpy Bear

Three reasons for a failure. 1.) Abuse. 2.) Flaw. 3.) Lubrication issue.    Is anyone going to admit to abusing their truck? Over rev. Not changing oil. Improper oil. Overloading.   

diyer2
diyer2

You have to decide how often you change oil.  Me, I like clean oil. I use Amsoil OE in our daily driver, a 2019 Hyundai Santa FE. I'm doing 4k oil changes. 

KARNUT
KARNUT

When we built a better mouse trap we got copied. When we used the better mouse trap to do better work we got costumers. That seems to be lost on GM. Changing oil every weekend isn’t possible for every

Posted Images

CamGTP Senior Enthusiast

CamGTP

Posted
Posted

Lifter failures on these trucks have been around since 2007 when AFM was put into the half tons. The chances of your truck having a failure is pretty slim given the amount of trucks out on the road. There was a small run of trucks that got bad parts a few years ago but if you're truck was part of it you would have been informed of it. Or you can contact a local dealership to see if your VIN has anything come up for a recall or bulletin.

 

 

  • Like 1
20L8TSierra24 Senior Enthusiast

20L8TSierra24

Posted
Posted (edited)

It has made it 75k miles. Seems like most fail within the first 10k if they're going to.

Edited by 20Denali22
NorthernX31 Enthusiast

NorthernX31

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

What concerns me is there have been several trucks in my town that have had failures at higher mileage with some being right around the 100k km mark which in Canada is the end of the powertrain warranty. 

Edited by NorthernX31
l1tech New Member

l1tech

Posted
Posted

I've replaced lifters and cams on these with miles as low as 50k and as high as 160k. A few months back I had 2 6.2's in the shop at the same time for lifters and cam, one had ~75,000 miles and the other was pushing 120k. The funny thing is that on both of these neither had a failure on an AFM cylinder. I had a 5.7 Ram in the other day with 48,000 miles that need lifters and cam.

  • Like 1
Gangly Senior Enthusiast

Gangly

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 4/16/2023 at 10:09 AM, l1tech said:

I've replaced lifters and cams on these with miles as low as 50k and as high as 160k. A few months back I had 2 6.2's in the shop at the same time for lifters and cam, one had ~75,000 miles and the other was pushing 120k. The funny thing is that on both of these neither had a failure on an AFM cylinder. I had a 5.7 Ram in the other day with 48,000 miles that need lifters and cam.

Not trying to argue, but trying to understand the validity of this statement since all of the 6.2 from 2019 up will have DFM, not AFM, and every cylinder will be controlled by DFM.

 

Were the two 6.2's the earlier body style?

Edited by Gangly
l1tech New Member

l1tech

Posted
Posted

Both 6.2's were pre 2019 so my bad there. I have a close friend that used to work for me that is a Gm tech and he tells me that the DFM motors are experiencing the same lifter failures. AFM and DFM are realistically the same thing with the only real difference being that DFM has the ability to cancel any cylinder and AFM can only cancel 4 cylinders. Other than that you still get the same failures.

  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...
Bradley E New Member

Bradley E

Posted
Posted

My 19 AT4 just had lifter failure at 35k miles. I know this is an old thread, but just goes to show, at 4 years old, it’s only a matter of luck i guess! Fixed Bank 2 only to have others come apart on the test drive after. Gm engineer told the tech to replace the whole motor. They also mentioned inadequate oiling in these motors.

No wonder you don’t see any on the lots currently…

alrockaz Enthusiast

alrockaz

Posted
Posted

I just joined this dubious club. 2020 6.2 L87 engine with 68,000 miles. Found a good shop and they'll be replacing lifters and pushrods in both banks, along with a new cam. Going to replace the water pump and timing chain while I'm at it, since the existing parts are already being removed. He'll also be disabling DFM for me.

BossTaco2020 Enthusiast

BossTaco2020

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, alrockaz said:

I just joined this dubious club. 2020 6.2 L87 engine with 68,000 miles. Found a good shop and they'll be replacing lifters and pushrods in both banks, along with a new cam. Going to replace the water pump and timing chain while I'm at it, since the existing parts are already being removed. He'll also be disabling DFM for me.

If you don't mind me asking, how much is that going to cost you?

alrockaz Enthusiast

alrockaz

Posted
Posted
On 6/5/2023 at 6:10 AM, BossTaco2020 said:

If you don't mind me asking, how much is that going to cost you?

$2400 for the cam, lifters and repair from that point. Add'l for the parts cost of the timing chain and water pump. Should not be any additional labor as those parts are already removed. He's not a fan of the GM water pump or timing set, so we're going with Melling. I suspect he's cheaper by several 100 than other shops, but more importantly I trust the guy. He rebuilt the transmission in my Hummer H3 as well as a few other transmissions for friends. 

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...
alrockaz Enthusiast

alrockaz

Posted
Posted

Shop just got it torn down yesterday. One lifter in cylinder #7 was broken, but the other lifter in the same cylinder had a failed roller that didn't roll smoothly and had flat spots, so obviously the cam is now bad. I was replacing it anyway. Additionally, there's one bent rod so there's going to be one valve that needs replacing.

 

The book time for the project for older (2017) engines was about 21 hours; this one, the book time is 32 hours. He quoted me too low, is willing to stick to the quote, but I'll work it out with him.

 

Since he was delayed a bit, I asked him to order parts from Texas Speed for a full DFM delete. Not sure if we're going to go with LS lifters, Morel or Comp Cams, but I asked him to work it out with Texas Speed as to which are the best bet for me.

 

We looked at the valves in the heads to check out the carbon buildup that comes with these direct injection engines. Here's one valve, and this was middle of the road. Some were significantly worse, some were a bit better. He's going to disassemble the heads and clean it all up.

IMG_2807.JPG

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
On 6/1/2023 at 8:13 PM, Bradley E said:

My 19 AT4 just had lifter failure at 35k miles. I know this is an old thread, but just goes to show, at 4 years old, it’s only a matter of luck i guess! Fixed Bank 2 only to have others come apart on the test drive after. Gm engineer told the tech to replace the whole motor. They also mentioned inadequate oiling in these motors.

No wonder you don’t see any on the lots currently…

 

Three reasons for a failure. 1.) Abuse. 2.) Flaw. 3.) Lubrication issue. 

 

Is anyone going to admit to abusing their truck? Over rev. Not changing oil. Improper oil. Overloading. 

 

@CamGTP in his post on April 3 mentioned the flaw. It happens to all makes and models. As @l1tech mentioned in his post on the 16th, this happens to non-AFM lifters as well. Heat treat is usually the culprit. Sometimes machining errors. Usually by batch. When it is the AFM lifter is can be traced to the VLOM sometimes. In high milers the lifter bore wear. Which takes it to reason #3. Lubrication. 

 

When parts touch they fail. Two things keep parts from touching. Viscosity and wear additives. Those additives are consumable and as the industry moves toward its mpg goals and oil for life goal these additives are being relied upon to do the work viscosity should be doing more and more. Sometimes when one walks to close to the edge...they fall off. When GM Engineers say "inadequate oiling' I don't think they are referring to the volume being supplied. Lifter bores don't wear out in 60K-120K if the oil is doing its job. Neither do adequately hard lifters/axles and cams. Not even in a million miles. 

 

Hands in the air, how many Ecotec3 V6's suffer this failure? It does happen. Like finding a Unicorn often. Before someone says, "But there are way more V8's"....lets normalize the statistic by saying how many per thousand units. They use the same parts from the same suppliers. Even the same oil pump. So, what's the difference? Ya all know the answer to that 🤫

 

Let's say 0W20 is actually effective. It can only be so if it STAYS a W20. One of GDI's biggest flaws is fuel diluted oil. So much so that 2.5% is considered 'normal' by everyone but a REAL Tribologist. Okay, and me :crackup:And what happens to viscosity when you dump a solvent (gasoline) in your oil? That said, not the only culprit. VII polymers are not all created equal. And pretty all of them will pass a DEXOS license test battery. Viscosity loss test have a pretty large window and many lube test services do as well before they send up the red flares. This means OCI is critical if you insist on walking the edge of the cliff. 

 

If you insist on using 0W20 then choose one at the upper end of the W20 viscosity spec and one with a 'stay in grade' VII package and one with enough antiwear to cover the silly long OCI's you believe are 'fine' and are not. Or be proactive and shorten the OCI. Don't use a UOA lab that serves up "tasty results' like Micky D. 

 

OR do what you've always done and get the results you've always got. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 3
KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

When we built a better mouse trap we got copied. When we used the better mouse trap to do better work we got costumers. That seems to be lost on GM. Changing oil every weekend isn’t possible for everyone. Imagine the wait times if everyone did that. I’ll just buy the better mouse trap. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 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

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Another JR
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By Another JR · Posted

      Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • newdude
      Gas fill door

      By newdude · Posted

      Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • newdude
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By newdude · Posted

      No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...