Jump to content

Bearing issues for the 6.2

ScathaTheWorm
 Share

Recommended Posts

ScathaTheWorm Enthusiast

ScathaTheWorm

Posted
Posted

Good evening gentlemen. 

 

I have noticed recently between MY22.5 and MY24..there have been some issues with 6.2 engines randomly seizing and locking up. This issue is fairly serious, so much so that there has been a CSP issued for the 6.2 ONLY. I am not sure how many trucks/SUVS in total are affected by this problem...because I saw it in  Reddit, in other forums, Tik Tok (one MY24 Denali, and one recent case of a brand new MY24 Tahoe at ONLY 320 miles- date of build unknown ). Many thousands of unverified claims that dealer lots are FILLED with trucks being waiting to get fixed.. (the date ranges would be good to know, especially with regards to MY24s ).  From what I understand, it occurs VERY early when the truck is under warranty. I have heard one case here in Qatar.

 

For starters, it would be great if:

 

1) The amount of 6.2s produced between MY22.5 and MY23 (and MY24 so far)

2) I have heard there has been a part change recently- not sure if the MY25 facelift Tahoe will be affected as it will start prod on Oct sometime

3) What is the percentage of 6.2s failing due to this?

 

So the bottom line, is whether this is likely to affect EVERY truck (granted, they sell a lot so a large number can be affected, but NOT SO large to cover the entire volume). 

 

Would like to hear your thoughts on this. 

PunchT37 Enthusiast

PunchT37

Posted
Posted

What causes the bearing issue? The 5.3`s don`t seem to have the problem. Forged vs cast crank? Crank finish too rough? Hmmm. The lifter bore sizing on some blocks causing even lower oil pressure with the 0w20 oil? Add 420 hp to the mix? A 5.3 block is just a small bore 6.2.🤔

Gangly Senior Enthusiast

Gangly

Posted
Posted

From what I understand, improper cleaning of the machined block during the build process.  Debris gets pumped through the engine and causes failure.  I could be wrong, but I believe it's a situation very similar to the Toyota engine issues.

 

However, I am skeptical of that as well.

PunchT37 Enthusiast

PunchT37

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Gangly said:

From what I understand, improper cleaning of the machined block during the build process.  Debris gets pumped through the engine and causes failure.  I could be wrong, but I believe it's a situation very similar to the Toyota engine issues.

 

However, I am skeptical of that as well.

Are 5.3`s and 6.2`s cast at the same foundry?

diyer2 Senior Enthusiast

diyer2

Posted
Posted

Lucky or not lucky of having bearing problems. IMO the best answer is better oil, more changes. I repeat.

 

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, PunchT37 said:

What causes the bearing issue? The 5.3`s don`t seem to have the problem. Forged vs cast crank? Crank finish too rough? Hmmm. The lifter bore sizing on some blocks causing even lower oil pressure with the 0w20 oil? Add 420 hp to the mix? A 5.3 block is just a small bore 6.2.🤔

 

 

They just hit 3000 or so 5.3s in 2024s just made for machining debris taking out engines.  Pending engine replacements.    

Edited by newdude
ScathaTheWorm Enthusiast

ScathaTheWorm

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, newdude said:

 

 

They just hit 3000 or so 5.3s in 2024s just made for machining debris taking out engines.  Pending engine replacements.    

Most of the seized engines involved 6.2s...not 5.3s. It is good they are taking preventative action on the 5.3s...as I have not heard a forum case yet (I could be wrong though..). 

 

And also, I heard there is a new part no change for the 6.2. Not really sure what this means. 

ScathaTheWorm Enthusiast

ScathaTheWorm

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 hours ago, Gangly said:

From what I understand, improper cleaning of the machined block during the build process.  Debris gets pumped through the engine and causes failure.  I could be wrong, but I believe it's a situation very similar to the Toyota engine issues.

 

However, I am skeptical of that as well.

Those people had glitter in the oil...and probably ignored it EVEN when it was excess...when they should have got rid of it in the first place. Cheaping out using regular fuel DOES NOT help either and would increase the possibility of this happening. 

 

Another issue that can cause a similar shut down is the fuel pump module. Also seems to be common on both engines (though I did not hear of this in Qatar...only the bearing issue). That is not fatal...but I will NOT be surprised if this module is on backorder...

ScathaTheWorm Enthusiast

ScathaTheWorm

Posted
  • Author
Posted

In any case, are recent MY24 builds suffering from this problem? As in, Builds made in July 2024 and after. I know early MY24s have these issues...

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, ScathaTheWorm said:

Most of the seized engines involved 6.2s...not 5.3s. It is good they are taking preventative action on the 5.3s...as I have not heard a forum case yet (I could be wrong though..). 

 

And also, I heard there is a new part no change for the 6.2. Not really sure what this means. 

 

 

Its not preventative action really, its they had some 5.3s fail and they were able to pinpoint the VIN range and are going to recall them to replace the engines.  

 

IMO, its all a quality control issue on these engines failing amongst other problems on current GMs and with all automakers.  Where that QC issue stems from, everyone will have their own opinions on, but its a QC concern.  Post pandemic fallout still present somehow.  

ScathaTheWorm Enthusiast

ScathaTheWorm

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, newdude said:

 

 

Its not preventative action really, its they had some 5.3s fail and they were able to pinpoint the VIN range and are going to recall them to replace the engines.  

 

IMO, its all a quality control issue on these engines failing amongst other problems on current GMs and with all automakers.  Where that QC issue stems from, everyone will have their own opinions on, but its a QC concern.  Post pandemic fallout still present somehow.  

Well. The general point is...how will the MY26 or MY27 LTDs fare? At that point a new generation will be introduced...

asilverblazer Senior Enthusiast

asilverblazer

Posted
Posted

The problem has already been identified and presumably corrected. So there should be no issues going forward. 

 

The problem as I see it is that there have been several QC issues regarding the 5.3 and 6.2 engines in the last few years.

 

1. Bad lifters

2. Bad lifter bores

3. Bad crank bearings

4. Bad crank bore/machining debris

 

I don't recall the specifics, but it seems there has been one major QC issue after another.

 

I wonder if tooling is wearing out... these engines have been in production for a LONG time and prior to these recent issues have been exceptionally trouble free.

Konstantin Vass New Member

Konstantin Vass

Posted
Posted

1. Production Numbers: Specific figures on how many 6.2L engines were produced in MY22.5, MY23, and MY24 are usually proprietary information held by manufacturers. It might be best to reach out directly to GM or consult industry reports for those details.

2. Part Changes: Automakers often implement design or manufacturing changes mid-cycle in response to issues. It's possible that the MY25 Tahoe will feature improvements aimed at resolving these problems, but without official confirmation, it’s hard to say definitively.

3. Failure Rates: Without official data, estimating the percentage of failures is challenging. Anecdotal reports on forums and social media can sometimes inflate perceptions of prevalence. However, if many trucks are being reported as affected, it could indicate a more systemic issue.

4. CSP and Warranty: The fact that a Customer Satisfaction Program (CSP) has been issued suggests that GM acknowledges the issue and is taking steps to address it. It's wise to monitor updates from GM and stay in touch with your dealer for information specific to your vehicle.

5. Safety and Longevity: While many vehicles may be sold, it’s unlikely that every single one will experience this issue.

  • 4 months later...
autobody New Member

autobody

Posted
Posted

The 6.2 l87 bearing failures are being caused by wrist pin clips coming out making the wrist pins slide out and the connecting rod run off center and eat up the bearings.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 2,448 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • B14Sierra
      Cam chain tensioner question

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      So I'm in the middle of a DOD AFM delete on my 6.2 L86 Sierra. I had a pick holding the tensioner but after I got the Cam phaser gear off I was cleaning off all the rtv and apparently I didn't have the pick seated far enough in. I bumped it and the tensioner sprang forward.  I think everything is good but I want a second opinion. The top of the tensioner is just a looped piece of plastic that rides in that channel right? There is no spring or anything is there? I got the gear and chain back on and it seems tight and everything looks right. I'm hoping nothing fell out.
    • dna9656
      No low range 4 x 4

      By dna9656 · Posted

      My 2015 1500 LTZ Silverado suddenly won't go into 4 x 4 low. It will go into 4 x 4 high.
    • asilverblazer
      Transmission Woes :-(

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      Yep, just a quick reference point.    My main point being I’d do a thousand other things before I’d pay 10k for a transmission.    Speaking in ignorance cause I don’t look at these trucks, what is it worth? 20k?
    • asilverblazer
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      I think users are going to want to pick their monitored parameters, which parameters they want to see first.    It should probably start with baseline at a minimum and adjust to learned, but be able to overlay baseline for comparison.   A simple severity level would be able to determine what type of alerting is appropriate or user selectable.    Why not use the OBD port though?   I think a phone connection would be a good idea, push notifications type deal.   Number 1 issue is having data is useless if you don’t know what the data should be under normal conditions. 
    • Chuck FB
      summer road trips in the 2026 2500HD

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...