New bulletin/Campaign 6.2 L87

[MrLeadFoot]

4 hours ago, bruincounselor said:

 

Got my letter yesterday as well. I agree it makes little sense to wait on the inspection and oil change because of the writing on the fill cap. Why not do everything else to prevent engine lock up (and potential injury/death/insert NHTSA language here) and let me know when you got a cap available? They could even put a few stickers under the hood to help us remember we need 0-40 oil.

 

I also received a letter from a law firm looking for my information for a class action lawsuit. The only folks making money on all of this are the lawyers.

Like I said in my post, I think GM knows the 40 weight oil won't really help. I think they know that the motor is just going to fail, and it's just a matter of when. I mean, think about it, if there is contamination in the journals, too tight tolerances in the bearings, mis-aligned casting for the crank, etc., no oil is going to help. I am really starting to believe the inspection and oil type change is really something to appease the NHTSA. If they really believed it has a remote chance of helping mitigate whatever the issue really is, don't you think they would be jumping on every opportunity to swap that oil to potentially limit their liabilty?

 

On the other hand, GM forecasts only 3% of the vehicles needing an engine replacement, which is like 16,000, yet 28,000 people already had the problem BEFORE they even lifted a finger! I don't think we can believe what GM says at this point. They haven't even made any official statements to try to clear things up, either. GM is obviously playing the numbers game, like they were doing even before the recall. I think it's looking more and more like they are adopting the type of strategy below:

 

How many owners will jump ship and get rid of their recall trucks? Seems like it must be quite a few, judging by even the number of people on this forum that have done so already. That reduces GM's liability right there. Then there are those who will total their vehicles in accidents before their engines blow up, and those that manage to eke out 60,000 miles (before their's blow up) and are the type that typically trade-in for something else at such mileage. That's another reduction. Combine all this with the fact that they're dragging their feet on the oil change alone, I believe the inspection and oil change is likely just smoke and mirrors.

Edited June 28, 2025 by MrLeadFoot

[MrLeadFoot]

20 hours ago, Jus Cruisin said:

They didn't make anything on my trade with a employee buying it. All they got was what the dealer makes off supplier discount. They didn't get rich off my purchase. 

As someone that used to run sales departments at dealerships, believe me when I tell you that a dealer ALWAYS makes money on the sale of a vehicle, new or used, whether to a retail customer or employee (even if it was a trade being bought), and regardless of what kind of "deal" was provided. Even when they sell "below invoice" there are dealer-only incentives and rebates from manufacturers that customers are not privy to that back such sales, so it's simply a matter of how much profit they choose to make on each sale.

 

In the context of what @WeGone was saying about "making more money" when we trade-in vehicles upon the purchase  of new ones, the manufacturer itself would, in fact, have a lot to gain on recall truck was trade-ins for new ones, because not only do they make a profit in every single one of the new vehicles dealerships sell, regardless of programs such as employee discount, supplier discount, etc., they also save on incidental expenses incurred when a customer brings their car in for recall work, such as the cost of a loaner and possible "customer goodwill" expenses and reimbursements.

 

So, while they didn't get rich off your deal, automobile manufacturers and dealers never NOT make money on a sale. They wouldn't be able to stay in business if they didn't. And, taking a recall liability off of a customer's hands makes them more money in the form of reduced expenses for them.

Edited June 28, 2025 by MrLeadFoot

[bruincounselor]

4 hours ago, MrLeadFoot said:

Like I said in my post, I think GM knows the 40 weight oil won't really help. I think they know that the motor is just going to fail, and it's just a matter of when. I mean, think about it, if there is contamination in the journals, too tight tolerances in the bearings, mis-aligned casting for the crank, etc., no oil is going to help. I am really starting to believe the inspection and oil type change is really something to appease the NHTSA. If they really believed it has a remote chance of helping mitigate whatever the issue really is, don't you think they would be jumping on every opportunity to swap that oil to potentially limit their liabilty?

 

On the other hand, GM forecasts only 3% of the vehicles needing an engine replacement, which is like 16,000, yet 28,000 people already had the problem BEFORE they even lifted a finger! I don't think we can believe what GM says at this point. They haven't even made any official statements to try to clear things up, either. GM is obviously playing the numbers game, like they were doing even before the recall. I think it's looking more and more like they are adopting the type of strategy below:

 

How many owners will jump ship and get rid of their recall trucks? Seems like it must be quite a few, judging by even the number of people on this forum that have done so already. That reduces GM's liability right there. Then there are those who will total their vehicles in accidents before their engines blow up, and those that manage to eke out 60,000 miles (before their's blow up) and are the type that typically trade-in for something else at such mileage. That's another reduction. Combine all this with the fact that they're dragging their feet on the oil change alone, I believe the inspection and oil change is likely just smoke and mirrors.

Selling/trading the truck doesn't reduce GM's liability - they are on the hook for the duration of the added warranty, regardless of who owns the truck; it's just transferring the issue from the current owner to someone else. I believe that GM is on record as saying the engine warranty is 150,000 miles for the affected issue. If the oil change works for just 1% of the affected engines, it's probably worth GM's energy to make the change.

[MrLeadFoot]

39 minutes ago, bruincounselor said:

Selling/trading the truck doesn't reduce GM's liability - they are on the hook for the duration of the added warranty, regardless of who owns the truck; it's just transferring the issue from the current owner to someone else. I believe that GM is on record as saying the engine warranty is 150,000 miles for the affected issue. If the oil change works for just 1% of the affected engines, it's probably worth GM's energy to make the change.

It does reduce their liability, because once it's in the hands of a franchised dealership, they no longer are exposed to incidental expenses such as loaner costs and "customer goodwill" reimbursements and such. Doesn't sound like much per recall truck, but add them up, and the total costs can be quite significant. The chances of lawsuits stemming from accidents related to "un-fixed" trucks also becomes reduced because the trucks are "grounded" until determined to be fixed. It's all about mitigating inevitable costs at this point.

Edited June 28, 2025 by MrLeadFoot

[Jus Cruisin]

14 hours ago, MrLeadFoot said:

As someone that used to run sales departments at dealerships, believe me when I tell you that a dealer ALWAYS makes money on the sale of a vehicle, new or used, whether to a retail customer or employee (even if it was a trade being bought), and regardless of what kind of "deal" was provided. Even when they sell "below invoice" there are dealer-only incentives and rebates from manufacturers that customers are not privy to that back such sales, so it's simply a matter of how much profit they choose to make on each sale.

 

In the context of what @WeGone was saying about "making more money" when we trade-in vehicles upon the purchase  of new ones, the manufacturer itself would, in fact, have a lot to gain on recall truck was trade-ins for new ones, because not only do they make a profit in every single one of the new vehicles dealerships sell, regardless of programs such as employee discount, supplier discount, etc., they also save on incidental expenses incurred when a customer brings their car in for recall work, such as the cost of a loaner and possible "customer goodwill" expenses and reimbursements.

 

So, while they didn't get rich off your deal, automobile manufacturers and dealers never NOT make money on a sale. They wouldn't be able to stay in business if they didn't. And, taking a recall liability off of a customer's hands makes them more money in the form of reduced expenses for them.

I was the GSM of a Lincoln Mercury dealership in Detroit for 10 years and in sales and service for maybe another 6 or 8. So I know what dealers make in sales (new and used along with service and parts). I know all about "invoice" and "net/net". Being a manager bought my truck, they made zero on that and supplier discount doesn't give the dealer much. I also write a check so they made nothing on the backend from me either. 

[MrLeadFoot]

2 hours ago, Jus Cruisin said:

I was the GSM of a Lincoln Mercury dealership in Detroit for 10 years and in sales and service for maybe another 6 or 8. So I know what dealers make in sales (new and used along with service and parts). I know all about "invoice" and "net/net". Being a manager bought my truck, they made zero on that and supplier discount doesn't give the dealer much. I also write a check so they made nothing on the backend from me either. 

Not that it matters, but I was also GSM and F&I Director for several different franchises and am not here to argue with you. In fact, please note that I previously AGREED with you that the DEALER didn't get rich off your trade-in deal. But, we are talking about a recall here so this is not about what the dealer makes on a sale that matters, whatever that amount may be, it's about the MANUFACTURER. I was simply trying to point out how someone trading in their recall truck can benefit the MANUFACTURER in reducing their liability, in addition to the money the MANUFACTURER makes on the sale of a new vehicle to the dealership that someone subsequently buys. It also doesn't matter how much the MANUFACTURER really makes on the sale either, because the reduced liability is more important, especially given the magnitude of the potential ramifications of this particular recall, but over undoubtedly many trade-in purchases, that adds up to a lot. So, my post was an attempt to corroborate what @WeGone was saying about "[them] making more money", in the form of reduced liability combined with sales at the MANUFACTURER'S level, when someone trades in their vehicle, that has the significance of this particular recall, for a new one.

 

I apologize if my previous post didn't convey my thoughts clearly. I know what I'm trying to say, but when put in writing sometimes things aren't perceived as intended. 

Edited June 29, 2025 by MrLeadFoot

[KARNUT]

I was a small fleet buyer for the family business. I had two instances of great service from a dealer. Of course it was in their interest to do so. I had a complete buy back on a problem truck. I traded it in on another truck from them as a leftover. That truck out of warranty lost an engine. They paid for the engine. I paid the labor. Did they make money, of course. Was I made whole, yes. I got service out of both trucks. That’s worth something. Fair is Fair. It wasn’t their fault. We had a manufacturing problem with our equipment years ago. We made people whole with loaner equipment and repairs. It took us awhile to recover. We sued the manufacturer for damages. We just wanted to be made whole. The refused and lost. The lawyers were happy. We kept our reputation only because of the lawsuit. The manufacturers never improved their product. They’re not around anymore. The dealers can only do so much. It’s hard but compassion and good relations help.

[WeGone]

My biggest issue is I have no choice but to keep my 2021 until it fails, I look at it this way the resale or trade in is now in the tank. I paid $64K In 2021, have put 16K miles on it thats 4K a year it is kept inside still looks and smells new,  and now the value is $35k or about $7500 dollars a year. I have never lost that much on any GM truck. My 2000 GMC SLE I paid $27K for has 130k 25 years old and is still worth $5000.  

Edited June 29, 2025 by WeGone

[KARNUT]

10 minutes ago, WeGone said:

My biggest issue is I have no choice but to keep my 2021 until it fails, I look at it this way the resale or trade in is now in the tank. I paid $64K In 2021, have put 16K miles on it thats 4K a year it is kept inside still looks and smells new,  and now the value is $35k or about $7500 dollars a year. I have never lost that much on any GM truck. My 2000 GMC SLE I paid $27K for has 130k 25 years old and is still worth $5000.  

Unless I’m missing something you’re in a good position. You’re on the list, right? The way I see it in your position it will last a long time as a keeper. Even if you replace the motor. You have a low mileage back up. In your case the last thing I would do is buy a new one. 

[WeGone]

15 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

Unless I’m missing something you’re in a good position. You’re on the list, right? The way I see it in your position it will last a long time as a keeper. Even if you replace the motor. You have a low mileage back up. In your case the last thing I would do is buy a new one. 

I agree but still a position I would rather not be in! I use it for towing my car's to shows  all over the US just hope the fail is not when I'm 1k to 3K miles from home! Last trip was 5K round trip!

Edited June 29, 2025 by WeGone

[KARNUT]

5 hours ago, WeGone said:

I agree but still a position I would rather not be in! I use it for towing my car's to shows  all over the US just hope the fail is not when I'm 1k to 3K miles from home! Last trip was 5K round trip!

I don’t have a classic anymore but my wife does. I ask her if she’s interested in doing events, she’s not. We’re usually around for cruising the coast as spectators. Only because of our favorite casino. Probably because of all the drag racing I did. Sitting outside in the heat isn’t her thing. 

[dieselfan1]

I am still waiting to get an appointment but needed an oil change. I changed it today with the supercar 0w40. 

Noticed a difference right away how much quieter it was just idling. Everyone know these sound clattery. The 0w40 seems to help in that regard. Anyone else notice this?

 

[MrLeadFoot]

13 hours ago, dieselfan1 said:

I am still waiting to get an appointment but needed an oil change. I changed it today with the supercar 0w40. 

Noticed a difference right away how much quieter it was just idling. Everyone know these sound clattery. The 0w40 seems to help in that regard. Anyone else notice this?

 

That's good to hear (no pun intended). Can you also post your findings on any affects to gas mileage once you've had time to evaluate?

[Silverado4x4]

15 hours ago, dieselfan1 said:

I am still waiting to get an appointment but needed an oil change. I changed it today with the supercar 0w40. 

Noticed a difference right away how much quieter it was just idling. Everyone know these sound clattery. The 0w40 seems to help in that regard. Anyone else notice this?

 

I wouldn't have done that putting 0W40 in there now if you get called to bring for a engine check the 0W40 might mask the noise they want to hear should have put the 0W20 back in there until you bring it in.

Edited July 4, 2025 by Silverado4x4

[dieselfan1]

4 hours ago, Silverado4x4 said:

I wouldn't have done that putting 0W40 in there now if you get called to bring for a engine check the 0W40 might mask the noise they want to hear should have put the 0W20 back in there until you bring it in.

I don't want a new motor. Too much hassle. I have 52,000 miles on it.  Im pretty sure it was going to pass the "test".

Runs fine. Id rather have the 150k warranty.