New bulletin/Campaign 6.2 L87

[MrLeadFoot]

1 hour ago, Snow White said:

well I slid under snow white today, what a pain in the ass to that engine tag but i got it.... September 14, 2024.... a saturday engine!?  not sure if that's better or worse than a friday or a monday but it's O.T.!!! when my dad and friends worked at harrison/delphi there were a lot of jokes about friday and monday builds.

 

My best friend has a Sierra SLT with Max Tow... April, he has the recall on his app.  he tows a 7,500lb 35ft travel trailer but hasn't towed with it yet.... freaking sucks.  interestingly he got his in november and it had been damaged in transit but the dealer didn't disclose it, he subsequently hit a deer on the same side of that other damage, and the shop he got it done at showed him all the shitty work that had been done prior... went back to the dealer and they gave him a 100,000 mile warranty for the bs.  that's one way to get the warranty i guess.

 

feel bad for people in the recall range but on the bright side you've got a new engine waiting in the wings i guess.

All the time you spent on this thread for what turned out to be nothing! 

 

Congratulations to you, while the rest of us suffer a slow death because, as of the last notice, all dealer inventory new or used gets a new motor, while us owners already on the road get to eventually breakdown somewhere over time, likely in a remote area in the middle of the night while towing a boat!  

 

Seriously, though, the way 002 reads, the rest of us will all eventually get a motor but, because it will take so long, we still have to be prepared for sudden engine seizure in the meantime. 

Edited May 4, 2025 by MrLeadFoot

[customboss]

 

20 hours ago, PunchT37 said:

For your viewing pleasure?

 

 

Another key takeaway: Don’t leave block casting swarf in your engine GM

Edited May 4, 2025 by customboss

[Grumpy Bear]

6 hours ago, MrLeadFoot said:

All the time you spent on this thread for what turned out to be nothing! 

 

Congratulations to you, while the rest of us suffer a slow death because, as of the last notice, all dealer inventory new or used gets a new motor, while us owners already on the road get to eventually breakdown somewhere over time, likely in a remote area in the middle of the night while towing a boat!  

 

Seriously, though, the way 002 reads, the rest of us will all eventually get a motor but, because it will take so long, we still have to be prepared for sudden engine seizure in the meantime. 

 

They've been intentionally nuanced about the specifics. This code thing is smoke and mirrors. The idea that the phases change between crank and cam with bearing dimension irregularities is BS. Has no effect on the phasing of either shafts centerline. Close your eyes and walk a revolution through. It will come to you.   Reluctor isn't reading rod position, it's reading off the main bearing rotational reference. They don't even lie well. 

 

 

[OnTheReel]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

They've been intentionally nuanced about the specifics. This code thing is smoke and mirrors. The idea that the phases change between crank and cam with bearing dimension irregularities is BS. Has no effect on the phasing of either shafts centerline. Close your eyes and walk a revolution through. It will come to you.   Reluctor isn't reading rod position, it's reading off the main bearing rotational reference. They don't even lie well. 

 

 

Perhaps when it finally punches a rod through the block the phasing may change a bit. But probably not.

 

Seems more like: “We have no practical way to inspect these. So if it isn’t blown up yet, pour a liquid band-aid in the sump and pray”.

 

Can't even be glad they changed the oil spec to something more reasonable given the circumstances.

[GETGONE]

2 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

They've been intentionally nuanced about the specifics. This code thing is smoke and mirrors. The idea that the phases change between crank and cam with bearing dimension irregularities is BS. Has no effect on the phasing of either shafts centerline. Close your eyes and walk a revolution through. It will come to you.   Reluctor isn't reading rod position, it's reading off the main bearing rotational reference. They don't even lie well. 

 

 

The sensor is in a fixed position. If the block or crank wasn't machined at a perpendicular angle to the sensor, it WILL read varying positions. There should also be an acceptable vs unacceptable range the sensor reads to determine bearing wear.

[66ss3964spd]

This was posted by newdude in the 6.2 L Recall thread.

 

Bottom end seizing up = spinning off phase of the camshaft.  VVT could be trying to compensate and it hits or exceeds that +/- 11 degree limit in doing so.

 

"The deviation of the relative camshaft position is greater than −11° in one direction or greater than 11° in the other direction (measured in degrees of the crankshaft)." 

Edited Saturday at 09:33 AM by newdude

[Grumpy Bear]

55 minutes ago, 66ss3964spd said:

This was posted by newdude in the 6.2 L Recall thread.

 

Bottom end seizing up = spinning off phase of the camshaft.  VVT could be trying to compensate and it hits or exceeds that +/- 11 degree limit in doing so.

 

"The deviation of the relative camshaft position is greater than −11° in one direction or greater than 11° in the other direction (measured in degrees of the crankshaft)." 

Edited Saturday at 09:33 AM by newdude

 

Now think about that and what it means for a motor that is just short of the limit. Say 10.8 degrees.  It has to be making physical contact between the bearing and journal. GM is doing what GM does when it has a teat in the wringer. Lie, deny and delay. The shear number of units involved before they acknowledged a problem sort of proves that. 

 

On a parallel note. Oil viscosity will not drag it that far. If it could then a cold day in Minnesota would set off the code every morning. So much for SAE 40 will kill my motor. 

 

 

Edited May 5, 2025 by Grumpy Bear

[PunchT37]

They are now extending the non code, 0w40 engines to 10 yrs 150,000 miles. Seems they are not worried about 40w oil finishing off the rest of the L87`s that are designed to operate on ONLY 0w20.

[Grumpy Bear]

8 minutes ago, PunchT37 said:

They are now extending the non code, 0w40 engines to 10 yrs 150,000 miles. Seems they are not worried about 40w oil finishing off the rest of the L87`s that are designed to operate on ONLY 0w20.

 

That in itself is interesting. Don't you think? You get a 5 year 60K warranty if using a 0W20 but a 10 year 150K warranty if you use 0W40 in a motor with issues? But will reject a warranty on 0W40 in a good motor. OMG these people are a hoot.

 

Someone explain please what hook of assurance in GM engineering I can hang my hat on? 

[PunchT37]

32 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

That in itself is interesting. Don't you think? You get a 5 year 60K warranty if using a 0W20 but a 10 year 150K warranty if you use 0W40 in a motor with issues? But will reject a warranty on 0W40 in a good motor. OMG these people are a hoot.

 

Someone explain please what hook of assurance in GM engineering I can hang my hat on? 

Amazing, isn`t it?

[KARNUT]

If in fact GM is extending the warranty. It’s a smart move. It brings some confidence to the product. We bought our first 05  Hyundai because it was cheaper than a civic and the warranty. My grandson is driving it today. We bought 3 more since. Never would’ve happened without the warranty. If accidents become frequent that could be a disaster. Years ago there was going around that Toyota had a problem with the throttle sticking. It was a big deal for awhile. The hysteria was eliminated for two reasons if memory serves. One it was speculated that the mat was the problem, if there was a problem. Second the brakes could over come the problem. As far as potential engine  failure with GM. Without fluid being pumped to the transmission wouldn’t the transmission go to neutral? 

[OnTheReel]

29 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

If in fact GM is extending the warranty. It’s a smart move. It brings some confidence to the product. 

I doubt the people who have one feel that way. I sure wouldn’t. These things are basically toxic now and the resale value will be awful.
 

GM: “Instead of replacing the defective engine, here’s some thicker oil and a warranty we will fight to get out of on your $120,000 Escalade.” Great.

[KARNUT]

1 hour ago, OnTheReel said:

I doubt the people who have one feel that way. I sure wouldn’t. These things are basically toxic now and the resale value will be awful.
 

GM: “Instead of replacing the defective engine, here’s some thicker oil and a warranty we will fight to get out of on your $120,000 Escalade.” Great.

I understand that. Why I quit buying new. Never thought I be driving a Honda. But potentially 700K bad engines. Even with the best intentions the line is going to be long. I know it’s their fault, they knew. Toyota had basically the same problem. They got on it. We had two vehicles that became very high stolen vehicles. My wife actually got stopped by the police. They warned her to stop driving it. We bought a used vehicle until it was paid for. We still have one. I drive it once a month. If my wife was driving an SUV that was involved. It would get parked until it got an engine. I almost bought a Denali in that time frame. It was a good buy. I got the Ridgeline instead. Probably a friend of the dealer who said get rid of it. Had advanced warning. Sometimes I pass if it’s too good to be true. My brother has a Escalade his wife drives. Next to it is a low mileage Hemi challenger she drove before it. She’s back to driving it. The Escalade will sit until they know for sure if it’s safe. Bad deal I’ve been there twice with GM. 

[Jus Cruisin]

6 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

I doubt the people who have one feel that way. I sure wouldn’t. These things are basically toxic now and the resale value will be awful.
 

GM: “Instead of replacing the defective engine, here’s some thicker oil and a warranty we will fight to get out of on your $120,000 Escalade.” Great.

I do own an affected 6.2l and I trade every 2-3 years but if I were one that holds on to a vehicle longer that special warranty extension would be great. In my case, I'm going back to a diesel again for the cheaper fuel cost and better mpg. NOT, because of this engine deal. There are a mess of 6.2l equipped trucks and SUV's in my sub and I see them tooling around daily. The vast majority of owners will have trouble free engines. GM just needs to get their act together and replace a blown engine quickly with high priority. If they can get owners back on the road with a replaced engine within a 2-3 week time period I see no need for panic. 

 

F150's also blow engines. Rams blow engines. I flew to Detroit from Florida and bought a 1999 F150 Lightning the first month it was out. Drove it back to Florida and the engine went south during my first month of ownership. Ford sent a complete engine, oil pan to supercharger, and I was back in the truck within 3 weeks. I was disappointed, sure but the truck never gave me another issue after. 

 

Anyway I'm good with the recall. And, I think it will be a selling perk to used buyers going forward. I'll be trading mine and don't expect any trade dings on the appraisal because of it. 

[tbtxaz2025]

New member here - just signed up to track this issue.

 

I have a 2022 Sierra with the 6.2. VIN search on GM recall website shows the recall.

 

I called my dealer today, VAN GMC in Scottsdale, AZ, and my service guy said their instructions were to do nothing at this time. Apparently regardless of the fact that they are supposed to implementing some kind of test. So that's at least a sample size of 1 saying the dealers don't know what to do with respect to this latest bulletin.

 

So far I've had zero problems with my truck in 46,000 miles. Love the vehicle. Not really sure what to think about all this. I take road trips to CO, NV, and CA a fair amount (daughter is starting college in CA this fall). Not thrilled about the idea of the motor going out in the middle of nowhere.

 

Staying tuned...