New bulletin/Campaign 6.2 L87

[customboss]

6 hours ago, butzers09silverado said:

https://forums.dealersedge.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=13098

 

one example, they're not particularily easy to find though, the tear downs.

No lubricant viscosity stops this. 

[wurgs]

So if no code is found and engine blows later would they honor the recall? We will see how much GM values their customers in how they handle this recall.

[MrLeadFoot]

4 hours ago, wurgs said:

So if no code is found and engine blows later would they honor the recall? We will see how much GM values their customers in how they handle this recall.

I'm pretty sure that at this time GM does not value owners of the particular model years involved with this recall, because they are such recent years that those owners already bought a GM product recently, so are not likely to be buyers again any time soon anyway. 

Edited April 28, 2025 by MrLeadFoot

[Grumpy Bear]

On 4/26/2025 at 10:52 AM, OnTheReel said:

. The only thing it costs them to change spec after that is a 10 cent oil cap.

 

What does this mean. I lead a sheltered life.  I mean, now does this work? 

[OnTheReel]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Bear said:

 

What does this mean. I lead a sheltered life.  I mean, now does this work? 

Just saying…as a part of the service bulletin they are changing the oil cap (to read 0w40).
 

Big picture…more carmakers should do this. Certify the engine on the thin stuff for the EPA, and then after the model year passes, release a TSB to change the spec to something that offers more protection. Protects their wallets and ours. All it costs them is a new oil cap.

[Grumpy Bear]

2 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

Just saying…as a part of the service bulletin they are changing the oil cap (to read 0w40).
 

Big picture…more carmakers should do this. Certify the engine on the thin stuff for the EPA, and then after the model year passes, release a TSB to change the spec to something that offers more protection. Protects their wallets and ours. All it costs them is a new oil cap.

 

Ah! Wow, am I slow. LOL. Thanks! 

[GETGONE]

3 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

Big picture…more carmakers should do this. Certify the engine on the thin stuff for the EPA, and then after the model year passes, release a TSB to change the spec to something that offers more protection. Protects their wallets and ours. All it costs them is a new oil cap.

Guess you forgot about the VW diesel scandal. Passed emissions tests but if they tested for other than the EXACT SPECIFIC tests, they put out WAY more emissions than they were supposed to!

[Snow White]

the real issue here is Metaldyne Performance Group who supplies most of the powdered metal forged and machined rods ASSEMBLED by Tonawanda.  As recent as 2021, JD Norman Industries sued Metaldyne over connecting rods that did not meet the required specifications.  JD Norman went chapter 7 in 2021 and lost GM, it's largest customer.  However, Metaldyne is still supplying the rods to GM for small block chevy's.......... make your own conclusions here but having family at Delphi, GM doesn't make much but they assemble a lot of parts from Tier 1 and other suppliers... Harrison Radiator pre-dating Delphi and supplied to GM.... GM didn't "make air conditioning or radiators" the same way they don't cast or machine rods, but Tonawanda (Silao and Ontario->Oshawa) should have a QC process for rod bore diameters but they obviously do not, and rely on revolutions or torque, neither of which would identify small bore diameters, it'd just gut buried into the rod via revolutions or torqued until it hit the spec regardless of the diamater.

 

GM didn't "retool", my dad was an apprentice and a tool and die maker, what GM likely actually did was call up the tier one supplier and told Metaldyne you fix your ****** or you're losing the contract!!  I highly doubt they are going to slow down assembly to check every bore diameter and the people running robotic hands would require the training to read a bore gauge, production would come to more or less a stop compared to the pace they run at now.

[Grumpy Bear]

8 minutes ago, butzers09silverado said:

the real issue here is Metaldyne Performance Group who supplies most of the powdered metal forged and machined rods ASSEMBLED by Tonawanda.  As recent as 2021, JD Norman Industries sued Metaldyne over connecting rods that did not meet the required specifications.  JD Norman went chapter 7 in 2021 and lost GM, it's largest customer.  However, Metaldyne is still supplying the rods to GM for small block chevy's.......... make your own conclusions here but having family at Delphi, GM doesn't make much but they assemble a lot of parts from Tier 1 and other suppliers... Harrison Radiator pre-dating Delphi and supplied to GM.... GM didn't "make air conditioning or radiators" the same way they don't cast or machine rods, but Tonawanda (Silao and Ontario->Oshawa) should have a QC process for rod bore diameters but they obviously do not, and rely on revolutions or torque, neither of which would identify small bore diameters, it'd just gut buried into the rod via revolutions or torqued until it hit the spec regardless of the diamater.

 

GM didn't "retool", my dad was an apprentice and a tool and die maker, what GM likely actually did was call up the tier one supplier and told Metaldyne you fix your ****** or you're losing the contract!!  I highly doubt they are going to slow down assembly to check every bore diameter and the people running robotic hands would require the training to read a bore gauge, production would come to more or less a stop compared to the pace they run at now.

 

Thank you for taking the time to post this up. Very informative and depressing at the same time. A great example of how chasing "margin" is like following Lemmings off a cliff. 

[newdude]

On 4/26/2025 at 5:33 PM, MrLeadFoot said:

Doesn't sound like it's more expensive at all compared to the 0w-20

 

0w-40:

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Mobil-1-FS-European-Car-Formula-Full-Synthetic-Motor-Oil-0W-40-5-Quart/23636902?wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=0&selectedOfferId=85CF50B8BB3E4853BCFD4C0DAB7F857D&conditionGroupCode=1&wl13=1760&gclsrc=aw.ds&adid=2222222227723636902_117755028669_12420145346&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=c&wl3=501107745824&wl4=pla-394283752452&wl5=9032443&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=8175035&wl11=local&wl12=23636902&veh=sem_LIA&gclsrc=aw.ds&gad_source=1&gbraid=0AAAAADmfBIqwDfZckf6JmDVkP7hU86viL&gclid=Cj0KCQjwiLLABhCEARIsAJYS6ulRkMFRkG_ODHIT7vpzHBRYuxQ5cButPZ2IXPJgxPV-upUos1hTOfUaAqOOEALw_wcB

 

0w-20:

https://www.walmart.com/ip/Mobil-1-Advanced-Fuel-Economy-Full-Synthetic-Motor-Oil-0W-20-5-Quart/17034374?classType=VARIANT&athbdg=L1200&adsRedirect=true

 

On 4/26/2025 at 3:45 PM, brianf60 said:

So now I need to start buying Dexos R 0w40 oil? A quick Google search says they only Mobile 1 makes this. I can’t wait to spend twice as much on oil every time I change my oil. 

 

On 4/26/2025 at 8:18 PM, MrLeadFoot said:

Oh crap, I didn't know it was a specially designated oil. Is there an actual difference between "R" and "non-R", or is it marketing hype? 

 

On 4/26/2025 at 8:54 PM, MrLeadFoot said:

How interesting that even the SuperCar formula doesn't mention "dexos R" anywhere on the bottle, front or back, unless I am blind (which is entirely possible).

 

On 4/26/2025 at 9:44 PM, GETGONE said:

Please note: GM dexos R engine oils meet or exceed the performance of GM dexos 2 and GM dexos 1 Gen 2 and Gen 3 oils and are backward compatible, therefore vehicles equipped with gasoline engines that used GM dexos 2, or GM dexos 1 Gen 2 or Gen 3 may use a GM dexos R licensed engine oil of the appropriate viscosity grade at their next oil change.

 

On 4/26/2025 at 9:44 PM, Byrds8 said:

Yeah I saw the gmdexos website. But when reading the bottles they don’t even mention dexos or have the emblem. 
 

I thought the Supercar said it. My bad, maybe it doesn’t.  It does have the dexosR emblem on it though. 

 

 

Bottom left corner of the front.  The Dexos R logo is the "DEXOS" with the red "OS" and the racing flag.    

 

Current GM p/n is 19432866.  Exxon Mobil # is 126870.  As long as you meet or exceed Dexos R, you can run it.  The GM Dexos licensed list is rather small but there might be some others that do meet and test to Dexos R spec testing (Amsoil for one).  

 

Also, this oil isn't new in 6.2s.  It debuted in 2019 for the Corvette LT1, LT4 and LT5, Camaro LT1 and LT4, CTS-V LT4 and CT6-V Blackwing LTA which prior to 2019 called for 5w30 and then 5w50 for track use. 

 

The 0w40 came in to play to have an oil that would cover DD and track usage without having to swap oils except on the LT5 ZR1 engine.  It was originally a Dexos 2 spec oil as it was a Mobil ESP Formula before (Emissions System Protection).  Low sulfated ash for catalytic converter protection. 

 

When they wanted thicker oil for track use, they only wanted you to run it on the track and then immediately drain it out for M1 5w30 Dexos 1.  The ESP Forumla, now Dexos R spec (M1 Supercar) eliminated that switchover.  

 

 

Edited April 28, 2025 by newdude

[KARNUT]

27 minutes ago, newdude said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bottom left corner of the front.  The Dexos R logo is the "DEXOS" with the red "OS" and the racing flag.    

 

Current GM p/n is 19432866.  Exxon Mobil # is 126870.  As long as you meet or exceed Dexos R, you can run it.  The GM Dexos licensed list is rather small but there might be some others that do meet and test to Dexos R spec testing (Amsoil for one).  

 

Also, this oil isn't new in 6.2s.  It debuted in 2019 for the Corvette LT1, LT4 and LT5, Camaro LT1 and LT4, CTS-V LT4 and CT6-V Blackwing LTA which prior to 2019 called for 5w30 and then 5w50 for track use. 

 

The 0w40 came in to play to have an oil that would cover DD and track usage without having to swap oils except on the LT5 ZR1 engine.  It was originally a Dexos 2 spec oil as it was a Mobil ESP Formula before (Emissions System Protection).  Low sulfated ash for catalytic converter protection. 

 

When they wanted thicker oil for track use, they only wanted you to run it on the track and then immediately drain it out for M1 5w30 Dexos 1.  The ESP Forumla, now Dexos R spec (M1 Supercar) eliminated that switchover.  

 

 

I’ve read over the weekend that GM has put out a stop sell on 6.2 powered vehicles. It includes several year models that would include used. That would be a gut punch for anyone wanting to trade in. Is this true?

[Snow White]

yes, they put a stop on 6.2sales and anything on lots has to be "inspected"

re:oil

there are 2 choices for 0-40 dexos 2 oil all are Mobil 1 from gm website

Mobil 1 ESP Formula

Mobil 1 ESP X3

dexos2 is now dexosR and replaces dexos2 per the website

dexos®2 | GM

all the mobil 1 supercar formula's exceed it.

 

 

now, if we go 5-40, the list gets longer but it's not great either.

 

Edited April 28, 2025 by butzers09silverado

[PunchT37]

2 hours ago, butzers09silverado said:

the real issue here is Metaldyne Performance Group who supplies most of the powdered metal forged and machined rods ASSEMBLED by Tonawanda.  As recent as 2021, JD Norman Industries sued Metaldyne over connecting rods that did not meet the required specifications.  JD Norman went chapter 7 in 2021 and lost GM, it's largest customer.  However, Metaldyne is still supplying the rods to GM for small block chevy's.......... make your own conclusions here but having family at Delphi, GM doesn't make much but they assemble a lot of parts from Tier 1 and other suppliers... Harrison Radiator pre-dating Delphi and supplied to GM.... GM didn't "make air conditioning or radiators" the same way they don't cast or machine rods, but Tonawanda (Silao and Ontario->Oshawa) should have a QC process for rod bore diameters but they obviously do not, and rely on revolutions or torque, neither of which would identify small bore diameters, it'd just gut buried into the rod via revolutions or torqued until it hit the spec regardless of the diamater.

 

GM didn't "retool", my dad was an apprentice and a tool and die maker, what GM likely actually did was call up the tier one supplier and told Metaldyne you fix your ****** or you're losing the contract!!  I highly doubt they are going to slow down assembly to check every bore diameter and the people running robotic hands would require the training to read a bore gauge, production would come to more or less a stop compared to the pace they run at now.

 

Edited April 28, 2025 by PunchT37

[PunchT37]

2 hours ago, butzers09silverado said:

the real issue here is Metaldyne Performance Group who supplies most of the powdered metal forged and machined rods ASSEMBLED by Tonawanda.  As recent as 2021, JD Norman Industries sued Metaldyne over connecting rods that did not meet the required specifications.  JD Norman went chapter 7 in 2021 and lost GM, it's largest customer.  However, Metaldyne is still supplying the rods to GM for small block chevy's.......... make your own conclusions here but having family at Delphi, GM doesn't make much but they assemble a lot of parts from Tier 1 and other suppliers... Harrison Radiator pre-dating Delphi and supplied to GM.... GM didn't "make air conditioning or radiators" the same way they don't cast or machine rods, but Tonawanda (Silao and Ontario->Oshawa) should have a QC process for rod bore diameters but they obviously do not, and rely on revolutions or torque, neither of which would identify small bore diameters, it'd just gut buried into the rod via revolutions or torqued until it hit the spec regardless of the diamater.

 

GM didn't "retool", my dad was an apprentice and a tool and die maker, what GM likely actually did was call up the tier one supplier and told Metaldyne you fix your ****** or you're losing the contract!!  I highly doubt they are going to slow down assembly to check every bore diameter and the people running robotic hands would require the training to read a bore gauge, production would come to more or less a stop compared to the pace they run at now.

Don`t the 5.3`s and the 6.6`s use these same rods? They seem to be the same on the gm powertrain website specs.

[newdude]

5 minutes ago, PunchT37 said:

Don`t the 5.3`s and the 6.6`s use these same rods? They seem to be the same on the gm powertrain website specs.

 

 

No.  And i think you mean 6.2 as the 6.6 has a longer stroke. 

 

All 3 engines have their own p/n connecting rods so that would indicate to me they are not the same.

 

5.3 uses rod p/n 12649190, 6.2 uses rod p/n 12714549 and 6.6 uses p/n 12675746. 

 

5.3 and 6.2 both do have a 92mm stroke but don't use the same p/n rods.  6.6 is 98mm stroke.  

 

The p/n 12714549 6.2 rod is used in LT1 2014-current, L86 2014-2018, L87 2019-current and the LT2 2020-current.  

 

The 12649190 rod in the 5.3 believe it or not is in a whole bunch of LS engines and then the LT based L83, L82 and L84.  Serviceability dates back to 2004 LS1 and LS6, 2010-2015 LS3 and L99 6.2, 06-09 LS4 5.3, LS2 and then a slew of LS 5.3s from 04-14.  Might explain the lack of 5.3 bottom end failures on the L82 and L84?  

 

6.6 rod is exclusive to the 6.6 L8T.