New bulletin/Campaign 6.2 L87

[Snow White]

1 hour ago, virtualdru said:

Why do you mention the Sept build?  I believe I was 08/24 for my AT4 and I do not show the recall.

Nevermind! I found the article that mentions changes to the crankshaft and connecting rods were put into place on Jun 1 2024.

 

https://gmauthority.com/blog/2025/04/heres-why-gm-6-2l-v8-recall-doesnt-apply-to-2025-model-year-vehicles/

 

Exactly..... I waited about as long as I could to get a 2024.  The 25 yukons (i understand this is a truck forum but we're in the same family, body on frame) can not be purchase with the max tow package without also getting the auto-level air suspension nor without the stupid television monitor as a "center console".  I wanted max tow and no center console TV.

 

They fixed a bunch of ****** in 2024, the lifter bores that were over bored, allegedly the supplier got their ass chewed for the rod bores and to fix their QC around June, and I believe the line bore but I've only heard about that not read it.

 

To be transparent, I have a cold start bottom end knock and I'm really looking forward to my 0-40 oil change.  once it's hot, it's fine.  not 100% sure it's a rod bearing or a crank issue, thrust bearing or something but it's audible doesn't sound like a lifter.  i have a range technology in it so the lifters cannot collapse, and there's no auto start stop.

 

the later in 2024 you got the 6.2 the better.

[KARNUT]

That bulletin is pretty scary. So now I have to be mindful of vehicles suddenly decelerating without brake lights. Not to mention those high end vehicles are usually driven by ladies with kids in the vehicle. Caddies are a dime a dozen around here. They should have issued a stop drive order.

[newdude]

2 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

So now I have to be mindful of vehicles suddenly decelerating without brake lights. Not to mention those high end vehicles are usually driven by ladies with kids in the vehicle. Caddies are a dime a dozen around here. They should have issued a stop drive order.

 

 

...uh...you should be doing that first part regardless of the vehicle in front of you...

 

[KARNUT]

8 minutes ago, newdude said:

 

 

...uh...you should be doing that first part regardless of the vehicle in front of you...

 

Dude I’ve driven over 2 million miles. I know how to drive. I think it’s clear most people don’t. Otherwise there wouldn’t be so many driving aids in vehicles. So let’s just throw vehicles out there that could suddenly lock the back tires. Stupidity.

[PunchT37]

2 hours ago, newdude said:

 

 

 

5.3 has its own bearing p/ns.  Rods are 12668160, mains are 12729654.  

 

The 6.2 and 6.6 share so L87, L8T, LT1, LT2, LT4 and LT5.  Rods are 12683811, mains are 12729655.  

Looks like the difference in the 2 part numbers is the stop/start coating?

 

https://www.michiganmotorsports.com/engine-block-and-rotating-assembly/5-3-gen-5-lt-engines/bearings/gm-12729655-coated-main-bearing-set-for-2014-lt1-l83-l86-l84-l87-lt4-l8t-5-3l-6-2l-6-6l/

 

https://www.michiganmotorsports.com/engine-block-and-rotating-assembly/5-3-gen-5-lt-engines/gm-12668160-rod-bearings-set-of-8-for-2014-l83-l84-l82-l8b-5-3l-connecting-rod-bearings/

[PunchT37]

Maybe some cranks have a larger fillet radius than the others? Causing the bearings to get grabbed on the sides and spin? These cranks would need a more narrow bearing.

 

Just thinking out loud. I have seen this. Especially on cast vs forged cranks. Most forged need the narrow style bearing.

 

By the way, GM, where do all these cranks come from?

 

Example;

 

On the 463 in my avatar, if the factory cast crank was used, one would need a Clevite "P" series bearing and a "H" series if one used most to all aftermarket cranks. P series on the aftermarket cranks WILL cause problems.

 

Thing is, I don`t have a bunch of GM, LT cranks laying around to see a difference in the radius.

 

Edited April 29, 2025 by PunchT37

[MrLeadFoot]

Can someone please explain the rationale behind this recall? Because I still don't get how scanning for a code helps. I mean, just because the code is not present at the time they scan for it, couldn't said motor still have an issue, but it's not yet to the point that a bearing has not yet spun, so no code is set? But, the motor would eventually throw a rod regardless of what oil is used from the point of inspection on?

 

Or, is it possible that something like switching oil really will help? Because otherwise wouldn't the nhtsa NOT be satisfied by this remedy?

 

Unless, of course, gm has the nhtsa in their back pocket, and the recall is aimed to pull the wool over the eyes of the average Joe and Jane. I did the math using approximate numbers, and if 877k motors need to be replaced or repaired, that could easily be in the range of 5-8 billion dollars, maybe more if you factor in logistics like providing loaner cars. There's no way gm would agree to absorbing that, and even if they could, they wouldn't be able to accommodate doing that many motors. That would have to interrupt gm's own operations, because they'd have to lend a hand in getting these motors fixed/replaced because there's no way their network of franchised dealerships would be able to handle something of this magnitude. 

Edited April 29, 2025 by MrLeadFoot

[PunchT37]

Thinking out loud again,

 

Notice the 5.3 with it`s cast crank, has little to no problems with locking up. Just the "normal" lifter problems.

[newdude]

1 hour ago, KARNUT said:

So let’s just throw vehicles out there that could suddenly lock the back tires. Stupidity.

 

 

...this too can occur...with any vehicle...and is nothing new...ever watch any of those dash cam videos on Youtube?  

Edited April 29, 2025 by newdude

[newdude]

55 minutes ago, PunchT37 said:

Looks like the difference in the 2 part numbers is the stop/start coating?

 

https://www.michiganmotorsports.com/engine-block-and-rotating-assembly/5-3-gen-5-lt-engines/bearings/gm-12729655-coated-main-bearing-set-for-2014-lt1-l83-l86-l84-l87-lt4-l8t-5-3l-6-2l-6-6l/

 

https://www.michiganmotorsports.com/engine-block-and-rotating-assembly/5-3-gen-5-lt-engines/gm-12668160-rod-bearings-set-of-8-for-2014-l83-l84-l82-l8b-5-3l-connecting-rod-bearings/

 

 

The bearings #s backdate to 2014 gen 5 in the EPC.  So its possible they added an additional coating to them in 2019 but the bearings still are used 2014-2025.  

Edited April 29, 2025 by newdude

[newdude]

27 minutes ago, MrLeadFoot said:

Can someone please explain the rationale behind this recall? Because I still don't get how scanning for a code helps. I mean, just because the code is not present at the time they scan for it, couldn't said motor still have an issue, but it's not yet to the point that a bearing has not yet spun, so no code is set? But, the motor would eventually throw a rod regardless of what oil is used from the point of inspection on?

 

Or, is it possible that something like switching oil really will help? Because otherwise wouldn't the nhtsa NOT be satisfied by this remedy?

 

Unless, of course, gm has the nhtsa in their back pocket, and the recall is aimed to pull the wool over the eyes of the average Joe and Jane. I did the math using approximate numbers, and if 877k motors need to be replaced or repaired, that could easily be in the range of 5-8 billion dollars, maybe more if you factor in logistics like providing loaner cars. There's no way gm would agree to absorbing that, and even if they could, they wouldn't be able to accommodate doing that many motors. That would have to interrupt gm's own operations, because they'd have to lend a hand in getting these motors fixed/replaced because there's no way their network of franchised dealerships would be able to handle something of this magnitude. 

 

 

I think its a multi pronged approach.  The 877k engines, that was 2019-2024.  2019-2020 are not involved with this, so its more like 721k engines 2021-2024., with 598k of those being for the US market.

 

GM Recalls 721K Trucks, Full-Size SUVs Due to Defective 6.2L V-8s

 

"This story has been updated to correctly state that the approximate number of total GM vehicles from the 2021 to 2024 model years that are involved in the recall is 721,000, of which about 598K are U.S. models."

 

 

So my thought is if the engine is a good one, replace the oil to 0w40 to fortify it somehow(?).  If a truck comes in with a P0016 crank/cam correlation, it gets an engine as they are using that as a sign that the bottom end is locking up.  And then if a truck has the new oil spec in it and it still happens, it gets an engine. 

 

So it sounds like they are doing a bit of damage control here to not have to shotgun 721,000 engines into these trucks, rather replace them as needed and hopefully that allows them to keep the quality up on replacement engines.  I say this as we have a 2022.5 in right now that is getting its 3rd new engine.  The original engine failed at 12,096 in April 2023, that replacement engine has now failed at 48,188mi on the truck. 

 

So engine 2 went 36,092mi before it packed up.  Which means any replacement engines from 2021-May 30th 2024 are suspect as well.  Complaint on the repair order was "Customer states vehicle shut off while driving, will not start or crank."

 

  

[KARNUT]

1 minute ago, newdude said:

 

 

...this too can occur...with any vehicle...and is nothing new...ever watch any of those dash cam videos on Youtube?  

Yes, that’s why I have one. So are you not appalled in the least that a company such as GM would let this slip by? I gave GM my business many times. I had several 5.7 olds diesel. A disaster. Four 6.5s trucks in the 90s. A little better. Finally experienced bulletproof proof 5.3s in the beginning of the 2000s. Happily owned several 5.7. In a Z28 and Impala SSs. After experiencing one cylinder deactivation GMC. I’m thinking oh no not again. I still drive a lot in congested areas. Dallas, Houston and until recently Atlanta. So I see stuff. Why I have dash cams. Sudden lock up isn’t up there in my experience. I also see what’s usually on the side of the road with the hood up. I’m an older guy now. I quit traveling with a tool box. I’m an odds guy. I’m driving the best that will get me there. I never thought I drive the vehicle I drive now. GM should have fixed this earlier. So I wouldn’t be saying well you should see just  what going on out there. We aren’t any worse. That’s just evil. They should be better. I really wanted to find a GM vehicle I wanted to trust again. I’m tired of them hiding bad stuff. I’m still a closet GM guy. I’ve owned the best of them. My favorite has been GM. Just not lately.

[newdude]

1 hour ago, KARNUT said:

Yes, that’s why I have one. So are you not appalled in the least that a company such as GM would let this slip by? I gave GM my business many times. I had several 5.7 olds diesel. A disaster. Four 6.5s trucks in the 90s. A little better. Finally experienced bulletproof proof 5.3s in the beginning of the 2000s. Happily owned several 5.7. In a Z28 and Impala SSs. After experiencing one cylinder deactivation GMC. I really wanted to find a GM vehicle I wanted to trust again. I’m tired of them hiding bad stuff. I’m still a closet GM guy. I’ve owned the best of them. My favorite has been GM. Just not lately.

 

 

So the last new GM you actually purchased was/is your 2002 Avalanche, if I am reading that correctly?  There's another user on here who's name escapes me but similar deal.  Last truck they got was an 07 or 08, had problems with it and then just hangs out here for years crapping on trucks and then always referencing their now going on 20 year old GMT-900. 

 

Can only beat the same drum for so long...  

 

Appaled at GM?  More like almost every automaker over the last 5 years.  Ford had 40 recalls JUST FOR 2025 so far.  Toyota had the bad 3.4 TT V6s in the Tundras.  COVID, chip shortages, the feds paying people for not working during that time, its a whole mass rolling snowball here.  Its all gone to $hit.  

 

I'll leave it at that and hopefully this thread sticks back to the topic here and not the past.    

[Z45]

On 4/28/2025 at 2:31 PM, BainMan said:

Were there changes from from 2020 to 2021 on the L87? Why aren't the 2019-2020 model years included in this recall? 

Possibly because they are no longer covered by any powertrain warranty. 

[MrLeadFoot]

2 hours ago, newdude said:

 

 

I think its a multi pronged approach.  The 877k engines, that was 2019-2024.  2019-2020 are not involved with this, so its more like 721k engines 2021-2024., with 598k of those being for the US market.

 

GM Recalls 721K Trucks, Full-Size SUVs Due to Defective 6.2L V-8s

 

"This story has been updated to correctly state that the approximate number of total GM vehicles from the 2021 to 2024 model years that are involved in the recall is 721,000, of which about 598K are U.S. models."

 

 

So my thought is if the engine is a good one, replace the oil to 0w40 to fortify it somehow(?).  If a truck comes in with a P0016 crank/cam correlation, it gets an engine as they are using that as a sign that the bottom end is locking up.  And then if a truck has the new oil spec in it and it still happens, it gets an engine. 

 

So it sounds like they are doing a bit of damage control here to not have to shotgun 721,000 engines into these trucks, rather replace them as needed and hopefully that allows them to keep the quality up on replacement engines.  I say this as we have a 2022.5 in right now that is getting its 3rd new engine.  The original engine failed at 12,096 in April 2023, that replacement engine has now failed at 48,188mi on the truck. 

 

So engine 2 went 36,092mi before it packed up.  Which means any replacement engines from 2021-May 30th 2024 are suspect as well.  Complaint on the repair order was "Customer states vehicle shut off while driving, will not start or crank."

 

  

 

2 hours ago, newdude said:

 

 

I think its a multi pronged approach.  The 877k engines, that was 2019-2024.  2019-2020 are not involved with this, so its more like 721k engines 2021-2024., with 598k of those being for the US market.

 

GM Recalls 721K Trucks, Full-Size SUVs Due to Defective 6.2L V-8s

 

"This story has been updated to correctly state that the approximate number of total GM vehicles from the 2021 to 2024 model years that are involved in the recall is 721,000, of which about 598K are U.S. models."

 

 

So my thought is if the engine is a good one, replace the oil to 0w40 to fortify it somehow(?).  If a truck comes in with a P0016 crank/cam correlation, it gets an engine as they are using that as a sign that the bottom end is locking up.  And then if a truck has the new oil spec in it and it still happens, it gets an engine. 

 

So it sounds like they are doing a bit of damage control here to not have to shotgun 721,000 engines into these trucks, rather replace them as needed and hopefully that allows them to keep the quality up on replacement engines.  I say this as we have a 2022.5 in right now that is getting its 3rd new engine.  The original engine failed at 12,096 in April 2023, that replacement engine has now failed at 48,188mi on the truck. 

 

So engine 2 went 36,092mi before it packed up.  Which means any replacement engines from 2021-May 30th 2024 are suspect as well.  Complaint on the repair order was "Customer states vehicle shut off while driving, will not start or crank."

 

  

Thank you for the response. Am I wasting my time putting a code scanner on my truck myself, if no SES light is on?