Can you help me regain my confidence in my engine? 2019 Yukon 5.3

BlaineBug · April 26

Last November 2025 I ended up having to have the camshaft and lifters replaced in my 2019 Yukon 5.3 liter with only 88,000 miles. If I remember correct it was the #5 exhaust lifter that failed. It didn't seem like it was collapsed and from what I remember the roller bearings were OK, but the metal on the roller and the corresponding camshaft lobe were spalled/cracked (I went to the dealership to confirm failure once they had the cylinder heads off). I only heard the typical "tap tap tap" when returning from shopping and stopped driving - although I drove it to the dealer about 20 minutes away rather than having it towed, maybe that was a mistake. This was not a failure that was driven on repeatedly like I occasionally see when inspecting warranty claims.

Anyway, to the tune of $8,800 they replaced the camshaft and lifters, spark plugs, and the oil pump as per my request. I'm currently over 95,000 miles as of today.

I did my first oil change at 5,000 miles after the replacement - maybe that was a bit too late and I should have done it earlier. I cut open the oil filter and found a couple of small metallic shavings/chips within the filter. I went back to the dealership to inquire and I was told that was "probably" normal. I was told that every filter probably has metal in it....nobody ever cuts them open apparently but me. I didn't bring them to filter nor did I take any pictures, nor did I check to see if the metallic particles were magnetic or not. Oops.

I hope everything is OK, but I just have to say that my confidence after such a failure is severely diminished. I'm currently sitting at about 95,000 miles, and Friday two-days ago when returning home from work I believe I heard a bit of pinging/detonation when traveling in the 45-60 mph range, if I ever-so-slightly gave it a bit of throttle input without having the transmission drop down into a lower gear. When I got home, I added two bottles of GumOut fuel injection cleaner. I had just filled up earlier in the day at Sam's Club.

What do you think? I had hopes to keep this vehicle for at least 10-years but I feel as though my camshaft and lifter failure occurred VERY early. I inspect warranty claims on a daily basis and find that most of these lifter-related failures occur after 140,000 miles and beyond. I purchased my 2019 Yukon at Carmax in December 2019 with 34,000 miles on it - yes, that was a lot of miles for the first year, but it was a Hertz rental registered in Missouri. I would have assumed they did their oil changes on time. I found no signs of sludge or varnish. However I drove the vehicle over 50,000 miles without an issue at that point between December 2019 and November 2025.

I was also hoping that the dealership would have been a lot better with communicating with me throughout the rebuild. I left them a lengthy note describing extra add-ons that I wanted them to do, and I was hoping they would have communicated with me on the condition of the camshaft bearings, etcetera. After 3-weeks I got a call that it was ready for me to pick up, and at that point I asked about the add-ons that I left on the one-page printed note. They said, "what things?" Figures...they had to go back in an replace some of the extra things that I had asked about like the TPMS sensors (Over $400 for 2 sensors, ripoff!), oil cooler hoses, coolant hoses, etcetera. I was hoping to have received a discount since everything was already torn down obviously, but of course no one elected to look at my note?

We pay top dollar for minimum effort apparently. GMC dealership too, not some rinky-****** backyard mechanic shop!

By the way, the only modification I have installed is an oil catch can. I have had that installed since November 2023. I also installed a new OEM water pump last month for peace of mind considering that we'll be headed on a 2,000+ mile round trip road trip in about a week and a half. I'm a bit nervous to say the least.

PunchT37 · April 26

1`st order of business is, if you haven`t done it already, is to never put 0w20 in it again.

KARNUT · April 26

1 hour ago, PunchT37 said:

1`st order of business is, if you haven`t done it already, is to never put 0w20 in it again.

It’s confusing and seems logical. But the oil geek and tester says otherwise and even advised against changing. Unless you’re getting gas intrusion.

BlaineBug · April 26

4 hours ago, PunchT37 said:

1`st order of business is, if you haven`t done it already, is to never put 0w20 in it again.

Funny you should mention that, I switched to 5w30 a little less than 14,000 miles prior to failure - I switched at about 74,471. The only time 0w20 has been back in it was that 5,000 mile period after failure until I changed the oil again.

Oh, and the oil drain plug was only fingerish tight - but not dripping. Thanks, Technician! $8,800...what other bolts did they leave loose, I wonder?

Edited April 26 by BlaineBug

BlaineBug · April 26

2 hours ago, KARNUT said:

It’s confusing and seems logical. But the oil geek and tester says otherwise and even advised against changing. Unless you’re getting gas intrusion.

So it was BAD to switch from 0w20 to 5w30? I thought these engines call for 5w30 in the UAE. I also moved south, to a much warmer climate. I thought it would be benefical.

KARNUT · April 26

11 minutes ago, BlaineBug said:

So it was BAD to switch from 0w20 to 5w30? I thought these engines call for 5w30 in the UAE. I also moved south, to a much warmer climate. I thought it would be benefical.

It seems the oil geek gets referenced quite often here. Go to YouTube and watch his post.

PunchT37 · April 26

Once the wear from 0w20 is there, it doesn’t go away.

BlaineBug · April 26

41 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

It seems the oil geek gets referenced quite often here. Go to YouTube and watch his post.

I just watched that video again, showing that there was a higher percentage of sheer in 5w30 than 0w20. But I believe they were comparing oils after a 10,000 OCI? Which is extreme. These days I change around 5,000 miles. I have Valvoline Restore & Protect in it right now because I have heard it was so awesome. Typically I use Kirkland Signature (Warren) oil, Project Farm shows it provides similar protection to Mobil 1.

Edited April 26 by BlaineBug

PunchT37 · April 26

17 minutes ago, BlaineBug said:

I just watched that video again, showing that there was a higher percentage of sheer in 5w30 than 0w20. But I believe they were comparing oils after a 10,000 OCI? Which is extreme. These days I change around 5,000 miles. I have Valvoline Restore & Protect in it right now because I have heard it was so awesome. Typically I use Kirkland Signature (Warren) oil, Project Farm shows it provides similar protection to Mobil 1.

The 5w30 will have a higher HTHS. Even after sheer.

Grumpy Bear · April 26

Blanket statements are dangerous. Listen to the qualifiers.

Blanket statement. 0W20 protects just as well as 5W30. THEN he notes, "As long as the 0W20 stays in grade". The qualifier. He is admitting 0W20 has ZERO 'cushion' so if you run it, run one with a hearty VII and assure yourself that there is little fuel dilution.

Blanket statement: He is assuming all oil fit this paradigm. They don't. Red Line HP 0W20 has the HTHS of a 5W30 and HPL's No-VII 0W20 doesn't shear at all. It will dilute but it will not shear but it is also at the very bottom of the HTHS for a SAE20. Ditto 5W30's. In his study of thousands of samples by its very nature includes them all but it will be bias toward shelf oils with non-stable VII's. Darn few people run a ACEA C3 spec oil so his sample pool is bias toward 2.9 cSt HTHS which is fractionally better than an SAE 20's 2.6 cSt. The C3 *W30 oils are 3.5 min and 'stay in grade". You can get stat's to say whatever you like if you dilute the pool of samples.

Blanket Statement. "The larger the difference between the number before and after the W' the most it shears and he has his pretty little graph to show that. He is also considering ONE of the four types of VII and the least stable of the lot. He is not considering in that sampling NO-VII blends or those of exceeding high natural VI that use a FRACTION of the polymer to do the same thing.

Blanket statement stink, even with statistical quotation marks around them. Number don't lie but liars use numbers. Even some people that don't lie get caught in the 'wrong conclusion for the data" trap. Here's why that matters...

Strictly on viscosity Stribeck HOLDS. Physics isn't optional. Thicker is more protection every single time and there is no exceptions to Stribeck. Now that said; wear is also dependent on AW and EP additives and IF you were testing the exact same add pack (concentration and all) and vary ONLY the viscosity, Stribeck HOLDS every time. However IF the 0W20 has a superior package and a superior VII then it could look as if Stribeck is violated. When you toss 6K samples into the Stats blender you get garbage. The LS Mean is supposed to filter that out but no one LOOKED at the variation bars in that graph. They just focus in on the MEAN. His chart doesn't show 'Just as good" he even admits that in the statement that the statistical difference is so small as to be meaningless. On that we agree.

So...what you are getting is CUSHION when you are driving the viscosity buss with both eyes shut. :idiot:

If you not going to take the time to learn the WHY then listening to blanket statements from experts is your way to go. You WILL do what you've always done and get what you've always got. Guaranteed.

He want's receipts? Here's mine... Total wear metals between two identical Mitsubishi 3A92 motors. The first (an acquaintance) was run on Mobil 1 5W30 Advanced and the second (mine) run on Red Line Euro 5W40. Those two yellow dots are the MEAN of the entire Blackstone library of 0W20 oils in the 3A92 platform.

You want to run without a cushion? Have at it but lord man, use one that stays in grade and has a robust package then don't outdrive it's headlights with silly long OCI's.

Edited April 27 by Grumpy Bear

KARNUT · April 26

Interesting, the man ( oil geek) test oil for a living. Is giving bad oil advice. That will bare out when he test your oil? I really don’t listen to any of it. I research vehicles. Then I buy the ones that have the best service history and longevity.

PunchT37 · April 27

Iv`e been running 5w30 in my 2025, L84 since 500 miles. It`s got 10,600 on it now. It`s amazing how quiet it is. Screw all the high pressure pump and injector bs.

Any machine with moving parts will tell you, with how it sounds, if it`s "happy" or not.

I believe these 6.2`s wouldn`t have as many a problems if they ran a real oil from new.

newdude · April 27

1 hour ago, PunchT37 said:

Iv`e been running 5w30 in my 2025, L84 since 500 miles. It`s got 10,600 on it now. It`s amazing how quiet it is. Screw all the high pressure pump and injector bs.

Any machine with moving parts will tell you, with how it sounds, if it`s "happy" or not.

I believe these 6.2`s wouldn`t have as many a problems if they ran a real oil from new.

Oil grade won't solve bad machining (the 6.2 problem 2021-2024).

PunchT37 · April 27

6 minutes ago, newdude said:

Oil grade won't solve bad machining (the 6.2 problem 2021-2024).

Hard to believe GM can’t or won’t correct machining problems after 3 years or so.

Grumpy Bear · April 27

3 hours ago, KARNUT said:

That will bare out when he test your oil?

IF you mean Red Line as a brand he, Lake, and Terry Dyson both give it a big thumbs down. What's my data say?

Are you telling me I should surrender what anyone can see in the data to someone's notoriety? I don't do hero worship. Those two put their pants on one leg at a time just like you and I. I listen and I listen intently. I buy what has value and does not violate the physics of the larger scientific community. I have no trouble rejecting the garbage no matter who it comes from.

LISTEN to Lake carefully. He admits C.A.F.E., EPA and the API are in charge. What you do not seem to understand is that promoting that agenda is THIER BUISNESS. ALL his testing leans toward that light, just like a Sunflower.

Terry was more bold about it. VM's that had huge temporary shear values he saw as a "Feature" of the chemistry that allowed a 5W30 to be as fuel efficient as a 5W20. What it is, is additive companies 'marketing' CHEAP VII's as a tool for CAFE compliance. It's not a feature. It's a flaw and it's cheap to use and to promote. It will also not meet the specifications for the EURO C3 license which requires the oils minimum 150 C HTHS to be 3.5 cP and stay there. It requires the minimum 100 C HTHS to not fall below 9.3 cSt. This display below is an example of an SAE 5W30 made by Warren Oil for COSTCO. Look at the second yellow highlighted test result? ASTM D6616. This 5W30 has a HTHS of 6.9 cP at .800 gr/cm density. That's a 8.62 cSt 100 C viscosity or the equivalent of a modest *W20. (Thank you Anton Paar and an on line Cp to cSt calculator)

A 0W20 may not have any VII in it if the natural VI is high enough so when Lake is comparing one to the other he is actually testing the same OPERATIONAL viscosity. Do you understand that? Good.

Now, he is not 'wear' testing an oil like HPL No-VII Euro 5W300 which has a 100 C viscosity of 11.2 cSt both by ASTM D445 and ASTM 6616. It doesn't shear because there is nothing to shear. Both solidly in the upper half of the SAE spec and miles above the ability of the oil to meet the ILSAC GF-6 or 7 spec for 'fuel efficiency. I doubt you will ever see him test a ILSAC GF-7 5W30 verses a ACEA C3 5W30. Bad for the business of herding the sheepeople toward those products the OEM's, EPA are demanding.

If I might be so blunt...you are not looking for what's true. You are looking to be right and in that mindset you will hear none of this. I didn't write anything in this post you can't look up for yourself. But you would have to buy a few SAE papers.

Those three highlighted values show you the entire viscosity profile of Kirkland's Signature Series 5W30.

Top line is the SAE requirement ASTM D445 at 10.91 cSt

Second line is the 100 C HTHS, rarely publishied and shows the viscosity under dynamic high shear. 8.62 cSt (after conversion) [What the motor sees in the bearings] and it's OUT OF SPEC

Thrid line is the recovery viscosity or HTLS at 100 C at 9.4 cSt. In spec but after shear is reduced and that is the 'stay in grade' value.

So...Stay in grade doesn't mean what you are lead to believe. Hey! It's in spec!! Woohoo. Yea, not really. This physical behavior is why I choose 5W40 oils 90% of the time even for 0W20 applications. Lake did admit that these alternate viscosities are appropriate for the machine, just not approved by the law. Listen to everything.