GM has a problem engine on its hands. The automaker’s 6.2-liter gasoline V8 is now under the magnifying glass. As reported by Reuters, NHTSA has launched a preliminary probe into over 870,000 GM vehicles equipped with the engine amidst reports of major failures in the field.
The engine in question is formally known as the L87, and branded as the EcoTec3. It comes from the broader LS small block engine family, and is effectively an LT1 engine that has been reconfigured for truck applications. It delivers 420 horsepower and 460 pound-feet of torque. It’s a modern and complicated engine, featuring variable valve timing, cylinder deactivation, and even a variable pressure oil pump. The direct successor of the earlier L86, it was first launched in 2019, and appears in a wide range of GM trucks and SUVs.
Reports received by NHTSA indicate that L87 engines built from 2019 onwards are suffering bearing failure with major consequences. Complaints indicate that the engines may seize, or, in extreme cases, eject connecting rods through the engine block. It’s no small problem, with over 877,000 vehicles potentially affected. Let’s explore what’s going on.
On The Ground
The 6.2-liter L87 is one of GM’s main workhorses, featured across a number of trucks and SUVs. It debuted in the Chevrolet Silverado 1500 and the GMC Sierra 1500 in 2019. It’s also found in the Chevy Suburban and Tahoe, the GMC Yukon, and the Cadillac Escalade.
Across all these vehicles, owners have found themselves suddenly facing a total loss of power when driving, only to later find out that major engine damage has occurred. The problem doesn’t seem to be limited to any one model year or model; instead, it seems to affect a range of vehicles with the L87 engine built from 2019 until today.
It doesn’t take a genius to know that a sudden engine failure can leave you in a dangerous situation. The agency notes the severity of the problem, and the inherent safety risks—explaining that “Failure or malfunction of the engine results in loss of motive power of the vehicle, which may lead to an increased risk of a crash resulting in injury and/or property damage.” Thankfully, as of yet, no crashes, injuries, or fatalities are known to have occurred.
As it stands, NHTSA has received 39 complaints regarding the matter, with submissions stretching back several years. Submissions to the agency indicate the problems often tend to crop up suddenly, without prior warning. At best, some owners hear strange noises or ticking, or get a warning for low oil pressure as the engine seizes up. In some cases, the issues have occurred in trucks with under 5,000 miles on the clock, with NHTSA recording multiple cases of total engine failure under 20,000 miles. However, some vehicles have approached 100,000 miles before failure.
Interestingly, some owners cite that their problems first became apparent when the vehicle suddenly shifted into neutral, only for them to later find the true issue to be major engine damage. Others have found they are able to restart their vehicles after an initial loss of power, only for the problem to reoccur. Most cases, however, seem to involve a single sudden incident where the engine loses power and totally seizes up.
In many cases, the engine has suddenly failed while owners are traveling at highway speeds, leaving them with zero power in a dangerous situation. “While driving on a busy road our vehicle stopped from catastrophic engine failure without warning which put my family and I instantly in danger and nearly got us killed,” stated one shaken owner. “Due to the high traffic where it stopped we were scared to stay in the vehicle and also scared to exit it, so we contacted the police before calling a tow truck.”
In cases cited by the NHTSA probe, post-incident inspection typically reveals telltale signs of engine bearing failure. One complainant notes that “while traveling at highway speeds, the vehicle suddenly and without warning lost power.” Upon pulling off the road, the engine would not restart, so the vehicle was towed to a dealership for repair. “While inspecting, dealership found internal engine bearing material in oil indicating internal mechanical failure,” reads the complaint. “Dealership removed engine oil pan and #1 and #2 connecting rods and found bearings spun causing catastrophic engine failure.”
Customer's 2023 6.2L Silverado with 28k shut off going down the road. Pan full of glitter, one damaged main bearing, three spun rod bearings.
byu/N_dixon inJustrolledintotheshop
Just knocked into the shop. 2022 GMC Sierra 1500 with the 6.2L, spun and stacked the #1 rod bearing at 15,783 miles
byu/N_dixon inJustrolledintotheshop
2023 Sierra Denali 6.2. You know it’s bad when you can see the top of cylinder 6 piston from underneath the truck.
byu/gmlubetech inJustrolledintotheshop
Horror pictures of seized 6.2L engines have started showing up in the usual places online.
Others have had even worse luck. One owner was out camping when disaster struck. “We were approximately 30 minutes out of town when the engine blew… [we] lost all electronics and had to drive off to the side of the road.” reads their complaint. Their vehicle was towed to a dealer in Arizona and fitted with a new engine, only for lightning to strike twice. “After 10 minutes of running, the new engine seized as well,” the owner told NHTSA. “My vehicle has been down for over 30 days and I still do not have it back.”
Head out on to the open Internet, and you’ll find plenty more stories along the same lines. Over on the Silverado Sierra forums, owners complain of engines suddenly seizing up, and problems with sorting out replacements under warranty. Meanwhile, on the Tahoe Yukon Forum, the story is much the same. “Have had my 2023 Yukon Denali for 9 months and broke down on [the] side of [the] road,” says Muzbomb, an owner up in Canada. “Towed to dealer and [was] informed today [the] main bearing on [the] 6.2L went.”
Another 2023 GM 6.2l Failure 2,049 miles
byu/Fast_Site7131 ingmc
Stories like this are easy to find.
Unknowns
At this stage, the root cause of the problem is unknown. Something is causing connecting rod bearing failures that are seizing up these engines. But precisely why these bearings are failing is unclear. What we do know is that some engines have failed at incredibly low mileage, and some owners have suffered multiple failures after engine replacements. This would hint towards a design flaw, rather than some minor or intermittent materials or manufacturing issue.
However, without a full engineering analysis, it’s impossible to say with any certainty what the cause could be at this stage. Nor is it clear how many vehicles are affected amongst the total population of over 870,000 vehicles with the 6.2-liter engine.
GM has issued bulletins regarding the matter. As published via TechLink, a platform for GM techs, the document concerns investigating bearing damage in L87 engines with a no-crank condition. It instructs techs to look for bearing material and other metal debris in the oil filter. It also contains several images indicating what to look for when diagnosing bearing failure. A bearing covered in scoring marks or chunks of metal is the key tell-tale sign.
In the case of bearing failure, a total engine replacement is indicated. GM has also specified that it is important to fully replace other components in the lubrication circuit too, in order to ensure metal debris is not immediately introduced into the replacement engine. As per the bulletin:
If the main bearing debris is sent through the oil galleries and other components that are in the lubrication circuit, which are very difficult to completely clean, it could lead to additional damage when installed on a new engine. When there is extensive damage, oil cooler, oil cooler line and oil tank replacement ensures all debris is completely removed and that any bearing failure debris is not transferred into the new service engine.
-GM TechLink
The Autopian contacted GM enquiring as to the root cause of the issue, but a clear explanation is not yet available. “GM is cooperating with NHTSA’s evaluation to review the potential problem and fully assess the potential safety related issues,” said a GM spokesperson. Nor are there any obvious preventative measures to take at this stage. “As with any GM vehicle on the road today, we suggest owners follow prescribed maintenance schedules and resolve any issues or concerns with their local dealers.“
This isn’t the only issue the 6.2-liter V8 has suffered, either. Lifter issues have plagued the model for some time, becoming a hot topic on owner’s forums over the last few years. Owners have shared tales of noisy lifters and even bent pushrods, some of which failed after less than 20,000 miles. GM also issued a bulletin regarding certain 2023 models that received engines with oversized lifter bores, mandating engine replacement for affected models. These issues seem to be largely separate from the bearing failures now being investigated by NHTSA, but are nonetheless another black mark against the L87 engine.
Supply Woes
It appears the failures could be common enough to cause supply problems for GM. Evidence is anecdotal, but stories of long waits are becoming increasingly common. Owners on the r/gmcsierra subreddit reported wait times of several weeks in early 2024.
Commenters on GM Authority this week suggest that the situation is more dire. “I bought a 2025 Silverado ZR2 with the 6.2 liter engine, [and] the engine blew the bearing at 3000 km,” said owner Tim Weber. “They tell me it’s going to be three to six months for a new engine from the factory.” Some owners are being told that replacement engines are currently on backorder. Meanwhile, some dealers have apparently started stockpiling replacement engines and parts in order to execute repairs faster.
The Autopian reached out to GM for comment on availability, though the automaker was unable to provide specific details around the issue. “GM dealers continue to address customer issues on a case-by-case basis and work to resolve them as quickly as possible,” said a GM spokesperson.
GM Dealer Adventures: as my wait for an engine goes into its fourth week, I’ve been evaluating emergency options. Here are some observations.
1. Deny. Deny. Deny. Only one sales guy was straight up and real with me on the engine problems. If I buy a second vehicle it will be
— Chey Cab (@CheyCab) January 19, 2025
Some owners are complaining of long waits to get their trucks fixed under warranty.
More recently, luxury car fleet operator Chey Eisenman took to Twitter to complain of a wait exceeding four weeks. Speaking to The Autopian, the founder of Chey Car noted that the 6.2 issues have reached a critical juncture. “I own one limo licensed vehicle and it’s currently not in service needing a 6.2 engine, a 2023 Cadillac Escalade ESV,” Chey explained. “GM has no ETA and I’ve been calling them nearly every day.”
Chey has noticed that the lifter issues have dominated in the transport industry, rather than the bearing problems. “Most of us having issues are the lifters going out and the metal particles contaminating the engine,” she says. ” There’s also reports of engines seizing up but our industry hasn’t experienced that yet that I know of.”
Ultimately, most luxury fleet operators take steps to avoid these issues, but it’s not working in this case. ” It’s unprecedented for us to have to do engines in our vehicles,” she says. “We buy new and trade out every 1-2 years.” Despite this, she reports seeing these engines go out with as little as 6,000 to 30,000 miles on the clock. The impact on the financial side is what hurts most for her operation, as she’s losing revenue as long as the vehicle is out of action. “I can’t articulate enough the hardship on my business,” she explains, noting the losses will likely stretch well into the five figure range.
Going Forward
It’s ultimately a difficult situation for GM and customers alike. At this stage, it’s unclear whether the 6.2-liter engine has a fundamental design flaw, or whether there’s a manufacturing issue at play, or something else entirely. Until the root cause of the problem is understood, GM can do little more than replace engines and hope for the best. The fact that several owners have reported engines failing after replacement suggests that the issue is still poorly understood.
If you’ve got a GM vehicle with the L87 engine under the hood, cross your fingers that it avoids this nasty calamity. Beyond sticking to the recommended maintenance schedule, it seems there is no clear way to prevent this problem at this time. Engine replacements may be hard to come by if reports from the ground are accurate, so don’t expect a quick fix at this time.
Image credits: GM
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
Why So Many People Hate Chrome-Capped Lug Nuts
-
Here’s Why Busted Plastic Grille Flaps On A Newer Car Can Cause A Check Engine Light
-
Some GM Trucks And SUVs Are About To Get Recalled For A Transmission Problem That Can Lock Up The Rear Wheels While Driving
-
In The Midst Of An Investigation, NHTSA Wants More Information On Tesla Driver Monitoring Systems
-
Here Are The Automakers That Recalled The Most Cars In 2024
Please send tips about cool car things to tips@theautopian.com. You could even win a prize!
What weight oil do they run in these? If it starts with a “0” to gain some fuel economy…
That’s not how it works… the winter rating, such as 0W or 5W is determined by different standardized tests than the operating temp viscosity rating such as 20 or 30.
You don’t think cold oil is thinner than warm, do you?
It’s getting to where it makes no difference. I helped a buddy change the oil on his Lexus Hybrid something-or-other Saturday (aka, I did it for him and he bought me lunch). The thing specs 0w16 oil. That crap is so thin that we left the car on ramps and went to run errands and have lunch, and it still came out so fast out of a TINY drain hole that my integrated tank catch pan overflowed. Next time, I will leave the filler cap on, hopefully that will slow it’s roll. Old and new alike basically poured like water, and it was a downright chilly day for SW FL. Also, it had an oil filter the likes of which I have only seen on garden tractors – literally 2″x2″.
I really have to wonder how much longevity tomorrow is being traded off for fuel economy today with these super-thin oils. I like to think the engineers know what they are doing – but there are an awful lot of explody motors these days too. And bean counters have been known to overrule engineers all too often. ESPECIALLY at GM.
Finally – 0w16 just seems so odd. Always been even 5s or 10s for viscosity.
While I understand the doubt that a visually thinner oil cannot effectively protect an engine over time, the stats would prove that it does work.
Engine longevity has gone up, not down over time. Now, what I think is hurting is that in old cars, they’d tolerate far more abuse by the owner. The perception is that they were “bulletproof” or “unkillable”. In reality, they’d get to 200k on the high end of things, but most didn’t last that long.
Now, we have engines that are designed with very tight operating tolerances that are not tolerant of neglect. So they don’t need the heavier weight oils that older cars did since there are many more controls and sensors that can adjust a variety of parameters or at least warn the owner that something is wrong if needed. Heat is better controlled, pollutants are better controlled, fuel economy continues to rise along with power and longevity.
There has been an ongoing movement toward higher efficiency, more power, fewer emissions. This is how it’s done. Yes, this trend demands additional complexity and changes from what we knew 10-20 years ago, but that’s the nature of technological progress.
In an ideal world, I think you are correct. But those thinner oils DO require more vigilance in maintenance, among other factors. And paying attention to things like “what constitutes severe service, and thus much shorter OCI”. It is surprising to me how many cars, like my friend’s Lexus (admittedly about the cheapest one), lack the ability to dynamically tell you when to change the oil. My now “old” BMWs have both an oil life algorithm AND a physical oil quality sensor to dynamically adjust for how you drive the car. His car just tells you to get a service every 10K. Which in a Toyota, most of the time, might be fine. And yet Toyota is looking at a very expensive pickup truck engine recall. So they are just as capable of dropping the ball as GM. A bit more tolerance for neglect is never a bad thing.
I think the longevity shark has been jumped. I will place bets on my 15yo BMWs lasting longer than a current production one, and being cheaper along the way too. Yup, slower and slightly less efficient, but fast enough and efficient enough.
0w-20. That is is recommended old for the 6.2 L87. It’ll be interesting to find out if it is just a bad run of components or an actual design flaw where the oil isn’t viscous enough to provide a sufficient oil film on the bearing surfaces.
I apologize if my over simplistic comment caught you out.
Considering how many 1GR-FE (5th Gen 4Runner) have well over 200,000 miles using 0W-20 and 10k mile change intervals the issue isn’t the oil viscosity. Not to mention the millions of other 0W-20 motors that don’t have bearing or oil related issues.
It’s either a system/component design or manufacturing issue. If not manufacturing, then my guess is the variable oil pump tuning. During highway drives at low engine speed and low/low-medium load the pump tuning likely reduces pressure too much resulting in insufficient flow for engines that are at the the edge of design tolerance.
I doubt very much there is ONE factor. It’s usually the “Swiss Cheese Effect”. But the less tolerance for error there is in any part of a system, the easier it is for the holes to line up just right.
Toyota historically made very simple engines that had wide tolerance for error all over the place. Today, not so much evidently.
For sure, just difficult to say everything through short text. My point is that 0W-20 is just fine.
People act like the change was made with minimum thought. The reality is tens of companies have spent thousands of hours each confirming it’s viability. At this point not only is there an abundance of validation data supporting it, but also real world data. This isn’t an oil viscosity spec issue. It’s a design for said oil viscosity or tuning of variable oil pump or manufacturing issue.
You can make a change with lots of thought and plenty of testing and still not figure out all the nuances of the real world. See Boeing MCAS fiasco as an excellent example.
There is no doubt in my mind that lighter weight engine oils prioritize fuel savings TODAY over longevity tomorrow. Just like light-weight valvetrain components and a whole host of other engine design changes do. All engines are a compromise, but WHO the compromise benefits is not always the owner. Or even often, these days.
How does Chevy go from the LS series V8s, which will go down in history as one of the greatest V8s made, to this?
LSs have their own oil-related problems, mainly in the valvetrain. Cam bearings, roller lifters, etc. The more mileage my G8’s L76 accrued before I sold it, the more paranoid I got that something in the DoD system was going to flake on me.
Car and Driver noted some smoke when they did skid pad testing on GM’s trucks/SUVs. Maybe related?
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a34900893/2020-winners-and-losers-testing-edition/
Good old GM. Managing to mess up something simple in all likelihood. Variable displacement oil pumps have been around for ages. I’m guessing there’s something in the ECU calibration that made sense in the engine dyno cell but isn’t working in the real world.
I remember when GM was going all electric. They didn’t need much in the way of powertrain engineers anymore. Put that talent out to pasture. Maybe throw in some covid related working from home missed details. Not good.
The rapid failures make me think it’s something external killing a weak engine. 5 failures seems to indicate it’s not just the engine itself.
To be clear a ecu telling the oil pump not to work or equally stupid is “external” while the engine needing a ecu to tell the oil pump to work is a shit engine.
Let’s be clear it sounds like an external factor is killing engines and the engine is allowing it to.
Just over here pondering all those big GM SUVs doing Secret Service duty….
I guess I assumed those were all 5.3s. The government wouldn’t shell out $3k more per car for that would they?
Approximately $1.5 m. , 20,000lbs. for the “Beast”. Doesn’t mention the engine, most specs. secret, and destroyed by the Secret Service when retired.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_state_car_(United_States)
I’m sure the run of the mill Secret Service vehicles are a relative bargain.
We worked on the drivetrain for those (think GM diesel pickup) at my last real job. The vehicles are fabricated in an unmarked facility in Motown. Access on a need to know basis with 24/7 security via SecServ.
FBI? CIA? Secret Service for members of Congress? Probably Not.
Secret Service on Presidential detail? Most certainly, Yes.
I figure the ones on presidential detail have the 6.6 and a host of other upgrades to make them extra capable
It’s funny how this is only affecting the L87 and not the LT2 or 5.3L L84. Is the fuel pump the big difference? I work at a GMC dealership and steer people toward the 5.3L V8 or 3.0TD regardless and honestly it’s only the L87 that we’re seeing the issues with.
Is the 3.0TD pretty solid now? I feel like I heard about issues when they first came out.
There were a few issues in the first year or so, but all 25’s are on the second generation of the 3.0TD (LZ0 now instead of LM2) with a lot of the weak points addressed. The biggest issue we see in service is people who accidentally put gasoline in the tank. It has 495 lb/ft of torque compared to the 460 of the 6.2 and is around $1000 cheaper to buy than the 6.2. It makes it a real no-brainer imo
Good to know. I had a 2.8 Dmax Canyon and loved that truck with that engine. Would absolutely prefer an I6 diesel in the full size.
The only thing I don’t like about the I6 diesel is that there is not a variation for the Colorado/Canyons. Chop off a cylinder or two and put it in the GM midsizers and get best in class mpg out of them too.
Ancedotal, but every 2019+ Camaro SS 1LE Owner I personally know is on their second or third engine. Granted all of the cars are frequently tracked on road courses but still cause for concern. The guy with a 2017 SS 1LE is still on his original LT1.Gotta give GM props though because all of them were covered under warranty even with obvious signs of tracking.
I think they all got lemons or abused them. Usually they should not go bad that quickly…
I own one! It’s a phenomenal engine right now and I hope we don’t have any issues. Have it in a Yukon and it cooks when I want to pass someone. Quiet and composed just ready to jump is how I’d describe it.
…apparently until it doesn’t.
yeah, I’m hoping it just does, or at least doesn’t die before they figure out the cause. Fingers crossed!
Some fail, others do not. People who have no issues do not complain. Yes, these engines seem apparently less tolerant to abuse compared to the L86 (with all its lifter problems), even if “in theory” the engines are simple…
I have to guess this is the fault of the variable PSI oil pumps. that just seems like a terrible idea in general.
The 6.6 in the 2500 seems like a better setup for longevity, but it is known for drinking oil even when new, so yeah GM needs to get this figured out if they want to hold onto the #2 spot. Ram kind of handed them a Bye week this year with the cold turkey V8 quit. But I suspect if the 3.0 proves to be OK for the next few years and maybe they bring back a few V8’s for the rest of us. the GM market dominance will continue to dwindle.
The manufacturers can get away with putting old school V8s in their heavier duty pickups because they’re not subject to the same fuel economy restrictions. If they tried to do that in a half ton CAFE would bankrupt them.
Also, literally every major truck manufacturer is having trouble building a reliable modern engine. Ram has the Hemi tick and I’ve heard of teething problems with the Hurricane, GM has lifter failures and apparently this problem, Ford has had issues with the EcoBoosts (although the 2.7 might be the most reliable engine on the market right now, modulo the stupid wet belt oil pump), and I’m sure we’re all aware of Toyota having to replace 100k engines.
If you’re buying a truck right now you’re rolling the dice and hoping you get lucky. Until we take a long, hard look at what CAFE requirements are doing to the long term reliability of modern vehicles (and, correspondingly, the environmental impact of premature failures) it’s not going to get better either. The manufacturers will have to implement increasingly risky strategies to hit their numbers.
Sadly I have to say the old Ford 3.5 Ecoboost is far less prone to failures than the Nano 2.7/3.0 variants. but I live in a fleet world so maybe the cheapo nature of them is not present in the higher option variants. at any rate, Ford still puts a 5.0 and even a hot 5.2 out there in a pick up. I applaud them for doing it, especially considering the bad taste in many peoples mouth for cam phased 5.4’s and Cross Plane V8 Foibles. I agree the V8 would need to be limited to handle the Cafe BS. but at least with the Ramcharger helping on the bottom end of emissions, they no longer will have to pay Elon for green credits.
The “environmental impact of premature failures” for heavily polluting vehicles is almost always a dogwhistle for “I just want to pollute as much as I want without paying for the problems I cause”. The reality is that the majority of the pollution that vehicles emit comes from their service life, not from their manufacture. In fact, I would be willing to bet that the premature failure of heavy polluters is a net positive for the environment in the same way that premature death of smokers and the obese actually lowers insurance costs.
Cash for Clunkers, which is basically the ideal version of what you’re talking about, had a negligible effect on greenhouse gas emissions. And that was taking the oldest, least fuel efficient vehicles off the road, not newer, more fuel efficient ones like premature failure does. It’s almost certainly a loss in the pollution column when a vehicle dies at 5 or even 10 years old due to excessive emissions reduction.
I’m not saying we should revert to the 70s when all of our cities were covered in smog, but I am saying that we need to revisit whether our current regulations are actually accomplishing their goals, because I’m not convinced they are.
FTFY. Obviously Hyundai are known for over decade of poor engine machining now, and Honda has that major J-Series bearing recall out right now too. Turns out when you squeeze profits to maximize margins quality really goes down, whoudathunkit? I’ll stick to ICE powerplants made before 2015. Meanwhile, hey electric motors don’t really tend to seize at highway speeds.
Not yet, but give the beancounters a few more years to cost cut. I’m sure they’ll find a way. 😉
Between displacement on demand systems for the gassers and DEF for the diesels, engines really have become pretty finicky.
RAM hemi tick is due to exhaust manifolds and long idling times. In Qatar, I have heard that RAM camshafts are more expensive than Chevrolet/GMC…
They are making 6th gen V8s already…and THESE ENGINES NEED TO BE FIXED before that. Meaning, an MY27 engine at least.
In the Gulf, RAM does not have as much market share as GMC/Chevrolet has…and the diesel option you state is not available…the V8s are most popular…
Between the tundra engine failures, these failures, and others I’m probably not aware of, I’m wondering if there is a new, secret competition between pickup truck manufacturers to see who can design an engine that will self destruct before the first oil change.
Nano Ford v6’s dropping Valves, Godzilla Coil wires and other variables. Yeah it is getting rough to actually figure out what brand and trim level might get you past the warranty these days.
I’m buying our families 2nd Gen Tundra with the 2UZ in it off of them soon, and it’s barely got over 100k miles on it, needless to say, as long as it doesn’t rust in half, I’ll be cherishing it and maintaining it for as long as humanly possible.
Yeah I was on the fence about getting the last of the v8 Tundras when the new thing came out. I wish I had now. they were quite a bit cheaper than they seem to be now. people are turning in the turbo sixes and buying a 2 year old 5.7 it seems.
On the bright side, it’s super easy to pick up a brand new TTV6 Tundra at well under MSRP. My dad is looking at new ones in the middle of the trim range, and it’s not too hard to find at 5k off MSRP even at dealers near met that love to put markups on everything. Last one we looked at around 6 months ago was like a 73k sticker but marked down to around 60, maybe lower if I’m remembering correctly. Still way expensive, but at least MSRP seems to be well above ATP.
If you are willing to drop down a size, the Nissan Frontier comes with a version of the naturally aspirated VQ engine. If this family of engines maintains its legacy (maybe/maybe not) these should be close to bulletproof. The bigger Titan has been discontinued and had a V8 that I don’t know much about.
I see the titan advertised for fairly good prices, the XD semi HD version is surprisingly favorable, and outside of the early units cat converter breaking up and getting sucked into the engine they seems to be pretty long lived.
The new Frontier 3.8 engine is pretty stout. I actually like it better than the Taco simply because of that engine.
Is it the same (or similar to those) VQ in all those Infiniti sedans and coupes?
Those VQ could survive the worst abuses the vape-and-backward-cap crowd can muster. They can survive a nuclear war.
My mom’s G37x with a VQ engine, after getting left in the garage for more than six months, started right up and I have put more than 60,000 miles on it since then- it runs really well and burns no oil. In general that car has been a tank. The VQ engine in the Frontier is in the same family, but supposedly has been tuned for a bit more torque at lower rpms.
Every once in a while the 15-year-old VQ engine in this G37x starts hard – I think because of a flaky coil or spark plug, and there is an issue with the MAP system that throws a code from time to time, but this may be fixed with an ECU update if I am ever willing to take the car back to the dealer. It does have Japanese style disk breaks which are more difficult to service than they should be (including a bolt on the rear caliper bracket that you cannot get an impact wrench on), and it eats front wheel bearings about every 40K miles (maybe due to a lead foot…), but otherwise it has been trouble free for 15 years.
When an engine fails on the highway pull over as quickly as possible. If possible do minimal braking until you are actually on the shoulder and doing a full stop. You do this to ensure you still have power braking. If you do have to deplete the power braking reserve, you will have to push extremely hard on the brakes. This is a freaky feeling, but the brakes will still work.
If you have hydraulic power steering, steering will be heavy but it should be manageable. (You are not trying to do a three point turn, you just need to turn the steering a little bit to pull over.) Electric power steering may actually stay on, as the car still can draw power from the batter for that. It is important to not yank the steering over too much without power assist during this procedure… take a deep breath and do things slowly.
Assuming you get pulled over safely, I cannot emphasize this enough. Stay in the freaking car. Do not get out. Stay in the car. It is the safest place to be until police and/or a tow truck arrives. Do not ever stand between two cars when pulled over on the shoulder of a road. When the tow truck arrives, again, get the freak into the tow truck and stay there.
Why the long lecture? Personal experience.
I was driving on the 401 (a very busy highway in Ontario) and a car had stalled on the left shoulder. A tow truck was stopped in front of the stalled car. While driving I watched in horror as a stupid driver not paying attention clipped the back right corner of the stalled car. The stalled car launched forward and into/over the tow truck. I flipped my hazards on an stopped a good 200-300 feet behind and angled my car slightly in the far left lane to force cars to go around.
Other cars stopped behind me and once I knew it was safe I went to render assistance. It was ugly. The car owner (who should have been sitting in the tow truck!) was standing between his car and the two truck. The tow truck driver was busy connecting the car for a tow.
The front of the stalled car was perched on top of the tow truck. I rendered assistance and did emergency first aid with the first person I found. They were under the wreck, and I started talking with them and doing a full body workup to assess injuries. (BTW, before doing anything I made sure I was not putting myself into a dangerous situation.) Smashed hips with likely internal injuries was my 1-2 minute assessment but they had stable vitals and started to talk more.
When they started coming slightly out of shock, I got their name and was keeping them conscious it came out they were the driver of the stalled car. My heart dropped. I gave the driver my health assessment and asked them to keep talking with me while I looked for the driver. He was stable, so I had to leave him.
The tow truck driver was further under the wreck hidden behind the tow truck wheels. Fuck. Time to crawl under the truck to render emergency aid. (It was safe, I checked carefully before making the move.) Unconscious, irregular, raspy, very weak, struggling breathing. Obvious head trauma. Weak pulse. I did a full body assessment to see if there were any bad cuts or things I could do to try and help. Outside of slow bleeding from the cracked skull there was no other bleeding. I knew this was bad, but did everything I could to help keep them alive. I paid very close attention to his vitals.
Police arrived in about 10 minutes (it felt like an eternity). They parked behind my car to build up a safe emergency area. The 2nd police car blocked the next lane over and then third made a wall of cars to protect the ambulances when they arrived. The first ambulance arrived. I passed on all the vitals I had been tracking and told them the tow truck driver was really bad, but the other victim had serious injuries as well. The two ambulance paramedics screamed at the police to call for a second (or was it a third?) ambulance and immediately rendered assistance to the tow driver. I swapped to the injured driver and did a secondary assessment to ensure they were not getting worse. Some other idiot bystanders had moved this poor guy with two smashed hips while I was occupied with the tow driver. I was really pissed that happened.
The second ambulance arrived. All four paramedics worked on the tow driver.
Eventually one medic came over and I helped them transfer the car driver to a dolly and loaded him into the car. I was tasked will constantly monitoring the car drivers vitals and doing assessments to ensure no other injuries were missed. So every 5-10 minutes or so I was pressing gently from toes to neck (skipping the obviously smashed hips), to see if other secondary injuries were manifesting. I focused in the stomach area a lot new tenderness looking for things like internal bleeding, ruptured kidneys, liver, etc. I think I was alone in the ambulance for something like an hour.
Finally one medic came back to replace me. A third ambulance had arrived while I was in the ambulance. The tow driver and first ambulance was gone (with three medics…) I gave my final assessment of how the driver was doing and seemed very stable and was very alert. I talked with that guy a lot about so many random things to keep him occupied. The medics thanked me, secured the dolly and drove away.
Then onto another hour talking to police about the accident…. I had the horrific honour of seeing the accident very clearly. During my statement they got a call saying it was “confirmed” and I looked at one of the police officers and said to them “So the tow driver has been confirmed dead?” He was surprised I was able to translate that one word. Then he simply said “Yes.” Shit.
I honestly was not surprised. His injuries were severe and I did everything that I could do and the paramedics worked their asses off rendering care. My job was to help as best I could. I have no regrets, I did what I had to do to try and save a life.
Stay safe. Stay in the car… it is the safest place. If you get in a fender bender, do not ever stand between the two cars. Ever. Ever. Ever. One distracted driver can kill you in an instant. I got to see that in real life.
Finally. Remember its just a fucking car. Your life is more important and take steps to always protect yourself.
RESQ (ref DanDanTheFireman):
-Remain calm, make sure somebody calls 911
-Ensure your own safety – don’t get run over trying to help…
-Stop major bleeding
-Quick assessment of injuries: TBI, spine, shock.
Yeah, I forgot to mention that the first thing done was a phone call to 911.
I have done emergency first aid courses at least 5 times including some run by paramedics who relayed real life experiences. All those courses kicked in big time… I was thankful I was able to help. While the tow truck driver died, I did everything I could do to help until the paramedics arrived. I did not expect to keep helping once the first ambulance arrived. But I helped there while the paramedics worked their asses off trying to save the tow truck driver.
Once I assessed the situation was safe, I kicked into ABC when rendering emergency first.
A – Airway. Is their throat clear (tongue blocking airway can happen when unconscious depending on head position)
B – Breathing. Are they breathing?
C – Circulation. Do they have a pulse? Severe bleeding?
I would do everything again without hesitation.
I hate to give a smiley face on that, but I felt I had to acknowledge that rough experience.
Thanks. It was quite the experience. I fortunately can look back on this without regret of my actions. I did the right thing by stopping. I did the right thing by helping. I was especially able to help the paramedics focus on the tow truck driver – he was still alive when they roared off to the hospital so I did, in a very small part, give that person a fighting chance to survive. I am obviously sad about the outcome.
This article just brought back a whole rush of memories when they discussed cars getting stranded on the side of a highway.
I hope at least one person can learn from this horrible story. Hopefully, it makes a few people more aware the dangers and be careful in a similar situation. Hell, I’ll take one person taking it to heart and being careful in the future.
It’s awesome that you helped out with first aid, but honestly it isn’t worth the risk as a Good Samaritan to stop on the highway anywhere near an accident. Fire Engines and police cars covered in flashing lights get rammed all the time.
I have a current WFR and a lapsed EMTB license, and currently am doing ride alongs on medicals as I work on getting rectified.
Scene safety is no joke and the very first thing to ascertain, and a highway is an absolutely unsafe place to be.
If you really really want to get out and help, buy an OSHA-quality reflective vest and a very bright light and a shitton of flares and park far past the wreck, far off the road, and walk as far from the travel lanes as possible. But honestly just calling 911 is enough, in an urban area the first responders will show up pretty quickly. Most people live, and the ones who don’t probably won’t benefit from your efforts. I’m not trying to sound harsh or badass, I’m pretty well trained and have a some experience and I’d hesitate to stop for a wreck considering the odds against me making a material difference in the short time before the pros appear.
I will now descend from my soapbox.
I get it. As I discussed, I parked a loooonnnggg way back from the scene of the accident.. blocking the left lane. As in 200-300 feet. That was very intentional to create a safe buffer zone. If some idiot was not paying attention and hit my car I was safe.
The police cars arriving did exactly what I did building a large buffer before the crash location. This created a safe zone for the ambulances to safely stop in. That is pretty standard procedure in Ontario accidents – heck large fire trucks often dispatch and become part of the barrier even when there is no fire risk.
I’ll respectfully say just calling 911 is not enough. If that tow truck driver had a bad gash (very amazing he did not) he would have died very quickly bleeding out waiting for the ambulance to arrive. Response time in the area of the crash for ambulances is around 15-30 minutes and sometimes longer.
I made a HUGE difference for the paramedics. I helped them to focus on helping the critically injured tow truck driver. So, I’ll respectfully and strongly disagree with you here.
Fair enough. I have all the CPR and trauma toys in my personal vehicle to help out in general, but I personally draw the line at stopping on an interstate. Fortunately I’m in a rural area and rarely have to travel on highways.
At least in my area, when I discuss traumatic injuries with the veteran medics I’m told the time-sensitive bleed out kind of patients are very, very rare. That said, we are doing mass shooter training this summer, yay America.
I am curious if other same generation LS engines of different displacements suffer the same malady. Is this a 6.2L exclusive problem, and if so, what is the difference between it and other LS engines?
As for the ‘variable pressure oil pump’, I am a bit confused as to what that means. Oil pressure is generally variable based on a number of factors, right?
Lots of cars use variable pressure pumps. It changes due to many factors such as cam adjusters being active, load, RPM and other stuff. For example if the ECU decides it’s time to turn on the piston sprayers it’ll ramp up the pressure.
I dont know how it’s made it this long before I’ve seen a story on this, but this is a real, BIG problem.
On another thread someone was asking me about 6.4 hemi reliability, and I mentioned I’ve seen two or 3 engine replacements on a 6.4 hemi, and DOZENS and DOZENS of GM 6.2 failures. What I didn’t mention is I’ve seen multi-dozens of GM 6.2 failures….and I work at a Dodge Dealership. I swear it feels like one out of 5 of these 2019 and newer trucks has either an engine failure or a transmission failure before it gets to 70,000 miles.
As all the linked stuff shows, it’s been bubbling under the surface for some time…and I didn’t know about it, either, but I wouldn’t buy a GM anyway.
I sincerely hope that legacy media ring these scum bags up. And all the dealers that pulled that bullshit where they try to say “we don’t know anything, this engine is amazing herr dee durr”
Yeah, we’re at the point now that when we take one in, we sell it to carmax. It really sucks too, because other than this issue it’s a truly incredible engine. Great power, great throttle response, doesn’t pollute much, and fuel mileage is great. But like Ford’s 3.5 Powerboost or Stellantis’ 4xe setups, there’s just no way I’d ever own one without a good warranty.
So, DO YOU KNOW THE EXACT FAILURE RATE OF these 6.2s in terms of units out of ENTIRE production…
Think about what this does to the resale value of one of these. If I had one out of warranty, I’d be trying to sell it immediately.
As someone who poked around Tahoe/Yukon prices recently, the Yukon Denali (6.2L standard) is still very expensive.
Another reason that dealers and the whole dealership model needs to get blown up.
So far, I’ve only seen Autopian going after this story. Legacy media is complicit as well.
Light these mf’ers on fire…good for you guys.
…what do dealerships have to do with what’s obviously a manufacturing issue? Did you even read the article?
What a dummy you are. Did you look at the linked Twitter article?
Please don’t be stupid. Please try to learn something.
Please.
Sounds like a single anecdote from a person dealing with an overwhelmed service advisor who has no clear answers for them from GM.
Holy cow, dude. I’m not doing your research for you. But after you resolve the rectal-cranial inversion, do some checking around. You don’t even have to look that hard.
My research? The article is about engine failures, you’re talking about disliking the dealership system.You got the point to prove, you do the research. I don’t have to work to prove you right; that’s not how debate works.
Anyway, everybody who comes storming in screaming “TeH DeaLErShIpS ArE DUh PrObLEm!!!11!!” when it’s not related to sales, financing, or ‘additional fee’ services like $600 paint protection sprays or that kind of bullshit – y’know, things that a dealership does on their own that are shady that are actually a problem in the dealer system – never has any suggestions for how not having a dealership in these sorts of situations would improve anything.
So, dealerships bad. What is your proposed solution, oh learned and well-researched one?
So, if you were to, you know, read the article, you’d see the start of the “proof.” Then, if you were to read/lookup ANY (and I mean absolutely any) message boards, you’d see more.
Lazy and stupid takes are all you got, it appears. And then you even counter your own argument by listing examples of other dealer problems.
Holy fuck, man. How are you able to get through life with the complete lack of critical thinking?
Proof is everywhere, in the article and linked stuff. Period. Be smarter.
So… No suggestions on how there’s a preferable alternate system to dealerships, and no proof to support YOUR arguments.
Again, not doing research to help YOU prove YOUR point. Not my job.
C’mon. Support your proposition. Why are dealerships the problem with 6.2L L87 failures? You’ve done the research, apparently, so please present your case.
They can be a problem, but the engine faults+ backorders+ lemons do NOT help…
Chill out. This isn’t that kind of site. Be nicer or don’t come back, please.
will do. Thanks. Hopefully the moderation will improve, but I’m not optimistic.
[This is Matt, I am the moderator. Be nicer to other people are GTFO]
Why? The only mention of dealers was that some were stockpiling engines to have on hand for faster turnaround, not to corner the market. And replacement engines are failing too so it’s not like there is a market to corner.
Wrong. Read the linked stuff, and check out the forums. This is a design/manufacturing issue but dealers have definitely made it worse.
So say why instead of demanding everyone take your word for it.
No, sorry, dumb ass. It’s literally in the article when you look at the stuff there.
Then, as smart people do, if you start to look for other corroborating information, it’s EVERYWHERE. It’s all over.
I knew nothing about this issue until yesterday, and then this article nudged the door open further. Even the simplest search will show you more about the problem…and how people have been hosed by dealers thus far.
But, or, keep bleating like a sheep. Your call. We all already know how this is going to go for you
Dude, no one comes to this site to deal with people like you. From the moment you were challenged, you immediately started with bad language and name calling. It’s OK to disagree, but for the love of God, act like a damn grownup.
Listen, man, I don’t know you, but the other two dunces have a history of being exactly the sort of people that don’t belong here.
The facts are the facts, they have been explained, and a couple of former-site rejects stanning for dealers despite the proof that is alllllll around is not ok, and I don’t mind calling it out.
I don’t care about your opinion either, bub
He’s a bad faith debater. Literally playing chess with a pigeon.
“I knew nothing about this issue until yesterday”
And I knew nothing of this issue till an hour ago when I read this very same Autopian story. So stop being an absolute dickhole and simply show everyone what you’ve found.
Best wishes on your journey.
I accept your apology.
lol Best wishes on your journey
I’ll pray for you.
Hey
You can make your point without being abusive. We don’t do that shit around here: other opinions & points of view are welcomed. And, I think you’ll find that a polite, wel-cited case for your cause will be listened to. Ranting notsomuch
Maybe do some “research” on the tone of debate on this site. And have a great day.
Lifters and bearings screams oil supply issues. I wonder what happens if you change out the variable pump for a high volume or high pressure unit.
It appears Katech makes an upgraded pump for the L87.
According to this I Do Cars video on the L86:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxFFTHbJQ7Y
…the Variable Pressure Oil Pump just might be the culprit.
It’s clear that this issue has been going on since at least 2015.
And it sounds like while the L86 was ‘not great’, the L87 is ‘worse’.
So, am I going to start seeing stupid comments, like “den da engine go boom” anytime these are mentioned like I see with the Toyobaru twins (and these truck failures certainly aren’t the cases of mis-shifts)? You don’t get more basic than a large displacement pushrod engine with a 70 year history. At least Ford’s problems are from smaller displacement turbo 6s, which seems more understandable (if no less infuriating as a customer). And this is in a massive full sized truck, how f’n good mileage improvement can be expected from such a thing that they spec variable displacement and pressure oil pump for nothing but minor on-paper gains that are likely negated by any number of simple and common variables in the real world in exchange for major points of catastrophic failure? Trucks are so expensive now, but hey, at least they’re built to last, right?
“You don’t get more basic than a large displacement pushrod engine with a 70 year history.”
Throw in Direct Injection, VVT, Variable displacement and a variable pressure oil pump and you realize pretty fast that they’re not as ‘basic’ as they used to be.
fair, but this looks like a massive own goal
Pretty much everyone else seems to manage VVT and DI (that isn’t German) without an issue and this is still fundamentally an evolution of 70 year old architecture wit a single cam OHV, relatively low rpm, high displacement, N/A engine, all of which should make for an inherently longer lived engine. The issues here don’t appear to have anything to do with VVT or DI, anyway, they are, to my point, likely down to the variable displacement and/or variable pressure oil pump, which are both utterly stupid. These are on-paper savings for little to no real world benefit with very real major failure risks. Even as far as on-paper savings goes, how much can it really be for such large, heavy, aerodynamically inefficient vehicles expected to perform high-load work?
Someone might point out that they have to meet (very lax for the truck sector) CAFE requirements, but my question becomes: whose fault is it that the industry all instead focus on performance over durability? With all these “stringent” standards, they’ve gotten faster, heavier, and increased in work ratings. I wonder how many customers who have these engines blow up on them (some, multiple times) would be happier buying a competitor’s product with slightly worse specs (say, “only” as good as the perfectly fine last gen’s specs) in exchange for far greater resiliency. “Yeah, our trucks are only rated to pull 1k pounds less trailer and do 0-60 in 7 seconds instead of the 5.5 of our competitors, but we don’t have any of that half-baked technology you can’t count on. Our trucks are meant for people who want a damn truck [display greater major drivetrain failure rates and recalls of competitors].” OK, I’m definitely not in the marketing business, but I know if I was buying a truck—especially when they’re so damn expensive—I’d want durability and reliability that’s better than average, never mind worse than overpriced and notoriously bad German luxury junk (that at least utilizes more advanced technologies for its lack of reliability).
“Pretty much everyone else seems to manage VVT and DI (that isn’t German) without an issue”
Not really. All the Ford 3V VVT engines had cam-phaser issues in the 2000s. And even some Japanese cars with DI without the port injectors had carbon buildup issues.
” they are, to my point, likely down to the variable displacement and/or variable pressure oil pump,”
I’m guessing you’re correct on that.
” whose fault is it that the industry all instead focus on performance over durability?”
The companies selling the stuff combined with the people buying it.
I agree completely with your post. Can’t wait to see how this is somehow because of gov’t regs.
More GM fuckery
I can’t speak for the L87, but all the DI, VVT, AFM, etc stuff on my 2016 5.3 seems to improve things quite a bit. My CC 4×4 truck was getting 20 MPG on the highway stock.
Now, the AFM is already a known flaw on all generations in the GM trucks.
DI and VVT are huge improvements and, if anything, I’ve been one promoting DI against those who cry that you need to walnut blast valves every 6 months with DI or else carbon build up will destroy your engine screamed by people who buy junk from the usual suspects who can’t build the simplest engine parts right (German) and are easily sold on catch can ad copy written by snake oil salesmen (I’ve had two DI-only cars, one over 200k miles and another near turbocharged one close to it that never needed any cleaning nonsense or catch can BS and never had a single issue attributed to DI). I don’t defend VVT, because I don’t think I’ve ever seen the need to. I’m calling out the two issue-prone and rather obvious high-liability technologies that are likely culprits in these engine failures: variable pressure oil pumps and variable displacement, neither of which, I contend are likely doing much to improve mileage in the real world and certainly seem not to be worth the potential (and real) effects of failure.
So Hyundai/Kia aren’t the only ones spinning bearings!
GM trying to horn in on their ‘suckcess’.
I read “variable oil pressure” in the opening segment and immediately thought, “well, that sounds like a recipe for disaster”
I know, right? What is the benefit of variable oil pressure? Does it increase gas mileage, reduce pollution? Is it worth it? Or just another failure point?
These are questions that modern car makers are not asking themselves
“When it comes to improving fuel efficiency, 3% to 5% are huge numbers. Achieving those fuel efficiency numbers while also increasing the power to the wheels is the holy grail of vehicle engineering, and new variable displacement oil pumps are able to deliver this boost in efficiency.”
https://www.underhoodservice.com/variable-displacement-future-oil-pump/
3-5% is quite a bit.
Maybe there’s a clue in here:
“The GM LT1 uses a variable displacement oil pump that enables more efficient oil delivery, per the engine’s operating conditions. Its dual-pressure control enables operation at a very efficient oil pressure at lower rpm coordinated with AFM and delivers higher pressure at higher engine speeds. Extra pressure can be requested from the pump for the oil jets on the pistons. The oil jets are used only when they are needed the most: at start-up, giving the cylinders extra lubrication that reduces noise, and at higher engine speeds, or when the engine load demands, for extra cooling and greater durability.”
The Penastar V6 has used a variable pressure oil pump since its inception back in 2011. It’s not a new design by any means.
A variable oil pump adjusts the oil flow rate depending on the engine operating conditions.
So when I owned my Ram 1500, I noticed the cold start oil pressure was about 80 PSI. Once the truck warmed up it lowered to about 25 PSI at idle (efficiency stage).
This arrangement also allows the oil pump to instantly switch back to 70-80 PSI once the engine exceeds 3000 RPMs for optimal oil flow. On a regular oil pump it takes a few seconds to build those PSIs as the oil pump is driven by the crankshaft so the oil pressure goes almost linear with the RPMs, but on a variable oil pump this switch goes almost instantly.
What I’m saying is those kind of oil pumps are a good idea per se, and they can be implemented successfully. A good implementation is key, though.
But just think about how green it is: over 100k miles, it saves 0.25 gallons of fuel!
According to this link variable pumps show fuel efficiency improvements of 3-5%:
https://www.underhoodservice.com/variable-displacement-future-oil-pump/
for a 17 mpg truck that works out to 170-230 gallons of fuel.
Saving less than $1000 worth of fuel at the expense of multi-thousand dollar premature engine replacements isn’t a good deal for the consumer or company.
That fuel that didn’t get used is also tailpipe emissions that didn’t get released. Lots of cars use this type of oil pump, they’re quite common. It seems GM just really borked something here. I’m not quite sure why they’re letting engines blow up over it when if insufficient oil delivery is the culprit they could just change a map to put it in high gear more often. Unless there’s some kind of material problem and it would be cheaper for them to change a few engines instead of one million oil pumps.
Yes, small improvements in fuel economy that work for society in general have lead to many ‘improvements’ that wind up costing the individual far more than the dollar cost of the fuel savings.
Those very same small improvements have lead to engines that don’t need anything more than fluid changes for the first 100k and with basic maintenance can last 400-500k or more. Would you prefer going back to points, carburetor and Zerk grease fittings? Do you really want to spend every other weekend doing car maintenance, stinking of gasoline and gear oil?
The tech to improve vehicles in mileage, emissions, power, and reliability as well as the circumstances under which those technologies offered all-around improvements in every area are not the same as the tech being called into question here that are of highly dubious real world value and that’s without arguing that reliability has taken a few steps back in the last 5-10 years as operational safety margins are eroded to chase the largely opposing and ever finer goals of power, mileage/emissions, and reliability (and OEMs have stopped investing much in ICE). Like anything, there is a point where too much of a good thing becomes too much.
Of course, maybe it’s me making this more general argument of the declining risk v reward of some modern tech where, instead, the issue is that GM just f’d this up, which is incredibly stupid on such an important, high-volume, high-margin, high-loyalty vehicle. This is one of those things where you need to make sure you got it right or don’t do it at all.
Pretty sure its not an inherent problem with the tech per se but poor implementation. And I will point out not all OEMs have stopped investing in ICE. Toyota, Mazda, Nissan continue to develop ICE tech.
If anything I think ICE in PHEVs and REXEVs is going to be the only realistic path forward for the short term adoption of EVs. I expect to see some rethinking of the 2035 goals as the realities of battery tech, costs, renewable energy and power grid shortfalls hinder widespread EV adoption even further.
Toyota engine failures. Kia/Hyundai engine failures. GM engine failures. Ford oil pump failures. Dodge/Ram lifter failures (in 2 totally different engines) leading to cam failures. What are most of these failures related to – the oil system. All I’m saying is maybe we’ve reached the point of diminishing returns.
Oh, and BTW, when my hybrid car was totaled last month, I went out and bought a PHEV to replace it. Even looked at electric but realized range would be a problem (I’m a delivery driver, do a lot a miles a day and need to make it home every day without a recharge somewhere at 3:30am.) So I’m not opposed to new tech, but I’ve driven plenty of vehicles from the 90s and 2000s to well over 200k miles. The ability to make it to 3-400k isn’t relevant to most people because the rest of the car is falling apart before the motor now.
Engine failures due to oil issues have been with us a long time. The PRV V6 used in the Delorean was known to clog its oil passages. Mid 90s Mercedes V8 had sticky lifters. early 90s Toyotas Camry engines also had oil clogging issues. So this is nothing new.
I disagree about diminishing returns. Those old engines had thermal efficiencies around 25% at best. Today’s Atkinson engines are hitting 40%, and some engines in the pipeline are hitting 50%+. That’s a lot.
I meant diminishing returns re fuel savings vs increased repair expenses.
Also, as average MPG goes up, the percentage rate of savings goes down. For instance if you drive 12k per year in a car that gets 20 mpg, you use 600 gallon of gas per year. At 40 mpg that’s 300 gallons per year. 50 mpg uses 240 gallons per year. 60 mpg uses 200. My point – 40 mpg is about the limit of cost efficiency for the consumer. Getting to 60 would only save you 50 bucks a month at $3/gallon. I only got a PHEV last month because of the no longer available $4k tax credit, otherwise I would have gotten a hybrid that cost 4k less. So any fuel savings by a 3-6% increase in fuel economy is quickly overshadowed by any repair costs associated with technology that allows said increase.
“My point – 40 mpg is about the limit of cost efficiency for the consumer. Getting to 60 would only save you 50 bucks a month at $3/gallon.”
Lucky you, you only pay $3/gallon. For those of us who pay more, sometimes much more for a gallon better than 40 mpg has a greater benefit to the wallet.
“So any fuel savings by a 3-6% increase in fuel economy is quickly overshadowed by any repair costs associated with technology that allows said increase”
Correlation does not equal causation. The failure may not be an inherent flaw of the tech but in how its implemented as is probably the case with this engine. The problem here if it is indeed the oil pump is likely the map is too conservative. If so and if remapping fixes the failures then it may make the engine slightly less efficient but still more efficient than with a standard oil pump.
Unless there is evidence the pump itself fails because it’s a variable speed pump or if there is no way a higher cost of the pump can overcome the potential savings I don’t see a reason to abandon the tech. After all lots of other engines have similar pumps and they do just fine.
Its an excellent deal in the long term once those pumps are dialed in.
There are people out there that think automotive technology should have never progressed past where it was in the 60’s and people just now learning variable displacement pumps exist and to them it is black magic, and no argument will change their minds. These pumps are not highly complex devices and are widely used. This is just a case of an OEM borking the implementation and taking the cheap way out until they’re forced to take the expensive way out. Lots of cars have problems just as bad as this but for whatever reason don’t get classified as a safety risk so they never get recalled.
“There are people out there that think automotive technology should have never progressed past where it was in the 60’s”
I wonder how many of those people accurately remember what it was like living with the consequences of everyone driving those cars? Or living with those cars? As someone who spent a few years in 1970s smogbowl LA I do remember. I also remember spending a LOT more time keeping the family cars running. And spending much more time waiting for tow trucks. And that’s not even getting into safety. So no thanks to 1960s tech for me.
“Lots of cars have problems just as bad as this but for whatever reason don’t get classified as a safety risk so they never get recalled.”
Porsche’s IMS bearing comes to mind.
Did I say go back to the 60s? A hyperbolic, IMHO.
There are vehicles that use variable pressure oil pumps that don’t crumble like this.
Sometimes a technology is bad. But, sometimes a technology is executed badly – but would be actually be great if they executed it well.
On paper numbers. In the real world, I doubt it makes much difference and weighed against the risk, hardly seems worth it, particularly on a vehicle that’s ostensibly sold for its durability and wide-ranging capabilities. Maybe for a high strung super car looking for every hair of extra power or efficiency to meet regs or some economy mobile (if the engines weren’t already downsized so much to begin with) that’s expected to perform fairly consistent and low-stress kinds of work, these kinds of risks can be worth it to a customer, but on a truck where durability and capability of handling just about anything in all conditions it seems completely stupid. The variable displacement had been a problem for a while, but this is the first I’ve read about the oil pumps (if that is the issue). The other part, though, is how much of the problem is the technology itself and how much is the implementation. Take variable displacement. I don’t know how it’s implemented, do they shut off the same cylinders every time? Seems a poor decision, I would think a better solution would be a rolling disablement of cylinders if that’s not what they do. Other issue I’m guessing is shutting down cylinders and leaving the (exhaust?) valves open to reduce pumping losses. This makes it more efficient, but introduces a failure mode (that they are experiencing) with the valvetrain that wouldn’t exist if they just basically ran it as normal and shut off the injectors to a rolling number of different cylinders. Wouldn’t save as much, but wouldn’t have as much potential for failure. Of course, then the mileage benefit might decrease too much so as to not be worth it at all, then so be it—these are work trucks (whatever many of the buyers might actually do with them), not efficiency machines and they have alternatives to meet mileage requirements: reduce performance that is already far beyond purpose. Trucks don’t need to hit 0-60 in the low-mid 5s. And if they still do, then fine, that’s what gas guzzler tax is for.
It should be easy enough to measure such energy savings so I expect all else being equal the paper savings to be realistic. I think those savings however are lost in greater weight and poorer aerodynamics thanks to pedestrian crushing, high hood, angry face styling and capabilities most owners rarely if ever utilize.
Personally I love DOD, at least in concept. If anything I’d prefer to see it taken to an extreme with hybrids such that the firing cylinders are always putting out just enough power at peak thermal efficiency to meet demand. Bonus points if it also uses hit and miss to further match peak fuel efficiency with power (and heat) demand, especially in generator only mode. By utilizing more such tech I think the engine can be operated within a much narrower range of conditions and its thermal efficiency raised within that range rather than lowering peak efficiency to provide useful power outside that range as is done now. Imagine using your Silverado hybrid to heat and power your house during a week long power outage. You probably don’t need it running on all 8 cylinders, maybe not even on more than one to keep the lights on. Or for camping. Fewer cylinders firing means less noise. But it does mean plenty of heat and power for your trailer. Or the jobsite.
Haha yup, should just be like old vehicles where revs go up oil pressure goes up, revs go down oil pressure goes down. Like with my firebird when pressure is low at idle I am not concerned but if it is low when I am getting on it now I am concerned. Also screw off oil pressure dummy lights vs a gauge.
Yeah, but then the oil pressure relief valve is pushed open every time you use any revs, so the pump is doing loads of wasted work. That’s where your 3% economy gain is coming from.
Mazda stopped putting an oil gauge on the dash on MX5s because it freaked out normal drivers that the needle kept moving. Later mk1s have a gauge that only reads “fine” or “low”.
Not necessarily. For example, the 3.6 Pentastar already had it 10+ years ago.
And while those engines are far from perfect with a couple of common failures, the variable oil pump has not been one of them.
They do have an issue with lifter failure, leading to camshaft failure. Could it be related to lower oil pressure?
Possibly. From what I understand, these engines had a bad batch of rocker roller bearings and it’s usually just one roller that fails.
I don’t think a fixed pressure oil pump would’ve prevented that issue, but I’m just an armchair hobbyist, not an engineer. 🙂
well, variable pressure oil pumps have been available for over a decade. The Pentastar V6 has used it since its inception almost 15 years ago and although far from perfect, it has been quite reliable. The dual stage pump allows for 80-90 PSI at cold idle, something very few OEM pumps can achieve. You would need to take the aftermarket route with a high volume oil pump manufacturer like Melling to achieve that.
Once the engine gets warm the pressure goes down to 20-40 PSI for more efficiency that would translate in small FE savings and if you pass 3000 RPMs you get your 70-80 PSI back.
It sounds brilliant in theory and as explained it can be implemented reliably. Just like most engine related systems….
But if there’s a defect in the oil pumps it might not be triggering the right oil pressure for those events when you need it most (like low oil pressure at a cold start or WOT)
Yeah the 6.2 is trash.
It was darkly funny when my nephew said the entire fleet was off the road where he works because their engines all failed – his truck stranded him in the U.S. without a vehicle.
Legit question: was it this stuff? Or something else? I thought (until now, obvs) that the 6.2 was better than the 5.7
I don’t know if it was this specific recall or the very well known lifter problems – when I asked him he shrugged and said “the lifters are made of tin foil” – and this was multiple trucks so they might have all had different problems.
If the L86 (and LT1 for that matter) are OK and the L87 is the one with problems, doesn’t that point to the continuously variable displacement on demand system as a likely culprit? Or other changes in the engine to accommodate that system?
My understanding is that is the primary difference between the 2014 L86 and the 2019 L87.
The 5.3 also has a variable displacement oil pump and apparently isn’t affected by this. Could be they under-spec’d the oil pump for the bigger engine though. These things are shockingly efficient for what they are and it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if they went a little too far with the optimizations.
Agreed. I think we need to pushback EPA standards…but the result would be us paying “gas guzzler taxes” for these trucks…
E90 M3 owners reading this <_< *_* <_<
I would recon,from doing absolutely no research and just hearing about this,that the variable pressure oil pump likes to vary a bit much.
Occam’s razor
Similar issue with the 7.3 Godzilla. Those required complete engine replacement…I believe they have been fixed now.
When these trucks (some might even say America) lose their heartbeat, they’re stuck immobile on the side of the road, like a rock.
A contender for COTD, bravo!