6.2 L87 (not LT1) discussion

[SS71SS24]

Couldn't agree more, Jim. But sometime very soon GM should tell owners of 2022-24 Camaro LT-1 if they're in the same pool as the L-87. We all paid an awful lot for the car!

[MRREVINTO7]

stay away from 20-26 6.2L L87 -LT1 I bought a 24 Trailboss Z71 6.2l at 2207 miles it seized on the Hwy at 71mph without a warning ,it sat at dealer from late April until 1st week of October and finally got a new engine ,gm bought it back 3 weeks later and the engine seized again while dealer had it ....took another brand new truck LT 2.7l for work just needed for ny winters and house errands it was 300a month 0 down lease 24 months so I said screw it ..2877 miles piston cracked ring land chunk of metal in engine took 1 and half months new engine got 6 months left on lease I'm getting out ...I wanna see the new 5.7 and 6.6 redisign before I ever buy this brand again ...I also had 23 LT1 Camaro sold it back to dealer with 3k miles on it . had no issues but I was not about to wait and find out ....

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I think it's "and", not "instead of". If they are correct that the issues are the result of a manufacturing process that was out of control and they've addressed that process, there's nothing that needs to be redesigned or re-engineered in the product. Just build them the way they're supposed to be built and pay more attention to the manufacturing processes.

Alright show the proof.

You worked there you know people.

Show me the engineering spec documents in a PDF that I can read myself that state the manufacturing or production process that specifically has been pinpointed and the proof of the changes eliminates the risk of catastrophic, premature engine failure.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by olrocker

Alright show the proof.

You worked there you know people.

Show me the engineering spec documents in a PDF that I can read myself that state the manufacturing or production process that specifically has been pinpointed and the proof of the changes eliminates the risk of catastrophic, premature engine failure.

I'm not going to do that.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I'm not going to do that.

Why.

You wonder why GM has a sh-tty reputation?

You’re partly, directly the cause of it.

[Capricio]

Originally Posted by olrocker

Why.

You wonder why GM has a sh-tty reputation?

You’re partly, directly the cause of it.

I probably disagree with James on more things than I agree with him, but that's unfair and unreasonable. He's not responsible for everything his employer has ever done, any more than you are (unless you own your business). He's certainly under no obligation to call in favors for random hostiles on a car forum. You could at least ask nicely.

Back on topic, not sure why you're in a rush to get into a Tahoe, but either settle for the 5.3 or wait for the Gen VI V8 (I'd wait for the second MY). I think it's the only way to be sure and put your mind at ease about the L87. Even if you got a "good one", it'll always have a rep that people will walk away from.

[SS71SS24]

I feel Jim is an asset here and hope he continues to opine.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Capricio

I probably disagree with James on more things than I agree with him, but that's unfair and unreasonable. He's not responsible for everything his employer has ever done, any more than you are (unless you own your business). He's certainly under no obligation to call in favors for random hostiles on a car forum. You could at least ask nicely.

Back on topic, not sure why you're in a rush to get into a Tahoe, but either settle for the 5.3 or wait for the Gen VI V8 (I'd wait for the second MY). I think it's the only way to be sure and put your mind at ease about the L87. Even if you got a "good one", it'll always have a rep that people will walk away from.

I’m Sorry.

I’ll ask nice.

Will you please provide the documentation that this issue was fixed?

[m6-lt1]

Originally Posted by olrocker

Alright show the proof.

You worked there you know people.

Show me the engineering spec documents in a PDF that I can read myself that state the manufacturing or production process that specifically has been pinpointed and the proof of the changes eliminates the risk of catastrophic, premature engine failure.

For me, the proof is the engine worked fine before 2021. The failure parts (crank/bearings) haven’t changed since 2014. Coincidently, the engines started to fail right around when everything else in the world started to get “enshitified”.

Now if your question was “show me proof it’s fixed now” then I am with you on that. I have no idea if they fixed the manufacturing process. I know it’s not a design issue since the failure parts haven’t changed since 2014, but can we trust GM to raise their quality control? Who knows.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by m6-lt1

Now if your question was “show me proof it’s fixed now” then I am with you on that. I have no idea if they fixed the manufacturing process. I know it’s not a design issue since the failure parts haven’t changed since 2014, but can we trust GM to raise their quality control? Who knows.

That’s exactly what I’m saying and all I’m asking.

[snizzle]

"The L87 recall stems from a supplier-related manufacturing issue involving rod bearing contamination and crankshafts that may fall out of the factory specifications."

Otherwise, you'll need to speak with someone that currently works for GM and you'll probably get what I pasted in quotes above. If you are that concerned, don't buy a vehicle with this engine.