GM recall--How could this have happened?

[MSDeneen]

How can they build and sell 877,000 truck/SUV with a defective engine? This is surely an epic screwup of high-tech engineering and manufacturing.

My own 2019 Yukon/6.2 someone is NOT in the recall, but having just bought this $50 grand TV a few months ago, I'm now nervous about my purchase and wish I had done better at researching reliability.

Technology should be making cars MORE reliable, but in fact, it seems to making them worse.

[sfranklin]

I was a GM dealer a few months back. In the shop was a Cadillac Escalade with the 6.2L. Engine was being repaired, not due to the manufac defect mentioned in the linked article, but for issue with the displacement on demand. If I were to get an engine with DOD, I would gladly purchase the kit, install it to deactivate it. Seems this Caddy went from 4 to 8 and some thing malfunctioned and ate up the engine as that thing helped time the transition according the service adviser.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a6...ive-v8-recall/

My early 2000s 6.0L may have slight piston slap, but that LQ4 is a real beast of an engine. Years before all that DOD and high tech stuff started to appear. It's been reliable now for around 25 years.

[Ginophiles]

Originally Posted by sfranklin

Engine was being repaired, not due to the manufac defect mentioned in the linked article, but for issue with the displacement on demand. If I were to get an engine with DOD, I would gladly purchase the kit, install it to deactivate it. Seems this Caddy went from 4 to 8 and some thing malfunctioned and ate up the engine as that thing helped time the transition according the service adviser.

Does GM just not know how to use this technology? My previous 2012 RAM 1500 with the 5.7 had a DOD system as you call it and it seems Mopar has been using it as far back as 2005. My new '24 RAM 2500 with the 6.4 has it as well.

While there are deactivation kits available for Mopar, it doesn't seem to be a big problem. It obviously stays off when towing and only comes on when cruising along. With the price of gas in California, every little bit helps.

EDIT: It appears sffranklin was talking about the DOD system in in the post above and I confused that with the current recall. The current recall does not seem to be about the DOD system, rather a manufacturing defect. My bad.

[Hook85]

Cadillac had a v4-6-8 back in ‘81. Didn’t work very well then either.

[SunchaserV]

Toyota recently recalled a few hundred thousand engines. Hyundai did the same a few years back. Debris was left in the engines during the build and machining process, recalls were not due to electronics. Our granddaughter's Sonata cratered halfway between Tucson and Phoenix due to engine failure for debris.

AS could do a similar admission by recalling a few thousand RVs due to FES. But, it is a different business model with few restrictions on the builder.

[JJTX]

.... when decisions are made on engineering based on irrational federal EPA regulations vs real world needs and reliability this is the result. I know personally three 2024 Chevy V8s that needed rebuilt because of the goofy cylinder shut downs to "" reduce emissions "".

[rideair]

There are folks that would tell you the best cars were made in the late 1980’s-1990’s. Still very repairable by the owners, limit amount of computers/electronics, less plastics, etc.. My newest automobile is a 2006, and plan to keep it that way.

Enjoy,

[Daquenzer]

I just read the recall. Ouch. Thankfully I didn't go with a GM last year. Considered it. I wonder how the "fix" will actually "fix it."

[BGClassic]

Originally Posted by JJTX

.... when decisions are made on engineering based on irrational federal EPA regulations vs real world needs and reliability this is the result. I know personally three 2024 Chevy V8s that needed rebuilt because of the goofy cylinder shut downs to "" reduce emissions "".

I don't entirely believe it's about the emissions. It's the fuel economy. I know that's the way it was advertised in the 80s. I don't know who buys a Cadillac, or a pickup, for the fuel economy. Somehow I think there's a lot of poor engineering, and MBAs in charge of engineering.

[Bill M.]

What I read on the internet is that the recall is for defective parts in the crankshaft system. Crankshaft and rods.

[jcl]

The article says that the dealer will do an inspection, and that the root cause problem relates to manufacturing. It then goes on to say that the dealer will put in heavier engine oil. That doesn’t fit. Lighter oils are spec’d to reduce losses and improve fuel economy. So, with heavier oil the fuel consumption can increase. Doesn’t sound like a manufacturing issue.

The problem goes back to complexity IMO. Fuel efficient engines don’t start out with 6.2 litres of displacement. Variable displacement is a complex solution.

[Daquenzer]

Originally Posted by jcl

The article says that the dealer will do an inspection, and that the root cause problem relates to manufacturing. It then goes on to say that the dealer will put in heavier engine oil. That doesn’t fit. Lighter oils are spec’d to reduce losses and improve fuel economy. So, with heavier oil the fuel consumption can increase. Doesn’t sound like a manufacturing issue.

The problem goes back to complexity IMO. Fuel efficient engines don’t start out with 6.2 litres of displacement. Variable displacement is a complex solution.

Every little bit counts with the regulators. And it creates unnecessary problems. I think everyone is generally for fuel efficiency, but as you say a 6.2 liter engine isn’t about fuel efficiency. It’s really about power. Ironically that same engine in a 3/4 ton isn’t considered part of fuel efficiency regulations. They don’t even post it on the sticker.

[Daquenzer]

Originally Posted by MSDeneen

How can they build and sell 877,000 truck/SUV with a defective engine? This is surely an epic screwup of high-tech engineering and manufacturing.

My own 2019 Yukon/6.2 someone is NOT in the recall, but having just bought this $50 grand TV a few months ago, I'm now nervous about my purchase and wish I had done better at researching reliability.

Technology should be making cars MORE reliable, but in fact, it seems to making them worse.

Sorry for your troubles. I do think cars last longer today. I remember having a car in the 70’s with 100,000 miles on it. Today that is really nothing. Back then it was a problem. The problem today is the cost of fixing. Today electronic fuel pump is $800 or more. I remember replacing a fuel pump in the 70’s. It cost $40. What technology is doing is making working on your own vehicle an impossibility and the cost of parts and shop fees atrocious.

[Ginophiles]

To be clear, the recall is NOT about the cylinder deactivation system, or DOD as some call it. As I noted above, Mopar has been doing it, fairly successfully, since the mid '00s.This recall, like the Toyota (some consider the Holy Grail of reliable engines) recall is about manufacturing defects. Particularly for GM, in the lower end of the engine affecting the crank shaft and connecting rods.

FWIW, a number of YouTubers are saying it appears an inspection will be made and if a particular code is present, indicating the crank and cam shafts are out of sync, an entire new engine may be needed.

Should the engine be deemed OK, one gets a free oil change. Again, according to some YouTubers, backed up by the actual recall language, a different weight oil will be used going forward. Possibly to prevent further damage due to the manufacturing defect? Unclear.

Going forward the DOD system may be an issue if it is calibrated to 1 oil weight and that weight is changed. This is due to the oil pressure in the hydraulic valve lifters being used in the DOD system to deactivate valves. So yeah, the recall fixes could potentially compromise the DOD system in the future.

Modern vehicles are complex, no way around it. As jcl and I were discussing in another thread, everything is a compromise. Engines from the late '80s may be simpler, but a late '80s Corvette has less horsepower and worse fuel milage than most modern family sedans.

An '89 'Vette made 245HP from a 5.7 (350) V8 with a 15/23 MPG rating.
https://corvettestory.com/specs/1989...cs-options.php

A 2024 Chrysler Pacifica Minivan is rated at 287HP from a 3.6 V6 with a 19/28 MPG rating.
https://www.edmunds.com/chrysler/pac...6bab9158096cc6

The late '80s aren't coming back.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by Ginophiles

To be clear, the recall is NOT about the cylinder deactivation system, or DOD as some call it. As I noted above, Mopar has been doing it, fairly successfully, since the mid '00s.This recall, like the Toyota (some consider the Holy Grail of reliable engines) recall is about manufacturing defects. Particularly for GM, in the lower end of the engine affecting the crank shaft and connecting rods.

Well, the recall is about the relative synchronization of the crankshaft and camshaft. The P0016 code that they are checking for has numerous potential causes per GM, and those causes include the variable valve timing system, and the hydraulic actuators for the VVT. They don't say cylinder deactivation, and I was (wrongly) lumping all of the related systems together without listing them individually.

The reason I did that is that the oil pump used to supply oil to bearings (which is what many assumed when they heard this was a crank/camshaft issue). Now, the oil also activates the cylinder deactivation system. And it operates the variable valve timing system.

All those teams will have a spec for what they need for engine oil. They likely have competing requirements. And the team that wants a certain oil for bearing life, or fuel efficiency, has to work with the team that wants a certain oil for their control system, where cylinder deactivation or VVT. I suspect one of those teams' requirements carried the day with the shift to a heavier oil.

My point was that the issue is complexity.

[sfranklin]

For what it's worth, I was not meaning to suggest the issues were related, just that the Caddy I described above was not an isolated incident and if the issues were related or not, the service rep told me they've had dozens of the 6.2s in w/ engine issues. Some were in for engine replacement, some were fixable. The one that I saw was completely torn down and was being repaired and the only reason I know was because I said, that's a new Caddy, what gives and I got the full .50 tour.

Again, I have no idea if this was related or not. I will add that a friend had a circa 2007 Suburban that had DOD and that engine started to have issues and codes thrown regularly past about 35k miles. I don't recall the actual codes, but I recall doing a bit or research on them and many roads led back to being DOD caused, from there I stumbled upon many folks who had similar issues and most had traced it back to DOD (displacement on demand).

As has been said, folks who buy trucks and SUVs with 5.3, 6.0, 6.2, 6.6 and 8.1 engines are not buying these for fuel economy, so my guess is it's a compliance thing trying to get the CAFE averages up. How well it is able to increase? I have no idea, but I can't see it adding enough to make much of a difference as the chassis these are mated to are typically 5-6k lbs.

As for the actual recall, it really couldn't have come at a worse time with parts costs going up. Clearly with automakers updating their long term profitability forecasting, at least in GM's case, they are going to feel this one. That recall is pretty significant and the fix takes days of work be it repair or replacement. Though GM doesn't pay the same hourly rates consumers do, my guess is that it will still have significant earnings impact. I myself am no mechanic, but also not a fan of the viscosity they would be using. If it were my vehicle getting repaired moving to that viscosity rather than an engine replacement using the normal viscosity for light trucks and SUVs (at least well before all these fancy technologies being added), I might have jumped ship to either a diesel or another brand. Sky isn't falling, but this doesn't give me the warm fuzzies either.

[TxLoser]

I’ve come to the conclusion that anything I buy these days is going to suck a little. We bought an Audi Q5 in 2023. New off the lot. Recall came a week or two later for push rod bearings. Had it checked and all was good. At 900 miles, the engine ate itself due to this issue. Dealer offered a straight swap for another on the lot, but out of caution and the desire for a fun vehicle I ponied up for the SQ5 with a different engine.

Now with a ‘24 Chevy 3500HD, they’ve got a transmission thing going on. Hasn’t affected me, but some probability it will. GM’s fix…..software that will limit you to 3rd gear if it thinks it’ll be problem in 10k miles. Issue is the valve body cracking. Thanks GM. This issue effects many GM vehicles with the 10 speed trans.

[GettinAway]

My comment wasn’t particularly helpful to the discussion. Deleted. My apologies.

[SunchaserV]

Ford's Godzilla 7.3 was specifically designed for simplicity and long life. It has certainly changed the game in the Super Duty lineup with most of us gear heads appreciating its advantages over any gas engine in the current GM or Ram pickup lines.

[jeffmc306]

Originally Posted by SunchaserV

Ford's Godzilla 7.3 was specifically designed for simplicity and long life. It has certainly changed the game in the Super Duty lineup with most of us gear heads appreciating its advantages over any gas engine in the current GM or Ram pickup lines.

Retired GM mechanic here. All modern engines have their own worts. The Godzilla isn’t without its own. Google Ford Godzilla Engine Problems and you’ll find issues with lifter failure and cylinder scouring among others.

I know there’s similar issues with the RAM 6.4 but so far (knock on Aluminum), it’s been trouble-free. It is a purpose build medium duty truck engine used in their 4500 and 5500 lineup. I pray that it continues to provide the same service until we’re ready to hang it up but understand it could happen.