2022 GM L87 6.2L Engine Teardown

[Shel_B]

It was brought to my attention that the manner in which I posted the video violated BITOG policy. I was given the opportunity to write something "substantial and meaningful" in order to bring the post into compliance, but I just could not think of anything I wanted to say. Sometimes words fail me.

I am not complaining about the BITOG policy. I am just saddened by my inability to be properly expressive.

 

[ctechbob]

I don't think I've ever seen an engine with that much bearing damage not make a viewing window in itself.

 

[Exhaustgases]

I saw that the other day.
I have never liked that supposed now popular line of GM engines, there is so much wrong with them. And it is now proving to be so.
Chevrolet anyway should not have fixed something that was not broke.

 

[Nessism1]

Is this the video? It shows how the crank bearings seized and spin. Supposedly because of poor surface finish on the crank. Thicker oil seems like a band-aid at best. I'd be very concerned if I had one of these vehicles.

And as an aside, I Do Cars is my favorite channel. Eric is funny, and moves the videos along promptly. Seems like a good guy. He's running a business, and will tell you as much during the videos, and that sort of honesty is welcome to me.

 

[Shel_B]

Yes. Thats the video. I agree with your comments about Eric.

 

[OVERKILL]

I saw that the other day.
I have never liked that supposed now popular line of GM engines, there is so much wrong with them. And it is now proving to be so.
Chevrolet anyway should not have fixed something that was not broke.

"Supposed now popular", you realize that these are all derivatives of the LS and later LT (itself an LS derivative) engine family that GM has been manufacturing since the late 1990's right? There's no "supposed(ly)" here, they have been popular for decades and GM puts them in a huge host of vehicles. While I'm no fan of the AFM/DFM systems GM fitted, minus the lifter failures, the engines are pretty bomb proof, there is not "so much wrong with them".

 

[GSCJR]

I Do Cars is my favorite channel. Eric is funny, and moves the videos along promptly. Seems like a good guy. He's running a business, and will tell you as much during the videos, and that sort of honesty is welcome to me.

+ no profanity.

I hate profanity.

 

[Exhaustgases]

"Supposed now popular", you realize that these are all derivatives of the LS and later LT (itself an LS derivative) engine family that GM has been manufacturing since the late 1990's right? There's no "supposed(ly)" here, they have been popular for decades and GM puts them in a huge host of vehicles. While I'm no fan of the AFM/DFM systems GM fitted, minus the lifter failures, the engines are pretty bomb proof, there is not "so much wrong with them".

Yes I know all that. I'm talking about that whole family of LS up. I personally don't like them, I don't like the design. Its a typical cut the corners GM design. And like I said fixing something that didn't need fixing. And making some things much worse.

 

[Snagglefoot]

To protect Bitog you need need to say “ this video is representative of the problems occurring with the GM 6.2 engines and is useful to understand the root cause of the problem. Make it sound like it’s for education purposes and “ Bob’s your Uncle”.

 

[Donald]

I like Dave Auto in Utah YT video. Everytime he has to make a call and tell a guy the bad news I see many $$$$$.

 

[OVERKILL]

Yes I know all that. I'm talking about that whole family of LS up. I personally don't like them, I don't like the design. Its a typical cut the corners GM design. And like I said fixing something that didn't need fixing. And making some things much worse.

OK, so we can agree to discard your "supposed now popular" statement then, correct? Since it's probably the most commonly produced V8 engine family in existence.

What is it specifically that you dislike about the LSx/LTx family engines? Because, objectively, they are vastly superior from an architectural standpoint to the old SBC family, with considerably fewer problems.

I can think of two main issues that exist at present, and only one of them applies broadly:
- AFM/DFM lifter failure (only applies to AFM/DFM equipped engines)
- Oil pickup o-ring hardening/shrinkage (which is a PITA to fix, but usually doesn't cause any lasting issues)

In the past we also had piston slap, which was annoying, but didn't appear to have any real effect on durability.

The current crop of crankshaft issues is anomalous and is in no way representative of the history of the engine family over the last almost 30 years.

Also, it's highly unlikely that the old SBC would have continued to pass emissions standards, so it did in fact "need fixing".

What things got "much worse"? The rear-mounted distributor being replaced by COP was a huge improvement (not even mentioning the God awful optispark distributors...). The abandonment of the siamesed intake and exhaust ports, which were a challenge for high performance applications was also a blessing.

I remember an episode of I think it was Hot Rod TV where they went to a scrapyard, grabbed a 5.3L out of a van, put a pair of hairdryers on it and made like 900HP without touching the longblock. There was not a chance in hades you were doing that with an SBC.

 

[CarlB]

OK, so we can agree to discard your "supposed now popular" statement then, correct? Since it's probably the most commonly produced V8 engine family in existence.

What is it specifically that you dislike about the LSx/LTx family engines? Because, objectively, they are vastly superior from an architectural standpoint to the old SBC family, with considerably fewer problems.

I can think of two main issues that exist at present, and only one of them applies broadly:
- AFM/DFM lifter failure (only applies to AFM/DFM equipped engines)
- Oil pickup o-ring hardening/shrinkage (which is a PITA to fix, but usually doesn't cause any lasting issues)

In the past we also had piston slap, which was annoying, but didn't appear to have any real effect on durability.

The current crop of crankshaft issues is anomalous and is in no way representative of the history of the engine family over the last almost 30 years.

Also, it's highly unlikely that the old SBC would have continued to pass emissions standards, so it did in fact "need fixing".

What things got "much worse"? The rear-mounted distributor being replaced by COP was a huge improvement (not even mentioning the God awful optispark distributors...). The abandonment of the siamesed intake and exhaust ports, which were a challenge for high performance applications was also a blessing.

I remember an episode of I think it was Hot Rod TV where they went to a scrapyard, grabbed a 5.3L out of a van, put a pair of hairdryers on it and made like 900HP without touching the longblock. There was not a chance in hades you were doing that with an SBC.

And the L8T resolves AFM/DOD and stop-start issues entirely by omission.

 

[Exhaustgases]

What is it specifically that you dislike about the LSx/LTx family engines? Because, objectively, they are vastly superior from an architectural standpoint to the old SBC family, with considerably fewer problems.

I can think of two main issues that exist at present, and only one of them applies broadly:
- AFM/DFM lifter failure (only applies to AFM/DFM equipped engines)
- Oil pickup o-ring hardening/shrinkage (which is a PITA to fix, but usually doesn't cause any lasting issues)

In the past we also had piston slap, which was annoying, but didn't appear to have any real effect on durability.

The current crop of crankshaft issues is anomalous and is in no way representative of the history of the engine family over the last almost 30 years.

Also, it's highly unlikely that the old SBC would have continued to pass emissions standards, so it did in fact "need fixing".

What things got "much worse"? The rear-mounted distributor being replaced by COP was a huge improvement (not even mentioning the God awful optispark distributors...). The abandonment of the siamesed intake and exhaust ports, which were a challenge for high performance applications was also a blessing.

I remember an episode of I think it was Hot Rod TV where they went to a scrapyard, grabbed a 5.3L out of a van, put a pair of hairdryers on it and made like 900HP without touching the longblock. There was not a chance in hades you were doing that with an SBC.

EPA and SBC, the most important of those 2 is now getting the improvement needed.

There is no need for any sort of HIGH PERFORMANCE improvements for any normal street engine that is meant for normal transportation.

If you can't see the major problems it does no good for me to say a thing, its like high school and the ford versus chevy or what ever your or his favorite was, no one see's an issue with their kids so to say.

And COP is a good thing? Yeah for more cost it is.

 

[Silverado12]

Just speculation, but there are so many cheap foreign parts in today's cars that this was bound to happen. These jobs take a lot of skill. The USA/Canadian content has gone way down in the last 15 years.

 

[OVERKILL]

EPA and SBC, the most important of those 2 is now getting the improvement needed.

There is no need for any sort of HIGH PERFORMANCE improvements for any normal street engine that is meant for normal transportation.

If you can't see the major problems it does no good for me to say a thing, its like high school and the ford versus chevy or what ever your or his favorite was, no one see's an issue with their kids so to say.

And COP is a good thing? Yeah for more cost it is.

So basically you’ve got nothing and you are trying sell it as not being worth your time.

The obvious takeaway is that it’s not within your ability to make your case in a manner that constitutes a comprehensive and convincing argument, which is why everything has been vague allusions to issues, with none actually mentioned and statements of complete nonsense like “supposed now popular” when referring to what is probably the most mass produced family of V8 engines in history.

 

[Exhaustgases]

I

So basically you’ve got nothing and you are trying sell it as not being worth your time.

The obvious takeaway is that it’s not within your ability to make your case in a manner that constitutes a comprehensive and convincing argument, which is why everything has been vague allusions to issues, with none actually mentioned and statements of complete nonsense like “supposed now popular” when referring to what is probably the most mass produced family of V8 engines in history.

If you think so fine.
My reasons are I get no recognition nor anything else giving away things (info) on sites like these.

The supposed now popular, is my way of wording I guess. Some like them and some don't.

Just be happy I call it a BRAKE pedal and not a BREAK pedal. Go pick at those ones not me.

 

[OVERKILL]

If you think so fine.
My reasons are I get no recognition nor anything else giving away things (info) on sites like these.

The supposed now popular, is my way of wording I guess. Some like them and some don't.

Just be happy I call it a BRAKE pedal and not a BREAK pedal. Go pick at those ones not me.

You aren't "giving away" anything, you've made a claim, and now refuse to provide anything to back it up. Saying that by providing some evidence or supporting those statements is akin to divulging grandma's award winning chili recipe is absurd.

I'm not "picking at you", I'm simply asking you to substantiate your claim that the LSx family is inferior to the Gen1/2 SBC engines. If you had simply said you preferred working on a Quadrajet and points or HEI, I'd have been fine with that, because it's a matter of preference, but you stated there was "so much wrong" with the LSx engine family, implying an extensive list of issues that exist beyond the ones I mentioned.

Why is it that the guy that's defending the LSx (who is NOT a Chevy guy, let's just make that clear), is the only one who has provided examples of some well known issues with it, while the guy that claims that issues are myriad is mum? Does this not strike you as entirely backward?

 

[nthach]

What is it specifically that you dislike about the LSx/LTx family engines? Because, objectively, they are vastly superior from an architectural standpoint to the old SBC family, with considerably fewer problems.

I

im not even a GM guy, but the LSx/“new” LTx(I added that since there as a Gen II-based LT1) is probably one of GM’s better engines. Proven, mostly durable(else UPS and other major fleets wouldn’t be specifying them to replace diesel), easy to get big power out of. I feel the current L87 debacle is trying to eke out more emissions reduction and MPG out of it - we’ve hit the law of diminishing returns with ICE when it comes to MPG/CAFE and emissions. And of course, GM isn’t a stranger to cost-cutting.

 

[OVERKILL]

im not even a GM guy, but the LSx/“new” LTx(I added that since there as a Gen II-based LT1) is probably one of GM’s better engines. Proven, mostly durable(else UPS and other major fleets wouldn’t be specifying them to replace diesel), easy to get big power out of. I feel the current L87 debacle is trying to eke out more emissions reduction and MPG out of it - we’ve hit the law of diminishing returns with ICE when it comes to MPG/CAFE and emissions. And of course, GM isn’t a stranger to cost-cutting.

Yep. The LS1 picked up about 40-50HP over the venerable LT1 "tree-fiddy" it replaced, and was able to deliver better fuel economy doing it, while providing massively more headroom for major increases from things like bolt-ons or a cam swap. The cathedral port heads were better than any GM small block head that came before them, as designers were freed from the constraints of siamesed ports and 1950's engine architecture.

The LSx engines also featured massively stronger bottom-ends, which has driven their surge in popularity, replacing the SBC in hotrods and budget performance builds. I mentioned the twin turbo junkyard 5.3L in an earlier post, there wasn't a chance in Hades you were getting anywhere near that level of performance from an SBC.

I don't take this current issue as an issue with the engine, it's clearly a manufacturing issue. AFM/DFM, which has been a big PITA for folks, that's something that's absolutely driven by emissions and fuel economy, but that's also not a problem with the engine architecture, which is objectively, very good.

 

[pantygnome]

Yep. The LS1 picked up about 40-50HP over the venerable LT1 "tree-fiddy" it replaced, and was able to deliver better fuel economy doing it, while providing massively more headroom for major increases from things like bolt-ons or a cam swap. The cathedral port heads were better than any GM small block head that came before them, as designers were freed from the constraints of siamesed ports and 1950's engine architecture.

The LSx engines also featured massively stronger bottom-ends, which has driven their surge in popularity, replacing the SBC in hotrods and budget performance builds. I mentioned the twin turbo junkyard 5.3L in an earlier post, there wasn't a chance in Hades you were getting anywhere near that level of performance from an SBC.

I don't take this current issue as an issue with the engine, it's clearly a manufacturing issue. AFM/DFM, which has been a big PITA for folks, that's something that's absolutely driven by emissions and fuel economy, but that's also not a problem with the engine architecture, which is objectively, very good.

I was able to get 27mpg out of my dad's 2016 Corvette with the 7 speed manual. Absolutely nutty for a 465HP V8, and the **** thing is still using pushrods and a single cam.