A Wisconsin judge has dismissed a class action lawsuit filed against General Motors over claims that its 5.3L LC9 V8 engine consumes excessive amounts of oil and experiences other problems that can eventually lead to total engine failure.
5.3L LC9 V8 engine
Plaintiffs in this class action suit, which is one in a number of separate lawsuits filed against GM over oil consumption problems in certain versions of its 5.3L V8, claimed their vehicles consume too much oil, causing the engine to knock and eventually fail. This problem can allegedly be traced back to the piston rings, which can wear prematurely and fail to keep oil in the crankcase. The plaintiffs also say GM breached its warranty conditions, although they never sought warranty repairs for their vehicles, and knowingly sold vehicles with defective engines. The lawsuit involved three separate plaintiffs, one of which owns a 2012 Chevy Avalanche and two others that owned 2011 GMC Sierras.
The judge presiding over the case, Judge Lynn Adelman, dismissed the case this week, as first reported by Car Complaints. In his ruling, Adelman said the plaintiffs never provided GM with notice that it had allegedly broken its warranty conditions, which is required by Wisconsin law in order to sue a company for breach of implied warranty. Plaintiffs also never approached GM about remedying the issue during the vehicle’s warranty period.
“The purpose of giving such notice is to eliminate an element of unfair surprise where a seller has not been informed that a situation is troublesome and, therefore, cannot take steps to correct it but only later has a lawsuit filed against him,” Adelman said in the ruling.
Additionally, GM successfully argued that its express warranty only applies to defects in materials and workmanship. The oil consumption issue in the 5.3L LC9 V8 engines, which was been widely documented, is related to a design defect, so it’s not covered by warranty.
Last year, a judge in Ohio tossed out a similar lawsuit filed against GM over oil consumption problems in its 5.3L V8 engines. Similarly, that suit was thrown out in part because GM’s warranty does not cover design defects like the one that affects these engines.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more General Motors legal news and around-the-clock General Motors news coverage.
Comments
I guess you could call any problem a ”design defect” if you feel like it.
You failed to comprehend the entire issue here. THEY NEVER EVEN ASKED GM TO FIX IT. “Further, no plaintiff brought his vehicle to a GM dealer for obtaining warranty service and none asked to have the oil consumption defect fixed.” All they had to do was take their vehicle to a GM dealer, ask for an oil consumption test, and have GM fix the issue under warranty. These people are as stupid as the person with an Equinox that sued after they too refused to do an oil consumption test and instead proceeded to just sue GM.
True story: I took my 2010 Sierra in for an oil consumption test because it was burning a lot of oil. They told me the rear main seal was bad, so they couldn’t do the oil consumption test until it was replaced. It was a warranty fix, but I was extremely hesitant to have them pull the trans to replace the rear main. Things never go back together correctly, and I had no visible oil leak from under the vehicle. . . . no oil stains where I parked and no residue on the bottom of the pan/trans cover. I got the truck back from the rear main replacement. I parked in my garage. Next morning, my garage floor was covered in trans fluid. I had them tow the truck back and refused to take it back. Fortunately, they gave me more than market on a trade-in.
I’m confused how a ‘design defect” can have hundreds of vehicles with the oil consumption issues, and somehow have millions of them running for 1/2 million miles without any issues at all.
You said it. I have one of these engines. Just had it’s first tuneup at 190k ( bought used in college, I doupt it’s owner did anything but change the oil) have had it for 30K miles, no issues at all. Crappy owners have crappy motors
Atleast these trucks cheap crappy interiors were better than the competition, now if the current gen would just go back it would be better.
I guess it’s GM fault for not checking your oil periodically.
I had an Avalanche with that engine and it used about half a quart every 500 miles. Just added oil occasionally. I have parents and extended family with those same engines with well over 100k miles and they have never had any issues.
What amazes me is that popular public opinion holds that Toyota is the absolute best when it comes to quality, yet they say it’s “normal” for their vehicles to burn up to a quart every 1,200 miles. They will not warranty an engine that’s burning 4 quarts of oil between the 5,000 mile oil change intervals specified by Toyota. The people that sued GM in this story didn’t even take their vehicle to the dealer to have an oil consumption test performed. Had they done that as they were supposed to, their engine would have been repaired under warranty. “Further, no plaintiff brought his vehicle to a GM dealer for obtaining warranty service and none asked to have the oil consumption defect fixed.”
Thru out the years I have owned all of the different GM models SUV like the 01 TAHOE, 02 YUKON XL, 05 SUBURBAN, and now I currently own 09 SUBURBAN LTZ which has the 5.3 V8 engine an I must say from my experience mine doesn’t consume a lot of oil.
I guess I’m lucky.
It’s a roll of dice with GM if you’re lucky you have no problems, but they know the Active Fuel Management system on the 5.3 made an otherwise fine engine garbage. Good luck with warranty coverage on any GM product.
Amazing. I know literally dozens of people with GM trucks with AFM 5.3’s and not one 2014+ truck has had a lifter failure. One is a 2015 with over 200k miles on it, AFM always enabled. They change their oil every 5000 miles. It’s no rocket science.
I have owned five trucks with 5.3L Motors and never had a lick of trouble. I have one currently in my 2019 GMC Sierra Denali. She drives like a cloud.
How can a design flaw or defect not be considered workmanship. Ford has mechanical engineering issues as well. Looks like ford can make the same claim. It’s bad when you buy an expensive vehicle and flip a coin as to the warranty should cover the problem or not.
My friend has a 2013 GMC Sierra, he starts the vehicle and drives a cold engine real fast to get to work. I used to race cars and was also a helicopter mechanic. This causes a lot of gas on cold pistons in the engine , to prematurely wear out the rings, causing oil burn. Another thing will cause this problem, letting the engine run “Hot”.
Every brand is going to have those same people doing that same behavior and other cars do not have this same issue? Subaru and Toyota have stepped up and fixed their engineering flaws with piston rings, why can’t GM?
HAHAHA oh Toyota stepped up? They changed their warranty to say that it’s “normal” for Toyota engines to burn up to 1 quart every 1200 miles. They literally say that if your Toyota drinks 4 quarts between 5,000 mile oil changes, that’s a normal characteristic of your Toyota. Even GM says that engines that burn more than 1 quart every 2,000 miles will be repaired under warranty. The key thing is that you need to take your vehicle to a dealer and have an oil consumption test performed. That’s something that none of the plaintiffs every even bothered to do. Instead they decided to sue.
I had a 2007 Sub LTZ with the 5.3. It burned so much oil I took it to the dealer, played the game back and forth for a few months and they finally put new pistons, rings and rods in it on their dime. The engine finally failed at 200k — we loved the car but I’ll never buy a 5.3 again. I’ve ordered a new 2021 Sub with Duramax for the wife.
These cars are going on ten years old and 3 platform design changes. Why is it a warranty issue beyond 36,000 miles if the owner didn’t document the problem during the warranty period?
A Chevy owner friend of mine told me thirty years ago NEVER ASK A CHEVY GUY ABOUT PROBLEMS WITH A GM PRODUCT. Well the facts remain that engine has been known to have this problem. But it is amazing that NOT all 5.3 like Fords 5.0 have this problem. So calm down fellows.
This should create more buyers in gm’s future. IN CHINA
GM is garbage!!!
I have a2013 5.3 Avalanche, has 150 000
Miles on it never uses a drop of oil, between changes! And I run the living
Hell out of it! Not one problem with it,
So far.
It’s got me wondering if their is anything to the “break in period” for these motors – you know, the old 500 mile thing…I saw a special on how certain companies pre-break-in the motor before sending it off the line. I bought my 07 Sub with 500 miles on it (as a new car — I know, I’m stupid…) but the wife wanted those exact set of options…I think the dealer’s kid beat the crap out of the car for 500 miles, twisted the rings, and sold it to me:) Oh well, live and learn. I really don’t think it’s a bad engine but I still have an avoidance to the motor now…
I have a 2012 Silverado and it burns oil. The design defect only affects certain years since the rings don’t have an oil return galley, port or other system in place just like the Trailblazer SS 6.0 engines don’t have enough sump for oil pick up in heavy acceleration. They knew about it as they also acknowledge that their is a fix for both design flaws but it entails removing tje engines, tearing them apart, fixing their craptastic b.s. and reinstall the engine
That’s why I had the 4 cylinder mode shut off. No problems now
I shut off the 4 cylinder mode in my 2017 every winter or it won’t run in cold weather. A baffle in the exhaust freezes up. Some have removed the baffle. GM changed the design and eliminated the baffle the following year!
I’ve read all these comments about oil burn.
But no one has mentioned that they followed any kind of New Engine Break in Periods.
Check Oil OFTEN and Top Off Often.
I’ve seen bad rings on the #8 on more than one 5.3. Considering it’s the rear cylinder/s I’d say it’s more than likely an overheating cylinder issue from abuse. My guess is changing the oil on time and using synthetic would remedy the issue.
GM’S DAYS ARE NUMBERED……………
Had a 2009 GMC with 5.3 that when I checked oil the first time there was nothing showing on dipstick. It went through over 2litres of oil between oil changes at every 5000 klms. It took till warranty was just about over before GM did an oil consumption test and rebuilt the motor. They kept telling me it wasn’t broken in yet. The piston rings apparently were not staggered and it left a line on the cylinder walls where the ring gap was. The motor was gummed up causing really poor fuel milage. I had 31 issues with this truck over 5 years as something was always broken.
I finally repaired it for the last time when I got rid of it and bought a tundra which actually gets better fuel milage than my junk GMC did. I owned GMs my entire life and after the 2009 I will never own another as long as I live and suggest everyone get rid of their junk GMs. The Toyota is so much better in every way it hard to express. Over 15000 klms the synthetic oil change on the tundra with filter is 79 dollars. In same period the GMC cost was 479.00 dollars for oil and filters.
No kidding.
Piston rings don’t stay the way they are assembled, they move around
Not true. This rings had there gaps lined up.
It’s highly unlikely it was assembled that way.
I agree owner awareness is important. Every manufacturer has skeletons in their closets, Ford has had a problem for years of their automatics disengaging from “Park”, yet they have avoided recalls and prosecution. A dear friend died when his Ford pickup truck rolled over him in his driveway.
So, when you have an oil sensor and an oil gauge that is displaying “Calculated Values” ???
It’s smoke and mirrors.
GM needs to Fess Up… and OWN it.
Maybe it’s time for these GM Owners and Consumers to Short Sell GM on the NYSE ???
So, when you have an oil sensor and an oil gauge that is displaying “Calculated Values” ???
It’s smoke and mirrors.
GM needs to Fess Up… and OWN it.
Maybe it’s time for these GM Owners and Consumers to Short Sell GM on the NYSE ???
ALL news engines are designed to fail.
And they all use weak piston rings that cause oil burning as well as GDI which causes fuel dilution of a already too thin oil which in turn causes excess wear of cam lobes, followers, and bearings.
Yes they ALL have “design defects”
Because they are designed to be tree hugger friendly instead of reliable.
Soft Chineses steel cranks, cams, and bearings combined with tree hugger thin oil and extremely high engine temperatures is a recipe for disaster.
And today’s beta males have zero knowledge of how a engine works or how motor oil works so like women they simply follow the advise of other beta males and the clueless on forums.
It doesn’t matter how you break in these motors, it has no effect on this particular issue with oil consumption. I have had GMC 5.3’s that did not, and others that did, in the same model and year, vehicles purchased used. If you got the engine with the flaw, you are unfortunate, they go through a lot of oil. Nobody checks there oil once a week, they rely on the gages to warn them, and you don’t always have your eye on those gages, or with the oil change interval sticker. Burning 4 or 5 quarts of oil between oil changes without smoke coming out of the exhaust is very unusual, and most mechanics don’t understand it. Just because they keep running well, doesn’t mean it is not a problem. With all of the concern about clean air, dumping 4 quarts of oil into the atmosphere every 5,000 miles is a lot of pollution. I am wondering how these engines are able to pass emission testing, other than that the problem may be more related to higher RPM, which may not be part of the testing process. This is happening with a lot of GM vehicles, and GM is getting away with it, by blaming it on a “design flaw”, which, by the way, is a GMC design. In many cases, the 5.3 engine is the only option with certain models, for example Denali, so in effect, GM is taking advantage of their clients that are purchasing their top of the line or higher end vehicle. This is the type of attitude that I would expect, if anything, to be directed toward their lower end vehicle. I believe it might be a little more acceptable if you purchased the cheapest vehicle, but not when you are purchasing the more expensive.
My 2012 Silverado 5.3 started to burn oil at around 80,000 km . Always changed oil since new with synthetic oils and regular intervals . Local dealership said it was normal and changed the valve covers , even tho it wasn’t leaking or anywhere else . I said that doesn’t make sense but I guess a cheap warranty claim to shut me up till warranty ended . I complained about the consumption till the warranty was up and the said just keep monitoring it . I kept monitoring it and was using three litres per change . Nothing was ever done
I’m going to jump in this conversation just tell you my story. 2013 Tahoe maintained by dealer. Never went past 4500 miles between oil changes. All oil changes, tire rotations, brakes replaced and such. Typical wear and tear parts. Oil pressure problems 3 times. Oil consumption test once. Replace filter, clean on oil pressure sensor. Main bearing is going at 82k. Motor is junk. To hear you people tell me its my fault that my motor ruined is bs. These problems are a fact not fiction. How can 1 state approve a lawsuit and 1 can’t.