NHTSA Opens Investigation Regarding GM 6.2L V8 Engine Failures

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) opened an investigation on Thursday into GM for engine failure in some full-size trucks and SUVs. The investigation applies to the 6.2L V8 L87 and involves trucks and SUVs from Chevy, GMC, and Cadillac equipped with this engine from the 2019-2024 model years, which the NHTSA estimates comprise 877,710 vehicles.

The investigation stems from 39 complaints reported to the NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI). “The complainants report a bearing failure that may result in either engine seizure or breaching of the engine block by the connecting rod,” the NHTSA report says. “The complainants report that there is no detectability prior to the failure.”

This defect poses a safety risk, prompting the NHTSA to open this investigation. No crashes, fires, injuries, or fatalities have been reported in connection with the engine failures.

The following General Motors models are potentially affected by the investigation:

The NHTSA’s Preliminary Evaluation (PE) is in the early stages of determining the scope and severity of the problem. Right now, owners need only continue regular maintenance of their trucks and SUVs.

The 6.2L V8 L87 was introduced in the 2019 Chevy Silverado 1500 and 2019 GMC Sierra 1500 when the T1 generation of these trucks came out. GM’s T1-based SUVs inherited it with their 2021 redesigns. Across all applications, this V8 generates 420 horsepower and 460 pound-feet of torque.

Featuring an Overhead Valve (OHV), or “push-rod” design in a “V” configuration, the L87 is part of GM’s Gen V Small Block engine architecture, which is known in trucks and SUVs as EcoTec3. It is part of the second-generation EcoTec3 engine family and is the direct successor to the L86 engine.

George is an automotive journalist with soft spots for classic GM muscle cars, Corvettes, and Geo.

George Barta

George is an automotive journalist with soft spots for classic GM muscle cars, Corvettes, and Geo.

View Comments

  • .04% failure rate really isn't that terrible, but if it's a design defect it needs to be fixed because the the other 99% might ticking time bombs

    • Lower engine failures in low mileage engines are not the norm. Toyota just showed how machining debris causes early failure across a huge number of engines. As part of this investigation, other sources of bearing contamination should come up. In the upper engine, the AFM lifters are a known weak point no matter what the deniers say. gm will be forced to disclose their guarded data about AFM issues and other issues as well. I wonder how much of that data will make the public domain.

      • Toyota is a MFG or design defect as they recalled every single darn 3.5 turbo.

        0.04% failure rate to be frankly honest, is very good for a spun bearing. NHTSA obviously needs to downsize if this is what they're focusing on.

        • So, you are calling for downsizing of NHTSA because it is investigating a potential safety risk. This is what the agency was created for.
          And the 0.04% percent you are talking about is calculated based on the registered complaints filled with the agency not the real numbers of failures fixed under warranty. These owners were happy to get their engines replaced, so most likely they did not fill a complaint with NHTSA.

      • Known weak point? Probably around the same failure percentage failure as these bearings (less than 1%) which is nowhere near a recall amount or amount of concern that is outside of other brands significant failure rates. There is no naysayers about there, there are those that know the facts and how actually small the failure rate is (LOW single digit percent which many of the times is due to neglect) and those that think it is some widespread large failure rate that is 25-50% of the engines and needs a recall (ie you fall in that category).

        • Downvote and deny all that you want. It's an issue. A quick web search of any search engine will bring up scores of videos and forums discussing it. 39 reports to NHTSA does not mean *ONLY* 39 failures. It means that 39 people or dealers were concerned enough that they filled out a form on NHTSA's website because they saw it as a safety issue on the 6.2 engine. It does not mean that only 39 people have ever been affected by this. If anyone can show actual gm data (or other non-anecdotal source) comparing the failure rates of <100k mile AFM (6.2 and/or 5.3) vs non-AFM engines (both in use and being produced today), I'll change my mind. Otherwise, we are both working off opinions.

          • The actual data is with the mfg. Neither of us know.
            This seems alarming. Hopefully by 2027 they will SET THINGS RIGHT.

            Toyota engines are still blowing up in MY24s....so.

          • Variable oil pumps, cylinder deactivation and countless other things like metered and throttled coolant flow along with stupid 0W oils are recipes for disaster.

      • My mechanics have said that the afm dfm failures that they have dealt with have always come from vehicle with large idling times. Direct injected engines tend to soot up the oil when idling for long periods of time. If they idle a lot and don’t increase the oil change intervals, the oil screen plugs and lifters fail to operate properly which damages them.
        Still could be considered a poor design, but also preventable?
        That would explain why some of them fail early, and others go 500K.

        • Exactly. There are some 2022s and 2023s with these "defective" engines above 100k, some probably above 200k and 300k as hotshots....

        • Municipal vehicles, city owned trucks, police cars etc. Sometimes sit idling for long periods and suffer from poor maintenance.

      • GM also needs to make it clear they had to start use AFM because of stupid EPA mandates. Many people have said getting rid of AFM they saw better MPG, so AFM is only for Emissions and with the Greenies not really caring about how to stop fires this is emission stuff is all a joke.

        Regarding Toyota, its not debris issue. If it was it would only include engines from one plant, not both in US and Japan. Its a design issue. The engine is not built strong enough and itsf flexing causing bearing failure. Now to fair everyone is have bearing issues even Honda. So the question is why, is it the part suppliers doing terrible job and harding the bearings, probably who knows. GM needs their next gen V8's as soon as possible and make them better without AFM

        • That is precisely WHY I will not take the risk of owning an LX600 or a Land Cruiser 300 Twin Turbo (or a Tundra V6 TT) out of warranty.. And when you consider how locals abuse them here in Qatar- the design flaw makes for a terrible disaster.

          200k kms is not much to say about reliability- 400k kms is the real deal. I doubt ANY V6 twin turbo Land Cruiser thrashed in the dunes will be a good long term purchase for expats here...

          The 2025 Patrol seems to be a good proposition, but already suffered leaking coolant...in one example.

    • Agreed. I hope they EITHER issue a recall or someone from inside give assurance that later MY26 or MY27 engines do not suffer the same issue.

    • I just bought a 2020 chevy silverado with this engine in July with 72,000 miles on it. The engine seized in December without warning. This is a big issue to me

  • If one goes to GMTrucks forum you can see that many people are having issues not only with the 6.2L, but also the 5.3L and anything associated with AFM/DFM.

    I was told by 2 mechanics at dealerships to take off AFM on the 2014-2018 trucks right away, and anyone can do it with a handheld tuner. I did it with my 2018 Denali 6.2L and it gets 1-2 mpgs better fuel economy than my older SLT with AFM. I have a Hyoertech Spectrum and it only cost me alittle over $200 from RealTrucks.

    GM has made it a lot harder to turn DFM off the T1 trucks. You have to go through HP tuners to get it taken care of, and it costs 2-3 times more than the older K2 .

    I truly hope GM gets rid of the DFM "junk" and finds a way to make their engines more reliable. Heck my sons 1998 C/K has 260k miles on it right now and runs excellent. Only issue I have with it is a rear main seal leak.

    • It's just as easy and no more expensive, to deactivate the DFM in 2018-2025 GM trucks. Range Technology makes a AFM/DFM disabler for the T1 trucks, and just about every other vehicle with AFM/DFM. It plugs into the OBD II port and sells for $200-$240. My dealer told me about it after my 21 Denali dropped a lifter and wiped out the cam.

      • @gbvette62

        You are correct on the range, but on GM truck forums some people have had issues with them. My point for the K2 trucks is that a handheld tuner can take off AFM and also tune truck for more power, speedo calibration for tires, TQ management, ect.. The T1 trucks are more difficult to do so. Hp tuners seems to be the place to go for that

      • There are much less expensive ( less than half the price ) and just as good or better DFM disabler dongles on Amazon other than RANGE. I've been using one on our 2018 Yukon's 6.2 for a couple of years now. My problem is I also use the OEM OBD port for my Valentine 1 Radar and had to buy an OBD port splitter which is messy. I'm looking into TINTSIERRA's device to do a delete tune on the problem causing AFM junk but his claim of the price is 50% too low.

      • Put one on my C6 Vette to shut that crap off fid not like it actually figured it was not good for the engine could see rpm wobble when cruising did not know Tahoe had it my 2023 with 15k blew a Con Rod bearing 3 weeks ago waiting for engine with no date on backorder

    • They cannot. They are held hostage by the EPA and CARB...

      I would rather take this over a 25k+ Toyota V6 TT engine...

    • Just to clarify Dodge is having the same issues....so the whole industry including ford is having issues. We don't seem to care a about quality anymore or at least the suppliers don't seem too.

  • EPA caused manufacturers to go this route. Dodge, Ford, Honda, Toyota all having issues. Toyota however does seem more like a design flaw. But bearings seem to be issue for everyone

    • It's on the 2.7 turbo. You only see it if you go to the TRIP screen and it's in the bottom right corner. I have 10,000 on my 23 ZR2 and if that system has been activated for more than 2 minutes total, I would be surprised. It's a complete waste of effort.

  • With this being a bearing investigation, what is the difference between the bearings in the 6.2 vs the 5.3? I thought they are basically the same engine.

  • i bought a 2025 silverado zr2 with the 6.2 liter engine. the engine blew the bearing at 3000 km. they tell me its going to be 3 to 6 months for a new engine from the factory. im a 3 time gm buyer and this is rediculous and unacceptable. i should have been given a new truck off the lot. i guess this is how being a loyal customer is treated.

    • The issue is more widespread than a small fraction of production which is the reason the engine is on national back order. That and they’d rather keep new vehicle production going rather than divert those engines for service parts. It’s all about the revenue.

      • Same with Toyota. MY25s blew up as well...

        How much percentage do you think have failed....I mean 6.2s?

        • Unless I see the actual data I won’t guess. Having heard non-stop about this issue for over two years from our Chevy dealer neighbor and even people I barely know who call to see if I have any pull to get them a new engine (me being ex-GM Engineering) it can’t be good. I don’t have the heart to tell them about the fuel pump module issue but that’s another story.

          If this particular issue is systemic to design then they’re all subject to potential failure. However failure patterns are likely dependent on variables like owner usage (duty cycle) and maintenance patterns. Possibly even regionality factors perhaps.

          I’d love to see the gm powertrain failure analysis data. The PT folks in Pontiac, Mi would have all that and it’s been going on long enough that they know exactly what the root cause is. If it was easy or cheap they would have already done a campaign to fix it.

          • Except this issue is NOT cheap.
            Costs are expensive to recall every single one, esp those that are at high mileages....but let us see with the NHTSA one...

            Toyota recalled 2022-23, but the MY24s are still failing.

    • Took 6 months to get a transmission for my F150 that's why I went back to Chevy my 2023 Tahoe with 15k blew a con rod been 3 weeks engine is back ordered with no date pretty discouraging seeing this another fellow said he had his do it twice

  • I own a 2024 1500 High Country Currently waiting for 2nd 6.2 L87 replacement. 1st one seized at 15,000, second seizure at 30,000. Waiting for replacement, I also have a 2023 HC 1500 with 42,000 no problems. I had a 2020 same issue, replaced under warranty, 2018 same issue. We do mostly highway driving, little or no towing.

  • Dealership tech here we've seen dozens of mostly 22' with some 23' 6.2s with seized main bearings low mileage. I'm at a smallish dealership one of our other GM stores in our dealership group has had to replaced 2-3x what we've seen. We've also had customers that the replacement engine fail too but I think we worked thur the problem ones. Word is improperly torqued main bearings most failures have happened at low milage under 10k. But this past month we've had 22' model yr with 50-60k 6.2 seized .

    • So, can you estimate overall numbers?
      Is it 100 percent failure rate?

      If that were the case recall would be issued by now...

      • I think it is more between 3 percent and 5 percent. The NHTSA numbers do not make sense. Probably anywhere from 7000 units to 25k-30k units affected...

    • Wow great to know my 2023 15 k popped 3 weeks ago engine is backordered have they done anything to correct the replacement engines ? Some people say it has happened twice 🙄 😒

  • May be unrelated, but I had to have all the lifters replaced at 29K miles and 2 injectors in my 2019 6.2 1500 - traded it for a 24 Denali with the 3.0 Duramax LZ0 - and getting 30+ MPG on the highway and 22-25 in the city :)

  • Problems with the 6.2 started before the lawsuit years, 2015 Denali that I purchased has 130000 mile and has been rebuilt twice. This truck is the worst vehicle I ever owned in my 50 + years of driving.

1 2 3

Recent Posts