GM L87 Engine Lawsuit: GM Seeks Dismissal Over 6.2L V8 Failures
General Motors is asking a federal court to dismiss a class action lawsuit involving its 6.2-liter V8 EcoTec3 L87 engines. The lawsuit concerns several popular GM trucks and SUVs, including the Chevrolet Silverado 1500, Chevrolet Tahoe, Chevrolet Suburban, GMC Sierra 1500, GMC Yukon, GMC Yukon XL, Cadillac Escalade, and Cadillac Escalade ESV.
The plaintiffs allege that these L87 engines can suffer from serious internal engine problems involving the crankshaft, bearings, connecting rods, and engine lubrication. According to the lawsuit, the alleged defect can lead to excessive friction, heat, spun bearings, broken connecting rods, loss of propulsion, and complete engine failure.
GM denies that the case should move forward. In its motion to dismiss, GM argues that the vehicles were already recalled, that the recall provides free repairs, and that the alleged engine problems were caused by supplier manufacturing or quality issues rather than a uniform design defect.
For owners, the bigger issue is practical: if a truck or SUV has repeated engine problems, suffers a major engine failure, needs an engine replacement, or spends significant time at the dealership, the recall does not necessarily end the story.
What’s the Problem?
The lawsuit focuses on GM vehicles equipped with the 6.2-liter V8 EcoTec3 L87 engine. The affected vehicles identified in the lawsuit include:
2019–2024 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
2021–2024 Chevrolet Tahoe
2021–2024 Chevrolet Suburban
2019–2024 GMC Sierra 1500
2021–2024 GMC Yukon
2021–2024 GMC Yukon XL
2021–2024 Cadillac Escalade
2021–2024 Cadillac Escalade ESV
The plaintiffs allege that the L87 engine has a defect that causes insufficient lubrication between the crankshaft and bearings. When that happens, internal engine components may experience increased friction and heat. That wear can allegedly lead to spun bearings, broken connecting rods, sudden loss of power, and catastrophic engine failure.
These are not minor complaints. Engine failure can leave a driver stranded, create safety concerns, and substantially reduce the value of a truck or SUV. For consumers who purchased these vehicles expecting durability, towing ability, and long-term reliability, repeated engine problems can be extremely frustrating.
Allegations
The class action alleges that GM sold vehicles with L87 engines that were prone to premature internal failure. The lawsuit claims the alleged defect may cause the engine bearings to fail, which can then damage the connecting rods and other internal components.
The plaintiffs further allege that some drivers may experience little or no warning before a serious failure occurs. In other cases, owners may notice knocking, hesitation, warning lights, abnormal engine noise, or other symptoms before the engine fails.
GM’s position is different. GM argues that the plaintiffs have not properly alleged a design defect. According to GM, the problem was connected to supplier-related manufacturing and quality issues involving specific engine components. GM also argues that only a small percentage of engines were defective, which GM says undermines the plaintiffs’ claim that the L87 engine has a uniform design defect.
GM is also relying heavily on the recall. It argues that because the vehicles were recalled and because repairs are available, the lawsuit should be dismissed.
That may be GM’s litigation position, but it does not mean every consumer problem is resolved. A recall may provide a repair procedure. It does not automatically compensate an owner for repeated repair attempts, extended downtime, loss of confidence, diminished value, or a vehicle that continues to have problems.
Recall/TSB
GM previously issued a recall involving certain L87-equipped vehicles. Under the recall, dealers inspect affected vehicles and determine whether the engine requires replacement or other repair measures.
For vehicles that fail the inspection, GM has said the engine may be replaced. For vehicles that pass inspection, the recall procedure may involve switching to a higher-viscosity oil, replacing the oil filter, and installing a new oil fill cap. GM also provided an extended engine warranty of 10 years or 150,000 miles.
GM is now using that recall as part of its defense. It argues that the recall addresses the problem and that owners received warranty protection.
However, consumers should be careful not to assume that a recall inspection means the vehicle is problem-free. If symptoms continue after the recall, or if the vehicle later suffers an engine failure, owners should continue documenting every repair visit.
A recall repair can be important evidence in a lemon law claim. So can a failed inspection, an engine replacement, a long parts delay, or a repeat complaint after the recall was supposedly completed.
Symptoms
Owners of GM vehicles with the 6.2L L87 engine should watch for symptoms that may indicate an engine problem, including:
Engine knocking
Ticking or banging noises
Check engine light
Low oil pressure warnings
Hesitation
Loss of power
Rough running
Metal in the oil
Engine seizure
Engine replacement
Vehicle stalling or loss of propulsion
Even if the dealership says the vehicle is operating normally, the complaint should be written clearly on the repair order. A vague repair order can hurt the consumer later. The repair order should identify the actual symptom, when it occurs, and whether the concern relates to the engine, oil, knocking, hesitation, or loss of power.
How to Proceed
If you own or lease a GM vehicle with a 6.2L L87 engine, you should:
Check whether your vehicle is included in the GM L87 engine recall.
Save every repair order, inspection record, recall document, and warranty document.
Ask the dealership to write your exact complaint on the repair order.
Keep track of how many days the vehicle is at the dealership.
Document symptoms with photos, videos, and written notes when safe to do so.
Save towing, rental car, rideshare, and out-of-pocket expense records.
Do not rely on verbal statements from the dealership.
If the engine was replaced, request paperwork showing what was replaced and why.
If the vehicle continues to have problems after the recall, speak with a lemon law attorney before trading it in.
Under California’s lemon law, a vehicle may qualify for relief if the manufacturer or its authorized repair facilities cannot repair a warranty-covered defect within a reasonable number of attempts. A serious engine defect can substantially impair the vehicle’s use, value, or safety.
This can include repeated engine complaints, a major engine failure, extended downtime, a failed recall repair, or an engine replacement that does not restore confidence in the vehicle.
Call Valero Law
GM’s motion to dismiss is an important development in the class action lawsuit, but it does not decide every individual owner’s rights.
Class actions and individual lemon law claims are different. Even if GM argues that the recall is enough, California consumers may still have claims if their own vehicle has repeated engine problems, long repair delays, engine replacement, or continuing symptoms after recall work.
Valero Law, APC helps California consumers with lemon law claims involving defective trucks, SUVs, and other vehicles. If your Chevrolet Silverado, Chevrolet Tahoe, Chevrolet Suburban, GMC Sierra, GMC Yukon, Cadillac Escalade, or related GM vehicle has experienced L87 engine problems, you may be entitled to relief.
Contact Valero Law, APC for a free case review.