General Motors is walking into its next-generation V8 era with a fresh headache: a vocal slice of its own fan base is convinced the company’s factory-fill oil is too thin to protect big-displacement engines over the long haul. The debate is no longer confined to forum folklore, it is being shaped by real-world failures, warranty drama and a growing body of technical guidance that suggests viscosity is not a trivial tuning knob.
I see a clear collision coming between efficiency-driven corporate strategy and owners who would gladly trade a fraction of a mile per gallon for a thicker oil film inside a 6.2 liter block. The question is whether GM will keep chasing regulatory targets with 0W-20 and 5W-20, or quietly recalibrate toward heavier blends as evidence and customer pressure pile up.
How a 6.2L recall turned into an oil-weight referendum
Among GM loyalists, the turning point in this argument is not a white paper, it is a recall. Owners of 6.2 liter V8 trucks and SUVs watched engines come apart and quickly zeroed in on two culprits: sloppy manufacturing and a lubrication strategy that left too little margin for error. In one widely shared account, a user named Jul described how a 6.2L recall was Caused by sloppy spec adherence at the plant and the use of 20w oil, a combination that left bearings and other internals exposed when tolerances were not perfect, and that experience has become a touchstone in the thicker oil debate among GM fans.
That same discussion, from a commenter posting as granolaraisin, framed the tradeoff in blunt terms, arguing that stepping up from a 20 weight to a thicker grade would cost only a small loss in fuel economy while potentially saving engines from premature wear. For owners who watched GM tear down and replace 6.2L units, the idea that a slightly heavier oil could have added a safety net is compelling, and it is why the recall is now cited as proof that thin oils can destroy engines when everything else is not exactly right, as reflected in the detailed 6.2L recall discussion.
Why GM and other automakers chased thinner oils in the first place
To understand why GM specified 0W-20 and 5W-20 in the first place, I have to start with the regulatory and engineering incentives that pushed the entire industry toward thinner blends. Lower viscosity reduces pumping losses, lets oil move more freely through tight passages and helps engines spin with less drag, which in turn improves fuel economy and emissions performance. That is why modern V8s with tight bearing clearances and advanced variable valve timing systems are calibrated around low-viscosity oils, even if that leaves less cushion when something in the manufacturing chain goes wrong.
There is also a marketing and ownership angle: thinner oils help with cold starts, reduce perceived friction and can support longer drain intervals when the chemistry is right. Automakers like GM have leaned on those benefits to promise lower operating costs and smoother operation, especially in trucks and SUVs that must meet the same fleet standards as compact cars. The problem, as the 6.2L recall saga shows, is that when tolerances drift or oil quality is not ideal, a lubrication strategy optimized for efficiency can look fragile to owners who expect a big V8 to survive abuse.
What actually happens when you use the “wrong” viscosity
The fan argument for thicker oil in GM’s next V8 often sounds simple: more viscosity equals more protection. The reality is more nuanced. Lubrication specialists point out that using the wrong weight can create its own problems, especially when drivers jump several grades thicker than the engineers intended. When People ask What Happens If they Use the Wrong Weight of Oil, the answer is that viscosity affects everything from how quickly oil reaches critical parts at startup to how well it carries heat away from those parts once the engine is hot, and both extremes, too thin or too thick, can be harmful.
Technical guidance on this point is blunt. If oil is too thin for the clearances and temperatures involved, it can shear down, lose its film strength and fail to keep metal surfaces separated, which accelerates wear and can lead to harmful sludge and deposits as the fluid breaks down. If it is too thick, it may not flow quickly enough at low temperatures, can starve tight passages and can also contribute to sludge formation by running hotter and oxidizing faster. That is why experts stress that deviating from the recommended viscosity is not a free upgrade in protection, and why any move by GM toward thicker oil on a future V8 would need to be baked into the engine’s design rather than left to owner improvisation, a point underscored in detailed explanations of what happens if you use the wrong weight.
The real pros and cons of going thicker
GM fans pushing for a heavier factory-fill on the next-gen V8 tend to emphasize the upside: a stronger oil film, better protection under towing loads and more margin at high temperatures. Those benefits are real in the right context. Thicker oils can maintain pressure and film strength when a truck is hauling a trailer up a grade in summer heat, and they are less likely to shear down under sustained high load. For owners who use a Silverado or Sierra as a work tool, that extra cushion can feel like cheap insurance compared with the cost of a major engine repair.
Yet the Cons of Using Thicker Motor Oils are not theoretical either, and they matter for a mass-market engine program. Cold Weather Performance is the most obvious tradeoff, since a Thicker blend can be challenging to pump at low temperatures, which delays lubrication on startup and can actually increase wear in northern climates. Heavier oil also increases drag inside the engine, which can cut fuel economy and blunt throttle response, and in some designs it can interfere with variable valve timing or active fuel management systems that rely on precise hydraulic behavior. That is why any shift toward thicker oil on a new GM V8 would have to be paired with design changes and clear communication, not just a quiet tweak to the owner’s manual, a balance that is spelled out in analyses of the pros and cons of using thicker motor oils.
High-temperature punishment and why viscosity matters more in big V8s
Where GM truck owners have a particularly strong case for thicker oil is in high-temperature, high-load use, the exact environment where a next-gen V8 will spend much of its life. Under heavy towing, desert heat or repeated wide-open-throttle pulls, oil temperatures climb and viscosity naturally drops, which can leave a thin film struggling to keep parts separated. In that regime, the Role of Oil Viscosity in High Temperature Performance becomes critical, because thinner oils break down faster and can lose their ability to maintain a stable protective layer over engine components when they are pushed beyond their design window.
Performance-focused lubrication research notes that as oil thins out at high temperature, it can allow micro-contact between surfaces that should never touch, accelerating wear on bearings, cam lobes and piston skirts. A slightly thicker grade, chosen with those conditions in mind, can maintain a more robust film and resist thermal breakdown, which is why racing and heavy-duty applications often favor higher viscosity despite the efficiency penalty. For GM’s next V8, which will likely power everything from half-ton pickups to full-size SUVs, the challenge is to choose a viscosity that protects under worst-case heat without compromising cold start behavior or emissions, a balancing act that is central to any serious discussion of the impact of oil viscosity on engine performance.
What GM fans are really asking for: more margin, not race-car oil
When I read through GM forums and owner groups, what stands out is that most fans are not demanding exotic race oils or wildly thick blends, they are asking for more margin than a 20 weight provides in a 6.2 liter or larger V8. The argument often centers on moving one step up the ladder, for example from a 0W-20 to a 5W-30, rather than jumping to a 15W-50 that would clearly be out of bounds for a street truck. That kind of modest increase can raise high-temperature viscosity enough to improve film strength while keeping cold-flow characteristics within a reasonable range for daily use.
Owners also point to how GM’s own recommendations sometimes vary by market or duty cycle, with heavier oils suggested in hotter regions or for severe service, as evidence that the factory knows a thicker blend can be appropriate. The 6.2L recall experience, where Jul and others linked failures to Caused manufacturing issues and 20w oil, has only hardened that view. In their eyes, a next-gen V8 that officially supports a slightly thicker grade would acknowledge the reality of towing, off-roading and long-term ownership in a way that the current thin-oil strategy does not.
Lessons from 10W30 vs 10W40 and older high-mileage engines
There is a useful parallel in the long-running debate over 10W30 vs 10W40, especially for high-mileage and older engines that no longer have factory-fresh clearances. Guidance on What Viscosity Grades Mean explains that Every motor oil label tells a story in numbers and letters, with the first number, such as 10W, indicating cold-flow behavior and the second number, such as 30 or 40, describing viscosity at operating temperature. In practice, that means a 10W30 and a 10W40 behave similarly when cold but the 10W40 stays thicker when hot, which can help engines with looser tolerances maintain oil pressure and reduce consumption.
Advice for High Mileage and Older Engines often notes that some designs with tighter tolerances run cleaner on 10W30, while others benefit from 10W40 once wear has opened up clearances. That nuance is exactly what GM fans want to see applied to a modern V8: an acknowledgment that viscosity choice should reflect how an engine is built and used, not just a one-size-fits-all efficiency target. If a next-gen GM V8 is engineered with slightly more robust clearances and oiling capacity, it could be validated for a heavier grade in severe service while still supporting a lighter option where fuel economy is paramount, a strategy that mirrors the practical guidance found in detailed comparisons of 10W30 vs 10W40.
Why simply pouring in thicker oil can backfire
For all the justified frustration around thin oils and recalls, there is a hard limit to what owners can safely fix with a different jug from the parts store. Modern engines are calibrated tightly around a specific viscosity, and jumping several grades thicker without engineering support can cause new problems. One vivid example used in enthusiast discussions imagines a car that requires 0W-20 full synthetic oil, but the owner insists on pouring in 10W-30 instead. In that scenario, the undesired effects grow exponentially as the mismatch widens, from sluggish cold starts to poor flow in tight passages and potential starvation of critical components.
Analyses of these scenarios warn that thicker oil in a design built for thin fluid can lead to increased friction, higher operating temperatures, sludge formation and lower MPGs, all while giving the driver a false sense of security. Variable valve timing systems, cylinder deactivation and turbochargers are particularly sensitive to viscosity, and a heavier oil can slow actuator response or starve bearings that rely on rapid flow. That is why lubrication experts caution against unilateral viscosity changes and why GM, if it decides to move toward thicker oil on a next-gen V8, will need to redesign and recalibrate the engine around that choice rather than leaving owners to experiment, a risk that is spelled out clearly in discussions of the downsides of using thicker oil.
Where GM could realistically bend toward thicker oil next
Looking ahead, the most plausible path for GM is not a wholesale abandonment of thin oils, but a targeted shift in specific applications where the case for more viscosity is strongest. Heavy-duty trims, off-road packages and performance variants of the next-gen V8 are prime candidates for a factory-approved thicker grade, especially if GM can point to real-world data from the 6.2L recall and similar episodes to justify the change. That would let the company preserve its efficiency story on mainstream models while signaling to enthusiasts and work-truck buyers that durability under load is being taken more seriously.
Internally, that kind of move would require GM’s powertrain engineers to revisit bearing clearances, oil pump sizing and cooling strategies so that a heavier oil does not compromise cold-start protection or emissions. Externally, it would mean clearer communication in owner’s manuals and service bulletins about when a thicker grade is appropriate, and under what conditions. Given how sharply the 6.2L recall and the Caused combination of plant issues and 20w oil have focused owner attention, it is hard to imagine GM ignoring the viscosity question as it finalizes its next V8. The company may not say it out loud, but the pressure from its own fans is already nudging it toward a thicker, more conservative lubrication strategy where it matters most.
More from MorningOverview
