General Motors has once again revised the oil specification for its troubled 6.2-liter V8, a change that might look minor on paper but lands in the middle of a sprawling legal and regulatory storm. The company is trying to thread a needle between mechanical fixes, cost control, and customer anger, while plaintiffs’ lawyers and federal investigators argue the problems run far deeper than what is printed on an oil cap. For owners of late-model full-size trucks and SUVs, the new guidance is not just a maintenance note, it is the latest twist in a years-long fight over engine durability and corporate accountability.
The shift in oil spec arrives after a wave of recalls, class actions, and defect probes that have already cost General Motors hundreds of millions of dollars and could expose it to far more. Earlier litigation over small-block V8s produced a $150 M settlement, and fresh cases targeting the L87 variant are now queuing up in federal court. Against that backdrop, a “tiny” change in viscosity looks less like routine engineering housekeeping and more like a legal chess move.
The defect pattern that turned a flagship V8 into a liability
The 6.2-liter V-8 at the center of the current controversy was supposed to be a crown jewel, powering high-margin pickups and SUVs with a blend of power and refinement. Instead, it has been dogged by reports of internal damage tied to debris in the lubrication system, with some engines failing early in their service life. In an Engine Failures Investigation, lawyers describe how, on April 28, 2025, General Motors recalled vehicles equipped with 6.2-liter V-8 engines after identifying a pattern of catastrophic issues. That recall covered 2021 model year trucks and SUVs and focused on contamination that could starve critical components of oil.
Dealers were told that some 6.2-liter V8 L87 engines left the factory with out-of-spec crankshaft parts, a defect that could lead to noise, loss of power, or even loss of propulsion while driving. A service bulletin for one Iowa retailer explains Why General Motors, warning that a crankshaft problem could cause sudden failure and leave drivers stranded. That kind of defect is not a minor annoyance, it is the sort of safety risk that draws the attention of regulators and class-action specialists, especially when it affects work trucks and family haulers that rack up high mileage quickly.
From recall to federal investigation and a “tiny” oil tweak
Once the initial recall was in motion, the scale of the problem became clearer. Nearly 598,000 full-size trucks and SUVs with the 6.2-liter V-8 were swept into the campaign, and owners of 2021–2024 models soon complained that the remedy did not always prevent repeat failures. The Office of Defects Investigation opened a new case after reports that engines continued to suffer internal damage even after recall work, raising the question of whether the underlying design was robust enough. That federal scrutiny put pressure on General Motors to refine its repair strategy and show regulators that it was not simply buying time.
In response, the company adjusted its technical guidance for the L87 recall, including a subtle but telling change to the recommended oil. An analysis of the updated procedure notes that Part one of the recall involves an inspection, and if the engine passes, technicians now pair the mechanical work with a revised lubricant choice. A report on the updated campaign explains that Part of the new fix is a shift to a different oil viscosity, a move framed as an “extremely tiny but important” tweak. On its face, that is a standard engineering response to bearing and crank issues, but in the context of ongoing litigation, it also looks like an attempt to show regulators that the company is still iterating on the remedy.
Why lawyers say an oil change is not a cure
Owners and their attorneys are not convinced that a new oil spec can rescue a flawed rotating assembly. One complaint filed in federal court argues that the real problem lies in the design and manufacturing of the crankshaft and bearings, not in the lubricant that flows around them. In that case, the plaintiffs point out that General Motors recently issued a recall for vehicles with its 6.2-liter V8 and will replace some engines, but they argue that the inspection-and-oil approach for others is inadequate. As one filing summarized by Brad Anderson puts it, However, the plaintiffs say an oil change will not fix the V8 issues and that the remedy for unaffected engines leaves drivers exposed to future failures.
Another suit zeroes in on the way the recall forces owners into what it calls “two bad choices.” The complaint, filed as McNamara et. al. v. General Motors in the Pennsylvania Eastern Disctrict of the Unit, argues that the company is effectively asking customers to accept either a potentially short-lived engine or a heavier oil that could hurt efficiency. According to that filing, the lawsuit’s focus is on that oil, alleging that the thicker lubricant could cost drivers hundreds of dollars more for gasoline over the life of the vehicle. The plaintiffs contend that General Motors is using viscosity as a bandage for deeper mechanical flaws, rather than addressing the potentially problematic rotating assembly head on.
How the recall fix actually works in the service bay
On paper, the recall procedure is straightforward. Technicians begin with an engine inspection, looking for signs of internal damage or contamination. If the truck needs a new engine, it will get one, with the replacement unit intended to correct the crankshaft and debris issues that triggered the campaign. If the engine is still okay, GM will change the oil and filter, update the software, and send the vehicle back on the road with the new lubricant spec. As one description of the process puts it, If the engine passes inspection, the fix is essentially an oil change paired with a reflash, not a teardown of the potentially problematic rotating assembly.
Critics argue that this split-path remedy creates a two-tier owner experience. Those whose engines have already failed get a full replacement, while those whose engines have not yet shown symptoms are asked to trust that a thicker oil and software tweaks will prevent future damage. Federal investigators have noted that some owners who received the inspection-and-oil treatment later reported repeat failures, which is part of what triggered the new probe into whether the recall fix “did not take.” That tension between a low-cost preventive measure and a more expensive mechanical overhaul sits at the heart of the lawsuits, which claim that the company is prioritizing financial exposure over long-term reliability for the affected trucks and SUVs.
The legal hangover from earlier V8 battles
The current L87 fight is not happening in a vacuum. General Motors has already faced a major class action over earlier small-block V8s that allegedly suffered from excessive oil consumption and premature engine failure. In that case, Siqueiros v. General Motors LLC, the company agreed to a $150 Million settlement that provided relief to thousands of affected drivers. Court documents describe how the agreement, sometimes referred to as The Road to Justice, delivered a $150 M package of reimbursements and repairs for owners who had battled oil consumption and engine damage for years. The plaintiffs’ lawyers in that case framed the outcome as a landmark decision that held Justice accountable for design choices that left customers footing the bill.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
