Ahem, have you forgotten about the 4.2 LL8, which is used more than the V8's in the GMT 360/370, has very good reliability. Sure there have been failures but nowhere near any of these newer engines. It's not perfect, no engine is, but I have never been left on the side of the road walking. But I forgive you since you've never owned one.I cant think of a single good GM OHC engine... EVER.

Lake Speed Jr. got me to change over my oil preference from Mobil 1 to Valvoline Restore and Protect. I have actually had a couple conversations, on his personal cell and via texting, about another oil sample analysis matter. The video @Mooseman references is very informative, no doubt.And here's the Motor Oil Geek explaining why GM is now specifying 0w40 in these engines instead of the watery 0w20:
My LM2 3.0L Duramax also uses 0w20 and wish I could go to 0w40, especially in summer, but I'm still under the drivetrain warranty and it specifies a DexosD certified oil. But then there hasn't been any, AFAIK, lower end failures of these engines. Looking at the list of DexosD certified oils, there are three 5W30 certified oils. The MOBIL SUPER 3000 FORMULA DD 5W-30 seems to be sold only outside of North America so basically in warmer climates. And reading the descriptions for these oils, they are actually Dexos2 certified so they are really just regular oil that they are making oil makers pay for the certification even though it's already certified. Dexos2 and DexosD are basically the same.
My opinion is quite a bit different. Planned obsolescence thru intentional market downsizing, with intentional inferior parts use.Just the whole industry as a whole has been going down in quality, even the mighty Toyota has been having engine issues.
That may be true but I think they would have gone way too far with engines blowing up during warranty. I would also believe planned obsolescence as I remember as a kid when a car was finished when it was over 100k miles (back when we were still using the imperial systemMy opinion is quite a bit different. Planned obsolescence thru intentional market downsizing, with intentional inferior parts use.
) and nowadays vehicles lasting 2x or 3x longer and 100k miles is now considered low.Quite a bit different here. The GM dealership I worked at last year was flush with new cars and trucks and couldn`t sell them. And from what I can see now in my other local dealerships, all brands, they have lots of stock so ??? GM Canada may have a different policy or the dealers are able to keep a sizable floor plan. I certainly saw that they had a hard time moving stock and was running out of lot space. I constantly see lots of advertising for discounts, cash backs, .99% or even 0% financing.My 2 local GM dealers, one is a Chevy/Buick/GMC, and the other one is a GMC/Buick/Isuzu, near me literally have no new consumer grade cars or trucks on the lot. They have a TON of commercial grade (Government White) trucks thou.
Were it that simple. Automotive companies do not make money by selling the best or most reliable vehicles, they make money by selling *new* vehicles. Speaking as an engineer with 40 years experience in high tech product development & manufacturing, these issues are the predictable consequence of the never-ending dance between marketing (seeking to better differentiate their products), engineering (seeking to build cooler, whizzier products), finance (seeking to build cheaper products), & executive management (seeking to sell more products). Add in compounding factors like tightened emissions requirements and a consumer that has been trained to live his life on a treadmill and the end result comes as no surprise.This is what happens when Auto Builders allow too many "Engineers" into the Meetings and influence the Plan Of Action for the "Next, Best Thing" and throw as many Modules and Gee-Gaws into these Machines as those Yo-Yos can dream up in a CAD Program.
05 Evnvoy XL 4.2 Atlas, 260000 miles and still a daily work truck. Back seats removed and packed with construction tools.drive train seals have began to fail servicing them now. The only issue I have is thinking something is wrong because the only check engine light I seem to get is an evap code . Gas cap has been the fault every time. I keep waiting for the light coming on. This anxiety comes from a 99 Tahoe from helloooooh not again, what the hello is it this time.Some more info on the recall and reasons for the failures:
Ahem, have you forgotten about the 4.2 LL8, which is used more than the V8's in the GMT 360/370, has very good reliability. Sure there have been failures but nowhere near any of these newer engines. It's not perfect, no engine is, but I have never been left on the side of the road walking. But I forgive you since you've never owned one.![]()


Pontiac built an OHV inline 6 back in the 60's. I saw a video on it saying GM corporate killed it because it was "too" good.GM has always had problems with technology. GM has been toying around with AFM/DOD since 1981 (6.0 Cadillac Big Block), and still cant get it right. OHC would solve a lot of the AFM/DOD problems. But GM cant even get that right.
Ford has been running OHC on every single mass produced engine since what, 1997?
Dodge has been running OHC on every single V6, and I think I4, motor since 2012, only not doing it in the Hemi, which is no longer being made. And Fiat/Dodge/Jeep/Chrysler is rated the worst auto manufacture in the WORLD!
Toyota/Lexus since the 80's
Nissan/Infinity since the 70's
Benz since the 60's.
Kia/Hyundai since the 00's (If not earlier, like the 80's)
Im not putting Audi/VW or BMW on this list. Any vehicle you have to replace rod and main bearings as part of routine maintenance doesn't deserve anyone's time or money.
Chevy... Nope, lets continue using the same technology that we have been using since the 60's on our V8's.
In all reality, I cant blame them. There is a reason that the early (1999-2006) LS engine are rated one of the most reliable engines ever mass produced (with a few exceptions like the LH6).
I cant think of a single good GM OHC engine... EVER. The Z06 Vette engine from 92 wasnt even a GM (Lotus). The GM 2.0 and 2.0 Turbo from the 80/90's had head gasket issues.... Now that I think about it, every single 4cyl engine that was OHC from GM had head gasket issues (except the Atlas 2.7, and the 2.7 TurboMax), or turbo issues. The 3.6 is rated one of the worst engines ever mass produced. The last good GM V6 was the 60* 3.5 engine that was built for 3 years (2005-2007), and the 3800 although it had its own share of issues.
I mean come on GM...
My boss just bought a Silvy with the L87 that is affected by the recall. They currently dont have a solution, and GM is only replacing engines that have already failed, with a backlog of 3-20 months! (depending on region). Its to the point in some areas that GM is just buying the truck back for sticker.
Edit: Just adding another opinion here, the 2.7 Turbomax looks strangely like a 2.7 Atlas with a Turbo.
This is exactly why I buy older GM's, and now Toyotas.. I really like this little 2005 Highlander... Except for the timing belt.And we all (most of us) remember the Vega aluminum block fiasco. Good idea, bad execution. Engineers aren't the brightest sometimes.