GM Class Action Lawsuit Over Defective L87 Engines

General Motors is once again facing legal trouble over its 6.2L V8 L87 engines. Following widespread recalls, consumer complaints, and mounting evidence of defects, the automaker is now the target of a class-action lawsuit filed by Seattle-based law firm Hagens Berman. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, claims that GM knowingly sold and leased vehicles with dangerous engine defects. The plaintiffs in the case are from both Washington and California, but the scope of the allegations impacts drivers nationwide.

The case shines a spotlight on the repeated and serious issues linked to GM’s full-size trucks and SUVs built between 2021 and 2024. These vehicles have become the subject of not only recalls but also litigation that alleges GM failed to disclose the risks to consumers. For drivers, the lawsuit adds yet another layer of frustration to an already complicated situation—raising questions about GM’s transparency and commitment to safety. At its core, the case is about accountability: did General Motors knowingly place unsafe vehicles on the road, and if so, how should affected owners be compensated?

The Alleged Defects Behind the Lawsuit

According to the lawsuit, the problems with GM’s 6.2L V8 L87 engine stem from serious manufacturing flaws. Plaintiffs argue that these defects include sediment building up on connecting rods and in crankshaft oil galleries, rod-bearing damage, and issues related to crankshaft specifications and finish. Each of these flaws contributes to the risk of catastrophic engine failure, often resulting in loss of propulsion. In many cases, complete engine replacement has been required to restore vehicle functionality.

These aren’t minor issues—they represent serious safety hazards. Loss of propulsion while driving can create dangerous situations, particularly at highway speeds or in heavy traffic. Beyond the physical risks, owners also face financial harm. Vehicles with defective engines lose resale value, making it difficult for consumers to recover their investment. In addition, repeat trips to the dealership for inspections and replacements disrupt everyday life. Plaintiffs claim GM knew about these problems but failed to adequately disclose them, leaving consumers to bear the cost and the risk.

What makes this lawsuit especially significant is its suggestion that simply replacing defective engines with identical engines does not fully solve the problem. According to the plaintiffs, the so-called “fix” may leave consumers exposed to the same undisclosed safety risk. If true, this claim could undermine GM’s defense and strengthen the argument that broader remedies are needed for affected drivers.

GM’s Defense and Recall Efforts

General Motors, for its part, insists that it has identified and addressed the root cause of the defects. The company maintains that the manufacturing issues were limited to engines built during a specific window—between March 1, 2021, and May 31, 2024. GM points to its detailed engineering analysis and teardown inspections, which found increased failure rates only in vehicles produced during that period. By contrast, the automaker claims that engines built in 2019, 2020, and 2025 are not impacted by the same defects.

As evidence of its response, GM issued a recall covering affected vehicles, requiring inspections and, where necessary, engine replacements. The company insists that replacement engines produced after the 2024 build window no longer suffer from the same vulnerabilities. For owners of affected vehicles, however, confidence remains shaky. Plaintiffs in the lawsuit argue that GM’s fixes are inadequate and that the company’s actions came only after mounting complaints, lawsuits, and regulatory pressure. This tension between GM’s assurances and consumers’ lived experiences is likely to play a central role in the case.

The recall tied to these engines has been assigned number N252494001. While GM is notifying owners and instructing them on what steps to take, the lawsuit suggests that many drivers will continue to deal with uncertainty until a permanent and comprehensive solution is provided.

Which GM Vehicles Are Affected by the Lawsuit and Recall?

The class action and related recalls focus on GM’s most popular trucks and SUVs powered by the 6.2L V8 L87 engine. Affected models include the Chevy Silverado 1500, GMC Sierra 1500, Chevy Tahoe, Chevy Suburban, GMC Yukon and Yukon XL, and Cadillac Escalade and Escalade ESV. These vehicles, produced between 2021 and 2024, represent a significant share of GM’s sales in North America, amplifying the scale of the issue.

For owners of these vehicles, the recall process requires inspections by certified technicians. Engines that pass inspection may receive updated oil changes and monitoring, while those that fail are slated for full replacement. However, as the lawsuit points out, simply swapping in another L87 engine may not provide long-term protection from future failures. This creates frustration and concern for consumers who rely on these vehicles daily for work, travel, and family needs.

The sheer number of vehicles impacted means delays are almost inevitable. Dealers are under pressure to manage inspections and replacements quickly, but owners may face long wait times for parts and appointments. For many, this situation is not only stressful but disruptive to their lives and livelihoods.

The Broader Implications of the GM Class Action

This lawsuit carries implications beyond the immediate recall. It signals growing consumer skepticism about whether automakers are adequately prioritizing safety. If GM is found to have knowingly sold defective vehicles, the financial and reputational fallout could be severe. The case also underscores the growing role of class actions in holding manufacturers accountable when recalls alone do not provide sufficient remedies.

More broadly, the lawsuit highlights the limits of trust between consumers and automakers. Buyers expect that the vehicles they purchase have been thoroughly tested and will perform reliably. When widespread defects emerge, it not only damages a brand’s reputation but also undermines confidence in the industry as a whole. As vehicles become increasingly complex, the risks tied to small defects expand, making robust quality control and honest disclosure more critical than ever.

For affected consumers, the class action represents not only a legal avenue for compensation but also a chance to demand stronger accountability from GM. Whether through settlements, trial, or expanded recalls, the outcome of this case may set a precedent for how automakers handle widespread defects in the future.

How The Barry Law Firm Can Help

At The Barry Law Firm, we specialize in helping California consumers take legal action against manufacturers when their vehicles fail to meet quality and safety standards. If your GM truck or SUV has been in the shop repeatedly for engine failures, oil issues, or if a recall or repair attempt has not fixed the problem, you may be entitled to a refund, replacement, or cash compensation under California’s Lemon Law.

Lemon Law Expertise – We specialize in California Lemon Law cases and know how to hold manufacturers accountable.
No Upfront Costs – The California Lemon Law requires the manufacturer to pay our fees. That means, at The Barry Law Firm, we will never charge you, no matter the outcome of your case.
Proven Success – We have helped thousands of consumers obtain favorable settlements for their defective vehicles.
Personalized Attention – We handle all legal paperwork and negotiations so you don’t have to deal with the stress.

If GM’s dealership inspections, oil treatments, or engine replacements haven’t resolved your L87 engine issues, you may have a case. Contact us to explore your options.

Closing

The class action lawsuit against GM is another stark reminder of the risks tied to the company’s defective 6.2L V8 L87 engines. While GM has taken steps to manage the problem through recalls and inspections, the allegations in court suggest those measures may not go far enough. For consumers, the stakes are high—not just in terms of safety but also financial loss and the stress of owning a vehicle plagued with ongoing problems.

Ignoring this issue is not an option. Affected owners should pay close attention to recall notices, monitor communications about the lawsuit, and act quickly to protect their rights. California drivers in particular should be aware that the state’s Lemon Law provides powerful protections when manufacturers fail to deliver safe, reliable vehicles.

At The Barry Law Firm, we are committed to standing with consumers against automakers who cut corners at the expense of safety. If your GM truck or SUV continues to suffer from L87 engine problems, you do not have to face the burden alone. We are here to fight for the compensation and accountability you deserve. Safety and reliability are not negotiable, and no driver should settle for less.