The GM 6.2L V8 L87 Lawsuit in 2026: Payouts & News

Never Miss a Lawsuit Update

Mark Lawfold as a Preferred Source so you never miss a settlement deadline or new filing.

Latest Update (as of September 22, 2026): The GM lifter/valvetrain lawsuit covering the AFM and DFM V8 engines, including the 6.2L L87, remains in the same holding pattern reported earlier this summer — the class still has not been certified more than four years after the case began. In March 2026, a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan denied a plaintiffs’ motion to split the AFM and DFM claims into separate trials, keeping the litigation together as one case. As of a mid-July 2026 case update, the certification motion had already slipped from its original December 2025 target into later in 2026, and no recall, settlement, or claims process has been established for L87 lifter/DFM owners as of this writing.

Last updated: September 2026

The GM 6.2L V8 L87 lawsuit is one of the biggest automotive defect cases heading into 2026, and thousands of truck and SUV owners could be owed money. GM’s flagship 6.2-liter V8, found in popular models like the Silverado, Sierra, Tahoe, and Escalade, has been plagued by premature lifter failures tied to its cylinder deactivation technology.

On a related note, check out Unilever Lawsuit 2026: Unauthorized Image Use Settlement

Owners report catastrophic engine damage, sometimes at under 50,000 miles. Repair bills regularly exceed $5,000. Some hit $10,000 or more.

This article breaks down everything you need to know for 2026. You’ll find which vehicles qualify, what payout ranges look like, how the class action is progressing, and exactly how to file a claim. If your GM V8 started ticking, knocking, or lost power, keep reading.

What Is the GM 6.2L V8 L87 Lawsuit?

The GM 6.2L V8 L87 lawsuit is a series of class action and individual lawsuits accusing General Motors of selling vehicles with a known engine defect. The core allegation is straightforward: GM knew the L87 engine’s lifter system was prone to premature failure and sold these trucks anyway.

Plaintiffs claim GM’s Dynamic Fuel Management (DFM) system causes hydraulic roller lifters to collapse. When a lifter collapses, it can damage pushrods, camshafts, and even the engine block.

The lawsuits have been filed in multiple federal and state courts. Several cases have been consolidated in U.S. District Court proceedings to streamline the litigation.

GM has denied wrongdoing in court filings. The automaker argues its warranty covers qualifying repairs. But plaintiffs counter that warranty coverage is too limited and often denied.

The stakes are high. The L87 powers some of GM’s best-selling and most expensive vehicles. We’re talking about trucks and SUVs that cost $55,000 to over $100,000 new.

GM 6.2 Engine Lawsuit 2026 Status Update

As of 2026, the GM 6.2 engine lawsuit remains active with significant developments expected. Multiple cases are moving through the discovery and class certification phases.

Courts have allowed several key claims to survive GM’s motions to dismiss. That’s a meaningful win for plaintiffs. It means judges found enough evidence to let the cases proceed.

Class certification hearings are anticipated in mid-2026. If a class is certified, it would allow all affected owners to be represented in a single proceeding rather than filing individual lawsuits.

Settlement negotiations have reportedly begun in at least one consolidated case. No formal settlement offer has been made public yet. But legal observers expect preliminary talks to pick up speed through the summer of 2026.

GM has also faced pressure from NHTSA complaint filings. Thousands of owners have reported lifter failures to the federal safety agency. That growing complaint database strengthens the plaintiffs’ position.

Discovery has revealed internal GM documents that plaintiffs say show the company was aware of lifter durability concerns before the L87 went into full production. GM disputes this interpretation.

GM 6.2 V8 Lawsuit Payout Amounts

Potential payout amounts in the GM 6.2 V8 lawsuit vary widely based on the type and extent of damage. There is no confirmed settlement amount yet, but legal analysts and plaintiff attorneys have outlined estimated ranges.

These figures are based on similar automotive defect settlements and current claim data. Your actual amount would depend on your specific situation.

Owners who paid for a full engine replacement out of pocket stand to recover the most. Some have documented repair bills exceeding $12,000 for lifter and camshaft replacement on the L87.

Owners whose repairs were partially covered under warranty may receive smaller payouts. But they could still recover deductibles, rental costs, and lost time.

If a class action settlement is reached, payouts often come in tiers. Higher tiers go to people with the most documentation: receipts, repair orders, dealer records, and photos.

Key Takeaway: The GM 6.2L V8 L87 lawsuit is alive and progressing in 2026, with potential individual payouts ranging from a few thousand dollars to over $10,000 depending on documented damages.

GM 6.2 L87 Lawsuit Eligibility Requirements

You may be eligible for the GM 6.2 L87 lawsuit if you own or lease a GM vehicle equipped with the L87 engine and have experienced lifter failure or related engine problems. Eligibility centers on three main factors.

Factor 1: You own or owned an affected vehicle.
The vehicle must be equipped with the 6.2L V8 L87 engine. Model years typically range from 2019 to 2024, though some claims extend to earlier or later production runs.

Factor 2: You experienced the defect.
You need evidence that your engine suffered lifter failure, lifter tick, valve train damage, or related mechanical breakdown. Dealer repair records are the strongest proof.

Factor 3: You incurred financial harm.
This means out-of-pocket repair costs, rental expenses, towing bills, or measurable vehicle depreciation. Even if GM’s warranty covered the repair, you might still qualify if you lost the use of your vehicle for extended periods.

• You purchased or leased the vehicle new or used
• Your engine showed symptoms like ticking, knocking, misfiring, or reduced power
• You have repair records or dealer visit documentation
• Your vehicle is within the affected model year range

Owners who performed a DFM delete (aftermarket modification to disable cylinder deactivation) may face challenges. GM could argue that the modification voids the warranty claim. However, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act limits a manufacturer’s ability to deny claims solely based on aftermarket parts.

Which Vehicles Have the GM L87 Engine?

The GM L87 engine is found in several of GM’s full-size trucks and SUVs from model years 2019 through 2024. It is the 6.2-liter V8 option in GM’s T1 platform vehicles.

Not every 6.2L V8 is an L87. GM uses different RPO codes for different applications. The L87 specifically refers to the 6.2L with Dynamic Fuel Management in the T1 platform. The older L86 was used in the previous-generation K2 platform trucks.

Check your vehicle’s RPO sticker, usually found in the glove box or on a label inside the driver’s door jamb. Look for the code L87. Your VIN can confirm the engine type through a dealer or online GM VIN decoder.

If your truck has the 6.2L but uses the LT4 supercharged variant (found in performance models), that’s a different engine and a different situation.

How to File a GM Engine Defect Claim

Filing a GM engine defect claim in 2026 involves several steps, but the process is more straightforward than most people expect. You don’t need a law degree to get started.

Step 1: Gather your documents.
Collect every piece of paper related to your vehicle and the engine problem. This includes purchase or lease agreements, repair invoices, dealer work orders, warranty claim records, and any written communication with GM or your dealer.

Step 2: Document the defect.
Take photos of any visible damage. Save screenshots of your dashboard warning lights. If your engine made unusual noises, note the mileage when symptoms started.

Step 3: File an NHTSA complaint.
Report your issue to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. This creates a federal record of your complaint and adds to the data regulators use to pressure GM.

Step 4: Contact a qualified attorney.
Several law firms are actively accepting GM 6.2L V8 L87 cases. Most work on contingency, meaning you pay nothing unless you win or settle.

• Gather all repair receipts and dealer records
• Photograph damage and save diagnostic reports
• File a complaint with NHTSA online
• Reach out to a class action law firm handling GM cases
• Keep copies of everything you submit

Step 5: Join the class action or file individually.
Your attorney will advise whether joining the existing class action or filing a standalone suit makes more sense for your situation.

Key Takeaway: Eligibility for the GM L87 lawsuit depends on owning an affected vehicle, experiencing the defect, and having documented financial losses, and you can start the claims process today by gathering records and contacting an attorney.

GM 6.2 V8 Class Action Settlement Details

No final class action settlement has been approved in the GM 6.2 V8 lawsuit as of early 2026. However, preliminary settlement discussions are underway in at least one consolidated case.

Here is what’s known about the settlement landscape:

If a settlement is reached, it will likely follow the pattern seen in other major automotive defect cases. Think of the GM ignition switch settlement or the Ford EcoBoost cases as rough templates.

Typically, a tiered payout structure rewards claimants who have the best documentation. Top-tier claimants with full repair receipts and proof of out-of-pocket costs receive the highest amounts. Lower tiers may include people who experienced symptoms but had repairs covered under warranty.

Before any settlement becomes final, the court must grant preliminary approval. Then there’s a notice period where affected owners are informed. After that, a fairness hearing takes place. Only then does the judge grant final approval and payments begin.

This process usually takes 6 to 12 months from the preliminary approval stage. So even in the best-case scenario, payouts are unlikely before late 2026 or early 2027.

Common GM L87 Engine Problems

The most common GM L87 engine problem is premature hydraulic lifter failure, often occurring well before 100,000 miles. Some owners report failures as early as 20,000 miles.

The L87’s problems cluster around a few recurring issues:

• Collapsed lifters: One or more hydraulic roller lifters fail, causing a loud ticking or knocking sound. This is the most reported issue.
• Bent pushrods: When a lifter collapses, it can bend the associated pushrod, leading to misfires and reduced power.
• Camshaft damage: Failed lifter rollers can score and gouge the camshaft lobes, requiring full camshaft replacement.
• Valve damage: In severe cases, collapsed lifters cause valves to contact pistons, resulting in catastrophic engine damage.
• Check engine light with misfire codes: Common diagnostic trouble codes include P0300 (random misfire) and cylinder-specific misfire codes like P0301 through P0308.
• Reduced engine power mode: The vehicle’s computer may limit power output to protect the engine once it detects a misfire.

Many owners describe the onset of problems as sudden. One day the engine runs fine. The next morning, a loud tick appears at startup and won’t go away.

The repair typically involves pulling the cylinder heads, replacing all 16 lifters, inspecting the camshaft, and replacing pushrods. At a dealership, this job runs $4,000 to $8,000 for parts and labor. Full engine replacement can exceed $12,000.

GM 6.2 Lifter Failure Lawsuit Claims

The GM 6.2 lifter failure lawsuit claims center on the allegation that GM sold vehicles with lifters it knew were defectively designed. Plaintiffs argue the company prioritized fuel economy gains over engine durability.

The core claim is product liability. Plaintiffs allege the L87 engine’s lifters are not fit for their intended purpose. The DFM system constantly activates and deactivates cylinders, putting abnormal stress on the lifter mechanisms.

Several specific legal theories support the lawsuit:

If you're curious, also see Finance Lawsuit April 2026: Settlement and Payout Updates

• Design defect: The lifter design cannot withstand the cycling demands of DFM operation.
• Manufacturing defect: Some batches of lifters may have had quality control failures in the roller bearing components.
• Failure to warn: GM allegedly did not disclose the known risk of premature lifter failure to buyers.
• Breach of warranty: Plaintiffs claim GM’s warranty is inadequate because it doesn’t fully cover all damage caused by the defect, especially consequential damages like rental cars and lost income.
• Fraud by omission: Some complaints allege GM actively concealed internal test data showing lifter durability concerns.

Named plaintiffs in the lawsuits have documented repair histories showing multiple lifter replacements on the same vehicle. One plaintiff’s complaint describes three separate lifter failures within 60,000 miles.

These claims aren’t just theoretical. Courts have allowed them to proceed past the motion-to-dismiss stage, which signals that judges see enough factual basis to move forward.

Key Takeaway: The lifter failure claims against GM rest on solid legal theories including design defect and fraud by omission, and courts have allowed these claims to advance toward trial or settlement.

GM L87 Lifter Tick Lawsuit Explained

The GM L87 lifter tick lawsuit specifically addresses the audible ticking noise that signals the beginning of lifter failure. That tick is not just annoying; it’s a warning sign of expensive damage happening inside your engine.

Lifter tick occurs when a hydraulic roller lifter loses its ability to maintain proper valve lash. The lifter’s internal check valve or roller bearing fails, causing metal-on-metal contact that produces a rhythmic ticking or clicking sound.

Here’s what makes the L87 lifter tick different from normal engine noise:

Many owners initially dismiss the tick as a “cold start” noise. By the time they realize it’s serious, the damage has spread from the lifter to the pushrod, camshaft, or beyond.

The lawsuit argues GM knew this tick was a symptom of a design flaw, not a benign characteristic. Internal GM Technical Service Bulletins (TSBs) address lifter noise, which plaintiffs use as evidence that GM was aware of the problem.

If your L87 engine is ticking, document it immediately. Record a video with your phone. Note the mileage. Take it to a dealer and request a written diagnosis.

GM AFM DFM Lawsuit Background

The GM AFM DFM lawsuit targets the cylinder deactivation technology that GM has used in its V8 engines for nearly two decades. AFM (Active Fuel Management) was the older system. DFM (Dynamic Fuel Management) is its more advanced replacement in the L87.

Both systems work by shutting down cylinders under light-load driving conditions to save fuel. AFM could deactivate 4 of 8 cylinders. DFM can run on as few as 1 cylinder, with 17 different firing patterns.

The theory behind the technology makes sense on paper. Fewer firing cylinders equals less fuel burned. GM advertises fuel economy improvements of 5% to 10% with DFM active.

But the real-world execution has been problematic. The constant cycling of lifters between active and deactivated states creates enormous mechanical stress. Each time a cylinder deactivates, the lifter must collapse. Each time it reactivates, the lifter must extend. This happens thousands of times during normal driving.

• AFM was introduced in GM V8 engines around 2005
• DFM replaced AFM starting in 2019 with the T1 platform
• DFM uses 17 cylinder firing patterns versus AFM’s 2
• Both systems rely on collapsible hydraulic lifters
• Lifter failure rates have been reported at significantly higher levels than non-AFM/DFM engines

The lawsuit alleges that GM knew from its AFM experience that cylinder deactivation caused lifter problems. Instead of solving the underlying issue, GM introduced an even more aggressive version with DFM.

Plaintiffs argue this makes GM’s conduct particularly egregious. The company had years of data showing AFM-related lifter failures before launching DFM with the same fundamental lifter design.

GM Active Fuel Management Problems and the Lawsuit

GM Active Fuel Management problems have been documented across multiple engine families for over 15 years. The L87’s DFM issues are part of a longer pattern that strengthens the legal case.

The earliest AFM-related complaints date back to GM’s 5.3L V8 engines in the mid-2000s. Owners of Silverados, Tahoes, and Yukons reported oil consumption, lifter noise, and premature engine wear. Sound familiar?

Here’s a side-by-side comparison of AFM and DFM problems:

The lawsuit connects the dots between these two generations of technology. If GM knew AFM caused lifter failures in its older engines, its decision to double down with DFM shows a pattern of prioritizing fuel economy marketing over customer safety and satisfaction.

Some owners have turned to aftermarket solutions like DFM delete tuners and range limiters to disable the cylinder deactivation system entirely. These devices prevent the lifters from cycling, which many owners say resolves the ticking and reduces the risk of failure.

The popularity of these aftermarket fixes is itself a talking point in the lawsuit. When thousands of owners spend $500 to $1,000+ to disable a factory feature, it tells you something about the severity of the problem.

Key Takeaway: GM’s cylinder deactivation technology, from AFM to DFM, has a documented 15-plus-year history of causing lifter failures, and this history is a central pillar of the lawsuit’s argument that GM knew about the defect.

GM L87 Valve Train Failure Issues

GM L87 valve train failure goes beyond just lifters. The entire valve train system, including pushrods, rocker arms, camshaft, and valves, can sustain damage when a lifter fails.

Think of the valve train like a chain of dominoes. The lifter is the first domino. When it collapses, the pushrod bends. A bent pushrod means the rocker arm can’t open the valve properly. The camshaft lobe that drives the failed lifter gets scored by debris from the broken roller bearing.

In the worst cases, a valve can drop into the cylinder. When that happens, the piston strikes the valve, and you’re looking at a complete engine rebuild or replacement. That’s a $10,000 to $15,000 repair on a vehicle that might be worth $40,000.

Common valve train damage patterns in the L87:

• Collapsed lifter roller bearing
• Bent or broken pushrod
• Scored or pitted camshaft lobe
• Damaged rocker arm
• Dropped valve (rare but catastrophic)
• Metal debris contamination in the oil system

The cascading nature of the damage is one reason repair costs are so high. A dealer can’t just replace the one failed lifter. Best practice is to replace all 16 lifters, inspect the camshaft, and replace any damaged pushrods.

GM’s own TSBs for the L87 engine call for inspecting multiple components when a lifter failure is diagnosed. This tacitly acknowledges that the damage rarely stays isolated to one part.

GM 6.2 Engine Warranty Issues and Coverage Gaps

GM’s powertrain warranty covers the L87 engine for 5 years or 60,000 miles, whichever comes first. But for many owners experiencing lifter failure, that coverage falls short.

The biggest gap is timing. Lifter failures in the L87 often occur between 30,000 and 80,000 miles. Owners who hit the issue after 60,000 miles are out of warranty. They’re stuck with a multi-thousand-dollar repair bill on a vehicle that’s only a few years old.

Even for in-warranty repairs, owners report frustrations. Some dealers initially diagnose the tick as “normal engine noise” and refuse to open a warranty claim. Others perform the repair but use the same lifter parts, only for the problem to recur.

The lawsuit specifically challenges GM’s warranty as inadequate. Plaintiffs argue that a known defective part should be covered beyond the standard warranty period, especially when GM was aware of the failure rates.

There’s also the issue of consequential damages. GM’s warranty covers parts and labor to fix the engine. It doesn’t cover rental cars, towing fees, missed work, or the stress of being stranded. These costs add up fast.

For more context, see Investment Fraud Lawsuit 2026: Who Qualifies & What to Know

Some owners have purchased extended warranties or GM Protection Plans that provide additional coverage. But those come at an extra cost of $1,500 to $3,500, and they shouldn’t be necessary for a defect the manufacturer already knows about.

Key Takeaway: GM’s standard powertrain warranty often expires before lifter failure occurs, leaving owners facing thousands in repair costs for a defect GM allegedly knew about from the start.

Explore this too: Reed-Nelson Lawsuit 2026: Settlement and Payout Guide

Has GM Issued an L87 Engine Recall?

GM has not issued a formal recall for the L87 engine’s lifter failure issue as of early 2026. The company has instead relied on Technical Service Bulletins and warranty repairs to address problems on a case-by-case basis.

This distinction matters. A recall is a public admission that a safety defect exists. It requires the manufacturer to notify every affected owner and provide a free repair. A TSB, on the other hand, is an internal service advisory sent to dealerships. It’s essentially a quiet instruction manual for fixing a known problem.

GM has issued several TSBs related to L87 lifter noise and failure. These bulletins guide technicians on diagnostic procedures and authorized repair methods. But a TSB doesn’t obligate GM to contact owners or pay for repairs outside of warranty.

• No formal NHTSA recall has been issued for L87 lifter failure
• Multiple TSBs exist for lifter tick and valve train noise
• Thousands of NHTSA complaints have been filed by owners
• NHTSA has the authority to investigate and mandate a recall if it determines a safety defect exists
• Plaintiffs in the lawsuit argue that the sheer volume of complaints warrants a recall

The absence of a recall is actually a key argument in the lawsuit. Plaintiffs contend that GM deliberately avoided triggering a recall by characterizing lifter failures as a “customer satisfaction” issue rather than a “safety defect.”

An engine that suddenly loses power on a highway is absolutely a safety issue. Plaintiffs’ attorneys have emphasized this point in their filings.

If NHTSA opens a formal investigation, which the complaint volume could justify, it would put significant pressure on GM to either issue a recall or accelerate settlement talks.

GM 6.2 V8 Lawsuit Timeline for 2026

The GM 6.2 V8 lawsuit timeline for 2026 includes several important milestones that could shape the outcome for affected owners. Here’s what to watch for.

Q1 2026 is focused on discovery. Both sides are exchanging internal documents, engineering reports, and expert witness disclosures. This is where the plaintiff attorneys dig into GM’s internal communications about the L87 lifter design.

Q2 2026 could be the most pivotal period. Class certification hearings will determine whether the case proceeds as a class action or as individual lawsuits. Certification would be a major win for plaintiffs because it brings all affected owners under one legal umbrella.

Q3 2026 is when settlement talks typically intensify. If the class gets certified, GM’s financial exposure becomes clearer, and the incentive to settle increases. No company wants a jury trial when thousands of angry truck owners are involved.

By Q4 2026, we should have clarity on whether this case is headed for a settlement or a trial. Either outcome will define what affected owners can expect in terms of compensation.

Throughout 2026, new NHTSA complaints will continue to pile up. Each complaint adds weight to the plaintiffs’ case. If you haven’t filed a complaint yet, doing so helps not just the lawsuit but all affected owners.

Frequently Asked Questions

How much money can I get from the GM 6.2L V8 L87 lawsuit?

Most claimants could receive between $3,000 and $12,000 depending on documented repair costs and damages.

Owners who paid out of pocket for full lifter and camshaft replacement will likely receive the highest payouts.

No final settlement amounts have been confirmed as of early 2026.

Is my truck eligible for the GM L87 engine class action?

Your truck is likely eligible if it has a 6.2L V8 L87 engine from the 2019 to 2024 model years and has experienced lifter failure symptoms.

Check your RPO sticker for the L87 code to confirm your engine type.

Both original and subsequent owners may qualify.

What is the deadline to file a GM 6.2 engine defect claim in 2026?

No firm filing deadline has been set because a final settlement has not yet been approved.

However, statutes of limitations for product liability claims vary by state, typically ranging from 2 to 6 years from the date of discovery.

Contact an attorney soon to avoid missing your window.

Has GM recalled the L87 engine for lifter failure?

No, GM has not issued a formal recall for L87 lifter failure as of early 2026.

GM has released Technical Service Bulletins addressing lifter noise, but these are not recalls.

Thousands of NHTSA complaints have been filed, and a formal investigation could change this.

What causes lifter failure in the GM 6.2L V8 L87 engine?

Lifter failure in the L87 is primarily caused by the Dynamic Fuel Management system’s constant cycling of hydraulic lifters between active and deactivated states.

This repeated mechanical stress causes internal roller bearings to fail, leading to lifter collapse.

The design flaw affects all 16 lifters, though failure usually starts with one or two.

This case is moving. If you own a GM truck or SUV with the 6.2L V8 L87 engine and you’ve dealt with lifter failure, ticking, or expensive engine repairs, 2026 is the year to act.

Gather your records. File an NHTSA complaint. Talk to an attorney handling these cases.

The window to join the class action and maximize your potential recovery won’t stay open forever.

Readers also liked: SEC Ripple Lawsuit Emergency Motion: 2026 Update

You may want to read Lawsuit Loan Funding in 2026: What Plaintiffs Must Know

This may also interest you — Live Olympics Lawsuit 2026: Settlement and Filing Update

Never Miss a Lawsuit Update

Mark Lawfold as a Preferred Source so you never miss a settlement deadline or new filing.