2021 Tahoe Camshaft Replacement

GasGuzzler

Hawkeye
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
6,383
City & State/Province
Cooke County, Texas
Finally got to spend a couple hours on the Tahoe. It's fully disassembled and I got all the new stuff laid out after I took these pictures. Today starts with cleaning A LOT of parts before reassembly begins. Should be able to have it back together today.

IMG-0254.jpg
IMG-0255.jpg
IMG-0256.jpg
IMG-0257.jpg
IMG-0258.jpg
IMG-0259.jpg
IMG-0260.jpg
IMG-0261.jpg
IMG-0262.jpg
IMG-0263.jpg
IMG-0264.jpg
 
Sorry if I missed a previous post about your truck but why did a 4 year old engine need a new camshaft? I can see the wear on the lobe and roller. Is this a common problem with that engine or just bad luck? Just wondering.
 
YUP, inquiring minds want to know... ☝️
Remember the old days ? If I recall correctly, we didn't even have to pull the heads to remove a cam on a small block Chevy (?). Although, it was probably worthwhile doing so. Just pull the radiator and pull it thru the grille :-).

J
 
Son and Grandson spent around 3 months fighting with a Dodge Durango engine. First thought it was a camshaft issue but apparently not. Already elbow deep into the fix so go all the way?? Pull the block and look at the crankshaft. About 110% of the original vehicle's value later, Grandson has a Dodge Durango with new crank, cam, pistons, rings, and ?? what else that no one wants to buy and he's afraid to drive because something else might fail. :unsure:
I also question what caused the cam damage shown by the OP????
 
Another user mentioned the 2022 6.2L crankshaft failures ( CLICK HERE )and I posted the common issues with 1999-2025 LS/LT engines and also mentioned I was in the middle of this job. I made a new topic since it's a bit different a topic than his. This is not my vehicle. I do this for a living.

Quoting part of my post there regarding these engines:

"2022 6.2's are not "blowing up", they're actually seizing and GM thinks it's because of unclean assembly processes. Kinda like Toyota's debacle only on a WAY smaller scale. Toyota's issues are far and away a magnitude larger. Remember, GM (and others) had a really tough time finding people that would go to work during Covid so they filled in the spots with newbies...and so did the suppliers who GM is putting partial blame on. The seizing issue pertains to a known portion of 6.2L engines produced in 2022 only and is not an overall platform issue.

It has ZERO to do with lifters. You got a GM LS or LT engine and immediately the unknowns on the internet scream lifters! But there are about 5 different types of lifter failures on at least four completely different generations of LS/LT engines. It's kinda like saying the problem with toast is sometimes it's burnt.

The most common year for lifter issues of the current generation engine (2019-2025) is 2021 and it's not limited to 6.2's. 5.3s are more common because 5.3's are ... more common. The current lifter issue is the two major halves of the lifter body separate when the locking lugs fatigue. Commonly bends the push rod on the other lifter in the same cylinder. Causes a misfire, sometimes intermittent...and the noise made varies greatly depending many factors. One in ten will have a damaged camshaft. The particular 2021 LT lifter failure almost always shows early, before 20K miles and will not damage the cam. I have one now and the labor to replace the cam is north of 30 hours on a 4WD.

The 2014-2019 generation would have a lifter fail to lock after a AFM/DFM (depends on the generation as the new ones are any combination of all eight cylinders and the older ones are just 4 or 8 cylinders with 1 7 4 6 being AFM) event (stays "squishy") and bend push rods. One in ten need a camshaft.

2007-2013 is where the reputation started and the issue was oil manufacturers were forced to take away or reduce certain beneficial chemicals at the same time GM changed some of the hardening processes of their cams. These will wear a lobe flat.

In all, I would say that a small percentage of 2007-2019 LS/LT engines will undoubtedly have one lifter fail. Lifter failure is not an engine failure nor will it blow up the engine. I have yet to see an engine failure due to a bad lifter and I have seen them with the roller on the lifter a half circle. May seem like semantics but an engine failure is a failure of a part of the engine that makes it inoperable, not a failure that makes it less than optimal.

We'd have to know what year and engine specifically to properly tell the story of any reported issues since, as mentioned, there are several different versions of these engines and each have their own issues. The ones that used oil were the 2007-2013 (but only until 2010 generally) and that issue was also 100% unrelated to lifters and unrelated to the two generations newer engine the OP is talking about."
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
Hey GasGuzzler- I used to do quite a few LS/LQ swaps into various Jeeps and hot rods. I always felt that 2004-2005 were the best engines for reliability. No scientific evidence other than the improved intake gaskets from the factory, just personal opinion/observation. ( I was buying low mileage take outs for the Jeep swaps. So no tear down was done.)

My question for you is- do you feel 2004-2005 LS/LQ were among the most trouble free years?
 
Aside from oil pump issues with high mileage, yes. 2002-2007 LQ9 was the hot rodder's choice. I have an LQ4 in my wife's Denali.

But the LT engines are so far superior, especially with the cylinder heads that with aftermarket support, they are the way to go. Direct injection makes a huge difference. The compression ratio is north of 11:1 on a new 6.2L from the factory. My dad's first year LT 2014 6.2L is rated at 420/440 HP/TQ IIRC.

Tahoe is back home with its owner.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top