6.2 liter longevity

[tights24]

Howdy folks,

Been a while since I posted. Still have the 2007 Yukon and am now up to 160K miles. I'm considering an Escalade or Denali for my next rig but wanted to check and see what the general stance was on the 6.2. I realize it's been around a while in some variation or another, and I also realize that typically all you see in here are the "problems" with any engine. What I am trying to determine is if there are any years that were more susceptible to issues, and how many miles is too many miles. Needless to say I will not be buying new as they have eclipsed 100K for the things. Crazy. However, I don't want to buy something with 70 or 80 K miles on it if they are not as bulletproof as the 5.3. Yes, every truck is different as to their lifespan, but we do have the added knowledge of things like a carfax that may or may not tell us regular service intervals etc. So, if a truck receives proper regular maintenance, any risks per se to go to a 6.2 that has up to 80K miles used? Again, I get it, with regular maintenance every engine should run fine, but we all know that's not the case. lol. It's like saying burning oil in the 5.3 is normal. Burning oil is NOT normal. The fact that the 5.3 does is. hahaha. Thanks for any and all input and comments.

 

[swathdiver]

Well, The L92 and its successor the L9H both have AFM components but was not active (PCM program) in the trucks until 2010. Being an LS engine it would seem to me they are as durable as the others and can be made more so with the removal of the AFM system both mechanically and from the PCM. Being a car guy, you know what makes them last and what doesn't.

I wouldn't mind an L9H without AFM someday.

 

[tights24]

Thanks for the reply. So to be clear, AFM is active fuel management? Forgive my ignorance. Is this the equivalent to the cylinder deactivation? I have this turned off in my Yukon via my Trinity as I get better mileage with it turned off. lol. Have yet to try the fuel economy setting as I suppose it throws more torque at the 4cyl setting to allow it to remain in that mode longer. No clue. Just wasn't a fan of trying it if that's in fact what it does. Regardless, thanks. I am just trying to figure out if a relatively high mileage 6.2 is something to worry about. I.e., greater than 70k miles. I'm tossed up between the 6.2 and the 5.6 that's in the 2011+ QX56 and QX80. Had a titan before my yukon and that engine is strong.

 

[swathdiver]

Yes, AFM is synonymous with DOD or Displacement On Demand.

The LY6 is a 6.0 iron block motor and does not have AFM at all. The 2010 models have VVT (Variable Valve Timing) as do most engines made then and thereafter.

 

[Denaliz]

As someone who owns both a 2011 Yukon Denali and 2016 Infiniti QX80..I'm way happier with my Denali as strange as it sounds. Sure the QX80 looks nice but I enjoy my Denali more even though its older.

I'm sure the mods help on my end.

 

[Miami-Dade]

As someone who owns both a 2011 Yukon Denali and 2016 Infiniti QX80..I'm way happier with my Denali as strange as it sounds. Sure the QX80 looks nice but I enjoy my Denali more even though its older.

I'm sure the mods help on my end.

IMHO the QX80 is the worst looking SUV on the road..To each their own.

 

[JRH2]

I bought my 07 Denali with 202K on it and now have 215K and I doubt if it uses a quart of oil in 5000 miles and it runs like a top and no leaks.Of course I don't know if anything was done to it previous to me owning it.

 

[cjsmith16]

Howdy folks,

Been a while since I posted. Still have the 2007 Yukon and am now up to 160K miles. I'm considering an Escalade or Denali for my next rig but wanted to check and see what the general stance was on the 6.2. I realize it's been around a while in some variation or another, and I also realize that typically all you see in here are the "problems" with any engine. What I am trying to determine is if there are any years that were more susceptible to issues, and how many miles is too many miles. Needless to say I will not be buying new as they have eclipsed 100K for the things. Crazy. However, I don't want to buy something with 70 or 80 K miles on it if they are not as bulletproof as the 5.3. Yes, every truck is different as to their lifespan, but we do have the added knowledge of things like a carfax that may or may not tell us regular service intervals etc. So, if a truck receives proper regular maintenance, any risks per se to go to a 6.2 that has up to 80K miles used? Again, I get it, with regular maintenance every engine should run fine, but we all know that's not the case. lol. It's like saying burning oil in the 5.3 is normal. Burning oil is NOT normal. The fact that the 5.3 does is. hahaha. Thanks for any and all input and comments.

Purchased my 07 6.2L Yukon Denali 5 years ago with 80K miles. Now have 165,000 miles and it runs great! I have had some minor work done (valve cover gasket, brakes, rear shocks) but it runs great! Especially on the highway. Love having the 6.2, especially if I'm pulling a small trailer. No oil loss!

 

[LADenali]

I have the L9H version (2009), the thing runs like a champ. No oil loss, engine pulls strong after 150,000 miles. I daily drive mines 85 miles a day.

 

[Big Mama]

I have an 07 Denali with 116k and have had zero issues. It doesn't burn a drop of oil. I've used it like a truck. I've had everything from sod to mulch to cement bags and blocks. I also pull my 4000 in boat it's never let me down. Not sure all can say this but 07 model seems fine.