If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
wrote: > > wrote in message > oups.com... > > > > wrote: > > > > >Someone (pardon for not remembering whom) posted that Toyota had also had > > >problems with sludging engines, leading to failure in some instances. > > > > >So I asked about the sludging problem while at the dealership. They > > >confirmed it had happened and gave the reason that many people tried > > >to run too long between oil changes. They said that the manual > > >clearly called for oil and filter changes near the 3000 mile > > >interval, but a lot of people tried to push oils to 7500 and > > >more. And it just didnt work. > > > > Nonsense. Car makers have allowed 7500-mile oil change intervals for > > about 30 years now and haven't had major sludge problems, despite the > > SE and SF rated oils back then being much worse at preventing sludge > > than today's SL and SM oils. Many cars now have 10,000-15,000 mile oil > > change requirements and few sludge problems. Toyota simply made a > > major mistake when it reduced the amount of positive crankcase > > ventilation (PCV) in order to regulate the combustion more accurately > > for emissions purposes (crankcase blow-by gases burn, just as gasoline > > does). Toyota reduced it too much, and any mechanic can tell you that > > this can greatly increase the build-up of sludge. > > Since this Toyota business is a bit new to me, I ran a web search to see > if the dealership version of the story is the same as the people effected > are telling. It isn't. > > Apparently, the manual recommended 7500 mile changes, or 5000 if under > severe conditions. We are told that the gelation problem has been noted > in cars with under 3000 miles on the oil. I've gotta ask. Where "are we told" that the gelation problem has been noted in cars with under 3,000 miles on the oil. Wher did you find this information. And have those cars experiencing sluding always had a regular oil change within the recommended limits? Or did the car owners in question all of a sudden get serious about oil changes after they had a problem. > > The pendulum of truth is certainly not tarrying long on the side of Toyota. Haven't seen anything to verify this statement so far. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
"John S." > wrote in message > > > > Apparently, the manual recommended 7500 mile changes, or 5000 if under > > severe conditions. We are told that the gelation problem has been noted > > in cars with under 3000 miles on the oil. > > I've gotta ask. Where "are we told" that the gelation problem has been > noted in cars with under 3,000 miles on the oil. Wher did you find > this information. I found it in the websearch. There are lots of pages of info (and probably misinformation as well) about this problem. Toyota flatly states that maintain the oil changes WILL PREVENT the problem, in their website. I have found a good bit of rebuttal for this. 'We are told' is a pretty non accusatory phrase. > And have those cars experiencing sluding always had a regular oil > change within the recommended limits? Or did the car owners in > question all of a sudden get serious about oil changes after they had a > problem. Good question. Wish I knew the answer. Usually where there is this level of smoke, there are some sparks, but I dont make any blanket statements until I know more. Some of the posters here, whose opinion I normally respect, have made me doubt the Toyota explanation. But we both know that owners are often lax in maintenance, and inventive in their complaints. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
qslim wrote:
> We've been around and around over this in the ole' Toyota forum. I've > de-sludged a few hundred of those darn 6 cylinders since they started > showing up a few years back, and not ONE had documentation of a reasonable > service history. They were all either spotty (10k intervals or more or so), > or absent of any records at all. > Then sanswer me these: WHY did they "start showing up a few years back?" Did people suddenly stop changing their oil, or did Toyota make a change that had an unintended effect and rendered that engine susceptible? WHY don't other Toyota engines show the same problem at the same rate? WHY don't other carmakers engines show the same statistics? (Some specific engines do, and they have a problem as well!) Most importantly, why is it so hard to admit Toyota screwed up? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
"Steve" > wrote in message ... What I can't understand or abide is the attitude that > "<insert car brand here> can do NO wrong! It must be the owners!" Fully agree. I maintain my cars very well and seldom have I had a problem. (Exception, a Ford 428 Cobra that broke a piston at 17,000 miles) Chrysler engines have traditionally been very strong, as you say. Their Mitsubishi engine choices may not be so great. Toyota appears to have had some some sort of problem with these engines, but hesitates to admit it if it is so. The service manager at this dealership states that he believes that the problem has been solved (aha...maybe there was a problem), but still recommends conscientious management. Some of the web accounts I have read indicate that many owners were less than diligent about keeping their documentation about oil changes, and Toyota was probably looking to avoid paying whenever they could. It was relationswise a bad move. I live about 60 miles from the dealership. I do not intend to drive there every time I need an oil change to get their blessing. If that is the name of the game, I'll do something else. I find situations like this very unsatisfying. The truth is there somewhere, but it seems hard to get to the very bottom of this story. Appreciate your comments. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
|
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
Masospaghetti wrote:
> The Lucerne uses the iron-horse series-III 3800 and the Northstar V8 - > both have been proven as good engines, although I wouldnt personally buy > any car in it's first model year. Oh, I don't know. One of the best cars I ever bought was a first-year Chrysler LH series (93 Eagle Vision TSi) built about 5 months into the production run. Still have it with 241,000 miles on the clock. In the case of the Lucerne, if its using a Northstar and a Gen-III 3800, the only "new" things about it are all low-risk engineering items. I have to admit ignorance on many of the new GM cars, but I did notice that the "all new" (according to the clever commercial with herds of metallic antelope) Impala appears to have the exact same underpinnings as a circa-1990 Olds Cutlass and Pontiac Grand Prix when you look under one in person. And thats a GOOD thing, IMO. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Follow up...Oil changes, Toyotas, and GM problems
I feel that my story, although slightly off-topic, might shed some
light. I bought a 1995 Toyota T100 pickup in December of 2000. 3.4 liter V6, automatic, 2WD long bed. At the time I bought it, it was showing 219,000 miles on the clock. In June of 2002, at 242,000 miles, it blew a head gasket. I knew that Toyota had experienced head gasket issues with this engine and that there was a recall on them. Per the dealership's service managaer's advice, I drove it to the local Toyota dealership - probably 8-10 miles. I made sure the coolant was full and drove gingerly. So, two days after taking the truck there, the service manager calls and says it was indeed a blown head gasket, the repair would be covered under the recall, and that I had pitting in several cylinder bores due to coolant leaking into the cylinders. The solution was new short block. Here's the kicker - Toyota covered the short block too under the head gasket warranty. I didn't have to scream, threaten, or anything. They admitted the problem was theirs and took responsibility for it. The repair was wrapped up in about 5 days and I now have 316,000 miles on the truck. Am I a fan of Toyota? Because of this experience, absolutely. Would I be a fan of GM or Ford or Chrysler if I'd been treated the same way? Absolutely. Experience, though has shown me that domestic car companies/dealerships have a "blame the owner first" policy. Just my $.02. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The dangers of DRLs | 223rem | Driving | 399 | July 25th 05 11:28 PM |
VW's are not as reliable as Honda's and Toyota's | Rufus McPiddlegump | VW water cooled | 5 | January 6th 05 02:26 PM |