 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Toyota / Toyota Cars / August 2008Engines that are prone to sludge
This is a list from Amsoil of engines prone to sludge. [Quote] "The engines identified in the following chart have been reported to be prone to sludge. [End quote] ^^^^^^^^^^ For Audi/Volkswagen (L stands for Liter): 1.8 L 4-cylinder Turbo Automobile Models and Years: 1997 - 2004 A4 1998 - 2004 Passat New Warranty Coverage: 8 years / unlimited mileage (I guess Audi/Volkswagen voluntarily extended the warranty for their sludger.) Oil drain intervals for warranty coverage: 5,000 miles / 6 months (normal/severe) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ For Chrysler/Dodge: 2.7 L V6 Automobile models and years: 1998-2002 Concorde 1998-2002 Sebring 1998-2002 Intrepid 1998-2002 Stratus New Warranty Coverage: None, handled on a case-by-case basis (Not as nice as the Audi/VW deal above) Oil drain intervals for warranty coverage: 3,000 miles/three months (severe) 5,000 miles/six months (normal) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ For Dodge/Jeep: 3.9 L V6 5.2 L V8 5.9 L V8 Models and years: 1994-1999 Ram Truck 1994-1999 Ram Van 1994-1999 Dakota 1994-1999 Durango 1994-1999 Grand Cherokee New Warranty Coverage: None, handled on a case-by-case basis. Oil drain intervals for warranty coverage: 3,000 miles/three months (severe) 5,000 miles/six months (normal) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ For Lexus/Toyota: 2.2 L 4-cylinder ( 5S-FE ) Models and years: 1997-2001 Camry 1997-2001 Solara 1997-1999 Celica New Warranty Coverage: 8 years / unlimited mileage. Oil drain intervals for warranty coverage: 5,000 miles/four months (severe) 7,500 miles (normal) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There's a second engine for Lexus/Toyota: 3.0 L V6 ( 1MZ ) [Actually "IMZ" appears, but the "I" must be a misprint. It's gotta be 1MZ.] Models and years: 1997-2002 Camry 1999-2002 Solara 1998-2002 Sienna 1997-2002 Avalon 2001-2002 Highlander Same warranty coverage and oil drain intervals as the first Toyota engine above. Sidenote: The 3.0 Liter V6 1MZ engine was used in some 2006 Camrys, so I don't know why the '06 model year doesn't appear in the list above. The Amsoil document is copyrighted 2008, so it shouldn't be a matter of old information. Was the sludge problem somehow fixed in the 1MZ after 2002 ? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ For Saab: 2.0 L 4-cylinder Turbo Models and years: 2000-2002 9-3 Hatchback 2000-2003 9-3 Convertible Another Saab engine: 2.3 L 4-cylinder Turbo Models and years: 1999-2003 9-5 1999-2003 Viggen New Warranty Coverage: 8 years / unlimited mileage Oil drain intervals for warranty coverage: 5,000 miles/4 months (severe) 10,000 miles (normal) 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 The Amsoil document lists its sources for the above info as Audi of America's warranty extension letter, Volkswagen of America's warranty extension letter, AutoSafety.Org copy of Toyota notification letter, and Saab Cars USA special warranty coverage letter. Amsoil's source for the Chrysler/Dodge information is ConsumerReports.Org and the source for the Dodge/Jeep info is a Chrysler TSB 09-05-00 (I guess this is a Technical Service Bulletin issued by Chrysler on 9/5/2000). Finally, Amsoil got the info for the oil drain intervals to meet warranty coverage from the "2005 Car Care Guide" put out by Motor Information Systems. Here's a link to the .pdf file: http://www.amsoil.com/lit/g1490.pdf > For Chrysler/Dodge: > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > 3,000 miles/three months (severe) > 5,000 miles/six months (normal) > 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > this is a Technical Service Bulletin issued by Chrysler on > 9/5/2000). Interesting info. - thanks for posting it. That Chrysler TSB must be only for the trucks because it doesn't show up in my alldata subscription on the '99 Concorde with 2.7L that I have (which incidentally is over 200k miles with no problems - I change the oil and filter every 3000-3500 miles and keep 8 oz. of Marvel Mystery Oil in the crankcase; other people use synthetic, which I don't - I have my reasons; and it is my 80 mile-per-day daily driver, which I think also helps prevent sludge). Curious that they don't list the 2.7L thru 2004 (the year LH car production stopped). There were some design changes in mid production that supposedly addressed the sludging, so maybe they are assuming that that fixed the problems - would have to check the LH car forums on the 2.7L failure posts by owners to see if the failures were heavily concentrated in the earlier production years. Evidence that something has worked is that they use the 2.7 heavily in the later platforms, and I haven't heard of failures in those (when they fail, it's generally in the range of 60k to 80k miles), plus it would be extremely foolish of them to start a whole new platform if it were not truly fixed. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') as long as its not a Toyota 3.0 built from 97 to 02. and Toyota blames the customers for that one. >> For Chrysler/Dodge: >> [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') >> For Chrysler/Dodge: >> [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] >reasons; and it is my 80 mile-per-day daily driver, which I think also >helps prevent sludge). That TSB only applies to 3.9, 5.2 and 5.9 engines, and it doesn't have anything to do with sludge. It addresses an oil consumption issue caused by a leaking intake plenum gasket. The 7500 mile interval is not correct. In 2004 Toyota has lowered that interval down to 5000 for ALL Toyota/Lexus engines while GM and Honda pushed it to 12,000 miles during this period. IIRC Audi has 10,000 mile intervals, BMW 15,000 miles, Porsche and Mercedes 20,000 miles, but these use synthetic oil meeting strict specifications (VW 502.00/505.01, BMW LL01/04, MB 229.5/229.51). Therefore I think the sludge tendency is still there with all new Toyota/Lexus engines, that's why you have to change oil at 5000 miles. http://www.boston.com/cars/news/articles/2007/04/01/carmakers_increase_oil_chang e_intervals/ > For Lexus/Toyota: > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > so it shouldn't be a matter of old information. Was the sludge > problem somehow fixed in the 1MZ after 2002 ? The 7500 mile interval is not correct. In 2004 Toyota has lowered that interval down to 5000 for ALL Toyota/Lexus engines while GM and Honda pushed it to 12,000 miles during this period. When I started to buy a Toyota, I asked about that sludging condition. They indeed recommended a shorter than original change interval, and told me that in every case that there had been a problem, the owner had not maintained the recommended interval. BUT, there were also some issues with the PCV system that were discussed on this newsgroup that may have also influenced the sludging. IIRC, they had reduced the ventilation action and that could well influence oil sludging. I believe that our 2007 has a longer change interval than 5000 miles, but I never let it go so long anyway. > The 7500 mile interval is not correct. In 2004 Toyota has lowered that > interval down to 5000 for ALL Toyota/Lexus engines while GM and Honda [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > that there had been a problem, the owner had not maintained the > recommended interval. I don't buy that - I'd take that with a grain of salt. People make that kind of statement often based on very little more than thin air. There is no question that some engines are way less tolerant of stretched out maintenance than others. Other factors come into play, like if the vehicle sees a lot of short-trip and/or stop and go driving vs. mostly highway commutes. IOW - with certain engines, long oil change intervals may not do it in if most of its driving is daily highway commutes, but give it OK change intervals, and do mostly short-trip/stop-and-go, and it will likely fail. Combine longer change intervals with short trip and stop and go, and it will surely fail. Another engine could tolerate both without a problem. > BUT, there were also some issues with the PCV system that were discussed > on this > newsgroup that may have also influenced the sludging. IIRC, they had > reduced the > ventilation action and that could well influence oil sludging. I have a theory that there was technical discussion within the industry where, in the lab and road testing, they were seeing some measurable incremental pollution control advantage in narrowing down crankcase venting and oil drain holes (the sort of thing that papers are published on in technical societies), so several companies decided to try it out without really knowing the longer-term effects - IOW, unintended consequences, being prone to sludging being one of the unintended consequences. IOW - a lesson learned. > I believe that our 2007 has a longer change interval than 5000 miles, > but I never let it > go so long anyway. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') >I have a theory that there was technical discussion within the industry >where, in the lab and road testing, they were seeing some measurable [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >consequences, being prone to sludging being one of the unintended >consequences. IOW - a lesson learned. Haven't kept up with it, but I thought that inadequate oil drain passages in the heads was determined to be the cause of the "sludge" problem in some Toyotas. IOW, overheating of the oil by the heads causing "coking" of the oil. I never worry about short trips causing oil problems in my cars (none Toyotas) since I do 3k oil changes. More concerned about that prematurely rusting my exhaust. But hey, I don't worry much anyway. --Vic Toyota news http://yotarepair.com/News_release.html http://yotarepair.com/Sludge_Zone.html http://yotarepair.com/My%20Opinion.html >> The 7500 mile interval is not correct. In 2004 Toyota has lowered that >> interval down to 5000 for ALL Toyota/Lexus engines while GM and Honda [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') > Toyota news > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://yotarepair.com/My%20Opinion.html Interesting links. One thing that I failed to mention previously is the fraudulent practices by many quick oil change places - and yes - even some dealers - on oil and filter changes. By that I mean charging the customer for it, documenting that it was done, yet not actually doing the work. There are TV news team exposes on some of the quick oil change places. And I caught the local Chrysler dealer doing that on my elderly mother on the very first oil and filter change on her brand new Concorde. I also discovered a Mopar filter (complete with rust around the unpainted outer part of the base) on a Jeep Cherokee that my daughter bought for which the previous owner had documentation that the oil and filter had been religiously changed at a local quick change place since it was new every 3000 miles. So - based on personal experience, you'd have a hard time convincing me that this is not arguably a common practice. I have to wonder how much that factor plays into this issue. Certainly it would for engines who were more prone to sludging than others that were more tolerant of extended/missed oil changes. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') oh yeah....some quick change places deal in so much volume that they have an acceptable loss policy of 1 engine, 1 trans, or 1 differential...per month. >> Toyota news >> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') > oh yeah....some quick change places deal in so much volume that they have an > acceptable loss policy of 1 engine, 1 trans, or 1 differential...per month. I wasn't aware of that, but that would be due to things like forgetting to refill after the drain, or refilling without the drain plug having been re-installed - on two separate occasions, I was in a local shop getting some pricing, and another person was in there getting a quote for a new engine due to the local WalMart having left the oil drain plug out. There would of course not be the immediate or even detectable effect of simply charging the customer for work not done, which seems to be the policy of *many* places as in "hey - what the customer doesn't know won't hurt them - if the customer doesn't know, what's the harm?" out-right fraud mentality. >>> Toyota news >>> [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] >> (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address >> with the letter 'x')  SignatureBill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') Yeah, I remember years ago a hidden camera news program caught a shop just wiped clean the oil filter and claimed to have completed an oil change. Maybe that's what some Toyota dealers do anyway, because some of these sludged up engines were maintained at the dealers. > One thing that I failed to mention previously is the fraudulent > practices by many quick oil change places - and yes - even some dealers [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > address with the letter 'x') > One thing that I failed to mention previously is the fraudulent > practices by many quick oil change places - and yes - even some dealers [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > it would for engines who were more prone to sludging than others that > were more tolerant of extended/missed oil changes. Before a change I scratch the oil filter and look at the oil color. After I can quickly observe if the job was done. Once when buying a new Chrysler I marked it's dead battery so I would know if they changed it as requested in the deal. They didn't, but did after I caught them cheating. It's unbelievable that a Chrysler dealer would practice this oil change fraud, but there are cheats everywhere. I no longer have my Chrysler dealer do my regular oil changes, they scared me with their overly strong desire to sell me a replacement for my '95 Concorde that runs like a top. >> One thing that I failed to mention previously is the fraudulent >> practices by many quick oil change places - and yes - even some dealers [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > scared me with their overly strong desire to sell me a replacement for > my '95 Concorde that runs like a top. hey.gotta love the 90s concordes. my old 94 was one of the most dependable cars I've ever had. The only Toyota engines "prone" to "gelling," as Toyota referred to their sludge problem when they extended the warranty, was with engines build with a "new" head designed to improve emissions. The head was basically changed back to the previous head design for engines built starting in October of 3003. Engines built after that date have not shown to be problematic. In addition Toyota now recommends synthetic oil The 7500 mile interval is not correct. In 2004 Toyota has lowered that interval down to 5000 for ALL Toyota/Lexus engines while GM and Honda pushed it to 12,000 miles during this period. IIRC Audi has 10,000 mile intervals, BMW 15,000 miles, Porsche and Mercedes 20,000 miles, but these use synthetic oil meeting strict specifications (VW 502.00/505.01, BMW LL01/04, MB 229.5/229.51). Therefore I think the sludge tendency is still there with all new Toyota/Lexus engines, that's why you have to change oil at 5000 miles. http://www.boston.com/cars/news/articles/2007/04/01/carmakers_increase_oil_chang e_intervals/ On Jul 24, 8:59 pm, Built_Well <Built_Well_Toy...@hotmail.com> wrote: > For Lexus/Toyota: > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > so it shouldn't be a matter of old information. Was the sludge > problem somehow fixed in the 1MZ after 2002 ? > The only Toyota engines "prone" to "gelling," as Toyota referred to their > sludge problem when they extended the warranty, was with engines build with > a "new" head designed to improve emissions. The head was basically changed > back to the previous head design for engines built starting in October of > 3003. I know sometimes engineering changes can take a while to be implemented, but HOLY COW!!!!! YUK YUK ;) >> The only Toyota engines "prone" to "gelling," as Toyota referred to their >> sludge problem when they extended the warranty, was with engines build [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I know sometimes engineering changes can take a while to be implemented, > but HOLY COW!!!!! > The only Toyota engines "prone" to "gelling," as Toyota referred to > their sludge problem when they extended the warranty, was with [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that date have not shown to be problematic. In addition Toyota now > recommends synthetic oil I've seen this theory before, but it makes no sense since the heads were not changed as you claim. Go check out the Toyota parts catalog sometime and you'll see it is a bogus theory. Toyota does not specifically "recommend" synthetic oil, at least in the owner's guides for new cars (just looked at the OG for my Sister's 08 RAV4). They did stop saying not to use it however (one of the old Toyota FAQs recommended against using synthetic oil - I have no idea why). And since they do recommend 0W20 oil, I guess they are defacto recommending synthetic oil, since as far as I know all 0W20 is synthetic. Ed I think that's correct. And is precisely the reason that Toyota downgraded the oil interval from 7500 to 5000 miles in 2004. Otherwise they'll have to re-certify with EPA. Given that, I think today's Toyota/Lexus engines are just as likely to sludge as the ones introduced after 1997 (with the then new LEV certification). On Jul 28, 4:34 am, "C. E. White" <cewhi...@removemindspring.com> wrote: > I've seen this theory before, but it makes no sense since the heads > were not changed as you claim. Go check out the Toyota parts catalog [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Ed > This is a list from Amsoil of engines prone to sludge. > [quoted text clipped - 145 lines] > > http://www.amsoil.com/lit/g1490.pdf I have driven 480,000 km (300,000 miles) with my 98 camry up to now. Last week opened the valve cover and everything looked like new!! No sign of any sludge at all! But I must say, I generally drive long distances (over 50 miles) and my fuel is propane. I change (synthetic) oil every 30,000 km (19,000 miles). Jan. The following is JMHO! NORMAL driving is considered driving on the highway for an extended period of time. OK what percentage of drivers have commutes like that especially with the price of gas today? ;-) This is great for an engine to operate at normal operating temperature to help burn off any moisture in the oil and maybe any carbon in the engine. These engines can last a very long life (100s of 1,000s of miles) and the oil does not get dirty too fast generally! I have seen many different engines live long lives this way, foreign and domestic. Of course there are some engines that just designed to fail after XXX miles no matter how they are driven. <g> Most vehicles are NOT driven this way but are driven in the city. The engines use more gas, create more carbon and the temperatures are usually colder than normal adding condensation/debris to the oil. These engines require more frequent oil changes! I have even seen VW engines get sick prematurely. :-( Signaturelater, (One out of many daves) "jan siepelstad" <jan@microsoft.com> wrote in message news:4356$488b2726$d97b6566 snip > I have driven 480,000 km (300,000 miles) with my 98 camry up to now. > Last week opened the valve cover and everything looked like new!! [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Jan. > The following is JMHO! > NORMAL driving is considered driving on the highway for an extended period [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > These engines require more frequent oil changes! > I have even seen VW engines get sick prematurely. :-( I agree. I am the owner of a Chrylser with the 2.7L engine - known for sludging up and failing between 60 and 80k miles. I drive it 80 miles a day, 5 days a week, change the oil (and filter every oil change) between 3000 and 3500 miles, and kjeep 8 ozs. of Marvel Mystery Oil in the crankcase at all times as a preventative. It turned over 200k miles last month. I attribute it's longevity to the highway driving more than anything else. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') Reminds me of an older gentleman my daughter introduced me to a couple of years ago, her next door neighbor. He has an old Chevy Nova he keeps mostly parked in his driveway. Drives maybe 1/2 mile one way on his weekly trips to the grocery store or what not. He complained about his carburetor needing a rebuild recently due to buildup as he seldom drives. Son-in-law did the rebuild. He found the plugs a bit fouled, but not too bad. The oil, only a few months old was very thick and very black. He pulled a valve cover, and found that cream colored greasy substance on it, water contamination. No such in the oil itself or similar indication in the antifreeze. After futher investigation, we all came to the same conclusion. The lack of continuous driving time was causing the oil to foul as the rings are probably not set any more. The creamy substance at the inside top of the valve covers was due to dew buildup as the mornings are terribly moist sometimes, and the engine never got hot enough to burn out the water. Its an extreme exaggeration of what can happen to current vehicles (which run hotter/faster nowadays), but, it drives home a point about the need to put adequate highway miles to keep the contaminants down in the oil. SignatureDave > The following is JMHO! > NORMAL driving is considered driving on the highway for an extended period [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> >> Jan. Remember the golden rule of collectors. We drive our vehicles for at least thirty miles every thirty. We also change the oil every six months despite low mileage, to remove the products of combustion that may have accumulated > Reminds me of an older gentleman my daughter introduced me to a couple of > years ago, her next door neighbor. He has an old Chevy Nova he keeps [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >>> >>> Jan. Sure, condensation in the crankcase does a lot of harm. And driving highways also helps the battery charge. > Reminds me of an older gentleman my daughter introduced me to a couple of > years ago, her next door neighbor. He has an old Chevy Nova he keeps mostly [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > -- > Dave > Sure, condensation in the crankcase does a lot of harm. And driving > highways also helps the battery charge. As well as get the moisture out of the exhaust. Exhaust system materials have improved greatly over the years, but not too many years ago, vehicles driven on lots of short trips will need most of their downstream exhaust components replaced every 2 to 3 years, whereas the same car driven mostly highway would go with the original exhaust system for most of its life. It's not unusual for today's exhaust systems to last the life of the vehicle (250+k miles) in mostly highway use. >> Reminds me of an older gentleman my daughter introduced me to a couple of >> years ago, her next door neighbor. He has an old Chevy Nova he keeps mostly [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >> -- >> Dave SignatureBill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') >> Sure, condensation in the crankcase does a lot of harm. And driving >> highways also helps the battery charge. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > It's not unusual for today's exhaust systems to last the life of the > vehicle (250+k miles) in mostly highway use. Exhause systems really do outlast the old ones substantially. Many of us tend to forget how they used to rust out. Improved materials have helped this problem a lot. (Wonder how the manufacturers allowed this to happen :>) > Exhause systems really do outlast the old ones substantially. Many of us > tend to > forget how they used to rust out. This is exactly why Midas and Mienecke had to resort to brakes and shocks to stay in business. HTH, Ben Bill, I used to be a Rep for Chrysler and back in 2003 we had a meeting with Walker exhaust. Talking with the engineer, he stated that because the exhaust system is aluminized or treated with stainless, people think there exhaust last the lifetime of vehicle. He then said the actually engineer them to onliy a liife of 80,000 miles. He said the mufflers are shot on the inside. They study the used exhaust by buying them at scrap yards. Good- old Tenneco. By the way. Chrysler determined the PVC system was causing a sludge condition, and redesigned it in the later 2.7. I think it was in 02 or 03. > Bill, I used to be a Rep for Chrysler and back in 2003 we had a meeting with > Walker exhaust. Talking with the engineer, he stated that because the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > inside. They study the used exhaust by buying them at scrap yards. Good- old > Tenneco... Yeah - hah! The "screw the consumer" philosophy works great until your competition or the original manufacturer starts using a "make it last the life of the car" philosophy, in which case the "screw the consumer" company deserves a huge downturn in business. He who has the last laugh... By the way. Chrysler determined the PVC system was causing a sludge > condition, and redesigned it in the later 2.7. I think it was in 02 or 03. They added a heat exchanger to the pcv hose (steals heat from the heater loop) to keep the blowby from condensing out into the hose and clogging it up - that was in '00 or '01 - I added that heat exchanger to my '99 Concorde. They may have done some internal things too for better breathing. It's hard to tell from the LH car forums if the '01-'04 2.7 is less prone to the problem, but I haven't heard anything on the later platform that uses the 2.7 as its base engine, and I think they've been out long enough to where they'd be getting failures if that were the case (60-80k miles is the usual failure window) - probably means they fixed the problem. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > Bill, I used to be a Rep for Chrysler and back in 2003 we had a > meeting with Walker exhaust. Talking with the engineer, he > stated that because the exhaust system is aluminized or treated with > stainless, people think there exhaust last the lifetime of vehicle. As far as I can tell, the exhaust on my '00 300m is 100% stainless (and not aluminized or "treated" with stainless). After 8.75 years, there is no pit-through on any of the pipes, but there are some perforations on the rear muffler shell. There is no way I'd see that much life out of them if the entire system wasn't stainless steel. Walker makes sh.t aluminized aftermarket crap. > I have driven 480,000 km (300,000 miles) with my 98 camry up to now. > Last week opened the valve cover and everything looked like new!! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > is propane. > I change (synthetic) oil every 30,000 km (19,000 miles). I'm convinced that longer trip highway driving will make up for a multitude of sins (poor maintenance, design prone to sludging, etc.) that would otherwise do an engine in before 100k miles in the absence of good highway miles. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') >> I have driven 480,000 km (300,000 miles) with my 98 camry up to now. >> Last week opened the valve cover and everything looked like new!! [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my > address with the letter 'x') My 1998 Camery is the fastest warming up car I've ever had. In winter it's putting out heat on even very cold days before I get to the first stop sign a few blocks away. Yet it never gets above half on the temp gauge with AC running and parked with the wind from the back on the hottest days of summer. I like that heater ! > For Chrysler/Dodge: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > 1998-2002 Intrepid > 1998-2002 Stratus I don't know why nobody has commented so far, but the V6 engines in the 98-00 Stratus are not the 2.7 Chryco ones, but the Mitsubishi 2.5L. The 2.7L appear from 2001 on. SignatureYou'd be crazy to e-mail me with the crazy. But leave the div alone. > This is a list from Amsoil of engines prone to sludge. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Models and years: snip > 1998-2002 Sienna snip Oh, yeah. I've got one of these with 215,000 miles on it. It must be that they sludge with Amsoil but I have no problems 'cause I use API certified Mobil 1 every 7500 - 10000 miles. Here is a post from a RX300 owner. This and 3 others on the lot had sludged up engines and oil was changed by LEXUS every 4000 miles !!! These engine designs stink. lexusownersclub.com IBuild Mar 4 2007, 11:19 AM Car Model:2000 rx-300 Location:south carolina Thanks, I have the car at the lexus dealer and they did a inspection and informed me that the engine was locked-up,due to oil sludge. I summited all my oil change recepts and my lexus service recepts(every 4000 miles). The service manager informed me that he had to turn in all of findings to the Atlanta office,and they would decide on the repair. The service manager told me from what he saw there sould not be any reason why Lexus will not replace the engine at thier cost. The down side of this is that he also told me that the repair would take 48 to 60 days and lexus would not allow me a rental car for use during the repair, i could rent a car and after the repair i could turn in the cost and Lexus may or may not reinburst me for the rental. There is suppose to be 3 other rx-300's at the same dealership waiting for parts ahead of me for the same repairs. If ANYONE has any suggestions that may help me through this please let me know!!!!!!!! > For Lexus/Toyota: > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > so it shouldn't be a matter of old information. Was the sludge > problem somehow fixed in the 1MZ after 2002 ? Makes you wonder if the oil was really being changed at that particular dealership? They should be able to compare the problems on cars serviced at that dealership with cars serviced at other dealerships and come to conclusions about that pretty readily. If engines are truly failing like that when being serviced regularly, then - yeah - it is a poor design. But I have to wonder about the service that they really got. Unbelievable how much credence these manufacturers are putting in paper documentation. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') > Here is a post from a RX300 owner. This and 3 others on the lot had > sludged up engines and oil was changed by LEXUS every 4000 miles !!! [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] >> so it shouldn't be a matter of old information. Was the sludge >> problem somehow fixed in the 1MZ after 2002 ? > This is a list from Amsoil of engines prone to sludge. You misspelled "Scamsoil." > For Dodge/Jeep: > > 3.9 L V6 > 5.2 L V8 > 5.9 L V8 Horse sh.t. These engines (the A/LA v8 family of which the 3.9 v6 is a derivative) have been around in one form or another since 1955, and they DON'T sludge the oil. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.