New engines & oil consumption

[rationull]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ

That's the way I feel as well.

Unfortunately manufacturers heve these crazy levels of acceptable oil consumption, so if someone is stuck with a car like that they have no means to fix the problem.



I will say that the standard "no more than 1 quart per 1000 miles" does seem a little too lax. My 07 Civic burned about a quart per 2k or 2500 and it did annoy me greatly. But the fact that this is annoying and points to the engine not being "perfect" is an owner satisfaction issue and is orthogonal to the question of whether or not there's actually a mechanical defect.

 

[mechtech2]

Some high performance engine builders shoot for some oil use.
Roughly 1 qt/ 2k miles or so.
Why ?
To ensure lubrication.

 

[NYEngineer]

They run on Natural Gas or Propane. They use more oil during the break in period but will still use some if they don't have a load on them for extended periods.

 

[friendly_jacek]

Originally Posted By: NYEngineer
They run on Natural Gas or Propane. They use more oil during the break in period but will still use some if they don't have a load on them for extended periods.


Interesting. I thought car engines were the opposite, more oil consumption at high speeds and high loads?

 

[Shannow]

When Holden 6s (Buick 3800) started blowing as they emptied the sump between 10,000km services, Holden started by blaming the owners (fair cop IMO, as they should be checking),then brought out the "fact" that 1L/1500km was "normal", and Australians weren't amused, we were used to engines that didn't use oil in appreciable quantities, and from full to empty in 5,000km meant that it was rebuild time...and that wasn't reached until 200,000km+ on the engine, if then.

Holden raised the full mark on the dipstick by a litre initially, and installed a litre bigger sump on the rest of them later, and admitted that LT rings didn't help the issue.

But the part that has me amazed is the circularity of the argument that 1qt/1,000 miles is "normal", additives kill cat converters, so we need to de-additise the oils to protect the cats...that seems pretty bass-ackwards.

But the additive reduction doesn't apply to 40 weights and above...

Which sort of spells out something about "normal" oil consumption, oil weight, and the compromises that car manufacturers are making on the consumer's behalf.

 

[Silk]

That's the spiel Mitsubishi trotted out when some of their engines started using a lot of oil - it didn't go down too well with owners. That was in the '90's though, 21st Century engines are much better....although the 2.4 GDI sucks almost it's whole sump dry before 10,000km.

My 4D56T powered Pajero used 2 litres between it's 5,000km oil change, and I didn't think it excessive. I'd put a litre in at 3,000km, and change at 5,000km when it needed another litre (think quart), and that is pretty normal for those engines. Mind you I did have my own auto repair shop at the time...the oil wasn't free, but it also wasn't worth thinking about. This engine was a full recon, rebore, new pistons etc, doing 1,000km per week on long hot runs.

 

[Eddie]

My feeling are this: If the engine is designed well and all parts are machined to tolerance and finish, then oil consumption should not exceed one quart during the maximum oil change recommended by the manufacture. The engine should of course be broken-in reasonably and the oil used should meet the manufactures spec. I have bought ~ 15 new and used vehicles and never had an engine that used more than 1/2 quart in a 6K oil change and this includes my present Mazda CX7 DISI turbo engine. Difficult to respect a manufacture or dealer that says a quart per 1K in normal consumption for a daily driver that is not tracked. Ed

 

[mechtech2]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
When Holden 6s (Buick 3800) started blowing as they emptied the sump between 10,000km services, Holden started by blaming the owners (fair cop IMO, as they should be checking),then brought out the "fact" that 1L/1500km was "normal", and Australians weren't amused, we were used to engines that didn't use oil in appreciable quantities, and from full to empty in 5,000km meant that it was rebuild time...and that wasn't reached until 200,000km+ on the engine, if then.

Holden raised the full mark on the dipstick by a litre initially, and installed a litre bigger sump on the rest of them later, and admitted that LT rings didn't help the issue.

But the part that has me amazed is the circularity of the argument that 1qt/1,000 miles is "normal", additives kill cat converters, so we need to de-additise the oils to protect the cats...that seems pretty bass-ackwards.

But the additive reduction doesn't apply to 40 weights and above...

Which sort of spells out something about "normal" oil consumption, oil weight, and the compromises that car manufacturers are making on the consumer's behalf.


Uncomfortable truths!

 

[rationull]

Originally Posted By: Eddie
Difficult to respect a manufacture or dealer that says a quart per 1K in normal consumption for a daily driver that is not tracked. Ed


Try to find one that doesn't say that or something close to it, though.

 

[Eddie]

I agree rationull: Seems like the bean counters are all looking for a way to avoid free warranty work. Ed

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
My parents had a 2008 Wrangler that was going through a quart per 700 miles.

Only had 80k miles. Oil consumption started around 45k and gradually got worse and worse.

There's a sooty / oily substance in the tailpipe. Do modern cats stop smoke from coming out?


Mexican assembled 3.8L engines from that year had oil consumption issues. The rings were installed upside down in many of them.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: rationull
Originally Posted By: Eddie
Difficult to respect a manufacture or dealer that says a quart per 1K in normal consumption for a daily driver that is not tracked. Ed


Try to find one that doesn't say that or something close to it, though.


This is true, in fact some dealers are quoting even less than a 1000 miles.

 

[rationull]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint

This is true, in fact some dealers are quoting even less than a 1000 miles.


I was pleasantly surprised to read 1 quart per 1200 miles as Subaru's standard in my WRX's owners manual. Still setting the bar pretty low but at least it's marginally better than 1 per 1000.

 

[SteveSRT8]

The simple fact is if you own enough vehicles sooner or later you'll get a "consumer".

I hope everybody noted the Briggs & Stratton info. Engines use the load to seal the ring against the cylinder wall by combustion pressures, not just ring tension.

This is why you want a heavy foot during the run in period. It results in a better fit and finish, more power, less blow by, longer life, etc.

 

[eddy21]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
The simple fact is if you own enough vehicles sooner or later you'll get a "consumer".

I hope everybody noted the Briggs & Stratton info. Engines use the load to seal the ring against the cylinder wall by combustion pressures, not just ring tension.

This is why you want a heavy foot during the run in period. It results in a better fit and finish, more power, less blow by, longer life, etc.


yeap. for the record Ford says 1500 a qt. my Focus is being monitored.