Why do Saturns burn oil?
John S. Washburn
for a Saturn over 100K to go through a quart every 1K miles. Yet, my 91
Honda CRX NEVER burned oil that much. If anything, I would be low half a
quart for every 3K miles. Also, it had 173K miles on it too!!!
What gives? Is it that Honda uses better piston rings or something (err,
well that is how Honda started out...making rings) to that of what's in a
Saturn?
Mr. Goodwrench
OIL.
....and... I don't get ripped off with Honda parts prices either.
"John S. Washburn" <sham...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:kYbk8.461718$eS3.35...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Dick Josaitis
I think, for the most part, people who post messages on Usenet
Newsgroups are mostly complainers and whiners. You'll have your
token benevolent newsgroup guru who genuinely likes to help people,
and that's fine.
So you don't hear many Saturn owners who may be satisfied with their
vehicles saying, "Gee, I really like my Saturn, it doesn't burn oil
(or whatever)". It's just not "news".
So at the risk of being flamed, being benevolent, etc, I'd like to say
I have a '97 SC 1 with over 70,000 miles on it and I've never burned a
drop of oil between changes. I try to have the oil changed every 3k
or so, but sometimes it's 4k. All in all, I like the car and the
service organization is tops in my book.
Just my 2 cents,
Dick J.
John S. Washburn
the little bolts that hold it one are always juicy with oil. Yet, I never
see a drop of oil drip off onto the driveway. I'm starting to suspect that I
might actually be leaking oil from someplace when the engine is under normal
driving load as I can't get it to drip why the car is in idle on the drive
way (even if I rev it a few times).
I dunno, I might just get both the valve cover and oilpan gaskets replaced
and see if it solves the problem.
"Dick Josaitis" <josa...@arenet.net> wrote in message
news:3c9150a...@news.arenet.net...
BANDIT2941
>for a Saturn over 100K to go through a quart every 1K miles. Yet, my 91
>Honda CRX NEVER burned oil that much. If anything, I would be low half a
>quart for every 3K miles. Also, it had 173K miles on it too!!!
Okie Dokie. First off, the stock Saturn rings are made by Hastings......which
suck to begin with. On top of that, the pistons don't have oil relief holes
drilled in the ring lands which makes for a bad combination.
My new engine has Sealed Power rings and we drilled holes in the ring
lands......so far so good after 11k, but we'll see.
BANDIT2941
>and see if it solves the problem.
You should definitly be able to tell if its the valve cover gasket leaking.
From what you say about the pan bolts having oil on them, I wouldn't even
bother spending the $ and time on changing the gasket. See if any of the bolts
are at all loose first.
KJH
But I was wondering about some of the oil-burning reports myself. I had a
'94 SL2 and a '99 SC2, and neither burned oil between changes (I'm hoping
the new 2002 SL2 I just got doesn't!); yet I've heard others say that after
they go over 100,000 miles, they start to burn it, although from what they
say, it's not much. Maybe it's just with certain years, or maybe when they
just get high mileage on them?
"Dick Josaitis" <josa...@arenet.net> wrote in message
news:3c9150a...@news.arenet.net...
Jonnie Santos
too.
--
My valid email address contains no numbers.
"Dick Josaitis" <josa...@arenet.net> wrote in message
news:3c9150a...@news.arenet.net...
Jonnie Santos
between the metals the rings are made of and the cylinder walls that lead to
accelerated wear?
Or would you think it's just lousy design/product (the ring sets) ?
--
My valid email address contains no numbers.
"BANDIT2941" <bandi...@aol.comNHRA> wrote in message
news:20020314212725...@mb-md.aol.com...
Dan Duncan
> 97 SL-2 here - rebuild at 44k, currently have 62k. Their service is great
> too.
Why was it rebuilt at 44k?
-DanD
--
# Dan Duncan (kd4igw) da...@pcisys.net http://pcisys.net/~dand
# The three principal virtues of a programmer are Laziness, Impatience, and
# Hubris. See the Camel Book for why. (From the Perl man page)
Matt Drury
> oil changes, since new oil is being constantly added. I guess the oil
> filter would need to be eventually replaced though.
Not to mention getting rid of the crud which collects in what remains.
Matt Drury
> drop of oil between changes. I try to have the oil changed every 3k
> or so, but sometimes it's 4k.
Similar experience here with a '96 SL, 75k. Aside from a recall a few years
back which cost me nothing out of pocket once everything sorted itself out,
this is a hardy vehicle.
Jonnie Santos
--
My valid email address contains no numbers.
"Dan Duncan" <da...@babu.pcisys.net> wrote in message
news:u9322n1...@corp.supernews.com...
@sympatico.ca -brad-
my 97 SW2 has 109000 km and just now begins to burn oil. I would like to try
your trick, is the landing the groove the ring sits in? or what? what size
hole do you drill?
--
-brad-
Skid
oil is burned.
"John S. Washburn" <sham...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:kYbk8.461718$eS3.35...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
BANDIT2941
3mm. We put 4 in each piston, 90 degrees apart.
Jamie
BANDIT2941
>your trick, is the landing the groove the ring sits in? or what?
Yes, the landing is the groove the ring sits in - forgot to mention that in my
first post.
Jamie
John S. Washburn
Austin is so bad.
As for my CRX, well I used race that car all the damn time on the weekends
back in Houston.
Also, the engine was always running high in RPMs.
BTW, I'm proud to say I was able to get that little SOHC 1.6L (non vtec) to
crank out 112HP at the wheels!!
And yes, it was naturally asperated. No NOS, no Turbo, and no Superchager of
any kind. ...I miss that car :(
"Skid" <sk...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:NAuk8.26057$Yg2.3...@news20.bellglobal.com...
Heartbeat 95 SL2
ludicrous "1 qt./2k miles is normal" while under warranty. By 100k
miles, it was up to 1 qt./1k miles. Now, with a seeping leak like
Washburn's, it's 1 qt/500 miles. My leak also does not drip on the
ground (much), but it is leaking at the pan gasket near the trans (so
it *might* be the rear main seal, but techs say they don't go out
often). The most I get is a sheet of oil down the side of the pan,
and maybe a couple drops on the ground. I'd say it's leaking while
the engine is running and oil pressure is high, so all the oil ends up
on the road, not our driveways.
There is no oil pan gasket per se, they just use RTV sealant.
However, Chilton's guide does not spell the procedure out properly.
They leave out the little fact that access to some of the bolts
requires the crank pulley to be removed, which is what some Saturn
techs have told me.
"John S. Washburn" <sham...@texas.net> wrote in message news:<NUck8.90365$uv5.7...@bin6.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...
BANDIT2941
>ludicrous "1 qt./2k miles is normal" while under warranty. By 100k
>miles, it was up to 1 qt./1k miles. Now, with a seeping leak like
>Washburn's, it's 1 qt/500 miles. My leak also does not drip on the
>ground (much), but it is leaking at the pan gasket near the trans (so
>it *might* be the rear main seal, but techs say they don't go out
>often). The most I get is a sheet of oil down the side of the pan,
>and maybe a couple drops on the ground. I'd say it's leaking while
>the engine is running and oil pressure is high, so all the oil ends up
>on the road, not our driveways.
You should be able to tell for sure if you jack it up/run it up on ramps and
get under it. There is an aluminum brace and a little tin cover at the bottom
of the flywheel. Theres an exhaust bracket attached to the aluminum brace,
unbolt it, then unbolt the brace(its a stiffener going from engine to
transmission). Then unbolt the little tin cover, hose everything off with
brake-clean, start the car and see where the leak is coming from. With the
cover off you should be able to get a better idea.
>
>There is no oil pan gasket per se, they just use RTV sealant.
>However, Chilton's guide does not spell the procedure out properly.
>They leave out the little fact that access to some of the bolts
>requires the crank pulley to be removed, which is what some Saturn
>techs have told me.
Yeah.......when you buy a gasket kit it comes with a few gaskets and a tube of
silicone :)
Are you sure the pulley has to be removed or can you just turn it to where the
access point is right and get in there with a wrench for those bolts? I'm not
really sure as I didn't have my pan off while the engine was in the car.
Jamie
Alan King
>Why do Saturns burn oil so much?
Well, not all of them do.
>I hear people talk about how normal it is
>for a Saturn over 100K to go through a quart every 1K miles.
The key is talk about. People who have problems talk about them. People who
don't, don't talk about them.
>Yet, my 91
>Honda CRX NEVER burned oil that much.
OK, none of my three Saturns has burned oil. My 1994 motorhome with a 454 in,
which are supposedly famous for burning oil, doesn't burn any. My 1965 Pontiac
Catalina with a 389 still wasn't using any at 168,000 miles. My cousin's 1967
Cadillac with a 429, that I changed the oil in personally many times, was
getting to almost use a quart every 3,000 miles when it had 329,000 miles on
it.
>What gives?
I don't know that anything does, other that this is a Saturn newsgroup tends to
collect individuals with complaints about Saturn vehicles. Doesn't mean the
complaints apply to all of them.
Alan King
Steven Scharf
leads to worn valve seals, leads to failed rings.
The repair is new rings and valve seals after honing the
valve stem surface.
They are supposed to have corrected the root
cause in later years (I think 2000 and newer).
Of course not every unit will have the problem
occur, but it seems to be a disproportionate number
compared to other vehicles, and the cause is well
known.
Honda's expertise has always been engines, you'd
expect them to have worked out the intricacies of
rings, valves, materials, and machining. It's one
reason that the engine is the best part of a Honda.
Now if they could just learn about paint it would
be wonderful.
"John S. Washburn" <sham...@texas.net> wrote in message news:<kYbk8.461718$eS3.35...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com>...
Jonnie Santos
they'd prematurely worn the valve stem seals. So a new set of seals took
care of the top end and a new set of piston rings along with cylinder honing
took care of the bottom.
I'm not a tech so feel free to correct the above...
--
My valid email address contains no numbers.
"Steven Scharf" <sch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4f153f94.02031...@posting.google.com...
Heartbeat 95 SL2
word for it, as he's a straight-shooter and he wouldn't jerk me
around. From the pictures in Chiltons manual, it does look like the
pulley's solid circumference sits right were you'd need to put the
ratchet/socket/wrench.
bandi...@aol.comNHRA (BANDIT2941) wrote in message news:<20020316104326...@mb-dh.aol.com>...
Chris Wheal
highway (commute 65 miles each way), local at weekends only, normal speed 65-75.
Chris
Paul L Fisher
extended warranty, Saturn told me that 1 quart per 1,000 miles is normal and
I used .9 at that time.
--
Paul L Fisher
'93 Ford Taurus SHO Crimson Clearcoat ATX 164K Build date 11/18/1992
- K&N Panel filter, Tokico Struts, Eibach Springs, Dynomax cat-back, Holley
190lph fuel pump, FPS rebuilt ATX, 26mm rear sway bar, Performance-Plus
Stainless Steel Y-pipe, Delrin sub-frame bushings, Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30
oil, Amsoil Synthetic ATF.
'00 Ford Explorer XLT 5.0L V8 AWD Oxford White Clearcoat 26K Build date
11/19/1999
- Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30 oil, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit
'96 Saturn SL2 Silver Plum 5 spd 113K
- Amsoil Synthetic ATF, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit
SHO Club member http://www.shoclub.com/
Check out my web site http://www.geocities.com/paullfisher/
Amsoil dealer http://www.geocities.com/paullfisher/oil.htm
Cheap long distance 5 cents a minute anytime, no monthly fees -
http://qwesteferral.com/r.jsp?a=DFmOnIzrj3lfVU541Lz2HA$$&x
"Chris Wheal" <cwh...@altaira.com> wrote in message
news:3C960701...@altaira.com...
Brian Morgan
> leads to worn valve seals, leads to failed rings.
Just curious - how does worn valve seals lead to failed rings?
Brian
Jonnie Santos
coked or gummed up the oil control ring causing it to freeze and no longer
float and keep a good seal. I'm not a tech - maybe one will chime in...
--
My valid email address contains no numbers.
"Brian Morgan" <brian-...@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message
news:yJLl8.170855$Hu6.39...@typhoon.neo.rr.com...
Heartbeat 95 SL2
stink with Saturn to have your car fixed. Even Saturn's website says
1 qt./2k miles is their standard. Any more, and people out of
warranty have been told they fail the oil consumption test. Of
course, the only ones I've heard of getting Saturn to do them right
are the people who were willing to make a lot of phone calls and not
get brushed under the rug. I was told people with extended warranties
are treated like royalty by Saturn, but I guess not. I would love to
raise hell myself, but before I found all this internet info, I bought
there line of crap, and never even had an oil consumption test done.
Doh!
"Paul L Fisher" <pfis...@charter.net> wrote in message news:<u9d0jnc...@corp.supernews.com>...
Alan King
>...not to steal Scharf's thunder
Don't worry, he doesn't have any. Tempest in a teapot maybe.
>I thought I read that the leaking seals
>coked or gummed up the oil control ring causing it to freeze and no longer
>float and keep a good seal. I'm not a tech - maybe one will chime in...
Sorry, just a lowly powertrain engineer. Leaking valve seals cause blue smoke
on start up and can lead to deposits in the combustion chamber that will cause
pre-ignition piston failures.
About the only way leaking valve seals could affect oil control rings would be
to leave out the top and 2nd compression ring sets.
Alan King
Jonnie Santos
--
My valid email address contains no numbers.
"Alan King" <ajkin...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020323072418...@mb-fz.aol.com...
Blue87T
> I thought I read that the leaking seals
>coked or gummed up the oil control ring causing it to freeze and no longer
>float and keep a good seal. I'm not a tech - maybe one will chime in...
>--
I'll chime in . The reason they burn oil is the rings seize to the piston . If
left unattended they will eventually wear the cylinder walls too. What causes
the rings to seize ? Saturn wont tell you . Initially the fix was to just do
valve seals . Then it was valve seals and rering / hone . I read the powertrain
engineer's response. Not arguing with him , but I saw tons of oil eaters that
didnt blow a drop of smoke on startup . The theory on that was that the cat
burned it all up . But I have worked on other makes that did blow a ton of
smoke with bad valve seals ( Chevy 305 for example ) . I dont have an offial
answer for why the eat oil. I can fix them though ;)
Bandits answer about drilling relief holes is
a popular solution amongst different field service engineers I talked to but I
never did it in the field. Oil gets "stuck " in there and cokes. Thats what
causes the sticking . Maybe poor tolerance between the piston and cylinder wall
.
Jonnie Santos
I figure the next time around (rebuild) maybe aftermarket pistons and
aftermarket rings (I've seen JE on the SPS site). I read somewhere the
total seal rings were good for turbo applications but not recommended for
normally aspirated engines.
Off topic:
Anything new with your Turbo Regal? My cousin still has his Grand National,
however since he retired (at age 50 - must be nice) he's running around in a
big Lincoln and his girlfriend was driving the Buick until it overheated -
it's parked for now until he can see what all got cooked...
--
My valid email address contains no numbers.
"Blue87T" <blu...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020323124646...@mb-cf.aol.com...
Blue87T
>Off topic:
Uh O , your going to get people mad with "off topic " stuff ...
>Anything new with your Turbo Regal?
The Turbo Regal has been sitting for quite a while now. I have been sick on
every nice Saturday we have had so far . I had the right side suspension out
and the lower control arm bolt is stuck in the metal part of the bushing. I
lost interest at that point. Then my dad bought me a new Sawzall to help fix
the problem. Didnt get around to cutting the bolt out. I have very limited time
with my little 9 month old boy taking up alot of it. I also just bought a new
house and have to get the Regal back to towable condition ( nice big garage ) .
Most of my time now is spent buying toy collections ( Star Wars and stuff -
takes up tons of room however ) .
Steven Scharf
> I thought I read that the rough finish on the valve stems was smooth after
> they'd prematurely worn the valve stem seals. So a new set of seals took
> care of the top end and a new set of piston rings along with cylinder honing
> took care of the bottom.
You are correct about that. However techs still recommend
ensuring that the finish is smooth before replacing the seals.
Remember that the actual cause of the consumption is stuck
rings, but the root cause is what causes the rings to become
frozen in the first place, and that's the rough finish.
If the valve stem seals didn't go bad then the rings
wouldn't become frozen.
Here's the scoop from Blue87T:
"Here's the most common situation ( as far as my experience goes). The actual
cause of the oil consumption is stuck rings. What causes the rings to stick ?
Usually blamed on valve seals. How come? I don't know. I think that putting an
oil relief hole in the piston wouldn't hurt.
How to fix it?
The repair can be done in the car as long as the cylinder walls aren't too bad.
Replace the valve seals. Clean the piston ring lands. Replace rings. Hone block
with a flexi-hone. Then wash cylinder bore out with Tide and warm water."
BANDIT2941
>
>The repair can be done in the car as long as the cylinder walls aren't too
>bad.
>Replace the valve seals. Clean the piston ring lands. Replace rings. Hone
>block
>with a flexi-hone. Then wash cylinder bore out with Tide and warm water."
>
How many of these have you done Steve?
>Remember that the actual cause of the consumption is stuck
>rings, but the root cause is what causes the rings to become
>frozen in the first place, and that's the rough finish.
>If the valve stem seals didn't go bad then the rings
>wouldn't become frozen.
Read Alan King's post regarding this issue.
6th planet auto parts Inc
know anyone interested in it? i also have some really rare 1940's Disney
books, i tried ebay but didnt really get any good hits. Joey
Ps, glad to hear about the new house and baby!!!!! thanks for the email! it
was good to hear from you off the boardnews:20020323153027...@mb-ce.aol.com...
Steven Scharf
> >"Jonnie Santos"
> Most of my time now is spent buying toy collections ( Star Wars and stuff -
> takes up tons of room however ) .
Buy the Tonka Dig and Rigs and the Tonka Workshop computer
games before they're discontinued (the Tonka Workshop may
already be gone).
Your boy will love them when he's about three. Maybe they'll
become collectors items!
They have controls or tools that attach over a keyboard and
depress keys on the keyboard.
http://www.gzkidzone.com/gzreviews/r13456.asp
http://www.geocities.com/~reviewcorner/tonkawkshpplyset.htm
GUNSDONTKILLPEOPLEIDO
up with the idea that it could be Saturn engines that are Dual
Overhead Cam for the most part that burn the most oil. This could be
due partly by it's design. But don't take my word for it.
Just my $0.02
"KJH" <kher...@suespammers.org> wrote in message news:<B4dk8.25415$N7.52...@ruti.visi.com>...
> Gee, I really like my Saturn, it doesn't burn oil -- seriously!!! :)
>
> But I was wondering about some of the oil-burning reports myself. I had a
> '94 SL2 and a '99 SC2, and neither burned oil between changes (I'm hoping
> the new 2002 SL2 I just got doesn't!); yet I've heard others say that after
> they go over 100,000 miles, they start to burn it, although from what they
> say, it's not much. Maybe it's just with certain years, or maybe when they
> just get high mileage on them?
Paul L Fisher
My '93 Taurus with 164K miles on it burns a quart every 4000 miles.
--
Paul L Fisher
'93 Ford Taurus SHO Crimson Clearcoat ATX 164K Build date 11/18/1992
- K&N Panel filter, Tokico Struts, Eibach Springs, Dynomax cat-back, Holley
190lph fuel pump, FPS rebuilt ATX, 26mm rear sway bar, Performance-Plus
Stainless Steel Y-pipe, Delrin sub-frame bushings, Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30
oil, Amsoil Synthetic ATF.
'00 Ford Explorer XLT 5.0L V8 AWD Oxford White Clearcoat 26K Build date
11/19/1999
- Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30 oil, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit
'96 Saturn SL2 Silver Plum 5 spd 113K
- Amsoil Synthetic ATF, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit
SHO Club member http://www.shoclub.com/
Check out my web site http://www.geocities.com/paullfisher/
Amsoil dealer http://www.geocities.com/paullfisher/oil.htm
Cheap long distance 5 cents a minute anytime, no monthly fees -
http://qwesteferral.com/r.jsp?a=DFmOnIzrj3lfVU541Lz2HA$$&x
"GUNSDONTKILLPEOPLEIDO" <vw7...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:5ec93304.02032...@posting.google.com...
vailchalet2
engine; as GM almost often does.
GM has some of the best engineers, and some of the worst management and
production.
Saturn engines like the DOHC, probably would do better with a fastidious owner/
driver that kept the engine in good tune, and used synthetic oil, or
conventional oil with frequent changes.
But, it wasn't a ultra bulletproof engine.
Bickford, R. (Richard)
> driver that kept the engine in good tune, and used synthetic oil, or
> conventional oil with frequent changes.
I'm like that. I go WOT daily (only after full warm up), rev it past
5500, use fully synthetic Mobil 1 changed every 5,000 miles, & go above
& beyond the required maintenance.
I've never understood why people have motors that use excessive oil? I
guess they just put in the cheapest that is on sale and then run it
excessively long?
I've pretty much run every car I've ever owned hard. Owned most of them
over 150k miles & I'm not opposed to redlining it as long as it's all up
to temp. I only have 42k miles on the 00 SL2 but it's been to the track
and used hard daily. I've got no drop in oil level at all when it comes
time to change.
Although I've had a little piston slap when below 45 degrees for the
first minute. (started around 18k or so)
Bill Davis
>I've never understood why people have motors that use excessive oil? I
>guess they just put in the cheapest that is on sale and then run it
>excessively long?
>
Yup. Yup..., and then there are those idiot's out there who assume
that since it didn't happen to them (luck of the draw), something bad
happening to someone else is OBVIOUSLY their own fault ...
Bill Davis
pissed off owner of a '93 SL2, maintained at the dealer in accordance
with the maintenance schedule since new, 122K miles, now using a quart
of oil in under 500 miles, & facing a $2000 engine rebuild
BANDIT2941
>guess they just put in the cheapest that is on sale and then run it
>excessively long?
The reason a Saturn engine burns oil isn't that the owner used cheap
oil.........
Bickford, R. (Richard)
> Yup. Yup..., and then there are those idiot's out there who assume
> that since it didn't happen to them (luck of the draw), something bad
> happening to someone else is OBVIOUSLY their own fault ...
>
> Bill Davis
> pissed off owner of a '93 SL2, maintained at the dealer in accordance
> with the maintenance schedule since new, 122K miles, now using a quart
> of oil in under 500 miles, & facing a $2000 engine rebuild
I did not mean to imply that. But I guess I did'nt say much more
either, did I?
Sorry.
I've bought high milage cars before that did indeed use oil pretty bad.
Like 1 qt every 500 miles or so.
And each time I saw evidence of neglecting regular maintainence.
I "rekon" what I should have said was; I don't understand why people
who have bought their car new, drove it for the engineered life (either
80k or 150k) have problems with high oil consumtion? BUT I will give
you this: I am ASSUMING people know the mechanical and engineering
things I do. They do all their own work and keep an eagle eye on every
detail. I am different then most in this manner and take it for
granted.
Don't think that the OEMs are going to help you buy a car and make it
last for more than 4-5 years. That's not their goal! Their goal is to
get you in every 3-4 years for another.
I know because I am an OEM engineer in Detriot and have been for a
number of years. And.. 6 yrs was spent in engine design.
Don't assume that someone who makes an off handed comment is an
"idiot". Maybey they are? Maybe not.
Bill, I think you have fallen prey to the notion that your car ought to
last "X" amount of time/milage when taken care of just like as was
presribed by the company who sold it to you?
I whole heartedly agree with you that at 122k miles there ought to be NO
problems like this. However the head honcho's don't. The amount of new
car owners who drive it these kinds of miles are few compared to the
"masses". It's simply not a big deal to the big guys.
I'll give some expert advise to ya,
Short term fix: I'd check the egr sys (make sure it's pulling a good
vacum on the crankcase) & do a compression/leak down check. this will
tell you what is really going on and where. Second If the leak down
shows it's not holding compressing I'd step up the oil to 10w-40 above
40 deg. F weather. And 10w-30 when colder (highs during the day).
Next time you get a fresh engine/car change the oil at 500 miles, 3000
miles, (using regular oil), then change it every 4-6k miles with mobil 1
and a purolater "pure one" oil filter. Then assuming the new motor/car
is built right (out of our control)? You could easily get 200k with
little problems.
This is what I do to my cars, & some days I "drive it like I stole it".
Later, WOT
John S. Washburn
more knowledge about cars and general maintenance then your 'joe-sixpack'.
That said, it would be safe to say those here in this news group are NOT
idiots...at least most of them arn't.
By the way, my 97 SC2 goes through about 1qt of oil every 3K. It's not bad,
but not exactly normal either for the amount of miles on it. Though, I think
the problem with my car may be that I'm leaking oil under high oil pressure
as my spark plugs look clean and I'm not dripping oil when the car is parked
or just sitting idling.
"BANDIT2941" <bandi...@aol.comNHRA> wrote in message
news:20020412172337...@mb-ch.aol.com...
Bill Davis
>
>> Yup. Yup..., and then there are those idiot's out there who assume
>> that since it didn't happen to them (luck of the draw), something bad
>> happening to someone else is OBVIOUSLY their own fault ...
>>
>> Bill Davis
>> pissed off owner of a '93 SL2, maintained at the dealer in accordance
>> with the maintenance schedule since new, 122K miles, now using a quart
>> of oil in under 500 miles, & facing a $2000 engine rebuild
>
>
>I did not mean to imply that. But I guess I did'nt say much more
>either, did I?
>
>Sorry.
>
>you this: I am ASSUMING people know the mechanical and engineering
>things I do. They do all their own work and keep an eagle eye on every
>detail. I am different then most in this manner and take it for
>granted.
Well, that's probably a faulty assumption, given your background &
qualifications. However, the average person expects that a new
vehicle, if religiously tended in accordance with the published
maintenance schedule, will last a reasonable lifetime without major
mechanical problems. Given improvements in the overall auto industry,
"reasonable" is a moving target, but increased oil consumption
starting at around 40 - 50K miles is unreasonable and any manufacturer
who, even in 1993, was fool enough to advertise their new vehicle
would start to increase oil consumption at that mileage, would lose
significant numbers of sales to their competition.
>Don't think that the OEMs are going to help you buy a car and make it
>last for more than 4-5 years. That's not their goal! Their goal is to
>get you in every 3-4 years for another.
>I know because I am an OEM engineer in Detriot and have been for a
>number of years. And.. 6 yrs was spent in engine design.
>
>Don't assume that someone who makes an off handed comment is an
>"idiot". Maybey they are? Maybe not.
Your comment pushed the right button. Note, however, I didn't
directly call you an idiot <g>. (However if you'd like to confess to
designing this particular engine, I might revise that ...)
>
>I whole heartedly agree with you that at 122k miles there ought to be NO
>problems like this. However the head honcho's don't. The amount of new
>car owners who drive it these kinds of miles are few compared to the
>"masses". It's simply not a big deal to the big guys.
It should be. Coincidently while reading this, received a phone call
from the local Saturn dealership trying to sell me a new Saturn. I've
been purchasing new cars as I needed a vehicle since about 1975, and
will probably purchase at least 5 or 6 more before I become too senile
to drive. At this point anyone trying to sell me a Saturn starts with
two strikes against them just because of the oil consumption issue.
Oil consumption aside, I like the car (that's why I've kept it) and
the initial purchasing experience with Saturn was great. However, all
has been overshadowed by lousy oil consumption. Even if I had decided
to replace the car earlier, say at 65 - 70K miles, oil consumption
would have been an issue, since oil consumption has been constantly
increasing on this vehicle since about 40K miles.
>
>I'll give some expert advise to ya,
>
Thanks for the constructive comments & advice.
Bill
BANDIT2941
>but not exactly normal either for the amount of miles on it. Though, I think
>the problem with my car may be that I'm leaking oil under high oil pressure
>as my spark plugs look clean and I'm not dripping oil when the car is parked
>or just sitting idling.
I bet your plugs would look fine even burning a qt/3k. If it was leaking under
high oil pressure you would still see it somewhere underneath - have you seen
anything? Also, if it was leaking theres a good chance you'd smell it
sometimes(or maybe just once in awhile).
I wish I could track down the oil pressure chart I wrote down with what
pressures my engine gets. I had a gauge hooked up to it awhile back and took
readings per 1k rpm, ie 1000 2000 3000 4000(just below rev limiter) not moving.
I want to say I had like 60 lbs or more but I can't remember.
Paul L Fisher
I whine continuously to anyone who asks about my oil consumption. Other than
that, the car has been bulletproof. It now has 115,000 miles on it. Replaced
the front brakes twice, one O2 sensor. That's it! In the big scheme of
things this car is almost a Honda when it comes to reliability but the way
that Saturn handles the oil consumption complaints has made it the last
Saturn I ever buy. If I got a letter in the mai tomorrow offering to fix it
for free, I'd be back on board.
--
Paul L Fisher
'93 Ford Taurus SHO Crimson Clearcoat ATX 164K Build date 11/18/1992
- K&N Panel filter, Tokico Struts, Eibach Springs, Dynomax cat-back, Holley
190lph fuel pump, FPS rebuilt ATX, 26mm rear sway bar, Performance-Plus
Stainless Steel Y-pipe, Delrin sub-frame bushings, Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30
oil, Amsoil Synthetic ATF.
'00 Ford Explorer XLT 5.0L V8 AWD Oxford White Clearcoat 28K Build date
11/19/1999
- Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30 oil, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit
'96 Saturn SL2 Silver Plum 5 spd 114K
- Amsoil Synthetic ATF, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit
SHO Club member http://www.shoclub.com/
Check out my web site http://www.geocities.com/paullfisher/
Amsoil dealer http://www.geocities.com/paullfisher/oil.htm
Cheap long distance 5 cents a minute anytime, no monthly fees -
http://qwesteferral.com/r.jsp?a=DFmOnIzrj3lfVU541Lz2HA$$&x
"Bill Davis" <no_spa...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:661fbu8a1niuq8dr6...@4ax.com...
John S. Washburn
"BANDIT2941" <bandi...@aol.comNHRA> wrote in message
news:20020413011422...@mb-fp.aol.com...
Lame Duck
> I whine continuously to anyone who asks about my oil consumption. Other
than
> that, the car has been bulletproof. It now has 115,000 miles on it.
Replaced
> the front brakes twice, one O2 sensor. That's it! In the big scheme of
> things this car is almost a Honda when it comes to reliability but the way
> that Saturn handles the oil consumption complaints has made it the last
> Saturn I ever buy. If I got a letter in the mai tomorrow offering to fix
it
> for free, I'd be back on board.
ALMOST the reliability of a Honda? From what you report your Saturn
surpasses Honda. In 115,000 miles you haven't replaced a water pump,
alternator or exaust. You would have done so if you were driving a Honda.
And how's the body holding up? Any rust or dents? How do the Civics of the
same year look? However, you won't buy another Saturn because you have to
add some oil every now and then? Hmmm... what's wrong here?
Al Phillips
Bill Davis
>"Paul L Fisher" <pfis...@charter.net> wrote in message
>news:ubg6cd2...@corp.supernews.com...
>> I whine continuously to anyone who asks about my oil consumption. ......<snip)
>
>ALMOST the reliability of a Honda? From what you report your Saturn
>surpasses Honda. In 115,000 miles you haven't replaced a water pump,
>alternator or exaust. You would have done so if you were driving a Honda.
>And how's the body holding up? Any rust or dents? How do the Civics of the
>same year look? However, you won't buy another Saturn because you have to
>add some oil every now and then? Hmmm... what's wrong here?
>
>Al Phillips
>
>
well, I'm not Paul, but to toss in my 2 cents: "some oil every now
and then?" .... !!!!!
My 93 SL2 goes thru SIX quarts between 3000 mile oil changes! ....
and for what it's worth, I also own a 89 Civic which has about 50K
more miles on it than the Saturn, doesn't require any oil added
between service intervals, and still runs fine.
Additionally, high oil consumption trashes the catalytic converter in
the Saturn, which at the dealer, costs $500+ to replace. Here in
California, bad catalytic converter = failed bi-annual smog check,
which must be passed to register the vehicle.
Bill Davis
not a happy camper
Lame Duck
> well, I'm not Paul, but to toss in my 2 cents: "some oil every now
> and then?" .... !!!!!
>
> My 93 SL2 goes thru SIX quarts between 3000 mile oil changes! ....
> and for what it's worth, I also own a 89 Civic which has about 50K
> more miles on it than the Saturn, doesn't require any oil added
> between service intervals, and still runs fine.
>
> Additionally, high oil consumption trashes the catalytic converter in
> the Saturn, which at the dealer, costs $500+ to replace. Here in
> California, bad catalytic converter = failed bi-annual smog check,
> which must be passed to register the vehicle.
Bill, I don't deny that having to add a quart of oil every 500 miles makes
for a dissapointing ownership experience. But the question to ask is "what
is it costing you?" In the case of Paul, who hasn't had much go wrong in
115,000 miles, I'd say he's only out the price of the oil. (I don't know if
he lives in a state that has an emissions inspection, so the condition of
his catalytic converter is unknown.) Have you had to replace your cat
converter, Bill? I know high oil consumption isn't good for them. However,
FWIW, I've owned a number (4) of Fords and Mercury's with the 5.0 lieter V8
engine---all of which burned a quart every 1,000 miles. I never replaced a
cat converter and never failed a NJ emissions inspection. This, of course,
is comparing apples to oranges, but it does show that a catalytic converter
will tolerate a certain amount burned oil.
Al Phillips
Bill Davis
> Have you had to replace your cat converter, Bill?
I've watched each inspection as the HC% got closer & closer to the
allowable max. This last inspection was a cat's whisker away from
failing. Coincidently the cat. converter has now physically failed
internally (you can hear it rattling inside), and as I have a year
till the next smog inspection, I'm going to resolve the oil
consumption issue before putting in a new converter.
Bill Davis
Paul L Fisher
consumption is normal.
--
Paul L Fisher
'93 Ford Taurus SHO Crimson Clearcoat ATX 164K Build date 11/18/1992
- K&N Panel filter, Tokico Struts, Eibach Springs, Dynomax cat-back, Holley
190lph fuel pump, FPS rebuilt ATX, 26mm rear sway bar, Performance-Plus
Stainless Steel Y-pipe, Delrin sub-frame bushings, Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30
oil, Amsoil Synthetic ATF.
'00 Ford Explorer XLT 5.0L V8 AWD Oxford White Clearcoat 28K Build date
11/19/1999
- Amsoil Series 2000 0W-30 oil, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit
'96 Saturn SL2 Silver Plum 5 spd 114K
- Amsoil Synthetic ATF, K&N Fuel Injection Performance Kit
SHO Club member http://www.shoclub.com/
Check out my web site http://www.geocities.com/paullfisher/
Amsoil dealer http://www.geocities.com/paullfisher/oil.htm
Cheap long distance 5 cents a minute anytime, no monthly fees -
http://qwesteferral.com/r.jsp?a=DFmOnIzrj3lfVU541Lz2HA$$&x
"Lame Duck" <2...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:a9ai4n$mf1$1...@slb6.atl.mindspring.net...
Alan King
>Don't think that the OEMs are going to help you buy a car and make it
>last for more than 4-5 years. That's not their goal! Their goal is to
>get you in every 3-4 years for another.
>I know because I am an OEM engineer in Detriot
Well, that may not be the goal of the OEM you used to work for (hint to others,
look at his e-mail address), but I wouldn't speak for other OEMs if I were
you.
>Next time you get a fresh engine/car change the oil at 500 miles, 3000
>miles, (using regular oil), then change it every 4-6k miles with mobil 1
>and a purolater "pure one" oil filter.
Why would he/she use a Ford oil filter in a GM product?
Alan King
Bickford, R. (Richard)
Because you don't. Just because my e-mail address is from this building
and I have access does'nt mean I am employed by them. And came from you
know who.
(hint to others, look at his e-mail address), but I wouldn't speak for
other OEMs if I were
> you.
It's true I cannot speak "for" any OEMs. But I CAN speak "about" the
ones I do have first hand engineering knowledge of. Of these, Saturn
engine engineering is included.
>Next time you get a fresh engine/car change the oil at 500 miles, 3000
> >miles, (using regular oil), then change it every 4-6k miles with mobil 1
> >and a purolater "pure one" oil filter.
>
> Why would he/she use a Ford oil filter in a GM product?
Actually you are 180 degrees wrong. The original ford motorcraft brand
is provided by a company I'll not name from southern Il. And the
"aftermarket" ones are produced by pur-o-later. (sp?)
If you buy the "pure one" model of filter, you'll get the synthetic seal
and in some cases a better anti-drain back valve.
WOT
busfamily
his posts and make fun of any typos or grammatical mistakes and try to make
ourselves feel more knowledgeable at the expense of a person just trying to
help. That's the newsgroup way after all.
"Bickford, R. (Richard)" <rbic...@visteon.com> wrote in message
news:3CBD6474...@visteon.com...
Bickford, R. (Richard)
caint always spel rite. :)
I just simply stand on the facts. Not my "opinions" or "feelings". No
self respecting mechanical engineer ever would shoot from the hip.
However sometimes I do tend to "sum it up" in my responses so as to make
my input short and simple.
OK back on topic, I did some research last night about this Saturn oil
consumption problem. And at this point I'll simply say, everything I
can find points toward premature piston ring wear and/or bore out of
roundness. Don't know the root cause yet though. Sometimes situations
like this will never come to light in the public eye. Because of the
out of spec processing of materials. Unfortunatly I've seen this in
water pump bearing shafts that would fail. They would give out at the
30-50k miles area because the material properities/processing was not up
to spec and caught before production.
I can tell ya'll that I suggest Mobil one because of two things I've
seen. 1) I've seen the cold/dirty flow testing first hand at that
"un-named" filter company I earlier mentioned. 2) When fully synthetic
Mobil 1 is used from day one in a particular engine, it has a problem
getting parts "seated". Mobil tried to get into the OE motor market a
while back and failed because of this. I can only guess that the Vette
is delivered with a special additive to assist in break-in, or regular
oil?, or maybe the motors are allready broken in?
Later, WOT
Michael
back in the day I seen that they tested each car that came off of the
assembly line on a dyno to make sure each and every corvette puts out the
horsepower. to me that is breaking the engine in a little bit when they
take the car to the max right after it is made. I don't know anything but
that on what they do.
"Bickford, R. (Richard)" <rbic...@visteon.com> wrote in message
news:3CBDAEAA...@visteon.com...
John S. Washburn
them on the dyno. The very thought of taking a brand new engine off the line
and then subjecting it to the stresses of a dyno run from a cold start makes
me cringe!!!
"Michael" <iked...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:r4rv8.28438$V44.704@rwcrnsc53...
Bickford, R. (Richard)
>
> I do hope they at least let the engine warm up for 10 minutes before running
> them on the dyno. The very thought of taking a brand new engine off the line
> and then subjecting it to the stresses of a dyno run from a cold start makes
> me cringe!!!
>
> "Michael" <iked...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:r4rv8.28438$V44.704@rwcrnsc53...
> > in response to the corvette: when I took a tour of the corvette factory
> > back in the day I seen that they tested each car that came off of the
> > assembly line on a dyno to make sure each and every corvette puts out the
> > horsepower. to me that is breaking the engine in a little bit when they
> > take the car to the max right after it is made. I don't know anything but
> > that on what they do.
I took the tour in 92 also. Pretty neat to see them rip on the dyno!
Well, what I meant about break in? Was before the engines are delivered.
Most engine plants I've been to only test 1 out of every ?? engines. In
the case of a Ford Truck 4.6 it's only 1 out of 6 that gets tested. (2
minutes)
vailchalet2
emotor will have little predictive value of problems in the field....in my
humble non-expert opinion.
Saturns burn oil, Toyota timing chains fail in older truck motors, and newer
Toyotas are having a sludge problem with oil.
In all three cases, most of the problems might have been avoided with more
frequent oil changes and/ or the use of a better motor oil.
When Fieros threw con rods, or Subaru Turbos and thermal reactor equiped BMW's
cracked heads, or Porsce timing chains failed, or VW TDI motors lost timing
belts etc etc . .....these were design problems and the best oil in the world
probably would have reduced the likelihood of problems only slightly.
In either type of example, manufacturers make mistakes and don't always tell
consumers until the problerms are in court or in the news.
A true factory commitment to the consumer would save a lot of money and
frustration for the vehicle owner, and perhaps help them avoid dangerous safety
issues, by sharing information in a more open and timely fashion.
Bickford, R. (Richard)
> emotor will have little predictive value of problems in the field....in my
> humble non-expert opinion.
That's true. But it's not the point of doing the test. The earlier you
catch a part that has been built wrong, the less it cost to fix before
it leaves the MFG plant. If you only have to fix 6 engines it's waaaay
cheaper than letting 1000 of them get into cars spread out all over the
world.
>
> Saturns burn oil, Toyota timing chains fail in older truck motors, and newer
> Toyotas are having a sludge problem with oil...........
All you said is absolutly true! Design stage is where 80% of the
problems can be eliminated.
The other 20% would come from doing more real world testing. They do
some, but not enough. If they did then us engineers would have the
"data" to beat up on management and get better quality stuff put into
new cars/trucks. Down side though? they most likely would cost more.
So what's the balance? personally I lean toward increased quality and
longevity even if it cost more.
Steven Scharf
The valve seals begin to fail. This causes the engine to
consume oil. The oil consumption causes the rings to gum
up. The rings eventually stick and the oil consumption
goes up even more.
There used to be a guy that posted here who claimed to have
had connections inside Saturn, and he stated that at one
time the company was going to address the problem.
See:
"http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=8jfe8r%2443h%241%40nnrp1.deja.com"
You can religiously follow the severe service schedule
and still have the problem.
"Bickford, R. (Richard)" <rbic...@visteon.com> wrote in message news:<3CBDAEAA...@visteon.com>...
Alan King
>The root cause has been known for years.
>
>The valve seals begin to fail. This causes the engine to
>consume oil. The oil consumption causes the rings to gum
>up.
The problem with your theory, Scharf, is valve stem seals are not expensive
components. If they were really the problem and the problem was as bad as you
allege, then where is the motive for Saturn doing nothing? Changing out valve
stem seals on engines isn't expensive. Come on, where is the motive for
enduring all of this massive customer dissatisfaction?
The only way to even get enough oil in the overhead to get by the valve seals
and even think about screwing up the piston rings would be for the oil
drainbacks to be plugged and that would be a sign of severe neglect. Not to
mention that much oil going by valve stem seals would foul plugs like crazy.
Alan King
Alan King
>Mr King, Don't assume what you know what's up with my employment.
>Because you don't.
Mr. Bickford, OK, I won't assume anything about who you work for. In turn, I
will expect you not to assume or express the generality that all OEM's
(including the one I work for) don't share the low expectations for long term
durability and quality as the OEM you used to work for apparently did as you
expressed in your original message.
>Actually you are 180 degrees wrong. The original ford motorcraft brand
>is provided by a company I'll not name from southern Il. And the
>"aftermarket" ones are produced by pur-o-later. (sp?)
>
Huh? I have a feeling oil filters are becoming like washing machines. There
is one factory making all of them. One week the line is set up making GE's and
the next week Kenmore's.
Motorcraft and Purolator are both Ford brands, just as AC Delco and Delco Remy
will forever be identified with GM, even though none of them are owned by the
parent company any longer.
Alan King
Jonnie Santos
Your comments made me think of when I was so tickled when I could afford a
really nice Kenmore washer and dryer from Sears. Then a few years into
ownership I had to replace a fill level valve and discovered my Kenmore
washer was just a rebadged Whirlpool. So unless Sear's brand is price
competitive, I'll look at more manufacturers...
--
"Alan King" <ajkin...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020420082401...@mb-cs.aol.com...
Bickford, R. (Richard)
all OEM's (including the one I work for) don't share the low
expectations for long term durability and quality as the OEM you used to
work for apparently did as you expressed in your original message."
Point noted.
But we ARE posting on a "budget" oriented board. If we were talking
about higher end overseas vehicles & I had no experience with them? I'd
keep my "opinions" to myself.
Since I was involved in engine engineering on early saturns.
I will gladly say that they were more detail oriented during the design
process than are "some" other brands in the same sales target. However
the majority of our work was toward finding new and more efficient ways
to produce the components. It was NOT focused on increasing the
longevity of them. As a matter of fact we designed the water pump using
traditionally "cheaper" methods and materials. But concentrated highly
on making them with increased inspection and better tooling.
But then right as production was about to start Saturn downgraded some
of the purchased components so as to pull out $$. Where is the overall
"higher quality" mentality in that? At the end of the day, cost is
what it comes down to. I've seen this in my customers such as BMW ,
Mercedes, Aston Martin, as well the home grown brands too. Until I see a
quality comitment from car manufacturers, I'll not deny what I've seen.
I'd only be kidding myself.
Please don't misunderstand my points. I cannot speak for the car as a
whole or even the engine as a whole. I was only involved in one
system. Cooling. Which effects bore size and warpage among many other
things. I can only speak the facts as I have experienced them. For
what it's worth? Look at what I spent my my money on after carefully
looking at all competitors.
A 2000 SL2. As an industry insider I think my purchase has some
"weight" in this discussion? Or at least I'd like to think so? ;)
"Motorcraft and Purolator are both Ford brands, just as AC Delco and
Delco Remy will forever be identified with GM, even though none of them
are owned by the parent company any longer."
Ford used to own purolater? I did not know that.
I do find it interesting that they use two totally different suppliers
for their filters. One delivers the "aftermarket" and the others are
the "original". I've not seen this happen to often in the american
market.
Later, WOT
1acondguy
I have heard from this board, that the Saturns that burn oil, do so because
of stuck rings, (supposedly due to carbon and sludge build-up in the ring
lands).
I have heard some good about this product called Auto RX. I don't have any
first hand experience with this product, but the guys here
www.bobistheoilguy.com seem to have used it quite a bit. It is designed to
remove deposits from the oil side of the engine. Who knows if it could do
anything for stuck rings, but it probably doesn't cost much to try. I would
definitely run some carbon cleaner through the top part of the engine such
as Chevron's techroline deposit remover, and I would do several treatments.
I can also tell you with certainty, that if you have an engine that is using
oil, switching to a heavier weight will greatly reduce the oil consumption
(20-50 instead of 5-30).
While I can't say if a top engine cleaner or this Auto RX would help, I
myself would try it, and I would certainly be running a heavier weight oil
to slow down consumption. I too, would be pissed if I had this problem in
any case.
Alex
"Brian Morgan" <brian-...@cinci.rr.com> wrote in message
news:yJLl8.170855$Hu6.39...@typhoon.neo.rr.com...
>
> "Steven Scharf" <sch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4f153f94.02031...@posting.google.com...
> > Rough valve stem surface (factory machining problem)
> > leads to worn valve seals, leads to failed rings.
>
> Just curious - how does worn valve seals lead to failed rings?
> Brian
>
>
>
Bickford, R. (Richard)
using
> oil, switching to a heavier weight will greatly reduce the oil consumption
> (20-50 instead of 5-30).
> While I can't say if a top engine cleaner or this Auto RX would help, I
> myself would try it, and I would certainly be running a heavier weight oil
> to slow down consumption.
Respectfully, that is not allways true. IF the oil is getting past the
valve seals a thicker oil will not drain back as quickly (especially
when cold) and consumption will increase.
IF the oil is getting past stuck/near stuck rings? Indeed a thicker oil
would get you by for a while.
I've personally seen both senarios.
BANDIT2941
>valve seals a thicker oil will not drain back as quickly (especially
>when cold) and consumption will increase.
>IF the oil is getting past stuck/near stuck rings? Indeed a thicker oil
>would get you by for a while.
>
>I've personally seen both senarios.
I used thicker oil on my oil burner and it definitly helped.
It shouldn't be getting past the seals in the first place, and a thicker oil
should help stop it from doing that in the first place. But what you're saying
might be right in some cases.
Bickford, R. (Richard)
That points to the piston, bore, & rings interface.
Steven Scharf
Look at the big picture. As you stated, the components are
not expensive (they rarely are). The labor that the manufacturer
has to reimburse the dealer for is very expensive. The attitude
of "it's normal" by the manufacturer, ends up resulting in gummed
up rings as well becuase the problem isn't fixed early.
Replacing rings and seals on tens of thousands of cars (possibly
hundreds of thousands) would be a major expense. No doubt the
cost of doing something versus doing nothing was carefully
calculated in terms of the dollar cost of repairs versus lost
repeat sales; Al Clapsaddle even said that Saturn was looking into
doing something about it but the huge losses from the L series
precluded spending the money on this (I don't see the direct
relationship, but I understand how if Saturn was flush with cash
then maybe they'd look at the long term benefits).
Look at how Toyota is now doing something about the sludge
problem, and if you believe them, it would only occur on
vehicles that were not "properly maintained." The oil burning
on Saturns can occur even on vehicles that were meticulously
maintained (i.e. Kirk Kohnen's Saturns).
It was pretty amazing that Toyota actually posted on Usenet
as well:
"http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=26591912.0202081327.b212c40%40posting.google.com"
I've never seen a major corporation post on Usenet like that.
ajkin...@aol.com (Alan King) wrote in message news:<20020420080919...@mb-cs.aol.com>...
Lame Duck
>Snip<
> I have heard some good about this product called Auto RX. I don't have any
> first hand experience with this product, but the guys here
> www.bobistheoilguy.com seem to have used it quite a bit. It is designed to
> remove deposits from the oil side of the engine. Who knows if it could do
> anything for stuck rings, but it probably doesn't cost much to try. I
would
> definitely run some carbon cleaner through the top part of the engine such
> as Chevron's techroline deposit remover, and I would do several
treatments.
> I can also tell you with certainty, that if you have an engine that is
using
> oil, switching to a heavier weight will greatly reduce the oil consumption
> (20-50 instead of 5-30).
Maybe, but keep in mind there is always a potential down side. "Cleaners"
can loosen up deposits in chunks that the engine cannot safley digest.
Using a heavier oil may reduce consumption, but may not properly lubricate
the engine. My recommendation? Be careful.
Al Phillips
1acondguy
news:3CC554DE...@visteon.com...
> I can also tell you with certainty, that if you have an engine that is
> using
> > oil, switching to a heavier weight will greatly reduce the oil
consumption
> > (20-50 instead of 5-30).
> > myself would try it, and I would certainly be running a heavier weight
oil
> > to slow down consumption.
>
point that drainback holes are plugged. A 20-50 is not molassis and will
drain back just fine at any temp over +20f and probably lower for purposes
of drainback anyway.
Thankfully it's been many years for me since I had an oil burner, but if
it's worn to the point that it blows that much oil, what's to lose? You
won't generate half the carbon in the combustion chamber if you can slow
down the consumption.
Alex
1acondguy
even a straight 40 wouldn't hurt it.
Alex
>
>
>
Bickford, R. (Richard)
> point that drainback holes are plugged. A 20-50 is not molassis and will
> drain back just fine at any temp over +20f and probably lower for purposes
> of drainback anyway.
> Thankfully it's been many years for me since I had an oil burner, but if
> it's worn to the point that it blows that much oil, what's to lose? You
> won't generate half the carbon in the combustion chamber if you can slow
> down the consumption.
Drainback on a modern engine which was DESINGED to use thin 5w-30 is
going to happen at a slower rate than on older one.
It's true that a 20w-50 will drain back but the rate is decreased. You
WILL have more oil on the top end especially when cold.
Again, If one were to use a thicker oil and the consumtion goes down?
I'd be looking first toward the lower end & pcv system rather than the
valve sealing.
BANDIT2941
>even a straight 40 wouldn't hurt it.
>Alex
I wouldn't go that for. Straight 40 is some real thick shit. Just because a
ring is stuck why make something else break? I would go with like a 10w-40 or
20w-50 at the thickest.
BANDIT2941
>
>That points to the piston, bore, & rings interface.
It would help valve seals too.
BANDIT2941
>point that drainback holes are plugged. A 20-50 is not molassis and will
>drain back just fine at any temp over +20f and probably lower for purposes
>of drainback anyway.
Agreed. I definitly wouldn't be worried about drainback.
BANDIT2941
>going to happen at a slower rate than on older one.
>
>It's true that a 20w-50 will drain back but the rate is decreased. You
>WILL have more oil on the top end especially when cold.
Yes, but not enough to make a difference. One problem with using really thick
oil is that the Saturn head doesn't have any cam bearings. If the oil thats
used is too thick(especially when cold) it could waste the head. My buddy saw a
couple honda engines do this. The engines had thicker oil in 'em for summer, it
got cold out, driver started the car and drove away, and it locked the cam up
in its place, snapping the timing belt. His head was wasted.
>Again, If one were to use a thicker oil and the consumtion goes down?
>I'd be looking first toward the lower end & pcv system rather than the
>valve sealing.
Thats true. BUT, valve seals aren't the reason the car smokes in the first
place, the rings are. I believe that the only way enough oil could get down
from the top is if the valve guides are so worn out that the valves are loose
and flopping around anyway. If you see a car that smokes when it gets started,
thats valve seals. What happens is the oil dribbles down into a puddle, and
when the engine gets lit that puddle burns. The oil that gets past the seals
while its running isn't enough to make it smoke.
Case in point: My buddies old race motor had NO valve seals, thats right, NONE.
It sometimes had a little bit of a puff of smoke when he started it, but NO
smoke when running. And this is an open header car, no cats or anything to eat
the smoke before it can be seen.
Bickford, R. (Richard)
>
> >Drainback on a modern engine which was DESINGED to use thin 5w-30 is
> >going to happen at a slower rate than on older one.
> >
> >It's true that a 20w-50 will drain back but the rate is decreased. You
> >WILL have more oil on the top end especially when cold.
>
> Yes, but not enough to make a difference.
Look that is simply not true on a modern engine like the Saturns. I
have years of engine design experience in the OEM market place. And you
could call me an expert in this area.
The worst case senario we engineer for is dirty cold 10w-40 oil, 97%
plugged filter. I've been apart of different oil testing right at the
filter supplier with all the test equipment in front of my face. And
I've touched it with my fingers. Smelled it with my nose.
What happens is when you have thick oil it goes through all the normal
passages then gets "discarded" spilling off of the cam races. The
trouble comes in when this thick cold oil (below 55 degress F) right
after startup is required to be pulled down by gravity through the now
engineered smaller oil passages.
It does indeed drain, however more slowly and therefor tends to puddle
up and flooding the valve train area. And now if the seals are "loose"
from wear, design flaw, whatever.. they will leak oil down into the
combustion/intake/exhaust chambers.
There is a common misperception that 10w-40 flows the same as 10w-30 at
a given temp. It DOES NOT. And we don't even consider 20w-50 because we
figure nobody is really that dumb to put it in their car at cold temps.
Let alone the valvetrain starvation even on moderatly warm startups.
One problem with using really thick
> oil is that the Saturn head doesn't have any cam bearings. If the oil thats
> used is too thick(especially when cold) it could waste the head. My buddy saw a
> couple honda engines do this. The engines had thicker oil in 'em for summer, it
> got cold out, driver started the car and drove away, and it locked the cam up
> in its place, snapping the timing belt. His head was wasted.
This illustrates my point perfectly! The oil supplied to the cam races
comes from the pick tube in the bottom of the pan. And because it's to
thick to flow quickly like was the DESIGNED oil viscosity you get oil
starvation. Irreguardless of weather the bearing surfaces are machined
or replaceable.
>
> >Again, If one were to use a thicker oil and the consumtion goes down?
> >I'd be looking first toward the lower end & pcv system rather than the
> >valve sealing.
>
> Thats true. BUT, valve seals aren't the reason the car smokes in the first
> place, the rings are.
That very well may be? It may be a down stream affect of something else?
I believe that the only way enough oil could get down
> from the top is if the valve guides are so worn out that the valves are loose
> and flopping around anyway. If you see a car that smokes when it gets started,
> thats valve seals. What happens is the oil dribbles down into a puddle, and
> when the engine gets lit that puddle burns. The oil that gets past the seals
> while its running isn't enough to make it smoke.
yes this is true. (from the top)
> Case in point: My buddies old race motor had NO valve seals, thats right, NONE.
> It sometimes had a little bit of a puff of smoke when he started it, but NO
> smoke when running. And this is an open header car, no cats or anything to eat
> the smoke before it can be seen.
I don't believe that you would be "seeing" the smoke from a set of worn
valve seals/guide.
You have to remember that oil will "coke" when left on a very hot
surface. What may be happening is that after the motor is run up to
full temp and then shut off, a small amount of oil then bleeds down
soaking the rings. Motor starts up again at a cold temp and the oil
gets coked into the ring grove. This repeatedly happening will in time
cause the rings to not operate properly and let oil get by and causing
excessive consumption.
BANDIT2941
>passages then gets "discarded" spilling off of the cam races. The
>trouble comes in when this thick cold oil (below 55 degress F) right
>after startup is required to be pulled down by gravity through the now
>engineered smaller oil passages.
>It does indeed drain, however more slowly and therefor tends to puddle
>up and flooding the valve train area. And now if the seals are "loose"
>from wear, design flaw, whatever.. they will leak oil down into the
>combustion/intake/exhaust chambers.
>
but the viscocity rating at which this difference becomes a problem is
debateable.
>There is a common misperception that 10w-40 flows the same as 10w-30 at
>a given temp. It DOES NOT. And we don't even consider 20w-50 because we
>figure nobody is really that dumb to put it in their car at cold temps.
>Let alone the valvetrain starvation even on moderatly warm startups.
>
Totally agreed about the w40/w30 flowing issues. I can't remember if I ever ran
20w-50 in my old motor or not. I know I mixed it sometimes but I don't know if
I ever ran it straight(and I only mixed it in the summer).
>This illustrates my point perfectly! The oil supplied to the cam races
>comes from the pick tube in the bottom of the pan. And because it's to
>thick to flow quickly like was the DESIGNED oil viscosity you get oil
>starvation. Irreguardless of weather the bearing surfaces are machined
>or replaceable.
Yes, and yes. Thick oil in an oil burner is good to a point - but then you
cross that line...and you pay for it :) If the oil is TOO thick it won't get
there in time, more-so when cold.
>That very well may be? It may be a down stream affect of something else?
Well, mine and my buddies(who happens to own a machine shop) opinions are that
Hastings rings are one of the major causes, along with no holes in the pistons
for the oil to drain back. He has built a couple motors with Hastings rings and
some of them are smokers. Its been hit and miss(smoking wise) with the engines
using Hastings rings that he has done(hit and miss much like the oil burning
Saturns are). My new engine has oil drainback holes drilled in the oil control
ring land, along with sealed power rings. So far so good :). What do you
think its a down stream affect of? Valve seals? I personally don't buy it, but
many people do and thats ok too. That valve seals looked totally fine in the
engine I got to replace mine, yet it had a stuck ring.
>I don't believe that you would be "seeing" the smoke from a set of worn
>valve seals/guide.
Sure you will. A puddle will leak down after you shut the car off and in the
first instant the car is started that oil will burn.
>You have to remember that oil will "coke" when left on a very hot
>surface. What may be happening is that after the motor is run up to
>full temp and then shut off, a small amount of oil then bleeds down
>soaking the rings. Motor starts up again at a cold temp and the oil
>gets coked into the ring grove. This repeatedly happening will in time
>cause the rings to not operate properly and let oil get by and causing
>excessive consumption.
Yes - BUT by this logic every motor will have stuck rings eventually. Put it
this way, this motor never had valve seals, never smoked at all other then
sometimes when he first lit it. And it did this since it was new.
As an aside, its nice to debate with someone knowledgable and not looking to
start flaming people right away. You da man Richard.
John S. Washburn
the oil (such as Gunk motor flush)? I remember the first time I did this, I
ended up with some black nasty shit in the drain pan (I'm talking really
*really* black oil). Now, every time I change the oil every 3K, the color is
just a dark brown to semi-black. I suppose I can rest easy with the thought
of the sludge all cleaned out. But I'd rather know for sure if using an
engine flush is safe and effective.
"Lame Duck" <2...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:aa3ufj$f4q$1...@slb2.atl.mindspring.net...
Brigg222
Saturns?........from the first ever made to the newest ones?
Dan.
1acondguy
plug a port before it gets back down to the drain pan. Gunk is basically a
solvent. It's debatable what is best to try to revive a poorly maintained
engine. Supposedly this Auto RX isn't supposed to allow any chunks to come
loose.
Alex
"John S. Washburn" <sham...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:dhox8.153133$GS6.14...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Bickford, R. (Richard)
worn
> >valve seals/guide.
>
> Sure you will. A puddle will leak down after you shut the car off and in the
> first instant the car is started that oil will burn.
Let me re-state in a clearer way.
You won't see smoke out the tail pipe from a worn out valve seal on a
fully warm and running motor.
(I was'nt talking about startup, Sorry about the confusion)
>
> >You have to remember that oil will "coke" when left on a very hot
> >surface. What may be happening is that after the motor is run up to
> >full temp and then shut off, a small amount of oil then bleeds down
> >soaking the rings. Motor starts up again at a cold temp and the oil
> >gets coked into the ring grove. This repeatedly happening will in time
> >cause the rings to not operate properly and let oil get by and causing
> >excessive consumption.
>
> Yes - BUT by this logic every motor will have stuck rings eventually. Put it
> this way, this motor never had valve seals, never smoked at all other then
> sometimes when he first lit it. And it did this since it was new.
I was talking about excessive oil build up. Not normal amounts.
This was a problem on all those SBC from the earily 70s PU. Those
things were pretty good motors but had really bad valve seal problems.
In time the rings would coke up from the constant excessive oil and
start using increased amounts of oil. This is what I was meaning by
downstream problems.
>
> As an aside, its nice to debate with someone knowledgable and not looking to
> start flaming people right away. You da man Richard.
Flaming is done by people who have nothing of substance to say :)
(childlike)
BANDIT2941
>You won't see smoke out the tail pipe from a worn out valve seal on a
>fully warm and running motor.
>(I was'nt talking about startup, Sorry about the confusion)
Totally agreed, you'll only see valve seal smoke when you hit the key.
>This was a problem on all those SBC from the earily 70s PU. Those
>things were pretty good motors but had really bad valve seal problems.
>In time the rings would coke up from the constant excessive oil and
>start using increased amounts of oil. This is what I was meaning by
>downstream problems.
I don't have any firsthand experience with these but I think I've heard
something about it. You don't see many of them around nowadays, and hey, I
wasn't alive in the early 70's!!
BTW, check out www.ulster.net/~tmsjoe/thecar.htm if you care to see more about
my buddies car. The new engine we just put in for this year should be killer.
We've only got a couple shakedown passes on the car but its done a 1.177 60'
time(real fast for the 2nd pass off the trailer) and that pass should have been
an 8.20 at 165 but he had to lift. The previous best with the old motor is 8.56
with a top mph of 156. We're hoping for 1000 HP with the new motor, but from
hearing it run and seeing it on the track, I can't help but think it might have
more then that :).
Bickford, R. (Richard)
And last month ran a 2.2 60ft!
That's waaay stout for a 195hp grandpa car.
Alan King
>It's not a theory, it's what actually happens.
There isn't enough oil present in the overhead to pass by the valve stem seals,
even if they weren't installed at all, to affect the piston rings. The valve
stem seals only see splash oiling off of the cam lobes and roller elements and
their purpose is to prevent this splash oil getting sucked down the intake
valve guides during startup and to prevent exhaust blow-by into the cylinder
head past the exhaust valve guides. As I said before, when you don't know how
engines work, a lot of "theories" sound plausible.
>Replacing rings and seals on tens of thousands of cars (possibly
>hundreds of thousands) would be a major expense.
I clearly said that replacing valve stem seals alone was not expensive. I
said nothing about piston rings. Replacing valve stem seals, if that were a
significant part of the problem, is not expensive, part cost wise or labor cost
wise.
Alan King
BANDIT2941
>And last month ran a 2.2 60ft!
>That's waaay stout for a 195hp grandpa car.
That is stout. My best 60' on the Saturn with the old motor is like a 2.30 or
2.31.
Kirk Kohnen
miles. This is shortly after noticed that it was burning more and more oil.
Replacing the seals did not make a significant difference in the rate of oil
consumption or the rate of increase in oil consumption.
At least in my case, I think that the valve seals don't have anything to do with
the oil consumption issue.
Lame Duck
news:dhox8.153133$GS6.14...@bin3.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
draining
> the oil (such as Gunk motor flush)? I remember the first time I did this,
I
> ended up with some black nasty shit in the drain pan (I'm talking really
> *really* black oil). Now, every time I change the oil every 3K, the color
is
> just a dark brown to semi-black. I suppose I can rest easy with the
thought
> of the sludge all cleaned out. But I'd rather know for sure if using an
> engine flush is safe and effective.
Personally, I will never use any of those engine oil flush products....
again. If you keep up with the oil changes (changing it more often under
severe conditions) you shouldn't have a sludge problem in the first place.
Especially if you use synthetic oil. A long long time a go I had a high
mileage V-8 that had been abused and was heavily sludged. The choice was
between doing nothing (and hope that the oil kept flowing) or flush the oil
system (and hope that the dislodged sludge didn't clog anything up). To
make a long story short(er) I went with the flush and got another 12,000
miles out of the engine before clumps of sludge clogged up the oil passages
and trashed the engine. I was kind'a pissed at the auto parts store guy
who sold me the stuff and told me it was safe to use. However, I really
have no one to blame but myself. I knew I was throwing the dice when I
bought the stuff.
Al Phillips
John S. Washburn
pressure combined with intense heat should dislodge anything that might get
stuck over time.
By the way, I'm not the original owner of this car (my father was). The oil
changes were always done by those Jiffy Lube places which use el-crappo
brand oil by default. For example, the standard Penzoil has shit for
detergent additives. Not a good thing to have missing in your oil when you
drive in hot weather in Houston, TX in my opinion. Now that I own the car, I
do all the oil changes myself. And this time, I use a synthetic blend.
"Lame Duck" <2...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:aa7r6j$u7g$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
vailchalet2
Chevron Delo 400 or Shell Rotella T.
These oils have extra detergents in them.
Jonnie Santos
suggesting it before and I ran across it in Wal*Mart - never tried it
though...
--
"vailchalet2" <vailc...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20020425024548...@mb-mj.aol.com...
Lame Duck
I followed the directions on the can, finishing the job with an oil & filter
change (or two). A few thousand miles later (3,4,5,6,7,8?) I started up the
car and it knocked loudly for a few seconds and the oil warning light was
slow to go out. I took the car to a mechanic who pulled off the oil pan.
There was a bunch of sludge in the bottom of the pan and the screen for the
oil pump was completely covered with glops of sludge. The screen was torn
away from the pump housing on one side and partially sucked in toward the
pump due to the suction of the pump trying to draw oil through the blocked
screen. By then I'm sure the filter had become completely clogged.
The mechanic cleaned the sludge out of the pan as well as the exposed engine
parts that he had access to. Just to be safe he replaced the oil pump as
well. (No telling what damage this wear and tear had done.) Everything was
fine for another few thousand miles. Eventually, I lost oil pressure. This
was about 12,000 miles after I had used the flushing solvent. I guess I
could have dropped the pan to see if the pump screen had clogged up again,
but I decided to get rid of the car instead. Hi mileage, out of control
body rust, questionable reliability, etc.
Al Phillips
"John S. Washburn" <sham...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:H2Mx8.6784$fg.7...@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
> I would think the oil filter would catch those clumps. Furthermore, oil
> pressure combined with intense heat should dislodge anything that might
get
> stuck over time.
> Snip
> "Lame Duck" <2...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
Blue87T
>The problem with your theory, Scharf, is valve stem seals are not expensive
>components. If they were really the problem and the problem was as bad as
>you
>allege, then where is the motive for Saturn doing nothing?
Maybe you should do some research on Saturns attempts at solutions for the oil
eating problem. Their first effort was to just change the valve seals. Then
they switched to seals and rings ( with honing ) .
Lame Duck
Snip
> Maybe you should do some research on Saturns attempts at solutions for the
oil
> eating problem. Their first effort was to just change the valve seals.
Then
> they switched to seals and rings ( with honing ) .
So, what about the new Saturn engines ('99 and later)? Are these engines
expected to become oil burners, or has the problem been solved?
Al Phillips