Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

1757758760762763842

Comments

  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,897
    Oops. Typing too fast. Panamera.
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Forest Lakes, AZPosts: 3,207
    edited February 2013
    . . . than clutch at straws to try to make myself look better.

    I agree, but you need to remember that losing face is important in Asia, but even more important on these forums.
  • My 2012 Acura TL SH-AWD Advance (whew!) is my first non-Audi since my first, a 1978 5000. Immediately prior to the Acura I had a 2009 Audi A4 2.0T Prestige with the sport package option.

    I may have (I do have) some issues with the Acura -- but many/most of them are of a cosmetic nature -- but, now that Acura bought new wheels for me (3 of the 19" wheels were bent so badly that they could not be road-force balanced), I have no issues with the steering. The wide and low profile tires that were on the Audi and on this Acura can be the source of some ride stiffness, but I have no issues that I can comment on that have anything to do with the electric power steering.

    The TL SH-AWD Advance is very well equipped, smooth driving and riding, yet agile and nimble (due to the wheel/tire combo and the sport suspension).

    It does seem to be not an unreasonable imitation of an Audi S4 when one factors in the S4's $11,000 premium when similarly contented -- if you can get past the controversial styling (yes, even the toned down 2012 still has too much "beak" for most folks.)

    I will shop Acura (among others) for my next car when the lease is up on this one -- at this point, I would shop the upcoming TLX, the Infiniti Q50, the Audi A4, the BMW 3, the Cadillac ATS and CTS and probably the Volvo S60.

    The Acura suffers from NOT providing its owner with an experience that is not crystal-clearly differentiated from the Honda upon which it is based.

    Some people think that Acura's best feature is that it comes from the Honda Motors Corporation. Others, like me, wish it wasn't quite so obvious that it came from Honda's loins (so to speak.) :D
  • jpp5862jpp5862 NCPosts: 297
    Sad that GM still has oil/engine problems on the Caddys. My uncle bought a 2002 DeVille with the dreaded Northstar. It drank oil and he complained to GM numerous times and was told the oil consumption was "acceptable" and they refused to do anything about it. He now drives an Infiniti and will never consider GM again, and I can't say I blame him.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,707
    edited March 2013
    The CTS doesn't have oil issues from a design standpoint. What is happening is that people need to learn that with an oil life monitor and synthetic oils, that the gauge usually will be telling you how much life/protection is left in it.

    If you run it down to 0%, it's not time to change it. It's that your synthetic goo has turned into water in terms of protection capability. You should never let it get even remotely close to 0%.
  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,428
    edited March 2013
    If 0% trully means zero protection, the designer of CTS should be fired, because it's a poorly designed messaging system. It should be such that "zero" means "change now", because that's how normal person would understand the message. I trully doubt that is how it's designed.

    As an engineer, I can tell you we work with factors of safety and other means to tell us that when the calculation shows an element is "over the limit" it does not mean "run and hide", it only means "do something to improve the situation". We NEVER design things to be on edge of destruction, whether it is a house, a bridge, or a machine. If we did, nobody would feel safe in them, as they would literally fall down somewhere, every day. Only things like spacecraft or similar "new frontier" items where risk calculation allows for safety factors to be cut to razor thin margins, would have "zero life left" mean "tell your wife you love her".

    If you are telling the truth, CTS HAS oil issues - big ones.

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,601
    The CTS owner's manual for 2013 shows that when the "Change Engine Oil" soon comes on, it should be changed with 600 miles and that the oil showed by changed at least once a year.

    that the gauge usually will be telling you how much life/protection is left in it.


    When the oil life percentage in my Explorer gets to 0%, Ford says to change the oil within 500 miles. That indicator has a level of safety built in.
  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,428
    I think that, too. Can't imagine it any other way, really.

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Forest Lakes, AZPosts: 3,207
    edited March 2013
    have engine lunching issues that have to do with excessive oil consumption that starts suddenly.

    I've been monitoring the CTS engine issue board for many years, and thought at the beginning that the root of the situation was pampered moderately ignorant CTS drivers never manually checking their oil. Mostly that was true, but not always. Several people posted who seemed credible and checked their oil on a regular basis. At some point the engine started using a quart of oil every few hundred miles, and that was a disaster for the average "set it and forget it" driver who wouldn't know how to check or add oil to save their souls.

    The 3.6 engine has serious issues, possibly related to the cam drive system, but in any event the symptom is sudden onset high oil consumption followed by engine failure. Too many people have outlined the same scenario for it to be made up and/or anecdotal isolated incidents.
  • sweendogysweendogy Posts: 1,052
    Does this issue effect other cars at gm using the same motor - ?
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,897
    edited March 2013
    "lunching issues that have to do with excessive oil consumption"

    Yuck. I'll take Jersey Mikes any day but light on the oil. ;)
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 7,107
    Hey Dino -

    Do your Xenon lights make one straight path, or does the one on the right seem to be aimed lower?

    I'm bringing my car in to have that checked out as well as a defective trunk latch. I'm coming up on my 1 year anniversary with my 328xi.

    2001 Honda Prelude Type SH/ 2011 BMW 328xi / 2011 Honda Pilot EX-L w/ Navigation

  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Forest Lakes, AZPosts: 3,207
    Does this issue effect other cars at gm using the same motor - ?

    I don't know. I only monitor the CTS board.
  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,428
    Yes, they do. By law, American market cars have to have lights aiming unevenly, biased to the right. You could see it in xenons because they are so bright, but the same is with regular lights - that is, unless people tamper with their settings, which I see done a lot. Some guy thinks he can't see, so he ratchets the up, blinding everybody else.

    BTW, Other markets (like European) have different regulations (even aim, there are other differences, too). However, US-versions of European brands have US-market settings, obviously.

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,428
    I would amend that it is left lights that should aim lower, not right. The idea is reduction in glare for the oncoming traffic and better vision for the sidewalk/shoulder pedestrians or small vehicles.

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • nyccarguynyccarguy Stamford, CTPosts: 7,107
    Cool. Thanks. So my left light is aimed too high. When I use the high beams, they are even.

    2001 Honda Prelude Type SH/ 2011 BMW 328xi / 2011 Honda Pilot EX-L w/ Navigation

  • dino001dino001 Tampa, FLPosts: 3,428
    Or perhaps your right light is aimed too low? ;)

    2012 BMW 328i wagon, manual and sports package. No. sold in the US: 1. Probably.

  • sweendogysweendogy Posts: 1,052
    Might be something to monitor if you are looking to go back at GM about a product fault- if it's an engine issue it should not be isolated to the Cts- and would effect other brands under the umbrella- just food for thought.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,707
    edited March 2013
    When the oil life percentage in my Explorer gets to 0%, Ford says to change the oil within 500 miles. That indicator has a level of safety built in.

    Evidently, in the CTS's case, 0 life was really very close to 0% and there was no leeway. GM changed it to be twice as sensitive (2011) so it tells you it's time in about 6 months or 6000 miles, which gives you a fair amount of leeway. Note - anything less than about 25% protection is running into greatly increased wear with synthetic oils. If you are running an older (2011 or older, evidently) CTS, letting it drop below 50% oil life remaining is causing increased wear and problems.

    I ran into this a few years ago when I was looking for a car for my parents. And back then the mechanics at the dealers were all saying to get it changed at 6 months/6K miles. (the manual says almost twice that interval) That they didn't do a recall is a whole other problem, but the mechanics certainly figured out what had happened with the oil life sensors several years ago.

    So the engine isn't the issue. In fact, it's the best engine GM has ever built. It, not too surprisingly, wasn't really designed to run on synthetic goo which some marketing genius managed to pass off as "oil". GM kind of found this out the hard way, it seems.

    NOTE - there is nothing that says that you can't run semi-synthetic in the car, either. In fact, the newer oil that they put in it at the dealership when you get it changed (on 2011+ models at least) is actually semi-synthetic. GM doesn't want to admit that their engines shouldn't be run on pure synthetic and are "suggesting" their new DEXOS standard oils.

    Yes, it's buried way way in the fine print, but DEXOS is semi-syntietic oil under a new brand name/standard to try to confuse the issue, since they spent over a decade ruthlessly pounding into everyone's head that pure synthetic oils were better than conventional ones.(which is not true, obviously)

    So the fix? Switch to semi-synthetic ASAP. Change oil every 6K miles/6 months. Ignore the computers and change the oil religiously at those intervals. Semi-synthetic costs about twice as much per change, but you change it half as often.
  • markcincinnatimarkcincinnati Posts: 5,049
    2012 3.7L V6 Acura engines didn't come with synthetic oil. Of course the dealer will sell it to you -- but if you don't ask you will get non-syn when the oil change indicator comes on (which is at 15%).

    I have used 100% synthetic oil from the first change forward. I change the oil damn near the instant the 15% indicator comes on -- and, of course, I always use a new filter. I bring my oil into the dealer, since at the beginning I didn't know if they actually even had syn oil.

    Are you saying that synthetic oil has a shorter (in miles or time) life span of "protection" but that semi-syn is better in that regard? I thought that one of the hallmarks of 100% synthetic was that it was able to hold more dirt and crud in suspension than non-synthetic oils (meaning, I assume) that you could use synthetic oil for longer intervals without engine damage or for shorter intervals for even better protection than non-synthetic oils.

    I've not heard the argument to use semi-syn; it seems if half synthetic is good, that full synthetic would be better still. :confuse:
Sign In or Register to comment.