By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
my point was that i didn't wait until 6750 miles for my first oil change (per manual and others here)...and it doesn't appear to have "affected" my engine's oil consumption at all. granted i usually change right around the 4k mark...and in that amount of mileage it doesn't appear to burn any at all. anyway i was being a bit sarcastic...catch my drift?
as for oil weight...my '02 5.4l v8 ford supercrew also calls for 5w20 year round. honda and ford are using 5w20 to help with cold start emissions and fuel mileage...and i don't have a problem with that.
as for oil consumption...it's been years since i owned a car that burned a quart in 3k miles let alone 1k miles. so, i'd be pissed if i had to add oil every thousand miles. but like the salesman says, most car makers consider 1k per quart normal ... and i think todays cars (past few years) will prolly use a little more oil vs cars that were built in the mid 80s to mid 90s. many carmakers have lowered the piston ring tension so that their cars will get better fuel mileage.
That loss impacts oil's cooling, cleaning and of course lubricating effects.
Engineers haven't, and didn't, design engines to consume oil.
I'd take my 3 year old car, if it was still under warranty and having observed proper drain intervals, to the dealer for a warranty claim if it's consuming a quart/5k miles.
If you car loses 1QT/3K miles, check for any sign of leak at the valve cover gasket and oil plug.
It's not expensive to replace the valve cover gasket.
1 quart loss @ 1k miles would be a highly lax standard. The original oil would have been completely changed out by 4.5k or so miles. I'm quite sure this isn't the case, or else there'd be millions of warranty claims against car makers because the majority of motorists don't check oil levels between changes, and their motors would basically seize before the next oil change.
As to piston ring tension, there's a direct correlation between that and compression ratio. Accord 4 cyl. motors have a c.r. of 9.7:1. The six, 10.0:1. Those rings would have to be pushing tightly against the cylinder walls to attain the desired compression. If ring tension is low, compression ratio would be low as well. And, not only will oil be burned, but gasoline will trickle down and contaminate the oil, reducing lubricity and eventually accelerating the demise of that engine.
Given Honda's engineering repute, my guess is that a 1 quart loss between oil changes isn't acceptable. A dealer may say otherwise, but obviously that'd be a commercially influenced position.
I've personally experienced too many logic stumpers with auto dealers to trust their opinion on mechanical aspects. Lexus appears to be an exemption from what I've heard so far. Their technicians are perfectionists who push the envelope to get things right.
Keep in mind that we're talking a threshold for determining if a problem exists, not a design objective. I don't think Subaru or Honda or anyone else is designing their engines to consume a quart of oil in 1000 miles, but oil consumption can increase in cars over time for a variety of reasons, and they have to have some standard in place to separate an increase that's a problem from one that isn't.
The root of this position is that the new vehicles I've owned - and most of which I've maintained personally - weren't in that category. And if they were, they were my regrettable pre-owned purchases (my first "decent" car, a used 1975 Mitsubishi Galant, consumed 1 quart @ 1k miles. And that car demanded the oil-check-every-Saturday routine).
In all likelihood, I agree that if I went in with my oil-burning 03 Accord with 35,900 miles for a warranty claim, the average dealer would say the subject loss rate is normal.
That scenario is the crux of my advocacy: a) a resigned owner may not even bring his/her car in for a claim, much less press forward, while b) an owner with a reasonable standard (which for me is 1/3 quart @ 5k miles) may seek out the regional rep for resolution if the car was burning 1 quart @ 5k miles.
"Oil Ring Tension" as brought up by emale is an interesting facet of this thread (thanks, emale, for inducing education). The link below indicates that tuners indeed install low-tension piston rings for less friction. However, the writer also assures that low tension doesn't mean a higher oil loss rate.
http://www.rbracing-rsr.com/enginetech.html
Carmakers ask us to do that as for presumably pre-emptive reasons - as in "did you check your oil regularly after each fill-up ?" - to deny a claim.
Checking or not checking the oil shouldn't acquit them of an engine design or assembly flaw.
Cheers.
You'll note that my post said that oil consumption can increase over time and that they have to use some kind of standard to distinguish between problems and normal situations. If I had a brand new car that consumed 1 quart of oil per 1000 miles right away, I think I'd feel justified in complaining.
I'm not trying to defend the 1 qt. per 1000 miles standard, but I can't fault the auto manufacturers for having set a standard. Perhaps that is a lax standard in your eyes, but on the other hand, dealing with frivolous claims takes time and money as well. Some people will accept nothing less than total perfection, and you don't often get that, even with Hondas, Toyotas, etc.
"an owner with a reasonable standard (which for me is 1/3 quart @ 5k miles)"
I suspect that if you complained about something that exceeded your standard by a bit (like 1/2 quart in 5000 miles), you'd most certainly get the "that's within normal limits" response. Personally, I'd have to do some long and hard soul searching to decide if I wanted them to do major surgery on my engine for such arguably low oil consumption.
What I'd probably do, though, is report it to the service department if I noticed this during the warranty period and make sure that it's documented. That way, if the problem gets worse later on, you at least have a record of having reported a potential problem, and would be able to make a case that the problem should have been corrected while the warranty was still active.
Since that's not something you're required to document, I'd have a hard time believing that they could make something like that stick through arbitration as a reason to deny a major claim. Now, if you can't prove that you changed the oil at least as often as required, that would be a different story altogether.
i guess everyone has their own comfort zone when talking bout' oil consumption. to me 1qt per 1k miles would be excessive on an engine with less than 100k miles. on the other hand 1qt per 5k miles would not bother me at all. i remember when putting in a quart every 2-3k miles was NORMAL...both when the car was new and when it had 150k worth of miles.
You nailed it here, talon95.
I believe with a passion that it's in our interest to hold our vehicle providers to the highest standards of quality and performance. Not only is it good for us, it's also good for them.
For that reason, I expect other carmakers to re-arrange our quality expectations, but not Honda and not of their engines.
FWIW, after my apparently "pre-abused" 1975 Mitsubishi Galant, a Mitsu Mirage/Nissan Sentra/Dodge Caravan/and 3 Hondas came and went (all acquired new) with tight, no-oil burning motors. A new Mazda 323 and 2 other pre-owneds missed the cut.
Your list of cars is interesting... both domestics and imports did well. I was a bit surprised about the 323... how bad was it?
Peppiest, best-handling small car I've owned. But on top of the oil burning, the rear wheel well panel began rusting through as well. Sold it before the car became 2 parallel-wheel motorcycles.
Additionally, 10,000 mile oil changes just became recommended. Mercedes, BMW, and a few other high lines also have 10,000 mile intervals. They don't say "don't add any oil" or "don't check your oil" for 10,000 miles. They just say don't change it.
I can certainly see how some manufacturers and people could agree, but it is nothing short of lunacy for a Honda tech to tell a new Accord owner this.
I am observing the 'severe' maintenance schedule recommended by Honda, and having my oil changed every 5,000 miles. If I were burning a Qt/1K, then I would drive the last 500 miles without a drop of oil in my engine. Is that fine with Honda?
If I was on the 'normal' schedule, and just drove the car, it would drive 5.5K miles with no oil left.
If I'm supposed to check the oil and top it off every other fill-up, shouldn't that be mentioned in the recommended service guidelines as well?
I would have quite a warranty claim considering the discrepancy between these two ideas.
You can speculate all day. But the fact still remain industry rules say 1gt/1k miles is excessive.
Engine oil
Weekly or when you stop for gas. Add oil if the level is below the lower mark.
Anyway, yes I check mine, I'm just trying to point out that an overwhelming number of people don't, and if an engine consumed that much oil then it would run dry before the next oil change. That is, considering the person didn't check and replenish.
You got that right... having driven an Accord EX V6 and a Century Limited (both 2003 models), the Buick, by comparison, features the following:
- 60's throwback American luxo-boat ride, with sub-par suspension control
- numb, lifeless steering
- massive understeer and plow in even moderate speed driving
- Barcalounger feel to the seats, with no support... belong in your living room, not in your car
- a dash that's loaded with cheap looking and feeling plastic trim pieces and controls
- fit and finish so bad that GM should hide its head in shame...you'd think that they'd have gotten it right after building it for 7 years, but you'd be wrong
Glad you're happy with your choice, but you're not going to even begin to convince Accord owners that the Buick is a better car. Not even close.
Our Hondas usually get their oil changed around the 4000 mile mark. I rarely, if ever bother checking it between changes. On the rare ocassion I do decide to take a look, the oil level is fine.
A far cry from the old beaters I grew up with!
By the way, perhaps we should get past the rhetoric and anecdotal reports about gas mileage and look at real comparisons. If you have a recent vintage Buick sedan with 205 hp., it must be either a LeSabre or a Park Avenue.
Here's what Consumer Reports has to say about gas mileage:
LeSabre 3.8L V6 (205 hp)
Overall: 20 mpg
Highway: 31 mpg
CU Trip: 25 mpg
Accord 2.4L I4 (160 hp)
Overall: 24 mpg
Highway: 38 mpg (beats LeSabre by 7 mpg)
CU Trip: 28 mpg
Accord 3.0L V6 (240 hp)
Overall: 23 mpg
Highway: 34 mpg (beats LeSabre by 3 mpg)
CU Trip: 26 mpg
These are CU's instrumented results, not EPA estimates. Seems like they didn't have any problems achieving much higher highway mileage with both Accords when compared to the LeSabre. And the I4 (your so-called "lawn mower engine") beat your LeSabre in acceleration from 45-65 mph (representative of a passing maneuver) by nearly 1 second (Accord, 5.5 seconds... LeSabre, 6.4 seconds). Lawn mower engine... yeah, right.
At any rate, enjoy your Buick... as for me, sorry, I've been there and I'm not even remotely convinced. Especially when confronted with your dubious claims for gas mileage.
This is my last post regarding this comparison, since it's only partially on-topic.
BTW: My 04 EX-L automatic gets 30 MPG + in my mix of city/highway driving.
I4 vs V6/handling... IMHO... drive them.. 2 reasons I didn't buy the V6... the I4 has more than enough power for me, and IMHO the v6 handled oddly(probably due to the extra weight, and non-specific tuned suspention). This is something you have to see for yourself... I tend to drive agressively, and like the I4's nimbleness(for a 3300lb car) and the power. I have heard rumors that the v6 sometimes drifts during hard braking, but never experienced it.
As for the US vs Japan versions, some people will swear the japan made ones are better, but if you get the V6 it doesn't matter because they are all made in Mexico/US. I personally like mine('03 Accord EX 5MT I4 Japan built purchased 10/02 14k miles) the only problem I had was a few missing screws on delivery, and I had some water in the fuel line/tank causing some backfiring and causing me to spend $15 on a new fuel filter at 13k miles(took me that long to figure it out backfiring about once a month sheesh)
As for the problems, there is the vibrating steering wheel at stop lights, stiff brakes(good in my opinion), stiff ride(again, good to me)...
I like the car, and actually plan to keep it for a while(coming from someone who is on his 6th car('86 Corolla, '94 Tempo, '94 Corolla, '00 Civic EX, '02 Trailblazer, '03 Accord) in ~7 years. by far this is the best of all of them. It won't win any races (actually, it'll beat an F-250, Escape AWD, Ranger, Camry)... but it's a great car IMO.
Hope this helps some
My 2003 EX V6 handles just great... certainly, the lighter I4 may feel a little more nimble, but there are no problems whatsoever with the V6 handling. With its quick, direct and communicative steering, the V6 also feels quite nimble. Check out reviews by Edmunds, Motor Trend, Road and Track, etc. if you want additional confirmation.
"the only problem I had was a few missing screws on delivery, and I had some water in the fuel line/tank causing some backfiring and causing me to spend $15 on a new fuel filter at 13k miles(took me that long to figure it out backfiring about once a month sheesh)"
My US built Accord didn't suffer from even these kinds of minor problems... it's the first new car that I've ever owned that has had NO issues at all in 10 months and 11,000 miles.
I'm not suggesting to slawenda that the V6 is necessarily the better choice (the I4 is a fine choice as well) nor am I suggesting that tblazer's comments don't have merit just because my experience differs, but I feel I should point out that the issues that tblazer listed for the V6 aren't issues for everyone. In fact, based on my experiences, those of other owners I know, and what I've read, I'd have to conclude that most people don't share those issues.
So obviously, such opinions are very personal, so you really need to drive both to see how you feel about them. And my feeling is that the V6's smoothness and abundant power can be absolutely intoxicating...
anonymousposts "Honda Accord Owners: Problems & Solutions" Jan 27, 2004 5:51pm
Is another discussion group here about experiences with older and the new Accords --
in case you haven't found it yet! I suggest reading through several of the pages through the last year's postings.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
As for the water in the tank, I haven't had a problem like that before, but it doesn't really surprise me a whole lot considering the ~6 weeks on the sea for shipping. Minor problems as I said.
I also suggested that the V6/I4 difference was something that would have to be decided yourself. True that the problems that I mentioned are not problems for everyone, and not everyone has experienced it. The poster asked for a summary of the problems listed in the board, and I gave it to them.
I plan on buying an '04 EX-L 4cyl Accord this weekend. 2 Questions: I understand that these are made in Japan,Ohio,Mexico. Since I am going to buy in Baltimore,MD can I expect to get a Ohio-made car? If so, have there been quality issues on cars coming out of one plant that differ from those of another?
I guess the driver-side doorjam will tell me when it was manufactured...will it give location as well or do I have to run a check on the VIN?
Thanks.
Also ask the sales person if it was a Monday built car-avoid if possible-I understand Wednesday/Thursday built are better.
By now your sales person is suffering from apoplexy:)
Others will argue, I'm sure.
Not many "J" cars out there anyway.
However, when one car has parts of a different manufacturer (nippondenso vs. delco) then the argument holds some weight.
If you plan on keeping the car, look for a dealership/independent shop who can adjust the the steering boost (technically, the VASP or variable assist power steering).
A web search shows it can be done with some work.
If you have taken it in a couple (or even several) times, this indicates that this has been a consistent problem that hasn't been fixed. You might get it fixed under warranty (because the problem occurred under warranty and wasn't fixed). Take the receipts with you to the new dealer and see if they will help you out. If the first dealer had to add fluid, it sounds like there is a leak in the system somewhere. But, as atlantabenny mentioned, it could just be a different steering "feel" than other cars. But I would definitely have someone else look at it.