Toyota Engine Sludge Problem

mapoe3 · February 2002

Don't get me wrong, I will be thrilled to get any money back, but even if Toyota determines that I did what I was suppose to do with the maintenance to my van, and they refund me the $$ I've put out to have the engine cleaned, that doesn't give me any answers as to why what happened happened. I'm still left with a car that I don't trust and a warranty that according to my Toyota dealer really isn't valid any more because they didn't perform the service or the oil changes on the van.

onebadc5 · February 2002

It was just a matter of time.

Now it's payback time.

And I love it!

canc · February 2002

in my opinion. A cover-up is for something that is unaccounted for, despite many sources indicating the contrary. Toyota is acknowledging it, but is putting the blame on the owners of these vehicles. Not a cover-up indeed, but a "blame game".

onebadc5 · February 2002

newcar31 · February 2002

The article points out that .1% or 3000 owners have "complained" to Toyota about sludge problems. I would imagine these 3000 cases were *severe* cases of sludge. How many people out there have this problem to a lesser extent and don't even know about it.....yet? There is another article about this in the automotive news. Here is a quote:

" Although it's not clear why the two Toyota engines are so susceptible to sludge buildup, some independent experts say the concentration of complaints within two engines and a narrow time band points to either a design flaw or a quality defect."

The full article can be read here:

http://www.autonews.com/article.cms?articleId=38302

mrdetailer · February 2002

It covers those who followed the guidelines. It certainly wouldn't cover our infamous and late gimpyrx and others who didn't follow the oil change recommendation guidelines will not be covered.

I don't think Cliffy's scenario would be covered. I still think that those who change their own oil would have a problem of proof.

The vindicated ones are the ones who changed their oil as per recommendations, and still got screwed.

Toyota's no angel. They are correcting what is now perceived to be a serious damage to their reputation. Glad they did, but the change Interval set up in the Manual is wrong. They printed it, they need to take care of the problems that arise.

canc · February 2002

then they'll fix it. Especially Toyota.

fxashun · February 2002

when they made up the term "Oil Gel". After that the rest of what they say has no credibility. It's been called sludge since day one and now they make up some new term for it. Who knows the true number of sludged engines? Who cares?

Fact of the matter is that there are a certain number of these cars that have a problem and there no fix. Used cars with these engine will take a hit on the market and so will the owners.

What is Toyota supposed to say? "We have a problem with half the cars we have sold in the past few years and they all need to be brought in for an inspection?" Talk about expense. All they can do at this point is damage control. But I have said and someone else just said, the sludge is just a timebomb waiting to kill an engine. Many people have it and are just riding on borrowed time.

Another thing that's funny is what they DON'T say. Why is it just these two engines if it's universal? I mean wouldn't "budget" issues effect Corolla and Tercel/Echo owners? They aren't included. What about Supra owners? They don't go through stop and go? Let's not forget the Tacoma owners....Pickup never suffer "severe" service. Come on get real people read the release not for what they say but what they DON'T say. Universal yeah right....If you have a 3.0 or 2.2 Toyota engine you are getting universally screwed.

Toyota knew this was a problem a long time ago they are just admitting it. I've seen links on 4 cylinder Camry's sludging since the mid 90's. It's corporate mumbo jumbo. They let it go until they saw there was no stop to it. Heck it wasn't killin no one so what's the rush? Even when products DO kill people it has to kill a few before guilt is admitted.

So no matter how those with clean engines try to avoid it, it going to effect you too in the long run. This is going to cause a ripple in the used car values of the cars you own. If nothing else wholesalers are going to be very leery of these cars.

And Cliffy you have gone from not hearing anything about sludge to hearing that a number of them HAVE come in now? Whas up wit dat? Be consistent will ya?

Mr_Shiftright · February 2002

My recollection was that intially, when this topic started, SOME of the Sludgites came in swinging with both fists, claiming that "all" Totyota engines made after 19___ were defective, etc etc. The degree of slander was so extreme that they got flamed for exaggeration--some of them that is.

So the whole thing started off on a hyperbolic note and it took a while for the smoke to clear and some "facts" to emerge.

fxashun · February 2002

I am one of the original people. Here's the original post in Camry
rrinehart "Toyota Camry - Original" Feb 28, 2000 12:01am

My original post on the subject..
fxashun "Toyota Camry - Original" Mar 6, 2000 4:42am

The statement I made was that these engines had a tendency to sludge up. I did NOT say that ALL Toyota engine were defective. That was a fictitious statement made up by Wenyue or Cyw0.

fxashun "Toyota Camry - Original" Mar 10, 2000 6:14am

What I DID say was that the oil should be changed every 3000 miles or use synthetic though. And that seems to be the consensus here now.

lbthedawg · February 2002

Wonder which national TV newsmagazine will pick up this story first?

Any bets?

I say Dateline.

sandman46 · February 2002

I've loved all 4 of our Toyota's and still plan on buying a 5th but I think Toyota dropped the ball on this one and should just put up and shut up. Accept responsibility for your actions, take care of those affected, correct the problem or a good fix, and move on. And in the future , don't screw your customers or one day, they might screw you! Still miss my '96 LE though.

newcar31 · February 2002

Although I've never owned a Toyota, I've always held them in high regard. This sludge issue is really surprising.

wain · February 2002

that a sludge issue was their only threat.

after the corvair, vega, chevette, falling market share..............

lbthedawg · February 2002

Ford wishes they wouldn't have put Firestones on Explorers...

Mazda wishes they never made rotarys.....

Audi wishes they made pedals that made sense...

So it's Toyota's turn.

nematode · February 2002

1) Deny everything.
2) Admit nothing.
3) AND the most important, always make counter accusations.

Sound familiar? ALL car companies will do this. Its pretty standard damage control and it usually takes care of things.

I cannot speak for Ford or Audi but:
Mazda never got away from the rotary engine. It just took time for 1) renewed interest in sports cars and 2) getting it emissions legal. They just ditched the sports car concept in the US like others (Toyota Supra, Nissan 300ZX, DSM 3000GT VR-4 all bit the dust in the US about the same time). I'm actually looking forward to the RX8 (with the Renesis rotary) making a comeback to the US soon.

canc · February 2002

"What is Toyota supposed to say? "We have a problem with half the cars we have sold in the past few years and they all need to be brought in for an inspection?"

Ok, talk about exaggeration. Yesterday's numbers cleared indicated that it was approximately 0.1% of Toyota engines affected. Now it's HALF? Come on! Be realistic for a minute.

Mark Twain once said: "Get the facts first. Then you can leave your imagination to distort them any way you want." This is a clear example of distorted facts. What next? Someone will post here that the sky is falling?

Whether you call it an act of goodwill, or fessing up to their mistake, this is the 3260th post dedicated to 0.1% of Toyota's customer base that bought a Sienna or Camry between 1997 and 2001. In their entire customer base, think how much this actually represents.

tfuzz · February 2002

Been reading all the various comments made here, both positive and negative, and one question comes to mind:

Has anyone bothered to run an oil analysis on any of these "problem" motors?

For many here that don't know what that is, it is often thought of as simply a "blood test" for your engine.

388

hlltd · February 2002

Don't know how I did it, but the message above, number 3261 was mine, not tfuzz's. Sorry Steve.

Perhaps someone who understand computers better than me will have to explain how this was able to happen.

388

nematode · February 2002

Look at the numbers this way: 3400 (thats the number I heard from him) complaints from cars/vans from 1996/97 to present. That means 3400 people ALREADY have enough "sludge" to be a problem. Its not the number of people that have "gel", its the number of people who have sludge bad enough to complain as its caused some type of engine problem. I guess that translates (at 12k miles a year) to sludge at 48-60k miles or so. If the posts here are accurate some are "gelling" up far earlier with 7500 mile oil changes. So what's my point exactly? I have two.
1) We have seen all (or most) there is of the gel story because its only the long interval people that are showing up in the statistics. Since most have complained (fixed) already we will see no more and there is nothing to worry about if you do 3k oil changes.

or

2) As the cars age more will show up regardless of interval because it can only be prolonged not avoided. Only time will solve this one.

I'm not sure which is true but I think #2 is what worries Toyota owners because they wanted to keep their cars more like 200k miles before any problems and without thinking about reliability. I know #1 would bother me as I have always done 7500 mile (6k minimum) changes with dead dino oil. Never had a car die because of sludge or have any problems because of it. When I was a kid I even pushed a Buick to 10k before I changed the oil. That car ran was sold with 180k. I have actually seen engine "sludge" in my 1989 Ford Taurus with 157,000 just before I traded it in. That was a 7500 mile oil change car its whole life. The sludge was there at 100k and when traded was still getting 28mpg highway.

ronbuffalo · February 2002

I started having problems with my 2000 Sienna after 10 months (11,000 miles) Dark smoke and vibration. I brought it in to dealership 4 times for this problem and then was told that the engine was sludged and it was my fault. (I had a short block replacement.) Toyota USA was disgraceful. They made me feel that this problem was specific to me. I sent certified letters and called multiple times to asked for their position in writing. They refused to put it in writing and now I understand why.This is a widespread problem with 3.3 million engines at risk. I purchased what I thought was a low maintenance vehicle which supposedly required oil changes every 7,500 miles. I didn't get what was advertised and they should consider replacing the vehicle. Dateline, 60 Minutes, 20/20,
which one will be first?

mrrogers · February 2002

In the aerospace industry, there is a procedure called Cause and Correction Action. When there is a quality issue, the vendor is responsible for telling the customer what caused the problem, for example, an uncontained engine failure. After the customer is told what the problem is, then the vendor must detail what the corrective action is, for example, changing the material in a rotating part from double melt to triple melt titanium. Only then is the customer comfortable. Toyota is the vendor here, and they have not stated the Cause or the Corrective Action. I don't see how the customers can be comfortable. Marketing people don't like uncomfortable customers

newcar31 · February 2002

Please do not take statistics out of context. You are distorting facts. .1% of Toyota customers have *complained*. That does NOT mean that only .1% of engines have been affected. HUGE difference. Huge. By repetedly leaving the word "complained" out of your sentences, you completely change what the statistics mean. This is a perfect example of how data can be manipulated to support one side of a story. Have you even taken a statistics class?

thewolverine · February 2002

Good Post mrrogers!

If you, like me, want more technical information on the cause check out yotarepair.com. He points to the PCV valve/air intake changes for better gas mileage. An unconfirmed, but intertesting opinion.

davedave1 · February 2002

term for those who have had sludge problems. ( I love that word 'gel' - but it sounds like a hair product). Companies will always try to understate the problem.
As a first time Toy owner, i bought because of the reputation and was willing to pay more to get it. Now I have that suspicion that there's sludge in the future of my 2k Sienna, even though through 17000 mi, the oil was changed between 3900 and 4400 miles at the dealer. As others have said, it is reasonable to believe that frequent oil changes only will get the van out of warranty before it 'gels' to the point of smoking. Very disappointed in Toyota.
So much for resale on Sienna's; the market is very unforgiving in situations like this.
Real gripe is that if Toy really did change the engine to burn hotter and cleaner or whatever, then they didn't complete their engineering. The could have done a lot to avoid this problem; oil cooling changes, specified syn oil for this engine, etc.
I would have paid $100 more for the vehicle if it had to come with an oil cooler. Afterall I paid over $100 for the mandatory 'option' of an external transmission cooler they shipped on every vehicle, regardless of towing needs. (is this an indication that higher engine heat is affecting the tranny?)
They certainly could have lowered the maintenance times/miles to match the engine need. I guess they wanted to present a low-cost-of-ownership vehicle to the market. Hmmmmm.
The least Toyota can do is declare a 100,000 mile warranty on 'gel' damage if oil changes can be documented. Another thing they can do is offer to change oil on Siennas using full syn at dino prices. Some posts indicated some dealers are doing this independently?
Anyway I'm in the market for another vehicle and am looking at Tacoma's; even though Taco 4 cyl engines are not part of the 'gel' problem, I am hesitating a bit, but may buy one anyway. The real question is how Toyota will treat their customers.
Apparently the old saying 'ya pays your money and takes your chance' applies more than ever.

canc · February 2002

"By repetedly leaving the word "complained" out of your sentences, you completely change what the statistics mean. This is a perfect example of how data can be manipulated to support one side of a story. Have you even taken a statistics class?"

Of course 0.1% complained, but I don't believe this is manipulated data. The fact is, 0.1% complained, and Toyota is repairing 0.1% of its engines. Of course, there might be more people that will complain about this in the future. Let's assume for a minute that the number of complaints doubles to 6000. That's still 0.2%. If a dairy company making yogurt would look at 0.2% milk, they would call it fat free.

As for inquiring if I've ever taken a statistics class, I believe it's not rocket science here when dealing with these numbers, and I therefore find your statement inappropriate.

canc · February 2002

What makes you think your Sienna will have sludge problems? 3,297,000 owners have been very happy with their vehicles so far.

Why does it seem that most complaints here stem from Sienna minivans? I haven't heard from anybody so far with a Camry or Solara having sludge problems. Has Toyota tweaked the 3.0 V6 exclusively for the Sienna?

wain · February 2002

"Audi wishes they made pedals that made sense..."

off topic I know.

My toyota is the best car I have ever owned (94 4 cyl) from a reliability and quality view, and dealer support.

canc · February 2002

"My toyota is the best car I have ever owned (94 4 cyl) from a reliability and quality view, and dealer support."

I feel the same way about my 2000 Solara SE V-6.

brucer2 · February 2002

by Canc Feb 12, 2002 (05:29 am)
"What makes you think your Sienna will have sludge problems? 3,297,000 owners have been very happy with their vehicles so far."

How do you know this? Did you ask them all? You did simple subtraction and fabricated a "fact".

Begining to sound like someone else else with a financial interest in Toyota-ron.

jj35 · February 2002

My letter from Toyota came yesterday, dated Feb. 7. It was from Toyota Corporation with a San Diego return address but Torrance postmark. Too long to report verbatim here, but it is essentially the same as their press release. I have also spoken to their customer service rep. at the toll free number twice in the last week. Here is what I gather from the letter, discussions, press release, and news articles:

1. The special policy applies to the Camry, Solara, Avalon, Sienna, Highlander, Lexus RX300, and Lexus ES300, model years 1997 through 2001.
2. If owners can show reasonable maintenance, they will be either covered for previous sludge repairs or can take their vehicle in to the dealer for repairs if it has sludged but hasn't been fixed.
3. Reasonable maintenance has been defined as at least one oil change per year.
4. Proof of reasonable maintenance can consist of service receipts, credit card bills, grocery receipts for oil purchase, etc. I take this to mean that people who changed their own oil and have some sort of receipt to show they did it at least once per year, will be covered.
5. No incidental costs will be covered. If you rented a car, had to stay in hotel because you were stranded, etc., none of that will be covered. Only the repairs.
6. The policy is in effect for one year from the date of the letter or the end of the powertrain warranty, whichever comes first.

canc · February 2002

"How do you know this? Did you ask them all? You did simple subtraction and fabricated a "fact".

Begining to sound like someone else else with a financial interest in Toyota-ron."

LOL! I don't have a financial interest in Toyota, but I believe in their product and in the company. When was the last time GM or Ford stood up 0.1% of their customers?

My simple substraction is not at all fact, but an illustration of the microscopic problem that has been blown out of proportion, in my opinion.

cholowicki · February 2002

If you haven't heard from anybody so far with a Camry, then you haven't been listening. I, for one, am a Camry 2.2 4L sludge victim.

As to the question posed earlier about why there is such a big deal over 3,400 complaints, I don't think it's because it's Toyota and people are looking to attack the "benchmark for quality." I fully realize that any automaker can produce a lemon now and again, and that is fine. My major problem with this whole situation has been the way I have been treated by Toyota, not that my Camry engine blew at 31,920 miles. If Toyota would have replaced the engine under the warranty after I provided them with proof of proper maintenance, I would have remained a loyal Toyota customer. The way that I, and other sludge victims, have been treated is what makes this such a heated topic.

I think the SPA is a start, as it will help those whose vehicles were not yet repaired and those that die due to sludge within the next year. If your vehicle was already repaired, then you might be reimbursed, if you still own the vehicle and they decide to cover it after reviewing your documentation. In most cases, this is documentation they already reviewed and rejected, so I'm not sure how many people will actually be reimbursed. And if your vehicle was beyond the 60,000 mile point, you aren't eligible, either.

How much "good will" is there in a gesture with enough restrictions on it to eliminate most of the people it is designed to "assist?"

canc · February 2002

I agree with you that Toyota has not been kind to its customers with the sludge problem, and instead of taking responsibility when legitimate proof was provided, they blamed everything on the owner. This is clearly a lack in customer relations from Toyota. If you've never changed your oil in your engine, then you shouldn't knock on Toyota's door asking for a reimbursement for repairs. This is clearly not the case with you.

Do you still have your Camry? If not, what did you do, and what's your current car?

amorales · February 2002

This is a sad situation in 2002. Let me see, last time i had sludge was in 1961 in my 1955 Chevy Bel-Air hartop with 265-4V. Engine had no oil filter. Was using Bardahl straight 30 and changed it 2X a year. Used Mom's butter knife to scrap sludge off valve covers and wash down lifters with kerosene. Sold vehicle later and purchased a '52 Chevy Pick-up 3/4 ton step side with 235 inline in 1973. Again no oil filter. Engine ultra clean. I cleaned up my act and changed oil 4-6 times a year. Using Castrol GTX 20W-50 with graphite additive. Drove it during college years and then 6 more. Leaked oil like a sieve. Changed pan gasket and rear seal. Stopped oil leak. Oil pan ultra clean. And this was with short trips to and from college.

My sympathies and regards to drivers who are having a sludge problem through no fault of their own. It is inexcusable in this day and age.

jj35 · February 2002

I left off the 1997-2001 Celica in the above list. I believe they are covered, too.

newcar31 · February 2002

It wasn't manipulated data until you left the word "complained" out. By leaving that word out, one would infer that only .1% of the engines are affected. Neither you, I, or Toyota knows this for sure. You cannot speculate on how many engines are affected since there is no data on that subject. Who knows how many more people will complain with the passage of time? The only thing anyone knows is that .1% of the owners have complained to Toyota about this AS OF YET.

canc · February 2002

Right... who knows how many people will complain about this in the future? Let's just hope that the complaints do stop at the 0.1%!

newcar31 · February 2002

If I was to speculate, I would guess that the complaints will not stop at 3300. If anything, as soon as this story really gets out, there will be a flood of complaints. That's just my guess though.

As the automotive news points out, there seems to be a design flaw that affects engines of a certain vintage, not just some engines, all engines made within the specified years.

sgergen · February 2002

I think that your statements that folks should quit complaining and that the squeaky wheel got the grease may be true, but that's not the point here IMO.

Folks like jj35 and cholowicki have the right to feel vindicated in this issue, from their reports here it has been an uphill battle with Toyota.

It's not enough that Toyota is covering the repairs and covering their butts, it would be nice if they were perhaps a bit contrite in their statements in the SPA.

Big corporations like the auto manufacturers don't admit fault easily, they simply pay and hope the problem goes away. Don't get me wrong, it's not just the auto industry, it's virtually any big corporation in any industry.

Cliffy, I hate to say it because I respect your viewpoints most of the time, but your comments just seemed to follow the big corporation mentality which is "look, we're fixing it so shut up." I think folks that have been through this should expect more than that, I think they deserve more than that. Just my opinion.

Scott

Mr_Shiftright · February 2002

Let's give some credit to Mazda, by the way. They replaced thousands and thousands of rotary engines out of warranty and did, in fact, save their reputation. I don't recall if they admitted fault or whatever, but they certainly did step up to the plate financially, and took all comers. You had a rotary engine blow up, you got an engine. Of course, their "problem" wasn't too subtle. It was a KABOOM sort of defect.

Audi was right. It was driver error, but being right doesn't mean you aren't going to get hurt as a corporation. I think Toyota is handling the situation as their attorneys advise them to. If you admit fault, you let yourself open to all kinds of litigation, from the legitimate to the completely frivolous.

robert_ca · February 2002

The possible engine sludge problems affect Toyota models equipped with 1MZ V-6 and 5SFE inline 4 engines produced between July 1996 and July 2001. I wonder what modifications were made if any to the 1MZ-FE V6 engine for the model year 2002? My 2002 Highlander 4WD V6 has a built date of 11/01.

Seeing as Toyota Canada has not released any statements concerning this problem, I called the Central Regional Office and was told that presently Toyota Canada is studying the issue and a statement would be release in due time. Comforting isnt it.

cholowicki · February 2002

My Camry is still at the dealership (since July 10, 2001) unrepaired. My lease is up in May. I currently do not have a car - I borrow cars and/or beg rides whenever I can. I have filed suit against Toyota Corporate, Toyota Financial and Red Holman Toyota in Wayne County, MI. We have requested a deposition date of Feb. 27 or 28th, and that is where it stands now. Toyota's SPA is too little, too late for me.

newcar31 · February 2002

That's great that Mazda did that. It only affected twin turbo RX7s though. Engine replacement isn't cheap, but there weren't too many RX7s out there to worry about. OTOH, Toyota has Camrys, Siennas, Highlanders, Solaras, and ES300s to worry about. If it really affects models in the specified years, they have a whole lot of cars that potentially might have a problem. Maybe that's why they won't admit guilt because they'd go bankrupt if they had to replace those cars' engines.

opera_house_wk · February 2002

Another poster talked about how Mazda treated their customers. I had a rotary engine that failed and the car was over 5 years old and had about 57K on it. Had an oil seal problem that caused the engine to grind to its death. I called Mazda USA and their regional rep called me the next day and they agreed to repair the car. No looking for 5 years of receipts and no other hassle. I will never forget how they treated me. I'm sure that none of the Toyota owners will forget how they are treated either.

cliffy1 · February 2002

Ummm... Just what more do you think Toyota could do to satisfy the likes of this shark tank? Declare bankruptcy? Fall on their swords? That seems to be the point now. Cholwicki really cracks me up when she claims the new policy specifically excludes those who most need it. The only ones excluded from the policy are those who can make absolutely no claim of any maintenance at all. That just made Toyota's point didn't it?

hlltd · February 2002

Just got off the phone with the people at Blackstone Laboratories. Very interesting.

Synthetic oils are NOT the answer, believe it or not!

A simple, relatively inexpensive oil analysis will tell whether or not your engine is having problems before it is too late!

Would be the best $20 you'll ever spend IF you are all that concerned?

388

canc · February 2002

yes, but wouldn't synthetic oil prevent any kinds of problems in the first place?

davedave1 · February 2002

It is not that I have any reason to believe my 2k sienna will get sludge.. It's that sludge - opps 'gel' - and it's control, is not definable. Would 3k oil changes do it, or is 5k good enough.
The definitions for which service to follow in the maintenance manual are too general for the average motorist. Further the maintenance manual even notes special service situations for Camry and not for Sienna, with essentially the same drive train. And the Sienna is by far tougher on the engine/tranny simply due to vehicle weight.
If there is a problem with head gasgets, or power steering parts, or brake parts; you either have the problem and it shows up or you don't. It is really not a maintenence issue for the customer, per se. Same with most 'defects,' except Toy is not owning up to this as a defect.
I interpret their letter as follows: "you have one year to get your complaints in and establish a maintenance record for your vehicle, and then you're on your own..." The letter policy does not even cover 'gel' for the 5/60k mi.; the indication is that Toy wants to be done with this ASAP, and the customer has a year to figure this out. Maybe the customer has to pay to get a valve cover removed or the oil pan dropped to verify there's no sludge and that maintenance is correct for his/her type of driving.
Toyota owners deserve a definitive answer to preventing this from occurring in their $25k+ vehicles. A reasonable answer is needed. Hopefully this is just the first salvo and represents an 'opening bid' by Toyota. Toyota needs to go further. The average customer shouldn't have to do oil analysis to keep a car in good working order; Gelling occurring under the warranty of the vehicle should be covered.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2002

newcar----no, I was thinking of even WAY earlier than the RX-7 TT, with the first Mazda rotaries from the RX2, 3 and 4. They put new engines in thousands of those old beaters! The old rotaries were the problem, not the normally aspirated ones in the run of the mill RX-7s. The twin turbo had some ugly detonation problem.

Toyota Engine Sludge Problem

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles