Toyota Engine Sludge Problem

hlron · March 2002

I do not think the SPA letter is demeaning. I just re-read mine, and what I think is that it is a mix of marketing and attorney wording, (both of which any company would do) and of writing at the lowest common denominator; that is, when a letter is sent to 3,300,000 people it may need to be written to ensure that it can be understood by those that may not have the best reading or interpretive skills (I do not mean anything by that, by the way, and no disrepect to anyone on or off this board. We all have different skills and abilities related to many things in life). Just my humble little opinion.

I also tend to agree that more people drive "severe" than realize they do. Like at least a couple of others on this board here, I do not like that term, by the way, in the context of how it is used to determine vehicle maintenance schedules.

fxashun · March 2002

Especially when it takes the place of the usual "I saw he saw" crap when nearly anyone with any independent credibility left says there is a problem with these engines.

How can you still post in here talking about "lack of maintenance" or "severe duty" after even the Toyota Dealer Council has noticed this problem. Of course that story may have credibility issues being in the Wall Street Journal and all.

As far as that post about the Intrepid....For starters it was in all caps. Anyone with any internet experience knows not to pay attention to any post in all caps. Also when that post is joined by about 5 more people with the same problem, then I'll call it significant. To put it in perspective, aren't there about 3 or four Camrys that have burst into flames on NHTSA'S web site?

No ones started a "Camrys ablaze" topic.

cliffy1 · March 2002

What does the dealer council have to do with this? Did they notice cars with sludged engines? Sure. I don't dispute that. Do you know how they noticed it? It was because dealers were buying cars at auction that were off-lease and were sludged. I've posted about this problem many times. Leased cars often get neglected.

Here are the results of the dealer's complaints:

1. Toyota added wording to the lease contracts reminding owners that they are still responsible for maintaining their cars.

2. Toyota began a more thorough post lease inspection and would charge owners if they had failed to do required maintenance.

3. Toyota created a new auction policy that gave restitution to dealers if they purchased a sludged car from a Toyota auction. In fact, a link to this was posted here a couple of months ago.

None of this changes anything. The dealer council never said it was an engine defect that I am aware of. Even if they did, how would they know. All a dealer council consists of is a bunch of dealer owners and few of them even know how to change their own oil.

bobistheoilguy · March 2002

Mr_Shiftright · March 2002

jj35---I'm sorry, I didn't see the "insult". Can you point me to the post in question? I scrolled back but didn't see anything egregious.

thank you

host

jj35 · March 2002

I was referring to #4658 which immediately followed one by Fxashun. It appears that others have been deleted for lesser offense (at least they seem to suddenly disappear). Your call.

jj35 · March 2002

If every engine on the market were developing engine sludge at low miles and with prescribed oil changes, it would not make it right for Toyota or any dealer to deny warranty coverage. However, since many people are still blaming this problem on owner negligence, the fact that there are very few complaints on the net about other vehicles and so many about Toyota's leads one to ask the question, if this was just lack of maintenance, why aren't we seeing the problem in all cars?

ramblinon · March 2002

the "letter" first of all does not have a full date. It was dated March 2002. My gelation will be covered for a year from the date of the letter. Actually, I'm only getting 11 months of coverage. But that of course is nit-picking and the stuff for lawyers to take long extended vacations on.

The letter is demeaning. The letter is not written for a certain "group". It states clearly the position. The letter has only deepened the distrust of the consumer. Combine the letter with the nationally ranked customer service and even the good old boys get it (stick in the eye).

I am framing the letter and hanging in the garage with old license plates etc. Am thinking of adding a halogen single track light to illuminate the letter.

Ed

john339 · March 2002

Is Cliffy's post #4470 okay? Thats the one where he calls FX a liar.

#4470 of 4698 fxashun by cliffy1 Mar 16, 2002 (10:58 am) There you go again. Stop lying. At no point did I ever say the Taurus was unavailable with a DOHC engine.

For context, that post dealt with an earlier post by Cliffy when Cliffy said "You have also made up an engine for the Taurus. It does not have a 4 cam, 24 valve engine. Here is the quote from Ford's web site in describing the Taurus engine:"

john339 · March 2002

According to the WSJ article, the Toyota Dealer Council complained to Toyota Management 3 years ago for 2 reasons. One, the dealers themselves were getting stuck with sludged Toyotas and two, because the dealer's customers were complaining to the dealerships. Per the WSJ article "...it got Mr. Rodland's attention in part because he wound up buying some sludge-damaged vehicles at an auction and in part because of the position he was in with customers who had the problem". The dealers had problems with sludge period, in owners cars, auction cars, whatever.

This was evidently a big enough and common enough problem across the Toyota dealer body that it rose to the level of the Toyota Dealer Council. The Toyota Dealer Council forwarded those complaints on to Toyota Management, 3 years ago.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2002

So what's their motive for not acting, do you think, if they knew about it and it was a serious issue way back then?

PS: I will check out the posts you mentioned asap. Someone on the board (was it --did I get that right?) mentioned posts disappearing without them knowing it but they are in error about us doing it. Must have been a posting error or software glitch.

PPS: Okay, post 4658 is out, uncalled for personal attack, five yards, cliffy. Post 4470 can stand because while not a good post to make, it refutes another accusation equally not a good post to make, so either both stay or both go, as you wish for the person making the complaint. Let me know on e-mail if it's double or nothing. Thanks and I hope that works for everyone.

jj35 · March 2002

I would normally let it lie, but after seeing proniger's and wellillbe's messages disappear, I feel a need to be a little more critical.

pjksr · March 2002

Nobody is really responding to Bob's post! For especially the "lurkers," who may own a 1MZ engine, it's worth calling attention again to how to prevent the effects of oil "shear-down," namely, sludge.

If it is true that Toyota engines are unique with their prevalence of gear meshes, then Bob's analysis looks like a probable answer. Oil, or more precisely, the lube package in oil, will only resist shearing for so long.

Change your engine oil before it shears, or before 3500-4000 miles and you will be OK.

jj35 · March 2002

So, for *idiots* like me who actually believe in following the owner's manual for recommended maintenance, who should be responsible for the oil breaking down too early in the engines and causing sludge? Me or Toyota?

pjksr · March 2002

If one followed the warranty requirements, Toyota.

But my point is that there are a couple hundred thousand Siennas out there, and if early oil changes can prevent most sludging, it benefits everyone to do them!

We hadn't had any new analysis/thoughts on the "why sludge?" issue for a while.

Best of luck!

im_brentwood · March 2002

Yes...

But the thing is, I dont notice a higer number of sludged Toyotas. If I had to name a car that WAS Prone to sludge, it would be Range/Land Rovers and V12 Jaguars.

They run hot, and at high temperatures, and dont tolerate abuse.

And just yesterday I heard about a sludged GS300, and that engine isnt alleged to have a problem at all.

But what I see here are people, many of whom (john339) who dont even OWN or DRIVE a Toyota going on and on about problems. Point is, we've only actually heard of a very few cars that DID sludge. At least a couple of which (Either knownst or unbeknownst to the owners) which were poorly maintained.
And then you have Charlene Blake who has made slamming Toyota her life's work. She apparently passes out flyers and brochures that she had made up. And now it seems that she is contacting the media very agressively. I think that a lot of the hullabaloo on the net can be traced back to her.
That being said, I remain a skeptic only as I see TONS of these cars that I buy and they have all been sludge-free..

Bill

Mr_Shiftright · March 2002

Proniger's posts were not deleted by the host.

john339 · March 2002

Hi Brentwood, with all due respect I find your continued fixation about what I do or don't drive to be quite amusing. I'm not sure why people who have opinions different than yours are challenged so vigorously. As I have previously told other people on this board, my grandparents own a 1999 Camry, it is within the list of affected vehicles. They bought the car on MY recommendation and we all thought the Camry would be a car they would not have to worry about. Obviously that is not the case, and actually it is quite the opposite. I don't know how any reasonable person can not be concerned about this issue.

I do have a major problem with any corporation who sells a product claiming one thing (i.e. a certain oil change interval) and then when their own recommendation leads to expensive problems, that corporation blames the owners. Next, that corporation has their dealers scare the customers into doing more than twice as much maintenance as was originally recommended.

The 'solution' of doing the maintenance at 2 1/2 times the rate recommended is no solution to me. As the Center for Auto Saftey says, Toyota needs to come clean on this.

As for your continued protestations of my opinions, I feel quite comfortable knowing many independent experts, like Pat Goss and others, have an opinion on this subject similar to mine, meaning I belive there is a problem and that problem needs to be honestly addressed and not masked over by placing increased demands on the customer.

jbollt · March 2002

Hi all! I have been reading this forum for a very long time, but have not posted yet. (Sorry in advance for this long post, and I will make the cell phone point soon)..And please excuse my lack of great literary skills.

I first thought the few folks with the sludge problem and associated lack of help from Toyota, represented just a few people who had neglected their cars. Time went on, finger pointing, idea sharing, name calling, etc..etcvery interesting reading. As I read more, I started to become a little concerned, as I own TWO 2000 model year Camry 4cyl vehicles. Both bought 1 year old with 28,000-30,000 miles thru a broker from the Toyota auction. Both cars had been Hertz rentals. At the end of the one year lease, Hertz gives them back to Toyota, who then goes thru them new brakes, tires, tune-ups, etc) and sells them to dealers at auction. I have ALWAYS changed my oil at 5,000 mile intervals, and I have been driving for over 35 years, have owned 40+ cars. Never seen such a thing as this sludge issue. The 2 Camrys are part of my current 5 car family.

As I read more of the forum, and more and more info comes out, I am really starting to wonder if there is really a Toyota defect here? We all know that Toyotas are well built, reliable, highly efficient for their market place. Something didnt seem right to me. AS many others here have said.

Well, now the cell phones come in. Please understand that I dont claim to have an answer, just a situation in a totally different industry. 2 ½ years ago, my wife and I bought 2 identical cell phones. Just under 1 year later (still under 1 year warrantee), mine started sounding like gravel in my ear. OK, fineit was replaced under warrantee.. My Wifes is just fine. A few weeks ago, my new one, now out of warrantee, starts sounding gravely again, and the charger cord is having a hard time plugging into the phone and staying snapped in, while my wifes is still fine! I start looking at the bottom of the phone where the plug goes, comparing these two identical phones. Out comes the magnifying glass. What? Lintfull of lint! I keep my phone in my pocket, my wife keeps hers in her purse. I start picking at the lint with a straight pinGOBS of it. After removing all lint, the cord plugs in again. Now I take off the face plate, and find lint in the speakercausing the gravel sounds. All clean now, and sounding like new.

My point? I guess I need to follow the severe maintenance schedule in the cell phone owners manual. Just kidding!

Actually, this post is just food for thought. Two identical phones, being treated two totally different ways. Both very efficient devices. (just like Toyotas) By the way, we expected the phones to last the same way our previous generation phones, did, but those hung on a clip outside my pocket, and were not subject to lintor higher temperatures.

Summing up, time will really tell herewhat Toyota does to fix their bruised reputation, and if there is really a cause found, or if it is similar to my (true) tale of the cell phones.different users and different conditions. Still doesnt answer the question why other model Toyotas and other makes of cars arent experiencing the same sludge problems. Anyone have a gravelly sounding cell phone?

Respectively,

jbollt

fxashun · March 2002

Okay that's your experience.

But I'll take the word of my employer, who buys and appraises thousands of cars a month, the unbiased opinion of people who have a lot more to lose than "credibility" here, and even the reporting credentials of the WSJ over yours.

No offense.

bob57 · March 2002

So, when did your grandparents '99 Camry sludge?
How often did they change the oil?

bobistheoilguy · March 2002

While sharing time with the toyota mechanics last friday, I learned some interesting things.

Because a lot of unsuspecting people are now aware of the sludge issue due to the letter, They have massive amounts of toyotas sitting on thier lots waiting to be exchanged or rebuilt.

As we discussed the gears in the engines I asked when was it that toyota started to use gears in engines..

around 92 when they put a gear box on the bottom to balance the engine.

So, how were they for sludged engines?,

we had them all the time with sludge.

not as much as now is it?

no, but since they have started using the 4 valve per cyl dual overhead cams, we have seen an increase.

Is this in anyone engine that is prone to this?

All of our engines are experiencing this problem with the exception of (i can't remember which vehicle he mentioned) this one that holds 7qts of oil.

Well, if that engine holds seven qts, you'd get away with it longer than one that holds 3.3 or 4qts.

---- end of dialog

So, is toyota got a design problem? I guess it depends on your perspective., As a toyota engineer,no, it's the lubricant or individual's fault.

As a customer, yes it's the engineers design.

As you may have noticed, The lubrication industry has stayed out of this.

I truly believe with the new version oils SJ/SL, yes toyota will continue to have this problem if they don't revamp thier drain intervals, (and i believe they are looking at changing thier drain intervals)

Another note, If you are intertaining the idea of having your engine fixed.

If your engine has been sludged but is only gelled, maybe just puffing a little smoke when starting up, they will just disassmble your engine, clean it and reinstall it.

If your sludge has been burnt(not gelling) to such a point and it starts to knock, then they will replace the engine.

Sludge will start to gell in the first stage of sludging, after awhile of running, the gell will finally become burnt in the 2nd stage.

conclusion, is there more toyotas with sludge problems? No question in my mind that there is.
Is there other vehicles that have sludge problems? yes, but... I believe you'll find the numbers of those will be due to the neglect as opposed to toyotas problem.

I think because they have not determined thier problem (and i suspect this is due to the lack of engineers knowledge of lubrication priciples) and they haven't put 2 and 2 together where the higher levels of zddp antiwear additives have been reduced, and them increasing the larger gear teeth area where more of the oil is exposed to shearing at one time) That they should have been more tactful in thier pointing fingers at owners.

ps,

If I understand this correctly, that the v6 engine is implicated as the main problem engine. If you look at that engine, they have 2 big gears meshing on each head and one little one spring loaded. In the 4 cyl engine, they have a smaller set midway of the valve train.. this one wont be near as hard on the oil due to less gear area to shear less oil. I believe this also supports my case on shearing aspect of base oil and how boundary lubrication priciples are relied on more than the base lubricant properties.

canc · March 2002

So are you saying that switching to a synthetic oil would resolve the problem?

fxashun · March 2002

Overtime like crazy. Lotsa Toyota techs riding around in Lexus's and Benzes soon.

jj35 · March 2002

If what you are saying is true, then I still place the blame on Toyota. In your scenario, they built an engine that cannot stand up to engine oils on the market today at their recommended oil change intervals. If their manual specified much more frequent oil changes and/or specified an oil that can hold up to their engine's severe operating conditions, only then would I consider it the owner's problem and a maintenance issue.

But all this speculation doesn't make me feel any more comfortable with the best way to prevent future sludge. Your theory is just as believeable to me as Larry Perry's (Autonews article) who blames the problem on the reduction in size in the coolant passages. Larry says it doesn't matter when you change your oil - you are still causing sludge build up. His recommended solution is use of synthetic oil.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2002

fsxshun --nobody owning a sludged Toyota can reasonably be considered "unbiased", just as no Toyota employee could be "unbiased" in this discussion. They are both "interested parties", for obvious reasons, and would generally want the discussion to turn to their advantage.

Therefore, in my mind, people like Bob, or other *unpaid* consultants and engineers, or good reporters, or perhaps good government investigators, would carry more weight of opinion than either consumers or Toyota spokespeople.

This doesn't mean, however, that consumers or Toyota employees couldn't present solid proof of something, but their "feelings" on the subject would naturally be quite biased.

ramblinon · March 2002

Toyota Techs won't be riding around in the Lexus with the 3.0 V-6 engine will they? I bet not.

I still can't get over the constant attack on John339 nor find any reasonable answer for it. Could it be he is not a member of the "let's get together at the Mt. Club" gang?

The irrational defense of Toyota and the demeaning of Toyota customers by the same posters has become more of a "cult" following similar to "Trekies" and various movies.

The more intently I read the posts of Bob who is an expert in oil/lubrication and has been most objective the more I realize I own a car that must have it's oil changed just prior to the 3K mile mark. I've already added BG 44K to the gas tank but am at a loss if I need to put BG MOA into the oil.

I have zero confidence in the 99 Solara SLE V-6 with just over 39,000 miles on it. I used to be concerned about how it looked now I'm simply hoping that it continues to run.

Sad indeed.

Ed

pjksr · March 2002

Are you saying that a straight, say, SAE 30 weight oil might be good to use (out of warranty) to avoid shear? Or, maybe a multi-visc without viscosity improvers, like I believe old Mobil-1? How 'bout a Delo or Delvac heavy duty with more ZDDP?

(I know you did say to change out the engine oil, as a first recommendation.)

Thanks for your insight!

Pete

Mr_Shiftright · March 2002

Some quick suggestions for peace online:

1.Don't be too aggressive or personal. Don't dominate, don't use ALL CAPS.
2. Don't argue policy decisions with the host online (use e-mail!)
3. Maintain courtesy at all times
4. qualify your statements with "in my opinion" or "I think".
5. use "emoticons" or quote marks to soften your words if necessary.
6. Don't make very long posts. Split them up.
7. Try not to post more than twice in a row, and keep them short.

Host

cliffy1 · March 2002

I really wish you all could have heard him this morning. He made three very interesting points.

1. It is his belief that the sludge problem is the fault of owner's lack of maintenance and the manufacturers lack to warnings to maintain the PCV system.

2. He says this is also a problem with MANY other cars as well, but Toyota is the only one that is backing up the owners of these cars.

3. He doesn't trust the oil light system on his Mercedes. Against what the manual tells him, he will be changing his oil every 5 to 6K miles. In spite of the Mercedes assurances, he doesn't trust his oil to last 10 to 13K miles.

All three of these statements were given between 11:30 and 11:50 on WJFK on his weekly radio show.

catgem · March 2002

any thoughts as to whether I should purchase one on my 2000 Sienna??
My confidence in Toyota is low....several weeks ago my engine overheated, coolant was gone...had it refilled,and over several days, it kept using up coolant....took it in to Toyota, they ran tests, and said there was no problem, it was just a one time fluke...Now, I HAD left it outside overnight(20 below zero), so I suppose their air pocket theory is possible....NO one( I also had it checked by indep. mechanic) could find any sign of a leak...well I think Toyota fixed whatever it was, and will not admit yet another problem!!
Paranoid? Yes, I am ...but remember, even paranoid people have enemies!

bobistheoilguy · March 2002

Let me try and be concise as possible.

These techs get paid on commission based on billable hours. They were telling me they hated these engine jobs because it pays 25hr for r&r a motor and 30 hrs for r&r and rebuild. avg actual wrench time it takes them is 20 ot 25 hrs.

They said they make more money billing a brake job because it takes less time to do the job and they make more billable hours. It is quite apparent there is no lacking of work even without the engine sludge issue, so i don't think the high dollar money is getting to them.

anyway, back to the sludge.

It is apparent that if YOU make no changes in your maint. practices that this sludge will re appear. My suggestions are as follow.

You can use your current oil but must do no more than 3,000 miles.

You can switch to a "full" synth but still recommend not to exceed 5,000 miles.

You can switch to a specialized oil like Redline, Amsoil, or Schaeffers and this will give you the better options.(I have one customer that does 7500 miles with no sludge)

explainations...

standard oils rely on VI improvers that will shear down and create a sludge issue.

"Full" synths dont rely as much if any or use a much higher quality VI improver thus the shearing effect won't rip it appart as easily. But this oil will still shear out between the gears so therefore, you still will generate higher levels of heat/friction wear. But since full synths have a better tolerance to heat, will be able to last longer in this severe application.

Specialty oils have higher levels of Antiwear additives and use higher grade VI improvers. Redline.. is a full synth with higher levels of moly and zddp. best of both worlds. Amsoil (not the xl7500 series) is claimed to be a full synth with higher levels of zddp.. this too better for resisting gearwear/heat/friction . Schaeffers, has a full synth, but myself have used nothing but the blend in all of them, this has min standards of zddp but has the moly and penetro(another antiwear additve). with this combination and the higher quality of VI's, also stands up to the abuse better.

A straight wt newtonian oil such as 30wt will do ok since it doesn't rely on VI's but still has the reduced zddp's so it too would produce higher levels of heat and not hold up as well and will not shear down in piston areas where it is needed to maintain proper lubrication. a straight 30 is thicker than a 20w50.

Diesel oils "delo 400", If it is not api certified for sj class oil (some are both ch and sj/sl) will have higher levels of zddp and might hold up but quite frankly I don't know.

I guess the conclusion I have on this issue is, pick an oil you like, if you want to go over the 3k miles, then invest in oil analysis and watch how your visc holds up and wear numbers stay. Each persons senerio can be different as i have learned from analysis myself. This is the main reason most oil change places use the 3k interval as a normal procedure. Yes oil can be extended but if not properly done, will cause problems so if you go with the masses and do 3k drains, then personally I don't see a problem in the future for sludge.

bob

megawattblues · March 2002

with AutoRx? Is this a good thing to have on hand if you find yourself in the earlier stages of sludge?

I ordered some of this stuff for my wife's '97 Camry which had just about 80K on it. When I pulled the valve cover off, I found not only no "sludgel", but noticed all the cams (& gears), and everything nice and clean. Whew!

So, now I have a container of this AutoRx on hand, just in case 3K oil change intervals are not adequate for keeping sludge away - which I doubt, since this car has gone past 5K at times (but not anymore), and no sign of the stuff.

Am I right in not treating an apparently healthy engine?

cliffy1 · March 2002

I talked to our service director about this. He said the techs were dreading an influx of these cars because they don't pay much under the SPA as compared to "COD" work. Bob is very correct about this. He did say however that because each Master Technician had only done a small handful of these over the years, it took them a long time. He believes that if they had these cars coming in at a rate a a few a week, they would be able to do them in their sleep in less then half the time it currently takes them. At that point, it would be very profitable for them.

Now here's the part that got my attention. We are the 5th largest volume dealer in the region (5 states, 135 dealers) and in the top three for service work. We have not seen any discernible increase in these cars coming in since the SPA. In the first week, we got hit with a flurry of people who suspected their cars were sludged, but only two turned out to actually be sludged. One of those is the van I described the other day. I have no details on the other.

From the perspective of the service department, they are a bit disappointed by the response. The technicians were dreading it, but the director looked at the long term possibilities. As of yet, the fears/hopes have not materialized.

retlif · March 2002

If the conditions inside certain Toyota engines are so harsh as to warrant accelerated oil change intervals to prevent sludging it stands to reason that these engines must be subject to premature wear even with 3,000 or 5,000 mile oil change intervals. Sludging is only the worst case scenario in the continuum of possible engine damage resulting from a shortened oil lifecycle. If the oil in these engines is so stressed it is likely that there is significantly increased wear even if there is no evidence of actual sludging. Will some mechanics or engineers speak to this possible issue?

bobistheoilguy · March 2002

According to what I know about the Auto rx, It is not a problem to run it in a healthy engine. I had run it in mine as an experiment with oil analysis and found no increase of wear or ill effect on the motor or oil. I see that since you were adhering to the 3,000 mile oil drains you have found not to have experience the sludge. Good for you.

As for extreme wear and resale value, I don't agree. This company has been using gears since 92 and has had an exceptional resale value and performance. I do beleive however that this has tainted them and will effect some of the market share for them but does this mean they are bad? No, The mechanics of this engine obviouly has excellent potential and understanding how doing oil changes prior to the oil being destroyed will insure a long life for these engines.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2002

Given that the public doesn't understand this problem very well, or the years or models affected, I don't expect much if any decrease in resale value. Could be some temporary effect, but you know Americans--in one ear and out the other and let's watch college basketball YEAH!

CATGEM--extended warranties are not really warranties. They are insurance policies. The insurer or issuer of the "warranty" is betting that nothing will happen to your Toyota and you are betting that it will. Like health insurance. If you're the lucky one, you have a brain tumor and it's "covered".

The problem with extended "warranties" is that they contain "exclusions", and you have to read those really, really carefully before you invest in this insurance. Just like health insurance has "pre-condition" clauses and also won't pay for this and only 1/3 of that, these extended warranties may specifically exclude sludge, overheating, abuse, etc.

So you need to read up on this and ask plenty of questions.

I'd imagine that sludge is not covered by most extended warranties, since it is generally believed in the "industry" to be a sure sign of owner negligence (as you well know).

john339 · March 2002

I believe resale values of these Toyotas will be adversely affected in general and in particular if the owner does not have a full and complete set of maintenance records.

Assume a buyer is given the choice between two equally well-cared for used cars, say a 2000 Accord vs a 2000 Camry. Assume both cars had their oil changed religiously at 5000 mile intervals.

All else being equal, if the buyer is aware of the "maintenance sensitivity" of the Toyotas, which do you think the informed buyer would be more inclined to purchase? Or, which vehicle would an informed buyer be more inclined to pay a premium for?

What if the Toyota seller has no receipts to offer, just a log of his oil changes? Should an informed Toyota buyer stay clear of that particular vehicle because of its 'sensitivity' to maintenance?

Interesting questions for used car buyers and sellers to ponder. These are serious questions that are left unanswered by Toyotas time-limited SPA.

webguyster · March 2002

I think if some of the posters had read the AERA Engine Rebuilders Association, March 2002, TB# 1963 , for Lexus/Toyota, cars/trucks, 3.0, V-6, year 1993-2001, properly maintained, you guys/gals would cringe. It's copy righted, and not mean't to be reproduced without permission, so I won't post it, but if you have access, like a dealer, or mechanic, I think you will be a bit more comfortable knowing that they have a technical bulletin about the problems with these specific engines. EECH! CHANGE YOUR OIL, maybe even more than 3,000 mile intervals, for long life. Just my 2 cents from reading the bulletin. I am going to start flushing as maintenance. These are not the 1980's Corollas that went on forever!?!

kuangtic · March 2002

Last time I talked to a Toyota Service Writer about switching to Synth oil like Mobile 1, he told me that for my 3.0L V6 engine, once I switched to Mobile 1, The car has to use Synth oil forever, I can not switch back to regular motor oil. Is there any valid reason behind this? Thanks.

bobistheoilguy · March 2002

This service writer is way out of date. The new synth's are completly compatible and can be switched back and forth if so desired. Fact is there is alot of supposed full synths that actually are part mineral based and part synth like castrol syntec for example. Here is the basic article about castrol...

goto http://www.bobistheoilguy.com and select FAQ's about oil.. then select "thoughts on oils"

(sorry, the link was too long to post directly)

bob

Mr_Shiftright · March 2002

Resale: Given that Audis and Mazdas don't have diminished resale even with horrendous past scandals to their name, I don't see why Toyota should suffer much in the long run--they certainly are doing more intervention than Audi ever did, and Mazda was very late stepping up to the plate for its ultimately generous intervention.

As for cars with current low resale, like say Jaguar, that a decade to build that bad a reputation (the XJ6s) and will take a decade to bring it back. They are just about there.

My personal theory is that the effects on resale will last about the same amount of time that the scandal remains in the public mind. So for Audi it was two years of fairly bad publicity and then two additional years of poor resale. Ditto with Mazda. The rotary is back!

So with Toyota it depends, but I don't see this one lasting too long, another couple months at most.

john339 · March 2002

In my opinion, I believe the resale values as projected by Automotive Lease Guide on Audi and Mazda vs their competitors. I think their lower resale values indicates that Audi and Mazda have never fully 'recovered' from their earlier problems.

Both Audi and Mazda have lower reasale values than comparable products from their competitors.

For example, a Mazda 626 V6 after 4 years is worth 34%, an Accord V6 is worth 45%.

An Audi A4 3.0 after 4 years is worth 44% and the 330i is worth 48%.

I don't believe Audi or Mazda have ever been able to recover the ability to universally charge a "premium" for their products. Once you lose the trust of your customers, it is very difficult to ever regain the ability to regain the "pricing power" that a select few companies enjoy. This is especially true if a company has been able to charge more for their product because they had a perceived 'bullet-proof' reliability. If customers no longer perceive that reliability to be 'bullet-proof', then the ability to charge a premium for it diminishes.

source: Resale Value Figures were provided by Automotive Lease Guide, Santa Barbara, Cal. through Kiplingers Personal Finance

davidfrancis · March 2002

of my views on Toyota's responsibility for these problems.

In the cellphone case jbollt was using his phone "normally" by carrying it in his pocket. Many phones are now small enough to do this, and are in fact advertised this way. If the phone can't stand the lint of a shirt pocket then it has been poorly designed for its purpose, end of story. The cellphone maker can't argue "severe" use or owner neglect.

This, IMO, is exactly where Toyota find themselves.

What we need is some sort of mechanism to get some statistics of sludging rates for different makes and models, so we can verify that either certain Toyota models are truly more prone to sludging, or that they are the same as other vehicles.

On the net its hard to tell a minority crusade from a genuine mass movement, but the number of posters, the Toyota Dealer Council action and Toyota's own SPA would all tend to indicate (at least to me) that there is a real problem here.

Anyone got any ideas on what govt agency or consumer group might have (or could get) some real facts on the incidence of sludging for different makes and models?

black_tulip · March 2002

"An Audi A4 3.0 after 4 years is worth 44% and the 330i is worth 48%."

So, is it your contention that before the hatchet job, Audi's residuals(or resale values) were higher than or equal to those enjoyed by similar BMW models from that era? Frankly, that would be news to me, if true. I think Audi has fully recovered and then some.

john339 · March 2002

Compare Audi and BMW market share from 1987 and now, that pretty much tells the story of how Audi has done vs. the competition.

and your thoughts on Mazda are?

Mr_Shiftright · March 2002

Exactly my thoughts, BT. Audi and Mazda never were the equal of Acura anyway. What I meant was that they recovered their former resale value rates. Sorry for the obfuscation.

You may not remember, but Audi and Mazda were on the ropes with a good deal of very ugly publicity, way, way worse than anything Toyota is experiencing. For one thing, the defects they were wrestling with were far more dramatic and out in the open than sludge. Cars crashing into beauty parlors, and engines smoking to holy hell all over the country in substantial percentages.

john339 · March 2002

Which former resale rates you are using? Are you using figures from the 2001 Intellichoice database or the 2002 ALG database?

There is actually a good deal of infomation out there on resale value vs. problems with automobiles. I think the Audi topic you brought up is a good one as it may have implications here with the sludge problem. There were suits filed against Audi for dimunition of resale values. For example:

http://www.state.il.us/court/Opinions/AppellateCourt/1997/1stDistrict/August/HTML/1922763.txt

fxashun · March 2002

As far as Audi resale....They have no resale. They depreciate fast than nearly any other "premium" European brand. There are a lot of A4's being appraised at $6500 with decent miles and no paint. To put it in perspective 1997 BMW 3 series still gets about $13000. Their prices aren't that far apart when new.
Or even worse...A 1997 Civic can pull more in trade in value than some Audi A4's. Base A4 when new $24,000 Civic EX when new $17,000. Ouch.

wishnhigh1 · March 2002

"An Audi A4 3.0 after 4 years is worth 44% and the 330i is worth 48%."

If I am not mistaken, neither of these models have been on the market for 4 years yet. How is this residual value calculated?

Toyota Engine Sludge Problem

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles