Toyota Engine Sludge Problem

ruking1 · January 2008

..."Toyota said it had received 3,400 complaints before it extended its vehicle warranty to eight years and unlimited miles on 3.3 million at-risk vehicles in 2002. The company will not provide an updated number."...

..."Some sludge victims have resorted to more intriguing methods to get satisfaction. After fighting Toyota for six months about a sludged 2003 Corolla with 26,000 miles, Mazie Passeri vowed to picket the local dealership and drive the car with the words Toyota Sludgemobile painted on it.

Within days, the claim to rebuild the engine was authorized.

"I will never buy another Toyota," said Passeri, of Jacksonville, Fla. "The funny thing is, the car trouble itself never shook my confidence in Toyota. It was Toyota's poor customer service and their unwillingness to accept responsibility and make things right that did it." "...

..."Toyota will not say what causes sludge in some of its V-6 and four-cylinder engines, ...."

..."Now here is the caution. What we learned was that Toyota in the past has had a sludge problem with their V-4 and V-6 engines. In fact, Toyota settled a class action law suit in January 2007 that covers roughly 3.5 million Toyota and Lexus vehicles damaged by engine oil sludge. ( View article ) We learned that the sludge problem is continuing to occur even in our engine although Toyota has said it has changed the design of the engine to prevent sludge. "...

..."If you do see oil sludge and your car is a model year after 2002, Toyota will tell you they already solved the problem and it is a maintenance issue (your fault)."...

..."LOS ANGELES -- Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc. has quietly settled a
class-action lawsuit that covers about 3.5 million Toyota and Lexus vehicles
that may have been damaged by engine oil sludge. Details of the settlement,
which allows for third-party mediation of sludge claims rejected by Toyota,
have been mailed to 7.5 million current and previous owners.

Critics contend Toyota has told customers and dealers too little about
sludge issues. They say some customers took vehicles with dead engines to
dealers who had little or no knowledge of the problem and often assumed it
was the owners' fault. Unhappy customers had no remedy other than hiring a
lawyer to go after Toyota.
Under the agreement, owners whose claims have been denied by Toyota may
submit them to a third-party mediator at no cost for binding arbitration.
"This settlement breathes life into claims that have been dead for years,"
said Gary Gambel, a lawyer for plaintiffs who sued Toyota. "This is not a
settlement that gives a few dollars to everyone. The relief is exactly tied
to the problems and damages that someone might have." The lawsuit, filed in
a Louisiana district court, is expected to be approved by the court in early
February.Toyotas at risk

About 3.3 million Toyota vehicles are susceptible to oil sludge, which can
cause thousands of dollars in damage and require replacement of the engine.
Here are the vehicles included in the settlement.

VEHICLE MODEL YEARS
Camry 4 cyl. 1997-2001
Camry 6 cyl. 1997-2002
Camry Solara 4 cyl. 1999-2001
Camry Solara 6 cyl. 1999-2002
Sienna 6 cyl. 1998-2002
Avalon 6 cyl. 1997-2002
Celica 4 cyl. 1997-1999
Highlander 6 cyl. 2001-2002
Lexus ES 300 1997-2002
Lexus RX 300 1999-2002"...

The links in the post before.

nippononly · January 2008

I don't know about the other manufacturers, but I don't put it out of the bounds of possibility that Toyota made a calculated decision regarding its sludge issue. 3400 owners out of 3.4 million vehicles is a very small number relatively - they may have decided it would be better to make only small changes in engine design and maintenance procedures, and pay off any owner who actually experienced the problem.

IF that is the case, I see no reason why there shouldn't continue to be small (relative to total sales, but not small in absolute numbers) numbers of sludging problems in Toyotas after '02. In that case, the only hope the consumer can have is that Toyota will be a lot less combative in the future when it comes to engine replacement time (witness Mazie Passeri's experience with her sludged 26K-mile '03 Corolla). It is also possible that with 5000-mile OCIs as they now have on all models, this problem will go away (provided people follow them).

I must say I am confident that in my own case the key to prevention of this problem lies in my hands: OCIs of no greater than 5K miles with regular checking of oil level and appearance in between (which is how my owner's manual reads anyway). That has done the trick for every Toyota (and other make) I have ever had, many of which went out to 200K miles and beyond without an engine problem.

ruking1 · January 2008

..."3400 owners out of 3.4 million vehicles is a very small number relatively"....

My point exactly, if they had just fixed mine, since some folks seem to suggest that some one like me would be the ONLY one to have had this problem: (which the dealer brought to my attention) and app 3,400 owners that actually HAD the sludging problem, it would have been indeed an almost TOTAL NON issue.

nippononly · January 2008

Yes, but that's my point: they may be taking the (IMO unfortunate) view that with all the owners out there, they can afford to lose 3400 or so each generation. And if they can placate some with this reimbursement program, so much the better.

ruking1 · January 2008

Well yes, I said the reason why they admitted no guilt, is so they can continue to make, without much needed redesign, making engines that sludge. Indeed what is truly telling is that one sentence in one of your quoted articles: ...

"If you do see oil sludge and your car is a model year after 2002, Toyota will tell you they already solved the problem and it is a maintenance issue (your fault). "...

So for example even after literally exponentially large strides in the anti sludge metric in modern day oils (2 to 4x BETTER) , the TOYOTA oem 33.3% DECREASED recommendation of 5,000 miles OCI's (vs a previous of 7,500 miles OCI) vs say Honda's 10,000 miles OCI is another way of saying... the critics are in total denial the issues can be and remain just an abnormally short oil change away...."

The other thing, the math does NOT add up. Supposed they DID spend 2,200 per vehicle to fix 3,401 vehicles. What is that $ 7.5 M? How much are the total costs to settle for the exposed 3.4 M vehicles, with lawyers getting 30-40% of the settlements?

obyone · January 2008

"Supposed they DID spend 2,200 per vehicle to fix 3,401 vehicles. What is that $ 7.5 M? How much are the total costs to settle for the exposed 3.4 M vehicles, with lawyers getting 30-40% of the settlements? "

Exactly, I know of a few Toyota owners who paid to replace their motors. Were they ever reimbursed? Who knows? Frankly, who cares, certainly not Toyota!

ruking1 · January 2008

..."I know of a few Toyota owners who paid to replace their motors"...

I take your quote to mean due to SLUDGED motors?

The other side of the deal, Toyota dealers did/can/still can (especially after the 2002 bulletin) charge premium dollars to fix and/or replace those affected sludged motors! What is not to like!?? A dealership that has the Bosch system can as a minimum, charge 100 to 200. as a "preventative measure". :sick: :lemon:

otto8 · January 2008

Now Now all you haters !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quit posting the TRUTH and any mention that toyoyo is or was trying to
hide that PHONY sludge myth !!!!!!!!!!!!

Ask the salesfolks who post here! They will tell you that it NEVER happened!

stever · January 2008

Since there don't seem to be any "victims" out there who want to unlurk, I'm wondering if it's time to wrap this one up.

If we do shut it down, anyone with sludge could email Claires or me and we could reopen it to help them out.

(no, I'm really not inviting last call potshots :shades: )

imidazol97 · January 2008

Isn't a problem with sludge that many people aren't aware it's present without tearing down their motor to check, i.e., removing valve covers to look for signs in the upper engine?

So when we say the cars, of all brands, with potential of sludge don't have it when we traded them at some given mileage, doesn't mean it wasn't developing or present at a low level.

Nippononly says it very well: I must say I am confident that in my own case the key to prevention of this problem lies in my hands: OCIs of no greater than 5K miles with regular checking of oil level and appearance in between (which is how my owner's manual reads anyway). That has done the trick for every Toyota (and other make) I have ever had, many of which went out to 200K miles and beyond without an engine problem

But it's odd how, though many companies have some engines known to be prone to sludge, Toyota has the biggest spread out there waiting. I compare it to the Firestone 500 tires, or GM upper intake manifold gaskets/Dexcool leaks, or many other known problems that affect _some_ cars of a brand equipped with certain powertrains.

There is lots of evidence, available through the web, that there is and has been a problem. How large it really might be is info a car company would want to quelch, sort of like a political candidate with a bad streak in their reputation. They would use publicity to try to minimize the damage to PR as well as financial damage.

imidazol97 · January 2008

The topic is Toyota Engine Sludge. It doesn't say it's only for those who own a sludge car to be able to discuss here.

210delray · January 2008

We have one poster trying to claim this sludge issue is like the Firestone 500 tire recall of the 70s, and we have a newbie who apparently doesn't understand Edmunds' Rules of the Road.

The class action settlement is a year old -- we haven't seen anyone here with sludge except for a certain someone whose alleged problem car would now be 23 years old.

Nippononly summed up the situation nicely, thanks! So it's time for this to go!

nippononly · January 2008

"The other thing, the math does NOT add up. Supposed they DID spend 2,200 per vehicle to fix 3,401 vehicles. What is that $ 7.5 M?"

From what I have read and heard, the very large dollar figure quoted in the news would be Toyota's payout if every vehicle in the affected class experienced the problem and needed an engine replacement. Obviously, this will never happen. It appears that so far the actual number of claims is about 1% or less. So where the news splashed around figures of $3 billion, Toyota's actual cost has been more like $30 million, including legal fees.

But according to what I have read (to answer someone else's point), owners have 8 years plus 120 days to make a claim with Toyota and get back all the repair money they paid on sludged Toyotas. The settlement is not JUST for free repairs going forward, but also a way for people to be reimbursed their costs.

imidazol97 · January 2008

>if every vehicle in the affected class experienced the problem and needed an engine replacement. Obviously, this will never happen. It appears that so far the actual number of claims is about 1% or less. So where the news splashed around figures of $3 billion, Toyota's actual cost has been more like $30 million, including legal fees.

That was my point on the Firestone 500 tire pattern ridiculed earlier. With the Firestone 500's Firestone company fought and delayed the government agency declaring there had been a problem with their tires chunking out tread. By the time the sesttlement was reached most of the tires were in the junkpile and people couldn't collect on the settlement because they had already gotten rid of the tires. Some early, some later. But the time delay reduced the cost to Firestone.

Delay is used by many companies to gauge how bad the problem in the field is going to actually be. GM did with UIMs. Unlike Toyota GM never has come to a settlement, although a class action case is in Missouri IIRC but it's involving DexCool as well as the design of the gaskets early. But then DexCool is Prestone and GM's baby.

Some seem very touchy about discussing the sludge. As pointed out many companies have had motors that may have been problem motors. Whether maintenance choices on the part of the own exacerabate an issue that isn't really an issue or cause a problem present to surface, is a variable that always leaves an out.

The real cost after litigation and all is a choice companies have made that looks bad. Pintos needed a $5 rubber cover between the gas tank and differential case to avoid igniting fuel when a secondary impact could ignite fuel libertated in a primary contact penetration of the tank. My 1979 Mustang Pace Car had one.

After the settlement Toyota, like Honda with its own transmissions, has stepped up to paying for the problems that get identified. GM didn't do that for the UIM people. But those too aren't fatal for the owner who maintains their car regularly or even for those who check their fluid levels regularly. Again regular maintenance avoids the problem.

ruking1 · January 2008

A couple of points,

1. Which is more/less 7.5M or $30M? If the problem is /was as infinitesimally small as Toyota (only because this is a Toyota sludge thread) and the denial mantra-ists claim: why would ANY business consent to pay $30 M plus dollars, with potential EXPOSURE for up to 3.5 M MORE cars, when it could have quietly paid 7.5M or 75% LESS and be TOTALLY done with it??? The way that is was handled was almost a guarantee they will pay a MINIMUM of 300% more than they HAD to!! It also almost guarantees' volumes of bad press by way of technical publications, etc, etc. Actions like this are the ones GM, Ford, Chrysler took on their downward business slides. It more than reminds me, I should have been a litigator.

2. 5,000 mile OCI's with more normally dealer recommended 3,000 OCI's. ? The denial mantra ists are making a ultra strong case for getting stuck in the 40 years ago PAST specifications !! Modern oils are/have been exponentially far better in the anti sludge metrics (2-4X better) and Toyota still builds engines that require a min of 34% more consumptive OCI's??? The good thing is... they know!? The bad thing:... they know!!??

Might I politely point out the industry trend is to design for LONGER OCI's. The European's do a min of 10,000 miles OCI's. latest VW 507.00 specifications are for 12,000 to 25,000 mile OCI's!!?? This is up to 5 to 8.3 X longer than Toyoto's recommended 3/5k.

I have been running 15,000 miles OCI's on non sludge prone TOYOTA products!!!!! Indeed I have INXS of 626,000 miles!!! So not to disappoint some denial ists, Toyota is more than capable of designing engines that can use longer OCI's, and remain literally sludgeless!!!

Honda one of its competitors has 10,000 miles OCI's on CONVENTIONAL oil!? GM Corvette's are up to 15,000 miles and they remain sludge less.

Really for as GREEN as Toyota bills itself to be to be, they still recommend the hugely consumptive quickie lube horror shows: 3,000 to 5,000 miles OCI's!!

nippononly · January 2008

Whoa, ruking, you're really getting GOING with the whole "oil has advanced" thing, huh?! :-P

Toyota does not recommend "3000-5000" as you say, it recommends 5000. This is also the recommendation of the vast majority of "automotive experts" I have seen weigh in on the matter. And I would be willing to bet that among the enthuisasts here, you would find very few using OCIs of longer than 5000 miles on dino oil.

I believe that most of the Europeans, certainly VW, stipulate synthetic oil, so OCIs would of course be longer.

Honda may put 10K-mile OCIs in their manuals, but they also equip the cars with "maintenance due" lights which switch on in some cases much sooner than 10K miles (depending on driving pattern), indicating that an oil change is due. I know enough Honda owners to be certain of that, at least.

As for the $30 million figure I posted, it was an educated guess, and a large part of that bill is the costs of litigation. Not sure why we are still discussing the same thing, I had the impression we mostly agree on the Toyota end of things. I am not an engineer in the oil industry, so I can't comment on all the detailed specifics of oils themselves.

ruking1 · January 2008

..."Toyota does not recommend "3000-5000" as you say, it recommends 5000."....

I stand by what I have said. (not by what you have quoted me to say.

Not only have I said Toyota DOES recommended 5,000 miles OCI's but I used it in the 33.3% increase examples. (7,500 miles(previous) -5,000 miles=2500/7500=33.3%) , but (my local) Toyota dealer continues to put oil change reminder stickers which "recommended" 3,000 miles. I wonder what your local dealer recommends, given the Toyota recommendations of 5,000 miles?

ruking1 · January 2008

..."Honda may put 10K-mile OCIs in their manuals, but they also equip the cars with "maintenance due" lights which switch on in some cases much sooner than 10K miles (depending on driving pattern), indicating that an oil change is due. I know enough Honda owners to be certain of that, at least. "....

I am definitely familar with and know/knew about the OLM as I posted especially the Honda. So what about longer than 3/5k miles do you think the OLM negates!?

The Corvette Z06 has an OLM. GM with full knowledge of the fact that THEY put in an OLM say 1 year/15,000 miles. So does the fact I change it when the olm coincides with 14,500 miles invalidate what I was saying?

Now on topic, I ran 1,500 to 3,000 miles OCI's (Castrol at the time, GTX if memory serves me correctly), and/or TOYOTA dealer specified oils. SLUDGE up ROYAL. So as you can see either recommendation/actual is between 70% to 40% less than even the currently LOW recommendation of 5,000 miles.

nippononly · January 2008

This is what you said, yes?

"Really for as GREEN as Toyota bills itself to be to be, they still recommend the hugely consumptive quickie lube horror shows: 3,000 to 5,000 miles OCI's!!"

Your local dealer is NOT Toyota, and even though many folks treat their dealers as if they speak for Toyota, you and I both know they do not. This has been part of the problem with the way sludged customers received a response to their troubles. If you speak directly with Toyota via their customer response phone center or with a zone rep who comes to see your car locally, THEN you are talking to someone who speaks for Toyota.

This is a sucky system IMO, that impacts customers of all the car brands.

And yes, my local dealer puts a sticker on the window that calls for the next oil change in 3750 miles. That sticker is always off the window and in the trash before I reach the first stoplight.

My friend with an '04 Accord has the 10K OCI in his owner's manual, and a light on the dash that comes on every 5K miles just as regular as clockwork, reminding him to change his oil. :-P

ruking1 · January 2008

Lets see the Toyota dealer does not represent Toyota products!!?? Interesting as those reps do NOT direct the work or sales and repair to independent vendors.

The Toyota representative at the time, physically went to the Toyota dealer. Indeed the dealer would have done the warranty work on the authorization of the Toyota Representative. The answers were what I have described.

As to your friend changing his oil in this Honda at 5,000 miles when 10,000 miles will do, trust me I am totally ok with it. As I have said in past posts fore warned is fore armed.

I do 20,000 miles OCI's on my Honda with the oem recommended every other oil filter change.(20,000 miles filter change) I am due one in 4k miles for a 60,000 miles oil change. The engine is absolutely sludge free.

nippononly · January 2008

"Lets see the Toyota dealer does not represent Toyota products!!??"

Your local dealer is in business for one thing and one thing only: to sell you as much as they possibly can using Toyota products. When an expensive repair is needed, their only interest is selling you that too.

Historically, one of the nicer things about owning and servicing a Toyota has been that there is good communication between Toyota dealer service departments and the engineers back at Toyota HQ. This has usually resulted in quick fixes to small problems.

But expensive systemic problems (like the sludge was) have obviously received a different treatment...

It seems like you remain upset at Toyota's response to the problems with your Camry, and when the zone rep basically thumbed his nose at you, that DID represent Toyota dismissing your woes. They are much better at collecting data on their vehicles than they were back in the mid-80s, but that fact doesn't always work to the customers' advantage.

As for your engine being totally sludge-free, I can assure you there is no way you could know that short of a complete tear-down. Others have explained that in detail above.

In my mother's Civic, because she doesn't drive very much, the oil change light comes on even sooner than 5K miles most of the time, and I have taught her how to turn it off and assured her that 5000 miles or six months is fine for her OCI. Of course, that car also has a supposed 10K OCI in the owner's manual.

ruking1 · January 2008

Taking off a valve cover is NOT rocket science, despite your assurances to the contrary. What do you think keeps sludge in those hidden spaces when the system is designed to FLOW OIL!!!??? . It was you that posted the pictures of a of a sludged top end!, after valve cover removal. If you dont see sludge I would surmise you would be fraudulently ignoring it, if you were a professional mechanic. A blind person could see sludge!!? Or did you not see the pictures that YOU posted? Pretty soon you will probably say less than a # of sludge does not meet the definition of sludge!? The representative DID see sludge, at the time he even said so. The dealer saw it too. indeed brought it to my attention in the first place.. The real discussion was he was not going to pay for it on Toyota's nickel short of a full blown law suit.

Also all my current Toyotas have been internally inspected(each 60k) by the dealer and are sludge free and that is with 15,000 miles OCI's.

Perhaps that is one way Toyota has been able to keep the number of complaints WAY down. How many folks statistically tear down their engines as you describe? So you make a good point. How many folks even know what a valve cover is?

chetj · January 2008

well it hasnt hurt business any...i bet my bro in laws camry has sludge..of course he changes his oil every 20k (if that)...or runs it 2 quarts low...the car has 220 k on it and engine is louder, but in this case it is not toyotas fault...one time he had 28k on same oil and was 2 quarts low when i checked dipstick...he did same thing on his subaru...my buddy went 60,000 miles on same oil on ford ranger...he would add a quart when engine started ticking...some people just dont give a rats a--- about oil...i go 6k on conventional or 8 k on syntheitic and i am very anal about checking dipstick

ruking1 · January 2008

Well for sure! Even my dealer has the Bosch system! The last time I checked, they charge 175. for a treatment procedure.

ruking1 · January 2008

Just in case anybody has any questions as to what sludge looks like.

This was posted previously by Nippononly.

http://www.idahoexaminer.com/features/7136/the-toyota-sienna-a-cautionary-tale

nippononly · January 2008

Removing a valve cover is not the same thing as a teardown, and making a visual inspection with the valve cover off will not tell you the engine is sludge-free. As I said before, there are many places in the engine that sludge can lurk that require a complete teardown of the engine to see, which is why if you have not done a teardown, you cannot categorically state that your engine is sludge-free.

And the happy little 60K service that the dealer performs is certainly not extensive enough to guarantee it either. In fact, if you ask them they will assuredly tell you there is no way they can guarantee your engine is sludge-free, even after their largest maintenance service, without tearing down the engine. Please ask them.

Therefore, when you say this - "Also all my current Toyotas have been internally inspected(each 60k) by the dealer and are sludge free and that is with 15,000 miles OCI's." - it is extremely difficult to believe. I would suggest you are not totally familiar with the inspections the dealer is doing during your 60K maintenance service.

There are a very large number of interesting spots on the Web to check out if you wish to learn more about it. That is what I was doing last night, and some of the mechanics' blogs were fascinating. In fact, having some sludge is quite common, but it is rare that it rises to the level of damaging or destroying the engine.

canadiantoyota · January 2008

I have read with interest the messages regarding engine sludge in Toyota engines. Let me inform you of my experience. First of all, I DO NOT own a Toyota dealership or work for Toyota, I own a window and door sales/installation company. I have owned Toyotas since 1993. I have owned 8 Toyotas. My current rides are a 2002 Toyota Tacoma with the V6 and a 2006 Toyota Camry 4 cyl. The Tacoma has 355,000 kms on it (220,000 miles) and I have changed the oil at 6000 km intervals as per the owners manual. The Camry is at 128000 kms (80000 miles) and the oil is changed at 8000 km intervals as per the manual. I have NEVER had one hint of sludge build up. The cars that I have owned have operated better than ANY North American car that I have ever owned. I have had a couple of minor problems, but :shades: the dealer has stepped up and handled them. In fact, this is the real difference between Toyota and everyone else, the dealer. I couldn't ask for better... both before, during and after the sale. This is why my whole family now drives Toyotas. The cars and trucks last and the dealer takes care of you.

There is a lot of bashing going on in the forums here.. it seems that the Big Three and their followers are scared. If you have a problem, state it. If you don't even own a Toyota, then go to another forum and SHUT THE HELL UP!!!!

nippononly · January 2008

"If you don't even own a Toyota, then go to another forum and SHUT THE HELL UP!!!!"

This seems extreme. Nowhere on the Edmunds boards is it a requirement that you own the vehicle/brand/whatever being discussed in order to contribute.

obyone · January 2008

Seeing that it's his first post I doubt that he has read the terms of agreement as posted for everyone to read. That being the case it would be much simpler to report his post to the hosts for evaluation and or removal. Either way doesn't make much difference as most long time posters read a person's first post then pretty much dismiss it anyway.

ruking1 · January 2008

..." it is extremely difficult to believe"...

Lets see you have gone from Toyota having less than 3400 vehicles of 3.5 M being affected with sludge and that I am/was probably lying that I had a sludge problem with 1,500-3,000 miles OCI's TO saying that most engines are not GURANTEED sludge free!!! ?? You not only misunderstand what I posted, you are misrepresenting what I obviously said.

What is extremely difficult to believe are YOUR assertions!?

If I were you, I would quit arguing yourself into a box,

imidazol97 · January 2008

80 posts from 2007

These are all posts from 2007 :mad: so they are contemporaneous. :P And there are about 80--one may be a Prius complaint. Enjoy. They don't sound made up.

ruking1 · January 2008

As my post on the 1985 Camry 4 cylinder 22/23 year old model, relates to the Consumer Affairs 80 or so posts (sludge only obviously) 2007 posts, I shake my head. SOS DD. SAME OLD STUFF DIFFERENT DATE (year)

nippononly · January 2008

OK, diplomacy hasn't worked - let's try this:

1. I believe you had a sludged mid-80s Toyota.

2. I believe you are ignorant of what your dealer is doing at your maintenance services or how the internals of your engine work.

3. No engine, including the one in the car you currently own which you state is "ABSOLUTELY SLUDGE FREE", can be guaranteed sludge-free without a complete teardown, so some of your assertions are ridiculous.

4. Let me say this again, because I am afraid you will miss it otherwise: I BELIEVE YOU WHEN YOU SAY YOU HAD A SLUDGED CAMRY IN THE 80S!

5. There was no need to escalate it to this point - you must have missed that I was AGREEING WITH YOU most of the way along - but everyone has their tolerance threshold, and I guess you have reached mine. Maybe it's just a bad day, and I have just not been expressing myself well. C'est la vie.

210delray · January 2008

I'd have to take that Consumer Affairs site with a grain of salt. Just look at their so-called
Top Ten Automotive Outrages of 2007. Number 1 is the claim that airbag failures are occurring at an alarming rate: "We examined more than 160 complaints from consumers nationwide who said airbags failed to deploy and protect them in an accident" (emphasis added). Interestingly, Toyota was not mentioned as having this "problem." How does the average person know if an airbag should have deployed or not? The answer is quite complex.

They hit up Ford pretty well and also take a potshot at GM for allegedly faulty truck brakes. For no. 6 and 7, they bring up the hoary myth of "sudden acceleration," one for the Prius and the other for the Jeep Grand Cherokee and Commander. This issue is almost universally accepted as "pedal misapplication," that is, the driver presses the gas pedal instead of the brake pedal. But the car gets blamed instead.

I think this quote from number 8 says it all: "I bought a 1994 BMW 525i with 190,000 miles Sunday. Transmission blew Wednesday night going up a hill in San Francisco. There were only 103 miles between the dealership and the fateful hill. This is my only BMW experience. I feel like I'm joining a support-group. This sickens me," he said.

The number 10 spot goes to GM for pulling the plug on analog OnStar. Well, it's not really a defect in the sense that the car still drives fine.

ruking1 · January 2008

I disagree with your # 2 and #3. I know EXACTLY what they are doing at the maintenance intervals and how the internals work. You are wrong about #3, which is what I have been saying and the proof is in the pudding so to speak, over 630,000 miles. You might not agree with the conclusion from having sludge free Toyota's and the fact they ARE capable of designing them: in my example I6's, but the problem is there are no current I6's in the product offering that I know of.

210delray · January 2008

No you're not having a bad day. I'd be upset too with the beating you've been taking.

C'mon Steve, make my day! Let's see the glorious words "read only."

imidazol97 · January 2008

When I tire of reading a particular topic, I turn off the "watch" on it.
When I tire of reading a particular poster, I scroll past them.
When I have someone singling me out I contact the host for Rules of the Road.
I don't suggest the topic should be turned off for others just because I don't agree with the topic especially when sludge is alive and well in 2007 for several cars according to Second Opinion. Second Opinion. And that reminds me it's time to change the oil in my leSabre and change the coolant in both leSabres since it's DexCool.

rockylee · January 2008

TOYOTA ENGINE SLUDGE PROBLEM

2002 Toyota Tundra

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/285/RipOff0285631.htm

-Rocky

Claires · January 2008

Consider your day made -- just about everything's been said (and said and said and said) in the past 5500 or so posts. If anyone wants to discuss his/her sludged Toyota and/or has a compelling reason to reopen this topic, please feel free to write Steve or me.

stever · January 2008

Callahan has spoken. :shades:

dana · January 2008

Toyota Engine Sludge Problem

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles