Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
If you haven't done so in awhile, replace your PCV valve. It's pretty cheap, and ought to be done on a regular basis anyway. On my Honda CR-V, I found that the genuine Honda part was less plastic and more metal, for about $3 more that the one at Pep Boys or Auto Zone.
And again, I'd stick with the Honda part.
j/k, but you could get your reading at idle that has nothing to do with what's happening at speed, and under load. My theory is, don't spend too much on diagnosing the problem, if a possible solution is really cheap. I'd bet that Firestone / Honda / Mr. Goodwrench wouldn't test a PCV valve in that way, or at all - just replace it.
If you don't diagnose you're just guessing. By diagnosing you have 100% eliminated one possible cause of the leaks, whereas a new PVC could be bad out of the box, you don't know. So you test it before and after replacement and then you know something for sure.
Mr Badwrench isn't going to learn anything the other way except how to throw parts at problems at your expense.
It's sloppy and there's no pride in it IMO.
And then there's the question of why the PVC clogged? The PVC could be the fever of the patient and not his disease.
I wish someone would just check the damn PCV! If it hasn't been changed in say 30K miles, sure it could be plugged, especially on an older engine with high miles.
Here's some Info:
http://www.carcarecouncil.org/Engine/crankcase_vent.shtml
Would have saved $50, and at least have had a chance. Now, nothing learned, and out $80. BTW, I've never had a bad PCV valve, right out of the box - I only buy OEM PCV's though. Your link was great - and it reminded me that I gave my '99 'V a new PCV valve, AND a new grommet. Both were less than $12, right from one of your sponsors, H&A.
I wouldn't go back to Firestone. But I hope you do look at Shifty's link - maybe you should print it out and show it to your next mechanic. Personally, I don't know where the PCV valve is on a '97 Accord, but typically they're not hard to change out. Why not go down to the Honda dealer and buy a new PCV valve, and pay/bribe someone to put it in for you? On my '99 CR-V, it can be done in under a minute, with just a pair of pliers. Have them check out the condition of the PCV valve hose, and the grommet it goes into as well.
Then, get some Simple Green or some citrus-based cleaner. Wait until your engine cools down (doesn't need to be cold, just wait 30 minutes or so after turning it off). Then spray the cleaner onto the oily parts, wait a few minutes, and then hose it off. Just use a garden hose, and not a pressure washer. Avoid the Distributor (if you've got one) and the spark plugs & wires. Just go for the engine leaks The idea is to clean the area off, as Shifty suggested.
BE CAREFUL of the tin foil that you don't bridge two live electrical and exposed connections! This is only for black boxes and such, not to cover a battery with exposed cables.
Some of us have cars we drive for fun, but most of have cars we need to get to work and to live our lives. Having one less thing to worry about is a great thing. Good luck.
When the car had 150,000 my friend replaced the water pump and the front oil seal. Since he replaced the water pump. He also replaced the time-belt. It took 3 hours. He also replaced the oil gastket, oil filter, etc.
Every 400 miles I have to add half quart.
Can anyone give me any advice??? :shades:
As you can imagine with all the Amsoil dealers on board he took a lot of flack, especially when he started really going after Amsoil as a sort of ponzi scheme. He was also nasty about additives which made all the Lube Control fanatics sort of nuts.
Well anyway, just when things were getting interesting, all his posts were removed, just like he never existed-- probably because he was going after all the site sponsors.
Anyway, I haven't linked to another forum, but I wanted to discuss his general points and felt he made some fairly knowledgable points before he was removed. I hope this post doesn't get removed because I don't know how to broach the subject without referencing what happened.
Some things to keep in mind--
1. This guy did sound like he had a good grasp of engineering.
2. With the GM trip computer (just got a Malibu Maxx and it's going to show about 6K before oil change) he was very comfortable with stretching modern SM dino (group II or II+ ) oils out to 6000 miles.
3. His point about synthetic was unless you need the additional top end temperature range (and most cars don't) that synthetic is largely a waste of money.
I'm sure he made some other points, but he got yanked so fast and so unexpectedly that if there was I'm not sure what the points were. He was posting to a brand specific board and apparently made some kind of snide remarks over there about showing up all the Amsoil dealers-- don't know where though.
"His point about synthetic was unless you need the additional top end temperature range (and most cars don't) that synthetic is largely a waste of money"
Now, keep in mind that MOST GM cars use very mild pushrod engines that don't stress the oil, either with heat or shearing. On the other side of the fence are widely reported, recent sludge problems with Toyota V-6 engines, VW Turbo 1.8's in Passats, Chrysler/Dodge 2.7 V-6's - and sludge is essentially due to temperatures getting out of control in engines, due to small oil passages, where the coolant passages are located, engine load etc. It happens. Synthetic prevents it.
That's if you are a normal driver. If you drive some mountain passes (with uphill sections) with some load (a passenger, some camping gear) on a hot day (that temperature thing) and drive hard (hey, twisties) with downshifts and high rpms - well, I'd rather have synthetic anyday of the week.
There is an additional factor, and that is "shear reduction" of viscoscity as the viscoscity index improvers (long link molecules) get "scissored" by pistons, gears, cam shafts (principally an overhead cam issue, thus the GM engineer's perspective), cam chains, etc. Some cars and designs are harder in this regard than others. GM pushrods are supposed to be relatively non-demanding on oil, specifically the older models with relatively low power output. Synthetic oils with moderate viscoscity ranges - like 5-20, 5-30, 10-30 - sometimes can get away without any VI improvers at all - the synthetic molecules are more consistent in size than non-synthetics. So synthetic oils are better if you might have shear issues or run longer oil change intervals. With 3,000 mile oil changes, viscoscity reduction is seldom a practical problem even with conventional oils, but on longer change intervals some people have seen 5-30 conventional oil slip down to 5-20. Which might be one reason why Chevy is sticking with 5-30 instead of recommending 5-20 (their oil monitor can allow 6,000-10,000 mile oil changes, I understand); it gives the oil more margin before you are in a dangerous zone (Ford limits oil changes to 5,000 miles max; Honda, which specs the same 5-20 oil, calls for 10,000 mile oil changes!).
I'd take the GM Engineer's postings as support for using conventional oil in a GM pushrod oil monitored car that's not being "raced." Even with a GM, I'd either use synthetic or change more frequently with more modern, demanding engine designs like the Ecotec 2.2 DOHC engine although this has an element of personal preference; I like to take care of my cars as though I am going to keep one for 100k + miles.
Finally, the GM engineer may have been in any number of departments not relating directly to engines or lubrication issues. I'd be most impressed with his or her comments if he is in their lubricants department.
(On a larger marketing issue, no oneat the Big Three likes to tell their customers that "regular" oil, which is cheap, might not be quite good enough, but synthetic oil, viewed as horribly expensive by the typical auto parts store shopper, is much better; even Amsoil promotes the "savings" you get from their oil by extending the oil change interval.)