Corollas2019-23ToyotasTech

Search Corolland!

Thoughts About Sludge

by friendly_jacek, September 10, 2004



friendly_jacek

Ellis wrote (in the closed sludge topic):

"Toyota does not recommend synthetic oil in their manuals, but they do recommend 5W30. What puzzles me is that the dealership I was using would put in 10W30 instead of the 5W as recommended. Could my warranty be voided when the dealership uses a different grade of oil than what was recommended? I must point out that I live in the south where the thinner oil is not as critical as in the north, so that could be why they were using the 10W30. But I switched dealers (for other reasons) and they new ones are using the recommended oil."

Good observation, some of the problem could be from using substandard or contaminated oil. Who knows what is in these bulk containers in cheap oil change places. Who knows if these minimum wage workers piss in it or not?

FYI, VW requires synthetic oils in many its engines, including 1.8 turbo.

It you take it to a VW dealer for oil change, you get the cheap dino.

Now, the twist is, these engines sludge left and right and VW pays warranty claims big time. Do you see a connection here? VW does not...

I don't understand why everything "sludge" gets closed or gets moved to another discussion forum. Can't the moderators just warn those who are misbehaving and then ban them if they don't comply? I thought the closed discussion was going along quite well for the most part.

Guest 98corolla110k

I would like to apologize for the can of worms i opened in my past post. Ijust wanted to state my 98 corolla didn't show any signs of sludge. i'm a simple man with simple words, but i see an awful lot of pot stirrring in some of these posts WHY?.. F.Y.I. friendly jacek... i dont smoke . default_wink

I would like to apologize for the can of worms i opened in my past post. Ijust wanted to state my 98 corolla didn't show any signs of sludge. i'm a simple man with simple words, but i see an awful lot of pot stirrring in some of these posts WHY?..  F.Y.I. friendly jacek... i dont smoke . default_wink

The sludge topic seems to stir up some angry emotions in people. It can get nasty - at least it has on other sites - without a moderator controlling it. I appreciate the efforts of the moderator to keep this site civil, but I just wish it didn't mean closing down a whole discussion. Sigh.

 

 

Guest model1822

simple

Use M1 ... then no sludge!

The fact is...Toyota has recieved only a few thouseand complaints, yet in that period manufactured over 10 million of the engines affected. That puts the rate of occurance around 1 in 10,000.

You have a greater chance of being killed in a car accident in a car accident than having your engine sieze due to sludging.

Guest Veritas

DB1, the moderator stated very clearly why that specific thread was closed. I believe it was a proper move.

I also believe it was done to keep sludge discussions open and informative, and not have them become yet another political platform for those who seem to want Toyota's head on a plate for self serving reasons.

Cherry128's response puts the issue into perspective quite candidly. I need not go into detail in that regard. It just isn't that big a problem, as some would have us believe.

Sludge has been around since internal combustion engines were invented. There may very well be occurences due to the statistical probability that some engines have a bad component no matter how stringent the Quality ****urence program may be--that's an inevitability of the mass production process common to all manufacturers, and I won't exclude that as one reason for sludge.

But the most common cause by far and away is failure to change oil when it's time to do so. That's my take on the issue, and after 38 years in the engine repair/rebuild business, I can attest to it being true. I also wish to point out that my shop is an independent business, and not affiliated with Toyota in any way.

A recent article in Automotive News is very enlightening, and is probably the closest we're ever going to get as to what the root causes are in the sludge issue. I have copied the following excerpts:

"Bob Orlee, a GM engine engineer who specializes in oil issues, said GM has installed oil life monitors because many consumers did not read their owner manuals to learn when they should change their oil.

He also said some consumers didn't know that severe driving areas, such as those with high heat and heavy traffic, required them to change their oil more frequently.

He said synthetic oil likely won't prevent sludge buildup.

Confusion abounded

"We realized in research back then when we talked to customers that they had no idea if they were severe or moderate drivers," he said. "Even with all those words we put in owners' manuals it was so difficult to describe to people when they should do an oil change. The oil life monitor simplified the maintenance procedure."

GM began using oil life monitors in the 1980s.

Chrysler engineers say improper maintenance is the likely reason for sludge buildup in some vehicles. About 70 percent of the vehicles with sludge-filled engines were sold to rental car fleets before consumers bought them as used vehicles, Locricchio said.

"The second or third owner can change oil on time, but if the first owner didn't, the engine can be susceptible to sludge," he said.

VW recommends oil changes at 5,000 miles or six months, or more frequently when climate or driving conditions are extreme.

Chrysler says owners should change oil every 3,000 miles in city driving or every 7,500 miles in highway driving.

Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc., which wrestled with a sludge problem in 2002 and 2003, denied there were design flaws in some of its four- and six-cylinder engines and also pointed to consumers for the problem. But Toyota extended warranties, replacing engines for free and changing the oil breather system in valve covers.

default_smile Orlee, the GM engineer, said sludge always has been a problem for engines. But improvements to motor oil and engines have reduced problems.

Said Orlee: "Sludge has to do a lot with how you drive. classic sludge was related to low-speed operations, like in taxicabs. Some of the sludge out there now we believe may be a different form of sludge. Some of it happens only in hot climates."

Please note the second last paragraph. I fully believe this is the answer to all the questions and theories surrounding the issue.

The fact is...Toyota has recieved only a few thouseand complaints...

Please, show me those "facts" (and make them current, please, not some 2 yr old data from Toyota PR before they made the problem public)

 

 

You show me yours first...then I'll show you mine.

I watched a news story several years ago about a lady with a Toyota Sienna that had a blown motor. She was pissed because at the time Toyota was refusing to repalce the motor because she only had some reciepts from quick-lube shops. No offical recall was ever required BECAUSE the rate of complaint was well below the federal government alert limits. The rate was somewhere around 0.01% if I remember correctly.

The federal alert limit for non-safety related problems I beleive is closer to 1% wihtin a specific period of production.

I don't really feel like doign an internet search news articles. The mdiea is anti-corporation and pro- American car anyway and it would be skewwed to make Toyota look bad intentionally.

If you're convinced the rate is higher, then fee lfree to search around or become friends with a local service manager and see if he'll comment.

Guest Veritas

default_wink Two year old data, unfortunately, is about the only data available with any authenticity.

Nobody can say with any degree of accuracy that a change in "complaint ratio" (complaints versus sales) has occured since those earlier stats were published.

There are some indications, at least in reliable/credible cartalk sites (like this one!) where poster authentication is mandatory, that sludge complaints are few and far between these days, and have been like that for at least a year or so.

There are other credible indications such as Consumer Polls which consistently show Toyota as having one of the lowest complaint to sales ration in the business.

So it would appear that the issue is decidedly less prominent than two years ago.

There are a few other indicators as well, but reliability of most of these are somewhat suspect. These are the "I Wanna Complain" sites around the net where no verification of authorship is required, hence the disgruntled individuals can anonymously load up the site with complaints. These sites appear to be favoured by those who prefer anonymity and "spin" to promote their complaints.

Aside from a persistent recycling of the same complaints from one site to another,(many two years old and older!), the number of recent complaints seems to have dropped of at these sites too. Even a few "petitions" which have sprung up over the years about the issue aren't getting significant activity--one of the more prominent efforts has only accumulated around 500 or so names in approx. two years. Again, it has to be noted that no authentication is mandated to for any names on an internet "petition", so credibility is questionable at best.

I'm afraid I still side with the observations by Mr. Orlee, the GM engineer who seems to know what he is talking about:

"Orlee, the GM engineer, said sludge always has been a problem for engines. But improvements to motor oil and engines have reduced problems.

Said Orlee: "Sludge has to do a lot with how you drive."

You show me yours first...then I'll show you mine. 

I watched a news story several years ago about a lady with a Toyota Sienna that had a blown motor.  She was pissed because at the time Toyota was refusing to repalce the motor because she only had some reciepts from quick-lube shops.  No offical recall was ever required BECAUSE the rate of complaint was well below the federal government alert limits.  The rate was somewhere around 0.01% if I remember correctly.

The federal alert limit for non-safety related problems I beleive is closer to 1% wihtin a specific period of production.

I don't really feel like doign an internet search news articles.  The mdiea is anti-corporation and pro- American car anyway and it would be skewwed to make Toyota look bad intentionally. 

If you're convinced the rate is higher, then fee lfree to search around or become friends with a local service manager and see if he'll comment.

I have been looking and all I can find is the statement from Toyota that they received in the neighborhood of 3,000 "complaints". prior to February 2002. I wouldn't go as far as categorizing it as "fact" because it is coming from a Toyota PR person. Knowing how public relations works, it was carefully crafted word-smithing that led to the use of the word "complaint". This is not a failure rate, but Toyota latched onto it as such. It is no more than the number of complaints received at the Toyota customer service center over two and a half years ago. Failures have continued after Feb.-2002 and would raise that number of complaints (and failures) but the number of affected vehicles sold would remain relatively unchanged (I concede that there may have been some unmodified 2002 models still on the lots that could have modestly raised the numbers sold). Even if you go out on a limb and do a SWAG using the 3200 number as a rate of failure, this would have been as of Feb. 2002, and would not reflect a failure rate or number of complaints as of Sept. 2004.

 

I have also found much information on continuing problems with sludge also. Even the website http://autos.msn.com considers this to be a significant engine problem in the covered models. Other websites with valuable information include http://www.autosafety.org (you can look at the Toyota sludge announcement as well as individual complaints on Toyota models), http://www.thecomplaintstation.com where there is a list 60 pages long of sludge complaints, the site Toyota Owners Unite for Resolution, http://www.yotarepair.com. Better yet, go to http://www.google.com and search for "Toyota sludge".



Topic List