01 Toyota Tacoma 3.4V6 and Amsoil, pt2

[radiometer]

What brainwashed my family was the constant annoying and expensive problems with GM. I did research in Consumers Reports for reliability and it was an eye opener. At that time to get the best in reliability, as reported by many owners, was to go with the imports. Just off my head I can state that with that move I've driven well over 700k miles, largely trouble free. I do believe some of the domestics have been doing some catch up and I hope they do. It is very fine with me for any one to prefer GM. I don't mind that at all because I have no agenda other than to get the best transportation I can for the money put into it. I hope there remains a good demand for the domestics, just as long as I don't suffer through them. My brainwashing has been my experience.

 

[JohnBrowning]

LastZ, Why and world would you judge all TOyotas based on their CAFE car. If wejudged all GM as a company based soley on their Geo Metro we would have a problem.

The Carolla is a wounderful car for the price point it has to hit. Toyota cuts corners like everyone to hit a price point. The difference is they do not cut durability to cut the price. NVH and driveabilty will always be second rate in a CAFE car. If you want to compare the Carolla to something at least make it a CAFE car. Compareing the Carolla to an F-Body is like compareing your F-Body to a Ferrari Stradale or like compareing a Buick Lasber to a Lexus LS430!

Black F250, Toyota has had a slew of engines that were considered almost unstopable of the top of my head you had the 3kc,4kc,"20R,22R,22RE,22RE-T",3VZE......

I would surely like to know how much boost you think is an issue for the Supra? I have seen too many of them with 200,000-300,000 ( stock) and never blow a gasket. They would eat a turbo or a chain or tensioner but the engines just kept on singing along. I am preety sure that if you need more then 20 psi machineing for steel o-rings would solve any seal issues. The weak link on this engine is rear main seal when you take them past 600-750 HP the rear main starts to leak. The bottom end starts to get really expensive as well.

The Supra's 3.0 I6 in stock form Turbo or not was one of the best engines Toyota ever designed. I actualy think that it was better then the 22RE it just was not as common. Say goodbuy to this engine. The Lexus IS400 has been useing it but is getting a V6 to replace the old I6!

Toyota has their reputation of quality and durability due to word of mouth. Owners tell their friends and family. You can not buy a repuation in an industry you have to earn it. J.D. Powers, Wards, Holt ...... are all industry watch dogs that keep track of every kind of metric you can imagine. THese metrics are then published in various trade journals. Every year about 2-3 times a year I have to sit through meetings at GM telling me how we are catching up to Toyota! Belive it Toyota includeing Lexus is the gold standard. Just because you do not see it in you chunk of the universe does not make it any less real! How many new Toyota products have you owned? I have owned cars and trucks from GM, TOyota, and Ford. I have worked on Forign and Domestic vechiles professional as well.

The market place is speaking with their wallets. GM could not even regain market share by giveing their vechiles away with huge incentives. Sure they sold more then anyone else but that still did not steal alot of conquest sales. People are voteing with their wallets! Sooner or later GM will have to decisde if they still want to sell cars. If they decide to keep makeing and selling cars and trucks they will need to address all of their durability and quality issues. They are still rideing the marketing advertiseing wave! THey are still trying to sell based on emotional content because they can not compete on quality or durability. That wave have been breaking since the 1980's!

GM and Ford have both come a long way but the gap is so large that it is not good enough. THe progress they have made has only been enough to keep loyal customers loyal!

If the share holders would allow GM to be number 1 they could do it in 10 years tops.

 

[BlackF250]

O.K. let me clarify a couple of things, first off I do not mean to bash Toyota, they certainly build some fine vehicles. I just was trying to point out that they are not without their problems. Secondly I am not touting GM either. Although I do like some of their products, I will agree that they are probably one of the worst company's for cutting corners. I was just illustrating that you can not judge an engines longevity by wear metals alone. In case you did not notice I am definatley loyal to Ford products! I am aware that they have put out some "gem's" in the past, but of the 8 that I have owned not one of them has ever left me stranded. They have been reliable, efficent, inexpensive to maintain/repair, and to insure. My post was partly due to a recent event, I have a friend that has a 95 nissan sentra with 150,000 miles that is on it's last leg. The compresion is just about nil in all cylinders. Now keep in mind that this car has been fairly well maintained with oil changes every 3-5k miles. Well needless to say she needs something to replace it.
she just had a baby and does not want to take on a second car payment, (Her and her husband recently just bought a new Sentra) So I showed her my 96 Crown Victoria that I have for sale. She was interested until I told her how many miles were on it, 233,000. Her comment was I don't know that's a lot of miles for an "AMERICAN" car. This car still starts at the touch of the key, burns no oil, shifts great, has not a single squek or rattle, and looks and drives new. This is what I mean by brainwashed, her foreign car is dead at a relativwly low mileage, but she still thinks their better! Go figue.

 

[TooSlick]

Compare the wear rates of a 2.0L, four cylinder toyota engine to it's GM counterpart. Compare the wear rates of a 3.4L V-6 or 4.7L V-8 Toyota engine to their GM "Vortec" equivalents.

The overall wear rates of the Toyota engines are not just a little lower, they are 40%-60% lower in many cases. For example, even though almost all Toyo engines are DOHC designs, they show much lower valvetrain wear. They also show much lower bearing wear, which may be even more important.

I have no doubt that GM builds some 150k-200k engines - however, I'd expect a 4.7L Toyota Tundra engine to last for 400k-500k miles; given lack of wear I've seen from that motor. The only engines that compare across the board are the high end German iron from Audi/Mercedes/BMW/Porsche. The Volvo and SAAB engines are in the second tier below the Germans, but they're still outstanding.

 

[BlackF250]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know what the wear metals look like from the old Ford 4.9 I6? They are known to go WELL over 300,000 miles. Actually a buddy of mine just traded in his 92 E-250 with that motor with a tic over 330,000 miles. And you can bet it was not for a Toyota!

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooSlick:
Compare the wear rates of a 2.0L, four cylinder toyota engine to it's GM counterpart. Compare the wear rates of a 3.4L V-6 or 4.7L V-8 Toyota engine to their GM "Vortec" equivalents.

The overall wear rates of the Toyota engines are not just a little lower, they are 40%-60% lower in many cases. For example, even though almost all Toyo engines are DOHC designs, they show much lower valvetrain wear. They also show much lower bearing wear, which may be even more important.

---

Ted, you know better than anyone that you cannot compare the wear ratings from two different design of motors. Comparing a Toyota V6 engine to a GM V6 engine or a Toyota V8 to a GM V8, when they use different types of materials, is like comparing apples to oranges. We have seen no evidence in real life which says that the GM engines are not lasting a long time. So even if you see higher wear, it doesn't seem to translate into shorter engine life. GM builds some very long lasting engines, the 3.8, the 4.3, the 5.7, they all last very long. Just look at the one million mile truck, it's a Chevy, so you can't say they don't make durable engines.

 

[TooSlick]

Patman,

You can most certainly compare engines of similar displacement, since all engines use very similar metallurgy for the same parts. I never said GM engines don't last, but Toyota builds incredible engines for very affordable vehicles. Only the Mercedes,VW/Audi and BMW V-8's are in the same league as the Toyota/Lexus V-8's in terms of build quality ...GM may be where Toyota was about five years ago in that respect.

Toyota is the quality benchmark for everybody, including other Japanese companies. I've had my Tacoma for eight years/70k miles and I once had a fifty cent vacuum hose pop off, which triggered the "check engine" light. That has been the only mechanical problem I've had with that truck, period. I find it incredibly boring to own, since there is never a reason to tinker with the thing

I've also seen oil analysis results from 4.7L Toyota engines with only 10,000 total miles on them and there is almost no break in wear. Go to the UOAs and you can find some of these....

 

[JohnBrowning]

Black250 I can agree 100% with your second post. They all make some lemons that is for sure!! While it true their is no ringer in a used car situation statistics favor her in spite of all the wounderful emprical evidence you have in your yard. I was worried about an 1997 Buick with 109,000 miles on it and some of my concerns have turned out to be true.

If you had a Toyota Supra Turbo in yard with 233,000 miles I probably would not by it either. Their is just something scary about a used car with that many miles put on by someone else!

It sound to me like you took excellent care of this vechile!! Those Sentra's are preety sound design. It makes me wounder what they did or did not do to this car. Usualy compression drops like you are talking about are ring or valve related. THey had to have abused it in some way! I would love to get a peak under that valve cover!!

 

[JohnBrowning]

Patman, How can 40%-60% greater material loss's not affect long term life cycle. GM is not useing an additional 40%-60% more material to offset this so "more wear = more wear"! I think reason and common sense rules out the idea that "More Wear=Less Wear"!

Patman, TS was not useing the differences in wear rates between GM and Toyota engines to compare oils. THis would not be good. It is quite acceptable to compare one engine against another of simalar displacement and number of cylinders. It also helps to keep "V", "W", "I" or "B" configurations like as well. How the valve are acuated has no bearing in how the bearings,pistons or rings are wearing!

 

[Last_Z]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JohnBrowning:
LastZ, Why and world would you judge all TOyotas based on their CAFE car. If wejudged all GM as a company based soley on their Geo Metro we would have a problem.

---

WOW WOW WOW!!! STOP THE PRESS!!!!

JB, Tell me in any of my posts where I'm judging ALL Toyotas or condemming them.


Posted by Last_Z (aka, myself)

quote:

---

Another car that is somewhat troublesome is the Supra Turbo.....turn the boost up and get ready for a blown head gasket.
My wife has an 03 Corolla and it rattles more than my Camaro. Suspension is very stiff, yet mushy when turning. No mechanical problems so far, but it ain't perfect!!

---

JB, these are FACTS!!! I'm not speculating, spinning, defamating, bashing...........or trashing Toyota. My wife's Toyota has been good so far. It has some minor irritating bugs, but overall, it's a keeper.

No need to hit the gas like that!!!!


TooSlick,
Like I've said before....These Toyota UOAs look beautiful, but what really counts is that they make it in the long run.......I have no doubt they will.....I have no doubt many GMs also will.

Rick

 

[Last_Z]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JohnBrowning:
Patman, How can 40%-60% greater material loss's not affect long term life cycle. GM is not useing an additional 40%-60% more material to offset this so "more wear = more wear"! I think reason and common sense rules out the idea that "More Wear=Less Wear"!

Patman, TS was not useing the differences in wear rates between GM and Toyota engines to compare oils. THis would not be good. It is quite acceptable to compare one engine against another of simalar displacement and number of cylinders. It also helps to keep "V", "W", "I" or "B" configurations like as well. How the valve are acuated has no bearing in how the bearings,pistons or rings are wearing!

---

How do you explain GM vehicles making it past 200-300k miles with owners that have less than perfect maintenance practices??
You are spinning JB....stop it!

 

[JohnBrowning]

I explain GM vechiles hiting 300,000 or more miles with out being touched as a fluke! IT is kind of like those cases were a man is struck by lightning 9 times and lives each time with no apparent damage other then light burns. I put it in the same colum as the storys about "99lbs house wifes lifting 2ton sugar beat truck off of son bare handed" storys. If they are well documented we know that it happened but it is a freak not a normal occurance!

I think that their are probably a few thousand cars and trucks built ever year buy GM that in spite of their efforts end up being almost perfect. These are the ones that make the headlines. It is so incredable that everyone wants to hear about it. It is so common for a Toyota to hit 300,000 and beyound that no one pays any attenion as it is noramal, routine occurance. I too have known of one person to go past 300,000 on a GM product. I have an aunt that did it. Never mind that everything else was replaced around the power train! SHe was also driveing in excess of 200 a day on average. 180 of that was going to and from work on the hwy the whole way!

THe said thing is that more GM cars and trucks should be hitting 300,000 with untouched power trains! It is still far from normal for GM powertrains to show this type of durability.

 

[sbc350gearhead]

Let me see........I have spent about 5 grand in repairs on my 99 camry so far, and it currently has 78000 miles on it. So at that rate, by 300k (I don't see it making it that long), I will have spent enough to buy another one. OH what a feeling.

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JohnBrowning:
Patman, How can 40%-60% greater material loss's not affect long term life cycle. GM is not useing an additional 40%-60% more material to offset this so "more wear = more wear"! I think reason and common sense rules out the idea that "More Wear=Less Wear"!

Patman, TS was not useing the differences in wear rates between GM and Toyota engines to compare oils. THis would not be good. It is quite acceptable to compare one engine against another of simalar displacement and number of cylinders. It also helps to keep "V", "W", "I" or "B" configurations like as well. How the valve are acuated has no bearing in how the bearings,pistons or rings are wearing!

---

My point is that the two engines might use similar metallurgy, but you can bet it's not totally identical. For one, I believe the Toyotas are all aluminum, while the GMs use iron blocks. That is a significant difference.

I'm simply saying that there are plenty of high mileage GM trucks on the road, there is no evidence in real life which suggests that GM trucks engines die at an early age.

I agree that you want to see the lowest wear numbers you can in UOA, but some engines just will not show you these kind of numbers, it's their nature, but for them it doesn't mean they'll die earlier than another engine. Just look at the 4.0 Jeep engine, it shows high iron in a lot of UOAs, yet is a very long lasting engine. I'd love to see UOAs on some of the most durable engines ever built, such as the slant six or the Ford 4.9 straight six. It wouldn't surprise me to see they show wear metals higher than we'd feel comfortable with.

Another engine which doesn't show super low wear numbers is the LT1 engine I have in my Firebird, but yet I know many guys out there who have driven the hell out of these cars and still have gotten very long life out of them.

Spector often says it best, watch the trends in UOA, but don't be concerned if the numbers are always higher, because it doesn't always mean that particular engine is going to die any sooner.

By the way, I've yet to hear of a Toyota going one million miles on it's original motor, like that Chevy truck did.

 

[TooSlick]

Patman,

In my job, I deal with documented facts, not lots of arm waving and emotion. The hard data clearly suggests that average Toyota or VW engine is wearing a lot slower than the average GM motor of a similar size.

Some of the new domestic engines seem to be doing very well in terms of wear - in particular the new 4.7L Damlier/Chry V-8's seem to wear pretty well. The Ford "triton" V-8s' and new V-6's also have a very nice wear pattern. The best GM engine is clearly their roller lifer equipped, 3.8L motor - with or without the Supercharger. This is the engine I recommend to my friends and relatives if they are looking to buy GM. Not only is it reliable, but it's remarkably fuel efficient and easy to service. Why GM can't do this with all their engines is a mystery to me??? Lord knows the early "Quad 4" motors were a joke in terms of NVH, compared to any Honda/Toyota/Mazda. This new "Ecotec" motor that is also used in the SAAB 9"3" seems to be a very well designed motor as well. I am seriously considering the GM/SAAB derived 9"3" instead of the Audi A4 if I can ever wear out my 1990 Audi 100. I like the fact that the SAAB uses a roller chain and has better servicability than the 1.8L VW motor - it also holds six liters of oil and you can get at the canister type oil filter from under the hood!

I think there is hope for GM - if they take all the bean counters and lawyers and put them adrift on a big iceberg somewhere. Take the $$$ you save and raise engineering salaries by 50% and your problems will be solved. Move all the engineering/design operations to someplace more desirable to live than Detroit as well ...

Ted

 

[BlackF250]

Sorry guy's, I did not intend to get everybody on the defensive! With that being said, I can honestly tell you that I have never seen any Toyota go over 300,000 miles. That is not saying there are not some that do, I just have not witnessed it. Most Toyotas I see in my father's shop are burning oil by about 200,000 or so. Also here in New England Toyota's (especially their trucks) are so rotted by the time they have that kind of mileage they won't pass inspection anyway. TooSlick, I am glad that you have had such good luck with your Tacoma, But after working at a Ford dealership, and years of being around my fathers garage, I can tell you that this is also the norm for Ford trucks! Of the three NEW Fords that I have owned, 98 Ranger,01Mustang GT,03 F250, none of them have had to go back for repairs of any kind except the Ranger, wich was for a contaminated MAF sensor from an over oiled k&N filter (my own fault)! I guess everyone has their own opinion based on personal experience, and that is fine, This is a free country!

 

[Last_Z]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JohnBrowning:
I explain GM vechiles hiting 300,000 or more miles with out being touched as a fluke! IT is kind of like those cases were a man is struck by lightning 9 times and lives each time with no apparent damage other then light burns. I put it in the same colum as the storys about "99lbs house wifes lifting 2ton sugar beat truck off of son bare handed" storys. If they are well documented we know that it happened but it is a freak not a normal occurance!

---

I will let this statement (your statement) speak for itself!!

Look, I have no doubt that "generally" speaking Toyota and Honda build better quality engines than any American manufacturer, but to say that a GM vehicle or any other Detroit vehicle that hits 300K miles is a fluke is absolutely ridiculous.

JB, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are going through some hangover or something.....hopefully your head will be clearer by tomorrow

 

[Grossomotto]

If Toyotas are not the best vehicles made, then why do they have the highest percent resale value?

 

[2003TRD]

quote:

---

Originally posted by TooSlick:
You have only 5000 miles on this sample, but insolubles are @ 0.4%-0.5% already, on both samples. This indicates fuel contamination from the short trip driving conditions is causing rapid oil degradation. If you wish to run longer drain intervals, try the Series 3000, 5w-30. That should allow you to go 50% longer than with ASL; with similar wear rates. Simply put, "SL/CI-4" rated, diesel formulated oils can handle more contamination ....

I normally like to use a lower limit of 4.0 on the TBN, so you are looking at 5000 mile change intervals with ASL or ATM (same basic stuff).

The rate of Fe wear is only 1 ppm/1000 miles and Pb is 0.2 ppm/1000 miles, but hey it's a Toyota! So I won't take credit for that .... Show me a 3.4L, V-6 GM motor that wears like this?

We make far and away the worlds best weapons platforms, but second rate consumer products in many cases. A matter of national priorities, perhaps?

Tooslick

---

I guess I am not sure Why you would not go this long on this oil? I see your saying the insolubles are .5 % but is that really bad? What are the insolubles? just sediment crap from gas? I am running the same amsoil in the same engine right now, and I have the same oil sitting here for another change, but man its expensive if your saying you shouldnt have this oil in for 5K miles, whats the point then? Wont the series 3000 build up insolubles the same? I mean they cant add anything to the oil to prevent fuel dilution/sediment? Also your saying 50% longer, but 50% longer than what mileage since this oil is no longer good?

I have 5000 on mine now, should I change and sample it now? I was gonna wait until 6000/6mos but now im worried.

 

[GSV]

There is more to the TCO of a vehicle than engine wear. Beyond cost there is a satisfaction quotient.

My LAST American truck was a 95 F250 4x4 that I bought new. I sold it when it hit 44,000 miles after having the power steering pump crap out. Before this the ignition switch, drivers side door handle and a Heater/AC blower had to be replaced. I'm convinced the transfer case was going bad as well.

The engine and AT were fine. Will I buy another Ford? Um, NO! My dad has bought 4 Ford trucks in the last 25 years and they all had more problems than I can stand putting up with. His last great American truck was a 1980 GMC 3/4 ton 4x4.

Compare this to my wifes 99 Subaru. In 99,000 miles total cost for unexpected repairs 71 dollars. Her Previous car was a 94 Grand Prix that lost the transaxle at 55,000. My 2001 4Runner has 71,000 miles. Problems, hitches, hiccups, misfires = zero. I've personally had 2 Toyota trucks go over 300K.

I really wish I could feel good about dropping my money on a domestic vehicle but until hard data and the advice of those I trust show a change I won't be doing this.