Car Care Nut -Why you shouldn't wait 100k mi to change coolant on a Toyota UR series V8.

[Astro14]

He says these repairs are trending up in his shop. He goes into detail about acidic coolant eating away at the small tolerances separating the combustion chamber from the coolant passages. Presumably, he has access to each vehicle's service records. If there were anything remarkable to point out, I'm sure he'd tell us.

In his mind, and as @D60 pointed out, I think CCN wants to see zero instances of these because, as a Master Tech, he believes they are avoidable with early and often maintenance.

What is the problem? Isn't that what BITOG espouses? Early and often maintenance? OCI's? If you want to talk about fear mongering...

“What BITOG espouses”???

With over 70,000 members, there is no consensus on “what BITOG espouses”.

Certainly, early, over-frequent maintenance has its adherents - but it is not universally supported.

There are other “camps”, including those who don’t like wasting $$ on “cheap insurance”.

I would very much like to see zero instances of this in any vehicle I maintain.

But since he failed to provide the maintenance history of the vehicles to which he is referring, any conclusions about the cause, and prevention, are, like his video, speculative.

And there are few here that like speculation.

 

[MBBW]

I think he wants to sell his services, has accumulated 4 paying customers to the tune of $10k+ which he accumulated through his YT channel.

I'm not criticizing him for trying to make money as a mechanic, but like @Astro14 says, no hard statistics, and i take it a step further with scare tactics claiming there is a trend when the only trend is his customer accumulation.

Like others have said, change your dang coolant. These folks probably didnt.

Hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure based on his subs that the shop is just a means to get donor vehicles in with which to make more content. The channel is far out-earning whatever his shop is pulling in.

It's YouTube, not a research paper. Come off it, mate.

 

[JeffKeryk]

CCN seems very genuine. Maybe you disagree, but unlike most people on YouTube, he's actually staking his reputation as a Master Tech behind it. This is not like some random guy on their farm/in their barn with nothing to lose.

Are anecdotal UOA's a valid statistic?

This is not a man that is out to rob you of your "clicks".

You understand his YT channel is in the business of making money, right? He isn't making those videos out of the goodness of their heart.
Kudos for him attaining the Master Tech status, but that does not make him 100% correct all the time.

 

[MBBW]

But since he failed to provide the maintenance history of the vehicles to which he is referring, any conclusions about the cause, and prevention, are, like his video, speculative.

And there are few here that like speculation.

I think reasonable people understand that if it goes unmentioned, the service history is unremarkable as it pertains to the issue he's presenting.

Unless you think he's lying, which seems to be your position. This is of course, speculation.

 

[cptbarkey]

Hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure based on his subs that the shop is just a means to get donor vehicles in with which to make more content. The channel is far out-earning whatever his shop is pulling in.

It's YouTube, not a research paper. Come off it, mate.

I dont care about how many subscribers he bought off google.com. I can buy them too all the same, I work for a marketing company that manages that kind of stuff for others.

here is an example:

 

[MBBW]

You understand his YT channel is in the business of making money, right? He isn't making those videos out of the goodness of their heart.

Could be worse, he could be accepting money from sponsors, boutique re-sellers of oil, etc... God forbid.

 

[Astro14]

I think reasonable people understand that if it goes unmentioned, the service history is unremarkable as it pertains to the issue he's presenting.

Unless you think he's lying, which seems to be your position. This is of course, speculation.

Where did I say that?

You and @350Rocket sure have put words in my mouth that I didn’t say.

Your very criticism makes assumptions - that the service history was “unremarkable” - and in the absence of information, all that can, truthfully, be said is that it is “unknown”.

Big difference.

You assume the maintenance was done correctly. That’s an assumption. A big one and it colors your perception of failure rate, it changes the validity of what he’s saying.

I’m not one to make that assumption.

My whole critique of this video is the fact that there is a great deal of assumption in it.

That’s part of what makes it clickbait.

 

[MBBW]

I dont care about how many subscribers he bought off google.com. I can buy them too all the same, I work for a marketing company that manages that kind of stuff for others.

here is an example:

View attachment 239377

I don't even know what this means. No context here.

 

[MBBW]

You assume the maintenance was done correctly. That’s an assumption. A big one and it colors your perception of failure rate, it changes the validity of what he’s saying.

Yes, certain assumptions have to be made. Either he's lying, or he isn't. Are you saying you don't think he's lying? Just dumb? Thats also a possibility.

Hard to say, I'm just a "fan boi".

 

[Astro14]

Yes, certain assumptions have to be made. Either he's lying, or he isn't. Are you saying you don't think he's lying? Just dumb? Thats also a possibility.

Hard to say, I'm just a "fan boi".

I’ve never said he was lying.

I’ve never said he was dumb.

I’m not the one questioning his intelligence, or defending it, we are talking about the content here, his video.

His video makes conclusions that are unsupported by the facts he presents.

His video is long, and boring, and doesn’t really get to the point.

His video fails to make a case that this is either a design flaw or a problem with following a proper maintenance schedule, because it does not present sufficient facts to support either of those conclusions.

So quit making the discussion personal.

 

[JeffKeryk]

Yes, certain assumptions have to be made. Either he's lying, or he isn't. Are you saying you don't think he's lying? Just dumb? Thats also a possibility.

Hard to say, I'm just a "fan boi".

The way I read it, his "trend" analysis was lacking context. So he's not necessarily lying; but is incomplete and perhaps inconclusive. Sensationalism for the win!

I adore my 2001 Tundra!

 

[dnewton3]

I watch his videos regularly.
But the last year or so, he's getting more and more like PF, LSJr, Sarah-n-tuned, etc ...
He runs on to add time to his video and takes WAY to long to get to the point.


Also - I'd like to see the clear, credible evidence that infrequent coolant changes are the cause of these types of failures. And, also see the evidence that frequent changes are the assurance the failures won't happen. He has several examples (if you watch the vid long enough, you see he has many head gaskets he's kept from similar jobs; all MLS coated gasket failures from UR and GR engines). But there's no real data to support his anecdotal conclusion.

 

[paulo57509]

Don't hold me to this, but I think the 99-09 Tundra had the 2UZ-FE which was Iron. Then the 4.6 and 5.7 UR engines were aluminum.

Correct. 1UZ and 3UZ were aluminum.

 

[JeffKeryk]

Also - I'd like to see the clear, credible evidence that infrequent coolant changes are the cause of these types of failures. And, also see the evidence that frequent changes are the assurance the failures won't happen. He has several examples (if you watch the vid long enough, you see he has many head gaskets he's kept from similar jobs; all MLS coated gasket failures from UR and GR engines). But there's no real data to support his anecdotal conclusion.

I was really wondering about all those head gaskets... Did he say they were all from prior jobs with the same problem? I don't remember, but it sure smacked me as sensationalism.

 

[350Rocket]

Where did I say that?

You and @350Rocket sure have put words in my mouth that I didn’t say.

Your very criticism makes assumptions - that the service history was “unremarkable” - and in the absence of information, all that can, truthfully, be said is that it is “unknown”.

Big difference.

You assume the maintenance was done correctly. That’s an assumption. A big one and it colors your perception of failure rate, it changes the validity of what he’s saying.

I’m not one to make that assumption.

My whole critique of this video is the fact that there is a great deal of assumption in it.

That’s part of what makes it clickbait.

There is even more unknown when you won't even watch the video. I understand if you don't like it and don't want to spend the time to watch or listen. But why comment then?
I also find him long winded but I wanted to see what he had to say. I watch it at 1.5x speed and on earphones while doing other work so I'm not spending that time exclusively on the video.

I perceive it as a legitimate concern because I was actually considering maybe one day buying one of these to replace my 2005 Silverado. But it looks like the type of failure that could have a high chance of happening after a certain number of hours of runtime or heat cycles and it's not a "cheap to fix" vehicle when compared to the Silverado. People don't seem to talk about the actual costs to repair very often anymore. It's like we just accept that it will be a mechanical write off at some point so who cares when.
As a former service advisor I already had a bit of experience with that and prices have gone way up since then. I never would have imagined a new complete engine one day costing $23,000. I remember the first time I made commission off an engine replacement. Brand new 350 in a 96 Chevy 1500 and the total bill was around $5500 Canadian. This was around 2006.

 

[Trav]

I know what I'm doing this week...

I watched 10 min and couldn't take any more of it, some of his arguments are fair but others are questionable.
There is no evidence of corrosion I can see anyway on either the block or the head or the head gasket steel and surrounding material itself which would be a sure sign of aged coolant no longer protecting the metals.

I would guess if you changed the coolant every year never mind every 5 or 10 years this issue would still crop up on some engines at this age and miles depending on use.
This seems more like a design error of putting the coolant holes to close to the cylinders or a elastomer material erosion/failure on the gasket or a combination of both. Blown head gaskets are common on open deck engines for this reason Darton makes special sleeves for these engines that see higher pressures. High engine temp due to towing may exacerbate the issue.

I did jump ahead a bit but when he said these block cannot be decked because it could knock the liners loose I was done.
IMHO instead of getting into a lather and running out changing coolant because of this get some test strips to check the ph levels.

 

[350Rocket]

“What BITOG espouses”???

With over 70,000 members, there is no consensus on “what BITOG espouses”.

Certainly, early, over-frequent maintenance has its adherents - but it is not universally supported.

There are other “camps”, including those who don’t like wasting $$ on “cheap insurance”.

I would very much like to see zero instances of this in any vehicle I maintain.

But since he failed to provide the maintenance history of the vehicles to which he is referring, any conclusions about the cause, and prevention, are, like his video, speculative.

And there are few here that like speculation.

I personally don't think he knows for sure whether the coolant changes would absolutely prevent it but if it's a potential problem it would probably be prudent to make sure it's done early enough.
However at the age most of these trucks are at, whether or not it has anything to do with maintenance or just heat cycles, it's a potential catastrophe if you buy one and it does fail.

 

[D60]

As I alluded earlier (and maybe this should be a separate thread but it goes to credibility, Your Honor), this is a 12 min vid about a filter allegedly damaging VVT components in a 3.5:


All time stamps approx:
-at 0:58 he claims vehicle maintained very well (should make @Astro14 happy)
-from 0:58 to 1:39 he shows the "before and after" sounds
-at 3:30 he uses terms like "Reason to suspect" and "Possibly blocking things"
-at 4:37 he admits they replaced the filter and the noise was still there. THEN, AFTER SITTING AWHILE THE NOISE WAS GONE
-at 5:28 he says the ONLY place to get filters is the Toyota dealership
-at 10:36 he says in a manner that can only be described as CONCLUSIVE "This [filter] almost destroyed this otherwise healthy engine"
-at 11:20 he provides an update that the noise has returned INTERMITTENTLY and again says CONCLUSIVELY the damage was already done [from the filter]

That's it. An intermittent noise blamed on a flimsy filter. No other evidence. Engine not opened up in any way.

I'm struggling to get there....

 

[350Rocket]

As I alluded earlier (and maybe this should be a separate thread but it goes to credibility, Your Honor), this is a 12 min vid about a filter allegedly damaging VVT components in a 3.5:


All time stamps approx:
-at 0:58 he claims vehicle maintained very well (should make @Astro14 happy)
-from 0:58 to 1:39 he shows the "before and after" sounds
-at 3:30 he uses terms like "Reason to suspect" and "Possibly blocking things"
-at 4:37 he admits they replaced the filter and the noise was still there. THEN, AFTER SITTING AWHILE THE NOISE WAS GONE
-at 5:28 he says the ONLY place to get filters is the Toyota dealership
-at 10:36 he says in a manner that can only be described as CONCLUSIVE "This [filter] almost destroyed this otherwise healthy engine"
-at 11:20 he provides an update that the noise has returned INTERMITTENTLY and again says CONCLUSIVELY the damage was already done [from the filter]

That's it. An intermittent noise blamed on a flimsy filter. No other evidence. Engine not opened up in any way.

I'm struggling to get there....

I didn't watch that one but based on your quotes I can't disagree with you. It's definitely a jump to blame the filter.
As far as the 5.7 goes he said he waited quite some time before making the video because he knew it was going to anger some people. As we know many people are very quick to defend Toyota.

 

[Trav]

I didn't watch that one but based on your quotes I can't disagree with you. It's definitely a jump to blame the filter.
As far as the 5.7 goes he said he waited quite some time before making the video because he knew it was going to anger some people. As we know many people are very quick to defend Toyota.

I don't think anyone is defending Toyota, there is an issue be it either design or material but to conclude it was from the coolant not being changed enough with no testing of something as simple of the coolant acidity is a stretch. IMO mechanics should not try and play the roll of engineer, getting to the root cause and finding a possible solution is a lot more complicated than guess work.