I've a new 2015 Camry, 4 cylinder, that uses oil. Toyota has a simple 1,200 test. If the engine uses one quart or more in a 1,200 mile test, they will fix the engine. At that rate, the engine would have to use 0W20 synthetic oil at the rate of 8.33 quarts between oil changes. So, Toyota has lots of Camrys driving our roads burning 4, 5, 6 or 7 quarts of synthetic oil between oil changes. What does this do to the environment? What chemicals are released when a vehicle burns synthetic oil? I probably should as the EPA this question, but does anyone know? Do you have any proof?
Synthetic Oil Pollution
- Thread starter WayneandAnna
- Start date
- Status
The refining process probably makes synthetic cleaner burning than dino. It's the additives which may be a problem in either case. Synthetic 2 cycle oil is popular in part because it doesn't smoke as much.
With the advent of xxw-20 oils and fuel saving strategies like low-tension piston rings, higher oil consumption was expected by manufacturers and the EPA. This is one reason SN spec oils further limit the amount of phosphorous in most grades as it harms catalysts.
I don't think burning the 2 gallons of oil in your example does any particular environmental harm as most of the compounds will be incinerated by the catalytic converter anyway. Trace amounts of metals like zinc and molybdenum could escape, but these aren't necessarily harmful and would only be released in tiny amounts.
I don't think burning the 2 gallons of oil in your example does any particular environmental harm as most of the compounds will be incinerated by the catalytic converter anyway. Trace amounts of metals like zinc and molybdenum could escape, but these aren't necessarily harmful and would only be released in tiny amounts.
Does conventional cause Pollution?
If I did the math right its about .8oz per gallon of fuel burned at the max consumption rate. I don't like buying extra oil but it won't make a difference on pollution. Rotary guys will run it that way on purpose!
Bet if you run PP or Amsoil Sig you use les than 1 L / per 4kKm. I had a Suzuki Aerio 2.4L in the mid 2000's that was eating oil and the dealer did "something" and sealed the fill cap (foil tape)for a consumption test.
Later, the engine didn't even use 1/8th a L in 2kKm miles.
Asked them what they did and they said " nothing".
If you want your car "fixed" just suck some oil out the dip tube using poly tubing.
Was car broken in well or a highway driver right off the bat?
Never buy a car that was driven a couple hundred miles from one dealer to another in a transfer.
Later, the engine didn't even use 1/8th a L in 2kKm miles.
Asked them what they did and they said " nothing".
If you want your car "fixed" just suck some oil out the dip tube using poly tubing.
Was car broken in well or a highway driver right off the bat?
Never buy a car that was driven a couple hundred miles from one dealer to another in a transfer.
Last edited:
You mean via Interstate at a set speed.
If he ran it from MD to WV it would be broke in nicely.
Varied speed and rolling hills..........
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Never buy a car that was driven a couple hundred miles from one dealer to another in a transfer.
If he ran it from MD to WV it would be broke in nicely.
Varied speed and rolling hills..........
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Never buy a car that was driven a couple hundred miles from one dealer to another in a transfer.
Originally Posted By: Danh
With the advent of xxw-20 oils and fuel saving strategies like low-tension piston rings, higher oil consumption was expected by manufacturers and the EPA. This is one reason SN spec oils further limit the amount of phosphorous in most grades as it harms catalysts.
I don't think burning the 2 gallons of oil in your example does any particular environmental harm as most of the compounds will be incinerated by the catalytic converter anyway. Trace amounts of metals like zinc and molybdenum could escape, but these aren't necessarily harmful and would only be released in tiny amounts.
I like the EPA....not much more commendable you can be than to promote fresh air, clean water and healthy food......but how far are they taking it?
How many gallons of oil is equivalent to how many gallons of gasoline burned?
How many saved gallons of fuel equal your app. 500lb engine with many hours of labor, alot of resources becoming a paperweight?
Kind of like making rubber stiffer so it wears slower.....well you may ruin alot of suspension parts, rattle your teeth and have aches and sores PLUS wear out the asphalt roads much quicker.
With the advent of xxw-20 oils and fuel saving strategies like low-tension piston rings, higher oil consumption was expected by manufacturers and the EPA. This is one reason SN spec oils further limit the amount of phosphorous in most grades as it harms catalysts.
I don't think burning the 2 gallons of oil in your example does any particular environmental harm as most of the compounds will be incinerated by the catalytic converter anyway. Trace amounts of metals like zinc and molybdenum could escape, but these aren't necessarily harmful and would only be released in tiny amounts.
I like the EPA....not much more commendable you can be than to promote fresh air, clean water and healthy food......but how far are they taking it?
How many gallons of oil is equivalent to how many gallons of gasoline burned?
How many saved gallons of fuel equal your app. 500lb engine with many hours of labor, alot of resources becoming a paperweight?
Kind of like making rubber stiffer so it wears slower.....well you may ruin alot of suspension parts, rattle your teeth and have aches and sores PLUS wear out the asphalt roads much quicker.
Okay, this car was driven about 200 miles from dealer to dealer. Why is that a problem?
Originally Posted By: zach1900
Go tell the epa, maybe they can reduce longevity even more, they are the reason.
Yes, maybe they can target oil consumption next as part of emissions warranties.
Go tell the epa, maybe they can reduce longevity even more, they are the reason.
Yes, maybe they can target oil consumption next as part of emissions warranties.
Originally Posted By: WayneandAnna
I've a new 2015 Camry, 4 cylinder, that uses oil.
Toyota has a simple 1,200 mile test.
If the engine uses one quart or more in a 1,200 mile test, they will fix the engine.
At that rate, the engine would have to use 0W20 synthetic oil at the rate of 8.33 quarts between oil changes.
So, Toyota has lots of Camrys driving our roads burning 4, 5, 6 or 7 quarts of synthetic oil between oil changes.
What does this do to the environment?
What chemicals are released when a vehicle burns synthetic oil?
I probably should ask the EPA this question, but does anyone know?
Do you have any proof?
Honestly, if you want to do something, you should take your oil burning car, and another 2015 Camry that doesn't burn oil, to an emissions testing facility, and have them both run back to back on the machine. Then, you can compare their results against each other.
You will then know how much more HC is showing up on your oil burner, and you can then find out if your car is within the specs for the state you have the cars tested in.
BC.
I've a new 2015 Camry, 4 cylinder, that uses oil.
Toyota has a simple 1,200 mile test.
If the engine uses one quart or more in a 1,200 mile test, they will fix the engine.
At that rate, the engine would have to use 0W20 synthetic oil at the rate of 8.33 quarts between oil changes.
So, Toyota has lots of Camrys driving our roads burning 4, 5, 6 or 7 quarts of synthetic oil between oil changes.
What does this do to the environment?
What chemicals are released when a vehicle burns synthetic oil?
I probably should ask the EPA this question, but does anyone know?
Do you have any proof?
Honestly, if you want to do something, you should take your oil burning car, and another 2015 Camry that doesn't burn oil, to an emissions testing facility, and have them both run back to back on the machine. Then, you can compare their results against each other.
You will then know how much more HC is showing up on your oil burner, and you can then find out if your car is within the specs for the state you have the cars tested in.
BC.
Originally Posted By: WayneandAnna
Okay, this car was driven about 200 miles from dealer to dealer. Why is that a problem?
While no formal break-in is needed, the car jockey was told to get the car from one dealer to the other as fast as possible. I've been passed by new cars that still had the plastic covers on the hood and truck. I'm guessing they were doing 80-90 mph in a 55. Something you would probably not do for the first hundred miles or more.
Okay, this car was driven about 200 miles from dealer to dealer. Why is that a problem?
While no formal break-in is needed, the car jockey was told to get the car from one dealer to the other as fast as possible. I've been passed by new cars that still had the plastic covers on the hood and truck. I'm guessing they were doing 80-90 mph in a 55. Something you would probably not do for the first hundred miles or more.
Originally Posted By: WayneandAnna
Toyota has a simple 1,200 test. If the engine uses one quart or more in a 1,200 mile test, they will fix the engine.
That's alotta oil being consumed. You do realize that the oil consumption rate within 1200 miles is supposed to be closer to zero right ?
Toyota has a simple 1,200 test. If the engine uses one quart or more in a 1,200 mile test, they will fix the engine.
That's alotta oil being consumed. You do realize that the oil consumption rate within 1200 miles is supposed to be closer to zero right ?
I had forgotten that there was such a thing as needing to add oil between chnages until we bought the old BMW and the rest of the beater fleet.
The '99 Legacy will need a quart every couple of thousand with the old BMW about the same and the '02 Accord one about every 4K.
If our '12 Accord had used noticeable amounts of oil when new, or now, at nearly 40K, I'd be mighty upset.
Arco has the right idea if you want Toyota to do the right thing and fix your new car's engine.
If the car is using even nearly a quart every 1200 miles now, how much worse will this get as it ages?
Break-in is not a factor, as the engine is by now as broken in as it'll ever get.
The '99 Legacy will need a quart every couple of thousand with the old BMW about the same and the '02 Accord one about every 4K.
If our '12 Accord had used noticeable amounts of oil when new, or now, at nearly 40K, I'd be mighty upset.
Arco has the right idea if you want Toyota to do the right thing and fix your new car's engine.
If the car is using even nearly a quart every 1200 miles now, how much worse will this get as it ages?
Break-in is not a factor, as the engine is by now as broken in as it'll ever get.
I NEVER HAVE TO ADD OIL, BUT I DON'T RUN 0W20. The thinnest I go is 5w40. And yes, synthetic is a very bad polutive. Some thin oils 4 stroke engines are in truth a 2 stroke oil consumption vehicle. too bad.
Originally Posted By: Danh
With the advent of xxw-20 oils and fuel saving strategies like low-tension piston rings, higher oil consumption was expected by manufacturers and the EPA. This is one reason SN spec oils further limit the amount of phosphorous in most grades as it harms catalysts.
I don't think burning the 2 gallons of oil in your example does any particular environmental harm as most of the compounds will be incinerated by the catalytic converter anyway. Trace amounts of metals like zinc and molybdenum could escape, but these aren't necessarily harmful and would only be released in tiny amounts.
Low tension rings really aren't as bad as your implying.
And even since low tension rings started being used I haven't seen a single cylinder bore "cone",and all cross hatching remains visible even on engines with 300k miles on them.
Low tension rings depend on the fuel charge combusting which forces the rings against the cylinder wall. On the upstroke they are less tight which reduces cylinder bore wear.
In fact I prefer low tension rings now. The reality is cylinder bore is vastly reduced which translates to more miles before a re-bore which means the engine lasts more miles.
So if a little oil gets burned so be it. I'd rather spend pennies on oil tha a rebuild,and low tension rings achieve that.
I firmly believe that oil consumption via the rings on late model vehicles is due to improper break in.
An engine needs high cylinder pressures to properly seat the rings. This happens in the first 100 miles. So if the engine is babied the rings never seat completely and the only way to fix it is a re-grind which on a new engine isn't happening.
I remember tearing in to my old 305 in my cutlass. The bores were worn and the cross hatching was long gone til the top of the stroke.
It was an 83 with 200k on it. The first 302 ford I tore into came from an f-150. It was a 94 and had over 400k miles on it. It was tired and we were putting a 351 in the truck.
The machine marks were still visible. I tore into a 4.6 2v from a 2000 mustang. I sprayed nitrous for over 100000kms and the engine had 300000kms total. Still had visible cross hatching. I've seen my buddies and their Honda's with significant abided miles on the engines and the cross hatching was still visible.
See my point.
So yeah they consume a bit of oil but the engines overall last longer before needing a significant amount of work and money.
Just my experience. Yours may vary.
With the advent of xxw-20 oils and fuel saving strategies like low-tension piston rings, higher oil consumption was expected by manufacturers and the EPA. This is one reason SN spec oils further limit the amount of phosphorous in most grades as it harms catalysts.
I don't think burning the 2 gallons of oil in your example does any particular environmental harm as most of the compounds will be incinerated by the catalytic converter anyway. Trace amounts of metals like zinc and molybdenum could escape, but these aren't necessarily harmful and would only be released in tiny amounts.
Low tension rings really aren't as bad as your implying.
And even since low tension rings started being used I haven't seen a single cylinder bore "cone",and all cross hatching remains visible even on engines with 300k miles on them.
Low tension rings depend on the fuel charge combusting which forces the rings against the cylinder wall. On the upstroke they are less tight which reduces cylinder bore wear.
In fact I prefer low tension rings now. The reality is cylinder bore is vastly reduced which translates to more miles before a re-bore which means the engine lasts more miles.
So if a little oil gets burned so be it. I'd rather spend pennies on oil tha a rebuild,and low tension rings achieve that.
I firmly believe that oil consumption via the rings on late model vehicles is due to improper break in.
An engine needs high cylinder pressures to properly seat the rings. This happens in the first 100 miles. So if the engine is babied the rings never seat completely and the only way to fix it is a re-grind which on a new engine isn't happening.
I remember tearing in to my old 305 in my cutlass. The bores were worn and the cross hatching was long gone til the top of the stroke.
It was an 83 with 200k on it. The first 302 ford I tore into came from an f-150. It was a 94 and had over 400k miles on it. It was tired and we were putting a 351 in the truck.
The machine marks were still visible. I tore into a 4.6 2v from a 2000 mustang. I sprayed nitrous for over 100000kms and the engine had 300000kms total. Still had visible cross hatching. I've seen my buddies and their Honda's with significant abided miles on the engines and the cross hatching was still visible.
See my point.
So yeah they consume a bit of oil but the engines overall last longer before needing a significant amount of work and money.
Just my experience. Yours may vary.
- Status
