Went looking for a RAV4 and ended up with Equinox

[zerosoma]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: zerosoma
We have a Rav4 with the 2.4L and we like it. Our only gripes are that it's just a 4 cylinder and doesn't do well on ice or wind. We get about 23-25 mpg highway/20 mpg city consistently.

The interior hasn't ever bothered me, it's rather simplistic and basic, but to me that means it's not confusing. I'm more disappointed in the stereo - I'm a big music guy (and a musician).


Did you guys try a Santa Fe? Those things rule the road.


I like the feel and interior of GM vehicles, but I would never buy a GM SUV. Simply because I've had trouble with them, and my step-dad. He is a Chevy FANATIC, and works at a used car parts/totaled and-or dead vehicles dealership and says he has seen so many issues with GM SUV's (everything from Cadillacs to GMC) regarding transmission, engine failure, piston failure, electronic failure, etc. He said in very blunt words - they are pieces of ****. Don't EVER buy one.

I was really surprised since he is a dedicated american car guy, ESPECIALLY GM.

I also had a Bravada that went to [censored] on me. Not saying that's gonna happen to you, but with what I've heard I wouldn't get one.

Best of luck to you, your wife, and your sister-in-law!


Does he have any info on their DI engines you'd care to share?



He didn't really mention anything to me about DI engines, but when he told me this was about a year ago, and more than likely the models he'd seen were probably 2010 and older. Not sure if that makes a difference.

 

[demarpaint]

^^ Thanks, if you speak with him again ask him if you don't mind. ^^

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: LeakySeals
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: LeakySeals
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2388059&page=1

I'll pass on DI for now if possible, I think the technology still needs improvement. JMO


Thats what I thought, with a name like "GMBoy" expect, outright denial LOL.



Mmmmm, you do realize that GMBoy WORKS as a production manager at GM's Arlington Assembly plant? I'd say he's more qualified to talk about these vehicles than anyone else on the site.


I would say that makes him quicker to deny any issues..People are complaining all over the web, are they all wrong?


You just totally disrespected me! I am honest and open minded. Those who KNOW me here can back me up. I just told the facts - that there is no known DI issues with GM engines...now show me where I am wrong. The internet is very "suspicious"..I am looking at REAL GM WARRANTY DATA and guess what - it ain't there. The only issue I can attest to with some DI engines is a timing chain issue mainly on Cadillac CTS and SRX models - but that is not related to the DI system and carbon.

I tell it like it is good or bad about GM...and for the record I also own non-GM vehicles.

 

[demarpaint]

^^For the record, I said nothing about you, and haven't shown you any disrespect.^^

I just don't understand why people won't admit fuel dilution in a GM DI engine is a problem. If GM didn't think it was a problem then why reprogram the OLM and shorten the OCI? Even Amsoil doesn't recommend pushing their oils to far in a GM DI engines. Now if that is not a problem associated with DI, what is?

As far as the carbon issues it was a problem early on, and honestly I believe it will still be a problem later on, but that is up for debate. The fuel dilution issue is quite obvious. Give them some time they'll get it all ironed out.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
^^For the record, I said nothing about you, and haven't shown you any disrespect.^^

I just don't understand why people won't admit fuel dilution in a GM DI engine is a problem. If GM didn't think it was a problem then why reprogram the OLM and shorten the OCI? Even Amsoil doesn't recommend pushing their oils to far in a GM DI engines. Now if that is not a problem associated with DI, what is?

As far as the carbon issues it was a problem early on, and honestly I believe it will still be a problem later on, but that is up for debate. The fuel dilution issue is quite obvious. Give them some time they'll get it all ironed out.



I have never gotten more than .5% fuel dilution in all my UOA's on my 3.6DI CTS, my dad (same model car) did get a 1.0 on his UOA one time with nearly 11k miles on it and he does lots of short trip drives. That is not bad at all. I agree with you that DI seems to have some inherent carbon issues simply based on design. However, unlike Audi (who really shows DI issues), GM and Ford and others have found ways around the carbon issue. I've got almost 60k miles on my CTS and no signs of carbon. Dad's car looks just as good. Carbon is handled by exhaust and intake valve timing. As for fuel dilution?? Modern cars monitor their fuel mixture so how too much fuel gets in there is beyond me...

I am basing my "denial" as some put it (LOL!) simply on my ownership of a DI vehicle, GM warranty data and GM Powertrain information. Others seem to only have "this guy on the forum says he has a fuel dilution problem".

Now - if I hear of a true pattern of these types of issues, I will let all BITOG know...just like I did with the timing chain issue on some DI engines. The timing chain issue was the reason they reduced the OLM software - NOT fuel dilution.

 

[demarpaint]

^^I have conflicting data, lets leave it at that or this topic will go in circles.^^ At any rate good luck with it.

 

[ls1mike]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
^^I have conflicting data, lets leave it at that or this topic will go in circles.^^ At any rate good luck with it.

Can you post your data?

 

[demarpaint]

I'd rather not. Search the board and the www you'll see what I mean. I also spoke to a few techs, but that won't matter to anyone here who owns a DI engine, as you can see the way this discussion has headed.

 

[ls1mike]

That isn't data, that is people posting on a message board.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: ls1mike
That isn't data, that is people posting on a message board.


Search, check with mechanics.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
That isn't data, that is people posting on a message board.


Search, check with mechanics.


Sure, I'll do that. The same mechanics telling people to run 20w-50 in their 2011 Camry.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: ls1mike
That isn't data, that is people posting on a message board.


Search, check with mechanics.


Sure, I'll do that. The same mechanics telling people to run 20w-50 in their 2011 Camry.


Check with anyone you'd like to check with, makes no difference to me. Anything I post will be attacked by owners of the vehicles, as clearly displayed here, so why should I bother posting my findings?

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Anything I post will be attacked by owners of the vehicles, as clearly displayed here, so why should I bother posting my findings?


Your posts up to this point contain no facts, which is why they are being picked apart.

 

[wallyuwl]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint


I just don't understand why people won't admit fuel dilution in a GM DI engine is a problem. If GM didn't think it was a problem then why reprogram the OLM and shorten the OCI?


DI engines have some fuel dilution, it is just the nature of things. However, unless that dilution is causing abnormally high wear, it is not a problem. There is no evidence this is the case with the GM 2.4 or 3.6 DIs.

The GM OLM reprogram for the 2.4 had nothing to do with fuel dilution or that it was DI. It had to do with it being a new engine in a new vehicle they were trying to get to market as fast as possible. The parameters for OLMs are vehicle specific, and it just wasn't adequately tested. GM OLMs are designed for dino. For anyone to think they can go 12k miles with dino is idiotic. To think changing the OLM so it goes off before the obsurdly high 12k is a sign of GM admitting DIs have excessive wear problems is moreso.

 

[Nick R]

I won't say that some DI engines, the 3.0L, and 3.6L DI HFV6s don't have fuel dilution in some UOAs. In fact, I will be performing a UOA on our equinox V6 here in a couple weeks once the OLM gets down to about 5%. I have the test kit sitting on the counter right now.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Anything I post will be attacked by owners of the vehicles, as clearly displayed here, so why should I bother posting my findings?


Your posts up to this point contain no facts, which is why they are being picked apart.


Fuel Dilution and the need to reprogram the OLM is not fact enough that there is a problem with the engine? And the re-program was an attempt to avoid a big nightmare? Or is it GM wanted to spend money and help the techs add to their 401K plans? Granted my conversations with techs servicing them is meaningless to you, and will be attacked even more. But what I read here, the fact that the OLM had to be reprogrammed, and problems other mfgs had was enough for me not to buy one, as well as many others on this board.

I think the problem here is how people want to interpret the facts. Happy Easter.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Anything I post will be attacked by owners of the vehicles, as clearly displayed here, so why should I bother posting my findings?


Your posts up to this point contain no facts, which is why they are being picked apart.


Fuel Dilution and the need to reprogram the OLM is not fact enough that there is a problem with the engine? And the re-program was an attempt to avoid a big nightmare? Or is it GM wanted to spend money and help the techs add to their 401K plans? Granted my conversations with techs servicing them is meaningless to you, and will be attacked even more. But what I read here, the fact that the OLM had to be reprogrammed, and problems other mfgs had was enough for me not to buy one, as well as many others on this board.

I think the problem here is how people want to interpret the facts. Happy Easter.



ONE MORE TIME - the reprogramming of the OLM for 3.6DI's was NOT due to fuel dilution. It was due to TIMING CHAIN wear. I even posted the TSB to warn the BITOG folks several months ago when it first came out.

You won't post your "data" because its all internet garbage. The first DI engine GM made was put on the road before 2008 so I would think if there were ANY issues we'd of heard about now thru warranty claims (which I read monthly) and perhaps news reports.

Lastly, the typical dealership mechanic leaves a lot to be desired so yeah I don't buy your "data" there either. I know some darn good one's, but most are very subpar in work knowledge and quality. The rest are too new out of school to really know much. I know this sounds harsh, but I cannot tell you how many calls I have gotten at the plant to help a dealership tech that most any of us on BITOG could figure out.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I'd rather not. Search the board and the www you'll see what I mean. I also spoke to a few techs, but that won't matter to anyone here who owns a DI engine, as you can see the way this discussion has headed.



Simply means you have none.

 

[GMBoy]

I just googled "gm direct injection fuel dilution" and wow, the 1st page hits were mostly Bob is the Oil guy forums...NOTHING REPORTED in other words. Oh there was VW site and a SAE paper (download cost $$)...I will get that SAE paper from work for free and read and post here.

Even if DI engine were to have an inherent fuel dilution issue, why have we not seen any engines with problems. Granted, the miles are still racking up but I know me and my Dad have ZERO issues at close to 60k miles on each of our 3.6DI CTS's and a friend just rolled 105k on his CTS. You'd think the cry of fuel dilution would mean trashed engines all over the place - just isn't so.

 

[ls1mike]

Get em. I love message boards being quoted as "data".

I don't have anything is this fight, but D.I. as whole is new and not enough data to determine anything.
Most people post on a message board when they are worried or want to complain.

I still say post your data.