The LS1 oil-consumption problem...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I got lucky I reckon, I generally don't get lucky as I know Murphy pretty well.

I have no oil consumption problems with my 2000 Firebird. No piston slap, no problems at all really. It generally uses less than 1 qrt. in 6K miles. The most it has ever used was about 1.5-2 qrts. in 6K miles but that interval had around 20 AutoX runs, 15 or so 1/4 mile passes and a good deal of play in the mountains!

I started using M1 0W30 at the second oil change at around 3000 miles or so. Car now has 37K miles and I just changed to M1 0W40 as I figured the motor has loosened up a bit, plus it was my summer fill. Maybe it was my break-in, kinda easy on it for the 1st 600 miles then I was at the dragstrip racking up runs!
grin.gif


I will agree with the other folks on the bargain of performance cars statement. I paid 26300 bucks and change "out the door" for my Firehawk {Firehawk option was 4K dollars}.

For that 26K, I ran a best of a 13.42@104mph in 90 degree weather at Bristol Raceway which is nearly 2000 ft. above sea level {if you correct for conditions, I would have run right around a 13.10} bone stock.

Later with a 100 dollar air cleaner lid and Drag Radials I ran a 12.96@108mph. Added 4.10 gears and a underdrive pulley and brought the times down to a 12.59@111mph. All mods put together are less than a 1000 dollars. I think I am going to buy a set of 350 dollar headers and see if I can get into the 11s.

The best fuel mileage was almost 30mpg, with the 4.10s it has dropped a bit,,, a smidge over 28mpg was what I got on my last long trip!
wink.gif


Handles pretty well also, F-bodies do pretty good against some rather pricey competition in SCCA T2.

The only problem I've had with the car has been with the paint on the hood {hood has been replaced 3 times} but that is SLP's fault, not GMs. Dead reliable in spite of over 100 1/4 mile passes, 5 AutoXs, and a crapload of playing in the N. Ga. mountains.

"All that and a bag of chips" and GM still could not sell the cars well?
dunno.gif
Just goes to show that most folks do not follow the form follows function motto. It is after all a "redneck car"!
rolleyes.gif
Dunno, all the car mags could do was ***** about the plasticky interior {on what amounts to a 22K dollar car} yet they praise a 32K dollar 350Z that would get it's butt waxed by the F-Body at a dragstrip and most likely a road course.
banghead.gif
 
Chris B;
If you want quiet, buy a car with an engine that has cast pistons and a lame valvetrain.
People used to complain about timing chain buzzing noise.
So what did the manufactures do? Install nylon gears instead of steel rollers.
People complained about mechanical lifters snapping away, so we got hydraulic lifters from the big three.
Forged pistons knock. High pressure valve springs cause the lifters to bleed down a at low RPM and as a result they click a little just like the mechanical ones used to.
Tubular exhaust systems ring.
In the end you have an engine that buzzes, knocks, rings, and clicks.
solution: Turn the music up.
Why do you want to switch to a synthetic engine oil when the 10W30 Havoline is doing so well?
Maybe try a group III 5W40 without the esters like Texaco's offering in another few thousand miles. The loose fit pistons, ring design, and PAO ester blends, just might be a bad combo.
dunno.gif

edit...Judd; A mid 12 is about all you will get with 3/8 fuel line.

[ October 07, 2003, 05:27 AM: Message edited by: userfriendly ]
 
The LS1 consumption issue is well known. They aparently fixed it in the Corvettes. Mobil 1 is on the thin side of the 30wt scale and there have been some over at the ls1.com site that mix Mobil 1 15w-50 with the 5w-30 to obtain a thicker 30wt Mobil 1 which can help reduce consumption. It's not the oils fault, its a design flaw but running a thicker oil can help. The advice to run dino is BS and an easy way out for them. They don't want to deal with it.
smile.gif
 
A few guys at the LS-1.com site blend their own oil.
That tid-bit of chemical engineering gets repeated on Bobzoilguy.com, then it ends up on the SoCalFordshate74camaros.com, and eventually becomes fact.
Judd here, takes a 0W40 off the shelf, and drives the crap out of the car.
Chris uses $1.19 10W30 without a hitch.
Maybe the design flaw is owners monkeying around with homegrown engine oil brews, and driving race cars like grandma drives her grocery getter?
itschy.gif
 
quote:

I thought they had to go to a reverse cooling setup to keep them cool? Check this. I read it on the net so the validity is suspect...

As was mentioned, it's the LT1 engine (which I have in my 95 Firebird) which uses reverse flow cooling. The LS1 does not use it. GM found the all aluminum LS1 ran cooler, plus they had a few issues with reverse flow cooling, it is hard to get all the air out of the system.

The LS1 is an excellent design, however the short skirt pistons are part of the problem. It's cutting things too close and piston slap/oil consumption is the result in many cases. Some oil consumption can be attributed to the PCV system too, there is an updated PCV Valve which has helped a lot of people.

Another thing is driving style. Those people who drive at high rpms and light loads (such as cruising around town in a lower gear) see more oil consumption. Case in point, my 98 Formula had no oil consumption when I owned it, but I found out it's new owner was having major consumption issues with it. Strange, but it does point out that his driving style probably did it. I drove that car very hard, however I did not run it at high rpms and light loads. If I was driving slowly, I put it in the highest gear I could safely run it in without lugging the engine.

By the way, my LS1 ran like a scalded ape! With just a few simple mods like 4.10 gears, drag radials, an MTI airbox, ported stock MAF, Hypertech programming and an exhaust cutout, it ran a 12.68 at 110.6 mph! And could still get 30 MPG, even with 4.10s! (gotta love that .50 overdrive 6th gear!)
 
I thought long and hard before buying another GM car. My experience with GM has been real hit-or-miss: the car was either indestructible or a source of constant trouble.

But what it came down to was that no one else offered a manual-trans RWD convertible that could run mid-13s in the quarter for under $30k. So I took a chance. So far, I've been pleasantly surprised. Up to this point it's had fewer trips to the dealer, and for less important things, than our Subaru.

I just don't understand why GM handbrakes suck so bad. How hard can it be to make one?
confused.gif


Cheers, 3MP
 
Keep in mind that Chevy High Performance Magazine is not a GM publication. Although most of their advice is good, if I had an LS1 I would use Amsoil in it, just like the rest of my cars. Also, it's hard to make a mass production car that's as fast as the F-Body where you don't sacrifice reliability. I think GM did a good job.
cheers.gif
 
quote:

The above came straight out of the November 2003 issue of Chevy High Performance magazine in the Q&A section on page 130. I had certainly never heard this one before. They also talk about a known ring problem and "fuel washing with ring wear".


First of all this is not GM, its some magazine reported offering opinion, no different than right here.

I have a 2002 LS1 in a WS6 Trans Am. It has not used a drop of oil. Mine was built in Sept 2001 and according to Scott Settlemire who is with GM and was heavily involved with the F-body platform has said since about Sept.Oct 2001 all F-Body LS1 were factory installed with Mobil 1. So for those "experts in the own mind" to advise against using shows they are not well informed.

And yes driving habits/style can have a big impact on oil consumption. Some are hard on the car. There is a young lad who dates a girl a few doors down from me. He has a 2000 TA and LS1. He is always hot-rodding the car. When he spots me on the road, he risks his life to pass me. Just the other week I was cruising in traffic going about 60 mph (with the flow). He had pulled in line a few cars back and then it started, he was passing everyone with no where to go. When he went past me he was wide open. 3 miles later he was stuck at a light. When he blew by me I saw 2 puffs of blue smoke when he shifted gears. High RPM's will use more oil, I have know that since 1970 with my LS5 Chevelle. It hardly used oil till I raced it. A couple of runs down the remote highway 1/4 mile and I would be a 1/2 to 1 wt low. Normal driving, never any problems.

[ October 07, 2003, 09:33 AM: Message edited by: Mike ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by Patman:

quote:

I thought they had to go to a reverse cooling setup to keep them cool? Check this. I read it on the net so the validity is suspect...

As was mentioned, it's the LT1 engine (which I have in my 95 Firebird) which uses reverse flow cooling. The LS1 does not use it. GM found the all aluminum LS1 ran cooler, plus they had a few issues with reverse flow cooling, it is hard to get all the air out of the system.

The LS1 is an excellent design, however the short skirt pistons are part of the problem. It's cutting things too close and piston slap/oil consumption is the result in many cases. Some oil consumption can be attributed to the PCV system too, there is an updated PCV Valve which has helped a lot of people.

Another thing is driving style. Those people who drive at high rpms and light loads (such as cruising around town in a lower gear) see more oil consumption. Case in point, my 98 Formula had no oil consumption when I owned it, but I found out it's new owner was having major consumption issues with it. Strange, but it does point out that his driving style probably did it. I drove that car very hard, however I did not run it at high rpms and light loads. If I was driving slowly, I put it in the highest gear I could safely run it in without lugging the engine.

By the way, my LS1 ran like a scalded ape! With just a few simple mods like 4.10 gears, drag radials, an MTI airbox, ported stock MAF, Hypertech programming and an exhaust cutout, it ran a 12.68 at 110.6 mph! And could still get 30 MPG, even with 4.10s! (gotta love that .50 overdrive 6th gear!)


Ok. I remembered reading about the need to go to a reverse flow system but it must have been the LT1 engines. I'm a little surprised they didn't add an oil cooler. They are minimal cost and you see them used all the time on trucks from Detroit. Heck, I had a Chevy cooler on my Nissan that started life on the neighbors 3/4 ton pickup.

You're right about the problems with part throttle operation at high rpm. Engine vacuum will be high and oil will tend to get pulled past the rings.

I still surprised they went to such short pistons. Slipper pistons have advantages of reduced friction and lower reciprocating weight and that would net a few more HP. But, I wonder if the reliablilty tradeoff was worth it. There's no arguing with the perfomance though. The cars do really well in stock form...

[ October 07, 2003, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: jsharp ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by userfriendly:
Chris B;
If you want quiet, buy a car with an engine that has cast pistons and a lame valvetrain.
People used to complain about timing chain buzzing noise.
So what did the manufactures do? Install nylon gears instead of steel rollers.
People complained about mechanical lifters snapping away, so we got hydraulic lifters from the big three.
Forged pistons knock. High pressure valve springs cause the lifters to bleed down a at low RPM and as a result they click a little just like the mechanical ones used to.
Tubular exhaust systems ring.
In the end you have an engine that buzzes, knocks, rings, and clicks.
solution: Turn the music up.
Why do you want to switch to a synthetic engine oil when the 10W30 Havoline is doing so well?
Maybe try a group III 5W40 without the esters like Texaco's offering in another few thousand miles. The loose fit pistons, ring design, and PAO ester blends, just might be a bad combo.
dunno.gif

edit...Judd; A mid 12 is about all you will get with 3/8 fuel line.


I never said I want a quiet car. I'm more concerned with long term durability. Piston slap and knocking noises mean metal to metal contact and that could mean the engine is "beating itself apart" If I new my car was going to last 200,000+ miles I would not care one bit about the knocking noise. My dealer said there was a problem with my engine and did the rebuild with out me really even having to ask for it. In fact I love loud engines, I think it sounds powerfull.
As for the Halvoline, Terry Dyson who knows more about oil then anyone on this board told me it was a great break in oil and to use it to break in the rebuilt LS1. I was told to put back in Mobil 1 10w30 after 3,500 miles using the Halvoline conventional 10w30. I'm going to do that as soon as I'm done running the Halvoline. I feel after being educated on this board that a good Synthetic is best for an engine. If my LS1 starts to burn the M1 I'll just try another oil till I find which works best. I would never use a conventional oil as I don't want any varnish/build up over time and conventional oils seem to shear out of grade to fast. I'm confinent in Mobil 1 because of what Terry has talked with me about.

I truly love this car and will keep it as long as I'm alive and well. I still feel it is the best car dollar for dollar and has tons of character.
patriot.gif
 
I have a LS1 also. It's a 2000 TA ram air 6spd. I bought it in 2001 with 9,500 mi. The piston slap and oil consumption was horrible. I went to my local Pontiac dealer, they looked at me like I was from outter space. I started reading LS1.com and found it was common and could be helped with oil selection. I changed to M1 10W30, no change. I switched to Royal Purple R41, no change. I changed to 10W30 Royal Purple no change. I gave up for a while. If I run it easy the oil consumption is better but the cold start pistion slap is there.
Fast forward one year the car now has 30,000mi. two months ago I put in Schaeffer's 7000 10W30. Piston slap GONE, oil consumption GONE. Is it a miricle? no. Is it the best oil in the world? No. It is working in the LS1 verry well. Viscosity and additives package are helping the problem.
I will be doing UOA at about 3,500mi and give a full report.
 
Kirk, what did your piston slap sound like? Did it sound like a diesel at all? Maybe I'll try the Schaeffers after a few more runs with the Mobil 1 if my UOA's don't show well.
 
quote:

yet they praise a 32K dollar 350Z that would get it's butt waxed by the F-Body at a dragstrip and most likely a road course.

Judd, you couldn't be any righter!


Userfriendly,
I didn't really have a "Top Fuel" cam in my car, but it was pretty big @230/236, 510/520, 110LSA....in a TPI
freak2.gif



Kirk and Chris,
I'll be trying the GC next interval. Right now I'm running 350ml of #132, 1 qrt of 15W-50 and the rest of 10W-30. We'll see what the UOA report shows.
Rick
 
Sounds like a lot of people are saying "this hurts, but if you do it this way it will only hurt a little"----- Avoid GM products till they can do it right.
 
What's the bottom line as far as longevity of these LS-1 engines go with these knock & oil consumption issues ?
I mean are they blowing up @ 45k miles or is it common for well taken care of engines to go over 100K, something SB chevys of the past that got 15 mpg's did easily?
Fascinating thread.
 
Yea but it's not that simple, badnews. They still offered something no one else on the market could deliver: 300 rwhp for $25k.

As far as longevity goes, I'm not familiar with any problems there. They seem to hold up. Drivetrain longevity has never been a problem in my GM vehicles. It's always other crap like switches, plastics, and paint.
mad.gif


Cheers, 3MP
 
As far as I know, there is no mystery to the engine problems with the LS1. The piston slap and oil consumption issues are often due to:

a) overbored block
b) hypereutectic pistons with short skirt

The factory fill for these engines is 10W-30 and so some purchasers find that a mild problem can be improved by increasing oil viscosity.

Holden Australia will rebuild an engine if it consumes excess oil but generally they rebuild it with the same factory hypereutectic pistons. Obviously, this does not fix the problem because the overbore remains the same.

It has been suggested that if someone really wants to rid themselves of the problem, they rebuild the engine properly and make sure the piston clearances are tight in the overbored cylinders.
 
Even with all the complaints of piston slap and oil consumption, these engines are still durable. The only LS1 guys I know (and believe me, I know a LOT!) who have needed engine rebuilds are those guys who have gone to stroker motors, or those who have put in more radical cams/heads. So these guys did not have LS1's built by the factory anymore, but aftermarket tuner built engines. Or guys who have put on turbos, superchargers or nitrous will often blow up motors too (but obviously this is no fault of GM's design when the engine lets go!)

As far as stock engines or those with just mild work done to them, I don't know of anyone who has needed a rebuild yet. Keep in mind these engines are also still relatively new, only having been out in the Corvette since the 1997 model year, and in the f-body since 1998. So it hasn't given many people the opportunity to put tons of miles on them yet, although I do know of quite a few over 100k, and I know of one guy on the Corvette forum with a 99 C5 who is almost at 300k now (although he drives all highway)

[ October 07, 2003, 08:10 PM: Message edited by: Patman ]
 
The LS1 is very amazing! My 02 SS burns no oil and believe me she is run very hard and I also have no piston slap, knocks or sounds. I am running Schaeffer #703 10W-30 blend and a Extended Wix oil filter. Yesterday after another LS1 edit tune my car made 399 rwhp @ 386 rwtq with a cam, headers and a few bolt on mods on stock factory heads! Name another engine that can do that without going a forced induction route. My SS was built in June 2002 and was filled with Mobil 1 as the day I got it home smelled the oil and it was just like new Mobil 1 out of a bottle.
 
I don't think there is any way that GM will stop recommending synthetic oil in these engines-not unless a problem could be demonstrated to exist and they would have known of such a problem by this time. In any case, before they went to conventional motor oils they could turn to another synthetic oil if Mobil 1 was a problem. Unless they put an oil cooler on the Corvette they could not use conventional oil anyway. And then they are going to retrofit all of those Corvettes they have sold? I don't think so.

If somebody is having oil consumption problems maybe try mixing 5W-30 or 10W-30 Mobil 1 with one or two quarts of 15W-50 Mobil 1. Might solve the problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top