My Car Is Ready To Die(I Think)

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

That's a pretty long life for GM car isn't it? :-)

Yeah, sounds about right, lol. My 88 year old buddy (looooong time friend of the grandparents) blew a rod in his 97 Olds (3.8 V6 if I recall correctly). Only had 72K miles. It's no surprise to me why Gm is in current state that they're.
 
My car is an '89 with the 3.8 v6, and just turned 180k miles. Nothing inside the engine that touches oil has ever gone bad. Many expected wear items have been replaced, and the transmission has been troublesome, but the 3.8 will run forever. There's a man at work who moved from Wisconsin and has a '97 Grand Prix 3.8 that looks ready to rust in half. The engine runs perfectly. Any engine which isn't abused and which gets faithful oil changes should run for a very long time.

Notice that none of the suggested solutions have to do with mechanical problems within the engine itself. It's all sensor this and wires that, which are generally the problems with modern cars. 50 years ago, 78k miles would have been ready for a valve grind and a set of rings at least.

Remember too, GM cars run badly longer than most cars run at all.
 
Well, the car was meticulously maintained. Oil changed every 3K ect, ect by the same shop he's been going to since the 60's. Driven by an old man like an old man, so no hot rod mileage was accumulated. He recently had the infamous intake gaskets replaced to the tune of $800. Too many issues on a low mileage car if you ask me. No trans problems, though mileage is kinda low for that.

"50 years ago, 78k miles would have been ready for a valve grind and a set of rings at least."

Eh, my 1959 Pontiac had over 200K miles and was never torn apart. 4 speed hydro trans was rebuilt once. Still has the same gear oil in the limited slip rear end from the factory. Had some sludge build up in the heads from a lifetime use of Penzoil and from short trips in cold weather. Car still ran great and held 19.5 inches of vacuum at 480 RPM idle. Shell Rotella 15-40W oil was rapidly cleaning the sludge before I tore the engine down.

GM most certainly had their heyday of many quality products (both auto and appliance related), but that came to an abrupt end in the 70's.
 
Spark plug wires and Dexcool issues...

In both the Chevy Lumina I had and the Monte Carlo I have now, I noticed similar symptoms especially if it was damp outside. Turns out that the rubber of the spark plug wires had deteriorated and there was "lightning" under the hood. When it acts up again and runs rough, take a look under the hood, if it is a dreary day you may see lightning coming from the wires to the engine. New spark plug wires would be the cure for this and they are not expensive.

Does your car have the Dexcool coolant antifreeze? My mothers Buick has Dexcool and not only has sludge formed in the radiator but now the oil looks like cappucino becuase it turns out the Dexcool ate the gaskets away. Eventually, she will have to have the engine rebuilt (which would make sense if she otherwise likes the car) but really should that happen?
 
Dexacool...

Dexcool was one of worst money making decisions GM made. That crap would eat up a heater core in less than 2 years. It was also infamous for eating head gaskets, although it never seem to affect rubber cooling hoses much. I have a buddy who works for a GM dealership in Livermore and the techs were immediately draining the cooling systems, flushing, and adding the old green coolant on their own brand new vehicles. It was the only way prevent the severe corrosion from occurring.
 
To me 78k is still low miles, but with my last GM car it was a mess after 65 k, it was a 2002 Impala with the 3,4 engine.
We have had 3 buicks with th eoldest being a 1990 LeSabre, and the current being a 1999 Park Avenue, The LeSabre, and the Century were both all original and sold with over 180K each, with no trouble, and the Park Avenue is all original with 148k currently.

My DeVille is still at work and will remain there for one more week, soonest appointment I could get. I have started it today and on Ssunday, there is no exhaust somke, and only a light shake, no where as bad as before, and the engine light dosen't flash now.

Last night I test drove a Mercury Monterey at what was America's last Mercury Only dealer and I was set to buy it until we got to a trade, thae dealer will NOT take anything with a Northstar V-8 on trade because he has lost so much money when taking them, then I stopped somewhere else today and same story. Apparently with these aluminum block engines are prone to blowing the head gasket and also prone to early failure, which after hearing here that it is common to need oil every 500 miles.

So I wont know what is going on for another week, I may end up stuck with it and selling as is for parts or repair and only having th Lincoln for a while
 
It's not plug wires on that car. Considering its age, it should have the coil on plug system.

Dex-cool was apparently a bad idea, whatever it was. It was supposed to keep water pumps from wearing out, but I don't suppose that worked out so well...
 
Over-reaction, anyone?

Xraytech, sorry to hear of the bad luck. This could be a very simple problem, perhaps cheaper to fix than a full tank of gas, if the dealer doesn't take you for a ride.

Before the FUD gets too out of hand, the maximum consumption is a quart of oil for every 1000 miles, which sounds like A LOT for those of us used to low revving, high torque, lazy V8's...which the Northstar IS NOT. See below for details....

Early Northstars ('93-96) are infamous for oil drips between the crankcase halves on some engines. It's a cheap gasket but costs bucks to yank the engine. That doesn't help it's reputation. Of course it's a high performance mill that should see service every 50 or 100,000 miles but lots of these cars ended up as abused beaters worn down and traded in and in that condition, any dealer would be a fool to take one in as they're much more complex than a simple push-rod V6 or V8.

In a similar vein, the Dexcool gets a bad rap because many owners assume it doesn't need flushing like traditional coolants and it doesn't take much to make it LOOK bad. It's orange to start with (some think it's rusty, it's not), of course, and the "sludge" people mistakenly see is actually the coolant supplement tablets recommended by the dealer whenever a drain/refill is done. If the tabs are just dropped in the radiator, you'll think the bottom is covered in sludge. Not so. These are organic tablets introduced for use on the 4100 design after consultation with aluminum block experts at OMC, and have been recommended wherever aluminum meets aluminum. I've heard some claim DexCool is a scam because it costs more per gallon, but it actually helps INHIBIT corrosion on aluminum engine parts. Not heard of it being a scam _deteriorating_ engine parts.

Below text is not mine, rather the explanation for high oil consumption from one of the experts...

"Usually, the Northstar is just using oil, rather than leaking it out. The Northstar has a very aggressive cylinder hatch pattern, to promote sufficient oiling at high engine speeds (6000 rpm). Unlike many engines, this thing was designed for sustained high rpm use and will run at 6000 rpm all day. The aggressive hatch pattern tends to retain the oil longer than a slicker cylinder wall will.

Naturally, this oil retention keeps the oil up in the piston rings, which is good for lubrication, but it also means that it'll use more than "normal". GM has stated that 1 qt. for 1000 miles is satisfactory. We're used to a "good engine" not using any oil at all, but those engines also need rebuilds after 100,000 miles due to worn out cylinders (less lubrication means more wear). The Northstar is good for many many miles and the oil usage is a small price to pay for this reliability."
 
"THE NEW GM", is building "Leaner, Greener, Faster & smarter. So from September 27, 1908 until April 27,2009 they WERE "Fat,polluting,slow to change & Stupid. I think its a perfect slogan, and a modern miracle that the taxpayers turned them around, overnight. You just can't make this stuff up.
 
"Naturally, this oil retention keeps the oil up in the piston rings, which is good for lubrication, but it also means that it'll use more than "normal."

Ok, I'll buy that.

"We're used to a "good engine" not using any oil at all, but those engines also need rebuilds after 100,000 miles due to worn out cylinders (less lubrication means more wear)."

I don't buy that remark. Please explain the 3, 4, 500K+ miles on Honda's and Toyota's that don't use oil?
 
I still say this may not be an internal engine problem given the low mileage, and the facts that it kept going for some time, and didn't overheat or lose lots of oil in a very short time. I'm very suspicious of the recent transmission job because there are so many fasteners and electronic connections that can be poorly installed or just left off. I don't know about GM, but some manufacturers (VW for instance) use loads of torque to yield nuts and bolts now, which must be replaced after one use. Dealerships don't always do this and the fasteners may eventually fail down the road. Electrical connections allowed to get dirty by a sloppy mechanic can also work for awhile then fail and even melt due to high resistance.

The Northstar is a neat engine, although they seem to have lots of headbolt troubles once they get some miles. I'm not too convinced that the hatch pattern is the sole reason for high oil consumption - this has been happening for years to some open-deck aluminum engines because the cylinder walls are made thin for lightness, but they are supported only at the bottom of the cylinder and being aluminum they move around a bit when heated and cooled. Plus, 6000 rpm isn't an unusually high engine speed for an engine built in the last 40 or so years. If the Northstar does tend to use lots of oil then I hope Cadillac at least gave it decent oil capacity - both GM and Ford used to make large V8s with tiny 5 qt sumps which are OK if on an oil-tight engine, but have very little extra capacity to accommodate one which uses oil.
 
When I had the transmission done it was the end of February at Aamco transmissions. It is going to a private garage that has the ability to service the newer Cadillacs, the only Buick/Cadillac dealer in our area cant be trusted so I wont go to a dealer.

As for oil capacity in the manual it states for oil changes it uses 7.5 quarts os SAE 5w30 oil.
 
Dan, I don't buy that remark either. Not sure if the OP was referring to low nickel content Cheb 305's needing an overhaul at 100k or what. Lots of 3800's out there at 300k+ and I've gotten good service out of my V8's.

Re the Honda's and Toyotas, they're not immune to oil problems either. Recall the class action lawsuit against Toyota that affected 3.5 MILLION vehicles due to their oil sludge problem causing engine damage and outright failure? After years of complaints and lawsuits they finally stepped up.

Guess that reinforces the point though...doesn't matter who makes it, nothing mechanical is immune to failure.
 
"Recall the class action lawsuit against Toyota that affected 3.5 MILLION vehicles due to their oil sludge problem causing engine damage and outright failure?"

Well, I think this is more of a maintenance issue more than anything. My parents have a 2001 4 cyl Camry that's under the slugemobile act and curently has 127K with no issues. Oil changed with Valvoline full synthetic every 4-5K miles. If you go on a couple Toyota forums, they usually have high millage postings (200K+ mileage) and there's plenty of those slugemisters running 300K + without any problems either. Those engines are more susectiple to sludge as the oil return gallery's in the head were designed smaller than they should have been (word also has it that the PCV system may be under par), but I believe these engines are fine, you just can't let the maintenance go, like most auto owners do.
 
I looked at your possiblities for another car. I know what the general perception of Chrysler product are, but in my experience, they are fantastic. We had a 2000 Grand Caravan that had 204K miles when we traded it on the current 2005 Chrysler Town and Country. It now has 104K on it and we have had no problems. My in-laws had a 1994 Chrysler Concorde, and it had over 300K when it was sold. They got a Dodge Stratus and are very happy with it.

Reading this makes me worry. I bought a 2006 Cadillac STS last December. I love that car,and so far, no problems. The whole keyless doors and pushbutton start takes some getting used to though. It has the 3.6 V6, and I'm getting great milage.
 
I know what you mean about the perception of Chrysler's quality, I too thought like that, but everyone I know that has a Grand Caravan or T&C have had good reliability and most now have over 100k on the 2001-07 models. Only one person I know that has one that has not been too great, but that is b/c they dont maintain it.
Hopefully I am going to test drive a Dodge, I love the Ford/Mercury vans, but want to see what Dodge has to offer
 
My buddy got a Dodge Caravan agains my advise. It kept breaking down leaving his wife stranded 3 times. Transmission problems,they are known for that. He got the extended warranty and found that "everything" is not covered. Cost him major money to have the car towed,rent a car,and the repairs. Not to mention a very angry wife! He then traded it in for a new Toyota Sienna (like I recommended in the first place). His transportation issues have been trouble free since 2001. No tow trucks,no repair shops,no hours stranded on the freeway and a happy wife.

 
The Caravan/Voyager is hit and miss. My buddies parents still have their 94 Voyager with 238K miles. Transmission rebuilt once, LOTS of front brake pads, but it keeps on ticking. The 3.3 Chrysler motor was a great design. I grew up with a 90 Voyager with the 3.0, and the motor was burning oil by 60K miles. Those engines were known for dropping the valve guides and had PCV system issues in the valve covers. 3 speed trans in it was bullet proof though. It's the OD transmissions that had a lot of issues.
 
Chrysler . . .

I hope Fiat can turn Chrysler around, but at present I'd be wary of their products not because of quality but because of their appalling parts supply and lack of information at dealerships. I once had a ten-year old Eagle in my family down for three weeks for water pump O-rings. The pump was available here in LA, but the O-rings were only in Minneapolis or Dallas and three dealerships refused to 2nd day air them at my cost - "we don't do that sort of thing, sir". In addition, the information Chrysler supplies to dealerships is often wrong, and as a result the parts managers are clueless. I was almost always asked if the car was a four cylinder or a V-6 even though that particular model was only available as a V-6 - I was there the day the car was custom ordered and knew every option in the book, and there were no alternate engines on that car regardless of trim or model. Even the parts book blow-up diagrams were wrong, to the point that the parts guys would ask me to point out exactly what I wanted, which was hard when the book didn't look like the car. I once asked a parts manager what their own mechanics did when the book was wrong - and he readily admitted it was wrong. His answer? "We don't get many ten year old cars in here, sir." Once the car is more than a few years old, Chrysler doesn't care at all about you.
 
Toyota and spin control . . .

Toyota has a few more skeletons in the closet than just the engine sludge issue. One of their most popular engines from the late '90s through about 2007 was the 1zz-fe. It's a 1.8 liter twincam long stroke engine, with the 2zz being the short stroke performance engine of the same size but different design. The 1zz was built in Japan, Canada, and the US, and used in the Toyota Corolla, Toyota Matrix, Toyota Celica, Toyota MR2, Chevy Prism, and Pontiac Vibe. Engines built before late '02 were usually OK, but a small but significant number became oil burners because there weren't enough oil return holes in the pistons and some of the blocks were weak and the bores went oval - this combined with low friction rings to make the oil control rings ineffective. Like the Northstar, this is an open-deck aluminum block engine. For most cars the oil burning was annoying, but like GM Toyota's official standards for oil consumption are pretty lax so they didn't warranty many.

On one car the problem was sometimes catastrophic: the little mid-engined MR2 two seater. This was a limited production car, with US sales starting at about 7500 cars in 2000 and ending with less than 800 cars sold in 2005. Toyota decided to emission certify the MR2 as an Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle, which meant adding two pre-catalysts to the normal exhaust catalytic convertor. Because of the mid-engine design, the only place to put them was in the exhaust manifold, inches from the exhause ports. Catalytic convertors use a ceramic honeycomb matrix to hold the metallic compounds that treat the exhause gases, and these ceramics are very, very hard but also brittle. They cannot tolerate oil, and will break up into tiny abrasive pieces if exposed to oil - this is a known fact. There are many documented stories of early MR2s which all of a sudden lost nearly all their oil, and often spun rod bearings as a result. Toyota mostly blamed the owners for not checking their oil and refused warranty coverage. A few owners got lucky and caught the problem before spinning a bearing and got covered for their new engines.

The mystery was, why did low mileage engines all of a sudden start using huge amounts of oil without mechanical failure? It took a lot of detective work amongst owners but eventually the cause became clear. All early MR2s have manual transmissions, and being sports cars Toyota gave them short gearing so they tend to rev high. The 1zz has variable valve timing, and at high rpm the timing provides a lot of valve overlap when both the intake and exhause valves are open. This is good for both power and emissions, but also results in some exhaust being sucked back into the engine. Once an MR2 engine started buring oil, the pre-cats broke up, and if the driver revvved it under load the little ceramic bits could be sucked back into the engine where they just destroyed the rings and bores. Toyota actually had to 'fess up to 1zz problems on MR2s in Britain, but here they denied it while quietly warrantying lots of engines caught before the bearings spun. Starting in late '01 and going through most of '02, they made running changes to the 1zz, first the rings, then the pistons, then the block assembly, then the oil pump. No manufacturer does this in a piecemeal fashion unless they're running scared. The fix seems to have worked, as very, very few '03 or newer cars have been affected with this problem.

I'm not posting this to rant on Toyota - most of their cars are very reliable indeed. My mother's eight year old Camry XLE has virtually all options available, including power everything, climate control, and the sometimes sludgy V-6, but in over 100,000 miles it has had exactly two failures: a seat belt retractor cover, and a slight leak from the rear main seal. The latter could have been expensive but was covered by warranty. The 1zz problems are atypical, but prove that Toyota is quite capable of making big mistakes.
 
Back
Top