Engine is Burning Oil

[Jugernot]

Corolla's are notorious for burning oil. I have a 02 Chevy Prizm (AKA: Toyota Corolla) and after purchasing noticed it used oil (approx. 1 quart per 1000 miles) and did some research. Turns out Toyota says it knows about the issue, but doesn't see it as a problem. Apparently the manual in several years even say "It is normal operation for upto 1 quart needed per 800 miles. This is within operating tolerances."

Just make sure you keep oil in it and it should be fine.

Jugs

btw, do yourself a favor and search google for "corolla burn oil" and you will gets hundreds if not thousands of other in the same boat.

 

[LTC8K6]

Tell Toyota to call Frank...

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Originally posted by: Jabbernyx

Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Stop feeding it oil, and soon enough it will stop burning it. Tough Love!!!

LOL

LOL x2

 

[chucky2]

Originally posted by: Greenman

Originally posted by: chucky2
Frank is over there because he's a site sponsor of BITOG - at BITOG, site sponsors are allowed to post.

Auto-RX doesn't make the oil thicker by any measurable degree. There was even a guy a ways back that took a virgin sample of his dino oil before doing an oil change. He did the oil change and when doing it, added Auto-RX. He drove like 10 miles, enough to get it all mixed in, and then took another sample. He sent them both in....the cSt @100C values were within margin of error testing.

Same offer I gave to LTC8K6: You find a consistent oil consumer in your stable of rides, I'll send on a bottle of Auto-RX on my dime. If it works, you PayPal me back. If it doesn't, then I'm out the $$$ and not you.

Chuck

I don't have anything to put it in, my truck only has 150k on it, my suv is around 90k. As I said, if the opportunity ever arises, I'll give it a try. But I simply won't pour solvent into a properly running motor, that's a last ditch effort to try and get a few more miles out of an engine that's at the end of it's service life.

I totally agree RE: solvents. However, there are no solvents in Auto-RX, it's comprised of esters...nothing to do with solvents.

Chuck

 

[chucky2]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6
Tell Toyota to call Frank...

Wouldn't surprise me if Toyota know about it. Lord knows there are tons of Toyota and Lexus owners that know....

Chuck

 

[LTC8K6]

Wouldn't surprise me if Toyota know about it.

It wouldn't surprise you to learn that Toyota knows it can solve the oil burning problem with a couple of bottles of magic, but Toyota refuses to do it?

Are you sure that wouldn't surprise you?

Maybe just a little fib?

 

[chucky2]

Toyota could solve the problem with a couple bottles of "magic", but, for Toyota to do that, it'd be admitting fault. Corp.'s that have class action lawsuits against them tend not to admit anymore fault than they have to.

The fact that it took a class action lawsuit in the first place, rather than them owning up to the problem, tells you exactly Toyota's stance on the issue.

Plenty of Toyota/Lexus Auto-RX users...no effort required to find them.

Ready to take me up on my offer?

Chuck

 

[Greenman]

Holy golden showers batman! That stuff is $26 for a twelve ounce bottle!

 

[ballmode]

Sell the car

 

[chucky2]

Originally posted by: Greenman
Holy golden showers batman! That stuff is $26 for a twelve ounce bottle!

Yep...less if you buy in bulk though. Around the holidays Frank will have reduced prices sometimes. With a 1-2mpg bump though, it eventually pays for itself.

Chuck

 

[Bu B3ar]

Originally posted by: Jugernot
Corolla's are notorious for burning oil. I have a 02 Chevy Prizm (AKA: Toyota Corolla) and after purchasing noticed it used oil (approx. 1 quart per 1000 miles) and did some research. Turns out Toyota says it knows about the issue, but doesn't see it as a problem. Apparently the manual in several years even say "It is normal operation for upto 1 quart needed per 800 miles. This is within operating tolerances."

Just make sure you keep oil in it and it should be fine.

Jugs

btw, do yourself a favor and search google for "corolla burn oil" and you will gets hundreds if not thousands of other in the same boat.

thanks jugs, thats the cheapest and easiest advice in this thread

I didn't know i was going to start a war about engine additives, can't we all get along? Put shit in your engine if you want, don't if you think its 'snake oil'. Either way, neither side is gunna beleive eachother, so let's just have a :beer:

 

[LTC8K6]

Ready to take me up on my offer?

Could you try to at least pretend to read my posts...

 

[chucky2]

Originally posted by: LTC8K6

Ready to take me up on my offer?

Could you try to at least pretend to read my posts...

So so ironic you say that....

Chuck

 

[Greenman]

Originally posted by: chucky2

Originally posted by: Greenman
Holy golden showers batman! That stuff is $26 for a twelve ounce bottle!

Yep...less if you buy in bulk though. Around the holidays Frank will have reduced prices sometimes. With a 1-2mpg bump though, it eventually pays for itself.

Chuck

By bulk do you mean alternator size or smaller?

 

[chucky2]

I've slept about 7 hours in the past 3 days...so I didn't get the joke...

...what do you mean by 'alternator size' and bulk?

Chuck

 

[Greenman]

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...y=y&keyword1=bulk+beef

You're going to need most of a day to get through it.

 

[chucky2]

Haha...just read the first page and I was already laughing. Reminds me of the Butter thread years back...

Chuck

 

[thecritic]

chucky2, I'm one of the more "original" members of BITOG, and I remember your UOA posts. Frank is no longer a sponsor of BITOG. His "babysitting" and obnoxiousness eventually caught up with him and in order to do damage control, he left for his own good.

To the original poster, the Toyota 1.8L engines have a tendency to consume oil when driven for prolonged periods of time at high speeds. there's NOTHING that you can do about that, just keep adding oil and maintaining a good preventive maintenance program.

I used Auto-RX on my Saturn and it did not improve the oil consumption. I didn't expect it to, because the Saturn 1.9 DOHC is just an oil burner. There wasn't any sludge or heavy varnish before the treatment so I didn't expect the Auto-RX to do anything. So did Auto-RX work for me? I don't know. I still have two bottles at home though.

It's possible that Auto-RX could clean-up the original poster's engine and possibly reduce some of the consumption, but it definitely will not eliminate it.

 

[dug777]

Originally posted by: chucky2

Originally posted by: Greenman
Holy golden showers batman! That stuff is $26 for a twelve ounce bottle!

Yep...less if you buy in bulk though. Around the holidays Frank will have reduced prices sometimes. With a 1-2mpg bump though, it eventually pays for itself.

Chuck

I've had a good look on the Auto-RX site, and I can't find the bit where they guarantee a 1-2 mpg bump. Lots of junky and entirely subjective 'testimonials' with anything up to 11ty billion mpg increases

I'd be very surprised if 'Frank' makes that claim, as that might be looked at a little suspiciously by whoever regulates the trade practices acts in the US ( I don't know, and to be honest, don't care whether it's State or Federal).

Unless they make the claim AND can prove everyone will get 1-2mpg improvements under identical driving conditions then YOU are being entirely misleading in providing that as a justification for buying 'Auto-RX', even in alternator-sized amounts.

It would certainly be something that would be very easy to independently test however (and even you couldn't claim it was expensive or unreasonable to expect 'Frank' to conduct such a test).

I found this comment out there by someone who tried it, and experienced nothing better that a 'subjective' improvement in their own words:

...Then again, when you spend $25 a bottle for something, you sometimes want it to work so badly that you can eventually convince yourself it works.

Perhaps just changing the oil five times in as many months is what cleans the engine and it's the cognitive dissonance on the ARX message board that sells the product.

I think that sums up what people who like some proof of such exciting and unlikely claims would think about the whole affair, in absence of that proof, which would take the form of properly constructed and constructed independent tests on this additive

 

[chucky2]

Originally posted by: thecritic
chucky2, I'm one of the more "original" members of BITOG, and I remember your UOA posts. Frank is no longer a sponsor of BITOG. His "babysitting" and obnoxiousness eventually caught up with him and in order to do damage control, he left for his own good.

To the original poster, the Toyota 1.8L engines have a tendency to consume oil when driven for prolonged periods of time at high speeds. there's NOTHING that you can do about that, just keep adding oil and maintaining a good preventive maintenance program.

I used Auto-RX on my Saturn and it did not improve the oil consumption. I didn't expect it to, because the Saturn 1.9 DOHC is just an oil burner. There wasn't any sludge or heavy varnish before the treatment so I didn't expect the Auto-RX to do anything. So did Auto-RX work for me? I don't know. I still have two bottles at home though.

It's possible that Auto-RX could clean-up the original poster's engine and possibly reduce some of the consumption, but it definitely will not eliminate it.

Did you have a Ford 4.0L too? An Explorer maybe? I had an Excel file of all the UOA's on Ford 4.0L's at one point, tracking how those UOA's and mine trended.

I totally agree (which is basically what I said in my second post in this thread): If parts are worn out, or similarly, if the design of the engine is so bad that it just burns oil not due to sludge/gummed up rings, then Yes, Auto-RX is not likely to help with the oil burning.

However, if your oil burning is due to sludge/gummed up rings, then Yes, Auto-RX will either eliminate it, or, greatly reduce it.

Good to see an 'original'er' from BITOG...those were the good 'ol days...

Chuck

 

[chucky2]

Originally posted by: dug777

Originally posted by: chucky2

Originally posted by: Greenman
Holy golden showers batman! That stuff is $26 for a twelve ounce bottle!

Yep...less if you buy in bulk though. Around the holidays Frank will have reduced prices sometimes. With a 1-2mpg bump though, it eventually pays for itself.

Chuck

I've had a good look on the Auto-RX site, and I can't find the bit where they guarantee a 1-2 mpg bump. Lots of junky and entirely subjective 'testimonials' with anything up to 11ty billion mpg increases

I'd be very surprised if 'Frank' makes that claim, as that might be looked at a little suspiciously by whoever regulates the trade practices acts in the US ( I don't know, and to be honest, don't care whether it's State or Federal).

Unless they make the claim AND can prove everyone will get 1-2mpg improvements under identical driving conditions then YOU are being entirely misleading in providing that as a justification for buying 'Auto-RX', even in alternator-sized amounts.

Frank is not making that claim, that's what I'm saying based on many many many user reports of a 1-2 mpg climb in fuel economy. Why would so many report this? Well, when you clean out the ring packs of junk, and they seal against the cylinder better, there's less blowby and more force down onto the piston. Now, I don't have a scanning tunneling electron microscope to prove this, however, that's an educated answer, not something just made up out of thin air.

It would certainly be something that would be very easy to independently test however (and even you couldn't claim it was expensive or unreasonable to expect 'Frank' to conduct such a test).

I would not doubt some of the Testemonials on the Auto-RX website indicate this...for sure there are many on BITOG/The Web. My Ranger maybe saw a 1mpg increase...my dad's Expedition and my brothers Tbird both saw 2 mpg increase...along of course with greatly reduced/eliminated oil consumption respectively.

I found this comment out there by someone who tried it, and experienced nothing better that a 'subjective' improvement in their own words:

...Then again, when you spend $25 a bottle for something, you sometimes want it to work so badly that you can eventually convince yourself it works.

Perhaps just changing the oil five times in as many months is what cleans the engine and it's the cognitive dissonance on the ARX message board that sells the product.

I don't doubt that response. Some people try to fix problems that just aren't there....then are surprised when they're not fixed. Did that poster say why they bought Auto-RX?

I think that sums up what people who like some proof of such exciting and unlikely claims would think about the whole affair, in absence of that proof, which would take the form of properly constructed and constructed independent tests on this additive

I guess that's my frustration: How many user reports do you need, before it is clear that the product works? Does Aaron's Test not provide the type proof that is being asked for? Granted, many Auto-RX users reports are exceedingly lacking in any type of accurately tracked results. Should we discount all the users who posted accurate feedback though because of this? I think not.

Chuck

 

[Greenman]

The point Chuck, is that user reports aren't science. Based on the user reports the best you can say is that "there does appear to be some benefit to using auto rx". That benefit could be psychological.
Look at this way, a few hundred people swear that auto-rx solved their problems. If you look around you can find a few hundred people that swear they have seen the Loch Ness monster, or a few hundred that have seen bogfoot, you can even find several hundred that will swear to have been abducted by aliens. Anecdotal evidence is not science, though some of the auto-rx reports that have before and after pics and long term mileage results are fairly compelling, those same results might be achieved by changing the oil every month for 5 months . The point that most people here are making is that none of this has been done by a testing lab in a controlled situation. It ain't science, it's hearsay.

 

[chucky2]

I'm not sure how a small business owner is going to get the very high amount of funds to have an independent controlled test done. As I said before, you'd have to seperate the oil system in each engine into two parts - one just normal oil, the other the same normal oil w/ Auto-RX.

Then you'd have to run those engines all for at least 5,000 miles (or the equivalent of 5,000 miles). That's just for one round. If you go two rounds, that's 10,000 miles.

So first there'd be the extremely high expense of the multiple engine modification to run dual seperate oil systems (well, first, there'd be the expense of finding suitable consistent consumption engines, doing the teardown and documentation, putting them back together, then running them again to confirm they are still consuming, and what rate), then there'd be the expense of running those engines for a mix of 5,000 and 10,000 miles, then there'd be the final expense of documenting the results (more teardown and measurement).

HowTF is any small business owner going to have the $$$$$$$ to get that done???

Or, you can just go be the hundreds of successful user reports. People, who already change their oil regularly, watching their consumption disappear/greatly diminish after doing an Auto-RX program must all be crazy right?

Here's a question for you guys: What else could it be, given the disapperance of the consumption/sludge that happens to occur after Auto-RX is used, not before?

Explain that one.

Chuck

 

[Greenman]

Ever tried changing your oil once a month for ten months? Has anyone ever tried the cleaning program and left out the auto-rx? The only engine I've ever had with sludge in it had a blown head gasket. After replacing the gasket I changed the oil 2 or 3 times and the sludge was gone. Does that prove that auto-rx isn't necessary?

Just so were clear, I'm inclined to believe that the stuff has some value, but stopping oil burning and leaking is a huge claim to make. Any company that wants to sell me that has to prove it.
All the engine gimmicks have page after page of testimonials, they prove that magnets on the fuel line improve gas mileage, they prove that putting vanes in your intake improve horsepower, they prove that a screen under the carburetor increases fuel mileage, and not a single one of those is true.

Being aware of the product, I might try it if the need ever arises, but I can promise you that I will never put it in a reasonably well running motor because it's untested. That's why the owner of the company should pay for independent testing, so people like me will use it. If he could prove to me that his product will increase gas mileage, or that it will safely clean my engine without any adverse effects, and that there was even a long outside chance that it will stop a leak, he'd have thousands more customers.

 

[thecritic]

Dyson Analysis has tested Auto-RX, take it for what it's worth:

http://www.auto-rx.com/pages/field_data_sheets.html

:shrug: