Jump to content

2005 Chevy Silverado


Recommended Posts

Posted

I own a 2005 Chevy Silverado 5.3L. The problem I am having is that when I first start the engine I get blue smoke which is oil burning. After about 10 seconds it clears up and no more smoke. I just replaced valve guide seals, and still have the same problem. Is there any other way that the oil can be getting in somewhere to cause this problem? Can it be from the EGR valve or EVAP solenoid. I'm at a loss here and running out of options.

Posted
I own a 2005 Chevy Silverado 5.3L. The problem I am having is that when I first start the engine I get blue smoke which is oil burning. After about 10 seconds it clears up and no more smoke. I just replaced valve guide seals, and still have the same problem. Is there any other way that the oil can be getting in somewhere to cause this problem? Can it be from the EGR valve or EVAP solenoid. I'm at a loss here and running out of options.

Others may correct me if I am wrong here but I have not heard of anybody with 5.3 smoking issues. If you are not consuming oil but are getting a blue puff on startup, it almost has to be in the heads somewhere. This used to be common on high mileage older generation 4.3, 5.0 & 5.7s because of worn valve guides leaking oil into the cylinders when the engine was shut off.

Posted
Others may correct me if I am wrong here but I have not heard of anybody with 5.3 smoking issues. If you are not consuming oil but are getting a blue puff on startup, it almost has to be in the heads somewhere. This used to be common on high mileage older generation 4.3, 5.0 & 5.7s because of worn valve guides leaking oil into the cylinders when the engine was shut off.

+1 Its normally the valve stems seals, or worse the valves them selves.

Posted

This certainly sounds like what happens with worn valve guide seals. Had this happen on my '90. Valves not seating right on the new seals? Could it be a problem with one of the values itself?

Posted

Once the valve guides are worn, it allows the valve to move laterally and the seals can leak (even if new). The seals are designed to sweep oil off of the valve stem during up and down movement.

Posted

Acually I'm seeing 5.3 with valve guide issues and causeing your problem. Its the seals or a guide in a head, sounds like its just one of the heads it has a weak guides I have been seeing on the older 5.3.

Posted

Consensus has been achieved. :thumbs:

 

A valve job is in order whenever you feel like it.

Posted

if my truck sits for about a week.. then i start it.. i get the puff of death smoke...lol. but every day starting... never noticable. the valve guides are leaky leaky i do believe =) but.. its not more than a drop so... im not worried.

Posted

So even if the valve guides are new it can still leak down? :lol: Could it be the valves themself not closing all the way.The motor has 76,000 on it.I just changed the oil two weeks ago and I had to add 1qt of oil already.Somedays it smokes evertime I start it and somedays not at all.

Posted

I am reaching here but thought I would ask. Have you recently replaced the PCV valve? Your truck should have a "fixed orfice style" PCV valve and not the style with valve. The early model 5.3s had the valve style and they did allow some oil to be recirculated which is not what you want.

 

Check it out, make sure it is a fixed orfice style and that it is free and clear in there.

 

The amt of oil you just had to add in such a short period of time sounds like too much to be valve seals. My 1971 may puff just a little at start up but I never have to add any oil. It has the original seals and is 38 years old. I can't complain.

Posted

You replaced the seals. Having worn guides or valves is different. This was mentioned in an earlier post. You're burning a small amounts of oil while you're driving. It's just noticed when you start-up after sitting for a bit. I've got a 350 that needs a valve job due to worn guides/valves.

 

Is the oil useage the same, more or less than before you replaced the seals? If it's more, you may have not gotten them on correctly

 

 

+1 on the PCV.

 

I'm sure you would've noticed while the covers were over, oil drain back holes all open?

Posted

before you go spending crazy money. Gm has the worst PCV system ever. fact is it suck in oil and then the oil rests inside the intake. when you go to start the truck up in the morning it will smoke some. I been moddign this motors for years now and never once ever seen a bad valve guide.

Posted

Yes check the pcv system first to make everyone happy. If thats not the case then fix the guides I see 2-4 of these engines a day in the shop and YES lots of them have bad guides!

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,984 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 
    • Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...