Jump to content

Afm And Oil Consumption

jimbrown1

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 188
  • Created
  • Last Reply
jimbrown1 Enthusiast

jimbrown1

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Picture.jpg

 

Are the installation of the new lifters taking care of the issue? I'm assuming you work at a GM dealership somewhere? I'm about to take delivery of a 2011 with the 5.3 and AFM, sure am scared about this issue with a brand new truck.

441G Enthusiast

441G

Posted
Posted
Picture.jpg

 

Are the installation of the new lifters taking care of the issue? I'm assuming you work at a GM dealership somewhere? I'm about to take delivery of a 2011 with the 5.3 and AFM, sure am scared about this issue with a brand new truck.

 

 

 

do not work at dealer. we are replacing the lifters because of cylinders missing and valve train noises. i don't thing the lifters have anything to do with the oil consumption - i believe that is a piston and ring issue with afm motors.

441G Enthusiast

441G

Posted
Posted

the two problems i see with these afm motors are the number of parts to fail switching the engine from 4 to 8 and the oil consumption that results from deactivating the cylinders. i would rather buy a truck without these extra mpg gimmicks.

Z'06 Enthusiast

Z'06

Posted
Posted
the two problems i see with these afm motors are the number of parts to fail switching the engine from 4 to 8 and the oil consumption that results from deactivating the cylinders. i would rather buy a truck without these extra mpg gimmicks.

 

It's just reached the point of over-engineering. The used market for GM trucks in a few more years from now will be interesting to see whether history looks fondly on Gen III v. Gen IV engines.

 

By analogy, household appliances like refrigerators and washers/dryers used to last a long time in the days before higher-efficiency standards. Now we just add to landfills at a faster pace with practically disposable household appliances.

1911guy New Member

1911guy

Posted
Posted

I have one of the oil burner/using trucks. 3.5qts in 2500 straight highway miles Missouri-tampa-missouri. Took it in to the dealer the other day and they put some sort of shield somewhere in the engine and something else I am no sure of. So I will see if this helps any or not. Truck only used oil on highway trips and never seemed to when driving around locally.

 

Yup, they said they did a carbon cleanup or something like that. Truck is an '07. Highway usage has continully gotten worse since I have owned it. Starting from using none to where it is now at 86,000 miles. Other than that love the truck.

Dansonic Enthusiast

Dansonic

Posted
Posted
I have a 2011 Tahoe with the 5.3 and AFM. I checked the oil yesterday and at almost 3K miles it has not used any oil. I can't say none of them won't or that it won't use oil in the future but for now I'm good. :(

 

 

Yeah that's probably because most if not all of these oil over-consumption problems seem to only be affecting the Guinea pig year model (ie:2007) first year of the AFM they apparently got it right on newer models they just can't get it right on 07' engines.

(By the way mine is going thru 3 quarts in 10,000 kilometers.)

emejay Enthusiast

emejay

Posted
Posted

My 07 Sierra NBS has 118K trouble free miles and uses no abnormal amount of oil.....I fill it to the "full" mark on the dipstick when I change the oil, after 7K miles I change it and the level is at the "low" level on the dipstick. This is comparable to the last 4 GM half ton pick ups I have owned. I love the AFM feature, I consistently get over 20 MPG every tank, and wouldn't hesitate to buy another.

statelax3 Enthusiast

statelax3

Posted
Posted

I feel very left out for not seeing this thread or one like it before. I have an 07 with 128K miles. I have used full synthetic mobil 1 since the day i drove it home with 7 miles on it. I change at 5K intervals. Starting at roughly 60K I I burn 3 quarts between oil changes. I have no smoke at start up, and I have ridden behind it with other people driving it and can smell no oil. How common is this? My neighbor has an 07 2wd and he has the same issue. Can I get a Clif's notes on what GM has said about this issue?

crew08 Enthusiast

crew08

Posted
Posted

I have a 2008 Silverado Crew Cab Z71 with about 50500 miles on it. I started noticing the oil consumption around 35K to 40K miles. At first the dealer told me this is normal. BS. I let it go now, I am going through about 1 quart of oil ever 3000K miles. It is not in an oil consumption study at the dealer. They supposedly have a TSB to fix this or what I think is a bandaid. #10-06-01-008A. some type of shield and if that don't work, they replace the pistons and rings. I have a friend with the same year model and engine 5.3 flex fuel AFM as me. don't have any problems with oil consumption. seems to be hit and miss. All I know is that when you pay almost 40K for a truck, it should not have these issues. I love my truck and the way it drives, but if they can't fix this problem, I may have to consider other brands. UGH!!!!

Yz2k20 Enthusiast

Yz2k20

Posted
Posted

My 07 Silverado started burning oil around 30k miles. After going through the oil consumption trial last year, the dealership replaced the lifters on both sides of the engine (one side per the TSB, the other side because of a slight tick) around 37k miles. The truck stopped burning oil for about 6k miles and it appears that it is starting to return. For the past week or so, I have noticed that my exhaust pipe tip is blacker and I saw a little smoke when I shut it down today. It's time for another oil change so I'm going to contact the dealership and see where they want to go from here.

StLouisMO Enthusiast

StLouisMO

Posted
Posted

My 2008 5.3 has 82,XXX miles. Doesn't burn a drop. Been running synthetic oil since new. Started with Mobil 1, then switched to Pennzoil Platinum, and now I'm running Castrol Edge. The first 50,XXX miles I changed it every 5,xxx miles. Now I change it when the DIC indicates thats it time for an oil change. I average about 16 or 17 mpg per tankful. Couldn't be happier.

SouthCo Senior Enthusiast

SouthCo

Posted
Posted

crossing fingers, knocking on wood, and praying... My 2010 5.3 AFM only has 2800 (so still early) but no oil loss yet and I change all my vehicles' oil around 4-5k miles. My 03 Tahoe 5.3 with 178k miles doesn't burn or drip oil and neither does my wifes' 06 Denali 6.0 with 67k miles. I use synthetic and will be switching the Sierra over as well when it's time for its first oil change.

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Transmission Temperature Hitting 220s

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Most thermostatically controlled ATF systems use a 'wax' pill just like the one in your water thermostat. They work on the expansion volume of the wax and the pill is constructed in such a way as to limit the travel to remain within that range. This means it has an opening temperature often called the 'cracking temperature' and a fully open temperature. For whatever reason oil is designated by it's fully open temperature and water by it's cracking temperature.    Between the two it the "Regulating Temperature" The entire range is about 20 F from closed to open. In your example the lower limit, opening point of 145 F then has a fully open temp of 165 F and a throttling temperature of 155 F.    Thing is, the throttling temperature needs two things to work properly. Enough system load high enough to reach the minimum and a heat sink (cooler/exchanger) large enough to prevent any load applied from exceeding the fully open temperature.    If your system exceeds the fully open temperature it is screaming MORE COOLER.    Here is the silly part of the whole thermostat system where the oil is cooled/heated by the radiator. Nothing is flowing to that system until the oil temperature reaches the cracking temperature unless it is equipped with a minimum flow bypass orifice or a bypass built into the seating surface of the plunger. That system meant to get it up to temp quicker isn't doing a thing until WORK drives if from ambient to cracking temp. One a cold winter day, like zero F, it may never get hotter than about 110 F. Sometimes not even that.    People forget or are young enough to not know that until this millennia transmissions were cooled by the radiator cold tank alone and without a thermostat at all.  In the 50's they weren't even cooled. OEMs learn everything the hard way.    When an OEM tells you the trans "Works best" between 175 F and 220 F it means works best for THEM. The transmission thermostat is fuel play. If you watch you trans temps like I do you will learn that it may take a hundred miles if you are not towing and not driving more than say 55-60 mph on a zero F day to even reach 120 F and it might sit there all day if it's colder. Yet if functions perfectly over about 100 F. It may need to get a bit warmer for the fuel and spark maps to go without an multiplier.    Worry more about too hot. Use a cooler large enough to put that thermostat in range.         
    • KARNUT
      Gas Prices

      By KARNUT · Posted

      Around 2008 if memory serves they took sulfur out. That was when diesel went up. 
    • richard wysong
      Gas Prices

      By richard wysong · Posted

      Question for you Grumpy, why is diesel so much more than gasoline? Seems to me that it may be slightly a little less refined than gas and it doesn't have 10% alcohol which presumably lowers the price of gas
    • TrueBlue
      Transmission Temperature Hitting 220s

      By TrueBlue · Posted

      Thanks, so being a different beast altogether, anyone know what the "optimal" temp is for the 10L80/90 for proper shifting?
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      How many years have I pointed out every point in that link to the folks here and been avalanched with criticisms and outright hostilities at times? I ran counter to even the great CUSTOMBOSS and Lake Speed Jr and the half dozen experts on YouTube and in the final.....GM, Physics (Stribeck) backs that Grumpy old Bear.    Honestly, I never said a thing engineering hadn't studied silly and laid in concrete during WWII. But I'm old, the information is old and yet, the Laws of Physics are eternal.    Okay there is one exception. I vehemently disagree with their use of the word 'tolerances' when what it meant is "clearance".   The clearance is the distance between two objects. The tolerance is the degree of acceptable variation permitted in that clearance. I.E., piston to bore clearance is 0.004" with a tolerance of +/- .0002" so the clearance is in specification if it lies between 0.0038" and 0.0042". Cutting that 'tolerance in half has ZERO impact on lubrication requirements. Makes for more difficulty in manufacturing.  But a tighter clearance 'MAY'. Depends on finish. Anyway....   It's one of those statements made by people to make themselves look smarter than they are to convince people who are as un-enlighten as they seem to manipulate their behaviors. But hey, the blind leading the blind puts them both in the pit. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...