Jump to content

Is your GMT-900 using oil  

1,555 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Went back to my dealer to start another consumption test and was turned down. 5 yrs have passed and I'm out of warranty. Was told by GM if I did a test before the warranty was up, they would still cover it. Guess not. Have lost the service number they gave me. I work with the public, and a lot have asked, how I like my truck. I have seen most of them driving new Fords. This engine will come back and bite GM in the rear. Think the next Pres will bail them out again? I don't.

 

 

If you would like, provide the last 8-digits of your VIN (PM if you prefer), and I can look into your case to see if any additional information is available.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Louis (assisting Tricia)

GM Customer Service

 

 

 

Last 8 are 7Z613606. Last consumption test was botched. Overfilled, which made it look like it wasn't using as much oil. I finally found the service number. It is 71-920-271-6566. Talked to Manny at ext. 22958.

Edited by hillbilly4u
Posted

I picked up my truck yesterday from the piston and and ring job, so far so good. Runs smoother than it did before. I hope this does the trick.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

Went back to my dealer to start another consumption test and was turned down. 5 yrs have passed and I'm out of warranty. Was told by GM if I did a test before the warranty was up, they would still cover it. Guess not. Have lost the service number they gave me. I work with the public, and a lot have asked, how I like my truck. I have seen most of them driving new Fords. This engine will come back and bite GM in the rear. Think the next Pres will bail them out again? I don't.

 

 

If you would like, provide the last 8-digits of your VIN (PM if you prefer), and I can look into your case to see if any additional information is available.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Louis (assisting Tricia)

GM Customer Service

 

 

 

Last 8 are 7Z613606. Last consumption test was botched. Overfilled, which made it look like it wasn't using as much oil. I finally found the service number. It is 71-920-271-6566. Talked to Manny at ext. 22958.

 

 

Thank you for providing your information. I have reviewed your case and it appears that the District Specialist was unable to contact you. I would be happy to open a new case for you. Please provide the following information via PM, so I can verify it with my records: your full name, address, phone number, best time frame to contact you, vehicle mileage, VIN and the name and city of your preferred dealer.

 

Once I receive your information, I will set-up a new case and forward the case to a District Specialist who will contact you directly.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Louis (assisting Tricia)

GM Customer Service

Edited by GM Customer Service
Posted

Went back to my dealer to start another consumption test and was turned down. 5 yrs have passed and I'm out of warranty. Was told by GM if I did a test before the warranty was up, they would still cover it. Guess not. Have lost the service number they gave me. I work with the public, and a lot have asked, how I like my truck. I have seen most of them driving new Fords. This engine will come back and bite GM in the rear. Think the next Pres will bail them out again? I don't.

 

 

If you would like, provide the last 8-digits of your VIN (PM if you prefer), and I can look into your case to see if any additional information is available.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Louis (assisting Tricia)

GM Customer Service

 

 

 

Last 8 are 7Z613606. Last consumption test was botched. Overfilled, which made it look like it wasn't using as much oil. I finally found the service number. It is 71-920-271-6566. Talked to Manny at ext. 22958.

 

 

Thank you for providing your information. I have reviewed your case and it appears that the District Specialist was unable to contact you. I would be happy to open a new case for you. Please provide the following information via PM, so I can verify it with my records: your full name, address, phone number, best time frame to contact you, vehicle mileage, VIN and the name and city of your preferred dealer.

 

Once I receive your information, I will set-up a new case and forward the case to a District Specialist who will contact you directly.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Louis (assisting Tricia)

GM Customer Service

 

 

 

I thank you for the effort and sent the PM as you requested. If you'll look at post # 74, you'll see that I never received a call from the regional specialist. I have had the same phone # for 16 yrs. +. I will look forward to the call. We'll see how this one goes. Not really looking forward to any more run around. Nearest dealership to me is a 70 mile round trip and 20 bucks in fuel. Real satisfaction would be to have the dealership order the parts below and set up an install appointment.

 

deflector

updated valve cover

pistons, rings and lifters

catalytic converters and 02 sensors

:thumbs:

Posted

Update: 86k on the clock. District specialist did call. I have to pay for the consumption test, because I am out of warranty, which isn't much. Even then, if I am using the 2 qts. per 3k, It will still be considered normal. I am losing power and using more fuel. I suspect the cats, plugs and O 2 Sensors are getting fouled.

Posted

Just got back from a 1200 mile round trip. (Didn't drive the truck, but did notice something related to this thread.) I don't know how many GMT 900 trucks and SUV's I saw on the interstate where the end of the rear bumper above the exhaust was soot covered. I recall seeing one white Tahoe that was unbelievably burned black. I know everyone says this oil burning is an internet inspired "epidemic" that in reality is not all that widespread, but unfortunately my observations over the last week say there may be more to it than a few vehicles. So far mine's good.

Posted

Just got back from a 1200 mile round trip. (Didn't drive the truck, but did notice something related to this thread.) I don't know how many GMT 900 trucks and SUV's I saw on the interstate where the end of the rear bumper above the exhaust was soot covered. I recall seeing one white Tahoe that was unbelievably burned black. I know everyone says this oil burning is an internet inspired "epidemic" that in reality is not all that widespread, but unfortunately my observations over the last week say there may be more to it than a few vehicles. So far mine's good.

 

 

I think part of that is the tailpipe exit location. The exhaust gas hits the bumper, and the side of the truck. I've noticed a little buildup on my bumper over time, but no noticeable oil consumption. I've actually considered an exhaust tip, just to move it out about an inch.

Posted

I know everyone says this oil burning is an internet inspired "epidemic" that in reality is not all that widespread, but unfortunately my observations over the last week say there may be more to it than a few vehicles. So far mine's good.

 

 

 

 

I mentioned this forum during my first call to GM, about the consumption problem. They didn't recognize any internet forum, as a serious source of how big the problem is. If this forum is causing an internet inspired "epidemic" , with no validity. then why has a customer service rep been assigned here? Also, why are many of our members, jumping ship and going the 6.2 route, if they are not sick of the 5.3?

Posted

'Cause a 6.2 equals more fun for you!! :smoker::drool::cold::thumbs::D:cheers:

  • Like 1
Posted

'Cause a 6.2 equals more fun for you!! :smoker::drool::cold::thumbs::D:cheers:

 

 

 

And the fact that it doesn't have AFM is a real plus too. :thumbs:

Posted

I think part of that is the tailpipe exit location. The exhaust gas hits the bumper, and the side of the truck. I've noticed a little buildup on my bumper over time, but no noticeable oil consumption. I've actually considered an exhaust tip, just to move it out about an inch.

 

 

What I saw I don't think could ever be described as normal as strict as EPA emissions are. Like I said the bumper on the white Tahoe was sooty black. I've never had one of my vehicles look that way and hope I never do unless someone parks a diesel in my garage.

Posted

My timeline:

 

80,100km Oil change, level now at full.

83,666km Add oil warning

86,470km Oil change

89,192km Add oil warning

91,655km Taken to GM for oil change, and reported problem. Start Oil Consumption Test.

95,424km Add oil warning. GM replaces drivers side rocker cover TSB #10-06-01-008C.

99,656km Add oil warning. GM performs service with 'oil pan deflector'

103,976km Add oil warning. GM replaced pistons, rings, spark plugs.

 

 

 

Over 3,000kms so far and not a drop burned. In fact my service guy called to see how it was going so far! Knock on wood, I think this might be it!

 

Update:

6000kms and still no oil light. Checked level, no oil missing! OLM at 51%.

  • Like 1
Posted

add another one...checked my level today after 1500 miles & found it down a littler over 1/2 a quart...took 20 oz to top it off so it's about 1/3 a quart every 1k miles....truck only has 7500 miles on it..been using Mobil1 since it's first change at 1200 miles....my 07 2500 with the 6.0 never burned a drop, neither did our 07 Tahoe with the 5.3 AFM either...

Posted

I have a 2009 Silverado with the 5.3. I only have 22000 on it and do NOT have a problem with oil consumption (YET). How BIG is this problem? You guys got me thinking I should sell this truck BEFORE I get the problem.

Yet when I look in Yahoo or Google for 2009 GM 5.3 oil consumption, or other words to that effect, I get very little information, if any.

I just would like to know what per-centage of 5.3s with AFM have this problem. Should I sell my truck and get a new Ford 150?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...