Jump to content

Is Your Gmt-900 Truck Or Suv Using Oil

RyanbabZ71
 Share

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

scogeb Enthusiast

scogeb

Posted
Posted

I've talked to my mechanic and the dealer's mechanic and my plan is to run 1,000 miles and see what the oil consumption is and then get the Range module and run another 1,000 miles and see what it is then. I'll post back with the results in a few months. Thanks!

  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...
  • Replies 825
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

GuyGene
GuyGene

I've been watching this oil usage issue a long time now. Sick of it. My '96 5.7 used NO oil! And I could get 20 mpg highway. Extended cab, loooong bed too. Dagnabbit, GM is running customers away.

Jsdirt
Jsdirt

Yep - they've forced alot of manufacturers to cut corners just to survive.   The EPA has done more harm to this nation the past 20 years than good. Another gigantic, bloated, goverment bureaucracy t

Cowpie
Cowpie

It is a sad testament to GM quality. My factory remanned 12.7L Detroit, 704,000 miles into its second life, only uses about 1 qt per 10,000 miles. Just did oil change on it at 21,580 miles on the oi

Posted Images

AzDragonLord Enthusiast

AzDragonLord

Posted
Posted
I have just over 141K miles on my 2009 with AFM still on, and I had #7 plug foul on me a few months ago. I just topped off my oil using 1 qt after 3754 miles, which GM does not consider "excessive".


I'm outside the warranty period so I suppose I just have to live with it or replace it...but I'm not needing another payment right now. Not certain if the Range AFM Delete will help at this point.

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted (edited)

Mine is also long, long out of warranty. Only 91k on mine though. Cam bearings are going, plus started burning oil at 50k when pushed. I'm sure AFM issues are just around the corner ...

 

If I can nurse that engine along for another 5 years it'll be exempt - then I can drop a carbureted 502 in there. $6k for a new long block LS ... or $6k for a 502 - a no brainer for me. Problems solved! :thumbs:

 

(EDIT: Had to change AMF [bowling company that owned Harley, lol] to AFM - Active Fuel Management :) )

Edited by Jsdirt
MaverickZ71 Senior Enthusiast

MaverickZ71

Posted
Posted

Mine is also long, long out of warranty. Only 91k on mine though. Cam bearings are going, plus started burning oil at 50k when pushed. I'm sure AMF issues are just around the corner ...

 

If I can nurse that engine along for another 5 years it'll be exempt - then I can drop a carbureted 502 in there. $6k for a new long block LS ... or $6k for a 502 - a no brainer for me. Problems solved! :thumbs:

 

How can you tell cam bearings are going out?

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted (edited)

High levels of brass/copper and iron in oil analysis - given the history of the 5.3's of this vintage, it's pretty much a slam dunk.

Edited by Jsdirt
dk1125 Enthusiast

dk1125

Posted
Posted

2008 sierra 5.3 I have used mobile 1 since the day I got it. I bought it new with 8 miles on it. Iron block, 148,000 miles and I have to add a quart atleast every 1000 miles. No I haven't had the consumption rear gone yet.

Colossus Senior Enthusiast

Colossus

Posted
Posted

High levels of brass/copper and iron in oil analysis - given the history of the 5.3's of this vintage, it's pretty much a slam dunk.

I am not as up to date as I should be, I did not realize cam bearings were a common issue. Is there a cause for this? Just shitty design? Was the issue resolved later on prior to the 2014+ models?

mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted

High levels of brass/copper and iron in oil analysis - given the history of the 5.3's of this vintage, it's pretty much a slam dunk.

 

 

This is a LS motor with "known" cam bearings problem? Never heard of that before? What is the Oil pressure at start up idle and hot idle etc, or 4K RPM's I am sure their is no problem with your cam or bearings...........

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted (edited)

Trust me - there is. It's a known issue in repair circles, maybe not the general public. The 5.3 in particular has shitty valve springs, AFM lifters, and oiling system. The failures are common and well known by any garage.

 

I've been watching my cold start-up oil pressure decline (albeit slowly) over the past couple of years, so that backs up my oil analysis findings. I'm running 10w-30, and on a 40° morning, the needle is now under 40 psi. Used to run way up around 60 or more. I've owned the truck since new, so I know exactly where that gauge is supposed to be, hot or cold.

 

Read this - keep in mind, this was 2009 when the issues were just starting to reveal themselves. This is just one post of hundreds across the net. Not hard to find: http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/topic/96854-nbs-53-engine-failure/

Edited by Jsdirt
mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted

Trust me - there is. It's a known issue in repair circles, maybe not the general public. The 5.3 in particular has shitty valve springs, AFM lifters, and oiling system. The failures are common and well known by any garage.

 

I've been watching my cold start-up oil pressure decline (albeit slowly) over the past couple of years, so that backs up my oil analysis findings. I'm running 10w-30, and on a 40° morning, the needle is now under 40 psi. Used to run way up around 60 or more. I've owned the truck since new, so I know exactly where that gauge is supposed to be, hot or cold.

 

Read this - keep in mind, this was 2009 when the issues were just starting to reveal themselves. This is just one post of hundreds across the net. Not hard to find: http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/topic/96854-nbs-53-engine-failure/

 

 

OK, So out of those 6 pages 2qty are actual users with internal failures on that design? That engine I have never heard of "anybody roasting a Cam or Bearing, loosing a piston etc! Now consuming oil due to a couple of factors yes that was more common I will agree.......but I just certainly can't believe there is a 'Known worn cam/bearing issues" and as for the 40psi on cold start or under 40psi......Your absolutely JUST FINE I don't believe there is anything wrong with your Cam Bearings oil pressure is JUST FINE......

 

I am gonna need much information to convince me of major problems with the LS internals or overall architecture.....other than oil consumption or springs?

 

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted (edited)

You're going to have to join iATN and read the HUNDREDS of posts on this topic.

 

Just a quick Google search, "5.3 valve spring failure" or "5.3 cam bearing failure" will provide you with plenty of reading.

 

I appreciate you telling me my truck is just fine from across the net, without ever seeing, or hearing, or experiencing anything I have described or linked. You're one special human. :thumbs:

 

 

 

Oh, almost forgot .... care to explain my high levels of iron and copper in my oil samples running Amsoil Signature Series 10w-30? Did someone throw a pipe and an old penny in my engine?

Edited by Jsdirt
Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted

fullsizeoutput_922.jpg

mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted

fullsizeoutput_922.jpg

 

Thanks for posting didn't want to get you all angry over this although it seems it has? Anyway I am not seeing your High levels of CU wear or Iron wear or the Oil consumption for that matter......Your oil interval changes are lengthy enough to warrant "Make up Oil" Is this an FE block LS motor? What spin on oil filter are you using?

 

I still have really no worries about these readouts...........You have had no internal failures or valve train related problems? Yet, these model year engines have convinced yourself your having issues when a very ultra small fraction....I mean I have never even heard of 1qty person saying they have burned up the cam or bearings in those engines...not even 1qty person? Your oil pressure which is going to determine MORE than anything the disposition of the Cam shaft and bearings is Absolutely fine.

 

How much money do you want for this crappy truck? Because somebody will have an excellent maintenance free experience......

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted

It's not you - the whole experience of spending $30-LARGE and getting SHIT in return has me pretty pissed off.

 

I have read post after post from professional technicians from all over the country fixing broken valve springs, pitted cams, prematurely worn out cam bearings, stuck closed AFM lifters, broken valves, and the list goes on. Guess you'll just have to take my word for it. When my engine finally grenades (which will be years down the road, since I drive my well-built '86 Grand Marquis and '93 Volvo 940 when I'm not hauling, and leave the junk in the garage) you can bet I'll have detailed pictures and possibly video of the whole process.

 

GM HAD a great motor, then decided to cheap out on it starting in 2007. You don't see ANY of these types of valve train failures on '06 and prior. They happen, but are extremely rare. '07 up, they are pretty much guaranteed for the most part at anywhere from 91k in my case, up to 160k in other cases. Majority of the ones I saw posted were 110k-130k. Not what I would consider "high mileage".

 

My Grand Marquis has 246, xxx miles - original engine, original tranny, original rear end, and original fuel pump. Those days are long gone unfortunately.

Cowpie Senior Enthusiast

Cowpie

Posted
Posted (edited)

Keep in mind, GM uses a LOT of copper in the form of brass, especially in cam bearings. High CU is not really that uncommon in GM engines. I have seen it in many engine oil analysis reports from relatively newer engines and ones that have racked up some serious miles and the engines are just fine. Only when there is corresponding elevated levels of tin and lead (the other components in cam and rod bearings) is that indicative of a problem. Elevated CU by itself may not mean much. Many sources from bearings I mentioned to oil coolers. And some oil additive packages will amplify CU leaching.

 

One of the big problems we as owners of cars and light trucks have, is that the OEM is not forthcoming with condemnation limits on wear metals in oil samples. We easily can get those for commercial equipment and heavy truck engines. Without knowing what the max limits on wear metals as established by the OEM itself, we are just wandering around in the dark, and probably over reacting to what some lab considers elevated wear metals. Many commercial engines do not reach max limits until FE counts get to 200 ppm. While 52 does seem disconcerting, it has to be factored along with other wear metal ppm to see if it is something to worry about. FE and CU are from totally different sources and elevated levels of each of them has little to do with each other. If I was seeing elevated levels of aluminum and chromium along with Iron, I might be concerned.

 

And without multiple UOA reports to track trend lines and patterns, it is a crap shoot to make a determination based on one oil sample.

 

On that report, TBN has gotten to the level I would change it out. Without doing a TAN analysis with TBN, the common practice in commercial industry circles is that when TBN reaches 1/3 of what it started at, it is time to get the oil out. TAN (total acid number) which rises over time, and TBN levels which deplete over time in addressing the acids, on average will meet at about 1/3 of the starting number for TBN. if the oil started with 10 TBN, then 3.3 TBN is all the lower I would let it go. If the oil started with 12 TBN like many of Amsoil's SS lineup, then the oil has dropped below 1/3, which would be 4 TBN. It is possible in that situation that acids are causing the elevated FE and CU. I said it is possible, not that it is a fact.

 

Will probably get some arguments against this, but there is tons of resources out there that will support my comments. So don't go shooting the messenger. Do your own research and find out.

Edited by Cowpie
  • Like 1

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,914
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    AidenVorpagel
    Newest Member
    AidenVorpagel
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 614 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      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. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      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.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...