Is Your Gmt-900 Truck Or Suv Using Oil

[bg1988]

On 7/1/2019 at 5:33 PM, Pinnacle said:

This some type of joke? I heard of the Hybrid reaching 18 in city but never that. my AFM 6L at best gets 14 city 

 

my City is highway speeds So i can get 22.5 with out issue typical  city speeds is 40 to 60mph on the bigger street

 

 

Regeneration = free mpg

[bg1988]

On 7/6/2019 at 6:51 AM, Dnt said:

2009 Hybrid Tahoe 209k  has averaged 18.5 over the last 2500 miles real world driving no hypermilling mix of city and highway driving. HOWEVER it has a 3.5" lift and oversize wheels and Tires (Nitto grapplers)  Uses around 2 gts oil every 3k miles. My driving style is aggressive at times with WOT and some tire chirping LOL that seems to bring the mpg down and make for some oil blow through. The Old beast runs and drives dang good....

Use Mobil/Exxon  or Chevron/Texaco   

 

 

that is because your knocking in v4 AFM  causing blow by...

 

 

18.5 is what i get with shitty gas or 87 (even if you try hard to "hypermile" )  

the timing is retarded really bad in v4 (even with premium  it clocks down to 10 on the timing  advancement)  so you need premium(91/93) for AFM, VVT and V8 mode  to work correct ( Mobil/Exxon  or Chevron/Texaco   91 or 93  preferred if available   )

Edited July 8, 2019 by bg1988

[Jsdirt]

What are these things 13:1 compression from the factory? 

[bg1988]

1 minute ago, Jsdirt said:

What are these things 13:1 compression from the factory? 

  garbage gas garbage results.....

 

correct... 

 

 

shell has garbage gas= garbage results  v-power = very powerless engine

[Jsdirt]

Dude, you're killing me!  

 

Stop with the B/S ... please.

[bg1988]

4 minutes ago, Jsdirt said:

Dude, you're killing me!  

 

Stop with the B/S ... please.

 yeah  that is why you burn oil they did not change it enough and used 87 oct and broke your AFM 

 

Yes  even on a NA v8 there will be some power gains  (esp if it's flex fuel compatible version)

 

 

My engine Does Not Burn Oil   3300 miles  so far ,  ZERO Consumption  No SLUDGE.... period

 

 

89,900 miles

Edited July 8, 2019 by bg1988

[Jsdirt]

They burn oil because GM cheaped out on parts. They're poorly designed pieces of shit, like most things in the 21st Century. Common knowledge. There's no explaining around this.

 

 

[bg1988]

1 minute ago, Jsdirt said:

They burn oil because GM cheaped out on parts. They're poorly designed pieces of shit, like most things in the 21st Century. Common knowledge. There's no explaining around this.

 

 

No they burn oil because lack of maintenance.....7500 miles oil change is a JOKE.   so unless you have a jumbo 1qt filter , Dirty oil fouls up the Seals and orings(WEAR and TEAR) as well as the lifter oil manifold assembly solenoid  

they required  clean oil to work correctly..

[Jsdirt]

That's true of any engine .... but you're missing the point.

 

In their quest to meet EPA regulations (better mileage / emissions), they cut corners on the entire AFM system, and valve train. Low tension piston rings were used to get the mileage they needed ... and in exchange they completely wore out at 50k miles - sometimes less, sometimes more. 

 

I bought my truck brand new. NOBODY has owned it but me since day 1. Forty miles on the clock. It's had a steady diet of top shelf synthetics since 2k miles. Started off with Royal Purple, then switched to Amsoil Signature Series at 40k miles - can't get any better oil than that. Most I've ever run that oil was 9,600 miles. The severe service interval on that oil is 15k miles - the additive package is robust enough to handle that without a problem. I sent my sample into Blackstone Labs, and had high levels of aluminum and iron (piston and rings). Second sample I changed much sooner, and had high levels of brass and iron (camshaft bearings and camshaft). I'm only at 97k now. Started using oil at 50k miles, and oil pressure started trending downwards at around 80k (along with the cam bearing pieces in the oil analysis). When I was a teenager up to my 30's, I abused the CRAP out of my cars and trucks from the 70's & 80's - some I never changed the oil in since they burned, leaked, or did both! NEVER had any sign of engine failure. Well over 200k, some well over 300k, and others we'll never know (maybe 400k to 500k). This truck might look, ride, stop and handle better than those vehicles, but it's a complete piece of shit in comparison. I won't even see 150k before I'll have to put an engine in this thing. Has NOTHING to do with maintenance - it's GM's quest to make money with a failing company.

[bg1988]

34 minutes ago, Jsdirt said:

That's true of any engine .... but you're missing the point.

 

In their quest to meet EPA regulations (better mileage / emissions), they cut corners on the entire AFM system, and valve train. Low tension piston rings were used to get the mileage they needed ... and in exchange they completely wore out at 50k miles - sometimes less, sometimes more. 

 

I bought my truck brand new. NOBODY has owned it but me since day 1. Forty miles on the clock. It's had a steady diet of top shelf synthetics since 2k miles. Started off with Royal Purple, then switched to Amsoil Signature Series at 40k miles - can't get any better oil than that. Most I've ever run that oil was 9,600 miles. The severe service interval on that oil is 15k miles - the additive package is robust enough to handle that without a problem. I sent my sample into Blackstone Labs, and had high levels of aluminum and iron (piston and rings). Second sample I changed much sooner, and had high levels of brass and iron (camshaft bearings and camshaft). I'm only at 97k now. Started using oil at 50k miles, and oil pressure started trending downwards at around 80k (along with the cam bearing pieces in the oil analysis). When I was a teenager up to my 30's, I abused the CRAP out of my cars and trucks from the 70's & 80's - some I never changed the oil in since they burned, leaked, or did both! NEVER had any sign of engine failure. Well over 200k, some well over 300k, and others we'll never know (maybe 400k to 500k). This truck might look, ride, stop and handle better than those vehicles, but it's a complete piece of shit in comparison. I won't even see 150k before I'll have to put an engine in this thing. Has NOTHING to do with maintenance - it's GM's quest to make money with a failing company.

 well you use it for towing and needs oil changed more often then 6000-9600 miles

was it very black and thick? when it came out more like tar then oil?

 

 

I know carbon starts to show up around 3000  miles

 

 

Dirty oil is like sand in a river   it wears away the rocks. as to the carbon in the oil wears away the seals and rings

 

 

 take a sand blaster to aluminum    it will punch a hole pretty quickly  that is what you do with dirty oil  to the seals and rings etc..

 

clean water in a pipe will last 100 years....   

 

 

you caused the damage..you should accept that...  newer engines have tighter clearances then 70/80s stuff

 

 

 

the newest engines use 0w16  oil

Edited July 8, 2019 by bg1988

[Jsdirt]

It's pretty clear you  haven't the slightest clue about engines. Nothing I did to that truck caused the problems it has. So by your statement, tighter tolerances mean you have to maintain them more? You're about 180° off on that one there ... better get some education on these subjects before you dig yourself deeper into the hole you're in. It's very entertaining, though .... so feel free to educate me.   I've only been working on cars since I could hold a wrench without dad's assistance.

 

Towing / hauling  ... isn't that what people buy trucks for? Tow? Haul things?  Why would be buy trucks that can't handle these tasks? 

 

0w-16 was chosen for FUEL MILEAGE, NOT engine longevity. Wait until those engines get some miles on them. You think things are bad now, just wait! Actually, you're probably not even aware of how bad things are. Engine replacements in modern cars are about as common as tune ups were back in the day.

[bg1988]

49 minutes ago, Jsdirt said:

It's pretty clear you  haven't the slightest clue about engines. Nothing I did to that truck caused the problems it has. So by your statement, tighter tolerances mean you have to maintain them more? You're about 180° off on that one there ... better get some education on these subjects before you dig yourself deeper into the hole you're in. It's very entertaining, though .... so feel free to educate me.   I've only been working on cars since I could hold a wrench without dad's assistance.

 

Towing / hauling  ... isn't that what people buy trucks for? Tow? Haul things?  Why would be buy trucks that can't handle these tasks? 

 

0w-16 was chosen for FUEL MILEAGE, NOT engine longevity. Wait until those engines get some miles on them. You think things are bad now, just wait! Actually, you're probably not even aware of how bad things are. Engine replacements in modern cars are about as common as tune ups were back in the day.

No my grandpa was a heavy machinery mechanic as his day job..he made 100k/year (in todays dollars).    even manufacturing his own tools..   ( When you could not find a store bought one) (and worked on his own cars/ Heavy duty trucks only)...   So I know quite a bit more then you know about cars I also worked on my own car as well..  he had many cars since the 1940s   at lest 3 dozen (had a hord of 12-15 at one time)

 

 

 

You buy  a tow rated filter   (the larger version)  which will filter longer...   another issue is vaporization/evaporation of the oil  which happens at higher oil temps..  since you are running 3-4,000 rpm for extended periods ... this will wear the oil faster then cursing on the highway at 1300rpm..

 

 

 

 for every Half mile at 3-4k rpm = 1 city mile driven    so 9600 miles oil change might have well been a 20,000 mile oil change

 

 

Please save the shit about 18 wheelers going 15-20,000 miles/ oil change

they have upwards of 7- 15 gals depending on the engine and  a SUPER Sized filter 

 

 

If i wanted to tow something I'd rent a pickup  from hertz .. it's only 29$ for the day(actual cost unlike  u-haul  chagrining 120$ for a day)

 good for burn outs etc. too or to have fun  burning up the tires and clutch.. LOL!  

 

like i did on a trip  from Los Angeles to phoenix and back in one day 950miles round trip in 10 hour(some load up time and breaks)

it gets boring driving 110mph on the freeway.. 

 

 

my 6.0L was never used for towing.....2 previous owners  that is why it still work good 

 

 

Edited July 8, 2019 by bg1988

[j-ten-ner]

The engine in my truck is burning oil since day one.

No lack of maintenance.

Oil change done way ahead of manufactures recommendation. 

It's simply bad engineering. Or a good one when it comes to meet the standards. Probably depends on which way you're looking at it.

Another aspect is the way of the driving style.

If I stay below 2,500 rpm, it's burning about 1 liter in 3,000 km (1,900-ish miles).

When I'm towing or rev up the engine above 2,500 rpm, it'll go up to 2.5 liters.

My take on it is that bad engineering and the driving style is what causes the engine to eat oil. More or less.

 

And yes, I've owned other vehicles in the past. None of them were eating oil like the AFM engines I've had. In fact, it was none to zero oil consumption.

'82 and '86 GMC van and truck, '87 Chevy van, '88 and '96 Buick regal 2.8 and 3.8 V6, '77 Jeep J10 401cui, European Ford cars , VW cars, Moskvich (Russian car) you name it. No noticeable oil consumption.

Except for the '82 and '86 GMC van and truck and '87 Chevy van and the Jeep, the fuel mileage on the other cars listed was comparable to modern standards.

I don't know why they can't built engines like that anymore.

Or, why can European and Russian car makers build engines with a decent fuel mileage and no oil consumption?

 

so long

j-ten-ner

[Jsdirt]

I hear that, J-ten-ner. Seems automaker's main goal these days is making money, and keeping shareholders happy - customer service and quality control are annoyances to them.

 

My truck is the exact same way with oil consumption. If I tow and let the cruise control scream to 4k or higher, I'll down a quart in 300 miles. If I shut cruise off on hills and just let the engine pull in its sweet spot, I can go 5-6k miles on a quart. Back when that first happened, everyone was telling me about the AFM bandaids that GM was throwing in all the warranty vehicles (splash shield, updated valve cover, etc.). No amount of those bandaids will fix this, since this is CLEARLY a piston ring issue. No ifs, ands, or buts about it, and oil analysis backed that up 100%.

 

My '86 Mercury Grand Marquis, 33 years old, 262,000 miles, still running the OE engine, transmission, and rear differential ... and FUEL PUMP, & power steering pump, doesn't BURN ANY oil at all! It's been leaking out the rear main seal since we bought the car almost 17 years ago, but not a hint of smoke out the tailpipe, nor any evidence of oil usage on the plugs. Our '93 Volvo 940 with 183k on the clock burns NO oil - running the same Amsoil Signature Series 10w-30 oil. Has a slight leak out the rear main -nowhere near as bad as the Mercury.

Edited July 8, 2019 by Jsdirt

[MaverickZ71]

19 hours ago, bg1988 said:

No my grandpa was a heavy machinery mechanic as his day job..he made 100k/year (in todays dollars).    even manufacturing his own tools..   So I know quite a bit more then you know about cars I also worked on my own car as well.. 

Dude's grandpa was a mechanic.  So he suddenly appears on out of left field with a grand total of 37 posts and automatically knows more than all of the rest of us on here put together.  He can fix anything, mostly just by using the correct octane of Top Tier fuel, which the GM Owner's Manual says to do anyway.  He must have absorbed all this magical all-powerful knowledge thru a$$-mosis--either he sat on his Owners Manual or had somebody read it to him.  Guess we should all just give up, because he's got high-speed internet in his trailer and all day to post while the rest of us are at work.  My grandpa said you can wrestle with a pig, buy why?  The pig loves it, and you just get dirty.  [Ending being withheld to respond to his inevitable wise-guy reply.]