Some Assembly is Required

Grumpy Bear · May 20

8 hours ago, asilverblazer said:

I'll ignore you likening me to a cartoon character generally regarded as a low IQ.

Again, nobody is denying anyone anything, or saying "the correct OCI isn't a number of miles nor a length of time that can be standardized for every vehicle in every environment under every circumstance for the entire service life of said vehicle." is incorrect.

My point is: The standard (defined above), despite it flaws, works for literally millions of people, millions of vehicles, millions of times. Changing my methods and spending more time, money and effort for NO TANGIBLE benefit, is "inefficient", others with similar circumstances might agree.

First let me thank you for a thoughtful and considered response.

I redlined a key phrase for discussion proposes. The phase says there is a ONE and only one possible STATE of engine condition, operation and environment. There isn't and over the life of the motor condition changes. It wears out. Inescapable fact. Unless you live on the equator so does the environment. Give our temperament our operation, routine and habits may change as well. Ergo my statement stands correct. Now that said, there is more to agree on.

In the last paragraph, you conclusion in bold, is correct. The STANDARD (book) does work for millions, for millions of people millions of times. IF YOUR vehicle is PRE-GDI, AFM, DOD, VVT. In which case, not so much. There are dozens of current lawsuits being litigated over 'Excessive oil consumption" and oil related brake vacuum pump failures due to oil maintence. In many of these cases the OEM response has been to....drumroll please...SHORTEN THE OCI significantly. In the most recent GM 6.2, increasing the VISOCISTY was the response. In the case of the Ecotec3 LV3 a TSB was quietly issued for ring replacement and shorter OCI's. Same ring 'type" as the Ecotec I-4 series that has been under litigation for the better part of two decades. I'm only covering the GM platform because this post would be as long as War and Peace if I cover them all.

Your conclusion is about 20 years too late but there are still a FEW non-GDI, normally aspirated Nissan, Mitsubishi etc.. motors for which your conclusion holds. Then there is this...

OEM numbers are a calculation based on warranty $$$$ not the machines best 'outcome'. They are in fact and deed padded a bit and they are also considerate of your main point. "I trade ever 5 to 10 years and don't put on more than 100K ish miles on a unit." not a direct quote but you get what i mean. You can win the game if you refuse to play the long game. Understood.

Blanket statements are always problematic. Like lumping all owners into the same blanket even when they are a majority.

Hum...and a few points I've take exceptional trouble to convey.... I don't write most of what I write on lubrication or maintenance in general for anyone but GUYS LIKE ME that keep them forever and are looking for an edge. I had expected after a decade that this was understood. I've often written, "Do as you like, I don't own it, repair it and it cost me nothing when you have an issue.

Next, I find this one puzzling. I'll keep this simple. When I buy 3 for your 9 I get to spent the cost of 3 of yours on my 3 in 'excessive maintenance' and am still the cost of 3 ahead. Even if I wreck two I'm still ahead and I have gamed this out with the NHTSA data base. Wrecks, acts of god and the like are not as common as some would like to believe.

Now all that said, I doubt any amount of discussion or explanation will change your mind and that wasn't what I was after anyway. I already explained that. I write mainly for those already convinced or those intrigued by the idea. But sir, I am keenly aware that people, on whole, will believe what they need to, despite the truth to justify the choices they make.

Not my dog, not my fight but I do acknowledge the best we may have in this case is to 'Agree to disagree" and stay friendly.

Edited May 20 by Grumpy Bear

OnTheReel · May 20

212k miles on shelf oils. 2003 LM7 5.3 I bought a couple weeks ago. I would consider this a clean, well maintained engine and do have the records. Still some room for improvement. No “sludge” per se but a little dirty for sure. To keep clean just takes better products than they used.

Either way, bores look great, nice cross hatching. Cam shows almost no wear. These pre-DI and pre-AFM engines are treats. But as Grumpy says, we are past this point. To keep a newer DI, low tension ring engine even just in this “average” state at 200k takes some care. It’s not 2003 anymore.

asilverblazer · May 20

18 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I redlined a key phrase for discussion proposes. The phase says there is a ONE and only one possible STATE of engine condition, operation and environment. There isn't and over the life of the motor condition changes. It wears out. Inescapable fact. Unless you live on the equator so does the environment. Give our temperament our operation, routine and habits may change as well. Ergo my statement stands correct. Now that said, there is more to agree on.

To be clear I agree with the statement, "the correct OCI isn't a number of miles nor a length of time that can be standardized for every vehicle in every environment under every circumstance for the entire service life of said vehicle."

18 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

In the last paragraph, you conclusion in bold, is correct. The STANDARD (book) does work for millions, for millions of people millions of times. IF YOUR vehicle is PRE-GDI, AFM, DOD, VVT. In which case, not so much. There are dozens of current lawsuits being litigated over 'Excessive oil consumption" and oil related brake vacuum pump failures due to oil maintence. In many of these cases the OEM response has been to....drumroll please...SHORTEN THE OCI significantly. In the most recent GM 6.2, increasing the VISOCISTY was the response.

This might be an agree to disagree without getting into some really picky semantics. Speaking strictly of GM full-size platform V-8s from 2000ish.. to include the early AFM versions (LS Family). Generally, my opinion is that the book works. Here is why, salvage yards are not piling up with them, resale values are still good, and plenty can still be found in sellable condition with over 200k miles (all anecdotal evidence), which is in contrast to an assortment of other vehicles (without naming a specific model, many small, some imported, sedans and CUV's). I think the jury is still out on the most recent 6.2 issue (though admittedly it doesn't look good) because there were A LOT of them built, vs. the internet amplifying the issue.

There is a number of engines that have failed prematurely, determining the number of those failures that are strictly linked to "not following the book" is impossible to know. Even with the latest 6.2, GM and thus us will never know how many didn't fail that otherwise would have.

Further still, this was in response to a manufacturing defect, which is not a lack of maintenance or problem with the 'book'.

Having said all that I think the GM 5.3 and even 6.2 will prove to be far above average in reliability following the 'book'. I'll freely admit there is no way to objectively prove this point with actual data.

19 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I get to spent the cost of 3 of yours on my 3 in 'excessive maintenance'

This might deserve a separate response for further discussion. I'm not certain 'excessive maintenance' guarantees you anything against a structural failure or machining problem? (A snapped connecting rod as an example, or in the case of the 6.2, I don't see how changing the OCI will help if it is using the new oil specification. Unless going from 7,500 mile (used to be the longest allowable in the OLM software) intervals to 5,000 keeps the new specification oil in better condition to prevent the metal-on-metal contact that the 0-20 couldn't do. What if that interval becomes 1000 miles?

18 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

OEM numbers are a calculation based on warranty $$$$ not the machines best 'outcome'. They are in fact and deed padded a bit and they are also considerate of your main point. "I trade ever 5 to 10 years and don't put on more than 100K ish miles on a unit." not a direct quote but you get what i mean. You can win the game if you refuse to play the long game. Understood.

I agree it's a calculation, but it does cut both ways, which we see with the ongoing 6.2 concerns. There was an argument on here in the past of whether failure at 200k miles a poor performance from GM. was The GUARANTEE is, the warranty terms, the expectation is different, I EXPECT a new GM V8 to last a minimum of 200k miles per the book, a literal jury would determine if that was 'reasonable'.

Gm may not be playing to WIN the long game, but they can't ignore it.

19 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Next, I find this one puzzling. I'll keep this simple. When I buy 3 for your 9 I get to spent the cost of 3 of yours on my 3 in 'excessive maintenance' and am still the cost of 3 ahead. Even if I wreck two I'm still ahead and I have gamed this out with the NHTSA data base. Wrecks, acts of god and the like are not as common as some would like to believe.

Keeping vehicles longer is cheaper, the point I am making is that an amount of people won't realize the savings you have, because they don't want to or circumstances otherwise prevent.

Something that costs everyone else that you already have, subject matter expertise. It will at a minimum cost time to gain that. The old adage, time=$.

19 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I do acknowledge the best we may have in this case is to 'Agree to disagree" and stay friendly.

I think we agree on more than it appears which is why I am focused on our points of disagreement. Not to argue, but to have a more in-depth discussion about those points.

asilverblazer · May 20

8 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

These pre-DI and pre-AFM engines are treats. But as Grumpy says, we are past this point. To keep a newer DI, low tension ring engine even just in this “average” state at 200k takes some care. It’s not 2003 anymore.

Have we seen enough 23-year-old DI 5.3 engines torn down to know?

No. They are all barely 10 years old. The ones we are looking at aren't the 'good' ones, because the good ones and many of the marginal ones are still in service.

OnTheReel · May 20

1 hour ago, asilverblazer said:

Have we seen enough 23-year-old DI 5.3 engines torn down to know?

No. They are all barely 10 years old. The ones we are looking at aren't the 'good' ones, because the good ones and many of the marginal ones are still in service.

Certainly no shortage of “not good” ones, younger age notwithstanding. But in my view there’s no need to wait 13 more years to see the writing on the wall anyway. Weaker ring package, weaker cam and lifter design, lower viscosity oil, and DI which even in the best state of tune dumps more fuel into oil. All of this saying nothing of the embarrassing manufacturing defects and just general poor quality of the last 5 years which works against everyone too.

What everyone got away with “in the old days” for maintenance is not likely to lead to the same results it did in the Gen 3s and earlier. I like em just the same but these newer engines just aren’t going to be cockroaches like the old ones.

Grumpy Bear · May 21

8 hours ago, asilverblazer said:

Keeping vehicles longer is cheaper, the point I am making is that an amount of people won't realize the savings you have, because they don't want to or circumstances otherwise prevent.

Something we agree upon. A lack of the owners WILL or WISH for a shiny new bobble doesn't nullify the physics and accounting.

6 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

Certainly no shortage of “not good” ones, younger age notwithstanding. But in my view there’s no need to wait 13 more years to see the writing on the wall anyway. Weaker ring package, weaker cam and lifter design, lower viscosity oil, and DI which even in the best state of tune dumps more fuel into oil. All of this saying nothing of the embarrassing manufacturing defects and just general poor quality of the last 5 years which works against everyone too.

Correct. No one gets to defy physics and Stribeck cannot be violated without MAJOR consequences. This includes the OEM's wishes and government mandates.

On 5/19/2026 at 7:52 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

But sir, I am keenly aware that people, on whole, will believe what they need to, despite the truth to justify the choices they make.

I rinse and repeat the above. An exception to the rule (guys car get totaled or stolen) isn't so common as to cast it as an inevitable value in the calculous. Odds continue to support 'severe schedule" maintenance and when the book lacks such a schedule cut the OEM number in half. Typically what that schedule is anyway.

6 hours ago, OnTheReel said:

I like em just the same but these newer engines just aren’t going to be cockroaches like the old ones.

Gen 1 SBC to the pre GDI LS engines are stone axes (cockroaches) and given EXCELENT care and an ADULT driver will outlast the average human beings lifetime. True for most makes actually. SBF and BBF give up nothing to their GM counterparts. In line 6 AMC, Ford 240/300 and Chryslers Slant Six's are bomb proof and will outlive a cockroach.

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/89-year-woman-1964-mercury-comet/

One female owner on the original unopened motor. Granny can but Gen X can't.

:banghead:

Honda D16Y5 SOHC three valve is the motor cockroaches wish they were for durability. I've seen dozens of these motors over a half million miles and not using oil, running like the day they left the factory. And on 20 weight oil no less on the severe schedule. I've also seen a 16 year old kill one with 200K on the clock drifting in 10 minutes. (sold mine to the kid next door for his birthday, mistake).

Grumpy Bear · May 21

19 hours ago, asilverblazer said:

Further still, this was in response to a manufacturing defect, which is not a lack of maintenance or problem with the 'book'.

Having said all that I think the GM 5.3 and even 6.2 will prove to be far above average in reliability following the 'book'. I'll freely admit there is no way to objectively prove this point with actual data.

On 5/19/2026 at 7:52 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

I get to spent the cost of 3 of yours on my 3 in 'excessive maintenance'

This might deserve a separate response for further discussion. I'm not certain 'excessive maintenance' guarantees you anything against a structural failure or machining problem? (A snapped connecting rod as an example, or in the case of the 6.2, I don't see how changing the OCI will help if it is using the new oil specification. Unless going from 7,500 mile (used to be the longest allowable in the OLM software) intervals to 5,000 keeps the new specification oil in better condition to prevent the metal-on-metal contact that the 0-20 couldn't do. What if that interval becomes 1000 miles?

I believe I've said multiple times in multiple threads that "No oil" can FIX a defective condition such as missed heat treat or machining issue. Correct, a shorter OCI in those cases is polishing the brass on the Titanic. But it is hard to claim these cases are the majority and the minority at the same time, right?

Interesting idea about 'New Platforms" that haven't been around long enough to have created enough data to determine their reliability, issues, etc..

I had zero idea about the Ecotec3 LV3's when I bought Pepper and there wasn't any information on them other that ghost shorties in forums like this one to alert me to 'probable' issues like the Vacuum pump failures. At that time what was unknown was the screens on those pumps was fine enough to varnish closed pretty darn quick. New pumps, upon inspection, used a looser weave. And even a few of those in underserviced vehicles failed post haste. Not knowing any of this but knowing that "Excellence is not a act but a habit" I did what I always do and got the result I've always got. A problem free (for 192,600 miles as of to date) motor, braking system, transmission and differential. It's how I handle the unknown and unknowable.

As it turned out the oil control rings on this motor are of the same 'type' as the problematic DLH faced low tension rings installed on pistons with inadequate oil drain back volumes that were also plagued with the oil consumption issues, Ecotec I-4. Some of these motors go on to long lives with standard maintenance and some don't and so one might ask what possible differences there could possibly be. Glad you asked.

GDI pump failures and or leaky injectors left undetected is the difference. A leaky pump doesn't always mean a total failure that is easy to detect such as a rise in oil level. These pumps will linger on for tens of thousands of miles dripping fuel into the crankcase diluting the viscosity and building varnish silently and for as long as the condition lasts to the inevitable end. Plugged oil control rings and worse, Polished Bores. Testing will find it earlier but it too is not infallible as some labs run GC fuels only if the viscosity breaks below grade lower limits. Starting to use oil after not for tens of thousand but quite early in the motors life are a CLUE not to be ignored. More frequent oil changes MITIGATE that even when it happens. Oil is like a sponge and when it is full, you have to wring it out (change oil).

Even if those pump and injectors don't fail some motors crash anyway (use oil, fouled rings). The CATS are warmed by dumping excessive bore washing volume of oil during warmups with the ignition timing re-tard-ed to about -15 to -20 degrees ATDC. Short hoppers suffer, Long hauler hang on longer. This is just the new reality and proactive oil maintence is key to keeping them alive.

garagerog · May 21

53 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I believe I've said multiple times in multiple threads that "No oil" can FIX a defective condition such as missed heat treat or machining issue. Correct, a shorter OCI in those cases is polishing the brass on the Titanic. But it is hard to claim these cases are the majority and the minority at the same time, right?

Interesting idea about 'New Platforms" that haven't been around long enough to have created enough data to determine their reliability, issues, etc..

I had zero idea about the Ecotec3 LV3's when I bought Pepper and there wasn't any information on them other that ghost shorties in forums like this one to alert me to 'probable' issues like the Vacuum pump failures. At that time what was unknown was the screens on those pumps was fine enough to varnish closed pretty darn quick. New pumps, upon inspection, used a looser weave. And even a few of those in underserviced vehicles failed post haste. Not knowing any of this but knowing that "Excellence is not a act but a habit" I did what I always do and got the result I've always got. A problem free (for 192,600 miles as of to date) motor, braking system, transmission and differential. It's how I handle the unknown and unknowable.

As it turned out the oil control rings on this motor are of the same 'type' as the problematic DLH faced low tension rings installed on pistons with inadequate oil drain back volumes that were also plagued with the oil consumption issues, Ecotec I-4. Some of these motors go on to long lives with standard maintenance and some don't and so one might ask what possible differences there could possibly be. Glad you asked.

GDI pump failures and or leaky injectors left undetected is the difference. A leaky pump doesn't always mean a total failure that is easy to detect such as a rise in oil level. These pumps will linger on for tens of thousands of miles dripping fuel into the crankcase diluting the viscosity and building varnish silently and for as long as the condition lasts to the inevitable end. Plugged oil control rings and worse, Polished Bores. Testing will find it earlier but it too is not infallible as some labs run GC fuels only if the viscosity breaks below grade lower limits. Starting to use oil after not for tens of thousand but quite early in the motors life are a CLUE not to be ignored. More frequent oil changes MITIGATE that even when it happens. Oil is like a sponge and when it is full, you have to wring it out (change oil).

Even if those pump and injectors don't fail some motors crash anyway (use oil, fouled rings). The CATS are warmed by dumping excessive bore washing volume of oil during warmups with the ignition timing re-tard-ed to about -15 to -20 degrees ATDC. Short hoppers suffer, Long hauler hang on longer. This is just the new reality and proactive oil maintence is key to keeping them alive.

And this my friends on why GDI has a multitude of wins for the manufacturers. Keeps the EPA happy with emissions and mileage and keeps the average consumers coming back for new vehicles after fuel dilution has killed their engines by the 100K mark. The rust free '05 K1500 that I inherited from by Dad will probably outlast me also. Plenty of gitty-up with the L33 5.3 MPI which has some factory goodies like LS6 heads for starters. Impressive hp for the era, but a little lacking in tq, so not a heavy towing machine.

Edited May 21 by garagerog

Atlas · May 21

Sigh. GDI is ~30 year old technology now (since mass production adoption, but the tech has been around a lot longer) and GDI engines have no problem achieving high mileage.

Edited May 21 by Atlas

garagerog · May 21

38 minutes ago, Atlas said:

Sigh. GDI is ~30 year old technology now (since mass production adoption, but the tech has been around a lot longer) and GDI engines have no problem achieving high mileage.

2010 is when GM adopted GDI and since this is a GM forum that's my baseline, 16 years. Tell me do you think that the average owner takes a sniff of the dipstick let alone get a UOA to check for a leaky injector or HPFP? I think not. As an old farmboy I believe that for engine longevity DI belongs on diesels only and I'm sticking with that premise. BTW, I see you drive a diesel p/u, so feel free to share when you have skin in the game.

Edited May 21 by garagerog

Atlas · May 21

34 minutes ago, garagerog said:

2010 is when GM adopted GDI and since this is a GM forum that's my baseline, 16 years. Tell me do you think that the average owner takes a sniff of the dipstick let alone get a UOA to check for a leaky injector or HPFP? I think not. As an old farmboy I believe that for engine longevity DI belongs on diesels only and I'm sticking with that premise. BTW, I see you drive a diesel p/u, so feel free to share when you have skin in the game.

Leaky injectors and HPFP's just aren't that common but it can happen. Most "average owners" follow oil change intervals set by the manufacturer and don't give any of it second thought. And they generally get the service life most of them expect from their car, given that average length of new car ownership is between 7-10 years. The average age of cars on US roads has now risen to almost 13 years old driven by rising prices for new vehicles.

My first GDI was in a 2007 GTI here in the US. The engine had been out for 4 years previously in Europe and it first debuted in the US market in 2005. VW has been using the same engine with a few updates since then. Although I sold my GTI I know who still owns it and it's on the original engine and turbo at 156k miles. Pretty good for a small car that has been driven spiritedly its whole life.

My second GDI was in a 2014 Camaro, 3.6. No issues for me, and it's still on the road with 120k+ as I know the owner of that car also.

Neither of those are rare cars and the engines are used almost ubiquitously across models and plaforms, and those are just two common GDI engines.

My third GDI was a 2.0 in a Jeep Wrangler. The engine/trans was fine but the rest of the rig was a Stellantis heap of crap, although I still keep up with that forum and 2.0's (first introduced in 2018) are going strong with 100k. Leaking injectors and HPFP failures aren't common on the 2.0, nor is extreme fuel dilution, coked valves, etc.

My fourth GDI engine is a 6.2L LT1. I just don't have many miles on it to give any sort of report yet.

Shoot...I forgot I've owned two different 5.3's, a 2014 and a 2020. The 2014 I tracked down since selling it and has almost 200k now, although I don't know the service history. I didn't own the 2020 long enough to care.

I'll remember this thread and come back to say "you're right!" if I have problems with my GDI 6.2. It might be 20 years before it hits 100k though.

Edited May 21 by Atlas

Atlas · May 21

As for sniffing the dipstick, well, I'm not here to kink-shame.

For real, though, they wouldn't have a good indicator of exactly how much fuel dilution is occuring by sniffing the dipstick of a GDI engine. They all smell like gas.

It's when you suddenly have a half more quart of "oil" according to the dipstick and you know you definitely didn't add any, now that's a problem.

garagerog · May 21

All good examples of average mileage Atlas, maybe I was alluding to vehicles that last into the realm of hyper-mileage. Now beat this one: last Friday I sold my Johnny popper D130 lawn tractor to a guy that pulled up with cash in hand and trailer in tow. His tow rig was an old chevy p/u that badly needed a new paint job as that old black paint was beyond long in the tooth. He proudly says to me, "I have 468k miles on that 4.3." As my jaw was dropping and not knowing what really to say next, I mumble something about the 4.3 being a good motor and then I ask him how many miles he got out of his transmission. One rebuild at about 260K he says. Obviously a guy that cares more about his p/u's maintenance than it's looks, in another words I guess a guy that uses a truck for it's intended purpose. I never got a good look at his p/u's grill area, so I couldn't tell you if it was from the carb or spider injection era, I would guess carb tho. So Grumpy, this is for you: the bar has been set, will Pepper make it to 468K miles with GDI, even with your beyond meticulous maintenance and pampering?

asilverblazer · May 21

One point of clarification to add to my "by the book" or "standard" maintenance regiment that I may not be clear in my posts. All of the vehicles that I am generally basing my position on have an on-board oil life monitor. These typically adjust oil change frequency based on all the same conditions that Grumpy also uses.

At last check, the maximum mileage interval was 7500 miles.

I would expect that most people see the light come on and service accordingly.

asilverblazer · May 21

My question for you guys keeping or intending to keep these trucks (or any vehicle) past 20 years or 250k miles.

FWIW, I consider these number to be end of a vehicle's life. You've got your money's worth out of it. It has fully depreciated and it no longer worth significant investment for repairs.

Where do you draw the line on fixing things? Would you rebuild a transmission? Collision repair? New (premium or name brand vs. may pops) tires?

As an example, Grumpy, If, someone hit your truck and caved in the driver's door to the point it won't open and close. Repair estimate in the 4-5K maybe as high as 10K range. What would your course of action be?

Personally, if it were me not sure, because:

1. To dispose of it as-is would be pennies on the dollar = bad.

2. Fixing it correctly (taking insurance out of the equation for simplicity) would be too costly for me to spend based on its 'book' value.

3. I'm not going to put a blue door on from a salvage.

4. Best I could come up and most likely thing I would do, is trying to get it fixed at a price point I could justify. Quality or out-come would be compromised.