Oil Consumption
10-02-2007, 09:12 AM
#41
Go Big Blue!
Originally Posted by chhimp
This would piss me off. Drive until the engine seize and have them replace the engine. Is it still under warranty? Free towing still? Get a lawyer.
navy, just stay cool and follow the basic strategy we laid out already. Call Acura Customer Services and open a case. They are actually much more even handed then the acura tech line who directly supports the dealer service dept. You'll get a case rep and he'll research it. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING.
If they shut the door on you, then use the lemon law to deal with it. It's an amazing set of laws that really works. The car manufacturers can't bully you when you understand (and use) these tools available to you.
If you're right, you'll win in arbitration and get them to buy back the car (saving thousands $$ over the alternative of trading in). If you're REALLY and OBVIOUSLY right, then Acura will probably back down before it gets that far, once they realize you can't be easily discouraged from fighting.
It's just a game. It's just business. Stay cool
10-02-2007, 09:24 AM
#42
Pro
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sarasota Florida
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
Sorry chhimp. All bad advice.
navy, just stay cool and follow the basic strategy we laid out already. Call Acura Customer Services and open a case. They are actually much more even handed then the acura tech line who directly supports the dealer service dept. You'll get a case rep and he'll research it. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING.
If they shut the door on you, then use the lemon law to deal with it. It's an amazing set of laws that really works. The car manufacturers can't bully you when you understand (and use) these tools available to you.
If you're right, you'll win in arbitration and get them to buy back the car (saving thousands $$ over the alternative of trading in). If you're REALLY and OBVIOUSLY right, then Acura will probably back down before it gets that far, once they realize you can't be easily discouraged from fighting.
It's just a game. It's just business. Stay cool
navy, just stay cool and follow the basic strategy we laid out already. Call Acura Customer Services and open a case. They are actually much more even handed then the acura tech line who directly supports the dealer service dept. You'll get a case rep and he'll research it. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING.
If they shut the door on you, then use the lemon law to deal with it. It's an amazing set of laws that really works. The car manufacturers can't bully you when you understand (and use) these tools available to you.
If you're right, you'll win in arbitration and get them to buy back the car (saving thousands $$ over the alternative of trading in). If you're REALLY and OBVIOUSLY right, then Acura will probably back down before it gets that far, once they realize you can't be easily discouraged from fighting.
It's just a game. It's just business. Stay cool
10-02-2007, 12:07 PM
#43
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2006
Age: 56
Posts: 353
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What does the mfr do with the car after they buy it back? Re-sell it? Do you think they would fix it or let the next chump have to worry about it? Can the same car be lemoned twice?
I had a friend about 20 years ago win a lemon law on an IROC-Z for leaking T-Tops. He got a call a month later from a lady about 1,000 miles away asking if he had leaking T-Tops (he wrote his name and number in the back of the owner's manual).
I had a friend about 20 years ago win a lemon law on an IROC-Z for leaking T-Tops. He got a call a month later from a lady about 1,000 miles away asking if he had leaking T-Tops (he wrote his name and number in the back of the owner's manual).
10-02-2007, 12:19 PM
#44
Go Big Blue!
Absolutely. They will just sell it wholesale at auction and take the hit on the resale value after giving NavyDoc 90%.
That's the risk you take when you buy a used car. That's why I don't buy used cars. Yes they are cheaper, but not cheap enough in my mind to justify the risk, unless you are buying a realy old one (7+ years). Plus your financing costs are always higher for a used car.
CarFax has helped alot though. Makes it a bit easier.
That's the risk you take when you buy a used car. That's why I don't buy used cars. Yes they are cheaper, but not cheap enough in my mind to justify the risk, unless you are buying a realy old one (7+ years). Plus your financing costs are always higher for a used car.
CarFax has helped alot though. Makes it a bit easier.
10-02-2007, 06:34 PM
#45
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
Sorry chhimp. All bad advice.
navy, just stay cool and follow the basic strategy we laid out already. Call Acura Customer Services and open a case. They are actually much more even handed then the acura tech line who directly supports the dealer service dept. You'll get a case rep and he'll research it. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING.
If they shut the door on you, then use the lemon law to deal with it. It's an amazing set of laws that really works. The car manufacturers can't bully you when you understand (and use) these tools available to you.
If you're right, you'll win in arbitration and get them to buy back the car (saving thousands $$ over the alternative of trading in). If you're REALLY and OBVIOUSLY right, then Acura will probably back down before it gets that far, once they realize you can't be easily discouraged from fighting.
It's just a game. It's just business. Stay cool
navy, just stay cool and follow the basic strategy we laid out already. Call Acura Customer Services and open a case. They are actually much more even handed then the acura tech line who directly supports the dealer service dept. You'll get a case rep and he'll research it. DOCUMENT EVERYTHING.
If they shut the door on you, then use the lemon law to deal with it. It's an amazing set of laws that really works. The car manufacturers can't bully you when you understand (and use) these tools available to you.
If you're right, you'll win in arbitration and get them to buy back the car (saving thousands $$ over the alternative of trading in). If you're REALLY and OBVIOUSLY right, then Acura will probably back down before it gets that far, once they realize you can't be easily discouraged from fighting.
It's just a game. It's just business. Stay cool
Spicy... My best friend is a lawyer...unfortunately, he's in CA and can't help me here, so I called him today and asked his advice. He recommended I get in touch with an lawyer here in TN (I've looked, most offer, no out of pocket cost and free consultation) I asked him where they recoup their fees, and he said usually in arbitration they get their fees from the other side. Anyway... do you think it would be a good leverage point, for when Costumer Relations calls me back to tell them that I've spoken with an lawyer? I am just wondering in their algorithm for dealing with situations like this...if they're more likely to give me what I'm asking for just to keep the lawyers out.
10-02-2007, 08:19 PM
#46
Go Big Blue!
Originally Posted by NavyDoc333
Spicy... My best friend is a lawyer...unfortunately, he's in CA and can't help me here, so I called him today and asked his advice. He recommended I get in touch with an lawyer here in TN (I've looked, most offer, no out of pocket cost and free consultation) I asked him where they recoup their fees, and he said usually in arbitration they get their fees from the other side. Anyway... do you think it would be a good leverage point, for when Costumer Relations calls me back to tell them that I've spoken with an lawyer? I am just wondering in their algorithm for dealing with situations like this...if they're more likely to give me what I'm asking for just to keep the lawyers out.
The best thing you can do right now is research the problem to determine if your assertions are correct. Is it unreasonable to have this much oil burned in a new engine? That's a key question to answer rigth now. Armed with third party data and facts, it will be harder for the Acura case manager to ignore you. If things don't seem like they are going your way in this first stage of discussions, then take a "shot over the bow" and tell them you'll be filing a lemon law case with the evidence you have if they refuse to repair/replace the engine immediately. Don't say that until after it appears they are shutting down on you.
If it gets to Arbitration, keep in mind the independent arbitrator is not a judge. However, he will be acting as one and his ruling will be legally binding for Acura. However, it's not binding for you. If the ruling is not what you want, you can always choose to pursue small claims court, etc. However, at that point it might be better to just sell the car and take your lumps. The aggrevation may not be worth the results.
When/If you go to arbitration, you will want to treat it like a court. You'll be expected to make your case and present evidence just like in court. The Acura Client Service reps are not stupid. They're trained for this sort of stuff. If they see you've got your act together and realize you're assertions are right, and they know YOU know your right, they'll probably realize where this is headed and just agree to do the fix.
10-02-2007, 09:07 PM
#47
Pro
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sarasota Florida
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
I'd keep lawyers out of it. You don't need them for this. The laws are in place to help you here. If you got a lawyer he wouldn't provide you with much extra leverage and would only end up taking most of the award. It's tough to hire a lawyer for a small case like this. If it was a class action involving many of you, then, that's a different story.
The best thing you can do right now is research the problem to determine if your assertions are correct. Is it unreasonable to have this much oil burned in a new engine? That's a key question to answer rigth now. Armed with third party data and facts, it will be harder for the Acura case manager to ignore you. If things don't seem like they are going your way in this first stage of discussions, then take a "shot over the bow" and tell them you'll be filing a lemon law case with the evidence you have if they refuse to repair/replace the engine immediately. Don't say that until after it appears they are shutting down on you.
If it gets to Arbitration, keep in mind the independent arbitrator is not a judge. However, he will be acting as one and his ruling will be legally binding for Acura. However, it's not binding for you. If the ruling is not what you want, you can always choose to pursue small claims court, etc. However, at that point it might be better to just sell the car and take your lumps. The aggrevation may not be worth the results.
When/If you go to arbitration, you will want to treat it like a court. You'll be expected to make your case and present evidence just like in court. The Acura Client Service reps are not stupid. They're trained for this sort of stuff. If they see you've got your act together and realize you're assertions are right, and they know YOU know your right, they'll probably realize where this is headed and just agree to do the fix.
The best thing you can do right now is research the problem to determine if your assertions are correct. Is it unreasonable to have this much oil burned in a new engine? That's a key question to answer rigth now. Armed with third party data and facts, it will be harder for the Acura case manager to ignore you. If things don't seem like they are going your way in this first stage of discussions, then take a "shot over the bow" and tell them you'll be filing a lemon law case with the evidence you have if they refuse to repair/replace the engine immediately. Don't say that until after it appears they are shutting down on you.
If it gets to Arbitration, keep in mind the independent arbitrator is not a judge. However, he will be acting as one and his ruling will be legally binding for Acura. However, it's not binding for you. If the ruling is not what you want, you can always choose to pursue small claims court, etc. However, at that point it might be better to just sell the car and take your lumps. The aggrevation may not be worth the results.
When/If you go to arbitration, you will want to treat it like a court. You'll be expected to make your case and present evidence just like in court. The Acura Client Service reps are not stupid. They're trained for this sort of stuff. If they see you've got your act together and realize you're assertions are right, and they know YOU know your right, they'll probably realize where this is headed and just agree to do the fix.
10-02-2007, 09:14 PM
#48
Senior Moderator
Honda's arbitration services are veyr good, I had to deal with them for my MDX battery dying and they helped a bunch. You don't need lawyers in this, send in the paperwork along with a letter to honda and the state and they will contact you and try to resolve this. Spicy Mikey hit it spot on.
10-03-2007, 05:23 AM
#49
Originally Posted by csmeance
Honda's arbitration services are veyr good, I had to deal with them for my MDX battery dying and they helped a bunch. You don't need lawyers in this, send in the paperwork along with a letter to honda and the state and they will contact you and try to resolve this. Spicy Mikey hit it spot on.
10-03-2007, 10:51 AM
#50
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Conway, SC
Age: 89
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of being flamed unmercifully, NavyDoc, with all due respect I think you are going way over the top about an oil consumption problem that really only seems high relative to other RLs that apparently "consume NO oil between changes". 1.2 quarts over 5000 miles is not excessive -- nor do other RLs consume "NO" oil between changes. Our RL, which was also purchased used (w/4000 mi. on the odo.) appears to be using less than you report, but nevertheless, it is consumming some oil at approx. 5000mi. since its last change -- approx 1/8" down on the stick since then.
As a former Cadillac DTS owner (4.6L Northstar V8) I can tell you that there is contiuous discussion on the Cadillac forums about excessive oil consumption on the Northstar from 1993 to the 2000 model year, when some major design changes were made to the engine. (Our DTS, incidentally, was a 2003). Consumption on the early design was reportedly running about 1000 miles to the quart -- and Cadillac maintained that this was well within normal limits -- it was by no means true of every owners experience, but was fairly widely reported. Turns out Cadillac was not just stonewalling the owners, much of the excessive consumption was due to the VERY conservative driving habits of their clientel -- who seldom revved the high-winding Northstar to its redline. The result was sludging and sticking piston rings, which allowed excess oil consumption. The cure, on that engine, was a periodic run or two to redline to keep the rings free and sealing properly. Many of those on the forums who were second owners, and who took the cars out regularly and really revved the engines out reported that their oil consumption dropped dramatiocally -- jumping into the 2500 - 4000 mile range per quart without a single bit of mechanical work on the engine. GM also developed a chemical cleaning procedure for de-carbonizing the rings, which worked and more or less proved that the oil consumtion was due to the sticking rings. Nevertheless, the first generation Northstar was never, compared to Honda or Acura, a low oil cosumption engine -- it was alway down at least 1/2 quart between changes at about 3-4 thousand miles (although the sump did carry 7-1/2 quarts). In any case, a GM power train engineer (who was in on the Northstar design) who was a regualar contributor on one of the forums, vigorously maintained that the engine's high speed design dictated the kind of internal clearances that precluded zero oil consumption between changes. He maintained that, in fact, an engine that consummed NO oil was not being properly internally lubricated because clearance were TOO tight for proper oil flow to moving and sliding parts.
Take his position as partisan and biased, but I followed his threads for months and the guy really was a GM engineer and knew what he was talking about. Several owners who had torn their engines down roported (some with 40 50 thousand miles on the engine) absolutely no cylinder bore wear,but severly stuck piston rings which apparently were not sealing, hence the excessive oil usage. Cleaning the ring grooves and adding new rings was all that was needed to bring the oil usage back into the 2500 - 4000 mile range -- more or less proving that keeping the rings free was the solution on the Northstar.
Anyone here who cares to can check this out on Caddyinfo. com or Cadillac Forums.com. GM stoutly maintained that 1000mi. per quart WAS acceptable and never had any general recall on the Northstar -- only the chamical cleaning procedure for those severe cases where the customer simply would not dirve the car hard enough to keep the rings free. There were no law suits either, that I'm aware of, at least from very extensive coverage on the forums.
In any case, long story short, my point is that relative to what was rated as acceptable oil consumption on a similar high-revving DOHC engine, 5000miles per quart of oil is not at all excessive. It may seem high, relative to other RLs, that apparently use NO oil, but even that is not really the case -- all RLs use some oil between changes. Not very much to be sure, which makes yours seem on the high side.
I don't know how hard you rev your engine, but it just might be worth a couple of runs to redline and several freeway miles at 60mph, in second or third gear, to keep the revs high for an extended period, to see if the rings free up and/or seat themselves. It may or may not help, but it certainly won't hurt the engine or make things worse. And if it beats the hassle and aggrivation of trying to have the engine replaced it will be worth it.
Most owners on the Cadiallac forum who followed the procedure reported it really worked at lowering their oil usage and surely beat removing the engine for a complete tear-down.
Check out the Cadillac forums for the exact procedure and good luck.
As a former Cadillac DTS owner (4.6L Northstar V8) I can tell you that there is contiuous discussion on the Cadillac forums about excessive oil consumption on the Northstar from 1993 to the 2000 model year, when some major design changes were made to the engine. (Our DTS, incidentally, was a 2003). Consumption on the early design was reportedly running about 1000 miles to the quart -- and Cadillac maintained that this was well within normal limits -- it was by no means true of every owners experience, but was fairly widely reported. Turns out Cadillac was not just stonewalling the owners, much of the excessive consumption was due to the VERY conservative driving habits of their clientel -- who seldom revved the high-winding Northstar to its redline. The result was sludging and sticking piston rings, which allowed excess oil consumption. The cure, on that engine, was a periodic run or two to redline to keep the rings free and sealing properly. Many of those on the forums who were second owners, and who took the cars out regularly and really revved the engines out reported that their oil consumption dropped dramatiocally -- jumping into the 2500 - 4000 mile range per quart without a single bit of mechanical work on the engine. GM also developed a chemical cleaning procedure for de-carbonizing the rings, which worked and more or less proved that the oil consumtion was due to the sticking rings. Nevertheless, the first generation Northstar was never, compared to Honda or Acura, a low oil cosumption engine -- it was alway down at least 1/2 quart between changes at about 3-4 thousand miles (although the sump did carry 7-1/2 quarts). In any case, a GM power train engineer (who was in on the Northstar design) who was a regualar contributor on one of the forums, vigorously maintained that the engine's high speed design dictated the kind of internal clearances that precluded zero oil consumption between changes. He maintained that, in fact, an engine that consummed NO oil was not being properly internally lubricated because clearance were TOO tight for proper oil flow to moving and sliding parts.
Take his position as partisan and biased, but I followed his threads for months and the guy really was a GM engineer and knew what he was talking about. Several owners who had torn their engines down roported (some with 40 50 thousand miles on the engine) absolutely no cylinder bore wear,but severly stuck piston rings which apparently were not sealing, hence the excessive oil usage. Cleaning the ring grooves and adding new rings was all that was needed to bring the oil usage back into the 2500 - 4000 mile range -- more or less proving that keeping the rings free was the solution on the Northstar.
Anyone here who cares to can check this out on Caddyinfo. com or Cadillac Forums.com. GM stoutly maintained that 1000mi. per quart WAS acceptable and never had any general recall on the Northstar -- only the chamical cleaning procedure for those severe cases where the customer simply would not dirve the car hard enough to keep the rings free. There were no law suits either, that I'm aware of, at least from very extensive coverage on the forums.
In any case, long story short, my point is that relative to what was rated as acceptable oil consumption on a similar high-revving DOHC engine, 5000miles per quart of oil is not at all excessive. It may seem high, relative to other RLs, that apparently use NO oil, but even that is not really the case -- all RLs use some oil between changes. Not very much to be sure, which makes yours seem on the high side.
I don't know how hard you rev your engine, but it just might be worth a couple of runs to redline and several freeway miles at 60mph, in second or third gear, to keep the revs high for an extended period, to see if the rings free up and/or seat themselves. It may or may not help, but it certainly won't hurt the engine or make things worse. And if it beats the hassle and aggrivation of trying to have the engine replaced it will be worth it.
Most owners on the Cadiallac forum who followed the procedure reported it really worked at lowering their oil usage and surely beat removing the engine for a complete tear-down.
Check out the Cadillac forums for the exact procedure and good luck.
10-03-2007, 02:17 PM
#51
Originally Posted by Jackzilla
At the risk of being flamed unmercifully, NavyDoc, with all due respect I think you are going way over the top about an oil consumption problem that really only seems high relative to other RLs that apparently "consume NO oil between changes". 1.2 quarts over 5000 miles is not excessive -- nor do other RLs consume "NO" oil between changes. Our RL, which was also purchased used (w/4000 mi. on the odo.) appears to be using less than you report, but nevertheless, it is consumming some oil at approx. 5000mi. since its last change -- approx 1/8" down on the stick since then.
As a former Cadillac DTS owner (4.6L Northstar V8) I can tell you that there is contiuous discussion on the Cadillac forums about excessive oil consumption on the Northstar from 1993 to the 2000 model year, when some major design changes were made to the engine. (Our DTS, incidentally, was a 2003). Consumption on the early design was reportedly running about 1000 miles to the quart -- and Cadillac maintained that this was well within normal limits -- it was by no means true of every owners experience, but was fairly widely reported. Turns out Cadillac was not just stonewalling the owners, much of the excessive consumption was due to the VERY conservative driving habits of their clientel -- who seldom revved the high-winding Northstar to its redline. The result was sludging and sticking piston rings, which allowed excess oil consumption. The cure, on that engine, was a periodic run or two to redline to keep the rings free and sealing properly. Many of those on the forums who were second owners, and who took the cars out regularly and really revved the engines out reported that their oil consumption dropped dramatiocally -- jumping into the 2500 - 4000 mile range per quart without a single bit of mechanical work on the engine. GM also developed a chemical cleaning procedure for de-carbonizing the rings, which worked and more or less proved that the oil consumtion was due to the sticking rings. Nevertheless, the first generation Northstar was never, compared to Honda or Acura, a low oil cosumption engine -- it was alway down at least 1/2 quart between changes at about 3-4 thousand miles (although the sump did carry 7-1/2 quarts). In any case, a GM power train engineer (who was in on the Northstar design) who was a regualar contributor on one of the forums, vigorously maintained that the engine's high speed design dictated the kind of internal clearances that precluded zero oil consumption between changes. He maintained that, in fact, an engine that consummed NO oil was not being properly internally lubricated because clearance were TOO tight for proper oil flow to moving and sliding parts.
Take his position as partisan and biased, but I followed his threads for months and the guy really was a GM engineer and knew what he was talking about. Several owners who had torn their engines down roported (some with 40 50 thousand miles on the engine) absolutely no cylinder bore wear,but severly stuck piston rings which apparently were not sealing, hence the excessive oil usage. Cleaning the ring grooves and adding new rings was all that was needed to bring the oil usage back into the 2500 - 4000 mile range -- more or less proving that keeping the rings free was the solution on the Northstar.
Anyone here who cares to can check this out on Caddyinfo. com or Cadillac Forums.com. GM stoutly maintained that 1000mi. per quart WAS acceptable and never had any general recall on the Northstar -- only the chamical cleaning procedure for those severe cases where the customer simply would not dirve the car hard enough to keep the rings free. There were no law suits either, that I'm aware of, at least from very extensive coverage on the forums.
In any case, long story short, my point is that relative to what was rated as acceptable oil consumption on a similar high-revving DOHC engine, 5000miles per quart of oil is not at all excessive. It may seem high, relative to other RLs, that apparently use NO oil, but even that is not really the case -- all RLs use some oil between changes. Not very much to be sure, which makes yours seem on the high side.
I don't know how hard you rev your engine, but it just might be worth a couple of runs to redline and several freeway miles at 60mph, in second or third gear, to keep the revs high for an extended period, to see if the rings free up and/or seat themselves. It may or may not help, but it certainly won't hurt the engine or make things worse. And if it beats the hassle and aggrivation of trying to have the engine replaced it will be worth it.
Most owners on the Cadiallac forum who followed the procedure reported it really worked at lowering their oil usage and surely beat removing the engine for a complete tear-down.
Check out the Cadillac forums for the exact procedure and good luck.
As a former Cadillac DTS owner (4.6L Northstar V8) I can tell you that there is contiuous discussion on the Cadillac forums about excessive oil consumption on the Northstar from 1993 to the 2000 model year, when some major design changes were made to the engine. (Our DTS, incidentally, was a 2003). Consumption on the early design was reportedly running about 1000 miles to the quart -- and Cadillac maintained that this was well within normal limits -- it was by no means true of every owners experience, but was fairly widely reported. Turns out Cadillac was not just stonewalling the owners, much of the excessive consumption was due to the VERY conservative driving habits of their clientel -- who seldom revved the high-winding Northstar to its redline. The result was sludging and sticking piston rings, which allowed excess oil consumption. The cure, on that engine, was a periodic run or two to redline to keep the rings free and sealing properly. Many of those on the forums who were second owners, and who took the cars out regularly and really revved the engines out reported that their oil consumption dropped dramatiocally -- jumping into the 2500 - 4000 mile range per quart without a single bit of mechanical work on the engine. GM also developed a chemical cleaning procedure for de-carbonizing the rings, which worked and more or less proved that the oil consumtion was due to the sticking rings. Nevertheless, the first generation Northstar was never, compared to Honda or Acura, a low oil cosumption engine -- it was alway down at least 1/2 quart between changes at about 3-4 thousand miles (although the sump did carry 7-1/2 quarts). In any case, a GM power train engineer (who was in on the Northstar design) who was a regualar contributor on one of the forums, vigorously maintained that the engine's high speed design dictated the kind of internal clearances that precluded zero oil consumption between changes. He maintained that, in fact, an engine that consummed NO oil was not being properly internally lubricated because clearance were TOO tight for proper oil flow to moving and sliding parts.
Take his position as partisan and biased, but I followed his threads for months and the guy really was a GM engineer and knew what he was talking about. Several owners who had torn their engines down roported (some with 40 50 thousand miles on the engine) absolutely no cylinder bore wear,but severly stuck piston rings which apparently were not sealing, hence the excessive oil usage. Cleaning the ring grooves and adding new rings was all that was needed to bring the oil usage back into the 2500 - 4000 mile range -- more or less proving that keeping the rings free was the solution on the Northstar.
Anyone here who cares to can check this out on Caddyinfo. com or Cadillac Forums.com. GM stoutly maintained that 1000mi. per quart WAS acceptable and never had any general recall on the Northstar -- only the chamical cleaning procedure for those severe cases where the customer simply would not dirve the car hard enough to keep the rings free. There were no law suits either, that I'm aware of, at least from very extensive coverage on the forums.
In any case, long story short, my point is that relative to what was rated as acceptable oil consumption on a similar high-revving DOHC engine, 5000miles per quart of oil is not at all excessive. It may seem high, relative to other RLs, that apparently use NO oil, but even that is not really the case -- all RLs use some oil between changes. Not very much to be sure, which makes yours seem on the high side.
I don't know how hard you rev your engine, but it just might be worth a couple of runs to redline and several freeway miles at 60mph, in second or third gear, to keep the revs high for an extended period, to see if the rings free up and/or seat themselves. It may or may not help, but it certainly won't hurt the engine or make things worse. And if it beats the hassle and aggrivation of trying to have the engine replaced it will be worth it.
Most owners on the Cadiallac forum who followed the procedure reported it really worked at lowering their oil usage and surely beat removing the engine for a complete tear-down.
Check out the Cadillac forums for the exact procedure and good luck.
If I took my car to 'Cooter's Garage' on the corner... and said, "It's burning oil, check it out"...they would say, "Yes Sir... we'll take a look." A few hours later I'd get a call and they would say, "You got a bad this or that...and it will cost x$ to fix"....or "We didn't find anything wrong... don't worry about it". Yes, I'd be paying for them to do this... but I paid for Acura to do it too...when I paid for a car with a warranty. I was hoping Acura would treat me better than Cooter would.
10-03-2007, 02:39 PM
#52
Go Big Blue!
Originally Posted by NavyDoc333
Hell... I won't 'flame' you. I'm open to all points of view. It's actually reassuring for someone to say, that it happens to them too. You're just the first one to say that yours does it too. I was thinking about it today....and in my 21yrs of driving, I've owned 10 cars... and this is the first one I've ever had to add oil to between oil changes. After doing some reading on BMW forums...etc, I can see that other cars consume oil. But....I also realize that a bad piston ring, or valve seal..etc can cause it... I'm not asking Acura to put a new engine in... I guess I'd just appreciate it if they would say, we'll take a look and make sure it's 'normal' and not one of those other things.
If I took my car to 'Cooter's Garage' on the corner... and said, "It's burning oil, check it out"...they would say, "Yes Sir... we'll take a look." A few hours later I'd get a call and they would say, "You got a bad this or that...and it will cost x$ to fix"....or "We didn't find anything wrong... don't worry about it". Yes, I'd be paying for them to do this... but I paid for Acura to do it too...when I paid for a car with a warranty. I was hoping Acura would treat me better than Cooter would.
If I took my car to 'Cooter's Garage' on the corner... and said, "It's burning oil, check it out"...they would say, "Yes Sir... we'll take a look." A few hours later I'd get a call and they would say, "You got a bad this or that...and it will cost x$ to fix"....or "We didn't find anything wrong... don't worry about it". Yes, I'd be paying for them to do this... but I paid for Acura to do it too...when I paid for a car with a warranty. I was hoping Acura would treat me better than Cooter would.
10-03-2007, 02:50 PM
#53
Go Big Blue!
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
I think your expectations are reasonable NavyDoc. I'm not flaming jack but I think he's wrong. Your engine is using WAY more oil then it should. With all due respect to GM, this is not a clunky early 90's GM engine. Something is wrong. Is it a symptom of bigger problems or is it just a benign issue? You don't know yet which is the point. For them to blow you off at this stage (without investigating and doing some basic tests), is wrong. Keep pushing
That's really what I'd expect from that engine, regardless of how a 1993 GM 4.6L v8 engine chews up oil.
10-03-2007, 04:03 PM
#54
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Conway, SC
Age: 89
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
By the way, I have 5300 miles on my new RL. Just about due for it's first oil change. I just checked the dipstick. It's right on the line. No measurable oil lose.
That's really what I'd expect from that engine, regardless of how a 1993 GM 4.6L v8 engine chews up oil.
That's really what I'd expect from that engine, regardless of how a 1993 GM 4.6L v8 engine chews up oil.
I was simply pointing out how a particular pattern of usage apparently created a problem and which could be solved to a large degree simply by using the engine much more aggressively than most Cadillac owners do.
I will agree that NavyDoc's RL is certainly at the high end of the oil consumption range, compared to what most RLs deliver, but I just don't agree that 1 to 1.2 quarts in 5000 miles is what a manufacturer (even Acura) would consider excessive. NavyDoc says he did not break the car in, so who knows what kind of use it got in the first 600 miles? Also, owner driving style and habits can have a huge effect on oil usage.
Ring condition is easily checked with a cylinder leak-down test, but at this level of oil consumption I doubt that the leak-down rate will be anything but acceptable -- assuming there isn't one cylinder with a problem. But, if that was the case, the PCM would probably throw a code because of the excessive plug oiling in the bad cylinder.
If NavyDoc wants to spring for cost, he should get an independent garage to do a leak-down test to see if all is OK with the rings. Then, if there is a problem he has a documented test to confront Acura with.
Without knowing NavyDoc's driving style, I think the rev-stressing of the engine, which is described on the Cadillac forums is worth a try toward determining if the rings are sticking or gunked up in the ring grooves. It won't hurt the engine and may easily clear up the issue.
10-05-2007, 09:18 PM
#55
Farewell...
Well... Acura Customer Relations finally got in touch with me...and not only did they say that it's 'normal' for it to use 1.5 qts between oil changes, but that it's considered "within operating standards to burn up to 1qt per 1000mi's.' I told them, "Thank you for looking into it for me"... and traded my RL today for a 06 GS300 with a certified bumper to bumper warranty 5yr/100000mi. Hopefully I won't have any problems with it.
First impressions from the 260mi trip from the out of state dealer I found it at... No rattles in this one... the RL has better Nav (something I use 2% of the time I drive)... The RL's voice recognition is much better....the GS has better milage (I got 32mpg average on the freeway)... and the ML stereo have MUCH better low end response! Although I like the tweeters in the A-pilar of the RL, the ML stereo is really amazing in it's range.
Anyway, I'll miss you guys. I'll pop in from time to time to see what's going on. Thanks for all of your advice!!
First impressions from the 260mi trip from the out of state dealer I found it at... No rattles in this one... the RL has better Nav (something I use 2% of the time I drive)... The RL's voice recognition is much better....the GS has better milage (I got 32mpg average on the freeway)... and the ML stereo have MUCH better low end response! Although I like the tweeters in the A-pilar of the RL, the ML stereo is really amazing in it's range.
Anyway, I'll miss you guys. I'll pop in from time to time to see what's going on. Thanks for all of your advice!!
10-06-2007, 05:21 AM
#56
07 RL (non-tech)w/06 Nav
sorry to see you leave...i hope things go better with the GS. The GS is a very nice car and in this model Lexus should have a very reliable product (unlike the ES transmission and other issues) when i bought my car, Lexus had been my 1st choice
10-06-2007, 06:30 AM
#57
Senior Moderator
Hey Doc, enjoy the new ride, it's a nice one. Hopefully you won't have any issues.
I totally understand how you feel, I might have done the same in your situation. No car I've owned, including the the abused (by previous owner) beater 1982 Honda Civic I owned for a while in medical school, has eaten a quart in a thousand miles.
I don't know if the powers that be at Acura are listening, but I hope they're thinking "lost another one to Lexus!" (ala the old DiTech commercials) and considering what level of service to offer if they want to consider themselves a real luxury car company.
I totally understand how you feel, I might have done the same in your situation. No car I've owned, including the the abused (by previous owner) beater 1982 Honda Civic I owned for a while in medical school, has eaten a quart in a thousand miles.
I don't know if the powers that be at Acura are listening, but I hope they're thinking "lost another one to Lexus!" (ala the old DiTech commercials) and considering what level of service to offer if they want to consider themselves a real luxury car company.
10-06-2007, 07:47 AM
#58
Originally Posted by neuronbob
Hey Doc, enjoy the new ride, it's a nice one. Hopefully you won't have any issues.
I totally understand how you feel, I might have done the same in your situation. No car I've owned, including the the abused (by previous owner) beater 1982 Honda Civic I owned for a while in medical school, has eaten a quart in a thousand miles.
I don't know if the powers that be at Acura are listening, but I hope they're thinking "lost another one to Lexus!" (ala the old DiTech commercials) and considering what level of service to offer if they want to consider themselves a real luxury car company.
I totally understand how you feel, I might have done the same in your situation. No car I've owned, including the the abused (by previous owner) beater 1982 Honda Civic I owned for a while in medical school, has eaten a quart in a thousand miles.
I don't know if the powers that be at Acura are listening, but I hope they're thinking "lost another one to Lexus!" (ala the old DiTech commercials) and considering what level of service to offer if they want to consider themselves a real luxury car company.
Thanks Neuron! So far I'm really enjoying it. Like I said, I will miss things about the RL too. Since I know you're a 'tech/spec guy' here's the details of my trade.
06 GS300 - RWD, 32,000mi Blk/Blk (Pre-Owned Certified 3yr/100,000)
Has power rear sunshade, power folding side mirrors, clear bra, ceramic tint, Nav, Mark Levinson, 18" wheels with the upgraded rims, Adaptive Front Headlights, Ventilated seats... can't think of anything else at this moment. Looks like the previous owner pretty much said, give me everything. OH...except Sat Radio, which I would like to have...so I may add later.
Traded my 06 RL (non-tech), Blk/Blk with 19,000mi (added tint) (You all know what's in it...so I won't bore you with details)
I paid to extend the warranty to a 5yrs/100k bumper to bumper. My out the door cost was $6,800. Wrote a check for the balance of my RL and the $6,800 and now hopefully I won't have to worry about anything but routine maint for the next 5yrs. Wish me luck!
As you may have noticed... I still like coming here.
10-06-2007, 09:05 AM
#59
Go Big Blue!
Originally Posted by NavyDoc333
Well... Acura Customer Relations finally got in touch with me...and not only did they say that it's 'normal' for it to use 1.5 qts between oil changes, but that it's considered "within operating standards to burn up to 1qt per 1000mi's.' I told them, "Thank you for looking into it for me"... and traded my RL today for a 06 GS300 with a certified bumper to bumper warranty 5yr/100000mi. Hopefully I won't have any problems with it.
First impressions from the 260mi trip from the out of state dealer I found it at... No rattles in this one... the RL has better Nav (something I use 2% of the time I drive)... The RL's voice recognition is much better....the GS has better milage (I got 32mpg average on the freeway)... and the ML stereo have MUCH better low end response! Although I like the tweeters in the A-pilar of the RL, the ML stereo is really amazing in it's range.
Anyway, I'll miss you guys. I'll pop in from time to time to see what's going on. Thanks for all of your advice!!
First impressions from the 260mi trip from the out of state dealer I found it at... No rattles in this one... the RL has better Nav (something I use 2% of the time I drive)... The RL's voice recognition is much better....the GS has better milage (I got 32mpg average on the freeway)... and the ML stereo have MUCH better low end response! Although I like the tweeters in the A-pilar of the RL, the ML stereo is really amazing in it's range.
Anyway, I'll miss you guys. I'll pop in from time to time to see what's going on. Thanks for all of your advice!!
Difference here is that I'm not letting them off the hook so easily.
10-06-2007, 09:48 AM
#60
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
I'm disappointed in Acura. They clearly lied to you. It's like my argument about the non-functioning CMBS system. Even after I sent them a video clearly showing it not working as advertised, they told me my expectations were wrong. Difference here is that I'm not letting them off the hook so easily.
Difference here is that I'm not letting them off the hook so easily.Your approach (also appropriate and appreciated by those who own CMBS) is to get word back to the engineers that something is amiss and not quite what the marketing guys are preaching.
Both cases frankly should be handled appropriately by Acura. Very disappointed in Acura corporate right now, even though I'm happy with my car.
10-06-2007, 09:58 AM
#61
Go Big Blue!
Originally Posted by neuronbob
Ah, but he's NOT letting them off the hook so easily, just handling it differently from you. He has chosen to vote with his feet, AND he's posted here, which for some may cause them to question leaving the Lexus, BMW, or Infiniti dealership and coming over to the Acura dealership.
Your approach (also appropriate and appreciated by those who own CMBS) is to get word back to the engineers that something is amiss and not quite what the marketing guys are preaching.
Both cases frankly should be handled appropriately by Acura. Very disappointed in Acura corporate right now, even though I'm happy with my car.
Your approach (also appropriate and appreciated by those who own CMBS) is to get word back to the engineers that something is amiss and not quite what the marketing guys are preaching.
Both cases frankly should be handled appropriately by Acura. Very disappointed in Acura corporate right now, even though I'm happy with my car.
This also has the negative outcome of simply dumping this bad engine on some other unsuspecting buyer who thinks he's getting a great "Certified" preowned car. I understand it's ME first and EVERYONE ELSE second. No one need apologize for taking that position. But, it does happen to be another downside of trading in a defective car rather then fighting to have the manufacturer take responsibility for fixing it.
10-06-2007, 02:25 PM
#62
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Conway, SC
Age: 89
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
True, dumping the car and advertising his problems here help others make informed decisions about whether to buy an Acura next time. However, that could have been accomplished even with keeping the car and continuing the fight.
This also has the negative outcome of simply dumping this bad engine on some other unsuspecting buyer who thinks he's getting a great "Certified" preowned car. I understand it's ME first and EVERYONE ELSE second. No one need apologize for taking that position. But, it does happen to be another downside of trading in a defective car rather then fighting to have the manufacturer take responsibility for fixing it.
This also has the negative outcome of simply dumping this bad engine on some other unsuspecting buyer who thinks he's getting a great "Certified" preowned car. I understand it's ME first and EVERYONE ELSE second. No one need apologize for taking that position. But, it does happen to be another downside of trading in a defective car rather then fighting to have the manufacturer take responsibility for fixing it.
No manufacturer is going to attempt to satisfy the totally unrealistic expectations of any customer (and a second owner, in this case) when the product is performing properly and well within manufacturing tolerances. The fact that many on this forum are of the "opinion" that "any oil consumption whatsoever" on an Acura or Honda engine is indicitive a failing or defective engine DOES NOT make it so.
You should all be aware that current Acura and Honda engines (virtually all current engines that I'm aware of, for that matter) use 5W-20 viscosity motor oil. This is a VERY thin oil, used for reduced friction, pumping losses and fuel economy.The fact that it's so thin makes it more prone, under some conditions, to greater vaporization, simply from engine heat. The fact that current engines consume as little oil as they do is remarkable with oil like this and a testament to the extremely fine tolerances to which they're built.
Finally, a dip-stick is not a precision measuring device. I doubt that a single person on this forum has an RL engine that is consuming zero oil between changes, assuming the change interval is between 7500 and 10,000 miles according to the oil life monitor -- a dip stick is just not that accurate and readings are not taken EXACTLY the same each time.
So flame away. I have an RL that seems to be using about 1/2 quart in 7500 to 8000 miles and I have absolutely no problem with it. Nor would I have a problem if it was a full quart in that interval. It is extrodinary oil milage for oil, that at a 230 degree sump temperature, is as thin as water. And nobody here should be alarmed if their oil usage reaches similar levels.
One final parting thought. Considering that NavyDoc paid $6800 to trade for a "perfect??" used Lexus, he could, for the same amount of money (at $2.50 a quart) have bought oil for over 13,000,000 miles of driving at the level of oil consumption on his RL. Do the math. Is having a "perfect" engine worth that much?? Nobody could live that long, much less drive a car that far.
10-06-2007, 02:45 PM
#63
Go Big Blue!
I can't really argue with your underlying assertions. I'll back off that statement and acknowledge that the engine MAY not have had a problem. Oil usage is a somewhat benign symptom and can only be used in conjunction with other evidence for drawing conclusions.
Personally, I think he jumped the gun too. I said that in one of the other threads today talking about it. I wouldn't advise people to follow that course of action. However, you can't ignore the fact that his engine was burning way more then average. Not a LITTLE more then average, a LOT more then average. I would have been concerned too and fought to have an answer. Navy seemed perfectly correct in raising concern.
Also, I didn't realize Navy was a second owner. In that case he had no lemon law recourse since it only applies to first owners. My suggestions were not valid in this case. So his only recourse would be to just sell it if the oil usage scared him that much.
I suspect the first owner dumped it quickly for these same reasons.
Personally, I think he jumped the gun too. I said that in one of the other threads today talking about it. I wouldn't advise people to follow that course of action. However, you can't ignore the fact that his engine was burning way more then average. Not a LITTLE more then average, a LOT more then average. I would have been concerned too and fought to have an answer. Navy seemed perfectly correct in raising concern.
Also, I didn't realize Navy was a second owner. In that case he had no lemon law recourse since it only applies to first owners. My suggestions were not valid in this case. So his only recourse would be to just sell it if the oil usage scared him that much.
I suspect the first owner dumped it quickly for these same reasons.
10-06-2007, 03:27 PM
#64
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
Also, I didn't realize Navy was a second owner. In that case he had no lemon law recourse since it only applies to first owners. My suggestions were not valid in this case. So his only recourse would be to just sell it if the oil usage scared him that much.
I suspect the first owner dumped it quickly for these same reasons.
I suspect the first owner dumped it quickly for these same reasons.
10-06-2007, 03:40 PM
#65
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
I can't really argue with your underlying assertions. I'll back off that statement and acknowledge that the engine MAY not have had a problem. Oil usage is a somewhat benign symptom and can only be used in conjunction with other evidence for drawing conclusions.
Personally, I think he jumped the gun too. I said that in one of the other threads today talking about it. I wouldn't advise people to follow that course of action. However, you can't ignore the fact that his engine was burning way more then average. Not a LITTLE more then average, a LOT more then average. I would have been concerned too and fought to have an answer. Navy seemed perfectly correct in raising concern.
Also, I didn't realize Navy was a second owner. In that case he had no lemon law recourse since it only applies to first owners. My suggestions were not valid in this case. So his only recourse would be to just sell it if the oil usage scared him that much.
I suspect the first owner dumped it quickly for these same reasons.
Personally, I think he jumped the gun too. I said that in one of the other threads today talking about it. I wouldn't advise people to follow that course of action. However, you can't ignore the fact that his engine was burning way more then average. Not a LITTLE more then average, a LOT more then average. I would have been concerned too and fought to have an answer. Navy seemed perfectly correct in raising concern.
Also, I didn't realize Navy was a second owner. In that case he had no lemon law recourse since it only applies to first owners. My suggestions were not valid in this case. So his only recourse would be to just sell it if the oil usage scared him that much.
I suspect the first owner dumped it quickly for these same reasons.
Just for clarification...although it's 'moot' now... I was the original owner. I bought a 'pre-owned' Lexus.
And... I realize that it may seem like jumping the gun... or a knee jerk reaction to what some may feel is a 'benign' problem... but it wasn't JUST the oil usage, it was a combination of things over time...including, more creaks than I can count, which were like splinters in my brain every time I would drive. I do realize that it may have been normal for that engine to burn oil... I STILL would have appreciated Acura humoring me and at least investigating other causes. The cost of doing that would have been far less than losing a customer. So far, on here...and in my own little census I've been taking around the office...and of family and friends, EXCEPT for Jackzilla... no one has to add a quart and a half of oil to their cars in between oil changes. Which makes me think that my car is 'special'.... like Special Olympics 'special'.... If someone had an RL that had 50 less horsepower than everyone elses... but was still considered 'within operating limits'... would you all say, "ok"... or would you say, well that sucks. I got the 'special one'!! I don't like being on the left side of the bell shaped curve.
Like NeuronBob said, I wasn't 'happy'... so I did the same thing I did when the Navy pissed me off... I didn't try and change the system... I voted with my feet. Now I'm a civilian...and much happier. But there are still A LOT of happy sailors, and I'm not telling them to get out... I'm just saying I'd never join up again.
10-06-2007, 05:30 PM
#66
Go Big Blue!
I didn't think you were a second owner but Jackzilla seemed to suggest it. Maybe I misinterpreted him.
Yea Navy, in the end you gotta do what's best for you, especially if there were other things driving you crazy. Didn't realize you had a creak problem. I just would have rather seen you fight it. But then again, that's only because that's what I would have done. I admit that's a ridiculous argument.
Yea Navy, in the end you gotta do what's best for you, especially if there were other things driving you crazy. Didn't realize you had a creak problem. I just would have rather seen you fight it. But then again, that's only because that's what I would have done. I admit that's a ridiculous argument.
10-06-2007, 06:34 PM
#67
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
I didn't think you were a second owner but Jackzilla seemed to suggest it. Maybe I misinterpreted him.
Yea Navy, in the end you gotta do what's best for you, especially if there were other things driving you crazy. Didn't realize you had a creak problem. I just would have rather seen you fight it. But then again, that's only because that's what I would have done. I admit that's a ridiculous argument.
Yea Navy, in the end you gotta do what's best for you, especially if there were other things driving you crazy. Didn't realize you had a creak problem. I just would have rather seen you fight it. But then again, that's only because that's what I would have done. I admit that's a ridiculous argument.
You guys have been great... I don't even think I'll join a Lexus forum, because I'm kinda thinking it would be a 'let down' in there.
Best of luck with your CMS struggle! I'll keep following the forum to see how you do!
10-06-2007, 07:00 PM
#68
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Conway, SC
Age: 89
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry NavyDoc if you were the original ownwer. But I seemed to recall (perhaps from another thread) you or someone commenting that thay did not know how their car spent its first 600 break-in miles plus the next couple of thousand. Guess I mixed you up with someone else.
Nevertheless, the fact that none of your immediate acquaintances has had a car that consumes some oil between changes does not negate the fact that auto makers build their products to conform to a certain tolerance range that is considered to be acceptable due to parts mix and tolerance stack up. The fact that what is acceptable the Acura/Honda is not acceptable to you does not make the product defective -- it makes it simply unacceptable to your standards, which may or may not be realistic -- but they are yours and you are entitled to act accordingly to satisfy yourself.
No one can stop anyone from bad mouthing a car maker over what they believe, but it really grinds me when I hear a company being bad mouthed over its failure to acquiese to some former owner's unreasonable standard of what in their opinion and others' hearsay comments constitutes acceptable product performance.
Lexus makes a fine automobile (I once considered buying an LS430 myself), but I'm sure, given time and when the novelty of newness wears off, you'll start to find that the GS has many warts and small irritants that will start to annoy you just as with Acura. All one has to do is check the Lexus forums -- different cast of characters, same kinds of problems, complaints and whining about the maker's unreasonableness.
What has to be realized is that the individuals that spend a lot of time posting on forums convey a false impression what the vast majority of owners experiences are. The very outspoken on forums DO NOT represent a true statistical cross section of the majority of owners level of satisfaction. The best I can say about any forum is it gives one a basis for the items to carefully investigate when shopping.
You have done what you think will remove what you regard irritants to continuing satisfied ownership of an RL. But before very long you'll probably have a whole new set of irritants from your GS -- perhaps they just won't be bad enough to make you get rid of the car. Nevertheless, I still maintain that some oil consumption between the very long change intervals that now are the norm is not a problem - and I personally am not bothered by my car using about 1/2 quart between changes that run between 9000 and 12,000 miles based on my type of driving.
.
Nevertheless, the fact that none of your immediate acquaintances has had a car that consumes some oil between changes does not negate the fact that auto makers build their products to conform to a certain tolerance range that is considered to be acceptable due to parts mix and tolerance stack up. The fact that what is acceptable the Acura/Honda is not acceptable to you does not make the product defective -- it makes it simply unacceptable to your standards, which may or may not be realistic -- but they are yours and you are entitled to act accordingly to satisfy yourself.
No one can stop anyone from bad mouthing a car maker over what they believe, but it really grinds me when I hear a company being bad mouthed over its failure to acquiese to some former owner's unreasonable standard of what in their opinion and others' hearsay comments constitutes acceptable product performance.
Lexus makes a fine automobile (I once considered buying an LS430 myself), but I'm sure, given time and when the novelty of newness wears off, you'll start to find that the GS has many warts and small irritants that will start to annoy you just as with Acura. All one has to do is check the Lexus forums -- different cast of characters, same kinds of problems, complaints and whining about the maker's unreasonableness.
What has to be realized is that the individuals that spend a lot of time posting on forums convey a false impression what the vast majority of owners experiences are. The very outspoken on forums DO NOT represent a true statistical cross section of the majority of owners level of satisfaction. The best I can say about any forum is it gives one a basis for the items to carefully investigate when shopping.
You have done what you think will remove what you regard irritants to continuing satisfied ownership of an RL. But before very long you'll probably have a whole new set of irritants from your GS -- perhaps they just won't be bad enough to make you get rid of the car. Nevertheless, I still maintain that some oil consumption between the very long change intervals that now are the norm is not a problem - and I personally am not bothered by my car using about 1/2 quart between changes that run between 9000 and 12,000 miles based on my type of driving.
.
10-06-2007, 07:22 PM
#69
Originally Posted by Jackzilla
Sorry NavyDoc if you were the original ownwer. But I seemed to recall (perhaps from another thread) you or someone commenting that thay did not know how their car spent its first 600 break-in miles plus the next couple of thousand. Guess I mixed you up with someone else.
Nevertheless, the fact that none of your immediate acquaintances has had a car that consumes some oil between changes does not negate the fact that auto makers build their products to conform to a certain tolerance range that is considered to be acceptable due to parts mix and tolerance stack up. The fact that what is acceptable the Acura/Honda is not acceptable to you does not make the product defective -- it makes it simply unacceptable to your standards, which may or may not be realistic -- but they are yours and you are entitled to act accordingly to satisfy yourself.
No one can stop anyone from bad mouthing a car maker over what they believe, but it really grinds me when I hear a company being bad mouthed over its failure to acquiese to some former owner's unreasonable standard of what in their opinion and others' hearsay comments constitutes acceptable product performance.
Lexus makes a fine automobile (I once considered buying an LS430 myself), but I'm sure, given time and when the novelty of newness wears off, you'll start to find that the GS has many warts and small irritants that will start to annoy you just as with Acura. All one has to do is check the Lexus forums -- different cast of characters, same kinds of problems, complaints and whining about the maker's unreasonableness.
What has to be realized is that the individuals that spend a lot of time posting on forums convey a false impression what the vast majority of owners experiences are. The very outspoken on forums DO NOT represent a true statistical cross section of the majority of owners level of satisfaction. The best I can say about any forum is it gives one a basis for the items to carefully investigate when shopping.
You have done what you think will remove what you regard irritants to continuing satisfied ownership of an RL. But before very long you'll probably have a whole new set of irritants from your GS -- perhaps they just won't be bad enough to make you get rid of the car. Nevertheless, I still maintain that some oil consumption between the very long change intervals that now are the norm is not a problem - and I personally am not bothered by my car using about 1/2 quart between changes that run between 9000 and 12,000 miles based on my type of driving.
.
Nevertheless, the fact that none of your immediate acquaintances has had a car that consumes some oil between changes does not negate the fact that auto makers build their products to conform to a certain tolerance range that is considered to be acceptable due to parts mix and tolerance stack up. The fact that what is acceptable the Acura/Honda is not acceptable to you does not make the product defective -- it makes it simply unacceptable to your standards, which may or may not be realistic -- but they are yours and you are entitled to act accordingly to satisfy yourself.
No one can stop anyone from bad mouthing a car maker over what they believe, but it really grinds me when I hear a company being bad mouthed over its failure to acquiese to some former owner's unreasonable standard of what in their opinion and others' hearsay comments constitutes acceptable product performance.
Lexus makes a fine automobile (I once considered buying an LS430 myself), but I'm sure, given time and when the novelty of newness wears off, you'll start to find that the GS has many warts and small irritants that will start to annoy you just as with Acura. All one has to do is check the Lexus forums -- different cast of characters, same kinds of problems, complaints and whining about the maker's unreasonableness.
What has to be realized is that the individuals that spend a lot of time posting on forums convey a false impression what the vast majority of owners experiences are. The very outspoken on forums DO NOT represent a true statistical cross section of the majority of owners level of satisfaction. The best I can say about any forum is it gives one a basis for the items to carefully investigate when shopping.
You have done what you think will remove what you regard irritants to continuing satisfied ownership of an RL. But before very long you'll probably have a whole new set of irritants from your GS -- perhaps they just won't be bad enough to make you get rid of the car. Nevertheless, I still maintain that some oil consumption between the very long change intervals that now are the norm is not a problem - and I personally am not bothered by my car using about 1/2 quart between changes that run between 9000 and 12,000 miles based on my type of driving.
.
I can sympathize with Acura...for having to deal with 'unreasonable people'. I have patients all the time who have unrealistic expectations regarding their health. I'll give this one example...then shut my mouth... If a patient came into my office with a headache...and I told them, that's ok, people get headaches all the time... it's 'normal' to have a headache every once in a while. And they said, "Well...my neighbor never gets headaches...this can't be normal.... could I have a brain tumor?" I would say, "Brain tumors can cause headaches (Back me up on the NeuronBob)... I doubt you have one, but I'll order a CAT Scan... if it's normal, then you can be reassured...and put the issue to rest" If I said, "It's nothing... you're being unreasonable..." She would probably ask.. "How can you be sure without even doing a single test??" If I said, "because my book says so"... there is a great change she would feel like I wasn't sympathetic to her concern...and she would most likely find a new doctor. Now... I was probably right... she probably didn't have a brain tumor...but I lost a patient for not understanding the "ART" of medicine. Like the ART of "customer service".
And maybe.. just maybe, she goes to another doctor.. he does the CAT scan... and finds a tumor. And I get sued. Now that would suck!
10-06-2007, 08:37 PM
#70
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Conway, SC
Age: 89
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by NavyDoc333
I can sympathize with Acura...for having to deal with 'unreasonable people'. I have patients all the time who have unrealistic expectations regarding their health. I'll give this one example...then shut my mouth... If a patient came into my office with a headache...and I told them, that's ok, people get headaches all the time... it's 'normal' to have a headache every once in a while. And they said, "Well...my neighbor never gets headaches...this can't be normal.... could I have a brain tumor?" I would say, "Brain tumors can cause headaches (Back me up on the NeuronBob)... I doubt you have one, but I'll order a CAT Scan... if it's normal, then you can be reassured...and put the issue to rest" If I said, "It's nothing... you're being unreasonable..." She would probably ask.. "How can you be sure without even doing a single test??" If I said, "because my book says so"... there is a great change she would feel like I wasn't sympathetic to her concern...and she would most likely find a new doctor. Now... I was probably right... she probably didn't have a brain tumor...but I lost a patient for not understanding the "ART" of medicine. Like the ART of "customer service".
And maybe.. just maybe, she goes to another doctor.. he does the CAT scan... and finds a tumor. And I get sued. Now that would suck!
And maybe.. just maybe, she goes to another doctor.. he does the CAT scan... and finds a tumor. And I get sued. Now that would suck!
Manufactured products of a particular model, on the other hand, are all as identical as modern manufacturing techniques can achieve. So what's true of one is generally pretty much true of all the others
My son is an Orthopedic Surgeon, so I'm somewhat familiar with the art of medicine and the protective techniques one must practice these days to ensure against malpractice suites. However, I doubt that any surgeon would replace someones hip for example (as a good patient/customer service practice) simply because that patient "knew" he needed a prosthesis because all his friends had them and they said they had exactly the same kind of pain and symptoms when they had their hips replaced.
By this token what should/could Acura have done that would have satisfied you? If they removed the engine, disassembled it and then showed you the cylinder wear patterns were normal, that the bores were perfectly round, that the wear patterns on the rings were normal and that everything measured within tolerance, would you know enough about what you were being shown and told to then accept the fact that what this particular engine was doing was within normal manufacturing tolerances? Maybe YOU would, but the majority of car owners wouldn't have the faintest idea of what they were looking at much less wheter or not a part was good or bad. So what would have been accomplished other than that the customer would feel he had been taken seriously even though his fears were completely without basis in fact -- and which he still would probably not admit. AND, he certainly wouldn't offer to pay all or part of the cost, which would amount to $3000 - $5000, after having it proved that there was no problem.
From what I can see of how Health Care services are handled and practiced today, no one could afford to buy any kind of auto or any other product if manufacturers had to perform the kind of customer satisfaction/protection functions that are an integral part of Health Care today.
10-07-2007, 09:52 AM
#72
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Conway, SC
Age: 89
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NavyDoc, I checked back on your previous posts and found where I got the impression you were not the original owner.
You indicated that your car came from another dealer several hundred miles away, in an inventory exchange for the RL you wanted. As you indicated, which is where I got the impression, the first few hundred miles were put on by whoever delivered the car to your dealer -- plus whatever may have been already on the car from its stay at the other dealer.
So the really important initial break-in miles were actually put on during the transfer to your dealer! It is a fairly safe bet that the individual who drove the car to your dealer observed NO break-in procedure during the drive, but merely drove the car to its destination as quickly as possible without tangling with the law. Unfortunate, but to car dealers, no matter what the brand, an inventory auto is "just a UNIT", nothing more. As far as many dealers are concerned, they operate on the principal that any problems that result from the way they treat their "UNITS" can simply be unloaded on the manufacturer as warranty work -- and which is why, in many cases, there is such an adversarial relationship between some dealers and the auto maker.
It's a shame that this (how the car was delivered to the selling dealer) was not made the major issue when dealing with Acura. It might have made their approach to handling the issue entirely different.
You indicated that your car came from another dealer several hundred miles away, in an inventory exchange for the RL you wanted. As you indicated, which is where I got the impression, the first few hundred miles were put on by whoever delivered the car to your dealer -- plus whatever may have been already on the car from its stay at the other dealer.
So the really important initial break-in miles were actually put on during the transfer to your dealer! It is a fairly safe bet that the individual who drove the car to your dealer observed NO break-in procedure during the drive, but merely drove the car to its destination as quickly as possible without tangling with the law. Unfortunate, but to car dealers, no matter what the brand, an inventory auto is "just a UNIT", nothing more. As far as many dealers are concerned, they operate on the principal that any problems that result from the way they treat their "UNITS" can simply be unloaded on the manufacturer as warranty work -- and which is why, in many cases, there is such an adversarial relationship between some dealers and the auto maker.
It's a shame that this (how the car was delivered to the selling dealer) was not made the major issue when dealing with Acura. It might have made their approach to handling the issue entirely different.
10-07-2007, 11:18 AM
#74
Originally Posted by Jackzilla
NavyDoc, I checked back on your previous posts and found where I got the impression you were not the original owner.
You indicated that your car came from another dealer several hundred miles away, in an inventory exchange for the RL you wanted. As you indicated, which is where I got the impression, the first few hundred miles were put on by whoever delivered the car to your dealer -- plus whatever may have been already on the car from its stay at the other dealer.
So the really important initial break-in miles were actually put on during the transfer to your dealer! It is a fairly safe bet that the individual who drove the car to your dealer observed NO break-in procedure during the drive, but merely drove the car to its destination as quickly as possible without tangling with the law. Unfortunate, but to car dealers, no matter what the brand, an inventory auto is "just a UNIT", nothing more. As far as many dealers are concerned, they operate on the principal that any problems that result from the way they treat their "UNITS" can simply be unloaded on the manufacturer as warranty work -- and which is why, in many cases, there is such an adversarial relationship between some dealers and the auto maker.
It's a shame that this (how the car was delivered to the selling dealer) was not made the major issue when dealing with Acura. It might have made their approach to handling the issue entirely different.
You indicated that your car came from another dealer several hundred miles away, in an inventory exchange for the RL you wanted. As you indicated, which is where I got the impression, the first few hundred miles were put on by whoever delivered the car to your dealer -- plus whatever may have been already on the car from its stay at the other dealer.
So the really important initial break-in miles were actually put on during the transfer to your dealer! It is a fairly safe bet that the individual who drove the car to your dealer observed NO break-in procedure during the drive, but merely drove the car to its destination as quickly as possible without tangling with the law. Unfortunate, but to car dealers, no matter what the brand, an inventory auto is "just a UNIT", nothing more. As far as many dealers are concerned, they operate on the principal that any problems that result from the way they treat their "UNITS" can simply be unloaded on the manufacturer as warranty work -- and which is why, in many cases, there is such an adversarial relationship between some dealers and the auto maker.
It's a shame that this (how the car was delivered to the selling dealer) was not made the major issue when dealing with Acura. It might have made their approach to handling the issue entirely different.
I guess it's like this... if I sit down at an expensive restaurant, and the food sucks... I'll finish my meal and just not go back. But if I sit down and get bad service, there is a good chance I'll get up and leave. We could argue all day as to whether or not my service was 'bad'. I guess that's in the eye of the beholder. If Acura doesn't mind losing a customer...and I don't mind paying the difference for something else... I guess there are no losers. I'm not going to "bad mouth" the RL... I bought it after thorough research, and my experience with the car is definitely not 'the norm'. But I can say with certainty that I won't be buying another Honda product... just like I'd never go back to that restaurant. And guess what... Honda's stock won't drop a bit. I'm not delusional enough to think my purchase matters in the grand scheme of things....but I sure slept good last night.
10-07-2007, 06:06 PM
#75
Burning Brakes
Sorry to see you leave the RL. I'll miss sharing and learning troubleshooting tips!
You are fortunate to have the means and ability to trade to something else that you'll find more satisfying. There's no doubt that Acura (and by extension Honda) left a bad taste in your mouth on the customer service front. I really don't know what more you could have done, other than to let the process play itself out (and feel frustrated).
It is disappointing that Acura corporate doesn't seem willing to stand more firmly behind their product, and customers are being treated like you'd imagine the US makers did in the '70s. Especially in a day when more and more carmakers have long-duration warranties and free maintenance, and most retail outlets have fairly reasonable return/exchange policies.
Jackzilla (and Acura) may be right that the amount of usage is normal. Still, Acura could have handled it better. Someone in the carmakers' corporate pipeline should be an advocate for the customer, not just the corporation.
To use the restaurant analogy, my wife and I went to a new restaurant and asked the waiter how he'd rate the cheesecake on a scale of 1 to 10. He gave it an '8', and we ordered a slice. What we got was a dense, hard, tasteless item that had the consistency of a stick of butter. When the waiter came back, we said it was foul. He took it back and said he woudn't charge us for it, but he did defend the consistency as being typical of "Italian style" cheesecake. A few minutes later, the "greeter" came to our table with two complimentary glasses of aperitif and said the cheesecake was indeed terrible; she pulled it from the menu and informed the pastry chef of the problem.
Being customer-oriented should be easy. The service experience at the best Acura dealer should be little different from the worst.
Rob144
You are fortunate to have the means and ability to trade to something else that you'll find more satisfying. There's no doubt that Acura (and by extension Honda) left a bad taste in your mouth on the customer service front. I really don't know what more you could have done, other than to let the process play itself out (and feel frustrated).
It is disappointing that Acura corporate doesn't seem willing to stand more firmly behind their product, and customers are being treated like you'd imagine the US makers did in the '70s. Especially in a day when more and more carmakers have long-duration warranties and free maintenance, and most retail outlets have fairly reasonable return/exchange policies.
Jackzilla (and Acura) may be right that the amount of usage is normal. Still, Acura could have handled it better. Someone in the carmakers' corporate pipeline should be an advocate for the customer, not just the corporation.
To use the restaurant analogy, my wife and I went to a new restaurant and asked the waiter how he'd rate the cheesecake on a scale of 1 to 10. He gave it an '8', and we ordered a slice. What we got was a dense, hard, tasteless item that had the consistency of a stick of butter. When the waiter came back, we said it was foul. He took it back and said he woudn't charge us for it, but he did defend the consistency as being typical of "Italian style" cheesecake. A few minutes later, the "greeter" came to our table with two complimentary glasses of aperitif and said the cheesecake was indeed terrible; she pulled it from the menu and informed the pastry chef of the problem.
Being customer-oriented should be easy. The service experience at the best Acura dealer should be little different from the worst.
Rob144
10-07-2007, 06:25 PM
#76
Go Big Blue!
Your right. They just needed to handle it different. It's amazing what subtle changes in your approach can do for the customer experience even if the outcome is the same.
Acura really seems to have a hard time getting their dealerships to bring the level of service up a notch. In many ways it feels a lot like a regular Toyota or Honda dealership experience. They are going to drive away the very customers they should be trying to court. Those with money in their pockets ready to buy/lease a new car every 3-4 years.
Acura really seems to have a hard time getting their dealerships to bring the level of service up a notch. In many ways it feels a lot like a regular Toyota or Honda dealership experience. They are going to drive away the very customers they should be trying to court. Those with money in their pockets ready to buy/lease a new car every 3-4 years.
10-07-2007, 06:32 PM
#77
Senior Moderator
Originally Posted by Rob144
Being customer-oriented should be easy. The service experience at the best Acura dealer should be little different from the worst.
10-07-2007, 08:53 PM
#78
AcurAdmirer
But you know, the funny thing is that when I was in the Infiniti ranks, the exact same things were being said of them in the forums ... poor dealership experiences, terrible service departments, inept salespeople, blah, blah, blah. And I can also tell you the Lexus experience ain't what it was when I owned 3 of those a few years ago, either.
In fact, when I got my '06 IS350 last year, I was a little shocked at how it had slipped in those few years. The red carpet was a little dingy, the customers treated a little more cavalierly, some hesitancy to do warranty work, etc. No more of the "you are king, what can we do to make you happy?" attitude I had loved so much before.
So, maybe the whole car ownership thing is just getting less personal and customer-oriented, and it's not just Acura. That's not to say Acura couldn't really turn heads if it suddenly became like the Lexus of olde, but that's not a realistic expectation.
.
.
In fact, when I got my '06 IS350 last year, I was a little shocked at how it had slipped in those few years. The red carpet was a little dingy, the customers treated a little more cavalierly, some hesitancy to do warranty work, etc. No more of the "you are king, what can we do to make you happy?" attitude I had loved so much before.
So, maybe the whole car ownership thing is just getting less personal and customer-oriented, and it's not just Acura. That's not to say Acura couldn't really turn heads if it suddenly became like the Lexus of olde, but that's not a realistic expectation.
.
.
10-08-2007, 07:15 AM
#79
Go Big Blue!
In the end it all comes down to money and profit. We all know that. The more the competition and buyer squeezes the car makers on the front end, the more they have to reduce costs on the back end. In a real way, we're to blame. We want rock bottom invoice deals, well, something has to give.
You get better service at Lexus, but you also pay 10% more for the same product. You want GREAT service.? Go to BMW. I was there two weeks ago checking out X5's. They had a free lunch buffet complete with servers in the service area!!! But, you'll pay 20% more for the car
You get better service at Lexus, but you also pay 10% more for the same product. You want GREAT service.? Go to BMW. I was there two weeks ago checking out X5's. They had a free lunch buffet complete with servers in the service area!!! But, you'll pay 20% more for the car
10-08-2007, 04:13 PM
#80
Racer
Join Date: Dec 2006
Age: 56
Posts: 353
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by SpicyMikey
In the end it all comes down to money and profit. We all know that. The more the competition and buyer squeezes the car makers on the front end, the more they have to reduce costs on the back end. In a real way, we're to blame. We want rock bottom invoice deals, well, something has to give.: