View Poll Results: If your TL consumes oil, is your car equipped with:
Voters: 87. You may not vote on this poll
Oil Consumption Poll - 3.7L AT or 3.7 MT
06-16-2015, 09:54 PM
#1
Pro
Thread Starter
Oil Consumption Poll - 3.7L AT or 3.7 MT
Wondering how many folks with the 3.7L engine and AT transmission have oil consumption issues.
Putting your vote down would provide some stats into why Acura Tech line thinks MT's are more vulnerable to oil consumption than AT's.
Putting your vote down would provide some stats into why Acura Tech line thinks MT's are more vulnerable to oil consumption than AT's.
06-17-2015, 12:25 PM
#4
Pro
Thread Starter
Thank you. I meant that oil consumption in itself is the issue/problem. But if there are separate issues/problems due to the oil consumption, still vote. There's power in data.
06-30-2015, 11:33 AM
#6
Pro
Thread Starter
Here's an article from Consumer Reports regarding oil consumption. Let's keep the votes coming if you're experiencing oil consumption of any sort.
Excessive Oil Consumption Isn't Normal - Consumer Reports
Excessive Oil Consumption Isn't Normal - Consumer Reports
07-01-2015, 06:06 PM
#7
I own an automotive repair shop here in DFW and have seen many 3.7 Acura vehicles such as the MDX, RDX, ZDX and the TL AWD that come in regularly with obvious oil consumption issues. Most of which who's owners knew nothing about it until making it known to them only because I myself own (and have owned many) an Acura vehicle with a 3.7 and am well aware of their "little" unknown issue they have with burning oil. I could get very detailed in my experiences and observations with the j37's but in summary, it's definitely an issue that's not being addressed by Honda and those who have made an effort into developing background for a TSB or recall are being told that it's considered "normal oil consumption" by standards that are unable to be challenged in a courtroom as there really isn't a definition for normal oil consumption in a specific amount of time. I believe GM customers went through a issue of which first involved having GM set an acceptable amount of oil per oil change duration before anything further could take place or develop. I'm quite certain we may have to go through the same thing. ALL of my 3.7 engines went through this issue so I know it's definitely an issue dealing with the manufacturing process of the engine and I'm inclined to believe its the new, unfamiliar machining technique of properly honing the all aluminum cylinders. So many manufacturers have refused to use this technology mainly due to its extreme difficulty in executing the hone properly. Perhaps this is the REAL reason why Honda ditched the 3.7 and ran in another direction with the iron lined DI 3.5?
The following users liked this post:
ExpensiveWino32 (08-17-2015)
Trending Topics
08-17-2015, 10:06 AM
#8
Advanced
I have been experiencing similar problems with my 3.7 2010 TL. I'm burning oil at a rate of 1 quart per 1,500-2,000 miles. The dealer has repeatedly stated this is normal/acceptable per Honda standards. I have called other dealers for their feedback and they all say the same thing. Even Acura customer service stated they will support the dealer comments. I find it very hard to believe that in a 'high-end' vehicle like Acura that I have to add 3 quarts of oil between oil changes. Unacceptable and very frustrating!! I will Acura/Honda would just properly fix this........anyone have better luck in getting this resolved by Acura/Honda?
12-09-2015, 10:07 PM
#12
Pro
Thread Starter
Bump! In case there are new folks who haven't voted..
12-10-2015, 11:29 AM
#14
Burning Brakes
Mine is burning oil. Taking it to the dealer this Saturday for the 3rd check up for oil consumption. I checked the dipstick and it's halfway with over 3K miles so far. If they recommend replacing the engine, I'm not sure if I will be inclined to agree because it will take a depreciation hit. 
12-17-2015, 10:42 PM
#15
Ok I'm confuse as hell. What is considered non over consumption. First time seeing this as I myself was wondering if it's a auto issue as well. One thing I know about Honda is it burns oil especially when VTEC is used and high compression.
12-18-2015, 10:43 AM
#16
2011 SH-AWD 6MT
I've read anything greater than 1 quart per 1,000 miles is out of spec consumption (so anything less is within spec). I think that's kind of bull because it's a rather high threshold.
08-09-2016, 09:38 AM
#17
3rd Gear
Join Date: Aug 2016
Age: 53
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3Qts in just less than 3k miles. 77,600 miles currently. 2010 TL SH-AWD MT.
Found this class action form.
https://chimicles.com/acura-engine-o...ction-lawsuit/
Found this class action form.
https://chimicles.com/acura-engine-o...ction-lawsuit/
08-20-2016, 01:10 PM
#19
My rambling 2 cents:
Has anyone experimented with a different viscosity to see if consumption is any better or worse? I've experienced the need to add oil between oil changes ever since they switched to 5W-20 from 10W-30 and increased the interval between changes at the same time. That newer stuff is like water when it heats up, so it doesn't surprise me if there's more blow-by, etc. at high rpm under load...Consumer Reports did not mention that consideration...IMHO, we are experiencing a design trade-off at the mercy of the CAFE regulations. I haven't tried putting 10W-30 in my 2010TL SH-AWD 6MT with almost 90,000 miles since I bought it new in March 2010, but it would be tempting..My 1991 Accord and 1995 Prelude VTEC used thicker oil and never seemed to lose a drop (but that was also back in the era of 3000-4000 miles between changes). I wouldn't be surprised to see mpg drop by 1 or 2, but consumption might be reduced.
In reality, I'll probably keep adding a couple of quarts between oil changes and keep the 24mpg I've been averaging....If that dropped to 23 with thicker oil, I would have to put 326 gallons of gas in the tank instead of 313 with the thinner oil. So, buy 13 more gallons of gas, or a few quarts of oil over 7500 miles.... Right now, I think it's still cheaper to buy the oil.... However, if I had to put 7 quarts of oil in 7500 miles, and I wasn't a monster driver using the gas pedal like an on/off switch between WOT and closed, and I regularly ensured it was warmed up before I ran it above 4000 rpm, I would definitely be convinced something is wrong, worthy of Honda being compelled to make it right.
I think the manufacturers are well aware of the trade-off they've made in the name of fuel economy, but it is a shame they write off some of the outliers...probably blaming aggressive driving style (ie it's normal includes an asterisk - *normal for aggressive drivers". It seems with the threat of class action suits, the manufacturers would use the technology available, and be willing to do an oil consumption test that includes a data recorder hooked up to the OBDII outlet...They can check driving style to see if there's any correlation between that and consumption....Maybe they already have, and they've seen it....but people who drive aggressively tend to be aggressive in other ways too, like being adamant the car shouldn't consume oil no matter how much they beat on it when it's cold or during their regular, aggressive commutes. I drive 26 miles one way to work each day, on city surface streets and interstates...maybe I'm just getting old, but the 'hyper competitiveness" on the roads is getting ridiculous...if you want to get to your job 5 minutes before I get to mine, be my guest....but don't be surprised if your gas mileage sucks and your car consumes oil....and blame yourself instead of the car manufacturer. That said, I would also not be surprised there are legitimate complaints...Putting myself in the place of the manufacturers, they are in a bind...how do you weed out the legitimate complainers who deserve a fix from the others? Can you legally define "normal oil consumption resulting from excessively aggressive driving style" vs. "excessive consumption during normal driving style" to enable drawing the line where legitimate complaining starts? Probably not, so the manufacturers take the trade-off assuming/hoping the number of legitimate complainers who will take their business elsewhere is the tiny, tiny, minority.
Has anyone experimented with a different viscosity to see if consumption is any better or worse? I've experienced the need to add oil between oil changes ever since they switched to 5W-20 from 10W-30 and increased the interval between changes at the same time. That newer stuff is like water when it heats up, so it doesn't surprise me if there's more blow-by, etc. at high rpm under load...Consumer Reports did not mention that consideration...IMHO, we are experiencing a design trade-off at the mercy of the CAFE regulations. I haven't tried putting 10W-30 in my 2010TL SH-AWD 6MT with almost 90,000 miles since I bought it new in March 2010, but it would be tempting..My 1991 Accord and 1995 Prelude VTEC used thicker oil and never seemed to lose a drop (but that was also back in the era of 3000-4000 miles between changes). I wouldn't be surprised to see mpg drop by 1 or 2, but consumption might be reduced.
In reality, I'll probably keep adding a couple of quarts between oil changes and keep the 24mpg I've been averaging....If that dropped to 23 with thicker oil, I would have to put 326 gallons of gas in the tank instead of 313 with the thinner oil. So, buy 13 more gallons of gas, or a few quarts of oil over 7500 miles.... Right now, I think it's still cheaper to buy the oil.... However, if I had to put 7 quarts of oil in 7500 miles, and I wasn't a monster driver using the gas pedal like an on/off switch between WOT and closed, and I regularly ensured it was warmed up before I ran it above 4000 rpm, I would definitely be convinced something is wrong, worthy of Honda being compelled to make it right.
I think the manufacturers are well aware of the trade-off they've made in the name of fuel economy, but it is a shame they write off some of the outliers...probably blaming aggressive driving style (ie it's normal includes an asterisk - *normal for aggressive drivers". It seems with the threat of class action suits, the manufacturers would use the technology available, and be willing to do an oil consumption test that includes a data recorder hooked up to the OBDII outlet...They can check driving style to see if there's any correlation between that and consumption....Maybe they already have, and they've seen it....but people who drive aggressively tend to be aggressive in other ways too, like being adamant the car shouldn't consume oil no matter how much they beat on it when it's cold or during their regular, aggressive commutes. I drive 26 miles one way to work each day, on city surface streets and interstates...maybe I'm just getting old, but the 'hyper competitiveness" on the roads is getting ridiculous...if you want to get to your job 5 minutes before I get to mine, be my guest....but don't be surprised if your gas mileage sucks and your car consumes oil....and blame yourself instead of the car manufacturer. That said, I would also not be surprised there are legitimate complaints...Putting myself in the place of the manufacturers, they are in a bind...how do you weed out the legitimate complainers who deserve a fix from the others? Can you legally define "normal oil consumption resulting from excessively aggressive driving style" vs. "excessive consumption during normal driving style" to enable drawing the line where legitimate complaining starts? Probably not, so the manufacturers take the trade-off assuming/hoping the number of legitimate complainers who will take their business elsewhere is the tiny, tiny, minority.
08-27-2016, 11:54 AM
#20
3rd Gear
Join Date: Aug 2016
Age: 53
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Restore?
I met a guy at the boat ramp who swears by Restore. I don't want to start putting in additives before I work with Acura and the dealer but I'm curious if anyone has tried something like that and the results?
08-31-2016, 09:26 AM
#21
FYI, for anyone who hasn't seen this yet. Sounds like Acura may be coming out with a repair procedure in the near future to fix the oil consumption issue...
http://www.urvi.net/forumfiles/SB/BTS160705.PDF
http://www.urvi.net/forumfiles/SB/BTS160705.PDF
The following users liked this post:
ABDomega (09-01-2016)
08-31-2016, 09:56 AM
#22
Racer
^ ^ This was posted somewhere but forgot where!
I was looking for this to present to Acura because I added 1.5qt and it was at the top of the line and now its halfway with less than 1100 miles.
I think it messed up my engine too because it makes weird sounds when it wasn't there before!
-DeL
I was looking for this to present to Acura because I added 1.5qt and it was at the top of the line and now its halfway with less than 1100 miles.
I think it messed up my engine too because it makes weird sounds when it wasn't there before!
-DeL
08-31-2016, 10:56 AM
#23
Yes, used castrol syntec 5w-40 and burned much less oil. For example, with the 40w stuff I didnt burn any oil the first 1000 miles, with 20w I burned half a quart after first 1000 miles. Currently in the middle of a consumption test with Acura. If I am able to get a new short block, I will be using 5w-40 from the start.
My rambling 2 cents:
Has anyone experimented with a different viscosity to see if consumption is any better or worse? I've experienced the need to add oil between oil changes ever since they switched to 5W-20 from 10W-30 and increased the interval between changes at the same time. That newer stuff is like water when it heats up, so it doesn't surprise me if there's more blow-by, etc. at high rpm under load...Consumer Reports did not mention that consideration...IMHO, we are experiencing a design trade-off at the mercy of the CAFE regulations. I haven't tried putting 10W-30 in my 2010TL SH-AWD 6MT with almost 90,000 miles since I bought it new in March 2010, but it would be tempting..My 1991 Accord and 1995 Prelude VTEC used thicker oil and never seemed to lose a drop (but that was also back in the era of 3000-4000 miles between changes). I wouldn't be surprised to see mpg drop by 1 or 2, but consumption might be reduced.
In reality, I'll probably keep adding a couple of quarts between oil changes and keep the 24mpg I've been averaging....If that dropped to 23 with thicker oil, I would have to put 326 gallons of gas in the tank instead of 313 with the thinner oil. So, buy 13 more gallons of gas, or a few quarts of oil over 7500 miles.... Right now, I think it's still cheaper to buy the oil.... However, if I had to put 7 quarts of oil in 7500 miles, and I wasn't a monster driver using the gas pedal like an on/off switch between WOT and closed, and I regularly ensured it was warmed up before I ran it above 4000 rpm, I would definitely be convinced something is wrong, worthy of Honda being compelled to make it right.
I think the manufacturers are well aware of the trade-off they've made in the name of fuel economy, but it is a shame they write off some of the outliers...probably blaming aggressive driving style (ie it's normal includes an asterisk - *normal for aggressive drivers". It seems with the threat of class action suits, the manufacturers would use the technology available, and be willing to do an oil consumption test that includes a data recorder hooked up to the OBDII outlet...They can check driving style to see if there's any correlation between that and consumption....Maybe they already have, and they've seen it....but people who drive aggressively tend to be aggressive in other ways too, like being adamant the car shouldn't consume oil no matter how much they beat on it when it's cold or during their regular, aggressive commutes. I drive 26 miles one way to work each day, on city surface streets and interstates...maybe I'm just getting old, but the 'hyper competitiveness" on the roads is getting ridiculous...if you want to get to your job 5 minutes before I get to mine, be my guest....but don't be surprised if your gas mileage sucks and your car consumes oil....and blame yourself instead of the car manufacturer. That said, I would also not be surprised there are legitimate complaints...Putting myself in the place of the manufacturers, they are in a bind...how do you weed out the legitimate complainers who deserve a fix from the others? Can you legally define "normal oil consumption resulting from excessively aggressive driving style" vs. "excessive consumption during normal driving style" to enable drawing the line where legitimate complaining starts? Probably not, so the manufacturers take the trade-off assuming/hoping the number of legitimate complainers who will take their business elsewhere is the tiny, tiny, minority.
Has anyone experimented with a different viscosity to see if consumption is any better or worse? I've experienced the need to add oil between oil changes ever since they switched to 5W-20 from 10W-30 and increased the interval between changes at the same time. That newer stuff is like water when it heats up, so it doesn't surprise me if there's more blow-by, etc. at high rpm under load...Consumer Reports did not mention that consideration...IMHO, we are experiencing a design trade-off at the mercy of the CAFE regulations. I haven't tried putting 10W-30 in my 2010TL SH-AWD 6MT with almost 90,000 miles since I bought it new in March 2010, but it would be tempting..My 1991 Accord and 1995 Prelude VTEC used thicker oil and never seemed to lose a drop (but that was also back in the era of 3000-4000 miles between changes). I wouldn't be surprised to see mpg drop by 1 or 2, but consumption might be reduced.
In reality, I'll probably keep adding a couple of quarts between oil changes and keep the 24mpg I've been averaging....If that dropped to 23 with thicker oil, I would have to put 326 gallons of gas in the tank instead of 313 with the thinner oil. So, buy 13 more gallons of gas, or a few quarts of oil over 7500 miles.... Right now, I think it's still cheaper to buy the oil.... However, if I had to put 7 quarts of oil in 7500 miles, and I wasn't a monster driver using the gas pedal like an on/off switch between WOT and closed, and I regularly ensured it was warmed up before I ran it above 4000 rpm, I would definitely be convinced something is wrong, worthy of Honda being compelled to make it right.
I think the manufacturers are well aware of the trade-off they've made in the name of fuel economy, but it is a shame they write off some of the outliers...probably blaming aggressive driving style (ie it's normal includes an asterisk - *normal for aggressive drivers". It seems with the threat of class action suits, the manufacturers would use the technology available, and be willing to do an oil consumption test that includes a data recorder hooked up to the OBDII outlet...They can check driving style to see if there's any correlation between that and consumption....Maybe they already have, and they've seen it....but people who drive aggressively tend to be aggressive in other ways too, like being adamant the car shouldn't consume oil no matter how much they beat on it when it's cold or during their regular, aggressive commutes. I drive 26 miles one way to work each day, on city surface streets and interstates...maybe I'm just getting old, but the 'hyper competitiveness" on the roads is getting ridiculous...if you want to get to your job 5 minutes before I get to mine, be my guest....but don't be surprised if your gas mileage sucks and your car consumes oil....and blame yourself instead of the car manufacturer. That said, I would also not be surprised there are legitimate complaints...Putting myself in the place of the manufacturers, they are in a bind...how do you weed out the legitimate complainers who deserve a fix from the others? Can you legally define "normal oil consumption resulting from excessively aggressive driving style" vs. "excessive consumption during normal driving style" to enable drawing the line where legitimate complaining starts? Probably not, so the manufacturers take the trade-off assuming/hoping the number of legitimate complainers who will take their business elsewhere is the tiny, tiny, minority.
09-01-2016, 02:12 PM
#24
2011 SH-AWD 6MT
I am mid oil-consumption test now. I'm supposed to go back after the first 1k, then 2k and finally 3k. I just checked my oil when cold (after about 12 hours) and the level is over the full mark which makes me think that the dealer certainly filled it over the fill line when they did the last change. I'm about 900 miles into the OCI.
Fully cognizant of the fact that thermal expansion accounts for accurate oil level readings when the level is checked when the engine is warm. https://acurazine.com/forums/fourth-...ur-oil-927857/
I'm thinking the dealer puts in an even 5 quarts since it's reading this high even when cold. This makes me suspect the consumption test since the engine has to consume 1/2 quart before even reading at the top of the knurling/hash marks.
Awesome, thanks for sharing.
Fully cognizant of the fact that thermal expansion accounts for accurate oil level readings when the level is checked when the engine is warm. https://acurazine.com/forums/fourth-...ur-oil-927857/
I'm thinking the dealer puts in an even 5 quarts since it's reading this high even when cold. This makes me suspect the consumption test since the engine has to consume 1/2 quart before even reading at the top of the knurling/hash marks.
FYI, for anyone who hasn't seen this yet. Sounds like Acura may be coming out with a repair procedure in the near future to fix the oil consumption issue...
http://www.urvi.net/forumfiles/SB/BTS160705.PDF
http://www.urvi.net/forumfiles/SB/BTS160705.PDF
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
IBankMouse
1G TSX (2004-2008)
8
06-13-2020 12:53 PM
mlody
5G TLX (2015-2020)
85
12-04-2019 02:11 PM
joflewbyu2
5G TLX (2015-2020)
139
10-08-2015 11:16 AM