consumeradvocate

Then why has sludge never been reported in a vehicle with the redesigned motor?

There have been plenty of Toyota owner reports of sludge in the redesigned engines. A 2003 Camry owner has been trying to get a resolution for quite some time now. She is not alone.

You say there are no reports. Where is the data coming from? I am just curious about Toyota's take on this data. How many owners have sent letters to it since the CSP?

[second, Used Oil Analyis reports, posted by independent car owners, show that even if owner change at 5K interval with dino oil, 1mz-fe used up the oil long before 5K. It is myth that no 1mz-fe get sludged if owner change oil at 5K. I don't understand where the myth originates from and why people helped to spread the myth. Here are Used Oil Analysis reports by independent labs, posted by independent owners to bust the myth.

You're right on, TunedRX300! Oil analyses are most revealing on these engines. I own a 1999 Sienna and each of my oil analyses shows "Abnormal Lubricant Condition" no matter what the oil change interval. For instance, once I changed the oil after just 2,900 miles. The TBN was reduced to 2.67! The viscosity was also reduced. Even with roughly 5,000 mile oil changes, the TBN is reduced to well below 2! Nitration is above the maximum range even with a 5,500 mile oil change.

Some owners of these engines have found excessive fuel in the oil on analysis. Others have found glycol contamination of the oil. Still others have found metal bits in the used oil with use of a magnet. Aside from premature breakdown of the oil, there seems to be contaminates originating from other sources. What factors are leading to these findings? As we know, contamination of the engine oil serves to further diminish the effectiveness of the oil.

It is truly a myth that every 3,000 mile oil changes and/or exclusive use of synthetics will prevent the development of Toyota engine sludge. Far too many Toyota vehicle owners have given accounts of sludge formation with better than recommended oil changes and/or use of synthetic engine oil. This myth has obviously become part of the PR used to counter the postings of the Toyota owner experiences. A common refrain at the Toyota dealerships is that Siennas used as taxis have over 300,000 miles on the them and that their engines are "as clean as a whistle." Every dealership has the mantra down, "We have never seen a case of engine oil sludge in a properly maintained vehicle." In fact, there are many, many Toyota owner accounts of proper (actually better than proper) maintenance and the development of engine oil sludge.

I agree that it is an insult to the customers to keep blaming them for this malady. Not only that, many Toyota owners never received the so-called CSP notification letter originally. I recently spoke to a co-worker who has a 1998 Celica. She was never sent the letter and knows nothing about the engine oil sludge problem. She is far from alone. A Toyota executive admitted to stopping the first mailings of the SPA letter when customers began to discuss how accusatory it was. All 3.3 million affected Toyota owners were supposed to receive the second letter about the CSP, but it just hasn't happened. I still don't understand why Toyota did not follow through on its very public promise.

Even with the class action lawsuit, Toyota "promises" to take certain actions. BUT, are there loopholes it will take advantage of? What exactly is "reasonable maintenance" and is Toyota going to change the original requirements and penalize the owners? We know that Toyota said publicly that oil change receipts were not all that important and that one receipt in 12 months time was the minimum. Behind the scenes, though, Toyota owners report that ALL the receipts are required and that Toyota is denying CSP claims if they are not submitted. Is this FAIR? What is the reason for the change in requirement? Why is one thing being stated publicly while another thing is being done privately? Toyota should know that Toyota owners are going to compare notes and find all this out.

Regarding the class action lawsuit, it seems like a real good deal for Toyota. However, it really doesn't do anything for all the Toyota owners who no longer own their vehicle and/or who threw out all documentation. It doesn't do anything for those Toyota owners who own other models and model years that also developed sludge under the same conditions. It doesn't do anything for those who don't put much mileage on their vehicles and/or those who have not yet had the sludge symptoms. What is does do is to give an additional notice (maybe the FIRST ONE) for the sludge-prone Toyota vehicle owners. It has been awhile and the CSP information is difficult to find even on the Toyota website itself! Nonetheless, Toyota owner accounts continue to accumulate (see Toyota Owners Unite for Resolution online petition). The recent online media coverage of the Toyota engine oil class action lawsuit has renewed the online discussion that has continued for six years or more. Many Toyota owners feel that Toyota should be extending their vehicle warranty further. Some Toyota owners are still getting the short end of the stick in this matter.

Unfortunately, some sites where detailed discussions between Toyota owners, engineers, oil experts, etc., took place daily were hacked and are no longer available. Two sites went down almost at the exact time in 2004...very mysteriously! Even the moderators at the sites were taken aback by the actions of some wishing to interfere with consumer freedom of speech! One wonders if more would have been uncovered had the discussions been allowed to continue. After all, the discussions of Toyota owner engine oil analyses and the design of these engines, in addition to the maintenance issue (and recommended maintenance schedule) are paramount to uncovering the true cause of Toyota engine oil sludge. Without this data, there is simply no way that Toyota can say this is exclusively an owner maintenance issue.