Oil consumption

H

H. Whelply

I noticed today that, at somewhat over 2,400 miles, my '04 XT Forester has
used a bit less than 1/2 quart of oil. This doesn't seem reason for
concern, but I haven't experienced this in my last few new cars (all Hondas,
and one Volvo). Any advice? Thanks.

HW
 
I did. What page/item did I miss? Anything starting in the index under
"oil." I didn't see anything on this subject.

HW
 
Similar consumption in my XT. The dealer said this is normal when running in
a turbo-charged donk.

Rob
 
It definitely shouldn't be so much. Usually I have a little below "full"
level right after oil change and I have a little above "minimum" level after
3500-3700 miles (at next oil change). I have Outback '97.
 
I guess I assumed there is one quart between the maximum/minimum marker
holes. As I recall, when brand new, the oil level was just below full; now
it's about half way between the max/min marker holes.

HW
 
H. Whelply said:
and one Volvo). Any advice? Thanks.

Yeah. Opinions will vary, and YMMV, too, but my opinion would be to top
it off and keep on driving. Not to sound like a smart ass, but 1/2 qt in
2400 miles translates into a quart in 4800 mi. That's hardly cause for
concern, especially when many mfrs still figure 1 qt/1000 mi is not
excessive (Particularly if you're trying to convince them something's
amiss with your engine! I remember battles with VW when they first went
water cooled trying to convince them 1 qt/500 mi is excessive! They
didn't buy it. I don't deal with them any more, but I understand they
still won't budge much.) Nor would I compare it to your Volvo or Honda.
IS it a Volvo or Honda? Didn't think so. I don't know about Volvos, but
the Hondas I've experience with are a bit stingy on oil consumption, the
Subies a bit thirstier. AND, is this your FIRST 2400 mi on the '04? If
so, you're probably still seating in rings--it may take 5-10k miles
before they're completely settled in. Another poster spoke of "just
below full and just above minimum" in 3500+ miles. Since there's approx
1 qt between the lines, I can only guesstimate his reference points
without seeing the stick, but it sounds like about 3/4 qt. Hmmmm... 1/2
qt/2400 mi = 3/4 qt/3600 mi on my cheapo calculator. Sounds to me like
you're doing fine!

Rick
 
I wouldn't be happy with that kind of usage
My 12 year old turbo legacy uses almost no oil what so ever, the level drops
less the 5mm per 5000km
Just my 2 cents worth
Mike
 
I have a new 2004 inpreza wagon 2.5 L - 4cyl
over 4000 k's now.
the oil level has not dropped at all.
 
Rick Courtright said:
Yeah. Opinions will vary, and YMMV, too, but my opinion would be to top
it off and keep on driving. Not to sound like a smart ass, but 1/2 qt in
2400 miles translates into a quart in 4800 mi. That's hardly cause for
concern, especially when many mfrs still figure 1 qt/1000 mi is not
excessive (Particularly if you're trying to convince them something's
amiss with your engine! I remember battles with VW when they first went
water cooled trying to convince them 1 qt/500 mi is excessive! They
didn't buy it. I don't deal with them any more, but I understand they
still won't budge much.) Nor would I compare it to your Volvo or Honda.
IS it a Volvo or Honda? Didn't think so. I don't know about Volvos, but
the Hondas I've experience with are a bit stingy on oil consumption, the
Subies a bit thirstier. AND, is this your FIRST 2400 mi on the '04? If
so, you're probably still seating in rings--it may take 5-10k miles
before they're completely settled in. Another poster spoke of "just
below full and just above minimum" in 3500+ miles. Since there's approx
1 qt between the lines, I can only guesstimate his reference points
without seeing the stick, but it sounds like about 3/4 qt. Hmmmm... 1/2
qt/2400 mi = 3/4 qt/3600 mi on my cheapo calculator. Sounds to me like
you're doing fine!

Rick

Well, my experience with Hondas (89 and 92 Civics) was that they used NO
oil in 5000 mile change period, UNTIL I had a head gasket develop a crack
and got it replaced at about 60,000 miles. After that (when the shop put in
Castrol instead of their previously used Pennzoil), it used about a quart
per 1000 miles almost immediately, and deteriorated a bit from there.
As for my two 99 Foresters, neither one uses ANY oil during a 5000 mile
change period. One has over 70,000 miles, the other is over 80,000. These
are not turbo engines, of course.
 
He is talking about a new car and a turbo. Hardly the same as a 6 year old
Outback, my 98 OBW uses no oil at all.

It definitely shouldn't be so much. Usually I have a little below "full"
level right after oil change and I have a little above "minimum" level after
3500-3700 miles (at next oil change). I have Outback '97.
 
Pete said:
Hi Rob,

Does this mean that yanks don't know what a "donk" is or just HW?

HW

Translation;

"Similar consumption in my XT. The dealer said this is normal when
running-in a turbo-charged engine."

Also go here for a related forum discussion;

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=446103

Rob

I'm not doubting anyone's word but I do not understand how a car can
use no oil whatsoever in let's say 3,ooo miles or 5,ooo kilometers.
At each power stroke of the piston, most of the oil on the cylinder wall
must be burnt with the fuel. As minute as this quantity must be, I
calculate that for a distance of 5,000 kilometers at 3000 rpm (110 kmh)
(highway condition so ideal situation; for city driving multiply by at
least 4) there is 900,000,000 power strokes in a four cyl engine. And
this is not going to burn ANY oil??!!
If I'm wrong, i'm missing something and would dearly want to know what.
 
Gilles said:
I'm not doubting anyone's word but I do not understand how a car can
use no oil whatsoever in let's say 3,ooo miles or 5,ooo kilometers. ....
least 4) there is 900,000,000 power strokes in a four cyl engine. And
this is not going to burn ANY oil??!!

Hi,

You already caught the calculation discrepancy in your other post, but
your basic idea is correct: engines consume oil. Don't you think the
penny pinching manufacturers would love to eliminate that buck or two
for the oil dipstick and tubing if they didn't? Yes, it's true some
don't use much, especially when new, but I was taught the same thing Jim
mentioned in the other thread--if it APPEARS the engine's not using oil,
it's probably cuz there's water (condensation) or fuel (cold starts,
running rich) dilution of the oil. This is not uncommon on cars driven
short distances, particularly in colder climates where the oil doesn't
get hot enough to boil off the water. OTOH, owners of such cars are
sometimes concerned when they take the car on a trip and it "uses" a
quart of oil rather quickly, then often settles down. What they don't
realize is they've just boiled off the water/fuel contamination and are
getting down to "just oil" again. Even eliminating that possibility,
driving style and conditions often affect consumption.

Another thing to take a look at is the definition of "using oil." In my
mind, if I put 4.25 qts in at a change, and 3,000 miles later, there's
3.75 qts left, the engine "used" a half a quart. But, since it's only
halfway down the marks on the stick, and it's not NECESSARY to add any
oil if one doesn't wish to top things off (I do out of experiences that
became habit), someone else might (somewhat rightly) say it "didn't use
any oil."

Naturally, opinions vary on this subject.

Rick
 
Rick Courtright said:
Hi,

You already caught the calculation discrepancy in your other post, but
your basic idea is correct: engines consume oil. Don't you think the
penny pinching manufacturers would love to eliminate that buck or two
for the oil dipstick and tubing if they didn't? Yes, it's true some
don't use much, especially when new, but I was taught the same thing Jim
mentioned in the other thread--if it APPEARS the engine's not using oil,
it's probably cuz there's water (condensation) or fuel (cold starts,
running rich) dilution of the oil. This is not uncommon on cars driven
short distances, particularly in colder climates where the oil doesn't
get hot enough to boil off the water. OTOH, owners of such cars are
sometimes concerned when they take the car on a trip and it "uses" a
quart of oil rather quickly, then often settles down. What they don't
realize is they've just boiled off the water/fuel contamination and are
getting down to "just oil" again. Even eliminating that possibility,
driving style and conditions often affect consumption.

Another thing to take a look at is the definition of "using oil." In my
mind, if I put 4.25 qts in at a change, and 3,000 miles later, there's
3.75 qts left, the engine "used" a half a quart. But, since it's only
halfway down the marks on the stick, and it's not NECESSARY to add any
oil if one doesn't wish to top things off (I do out of experiences that
became habit), someone else might (somewhat rightly) say it "didn't use
any oil."

Naturally, opinions vary on this subject.

Rick

"Doesn't use any oil" in my case means this: I change my own oil. I am
meticulous about where on the dipstick I bring the level up to, and about
when I measure this (with warmed up engine, allowing a few minutes for oil
to drain into the pan. I measure the oil frequently enough throughout a
change period to follow any changes if they occur. I check the level again
before changing the oil and filter.
It is not down any measurable amount as far as the dipstip shows, and
the amount in the drain pan measures back to over 4.25 quarts after allowing
the filter to also drain into it (started as 4.5 quarts put into the engine
at last change). The filter is certainly still holding more oil, which means
my "usage" of oil is less than 1/4 quart in 5000 miles or more.
While the logic of burning some amount of oil may be correct, the actual
amount used is quite difficult to determine, I propose, and therefore my
manner of following oil "usage" is quite sufficient for my purposes to
convince me the engine is not "using oil." I have no trouble in this case
saying that my engine does not burn oil.
I have had plenty of engines than did "use, burn, consume, leak" or
otherwise lose oil during use (and non-use.) It was pretty easy to be
convinced that they were "using oil" without having to think through whether
or not they achieved this loss through burning it in a healthy piston or
leaking it through a gasket or blowing it by a worn piston etc, even though
it would be nice to know exactly to which of these the loss of oil was due.
 
Also, I forgot to add: I definitely don't do continuous short trip driving.
I do plenty of long trips with well heated engine, sufficient to burn off
condensation that might occur.
 
Not sure. I'm glad you came along - I was beginning to feel like there was
something wrong with me !!
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
13,889
Messages
67,365
Members
7,364
Latest member
Cimarron49

Latest Threads

Back
Top