Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra Forum banner

Oil consumption test - Will GM step up to fix the issue?

8K views 46 replies 11 participants last post by  travis_1500 
#1 ·
Been reading a lot re the oil consumption on the 5.3l and wondering if I am wasting my time dealing with the service department. They constantly want to up sell me for service that I don't need. Here's what I do need.....an honest answer on what GM is going to do to fix my engine. My 2009 silverado 5.3l burns around 3 quarts between oil changes. Been through one oil consumption test where they claim "oil cooler hoses" need to be replaced, luckily covered under power train warranty. Now they have me under another test and I am over a half quart down at 1000 miles. The service manager claims that GM's policy is one quart for every 100 gallons of gas is "acceptable consumption".

What has been other peoples experience with GM resolving the oil burn issues in the 5.3l?
Thanks in advance for your answers.
 
#2 ·
Greetings! I'm not a moderator, but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last night. :mrgreen: I sympathize with your issue because my 2012 is actually consuming oil. I'm also one of those guys who have asked a question and been flamed before (although not on this board - some of the nicest folks I've ever encountered - and smart). There are a lot of threads on oil consumption on this board. If you're not good with the "search" feature (which I struggle with too in finding the right "key words"), try paging through the "Vortec 5300 5.3L V8" section (which we're in right now). You won't go more than a page or two and you'll start seeing the threads. Many of them are dozens of pages long, and many folks with many different model years have posted.

My personal opinion is that you're burning oil at an excessive rate, and your dealer should acknowledge that. I'd start going right to GM if you're not getting satisfactory answers.

Good luck!
 
#3 ·
Additionally, right above this current discussion thread, you'll see a section called "Related Topics". This board is really well laid out and there's a lot of information available. It's also one of the best I've seen at showing you intuitive links around the current page you're in. I actually poked around and studied the layout for an hour or two when I first joined - time well spent!
 
#6 ·
I thought they were all AFM motors in the 5.3 size in these years. Shows you how much I know! I will tell you this...my 2012 has about 20,000 miles on it and it really wasn't burning that much (I now believe it to be about half a quart in 5,000 miles). But I installed the RANGE AFM delete device about 2,500 miles ago and it doesn't seem to burn any noticeable amount of oil anymore. Now, a lot of these threads will tell you it MATTERS when you install that RANGE device in the life of your engine and whether it will stop oil burning. But I'm optimistic at this point and I love the fact that my truck never runs in 4 banger mode - ever. And it NEVER will again.
 
#7 ·
Being that you are still under warranty and you are not getting the results you anticipated, you need to escalate the issue asap and go over the dealership's head. I've not heard the GM policy quote for acceptable oil consumption before, and I would be curious to see if he would give you that in writing. I've had issues with oil consumption on late model 5.3s, as early as 45k on one vehicle, but they were not afm motors and it had to do more with the type of oil I was using rather than anything else. There are folks on this forum who have succeeded in getting major top end work done under warranty for the oil consumption issue alone. Your wheel just may need to get a little more squeaky. After all is said and done, if it were my truck and it was a keeper, the AFM system would go away. Too many issues and the idea of getting a few miles extra per gallon in exchange for buying more oil and a potentially shortened engine life if a no brainer in my book.
 
#8 ·
I believe the GM Policy of 1 quart per 1000 miles as being acceptable is clearly stated in a TSB. I may be wrong, but I think it is in writing.
 
#9 ·
You should call different dealers and ask the questions you NEED answers to. When you find one that seems to know WTH is going on then deal with them, some dealers are clueless sometimes :roll: .

**One qt per 1000 miles is what GM deems acceptable........whatever
 
#12 ·
mthorne said:
But I installed the RANGE AFM delete device about 2,500 miles ago and it doesn't seem to burn any noticeable amount of oil anymore. Now, a lot of these threads will tell you it MATTERS when you install that RANGE device in the life of your engine and whether it will stop oil burning. But I'm optimistic at this point and I love the fact that my truck never runs in 4 banger mode - ever. And it NEVER will again.
What exactly is this range device thing? I heard AFM would start eating oil around 35k if not somehow prevented. I'm at basically 60k in my 2010 and I burn more oil than I think I should. While having it go into 4 cylinder way too much. :(
 
#13 ·
Range AFM delete prevents your truck from ever entering 4 cylinder mode. It plugs into the OBDII port and can be removed at any time and does not leave a trace that it was ever used.
Here is a link to it on Autoanything.com. If you purchase one through them, you should get a forum member 15% discount.
http://www.autoanything.com/performance ... ble-device
 
#16 ·
From what I understand, no, the range at best will only help to prevent the oil consumption problem. If your truck has already been damaged, then it will need servicing.
 
#17 ·
Depends on the real issue. Quite often after stopping the oil ingestion causing the buildup in the ringlands (if that is what it is) that causes the rings to not move freely the consumption drops. The AFM/DOD delete also should reduce it quite a bit. But if it is the rings never seated issue (most of the cases) it needs a re-ring and new hone, and very few service centers will do the hone as GM wont reimburse for it. And that results many times in the issue being the same afterwards. Rings need to seat properly, and as long as the owners manuals still tell new owners to drive easy the first 1500 miles, it will still be a widespread issue.
 
#19 ·
Do the Math: 40,000 per month for 5 years (60 months) equals 2.4 million.
Yep, I think that qualifies as "MILLIONS".

5 * 12 * 40,000 = 2,400,000
 
#20 ·
^^^ I think CKNSLS was inferring that out of the 40,000 per month of units rolled out that the AFM oil consumption problem is not widespread. However I can't imagine why some would eventually consume oil while others, that have not been modified as per GM oil consumption protocol, of the same design and set up would not.
 
#21 ·
Oh, ok, I get that. I suppose the oil consumption could have to do with how the trucks are broke in, driving habits, what kind of oils are used, how often they are changed, etc... But it is interesting that some trucks never exhibit the problem while other, seemingly identical trucks do.
 
#22 ·
O'Brien said:
^^^ I think CKNSLS was inferring that out of the 40,000 per month of units rolled out that the AFM oil consumption problem is not widespread. However I can't imagine why some would eventually consume oil while others, that have not been modified as per GM oil consumption protocol, of the same design and set up would not.
But they don't all consume oil. And according to those on this site that work on them-it all depends on how they were driven in the first couple of thousand miles.

If one could spend time (in theory) on all the Internet sites and count the problems....you would do the math and there were be many zeros in front of your number (.000000%?) of units.
 
#23 ·
I really don't know what the problem is. If it was a problem with how they are broke in, then I would think GM would have adjusted their recommendations by now. GM spends a lot of resources tracking these things and if it was determined that a gentle break in was a contributing factor, they would have changed their recommendations by now.....I would think???
 
#24 ·
CKNSLS,that's your number....not mine.I was simply clarifying your comment for esox07. It's near impossible to tell from a forum member stand point just how many units are effected by excessive oil consumption. Most owners don't visit or report conditions on public forums. Most owners that do frequent forums are aware that the AFM will not initiate in M-5 select. How many owners use this feature to avoid AFM kicking in? ...........I have no clue. I do know however that many if not most who initially purchased their 5.3 Silverado had no clue that it came with the cylinder deactivation feature. Who knew what AFM even meant unless they kept close tabs on GM trucks and features? Many sales people don't even know what it is, and GM doesn't make it public information either...... only to mention that they come with "active fuel management." I'm certain GM had their reasons for simply not spelling out cylinder deactivation feature on their window stickers as many would have avoided it like the plague.

Either way, I don't have the first damn clue how many units are consuming oil at an excessive rate or at a rate that GM stipulates as being "normal". Otherwise if it was primarily an improper 'break in' issue , why would GM have come up with a revisions to baffle plates and deflectors? I don't buy the break in theory as it pertains to AFM excessive oil consumption problems.
 
#25 ·
All I can relate to is working on them (started as a GM tech in 1974 and have seen the gamut of engines and issues) and building engines for over 40 years what we see up close and personal. Just like the introduction of the LS1 in 1997, it took years for GM to address and fix the piston slap issues, and the oil consumption has been around since then as well. If I had to (based on the # of warranty claims) guess, I would say 40-50% have excess consumption issues. I can also say that when we rebuild them and have the engine broken in with conventional oil, and several hard acceleration/deceleration's in the first 100 miles, almost never have any oil consumption issues...and that's years and hundreds of engines. If you search my posts, I have posted tons of pictures of the cylinder walls and pistons to show what happens.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top