Just a final update (I hope). I’ve put 2000 miles on the Equinox since the repair. No changes in driveability and mpg since the work was done. Oil consumption, if any, appears to be negligible. The PCV return hose connector at the air box only has a thin film of oil on it, prior to the repair there would be a drop or two of oil on it every time I checked…
Interestingly, the dealer was sold on the day I picked it up. Hopefully the new owner will provide the same level of service.
Ed B
Docnick: Reading the rental car owner’s manual while on holiday sounds like something I would do. LOL
Well just anecdotal but I used to use nothing but Pennz but before the engine went I was using a quart every 500 miles and I had changed it every 3000 miles since new. Even in lawn mowers the engines looked filthy. I’m told other oils hold deposits in suspension so they are drained with the oil but not Pennz. I switched to Mobil and Rotella and never looked back. To be ok and then start using oil at 28K would be worrisome. Just me but I won’t even allow a Pennz empty oil can in my garage.
I always saw this in older engines using the standard Pennzoil yellow bottle myself. They were full of gunk/sludge. I have used some of the Platinum product in more recent years. This stuff is supposedly one of the better synthetics on the market and meets the GM Dexos specification.
I would have to assume that the conventional yellow bottle has been improved but I don’t know. The stuff is still sold and meets many of the modern specs so I would have to think this has been improved.
I run Mobil 1 in pretty much all the cars these days as well. The mowers get a Rotella synthetic 5W40 and seem to eat this stuff up. Many of them used to puff blue smoke on start and use a little oil but this went away within a couple hours of operation after switching to Rotella. I usually get my mower equipment or just the engines used so have no clue how they were treated or what oil they had before I get them. The Kohler Commands with the hydraulic valve lifters run great on the Rotella. They both clattered like mad when first started. I suspect some of this was related to dirty oil but some might have been that they had been sitting a while before I got them and they bled down. Again, I have not had any issues with the lifters clattering since using the Rotella.
With tighter tolerances in engines and specifications calling for thinner 0W20 oil and such, having a good oil is more important than ever.
Oil “consumption” between service intervals should be immeasurable. If otherwise, there is a mechanical problem! These “normal oil burners and leakers” are polluting more than their 32 MPG numbers represent! They should be warranty buy-back LEMONS! My Ex-wife owned an 81 faux Mustang straight 6 that she watched the oil gauge never “go empty” (pressure hi/low!) It WAS nearly 3 quarts low when I checked and changed it! 
As much as it “weeped but never dripped” after that oil change, even with that “new fangled Mobil-1 Synthetic” that just was introduced, which promised 15-25K changes, and I tried one to save $$$. (I did change the filter on this extended life oil), but the top-off was the the amount of the FL1A filter, but no more! (No consumption!) I’m not sure where she had that 2 out of 5 quart oil service done before I started doing the maintenance, but my 3-5K changes were full until the car was donated, because the state testers here made a CA emissions car here in CO fail on demand! Before the state ran the program, I went to a local “filling station” the owner’s 16 year old daughter showed me how she could pass or fail it by running a the correct RPM ( 2500+ not the low 2300 where the O2 pump struggled here at Hi-Altitude. Ford should have made a smaller pulley conversion for here in CO!) It was donated to Bud’s Warehouse, they were shocked it was a running vehicle when they picked it up! Oh BTW my 2003 Ford F250 6.0 with 165K won’t leave a drop of anything on your driveway either!
“My Ex-wife owned an 81 faux Mustang straight 6 that she watched the oil gauge never ‘go empty’ (pressure hi/low!) It WAS nearly 3 quarts low when I checked and changed it! ;-)”
What? I’m confused by what is written. She/You were using oil pressure as an indication of oil volume? That’s a good thing that the oil never went “empty,” but rather only 3 quarts low? Was she thinking the pressure indicated volume?
What ended the rapid consumption? Different oil? I don’t get it.
CSA
“Oil “consumption” between service intervals should be immeasurable. If otherwise, there is a mechanical problem!”
I respectfully cannot agree with this statement. While manufacturers’ new-car standards are absolutely too low regarding oil usage, it’s perfectly normal for an engine with some miles on it to use oil. I keep my cars for hundreds of thousands of miles and have never had to open one of my engines, but they’ve all used some oil when they got older. Cylinders wear, wiper rings wear and lose their tension, and in some cases valve stem seals get old, but no vehicle I’ve ever owned in almost 50 years of ownership has never used a drop of oil. To say any engine that uses any oil whatsoever between changes has a mechanical problem suggests an “absolute” approach that simply isn’t realistic in my opinion.
One of the functions of the oil is to lubricate the cylinders. “Honing” of the cylinders helps retain a bit of the oil after the wiper rings pass by to lubricate the compression rings. That film ends up in the combustion chamber getting burned. The amount is miniscule, but without it your engine would seize.
I also see in your post an environmental comment. Personally, I think it would be an environmental disaster to send every car to the scrapheap whose engine showed any loss of oil between scheduled changes. The energy costs to try to recycle such a monster would be enormous, as would the environmental cost to manufacture replacement vehicles.
I respect your concern for the environment. But I honestly think that your standards for oil burning are unrealistic and your suggestion would be an environmental disaster. IMHO it’s far better for the environment for people to maintain the vehicles they have and keep them as long as possible.
@mountainbike I agree! Although I have 2 cars which consume hardly any oil between changes, I still do not ever have to add any. I gave away a gallon of top up oil because it was just sitting there.
Environmental zealots usually lack a sense of proportion. If the burning of a quart of oil every 5000 miles is considered environmentally bad, we should put a prohibitive tax on large engines that create a lot of greenhouse gasses.
A good example of environmental insanity: We lived in Malaysia and just across the Strait of Malacca in Indonesia, a large producer of palm oil for diesel use in Europe. The European union had legislated a certain % of “renewable” fuel in diesel, which is mostly met by palm diesel. As a result, Indonesian operators with the tacit agreement of their government burn thousands of acres of prime jungle (they don’t even harvest the wood!), creating a really bad smoke situation and putting millions of tons of CARBON into the atmosphere. The palm trees planted yield fruit in about 10 years, then the oil is shipped to Europe. Even in the long or short term, this activity has no net contribution to mitigate climate change.
Compared to 30 years ago cars are more kind to the environment, but building ever larger vehicles partly negates the improvement. This is called the Efficiency Paradox
With respect to the poster’s comments, the SAE has done several life cycle environmental calculations and by far the most benign impact is building a good car, maintaining it well till the end of its DESIGN LIFE and then recycling it. Today’s design life is at least 250,000 miles for most cars. Poster would do well to download some of these papers.
These thinner oils are being specified for CAFE standards as they have less viscous drag and thus increase mileage. The issue is that SOME engines tend to burn this thinner oil because it can slip past the rings, etc. It isn’t just this GM engine. It seems a lot of European makes went through this as well. A couple years of the Camry were also bad about this.
My new Mitsubishi Mirage specifies 0W20 oil and am sure this is to keep the mileage up there near 50mpg. Both mine and my girlfriend’s used about 1/3 quart of oil during the break in period and then consumption has stopped for now. I figure this had to do with the rings and cylinder walls wearing into each other.
Several times when the dealer overfilled the oil on my Subi on a routine oil change, the excuse was: we know the engines burn a lot of this 0W20 oil so we add more initially.
Yes, that is what the service writer said.
LOL, Bill, that one gave me a chuckle.
It’s sad the extent to which the feds have affected our cars. IMHO we’ve reached the point where further raising of the standards is counterproductive. I know we’ve had this discussion a number of times, and don’t mean to start another lengthy debate, but I’m really not saying anything that the overwhelming majority of people in the industry already know. The real debate is really about how much each of us is willing to accept it.
One thing I never see addressed is oil consumption vs engine size.
Wouldn’t a 2 liter engine that uses a qt every 1500 miles be more of a concern than a 5.7 liter engine that used that much?
@mountainbike
"The real debate is really about how much each of us is willing to accept it."
You’re familiar with the frog in a pot of water on a stove, right?
CSA
Yes, I agree. Burning oil creates emissions too and probably a lot dirtier than those caused by a tad less MPG caused by thicker oil. I understand that modern emissions systems can actually process quite a lot of oil although I am sure this fouls them quicker.
I wonder what percentage of certain offending engines actually have these problems. One of my friends once had a 2007 Camry that DRANK oil. I understand oil burning was an issue with these but wonder how many didn’t have the problem. Of course you only hear people who are pissed about the problems with their cars, not those that work correctly. Toyota is known for making a pretty decent product so people really take notice when they have problems.
You’re familiar with the frog in a pot of water on a stove, right?
That comparison refuses to die.
It’s not true of the frog (with a relatively minuscule brain) let alone a human (with hopefully larger capacity although debatable in some). There is always a threshold of pain that causes action. If you rented and the landlord slowly raised the rent over a decade to 5x what it was, would you not notice? At some point, anyone will go- this is ridiculous, I can’t afford it, I need to make a change.
So far, we haven’t hit that threshold of pain with cars and emission/cafe standards. So why stop pushing the envelope??
These corporations are not altruistic. They react to mandates and market pressures…
Yes, we can certainly blame for government for some of this. Switching to a thinner oil is a very easy way to increase mileage. This doesn’t mean that the car makers have an engine that has been tested to work well with such thin oil. This relates to both the materials used as well as the machining process.
Decided to change oil and filter at 4100 miles since the rebuild.
Both the drain plug and the filter housing were a bear to remove. I’m surprised the oil pan threads weren’t stripped. The filter was somewhat crushed, the white material looks like silicone rtv from the engine reassembly. I dId not see any metal debris in the filter. Hopefully the silicone is harmless.
Ed B.
The question in my mind isn’t “why stop pushing the envelope” but “why PUSH the envelope until the pain is unbearable?” Must the frog be boiled to make us happy? Are you aware that suffering is already going on among elderly people on fixed incomes and those of limited income? At whose pain threshold should we stop? Mine? Yours? Paris Hiltons?
Motors with variable valve timing and with cylinder deactivation require low viscosity oil to prevent clogging of the tiny oil passages that make these features work.
