2Ad Engine Replacement Poll

[Gods_gift]

Time and time again other brands or models are put up as a smoke screen to these topics......

But We are talking Rav4 here because this is after all a Rav4 Forum......

As I don't own a Land-rover or a Honda what goes on with them is of no importance to Me whatsoever. Sorry if that sounds selfish but it just isn't !

Hi Charlie I don't think people are trying to throw up a smoke screen they are just stating that Toyotas aren't the only ones with issues and this is more common than probably thought due to the rapid development cycles employed by all manufacturers. Although this is a Rav/Toyota forum we aren't in a walled garden, quite often on other subjects we discuss other manufactures.

Just to add my engine was replaced two months ago (104,000 miles) I've since done 2400 miles with no issues and I'm greatful to Toyota for putting their hands up and rectifying the fault. My engine had always used oil and I thought this to be the normal until I started losing coolant too. After speaking with Don we asked Toyota to look at it and they recommended the engine swap.

[CharlieFarlie]

Time and time again other brands or models are put up as a smoke screen to these topics......

But We are talking Rav4 here because this is after all a Rav4 Forum......

As I don't own a Land-rover or a Honda what goes on with them is of no importance to Me whatsoever. Sorry if that sounds selfish but it just isn't !

Hi Charlie I don't think people are trying to throw up a smoke screen they are just stating that Toyotas aren't the only ones with issues and this is more common than probably thought due to the rapid development cycles employed by all manufacturers. Although this is a Rav/Toyota forum we aren't in a walled garden, quite often on other subjects we discuss other manufactures.

Just to add my engine was replaced two months ago (104,000 miles) I've since done 2400 miles with no issues and I'm greatful to Toyota for putting their hands up and rectifying the fault. My engine had always used oil and I thought this to be the normal until I started losing coolant too. After speaking with Don we asked Toyota to look at it and they recommended the engine swap.

Yes Mate I realise all cars have problems and also know We are not the only ones..

But it matters not that other cars have problems to Me.. What we are i though were talking about is the apparent weakness with the cars We own..

What worries Me is the amount of Owners just like your self that think that the burning of oil is fine.. Which of course it is not..

How would You feel in say a years time if the problem was to become apparent and the extended warranty had expired ??

And this is the main problem surely....

I'm glad You came on this forum and discovered this rather regretful situation now and not later on.

Perhaps My ramblings on this issue is not wasted after all..

My feelings are People have a right to know exactly what they are buying or have bought.. This way You have the full information when deciding whether to buy or not and what to do and how to proceed if a Member finds themselves in the exact position You were in .....

[anchorman]

I do know what you mean, I really do and it does seem cruel.

I can also see another side that says that if you buy a 7 year old car of any brand you can expect some risk. If the car has a full history then either Toyota or the repairer should have picked up a problem and for those with no history then you pay your money and take your chance. All TGB ask is for a "reasonable service history" and not necessarily a full Toyota service history. It just protects against a car that never had an oil change.

I don't see an easy solution but I do think the compromise is reasonable.

[blue monster]

Because by the time yours had been built they were in the process of running production changes. I expected/hoped/predicted that we would se this trend. The poll should see primarily 2006/7 models but there may be a few stragglers that were registered late or the owners have wangled a new engine with boderline oil consumption.

Don, ours was first registered in May 2008 and did genuinely use oil as per the threads that I started on here querying the Toyota recognised bench mark/amount of oil that is used to be deemed excessive and it obviously exceeded that amount the fact that we had a new engine.

Do you think that we were just unlucky and had a late straggler?

[anchorman]

Can you pm me your VIN No while I look when it was built?

[DjRav]

No modern engine should "use" oil. My 57 XTR doesn't use or lose any at all, which I would like to regard as normal. My Vauxhall van does use oil, but that's because it's a) Rubbish and B) seriously underpowered for what it's asked to do.

If you tow a heavy load for long periods with a Rav then obviously you'd put more strain on the engine and maybe use a little, but in "normal use" you shouldn't.

If it does there is something wrong. I think Anchs said it- if you buy a Rav NOW you have a chance to monitor oil loss and can get support from Toyota so there is much less risk.

If you buy a Rav out of the 7 yr 112k warranty and the seller doesn't admit oil loss (and the engine's not been changed) then you're stuck with the dodgy engine.

Dave

(I'll reserve the right to mention LR or other brands if that's okay, but I'll try my best to keep it relevant and thread contexticle)

[anchorman]

Yours not using oil is proof that the problems were fixed in production and this is relfected in the poll. If a previous engine uses oil it doesn't necessarily mean it is dodgy. My old one was run on high grade fuel because it sounded nicer when cold and I later found out it was doing the inside of the engine good. Both me and the following owner ran it for years and just kept adding oil. It never gave a minutes trouble.

[blue monster]

Can you pm me your VIN No while I look when it was built?

Don, did you manage to look in to this for me? I PM'd you my VIN number as requested.

Thanks

Martin

[anchorman]

Sorry Martin

I looked up the build date and then intended to look what production changes had been done and thats as far as I got.

It was built in March 2008 so was "fresh off the ship" when it was registered in May.

I'll just go through the various production changes.

When the vehicle was launched in March 2006, the 136 engine and the T180 engine had different pistons but the same piston rings.

In August 2006 they changed the pistons to have 8 drain holes at the oil scrapers groove from 4. They also changed to a modified piston ring. This meant that oil collected by the scraper ring could make its way back to the sump instead of being forced into the upper cylinder and burned. This first change made all the difference to most owners but how successful it was depended on how it was being driven and the mileage as this affected how well the rings bedded in. It would have applied to most vehicles on the road by October 2006 so most 2007 models were significantly improved.

If we apply your delivery dates to my old red RAV then being first regisetered in September 2006 it would have had the original design. It did indeed consume quite large quantities of oil and it turned black within days of it being changed. It had just missed the first mod (I was completely unaware of this at the time and considered it "normal").

To try to make the production engines "fit all" duty cycles, they modified the rings in production again in May 2008 by increasing the tension of the top ring and the entire shape of the oil scraper. This stopped carbon getting down into the sump and oil getting up regardless of duty cycle. By now, the oil consumption had stopped and the oil didn't turn black so readily. Again if we allow for shipping dates then all models registered by July 2008 will have been included in this production change.

Engines that were being reworked at this time were being dismantled at dealers. The problem is that this engine is very complex and it required the best mecahnics and a considerable amount of time. For this reason, some dealer reworked engines were not successful. For this reason, TGB changed the policy and fitted factory rebuilt engines (or in some cases new depending on availability of returned units).

You can see that your engine fell into the interim period with only the first stage modification and therefor qualified for a replacement. Had it been driven differently from new it might have been more successful and not needed a replacement. The advantage of the factory rebuilt engine is that it benefitted from several running changes to sealing so oil leaks and weaps were also eliminated. I would stress that these leaks were seldom more than an annoyance but could effect sumps, rear crankshaft seals and timing cases - sometimes individually.

[blue monster]

Don, thanks got the info. As for being driven differently from new I can't comment on that, all i know is ours had 30k on it when we bought it & only 1 previous owner with FTSH. For all I know he could have driven it like a granny or Nigel Mansell :-)