Chevrolet Colorado & GMC Canyon Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,732 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
GM 5.3L OIL CONSUMPTION LAWSUIT FILED IN MINNESOTA
Oil allegedly enters the combustion chambers of 5.3-Liter V8 Vortec 5300 engines.

By David A. Wood, CarComplaints.com

December 15, 2016 — A GM 5.3L engine oil consumption lawsuit alleges numerous 2010-2013 General Motors trucks and SUVs suffer from defects that allow oil to enter the combustion chambers of the 5.3-Liter V8 Vortec 5300 engines.

The lawsuit says GM 5.3L oil consumption problems are caused by defective piston rings, PVC systems and "active fuel management" (AFM) systems that cause the spark plugs to wear out prematurely and the engines to experience all kinds of malfunctions.

According to the proposed class-action lawsuit, the following vehicles are affected by the oil consumption problems:

  • 2010-2013 Chevrolet Avalanche
  • 2010-2013 Chevrolet Express 1500
  • 2010-2013 Chevrolet Silverado 1500
  • 2010-2013 Chevrolet Suburban
  • 2010-2013 Chevrolet Tahoe
  • 2010-2013 Chevrolet Colorado
  • 2010-2013 GMC Yukon
  • 2010-2013 GMC Yukon XL
  • 2010-2013 GMC Sierra 1500
  • 2010-2013 GMC Savana 1500
  • 2010-2013 GMC Canyon
The plaintiff says all the defects were present when the trucks and SUVs were manufactured and can start causing owners problems without warning.

According to the lawsuit, it's so important to keep oil out of the combustion cylinders that manufacturers use valve guide seals and piston rings to keep the oil out. But if those seals fail, the loss of lubrication can destroy the 5.3L engine.

Drivers may experience a loss of power during acceleration, smoke from the exhaust and the vehicle may enter "safe mode." In that mode an engine may suddenly shut off or run badly until the problems can be fixed.

General Motors made changes in 2007 to its 5300 engines to improve performance, creating the Generation IV Vortec 5300 engines from 2007 through 2009.

The 2007 changes continued through at least 2013 with the introduction of new piston rings meant to increase horsepower. But the plaintiff says the changes result in oil being allowed to migrate into the combustion process where it is burned. A new PCV system also allegedly allows oil to be sucked through the intake and into the combustion chamber instead of acting to capture excess gas.

The plaintiffs claim whatever advantages the engines provide are outweighed by the vehicles using too much oil, something the automaker should have told consumers.

According to the complaint, GM must have known about oil consumption problems in the 5.3L engines because on September 28, 2010, the automaker issued technical service bulletin (TSB) 10-06-01-008A addressing engine oil consumption in its 2007-2008 models. Then on January 3, 2013, GM issued another bulletin (10-06-01-008G) concerning oil consumption problems in 2007-2011 models.

The plaintiff claims GM issued at least seven service bulletins from 2010-2013, all because of excessive oil consumption. However, without an official recall, GM wasn't required to contact owners and let them know about the service bulletins.

Based on what the plaintiff claims, the use of an "oil life monitoring system" lulls drivers into driving thousands of miles without knowing how low the engine oil levels really are. The system is used solely as a warning to let drivers know when to change the oil but allegedly does nothing to accurately let drivers know their engines are being ruined.

General Motors finally took action to fix oil consumption problems starting with 2014 models, but it was allegedly too late for all the consumers already affected by the problem.

The lawsuit alleges the automaker violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the Minnesota Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, committed fraud by concealment, negligence and breached express warranties.

The GM 5.3L oil consumption lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota - Bradley K. Zierke, et al, vs. General Motors LLC, General Motors Company, General Motors Holdings LLC and GM LLC.

The plaintiff is represented by Johnson//Becker.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,757 Posts
+1 reason for 09' being the ultimate year of 1st gen Colorado/Canyons :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,686 Posts
NO, 09 is not the best, read Jan 3 2013 bulletin 10-06-01-008G
2007-2011 all 5.3L's are affected
 

·
US Army 19yrs and ......
Joined
·
45,284 Posts
I know there have been many problems with the Tahoes/Yukon with the 5.3 with DoD/AFM and drinking oil.

I have been using Royal Purple HMX 5w30 and 1qt of Lucas Synthetic Oil Stabilizer; I've never lost more then .5 qt over 7500 miles

I know there was a Service bulletin that requires the swapping out the passenger side valve cover for a revised version (I don't think mine has ever been swapped)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
874 Posts
Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I was unaware the Colorado was effected by the oil consumption issues.

I thought only vehicles with active fuel management had to worry about it.

I will be following the updates to this thread closely.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
13,732 Posts
Discussion Starter #9 (Edited)

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,757 Posts
NO, 09 is not the best, read Jan 3 2013 bulletin 10-06-01-008G
2007-2011 all 5.3L's are affected
Neither the LH8 or LH9 were included in that bulletin.

It wasn't until a later revision (10-06-01-008M) that the LH9 ('10-'12) was added.

I'm willing to bet that if I tried to get my truck involved in any of this, GM would tell me to kick rocks.
 

·
US Army 19yrs and ......
Joined
·
45,284 Posts
Because you cam is an oil eater?? @ahelm3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,686 Posts
We have a diff left valve cover w/oil deflector
than the one's shown. I have had no oil prob on
the 5.3 or the 6.2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
I've actually dealt with this problem first hand.

So there's 2 culprits the valve cover was a issue but has been revised with a better baffle and I'm not sure if this affects the 355's or not because they have a specific oil pan but on AFM motors there's a relif valve in the oil pan that literally sprays oil in to one of the cylinders now I believe this was a necessary feature on the AFM models but poorly thought out, unfortunately they added that same valve to almost every newer motor regardless if it had AFM or not my LY6 had the valve and was burning thru 2 qt's every 3500 miles I pulled the pan plugged the valve and swapped to the newer valve covers and I don't think it burns any oil at all now.

I would like to see a Colorado oil pan to see if the valve is there
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
994 Posts
It's that damn pcv system more than anything else. Bet.
Never seen such bs... oh wait, yes I have- GM sealing automatic transmissions in those front wheel drive cars... 'pour fluid in here until it comes out this bolt hole here'
Even my 2.9 did the pcv eating oil trick until the workaround... which is kinda ridiculous when you think about it. Oh I know, let's reengineer this $5 part into a $200 part! Yeah! That's the ticket!
bastards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,686 Posts
I have a set of early PVC valve covers that i painted Blue
and installed on my 5.3 when the cam was installed.
It never used any oil with them on. I have the PVC less
covers on the 6.2 and there is no oil loss or build up in
my catch can or filter in the breather line.
 

·
Custom User Title
Joined
·
247 Posts
Neither the LH8 or LH9 were included in that bulletin.

It wasn't until a later revision (10-06-01-008M) that the LH9 ('10-'12) was added.

I'm willing to bet that if I tried to get my truck involved in any of this, GM would tell me to kick rocks.
I have an '09 Colorado with the LH8 so I should be good?

Or do I need to install the updated valve cover?



I have a set of early PVC valve covers that i painted Blue
and installed on my 5.3 when the cam was installed.
It never used any oil with them on. I have the PVC less
covers on the 6.2 and there is no oil loss or build up in
my catch can or filter in the breather line.
Speaking of oil catch cans... I was searching and cannot seem to find on the board where to connect everything up on the 5.3L.

Is there a thread for that?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,692 Posts
I have considered a catch can on my LFX...
Not for oil consumption but because of the direct injection....
Still not sold on the ideal it is necessary... ???
 

·
Custom User Title
Joined
·
247 Posts
Did anyone ever post up a how to for installing an oil catch can on the 5.3L engine?

I'm not quit clear on where to connect it to...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
The 6.2 also has AFM, I can foresee problems with it as well. Its only been around a couple model years so maybe not long enough for enough trucks to rack up enough miles for it to be a problem, yet. I remember reading all sorts of oil consumption problems for the 5.3 in another GM trucks forum that I used to go to a lot when I had my Silverado. Some trucks with as little as 25,000 miles on them already needing engine work. Ram has basically the same system but apparently doesn't have the same problems on the hemi V8s. Toyota Tundra has the oldest V8 engine on the market but its the most reliable. Yes it gets poor gas mileage compared to the other V8s and the ecoboost engines from Ford but it makes good power and will last 300K miles. No need to change something that works.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top