- This topic has 7 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Topic
-
Drove my 2003 Accord (specifics below) about 700 miles this weekend and ended up using about 1.25 quarts of oil when it was all said and done. Noticed greater than average oil usage over the past 5 months, but this is the worst i have seen in the 30,000 miles i have owned the car. There do not appear to be any leaks with a visual inspection, or on the ground where the car is parked. Also, the exhaust is not “smokey,” at least at idle.
The car has been well kept, with regular maintenance for its entire life. No other problems to note other than the oil burning. Any ideas what might be causing the oil consumption, or is the engine simply old and on it’s way out?
Details:
2003 Honda Accord Sedan EX-L
2.4L L4 5MT
165,000 miles
-
Replies
-
Even without the common smoke sign, I am pretty sure that Eric mentioned common oil consumption on the accords were piston rings. Try checking out his FAQ pages
Agreed – Japanese engines seem to suffer from oil control ring carbon build up. It’s a function of oil quality and oil change frequency. If using non synthetic then oil change intervals must be strictly adhered to. Better to use synthetic as it handles higher temps for much longer. But once the oil control rings are impacted with carbon the only thing you can do is pull the pistons, clean them up, and install new rings. DO NOT hone the cylinders. We do re-ring and skirt knurling on Subaru engines – about two to three a week – they go 6,000 miles on synthetic with no oil consumption after the procedure.
Rick
Thanks for the quick responses! About the answer I was expecting unfortunately. Given the age of the car and the milage I don’t think I’m in a position where I want to sink any more major money into it (whether that’s new rings or a used engine).
I switched to using full synthetic oil when I bought the car (approx. 30,000 miles ago), with about 5,000-6,000 change intervals. Up until that point it ran conventional at Honda’s change interval of 10,000. Would switching back to conventional at a shorter interval potentially be a good idea?
Also, assuming I take the route of consistently checking the level and adding oil when needed, is it likely that this will eventually affect the performance/longevity of the catalytic converter or other emissions components?
Thanks again for the help.
Conventional @ 10,000 intervals?!!?
HOLY #%÷%'[]!!
Yeah that engine is likely trashed inside. Sludged and varnished. Probably even doing a re-ring wouldn’t buy it much more life. Find a JDM replacement or trade car in.
Rick
Yeah wish I was joking, but that’s straight out of the 2003 manual, what’s even crazier is they only call to replace the oil filter every 20,000 miles.
That’s certifiably insane. Conventional will turn basically to tar after that many miles and heat cycling.
I would pull the valve cover and inspect. I bet it’s a sludge factory in there.
Those maintenance intervals are designed to reduce projected “ownership costs” but they don’t care if you need a new engine shortly after the warranty runs out.
Rick
Really unfortunate situation given that the rest of the maintenance on the vehicle was completely by the book, but i guess in the case of oil changes the book is more concerned with the initial sale. I likely won’t pull the valve cover seeing as anything i find is not going to change the end result, more money into a car who’s KBB isn’t worth the cost of a replacement engine.
Going forward this beings up an interesting point though, on a newer vehicle with one of those “smart” maintenance-minder systems (talking 2015 and forward), are you likely to follow the recommendation of the system or stick to regular, reasonable intervals?
Thanks for the input.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.