Engine Sludge/Oil Gelling--Toyota's Customer Response - READ ONLY

877 messages, Last post on May 09, 2002 at 5:24 AM

You are in the Maintenance & Repair - Archived Discussions Forum. Your Host is mr_shiftright

This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the M&R Host for directions! discussion.

What is this discussion about? Toyota, Lexus, Engine, Oil, Coupe, Convertible, Sedan, SUV

OPEN FORUM--All invited! Please Ask Questions One At A Time and Be Patient For A Response.

Outline

Messages Page 83 of 89: 1; ...; 80; 81; 82; 83; 84; 85; 86; ...; 89; Prev; Next; Last

#812 of 877 rubicon by duckshooter May 02, 2002 (5:40 am)
Thanks for replying. You asked if it's possible to compare how different companies respond to a problem when the situations aren't identical. Yes, it is possible when the problems are not identical, but they must be similar situations. Obviously, willful fraud or employee misconduct is not similar to an unintended design or production flaw. And tire tread separation resulting in catastrophic loss of vehicle control, serious injuries and death is not similar to oil sludging. Remember that prior to this year, the universal consensus in the auto repair industry was that sludging results only from improper maintenance - nothing else. To assume that Toyota should come forth and admit wrongdoing assumes that Toyota has done something wrong. That hasn't been shown and Toyota is wise (in these litigious times) to withhold any such acknowledgement without specific, compelling evidence. Yes, some cars did sludge for no apparent reason (following these message boards). But just because there's been no apparent reason does not mean that Toyota is at fault -- there are numerous other factors and variables that are completely out of Toyota's control. Bottom line - as I've said before - we should accept Toyota's latest offer as exceedingly generous and more than sufficient in lieu of any admission of wrongdoing or apology. Jeff
#813 of 877 Forum by cmuniz May 02, 2002 (5:54 am)
I agree with Bob that this forum has served its purpose. I own a 2002 Highlander which I bought before I knew about sludge problems. I started reading and posting to this forum to find out the facts and to determine what I needed to do to prevent the problem. I am now satisfied that whatever the cause of the problem, what I need to do as an owner is to change the oil at 3-5,000 mi intervals and keep good records just in case. I think that although, Toyota started off on the wrong foot they have changed course and are now doing what they can for the owners by taking each case on an individual basis and providing the extended policy. What goes on behind their close doors about engine design, etc is their business. I really liked tmsusas1's last post and am satisfied that Toyota Inc is now doing the right thing. Hopefully their dealers will sign up to the same program. I have two final recommendations directed at Toyota: First, enclosed with the letter that we are going to get should be a sticker that we can place in the owner's manual that states specifically the right oil change interval if it is to be less often than the 7,500 miles in there now. That would eliminate some confusion. Secondly, I urge them to take good care of those owners that have sludge problems in the future. That would prevent further adverse press and would help all the owners that never experience the problem by maintaining the excellent Toyota reputation that we bought into when we bought our vehicles. By doing that we should be able to mainatain the high resale values that used Toyotas have had in the past. I think this forum has helped owners find out what Toyota is really doing for owners and has helped Toyota realize what an emotional issue this is for those that have been affected, especially by their early actions.
#814 of 877 I find this forum useful by jj35 May 02, 2002 (9:25 am)
One thing I take exception to in many recent posts is people telling me (as a person who has had a van with sludge) how I should feel and how grateful I should be now. Especially if they have not personally had the "sludge experience". I have every right to feel the way that I do! As I told Mr. Ertmann yesterday (yes, we finally connected), I probably would have complained and then left this site 10 months ago if it wasn't for all of the people on this and the previous board who haven't even experienced sludge that resort to insulting and chastising and now trying to tell the owners of sludged Toyotas how they should feel about Toyota's policies. This treatment, while not appreciated, has given me the drive to stay active. Some of the Toyota "supporters" have been as equally disruptive to Toyota's efforts as some of those recently banned, in my opinion. I am more appreciative of the efforts that Toyota is making through this forum to appease those with sludge than I am with the policy, to tell the truth. So closing this forum may result in refestering the wounds that have started to heal for some people or keeping them open for longer for others. As long as both sides can stop playing games and stop trying to one up each other and can share useful information, then I think there are benefits to all to keep this open.
#815 of 877 by innovations May 02, 2002 (10:01 am)
I have to agree jj35. It would be wise to leave the board open. Eventually more and more search engines will counter the negative posts on the web and point people in this direction. Some of the web crawlers take weeks and weeks to include new posts. I'm glad you finally had an opportunity to speak with tmusa. I believe they are doing the right thing. I too watched the "pro-Toyota" folks shoot their own selves in the foot by telling the people who had experienced the sludge "how they should feel". I saw that one coming and am glad you hung in there. I suspect it's also a reason this issue remained active for others too. Suffering takes time to heal. It's best to go through the process and not try to pretend it never existed. Thanks TMUSA for taking your time to help these people. I've been impressed.
#816 of 877 Question for TMSUSA1 by cholowicki May 02, 2002 (10:06 am)
How is Toyota educating their dealers about this policy? More than a few of the newer victims that I have been in contact with are not getting the same information from their dealers that you are posting here. I am guessing this is a Toyota internal communication issue, and am wondering how this policy information gets published to the dealer network. And for owners that are getting differing information from their dealers, who should they contact to get the dealer straightened out? You? The Gel Hotline? Thanks.
#817 of 877 by Mr_Shiftright HOST May 02, 2002 (10:43 am)
jj35---of course you have the right to feel the way you do, but with another interpretation the exact same experience would not be so unpleasant for you to feel. I think what people were suggesting is that they would deal differently with the same experience by interpreting differently the intentions and point of view of the dealer and of Toyota.
#819 of 877 RE: dtown by bob by dtownfb May 02, 2002 (1:07 pm)
True the owners do need to adjust their oil change interval but something official should come from Toyota with regard to this. Whether it's every 3k or 5k miles, it doesn't matter. Right now the manual they wrote on how to maintain the car they built says 7500 miles. That needs to be clarified. I think someone mentioned a sticker or some type of official revision to the manual. Yes common sense says not to do the same thing but I'm interested in not having the problem occur at all. Like I mentioned before, who wants to go through the hassle. I understand why some owners are still upset. They were treated very poorly by Toyota. That is why I suggested that Toyota write or call these individuals for their treatment. This could easily be done at the local level esp. since oyu are only talking about 3300 people. I think the board shoudl be left open but should only be for Toyota owners or prospective buyers. Shifty will have to use discretion as to which ones are pertinent to this board but as the saying goes, 'this is why he gets paid the big bucks'. Good luck and congrats to everyone with their Toyota. It seems like the company took the high road on this one.
#820 of 877 Will be interesting to see if this sludge issue has any by rubicon52 May 02, 2002 (1:15 pm)
long term effect on Toyota's reputation. The 8-year special policy is great, but without a full explanation of the sludging problem, there may be a some question in the mind of the consumer. I visit the other Toyota forums at Edmunds and have seen more than one poster wondering if he should consider a Toyota in light of the sludge issue. I'm also not sure if you can restore consumer confidence just by extending a warranty. Hyundai and Kia currently have the best warranties in the business in response to past reliability problems. However, I don't see that these long warranties have restored consumer confidence in their products. I know that Hyundai has seen a huge increase in sales, but both companies are selling vehicles solely on price. They are (as Warren Buffet would say) commodity businesses. Of course, neither of these companies has Toyota's great reputation to fall back on. The markets in which Toyota competes (family cars, all sizes of SUVs) are crowded with very good cars. A consumer with even a slight concern about sludge can readily find any number of good alternatives. I think something that we all agree on is that if you have a Toyota it's probably a good idea to shorten the oil change interval below the 7500 miles in the owners manual. At the same time other manufacturers are lengthening their oil change intervals and cars with oil monitoring systems often go 10K-15K miles before an oil change is needed. Again, some consumers may not consider this a big deal, but it is a departure from the past conventional wisdom that Toyotas are very tolerant of minimal maintenance.
#821 of 877 one word by wammerjammer May 02, 2002 (2:22 pm)
warranty. I see many people use it on this board. I don't see it in the "policy". Can the people from Toyota please explain.