1ZZ-FE oil level

[Petrus]

A spin off from the ´what have you done...´ thread in order to not continue going off topic there.

So.
It is clear that in 2006 Toyota service bulletins were issued about the oil level in various 4-cil. engines, among which the 1ZZ-FE.
The instruction was to increase the quality in the engine by 0.5 litres and retrofit an accordingly modified dip stick with the markings 1 cm. higher.

The MR2 was excepted.
That may very well be because the 1ZZ-FE in the MR2 has a different dip stick and they thought the number of cars thus issues too small to warrant a different modified dip stick.
Or something else.

My point is that if the experience based best practice of Toyota corp. warrants the cost of a retrofit action for all 1ZZ-FE engines, than that is probably a well proven thing.
The motivation was that more oil reduced the running temp when driven hard with the goal to reduce hot engine oil use. Again probably a well proven thing worth the over the board retrofit.
So, why nót the MR2.
If that is just the bean counters, would we then not better add 0.5 litres too?

Mind, my engine has been recently revised and consumes no oil, nor do I have a bee in my bonnet about wanting more oil in the engine; it simply bugs me why the 1ZZ-FE in the MR2 is excepted.

[Dev]

More oil using a larger pan can reduce oil temps to a degree but not as much as you think especially when the car is driven as a commuter car where I reaches operational temps by design and is stable. Most commuters do not religiously check their oil to make sure it is at full capacity during the interval even if that extra .5 liters saves it from certain death.
 
 What I would do in your situation is to make a small investment and purchase a filter sandwich plate that has two fittings. Buy a temp gauge and pressure gauge particularly one that has a logging feature, and do some observations so you know for sure.
 I did just that with an oil temp gauge and learned that Toyota did a great job with engine temperature regulation where I will never need to buy an oil cooler or aluminum radiator.

[Petrus]

Agaín; it have NO particular issue with the oil or cooling so I do not want to address anything untill I know something needs addressing.
THÚS I have an ´issue´ with the service bulletin increasing 0.5 in all 1ZZ-FEs but for in the MR2.
I want to know why and consequently whether we should draw our own conclusions from that.

[Dev]

There is some speculation to suggest that it may have coincided with the switch to 0w-20 synthetic oil for longer drain intervals. This is all a scam to meet goals of new industry standards to promote reduced operational costs and environmental concerns. The same with lifetime fluids. The reason why it seems weird is primarily because of unattainable regulations that most times goes against the owner. Adding a little more oil offsets adding oil during the longer interval.
 These quick fixes often do not carry much logic as they are sometimes not inclusive. As an example my other car made in 2011 has 5k oil change intervals and sometime in the 2014 model year which has an identical engine they increased the oil change interval to 10k miles that also applied retroactively to the 2013 model if you use synthetic oil but not my car. Some owners for the model cars before 2013 contacted Lexus and they said if you have the older model you must still follow 5k oil changes even with synthetic oil without any further explanation.
 In my opinion the reason doesn't follow any logic and is most likely political.

 

[Petrus]

In my opinion the reason doesn't follow any logic and is most likely political.

Remains; if so then why specifically except the MR2?

[Dev]

Remains; if so then why specifically except the MR2?

It's probable that the 2005 MR-S ended for most markets where longer change intervals started to appear and for its low production that it did not require an alteration. The 1ZZ lived on in other applications when the bulletin came into existence which is 2005. This is all circumstantial but if I had to speculate it would seem like the most likely scenario. 
Think of it this way, why is the MR-S is the only car that had a 1ZZ motor with pre-cats. The reason some say is they wanted a low production vehicle to be the test bed to qualify as being a ULEV.   

[Petrus]

Ok..... Not fully, but more than half, convinced about the eco marketing conspiracy but the post ´05 production argument seems logical. Why design a new dipstick for a non priority?  But without a stick to mark that, best not change the level.
Íf so, that would mean that there is no reason nót add 0.5 l.  to our engines; that there is no MR2 specific NoNo.

[Dev]

Ok..... Not fully, but more than half, convinced about the eco marketing conspiracy but the post ´05 production argument seems logical. Why design a new dipstick for a non priority?  But without a stick to mark that, best not change the level.
Íf so, that would mean that there is no reason nót add 0.5 l.  to our engines; that there is no MR2 specific NoNo.

It's still speculation and it can go either way as a benefit or a consequence. I mentioned there is a way to know by logging oil pressure.

[Nvy]

Slight off topic: My mazda is getting overfilled by the dealer for the last 50k. The dipstick reads 1.5 cm above max and its fine. I just noticed on the last change and will ask them the next time. With 2 years change intervals and 15k I guess they want to be sure it will have oil for the period. I am getting oil changes every 9k tho, want to preserve the engine as much as possible.

[Petrus]

It's still speculation and it can go either way as a benefit or a consequence.

Hence I would like to knów.

I mentioned there is a way to know by logging oil pressure.

Not the ´issues´ which Toyota mentions in the bulletins.
An oil temp. gauge might 

[Dev]

Hence I would like to knów.

Not the ´issues´ which Toyota mentions in the bulletins.
An oil temp. gauge might 

 I can tell you that adding .5 liters of additional oil will not change the oil temps. I have been observing oil temps for a very long time and one time for a new project adding heat sinks to the oil pan for cooling I was logging them.
 These engines reach operational temps no matter how gentle you drive above the boiling point so that water is evaporated out to preserve the oil for its interval unlike older cars and that is why cars these days no longer have many gauges. After that there is a very large buffer where the oil temps will not be exceeded for any kind of road use to put it in jeopardy even sprinted in the hot summer. It might get exceeded if you race but even some of our racers here are doing fine even without an oil cooler.

 That little bit of additional oil is not going to put a dent in lowering oil temps and if it does it will be  insignificant to the operation of the vehicle to prevent any kind of issue with the engine. The actual fix is a new short block from the bulletin. If it really mattered then the MR2 would have had a revised dip stick.

 The reason why I said to test using an oil pressure gauge is if you overfill by .5 liters then you might damage the engine over a long period of time and not even know the reason if it creates more aeration of the oil which gets sucked up by the pick up tube and lowers oil pressure. If it doesn't then its possible you have a benefit of dissipation which results in better transient oil pressure. The more likely scenario is no difference at all except for having to add less make up oil between services. 




 

[Petrus]

The amount of speculation we can come up with because of ´except the MR2´

[Dev]

Slight off topic: My mazda is getting overfilled by the dealer for the last 50k. The dipstick reads 1.5 cm above max and its fine. I just noticed on the last change and will ask them the next time. With 2 years change intervals and 15k I guess they want to be sure it will have oil for the period. I am getting oil changes every 9k tho, want to preserve the engine as much as possible.

Hard to say the reason why they are overfilling. A lot of times dealers and service shops just go by the book and not the dipstick to fill oil which is irresponsible because it results in overfilling.
1.5cm above is a lot and it would worry me.
  I use to be a big believer in extended oil change intervals but not anymore because there is a lot of politics behind it that goes against the owner if you plan to keep the car for a very long time.

 Engines and oil are made well these days that I feel they can do the extended drains if you plan to sell the vehicle a little after 100k miles as they will keep running but I think its optimal to change the oil much earlier if you want to get the best longevity from it without consuming oil.

[Petrus]

Meanwhile I have a spare dip stick underway from Rutland.

Pending more info my autious dopion is that áll 1ZZ-FEs benefit from 0.5 litres oil more and that the MR2 was excepted because a modified dipstick was not deemed worth the effort.
Without that they would;
a. need to inform the customers about the issue
b. trust them not to óverfill despite not having the proper dipstick.
Basically more potential negative fall out from that than from leaving it be.

[Dev]

 It would certainly be worth the effort for Toyota to retroactively issue new dipsticks if they felt that it solves any issue with oil consumption. Because they specifically mentioned the exception that means they made a conscious decision for whatever reason not to. 

Internet forums work both ways in that they can save people from disastrous consequences but they can also appeal to those that want to do something that is not to their benefit. All it takes is some random person to say they did the very thing without any initial problem as a means to justify doing it. This happened with un-dampened crank pulleys a decade ago and now it is common knowledge given enough time they ruin the engine.
The worst kind of damage is cumulative over time because it will never be realized and it is destined to be repeated and spread to others.

I have been around forums a long time and I often see patterns where people have already made of their mind but need validation no matter how small with a strong bias. Nothing was going to stop them from doing it.

[Petrus]

I have been around forums a long time

Forums are a relatively modern thing. In earnest as a ´thing´ it is 21st C. Heck, Facebook has not even reached the US age of consent yet!
The phenomena of ´hearsay´ has been around for much longer than the internet. From wayway before I stárted racing even 
Probably dating back to when humanoids started developing proper language and relating their experience based best practice.
If we had more info about the intended meanings, we would probably find that rock art was the first ´literary´ expression of some 

Back on topic, it is, as I wrote, largely assumptions.
Even if Toyota would answer my question, it is unlikely to be that of the engineers.

[Joesson]

Something I mentioned some time ago, (2014):

@BillRitson has/had a 2 with 217k miles since he had it from new.
For the first 120k the oil and filter was changed every 5k!


The volume of oil required was not in debate at that time and so I guess he used the supplied dip stick.

[Petrus]

The volume of oil required was not in debate at that time and so I guess he used the supplied dip stick.

As would have/will any owner with a modified dip stick in total oblivion of the quantity change. Just as the bulletin instructs the AD.

On the one hand we have a proven issue with oil consumption because of the piston/ piston ring design for several engines more than just the 1ZZ-FE.
On the other we have the Toyota Service Bulletins addressing the issue for all those, part of which is the 0.5 litre extra and matching dip stick excepting the MR2.

That is it: Even Toyota´s motives as given in the bulletin are vetted by the marketing division.


My ówn, totally individual and personal experience is an engine developing a thirst for oil and a spun bearing when on the limit of the AD08Rs through a longish corner.
Now I álso have a lightweight crank pully.
I could thus blame the latter although I am very    aware that I should have topped up the oil earlier and not ´do it when I get back´.

Íf I can modify the dip stick to my satisfaction I will probably run a slightly higher oil level. Call it piece of mind, benefit of the doubt, internet lore, whatevvah; it is admittedly not for a solidly based technical reason as we don´t have one either way.

Btw @Joesson , being ´old school´    have a neodymium magnet stuck to the outside of the sump plug even though the wisdom of that for a modern in line filtered system is doubtful.

[Petrus]

It would certainly be worth the effort for Toyota to retroactively issue new dipsticks if they felt that it solves any issue with oil consumption. Because they specifically mentioned the exception that means they made a conscious decision for whatever reason not to. 

For me the second assumption may very well have overruled the first.
The cost of developing, manufacturing, distributing and restocking may very well have outweighed the cost of future warranty claims for MR2s.
The service bulletins are dated 2006 after all and Toyota´s goal by making cars is to make money.
Thus the conscious decision would have been to except the model.
Again an assumption.

As I wrote, we do not KNOW beyond what I wrote in the previous post.

[Petrus]

Ok, dunnit. Modified the spare dip stick.

My query to Toyota has not been responded to.

Never mind the wisdom of it: Í feel better following the Toyota Service Bulletin for the 1ZZ-FE engines.