Hyundai Forums banner
21 - 40 of 97 Posts
None of that is going to help, and sorry to say the companies Kia/Hyundai are
taking a hard stance on oil consumption. In the last week the dealerships and
Kia have said they wouldn't replace engines using a qt p/300 miles as that
was not part of the settlement. The settlement was for a "debris" issue that
caused engines to seize, or alert knock sensor detection, neither one,
no engine replacement.

My '11 2.0T, ran great, but oil consumption (qt p/320 miles) and was replaced
12/2019, looks like they've changed their stance on oil consumption, so guess
one must get the engine to seize. Great for customer satisfaction.
Thumbs-up
 
.... Kia/Hyundai are taking a hard stance on oil consumption. In the last week the dealerships and Kia have said they wouldn't replace engines using a qt p/300 miles …
So you have seen the above policy change in writing? I have not, so can you please post a link to the source of that information?
 
What about them? My view is based on what seems to be Hyundai pushing their problem onto the unsuspecting buyer. That attitude does not deserve a repeat buy.
Fair enough, I can agree with that. Plus the only reason they did anything was when their office got raided and they were forced to issue recalls. They knew it was a widespread issue but they had no fix and continued to sell those vehicles with those engines and hoped for the best. We still don't know 100% if the issues 2017+ Theta 2 have been resolved or not, cars as late as 2016 have been failing.
 
Fair enough, I can agree with that. Plus the only reason they did anything was when their office got raided and they were forced to issue recalls. They knew it was a widespread issue but they had no fix and continued to sell those vehicles with those engines and hoped for the best. We still don't know 100% if the issues 2017+ Theta 2 have been resolved or not, cars as late as 2016 have been failing.
Thumbs-up
 
.... Kia/Hyundai are taking a hard stance on oil consumption. In the last week the dealerships and Kia have said they wouldn't replace engines using a qt p/300 miles ...
Maybe you didn't see that a couple of days ago I asked for a source of the information you posted above, so I'll try again.
 
I searched Consumer Reports about excessive oil burning. They did a report (almost 500,000 owners) on vehicles from 2010 to 2014. Interestingly not one Hyundai was listed. They do say however that burning a quart between regular oil changes is not normal - I agree. The makes that burned excessive oil in the report is BMW, Audi, Porsche and Subaru. I'd link to the web article but I'm a paid member and am not sure it's accessible to non members. HERES the link just in case.

Clearly we have Hyundai owners complaining about oil consumption. Honda and Toyota extended the warranty on offending models - so that response is better that Hyundai.

Maybe another class action suit is needed.
 
I searched Consumer Reports about excessive oil burning. They did a report (almost 500,000 owners) on vehicles from 2010 to 2014. Interestingly not one Hyundai was listed. They do say however that burning a quart between regular oil changes is not normal - I agree. The makes that burned excessive oil in the report is BMW, Audi, Porsche and Subaru. I'd link to the web article but I'm a paid member and am not sure it's accessible to non members. HERES the link just in case.

Clearly we have Hyundai owners complaining about oil consumption. Honda and Toyota extended the warranty on offending models - so that response is better that Hyundai.

Maybe another class action suit is needed.
Excessive oil consumption is a commonly complained about issue over here 2011 Hyundai Sonata Engine problems
 
If you don't want to believe it, then don't. No one's forcing you to listen.
So where did I say, or even imply, that I didn't believe it? The guy posted something which would be a HUGE change to what Kia/Hyundai have been doing up until now. If he had posted this as his opinion, I wouldn't have replied at all, because everyone is entitled to their own opinion regardless if true or not.

However, he posted it as fact and I have no idea where he got this from. So I'm simply giving him the opportunity to post the source of his information. I'm totally willing to believe he read something from a reliable source to support what he said, and I would like to have that same source myself, because I follow this stuff very closely.

But OTOH, there are also lots of people in this online world who simply believe and pass along everything they read, regardless of where it came from. And there are of course a few others who just say whatever they want to, regardless if it's true or not. And if those people don't get flushed out for pushing BS, then a site like this just turns into a useless trash dump.

So I have made no call on this one yet, and am still giving the poster the benefit of the doubt, and waiting for him to reply.
 
So where did I say, or even imply, that I didn't believe it? The guy posted something which would be a HUGE change to what Kia/Hyundai have been doing up until now. If he had posted this as his opinion, I wouldn't have replied at all, because everyone is entitled to their own opinion regardless if true or not.

However, he posted it as fact and I have no idea where he got this from. So I'm simply giving him the opportunity to post the source of his information. I'm totally willing to believe he read something from a reliable source to support what he said, and I would like to have that same source myself, because I follow this stuff very closely.

But OTOH, there are also lots of people in this online world who simply believe and pass along everything they read, regardless of where it came from. And there are of course a few others who just say whatever they want to, regardless if it's true or not. And if those people don't get flushed out for pushing BS, then a site like this just turns into a useless trash dump.

So I have made no call on this one yet, and am still giving the poster the benefit of the doubt, and waiting for him to reply.
I see, the poster did say their source was the dealership. I got a similar experience with mine, they refused to replace the engine until it seized regardless of oil consumption. My rep did say that oil consumption is not part of the bulletin or recall so they have the right to say no. According to my service rep they really tightened up after August-September. Before they would approve almost anyone but now they are being very selective to save money.
 
I see, the poster did say their source was the dealership. …
No, his statement was: "the companies Kia/Hyundai are taking a hard stance on oil consumption. In the last week the dealerships and Hyundai and Kia have said they wouldn't replace engines using a qt p/300 miles" What he wrote above (dealerships and Kia/Hyundai) is very broad and has a scope way beyond what should ever come from one (the) dealership. And a "qt p/300 miles" is very specific and MUCH different than the currently accepted and acknowledged quart per 1K miles, which makes it sound like a designated change in policy.

Now if he had said it came from just one dealership then I would not have not replied, because we all know any individual dealer is capable of saying and doing just about anything. That's why they're called stealerships. And if he should come back in the future to say all of this actually did come from just one, then I'll just leave it at that and call it a day.


… I got a similar experience with mine, they refused to replace the engine until it seized regardless of oil consumption. …
I have no problem believing that, but again one dealer is not automatically representative of what the majority are doing.


…. My rep did say that oil consumption is not part of the bulletin or recall so they have the right to say no. ….
Now that part above is 100% true. The automakers have never (that I'm aware of) put this oil consumption thing into writing for the public domain. It's something that just evolved over time, and their thinking probably is that a 1 quart/1K miles vehicle is not too many miles away from wetting the bed. So why not just do it now, because they know they'll be on the hook to replace it anyway.

… According to my service rep they really tightened up after August-September. Before they would approve almost anyone but now they are being very selective to save money.
Again this is one person's opinion, unless they received something in writing from the automakers. I am willing to believe what he said is possible, and time will tell if it is or not. And it will be very easy to confirm it's true, if multiple reports start showing up here soon, saying the same thing.
 
So where did I say, or even imply, that I didn't believe it? The guy posted something which would be a HUGE change to what Kia/Hyundai have been doing up until now. If he had posted this as his opinion, I wouldn't have replied at all, because everyone is entitled to their own opinion regardless if true or not.

However, he posted it as fact and I have no idea where he got this from. So I'm simply giving him the opportunity to post the source of his information. I'm totally willing to believe he read something from a reliable source to support what he said, and I would like to have that same source myself, because I follow this stuff very closely.

But OTOH, there are also lots of people in this online world who simply believe and pass along everything they read, regardless of where it came from. And there are of course a few others who just say whatever they want to, regardless if it's true or not. And if those people don't get flushed out for pushing BS, then a site like this just turns into a useless trash dump.

So I have made no call on this one yet, and am still giving the poster the benefit of the doubt, and waiting for him to reply.
Kia, nor Hyundai, are going to replace a smooth running engine for free, because it loses a quart of oil in 350 miles. When the engine either seizes or begins to run poorly, due to common symptoms associated with the vast replacements done already, then they will replace the block on engines designated for the repair.
 
Kia, nor Hyundai, are going to replace a smooth running engine for free, because it loses a quart of oil in 350 miles. ...
There are a number of prior oil consumption threads on this forum for you to fact check the above statement. Or you can simply just continue to believe it. Doesn't matter to me, either way.
 
it may discuss about excessive oil consumption endlessly. :)
We purchase korean cars because they are relatively chip. Spare parts are also chip. So what about simple engine repair?
your engine G4KJ requires.
-new cylinder cartridges;
-new pistons;
-new rings;
-valve sealing rings;
-perhaps timing chain and its tensioner require replacement (it has nothing to do with oil consumption, however must be changed if it has any signs of wear.);
- also oil pump must be checked.


entrust this to a guy whose hands are growing from a correct place and you will put oil consumption in tolerance or you will get rid of that at all for the next 60k miles.

P.S. a root reason of a quick wear of cylinder/piston boundle might be collapsing catalytic converter. If it is the case, it must be replaced as well.
 
Maybe there's just a difference in the way US vs Canada dealerships are behaving.
It's possible, Canada in general has less consumer protection and lawsuits. The end consumer suffers, I know its much harder in Canada to get an engine approved. The US moved much faster in forcing Hyundai to take action.
 
Maybe there's just a difference in the way US vs Canada dealerships are behaving.
It's possible, Canada in general has less consumer protection and lawsuits. The end consumer suffers, I know its much harder in Canada to get an engine approved. The US moved much faster in forcing Hyundai to take action.
Yes, I agree that's a definite possibility, and perhaps he read that information in a Canadian publication, which I naturally would not normally see. In any case, just looking for an answer to my question.
 
21 - 40 of 97 Posts