Toyota RAV4 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 53 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Although there is already a "sticky" on this issue in this forum about the recall, a new and important development has occurred that is very troubling and may ultimately affect many of the 1.6 million vehicles covered by the LSC 90K (recall) which replaces a defective rubber oil line hose with a replacement hose that was supposed to be stronger. Despite the fact that the "campaign" documents essentially extend the "warranty" to March 2013, Arlington Toyota of Palatine Illinois (a Chicago suburb) has refused to cover oil line replacement and engine damage caused when the new rubber recall hose replacement rutptured and the engine essentially ran out of oil

Facts: Owner has a well maintained 2006 Rav4 with a placed in service date of 07/25/06. She takes it in to Arlington Toyota in April 2010 at 31,719 miles for regular oil change service and LSC 90K (recall) hose replacement. According to her receipt, correct parts were replaced pursuant to LSC 90K. The car was taken into Arlington Toyota for service every 5K miles thereafter. Then, on Christmas Eve 2011 at 48,471 miles - just 16,652 miles after the vvt-i recall hose was replaced and only 2,000 miles since her last oil change visit, the replacement oil line ruptured causing the oil to rapidly drain out of the engine so she has it towed to Arlington Toyota.

Arlington Toyota ignores the March 2013 date noted in the LSC 90K documents and tells her "you are only entitled to one oil line replacement .... " and hands her a $700 bill for new oil hose, ancillary damage, and tow. Within 15 minutes of driving it off the lot, the engine starts making loud noises and the owner has it towed back to Arlington Toyota. They tell her essentially "tough luck" and want $1,200 just to inspect the engine for damage .... which is probably going to run into the thousands of dollars. She calls Toyota headquarters and gets no relief. I called and sent an email to their service department director and told him of the many cases where Toyota paid for post warranty repairs relative to this issue and was stunned by his has callous response " the warranty is up and it time for her to take reponsibility and ownership of the vehicle." WOW I told him - had Toyota taken ownership and responsibility for its admittedly defective parts in the first place and replaced the rubber oil lines with the metal ones used in the manufacturing process beginning in April 04/08, this problem never would have occurred in the first place !!!!!

[She had the car towed to an independent shop where the curent plan is to have the car fixed, ask for reimbursement ..... and probably sell the car for fear something like this could happen again. What is particularly ironic and absurd here is that had the owner NOT taken the vehicle in at all for the recall in April 2010 and the origianl oil line failed, she clearly would have been covered by LSC 90K since that document clearly states the "recall" is good through April 2013 and there is no sense of urgency about bringing the car in prior to that date.]

Another LSC 90K Oil Line failure: A similar story is found in the Edmunds.com Camry forum where a 2008 Camry had the recall performed in September 2010 and the replacement oil line blew Thanksgiving day 2011. The dealer paid for the repair but the person that posted the
announcment does not accept private messages so it cannot be confirmed that the car was still within the 60,000 mile limit of the powertrain warranty.

Look at how fast these oil lines ruptured: Just 16,652 miles and 20 months on the Rav4 and 14 months on the Camry. Even the old 2005 Avalon hoses did not go out this fast. Since the new improved rubber oil line is suppose to be reinforced with Kevlar or some other such substance, I didn't figure we'd be hearing about any failed LSC 90K replacement rubber hoses until about 2015! And oh what logic: "Dear Toyota Customer: We are recalling your defective oil line that has already lasted you 30,000 miles with another part that will fail right after your warranty expires ... ya know ...... we just don't want to pay for your new engine !!!"

Warning to anyone with 2GR-FE V6 engines manufactured prior to April 2008 where the recall has been performed: Since the new hose is subject to failure, essentially 1.5 million or so people are driving vehicles that are potentiall "ticking timebombs." If other dealers follow the policy of Arlington Toyota, once your powertrain warranty has expired by either the passage of time or by the mileage limit and it has been more than one year since the LSC 90K oil line replacement was done, then repairs that occur as a result - which can easily run into the thousands of dollars - will not be covered by Toyota.

What you can do if your affected vehicle is approaching or has past the applicable dates of warranty expiration: Go back to your dealer and demand that the dealer either:

(1) replace the "band aid" rubber hose fix called for in the LSC 90K with the same all metal oil line that Toyota/Lexus installed on all 2GR-FE V6 engines manufactured beginning in April 2008 even if you have to pay some reasonable charge. There are many threads in many Toyota & Lexus forums on this. Many people have already used the metal oil line replacement despite an assortment of lame excuses by dealers stating that the metal version either would not fit and/or the all metal line would void their warranty

or

(2) that the dealer put in writing that the LSC 90K replacement hose is guaranteed until at least March 2013 ... or longer.

Question: Has anyone else heard of other cases where the oil line recall repair failed and if so, how was the issue resolved and was a cause determined? Either the dealer(s) did not perform the original service at all, incorrectly performed the service, or Toyota has a bad batch of parts. All possibilities SHOULD have been investigated by the dealer(s) as soon as these oil line failures occurred.

https://sites.google.com/site/toyotav6oillinescandal/

Update as of February 8, 2012: Owner appealed to the President of Arlington Toyota with positive response. Toyota picked up the tab for all repairs which essentially amounted to a new engine. Parts replaced include new short block, cam assembly, gear assembly, & water pump. Arlington is also throwing in some brake work as a goodwill gesture.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,394 Posts
Well isn't that lovely. :roll:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,614 Posts
My friend's 07 V6 camry was 20k past his powertrain warranty. The oil line ruptured and since it's out of warranty and the tsb was never address he paid out of his pocket for the repair. He then wrote a nice letter to toyota corporate and got 100% reimbursement from toyota for the repair. YMMV i guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,946 Posts
There are Toyota dealers and then there are Toyota dealers. My experience with two different ones has been that they are questionable and have either provided incorrect information or have been incompetent. I have two others within striking distance (we live in a somewhat isolated situation I will try before passing general judgment.

What the owner in Paul3637's post apparently has experienced is an expensive unjust absurdity.
 

·
Your Humble Administrator
Joined
·
16,451 Posts
Paul, you're wasting your time talking to the service manager and sending him e-mails. He probably deleted your email before he finished reading it, IF he read it at all!

The owner needs to write a proper LETTER, and send it USPS mail with return receipt requested to the dealership's OWNER and/or GENERAL MANAGER. Also send a copy to TOYOTA also with return receipt. This will be noticed, fall into the right hands and be passed around to others. Keep the letter short and sweet, to the point, no more than 1 page if you can, and a brief mention of the possible involvement of an attorney won't hurt. We have the notice in writing that the repair should be covered up to March 2013 and lawyers just LOVE it when you have it in writing.

I sure am glad mine came with the metal oil line!
 

·
Your Humble Administrator
Joined
·
16,451 Posts
Do you have a photo of the new setup?
Sure, but it only applies to the V-6 engine:

Old setup with metal/rubber line:



New setup with all metal line:



 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,669 Posts
This is exactly why i refused that silly rubber recall and installed a steel line myself at a cost of $25 IIRC.

Whoever thought about replacing prone to rupture rubber oil line by another rubber line while Toyota had already a steel line replacement was a total moron, and Toyota's officials agreeing to the idea underscore a complete lack of common sense.

Don't get me started on this, but the whole oil line affair is an example how Toyota is a huge bureaucracy with lack of internal communication on vital engineering issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I'm looking at an 07 v6 tomorrow. Where is this "problem" oil line located under the hood? I want to see if it has been replaced or not. I know I can't rely on the dealer to tell me. Thank you. Boo
 

·
Your Humble Administrator
Joined
·
16,451 Posts
I'm looking at an 07 v6 tomorrow. Where is this "problem" oil line located under the hood? I want to see if it has been replaced or not. I know I can't rely on the dealer to tell me. Thank you. Boo
Look at the photos above. See the gray cap with the "H"? That's the high pressure fitting for the A/C system. The oil tube is just to the right of that. There will be a black plastic cover over the engine with a V6 emblem, but if you look down at the corner on the passenger side you can see it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Look at the photos above. See the gray cap with the "H"? That's the high pressure fitting for the A/C system. The oil tube is just to the right of that. There will be a black plastic cover over the engine with a V6 emblem, but if you look down at the corner on the passenger side you can see it.
Thank you, June Bug. :thumbs_up: I'm off to check out the '07. Thanks again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Does anyone have a comparison pic showing the "old" defective design vs the "new" vvti oil line (still with the rubber section) that was used under the Limited Service Campaign (LSC)?

I've heard the rubber hose used is different (I'm wondering if there are visible markings on the hose), and I've also heard that the clamps that hold the hose onto the metal pipe portions were redesigned. I just would like to see with my own eyes.

Also, has anyone experienced their limited service campaign replacement vvti oil line fail?

I have an 07 that has the limited service campaign revised part, still with rubber section. Just debating if I should go the all metal route...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,064 Posts
Does anyone have a comparison pic showing the "old" defective design vs the "new" vvti oil line (still with the rubber section) that was used under the Limited Service Campaign (LSC)?

{snip}
I have an 07 that has the limited service campaign revised part, still with rubber section. Just debating if I should go the all metal route...
You would seem to be in a good position to post a picture or two of the revised pipe with the rubber section. When you do that, people will be able to contrast the pictures with the ones that have already been posted.
 

·
Your Humble Administrator
Joined
·
16,451 Posts
Does anyone have a comparison pic showing the "old" defective design vs the "new" vvti oil line (still with the rubber section) that was used under the Limited Service Campaign (LSC)?

I've heard the rubber hose used is different (I'm wondering if there are visible markings on the hose), and I've also heard that the clamps that hold the hose onto the metal pipe portions were redesigned. I just would like to see with my own eyes.
This was reported by Vee6er:

I had my hose replaced under the Canadian campaign yesterday. After the hose got replaced a took a look at it and looking at its cross section it seems like its layered where the inner layer is greyish silicone like while the exterior is black rubber. Anyway its just an observation. :roll:
And KMonster posted this picture. The new rubber line has a yellow stripe:

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
Thanks to those that replied.

I haven't had time to check mine, but here is what I found:

Oil pressure hose failed - Page 4 - Club Lexus Forums

See post #51 at the link above. Good pic of the defective oil line. Visually the rubber looks fatigued (bulgy) and the clamp is cutting into the rubber.

That poster notes that the defective rubber is denoted by "AT OIL ACM" markings, while the LSC replacement is denoted by markings on the rubber showing "KK20 OIL ACM FKM".

I'll have to see what mine says...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Owner liked your Idea Junebug and wrote letter. Thanks

Paul, you're wasting your time talking to the service manager and sending him e-mails. He probably deleted your email before he finished reading it, IF he read it at all!

The owner needs to write a proper LETTER, and send it USPS mail with return receipt requested to the dealership's OWNER and/or GENERAL MANAGER. Also send a copy to TOYOTA also with return receipt. This will be noticed, fall into the right hands and be passed around to others. Keep the letter short and sweet, to the point, no more than 1 page if you can, and a brief mention of the possible involvement of an attorney won't hurt. We have the notice in writing that the repair should be covered up to March 2013 and lawyers just LOVE it when you have it in writing.

I sure am glad mine came with the metal oil line!
The letter you suggested can now be found on

https://sites.google.com/site/toyotav6oillinescandal/

as footnote [C] but without her name or address and with the last four VIN digits X'd out.
 

·
Your Humble Administrator
Joined
·
16,451 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
340 Posts
<Eyeballs the new Subaru in the driveway>

:)

I can deal with my current ECM flash issues rather than this crap any day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
246 Posts
I was interested to know the technical explanation behind the VVTi oil line failure. Here is an excerpt from Toyota Canada's response:

"Toyota has determined that on affected vehicles, the rubber portion of the engine oil supply hose for the VVT-I actuator on the cylinder head may develop a small crack due to the use of improper rubber material. These cracks can develop inside the oil hose from exposure to small amounts of corrosive components in positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) gases. If the vehicle is continuously operated in this condition, the crack in the hose may expand as a result of the oil pressure and engine oil may leak from the oil hose which can eventually cause damage to the vehicles engine."

I don't see why the new and properly designed hose (using the proper rubber) would give any problems. I agree, the metal hose is probably a fool proof solution, but having said that, there are many rubber hoses used in all makes and models of vehicles on the road today without issue. In this particular instance, some Toyota engineer/supplier/ or whomever spec'd the wrong type of rubber for the job....leading to a costly mistake.
 
1 - 20 of 53 Posts
Top