When it comes to reliable, cheap, durable used cars, two manufacturers immediately spring to mind: Toyota and Honda. Not only do these Japanese marques have incredible reputations for reliability, you’ll often see cars from these brands crossing into moon mileage territory, be it a humble Toyota Corolla or a family-hauling Honda Pilot. However, not every used Japanese car is as maintenance-free as a cinderblock, and if you’re on a budget, you might be better off with a slightly higher-mileage V6 Honda than one with just under 100,000 miles on the clock because most of these engines use ancient valvetrain technology. Huh?
When you think about it, it’s amazing how reliable and long-lasting cars have become over the past half-century. Well into the 1980s, certain manufacturers equipped some models with five-digit odometers because as soon as a car of that era reached 100,000 miles, chances are it was junk. We can thank technologies like electronic fuel injection, electronic ignition, and hydraulic valvetrains for relegating many pesky maintenance items to the dustbin of history, and although every manufacturer got the memo on the first two issues, not every marque hopped aboard the hydraulic valvetrain, erm, train as soon as it became feasible.
Before we go any further, it’s just worth noting that no matter what used car you’re looking to buy, it’s worth check in on servicing requirements before signing on the dotted line. Cars are seriously expensive purchases, and the more informed you are, the less likely you are to get a bad deal or a bad car. While larger Hondas with V6 engines are typically quite solid vehicles, a little due diligence could save you hundreds of dollars on maintenance.
See, up until its latest J35Y8 sub-model found in the 2023 Honda Pilot, the Honda J35 V6 used a solid valvetrain rather than hydraulic lifters, so periodic valve adjustment is required as valve lash isn’t adjusted hydraulically. Considering how frequently valves have to open and close to let gases into or out of a cylinder, you’re going to want smooth operation so that valvetrain components don’t smash into each other, causing accelerated wear. If the valve lash is too loose, the engine will run poorly, make a ticking noise, and valvetrain damage may occur over time. More likely, unadjusted valves in a Honda V6 will eventually run too tight, potentially resulting in valve damage and a bad idle. I don’t know about you, but a few hours of labor sounds way cheaper than valve replacement.
The use of a solid valvetrain for so long is decidedly weird because almost everyone else switched years ago to self-adjusting hydraulic lifters that fill with engine oil and then use the pressure of that oil to maintain correct valve lash. The 2007 Toyota Sienna and Highlander come with hydraulic lifters, Mopar’s Pentastar V6 uses hydraulic lifters, the downsized 2.5-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine in the outgoing Mazda CX-9 uses hydraulic lifters, and the 3.6-liter VR6 engine available in the pre-2024 Volkswagen Atlas uses hydraulic lifters. These hydraulic lifters require zero maintenance, and although they may take a second to fill with oil upon startup, they are the superior option for most consumers. So why is Honda still using a solid valvetrain in several products?
Well, part of it could be due to the ancientness of the J-series V6, and Honda sticking with what it’s used to. The first J30A three-liter V6 was used in the 1996 Acura 3.0CL, meaning this engine architecture was developed in the early-to-mid 1990s. Hell, the first application of the 3.5-liter J35 V6 was in the 1999 Honda Odyssey, which, due to the peculiarities of North American model year convention, entered production a quarter of a century ago. A quarter of a century before that, the Honda Accord just didn’t exist yet, and the Civic was a brand new nameplate.
Secondly, many Honda single overhead cam four-cylinder engines feature rocker arms that push the tip of the valve directly. When Honda was developing the J-series V6, it makes sense that the marque stuck to known technology, rather than venturing out into the great unknown. [Editor’s Note: I’m not sure calling hydraulic lifters “the great unknown” is quite fair given how tested the tech was by then. There are obviously advantages to foregoing hydraulic lifters given that many motorcycles have gone without for years. There’s less valvetrain inertia, which you’d think would help for high-revving motors, though I’m not sure that a Honda Pilot should be particularly concerned about valvetrain inertia. I’m going to quote Autopian User Rust Bucket, here:
Almost all American engines use hydraulic lifters since the early 1960s. This is because quiet and smooth engine operation was valued above almost anything else in the US at the time, and hydraulic lifters guarantee perfect valve clearance at all temperatures, in all seasons, with no maintenance. However, the tradeoff is increased cost, complexity, reciprocating valve train mass, and sensitivity to oil quality.
Honda was a major motorcycle company before they ever got into the car business. Motorcycles in the 50s and 60s, and indeed motorcycles nowadays, exclusively use solid lifters. This is because the complexity and extra reciprocating mass are unacceptable for a high revving motorcycle engine. When Honda started making cars, they stuck with solid lifters, for the same reasons. This was the mid 70s when hydraulic lifters were already standard on American cars.
Into the 80s and 90s, as Hondas and other Japanese cars became more mainstream, more Americanized, and more smooth and powerful, they still didn’t switch to hydraulic lifters, because the extra mass is mutually exclusive with 8500rpm redlines and VTEC, and because adding hydraulic lifters to an overhead cam engine would mean a significantly taller head. The solid roller rocker system is quite compact. The J series is pretty much just a V6 version of the D series and F series engines that Honda already made, and it keeps the same valve train.
So Honda engineers made the engineering decision that solid valve trains would be better in their cars. They’re not alone: plenty of very modern engines use solid valve trains, although usually with bucket and shim lifters. The advantages of a solid valve train are very real, and what’s the downside? It has to be adjusted every 100,000 miles? Adjusting it is not very difficult or time consuming, and that’s not very frequent at all.
No, the real problem here is that transverse V6s suck to work on, and that caused the easy quick valve adjustment on a four cylinder to become a much more involved and expensive process.
Say it with me, guys, transverse V6s are not okay!
I have no clue who Rust Bucket is, but I can tell you that that all makes a lot of sense to me.
-DT].
So how is valve adjustment carried out on a Honda J-series V6? Well, removal of the airbox, throttle body, and upper intake manifold, along with spark plugs, leads, and any plumbing or electrical components in the way is required to remove the valve covers. Once the valve covers are off, set the number one cylinder at top dead center as per the marks on the front cam pulley and upper timing cover, then break out the feeler gauges. If everything’s all good, you should feel some slight friction when you slide the correct feeler gauge between the rocker adjustment screw and the top of the valve. If not, tighten or loosen the screws on the end of each rocker, paying attention to the jamb nut. From there, repeat for all six cylinders. Needless to say, it’s a bit of a faff. At least it doesn’t have to be done terribly often.
Honda used to recommend replacing the timing belt and performing a valve adjustment every 105,000 miles on V6 cars, although technology has seeped in, replacing easy mileage-based tables on paper with a gauge cluster maintenance minder serving up various service codes. Any maintenance code with the number four in it will cover timing belt replacement and valve adjustment, although it’s also possible to play it safe and just stick with the previously recommended 105,000-mile interval.
Keep in mind that Honda recommends timing belt replacement every 60,000 miles for those living in extreme environments or doing any towing, although that doesn’t bundle in valve adjustment. Residents of Palm Springs, take note.
So, let’s say that you’re looking to have all those “sub-item 4” services done at once. What sort of labor are you lookin at? Well, it depends on the model of vehicle, but on a 2013 Honda Pilot, timing belt replacement, spark plug replacement, and valve clearance inspection call for 5.4 hours of book labor, plus the cost of a timing belt and spark plugs, and any additional servicing added to the job (like an oil change, for instance). It’s the one seriously expensive service required by this otherwise stout vehicle, and if you’re looking to buy a used Honda Pilot, wouldn’t you rather someone else spent all that money?
Of course, you could always neglect to do the manufacturer-prescribed valve adjustment, but that probably isn’t a smart idea. Not only could the few hundred dollars in labor to adjust the valves be easily eaten up by the reduced efficiency of an out-of-spec engine, top end damage isn’t something worth risking as a burnt valve isn’t typically something you’ll hear until it’s too late. Reports of burnt valves on J-series V6s seem to occur at a variety of mileage points, so it’s best to be proactive rather than reactive.
Thankfully, if you’re buying new, you may be able to catch a lucky break. For the 2023 Honda Pilot, the powertrain engineers revised the J35 V6 with dual overhead cam heads that use hydraulic lifters to eliminate the need for valve adjustment. While this engine hasn’t yet made its way into the Honda Odyssey, Ridgeline, or Passport, expect changes to happen once those models get redesigned. It took long enough, but Honda has finally seen the light.
(Photo credits: Honda)
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
Fiat Once Offered A Car With A Built-In Espresso Machine And Here’s How It Worked
-
The Nissan Variable Compression Ratio Engine Everyone Got Excited About Was Maybe Too Good To Be True
-
How BMW Replaced One Of Its Best Engines With One Of Its Worst Engines
-
How One Little Nut Has Been Known To Kill BMWs
-
Why Driving Short Distances Can Kill A Newer Honda CR-V
Got a hot tip? Send it to us here. Or check out the stories on our homepage.
Longitudinal V6s can also be major pains! Or could be a GM thing.
I think cylinder 4 and 6 on the S-10 were behind the steering column, so good luck getting to the sparkplugs!
Interesting that Honda didn’t go hydraulic lifters when another Japanese company not known for reliability did. Mitsubishi used hydraulic lifters in the 4G63 in 1980
Cylinder number 4 is an absolute bastard to get to on 4.3L V6’s, right against the steering shaft. I’m able to do it by jacking the engine up a bit and using a special socket, but some guys just pull the steering shaft. I don’t blame GM too much, though, that S-10 chassis was never designed for 90 degree V-6’s, but they run so much better than the anemic 2.8. And they’re more reliable.
It’s intetesting that you say a company not known for reliability used hydraulic lifters…
I think it’s a bit brash to knock non-hydraulic valve trains in the way you have. The point of a hydraulic valve train is to maintain zero-lash throughout the engine’s life span. Although it does reduce valve noise vs a non- hydraulic valve, it is indescernible from the other if properly adjusted.
The applications of hydraulic valve trains were targeted at slower-running engines were the owners complain of too much NVH. 50 years worth of machining experience has taught us how to make engines without that problem.
Non-hydraulic valve trains are not ancient, antiquated designs, they are the perfect engineering balance between simplicity, reliability, and performance . Some are even adjustable. Hydraulic valve trains are more complicated, unreliable, and worse performing. Every lifter is a failure point (gm’s cylinder deactivation is terrible) and you can’t get the same power, efficiency, or rpm from them.
Rpm equals horse power and putting your torque as high as possible makes more hp as well. Also, below peak torque, an engine burns all its fuel, above peak torque, it still has unburnt fuel left over. This means engines with high rpm potential and high rpm peak torque naturally benefit from higher fuel economy, higher power, lower emissions, and more fun. Hydraulic valve trains can’t do that.
Also, over time, unadjusted valves don’t tighten up, they become looser as the mating surfaces wear. This reduces performance, but won’t cause additional damage. The engine will just run like crap until they get adjusted.
Ford, honda, toyota, and especially, yamaha all run non- hydraulic valve trains in many of their engines (just to name a few). Why? Because they are the better compromise.
I think on some engines they have a tendency to tighten up too much and cause damage that way, rather than by being too loose. I’m not a mechanic and have no idea how that’s possible (because your explanation does make sense), but I have been told by mechanics that it can be quite the opposite.
There are ways valve clearance could tighten up, but only under very special conditions.
1. Prolonged high speed and high load causing the valve to grow longer from thermal expansion. Hence the reason why valves are always set on a cold engine. If the valves grow too much, they won’t close all the way and hang open. This can be alleviated by adding extra clearance to an initial valve adjustment in anticipation of running an engine in that way.
2. Abuse from over- speeding an engine past its designed speed causing the valves to mushroom or the valve seat to get pounded out. This would allow the valve seat deeper in the head making the effective length longer and the valve adjustment tighten up. If this happens, you have way more problems than a valve adjustment would fix, but you wouldn’t know your engine had this problem if you had a hydraulic valve setup.
I enjoyed adjusting the valve lash on my mid-80’s CRX Si, but all I had to do was pull off the valve cover and get to it. That arrangement makes a rather pleasant bit of maintenance into a pain in the butt that I’d just bring to a mechanic.
Rust Bucket is correct. Transverse V6’s are an abomination. VR6’s are bad enough in VW products. But that rear bank on a real transverse V6 is absolutely ridiculous to get to. Gimme a straight six if you have to have six cylinders. So many reasons.
Or a flat six, or a longitudinal V6, or a turbo four cylinder, or anything that isn’t a transverse V6.
Would a transverse V8 be 33% more of an abomination?
I think at least that. But being as it almost always means luxury car size, using weaksauce FWD with way too much torque, prolly closer to 50% worse.
These kinds of abominations go up at a square function. It’s *at least* 77% worse.
Gloves, lab coat, and classical music is the only way you can work on them.
Don’t forget the plastic sheeting and the shovel in the background…
Shhh…. nobody else knows that.
I’ve got one of those. No adjustments can even be made. It’s a Volvo (Yamaha) B8444S in my xc90. It’s engineering is absolutely beautiful unless you have to work on it. I just actually just had to change the engine due to the last owner’s maintenance neglect.
The overhead cams directly activate the valves with a lash cap between the valve and cam lobe. You pretty much have to tear the engine down to a long block, remove the timing chains and cams in order to re-set the valve lash.
Wait till you own a Subaru. Both banks are horrible!
As much as I prefer the I6 (having had 3 of them), there are some I6 automobiles where the 2 cylinders closest to firewall are very hard to reach. Probably not as hard as the rear bank in some minivans, but apparently still a PITA.
the Honda Fit 2009 also has solid lifters.. had to do the valve adjustment on both the Fit and an Acura MDX (which is the Pilot dolled up with leather seats etc).
It wasn’t a couple hundred dollars in labor costs, more like 800 and up. Getting to the valves on these engines took me most of a day in both cases.
The MDX is now at 175k, and I’m dreading the job at 200k already.. might just neglect it honestly. At 100k the valves were a tiny bit tight and I adjusted to the loosest spec, still running quiet and getting the same mpg as always.
I did my ’12 Fit and it wasn’t -that- bad, but transverse V-6’s are always a PITA to do anything on the rear bank.
Honestly, look around you at the numbers of Pilots, Odysseys and V6 Accords on the road(and their Acura brethren) and figure how many of them have ever had their valves adjusted as per factory spec. If it was 25%, I’d be shocked, probably closer to 10-15%. And J-motors run a very long time as long as the timing belt is done at reasonable intervals.
I believe my 3rd gen does too. My mechanic warned me about the 100K work (he’s the car whisperer).
I’ve worked on valve trains so worn using a feeler gauge to set lash was futile. The valve stem and rockers wear and your gauge contacts only the “high spots” and the lash doesn’t feel right because the feeler is acting like a leaf spring.
This is when I get the mag base, indicator and test gauge to measure actual movement of the rocker tip. The results can be dramatic.
I had a 82 Virago I would take on red line runs across Florida swamps. Poor thing. I had been using feelers to adjust lash and around 75k miles she ran ratty and a reliable idle when cold was a nice thought.
I gained access to machinest tools and indicated lash. There was a substantial difference between feeler lash and measured lash. She didn’t run like a new bike it just seemed that way.
For the last thirty years when I think there’s something hinky in the valve train out come the indicators. And there’s always something hinky. And it’s ALWAYS a royal pain. Especially on aluminum heads.
Then there are the hot lash engines. Measure an I and E rocker movement hot, then cold, and adjust cold lash accordingly.
I must be a masochist.
This surprises me and doesn’t at the same time. If you play around with a lot of different cars, you know that Toyota and Honda are pretty good about not doing anything that pushes any envelopes (Toyota hasn’t done anything all that interesting since the Prius came out, and I can’t think of a Honda that’s captured my interest ever). They’ll milk every last drop out of a proven, reliable (or “reliable”) technology until the market forces them to change. I’m sure there’s a cultural element to this that gives Japanese cars as a whole the “reliable” reputation. Mazda seems to be sort of an exception in that their milking of old tech includes pushing it as far as they can with a warranty; sort of playing it safe, but not at the same time and with what we can probably all agree are excellent results.
Had no idea there were still cars being made in the 21st century with solid lifters. My 1972 Super Beetle has them, of course, and it’s a pretty easy job to do. Valve covers are accessed under the car, but there’s just one big clip and they come off. Adjust with wrench, feeler gauge, and screwdriver, replace the cork gaskets on the valve covers, and you’re good. This should be done every 3k miles or so (along with changing the oil, setting the timing and the point gap, and potentially adjusting the automatic choke, the carburetor, or replacing the fan belt). Don’t get me wrong, a tune up can make for a pleasant spring morning, but I’m glad I don’t have to do that on my daily.
I didn’t realize the Jeep 4.0 had solid lifters all the way to the end until a guy in the car club pointed it out the other day. I thought that was an anachronism then (and with the logic presented above, it still is). If any OEM is going to hold onto old tech like this though, it’s going to be Honda (or Toyota).
It’s not true. A Jeep 4.0 has hydraulic lifters. The AMC inline-six has used them since the 1960s.
I think what you probably mean is a hydraulic *flat tappet*. This is one of the reasons why folks use high-zinc oil in the 4.0s.
Ah. Yup. I stand corrected. Jeep trivia fail. No less surprising. Car club guy was correct, my memory just sucks.
The 4.0 has hydraulic lifters, but they are flat tappets instead of roller lifters. This absolutely was an anachronism by the 80s and was really an anachronism by 2006.
My experience is that you should only buy 4 cylinder Hondas/Acuras. Years before this issue the V6’s would eat their transmission.
Having personal experience with this issue, I whole heartedly agree. However, this problem was a transmission design failure in Hondas part.
They were extremely picky with what type and brand fluid, and the early years did not have an external filter. Honda said the strainer- filter was lifetime, but required the fluid to be changed pretty much every other oil change .
“When Honda was developing the J-series V6, it makes sense that the marque stuck to known technology, rather than venturing out into the great unknown.”
erm… VTEC??
Admittedly not the first variable valve timing technology, but Honda had no issues with “venturing out” with that
VTEC is not variable valve timing, it’s basically variable valve lift but I’d describe it as a system that allows one engine to run two cam profiles.
Isn’t the same engine in the Ridgeline, Odyssey and Passport?
The Pilot got the new engine with the redesign, the other three still have the solid lifter engine at the moment.
Thanks. 94k on my 2019 Ridgeline and rock solid so far. Should be doing the timing belt soon and I’ll have my mechanic do the valve adjustment when it is time.
Sometimes solid lifters are better than hydraulic ones. From what I’ve read on the air cooled 1.8L engines that were in Vanagons during startup you get “sticky lifter syndrome” and the only way to get rid of it is to drive around for a few minutes to build up oil pressure.
Generally speaking I prefer mechanical systems provided I can work on them easily enough. The above mentioned Honda valve system job seems like a big PITA that’s probably better suited for a Honda shop if it’s done right.
On something like an air cooled VW I’d prefer solid lifters.
“Secondly, many Honda single overhead cam four-cylinder engines feature rockers arms that push solid shim-and-bucket tappets, which then act on the valves.”
A shim and bucket lifter is a completely different thing that Hondas do not have. The rocker arm pushes on the valve directly.
“Well, part of it could be due to the ancientness of the J-series V6. The first J30A three-liter V6 was used in the 1996 Acura 3.0CL…”
1996 is not ancient, and that’s not why Hondas use a solid valve train.
Almost all American engines use hydraulic lifters since the early 1960s. This is because quiet and smooth engine operation was valued above almost anything else in the US at the time, and hydraulic lifters guarantee perfect valve clearance at all temperatures, in all seasons, with no maintenance. However, the tradeoff is increased cost, complexity, reciprocating valve train mass, and sensitivity to oil quality.
Honda was a major motorcycle company before they ever got into the car business. Motorcycles in the 50s and 60s, and indeed motorcycles nowadays, exclusively use solid lifters. This is because the complexity and extra reciprocating mass are unacceptable for a high revving motorcycle engine. When Honda started making cars, they stuck with solid lifters, for the same reasons. This was the mid 70s when hydraulic lifters were already standard on American cars.
Into the 80s and 90s, as Hondas and other Japanese cars became more mainstream, more Americanized, and more smooth and powerful, they still didn’t switch to hydraulic lifters, because the extra mass is mutually exclusive with 8500rpm redlines and VTEC, and because adding hydraulic lifters to an overhead cam engine would mean a significantly taller head. The solid roller rocker system is quite compact. The J series is pretty much just a V6 version of the D series and F series engines that Honda already made, and it keeps the same valve train.
So Honda engineers made the engineering decision that solid valve trains would be better in their cars. They’re not alone: plenty of very modern engines use solid valve trains, although usually with bucket and shim lifters. The advantages of a solid valve train are very real, and what’s the downside? It has to be adjusted every 100,000 miles? Adjusting it is not very difficult or time consuming, and that’s not very frequent at all.
No, the real problem here is that transverse V6s suck to work on, and that caused the easy quick valve adjustment on a four cylinder to become a much more involved and expensive process.
Say it with me, guys, transverse V6s are not okay!
how about transverse any engine is not ok. Right Wheels Drive for life ;P
Great stuff!
The easiest/best engine to adjust the valves on was the Honda 450 DOHC vertical twin. Only 2 valves/cylinder w/torsion springs closing the valves and the rockers were pivoted on eccentric shafts that protruded through the ends of cam boxes at each side of the head. Loosen the locknuts and turn the shaft w/ a straight blade screwdriver.
The recommended procedure in the owner’s manual was to remove the tank and the cambox covers and slide the feeler gauge between the rocker end and the valve, with the engine cold. I pushed that bike the big part of a mile and he morning I had an appointment to take it in for its first oil change and valve adjustment.
The mechanic took it in and fired it up and when it was warm, adjusted the valves by loosening the eccentric and twiddling the shaft. I was shocked that the procedure was blatantly ignored. When I got it back, I took it home and the next morning I pulled the tank & cam covers and checked the clearances. Damned if they weren’t dead on. I set them that way for as long as I owned the bike.
You aren’t kidding about checking out what maintenance requirements a car needs before you purchase. In 2017 I bought my wife a new honda civic with the 2.0L engine. I checked really quick to make sure it used a timing chain and figured all else would be fine, “it’s a honda, they make rock solid cars” I thought. Now she’s approaching 100k miles and that’s when the dreaded maintenance minder #4 will be coming up. I couldn’t believe that was still a thing when six months after buying the car I first read in the owner’s manual about checking the valve clearances.
My 2010 4.0 Taco had shims under the solid lifters. They recommended checking/adjusting the clearance every 100K miles. I gave it a miss, then traded the truck off at 105K.
I had no problem adjusting the valves on my 89 Civic SI or the motorcycles that preceded it, but having to pull the intake & cams to adjust the valves was a step too far.
Having read the procedure for “adjusting” valve clearance on my car (which includes the phrase “tie the timing chain with a string” in between removing both cams and replacing, no, not shimming, any lifters that’re now marginally undersized) I’ve been thoroughly put off from even checking the clearance.
My ‘68 Dodge Dart has a 225 with solid lifters. When it was my daily about 10 years ago, I lashed the valves every 10-15000 miles, as one of the cylinders tended to close up valve clearance on extended drives. With a reusable valve cover gasket, I could do the job in 15 minutes. If you’re familiar with the /6, you know that the recommended procedure is to actually lash the valves with the engine warm and running. It’s definitely a weird experience the first time you do it, but reasonably straightforward. American automakers all pretty much switched over to hydraulic lifters in the 70s, truly I had no idea any maker still used solid lifters.
From a DIY perspective, having to get the valve cover off a Leaning Tower of Power is a lot different from a doing the same on a modern transverse V6.
Slant 6 owners have been known to remove and re-install their valve covers as a method of timing a soft-boiled egg.
6 minutes?
My first car, a 1959 Ford Custom 300 four-door sedan, had a 292 Y-block V8. It of course had solid lifters. The official factory specifications required the valves to be adjusted with the engine fully up to operating temperature and running at idle, which meant using a go/no-go stepped feeler gauge and a socket wrench as the rockers were, well, rocking.
The slightly less messy way to do this involved having a spare valve cover with an opening cut in the top so that the oil was somewhat contained around the sides. I didn’t have a spare valve cover. Good times.
My ’06 Suzuki Grand Vitara with the 2.7 v6 had the shim & bucket setup. Once at 25000km and every 50000km afterwards.
2 hours shop time max. My dealer usually got it done in 1.5 hours.
Hydraulic vs solid valves and timing belts vs chains are topics near and dear to my brain, maybe not my heart, as I like Hondas, motorcycles, Ducatis, and high mileage hero’s, and these are major components of all these things. I have a Honda Element Mr. Jeep Man and it’s great, don’t let the minor adjustment bother you (easier on a K-series than a J anyway). But also, my first motorcycle was the only one I’ve owned with hydraulic valves as almost all of them still use solids…and that was a 1984 Honda Nighthawk 700SC, so Honda certainly could have implemented hydraulic lifters sooner if they had felt like it. I suspect their penchant for high revs and race engines is what held them back longer than others in this area. But also, a lot of very high mileage engines are timing belt ones, almost all the “million mile” Toyota and Honda engines from the 80-90s they built their reputations on were belt driven. As a mechanic I have seen poorly built timing chain components (why are the Germans so bad at this?) or poor maintenance (overstretched oil change intervals or junk oil can quickly eat a chain) lead to many stretched or failed timing chains that put engines in early graves. But I have no problem with a chain in general as long as it’s well built and maintained (see above Honda Element). But with a belt engine you didn’t have to worry as much about that, just make sure the belt has been done and carry on, even if the prior owner abused it a little it’s easier to save. Plus you often get a new water pump in the process and fresher coolant, keeping the cooling system in better nick. But people don’t want to pay the maintenance so that’s gone away. But I suppose it’s hard enough to get folks to change there oil on time as it is these days.
I had a Saturn VUE with the J35 and don’t remember valve adjustment being part of the maintenance schedule – interesting.
GM probably just couldn’t be bothered, haha. Fascinating those J-series Vues. Was it a Redline?
No, just a plain V6 AWD. It was a really good vehicle IMO.
Ah, this explains why my parents’ old 2000 Odyssey–still kicking after over 250,000 miles–needed a valve adjustment recently.
And why, after the adjustment–as well as many other maintenance items that my dad should’ve done like 100,000-plus miles ago, but that’s another kettle of monkeys–its fuel consumption dropped like 30-40%.
If ever there was evidence that proper maintenance is worth it, that was it.
Valve clearance being out of wack should not cause a 30-40% change in fuel economy, at all. If the clearance is too tight, it’ll burn a valve before you notice an mpg issue. If the clearance is too loose, and it would have to be MASSIVELY too loose, you would notice the loss of power and very loud ticking before you notice an mpg issue.
I believe you–the valve adjustment was just one of several things that were done as part of a repair to get the Odyssey to pass emissions testing. Spark plugs, ignition coils, an EGR replacement, intake manifold cleaning were also done.
Okay yeah that’ll do it
The Nissan D21 Hardbody’s KA24E has 3 valves and hydraulic lifters, the succeeding D22 Frontier’s KA24DE has 4 valves with shim-under-bucket solid lifters which gets it a little more RPM and peak HP that I ain’t using anyway. I want to “upgrade” from my D22 to a D21 but surprisingly (or not) they’re thin on the ground.
This particular Honda idiosyncrasy kept me from buying an Element more than once. It’s not that I couldn’t do this service, but I feel it shouldn’t be necessary on cars produced in this century. I hold it in same regard as timing belts, although this is way, way more egregious. 2023? Come on…
I have to disagree with you mate and I love my Element, but then I have a Ducati so clearly I’m not all right in the head when it comes to valve train design and cam timing methods.
Far be it from me to knock anyone who enjoys adjusting valves as routine maintenance. I just don’t have the time or patience for it, especially on a modern vehicle.
I’ve driven my brother in law’s Element. I think they’re great, I just feel like that kind of maintenance is unnecessary and outmoded in the mid aughts.
I can understand that if you’re talking about service that needs to be done often – 25-30K miles, but 105K? Even if you drive your vehicle 280,000 miles, that means you’ve only had to do it twice. Solid lifters are able to make a little more power than hydraulics because of the faster valve lift, and they’re certainly more reliable – just ask owners of DOD LS and Hemi motors that have had hydraulic lifters shit themselves.
I love The Autopian, but IMHO, this article is kind of a bullshit hack job.
I can see the point you’re making, and it’s true, it’s not like older European cars where you’d sometimes have to do that every 30-60K. Which is fair. I’m more annoyed that it has to be done. While there are benefits to this type of valvetrain setup, it smacks of either laziness or cost-savings. Kind of like how Toyota limped 3 speed automatics into the 00s or kept drum rear brakes on the Tacoma until the most recent generation. For me it’s more about the principle of the matter.
Legitimately asking, am I really being that unreasonable about this?
I know one of the primary design goals when Honda designed the J-series V6’s was to have as compact of an engine as possible, due to packaging constraints, and that’s likely part of the motivation rather than cost, as substituting hydraulic lifters(technically lash adjusters, I guess) isn’t a whole lot more expensive when designing a clean-sheet engine.
Simplicity might also be part of it, but the most likely explanation is just age – the J-series came out in, what, about ’97? That means they were designing it in the mid-90’s, when solid lifters were pretty common in Japanese engines, and “if ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. It’s not an issue like not adding overdrive or sticking with obviously inferior drum brakes where it will materially affect the drivability of the vehicle.
That makes sense – appreciate the clarification.
Just have to object to your slander against drum brakes, which are most certainly not “obviously inferior”.
Point taken, although I will argue that drum brakes on something that may go into the water(such as when towing a boat) is an inferior option to discs. Unlike a lot of people, I don’t hate drums, they have their place, but not wild about them in pickups.
Not sure why water really matters, at least if you drive immediately afterwards the drums will dry out just fine. Not that anybody is really launching a boat with a Tacoma.
What do you mean “Not that anybody is really launching a boat with a Tacoma”? I see that several times every weekend during the boating season.
FYI, Toyota has a “Bonus Bucks” program for tournament fishers who use Tacomas (and other Toyotas) to tow and launch their bass boats. It’s been going on for years and years.
After years of that, they even added an annual Toyota owners’ exclusive event. 2023 was the 12th year of this, and it was booked full again, as usual.
There’s nothing wrong with using a Tacoma for boating. You just have to match the size of the truck with the size of the boat being launched and recovered.
Tbo, I think so. Everything is an engineering trade off, balancing simplicity, reliability, performance, and cost. Maintenance is very rarely considered in the list of priorities. The fact that valve adjustment can be pushed out to 60-100k is fair considering the torment an engine goes through.
As far as toyota with the 3spd and drum brakes, you have to look at the application. Toyota is a true engineering company. Each car they make is very carefully engineered to make it what it is. They will only put things on their cars if they’re necessary. Tacos are the #1 best truck you could possibly get, bar none, new or old. Drum brakes have more surface area, thus better braking. They just suffer from heat rejection and fade.
Agreed. My friends 2021 gm ls (ecotec3) has already gone through 3 sets.
I also agree that the original idea for this article could’ve been different. I don’t blame the article author, as he probably picked the article because he knew what to write to make it an article. When I used to write for all3dp, people would create topics and others could pick them to write about.