I was so focused on the head gasket thing I totally missed the one quart of oil statement.
There is not a hope that the car burned through all of that oil without it looking like it was doing mosquito control when going down the road. Hell, to burn through that much oil in 10K it would have to be practically pissing out the exhaust. The cats would have been clogged before even half that much was burned.

maybe over 20k though? If it never had an oil change? That's certainly possible... as we entertain ourselves waiting for OP to return...

Subaru states ~1quart/1k miles is acceptable and normal so it's within the realm of possibility that it did actually burn up all it's oil (given it's ~5.5 quart capacity even if it was properly changed at 15k miles). That doesn't excuse neglecting to check the oil however.

I would buy that if he drove it hard but as he stated it is a lightly used DD. I push my oil changes out to the very limit and have never lost even a 1/4 of a quart much less 4.5.
I was of course referring to burning it all up if it had been changed at the proper intervals so we assumed it was full.

I think proof of oil changes is all you'll need to win this case. The dealer pointing to it being a used car for the warranty denial is BS. That is immaterial unless they can point to hard evidence of a mod causing the damage, or you don't have evidence that the oil was changed at the minimum required intervals. Save the receipts from your 3rd party inspection and seek reimbursement.

Proof of oil changes is all well and good if there was still oil in the engine. This goes way beyond proving that the oil was changed.

The problem is this: there is a quart of oil left in the engine.

If I went to a tire shop for new tires, ran the tires for 50,000 miles, had low tire pressure for 10k and ran it without checking the pressures periodically, and the tire sidewall blew out... do I just take my receipt of the tire change at the shop and seek reimbursement/legal relief just because I changed it at an authorized shop?

Maybe the tire shop screwed up installing the valve stem... that caused the low pressure. But it doesn't take away from the fact that to get to 1 quart in the engine, you need to 1) burn the oil away, or 2) have it physically leak (out) somewhere. Obviously we can rule out faulty oil changes since that's highly unlikely, but my point is that there's a dipstick in the engine bay for a reason, and to get to 1 quart tells me that dipstick was not used in the proper manner.

Now try that in a court of law, and it will shoot holes in the claim that is very hard to go around.

Eh...

Definitely waiting for OP to come back though.
:popcorn:

According to OP, Toyota's inspection concluded there wasn't any evidence of leaks or burning oil. My assumption was the spun bearing resulted in a hole in the block or pan and the oil escaped during failure. Why would Toyota tear down a motor that had a contained rod bearing failure, and not simply point to 1 quart being recovered as evidence of neglect? That's literally all they had to say. Instead they said that there wasn't any evidence of leaks or burning, but lack of lubrication caused the failure. If that's true, then Toyota put themselves into a bad spot for defending their warranty denial (assuming OP has oil change evidence). OP needs to clarify a few details.

While possible the dealer would have to be pretty stupid to try this and there would be a big mess of oil still in the engine bay to support this claim. I thought the same thing, had it half written up and realized that would have been obvious and likely mentioned in one of the OP's two posts.

Not every blown engine ends with oil on the ground.

If OP's account is true then they have already proven to be pretty stupid by claiming anything other than low oil caused the failure. I'm aware a blown engine can not leak oil, hence my earlier reference to a "contained" rod bearing failure.

I see nothing in this statement where the dealer tried to blame anything but low oil. This is the OP's words not theirs.

Where does the dealer actually blame anything in that post? The dealer said no evidence of oil burning, warranty denied. Based on OP's account, we don't know who said there was a quart in the engine or the context surrounding that quart.

I think the idea has been covered like a corpse, but if the car was low on oil when the bearing spun, OP's chances of winning a court case over it have slimmer chances than snowballs in Tijuana.

If you're interested in keeping the car long term, I'd recommend getting a built long block from a good engine builder. Personally, I don't really need the headaches of FI so I'd go for a 13.5:1 CR and take comfort in the idea that I have a bullet proof motor.

Lemme clarify what I can: Car was previously serviced at another Toyota dealership (within service interval).

There were no leaks on ground when the car died. Never a drop in my garage floor.

After I had towed the car to the dealer they called me they said it took 4 quarts to bring it back up to full.

These were dealer's verbatim words: no signs of leaks, (drain plug, filter etc) no fouling on plugs.

Tcoat, you say it would be smoking like it was running on coal to be using that much oil, but others say that's perfectly acceptable oil usage (1qt/1000miles).

My FA20'd WRX ran for 2 years without burning a drop of oil. Something ain't right.