Knurled wrote:
Pet peeve: Comparing "dino juice" and "synthetic". Synthetic is petroleum based too, some of it from crude but usually natural gas. The difference is that it isn't refined from, but rather is assembled to, so you can dictate exactly what is in it. Requires less additives in it that way.
I was going to say that I was sorry to tickle your pet peeve, but then realized that if I hadn't done so, I'd never have learned this about "synthetics". Thanks, man..I honestly didn't know that stuff about how it was made. I'll try to keep from using those terms in the future. (where's the "thumbs up" icon?)
On a slightly related note, what is different between the high mileage oil and regular oil?
96DXCivic wrote:
On a slightly related note, what is different between the high mileage oil and regular oil?
Usually HM is slightly thicker in grade than the standard stuff (a regular 10w30 will generally be thinner than an HM 10w30) and contains some percentage of esters to assist in cleaning and swelling seals (nothing bad like a stop-leak product, though).
I used to change my oil every 3k but started thinking about all that used motor oil in the ecosystem. Recycling oil is a dirty business but not much less harmful than refining from scratch so using less motor oil is better.
Now I look at the manufacturer's severe service recommendation and use that instead (we're in CA with a lot of heat, traffic, and dust). For both our cars, it's around 4k so instead of four oil changes a year, I'm down to three. That's 25 percent less oil over the car's life with most likely a negligible impact on engine wear. Besides, what good is a motor that runs great at 300k when the rest of the car is falling apart around it?
Most manufacturer's severe service recommendations are about half the normal change interval so it's a good place to start.
02Pilot wrote:
96DXCivic wrote:
On a slightly related note, what is different between the high mileage oil and regular oil?
Usually HM is slightly thicker in grade than the standard stuff (a regular 10w30 will generally be thinner than an HM 10w30) and contains some percentage of esters to assist in cleaning and swelling seals (nothing bad like a stop-leak product, though).
So is it actually worth it?
96DXCivic wrote:
So is it actually worth it?
I notice I burn less with my 450K mile CRX then if I use regular or synthetic. With non-high mileage (of the Mobil variety) I lose about 2 quarts every 7500 miles, which is my standard interval for changes. With the High Mileage it is only about one quart. Is it worth it? I guess I keep buying for some reason but it might just be habit now.
96DXCivic wrote:
02Pilot wrote:
96DXCivic wrote:
On a slightly related note, what is different between the high mileage oil and regular oil?
Usually HM is slightly thicker in grade than the standard stuff (a regular 10w30 will generally be thinner than an HM 10w30) and contains some percentage of esters to assist in cleaning and swelling seals (nothing bad like a stop-leak product, though).
So is it actually worth it?
Too many variables. Short answer, if your engine burns or leaks significant amounts of oil, it may help, depending on what's at fault and the particulars of your engine. It won't hurt anything, and will do just fine in newer engines that have no oil-related problems as well.
I have been using either Mobil 1 high mileage or Royal Purple depending on how broke I am. My car sure doesn't seem to be burning or leaking oil.
Most manufacturer's "severe service" ratings apply for a shockingly large percentage of the populace.
For example... if you live within 20-30 miles of a major city, you're severe service because of the dust and traffic.
On the other hand, if you live in a rural area, you're severe service because of the agricultural dust.
If you live north, it's too cold. If you live south, it's too hot. if you live in the middle, it's both.
And so on...
Knurled wrote:
Interesting fact: Ford does recommend a 5k oil change. Motorcraft oil is also a partial synthetic.
the only problem , according to a friend , who is an oil distributor... nowhere on any available list can you find out the % of synthetic in any oil titled "partial synthetic".... he claims it's the greatest ripoff since... anything...
Johnboyjjb wrote:
96DXCivic wrote:
So is it actually worth it?
I notice I burn less with my 450K mile CRX then if I use regular or synthetic. With non-high mileage (of the Mobil variety) I lose about 2 quarts every 7500 miles, which is my standard interval for changes. With the High Mileage it is only about one quart. Is it worth it? I guess I keep buying for some reason but it might just be habit now.
I switched to the HM stuff in my Golf (225K mi) before I had the valve seals replaced, and consumption went from a quart every 2K to one every 3K. Still using it now that the seals are new, it seems to seep less from the valve cover gasket (notorious on old 8v VWs).
Nashco wrote:
I'm a big fan of the "oil life" indicator that the Saturn has (as well as lots of GMs for a long time now). They have formulas they've established from testing, warranty, and just general experience after building millions and millions of cars to tell you how used up the oil is. If you drive in mild climates on long highway trips, the oil lasts a really long time. If you drive in very extreme climates and beat the hell out of the car, the oil doesn't last very long. Time is factored in as well. It takes the guess work out for the average person, and all but the most extreme track cars can live life by that indicator with no worries.
Bryce
I agree GM's Oil Life Monitor is awesome. No other manufacurer has done as much research into understanding engine oil drain intervals.
alfadriver wrote:
Some of you conspirists are funny- that OEM's tell you to change oil less frequently so that the car wears out faster.. that's hilarious. Come on- you can't be serious- we are all measured by how long cars last, so if they all fail reliably at 150k miles, vs. another that lasts +300k you would be crucified.
US cars are required to meet emissions to 120k miles, Clean state cars are required to meet emissions to 150k miles. For that to happen, you need to deposit little enough phosphorus on the catalysts to be roughly equivallent to 15k miles per quart burnt (+- some, depending on the standard you are trying to meet).
Basically, the oil change requirement is a customer want, that started in the European market, for the vehicle to require less maintenence. Since MOST of a vehicle maintenence is oil changes, thus the move to increase the span of the oil changes to beyond 10k miles (or just over 1.5 times, average, per year). Engines last just fine out at that interval- even super thin oils like 5w-20 (which is the current standard for most engines).
For the mechanics that like to change oil at 3k miles, of course you do- you'll get paid 3x as often as you should for a simple change. 5k = twice as often as you should. Dealers try to do that to, but you have to understand that dealers are NOT the OEM's- they just sell and service the vehicles.
As for those of you who wait to warm up your car, as well- that, too, is a waste. Mainly of gas and your time. Driving warms up the car faster, and generally leads to lower overall emissions (and I've done the testing to know that). Just remember, sitting still = 0 mpg.
The car is designed to be able to drive away immediately, and the emissions test only has a 15 sec neutral idle, 5 seconds in drive (or 20 sec neutral for manuals), and then the car is driven.
If you want to wait a min or two, and insist on changing oil at 3k miles- that's fine- it's your money. Just be aware that you are saving nothing in the engine.
So true. Those who manufacture the oil, sell the oil, and change the oil will recommend more frequent oil changes. The OEM's understand best when to change the oil so follow their recommendations.
bruceman wrote:
alfadriver wrote:
Some of you conspirists are funny- that OEM's tell you to change oil less frequently so that the car wears out faster.. that's hilarious. Come on- you can't be serious- we are all measured by how long cars last, so if they all fail reliably at 150k miles, vs. another that lasts +300k you would be crucified.
US cars are required to meet emissions to 120k miles, Clean state cars are required to meet emissions to 150k miles. For that to happen, you need to deposit little enough phosphorus on the catalysts to be roughly equivallent to 15k miles per quart burnt (+- some, depending on the standard you are trying to meet).
Basically, the oil change requirement is a customer want, that started in the European market, for the vehicle to require less maintenence. Since MOST of a vehicle maintenence is oil changes, thus the move to increase the span of the oil changes to beyond 10k miles (or just over 1.5 times, average, per year). Engines last just fine out at that interval- even super thin oils like 5w-20 (which is the current standard for most engines).
For the mechanics that like to change oil at 3k miles, of course you do- you'll get paid 3x as often as you should for a simple change. 5k = twice as often as you should. Dealers try to do that to, but you have to understand that dealers are NOT the OEM's- they just sell and service the vehicles.
As for those of you who wait to warm up your car, as well- that, too, is a waste. Mainly of gas and your time. Driving warms up the car faster, and generally leads to lower overall emissions (and I've done the testing to know that). Just remember, sitting still = 0 mpg.
The car is designed to be able to drive away immediately, and the emissions test only has a 15 sec neutral idle, 5 seconds in drive (or 20 sec neutral for manuals), and then the car is driven.
If you want to wait a min or two, and insist on changing oil at 3k miles- that's fine- it's your money. Just be aware that you are saving nothing in the engine.
So true. Those who manufacture the oil, sell the oil, and change the oil will recommend more frequent oil changes. The OEM's understand best when to change the oil so follow their recommendations.
While I agree with the general sentiment, there are several caveats to consider. Take BMW, for example, as it is the marque with which I am most familiar: modern OLMs are adaptive, but usually indicate a change around 15k miles. However, in practice, this interval very often results in serious sludge accumulations. Why? Well, the oil requirements are rigorous, and many people don't meet them; the crankcase ventilation system is prone to failure and blockage; and the calculations done by the OLM seem to be somewhat optimistic, especially regarding the moisture accumulation and fuel dilution caused by repeated short trips and cold starts. The net result is that a lot of people end up with sludge problems by following the OLM. Rather than searching out exotic Euro-spec oils and repairing the CCV, the simplest remedy for many is to change the oil more frequently. Even with everything working 100%, the margin provided by the OLM in terms of TBN is extremely thin, if used oil analysis is any guide.
Knurled wrote:
Most manufacturer's "severe service" ratings apply for a shockingly large percentage of the populace.
For example... if you live within 20-30 miles of a major city, you're severe service because of the dust and traffic.
On the other hand, if you live in a rural area, you're severe service because of the agricultural dust.
If you live north, it's too cold. If you live south, it's too hot. if you live in the middle, it's both.
And so on...
Quoted for truth.
That being said, I hear you guys talking about the OLM, but is such a device really ready for retrofit for most of us with older cars? Sounds like the thing is so new that there aren't any aftermarket applications yet.
And since all my cars are approaching 20yrs old, the aftermarket is dang sure what I'm looking at...
02Pilot wrote:
While I agree with the general sentiment, there are several caveats to consider. Take BMW, for example, as it is the marque with which I am most familiar: modern OLMs are adaptive, but usually indicate a change around 15k miles. However, in practice, this interval very often results in serious sludge accumulations. Why? Well, the oil requirements are rigorous, and many people don't meet them; the crankcase ventilation system is prone to failure and blockage; and the calculations done by the OLM seem to be somewhat optimistic, especially regarding the moisture accumulation and fuel dilution caused by repeated short trips and cold starts. The net result is that a lot of people end up with sludge problems by following the OLM. Rather than searching out exotic Euro-spec oils and repairing the CCV, the simplest remedy for many is to change the oil more frequently. Even with everything working 100%, the margin provided by the OLM in terms of TBN is extremely thin, if used oil analysis is any guide.
Good discussion. A number of European OEM's (and Toyota) have had sludge problems probably due to CCV, oil quality, and insufficient oil changes. One of these was SAAB in the late 90's which did not have an OLM. If a GM owner follows the OLM and uses oil meeting the recommended specification they will not sludge their engine. http://www.gm.com/corporate/responsibility/environment/maintenance/simplified_maintenance_040104.jsp
I'm not familiar with how the BMW Oil Life Monitor works but it doesn't sound like it works well if it always recommends 15k oil drains unless that is ALL highway mileage. European OEM's seem to be fixated with long fixed mileage drain intervals probably their customers are demanding it due to the incredibly high price of a quart of engine oil compared to NA.
GM's OLM is conservative and is driven by the number of combustion events and oil temperature. It was first tested within GM on 1983 Corvettes and then in production on certain 1988 Olsmobiles. Most GM vehicles have the OLM since 2003 and if GM customers followed the OLM over 6,000,000 gallons of oil annually would be saved compared to changing every 3000 miles.
TBN has been proven to be good only for the marketing folks and is not worthy for the engineers. This is because the ASTM test methods can provide accurate readings for new oils but not for used oils. The method requires the lab technician to determine an inflection point in the data which is clear with new oil but not easy to identify with used oil. In addition engine testing has shown an oil with high TBN doesn't perform any better than an oil with normal TBN at controlling acid. Basically the amount of TBN in a used oil is not a good indicator of oil life. Better indicator of oil life are viscosity, FTIR, PIN, elemental analysis, and GC-MS.
I have never encountered a sludged BMW, Toyota, or VW. Even the 1.8ts. We get to see inside a lot of those thanks to the wonderful cam chain tensioner/adjuster gasket leak problem 
But then, we recommend 3k oil changes for standard oil and 7500 for synthetic. We also rigidly adhere to OEM oil specs. It's not that difficult to find the right oils, if you look. Most OEMs will gladly provide a list of oils that meet spec, instead of just barfing up a spec number and expecting you to do the legwork.
One sludgey engine in particular that I DO remember was a dealer-maintained Land Rover. I am not exaggerating when I say that I spooned a quart of gunk out of the oil pan. We didn't want to get our parts washer dirty so I scooped as much out as I could manually, and dumped it into a 32-ounce drink cup.
