|
All I know is "Oil is cheaper than engines".
And low mileage engines can often equate to low-maintenance, "yeah it's 12k service intervals but I only do 5k/ year..."
Just think of all that extra work the oil has to do in a turbo engine, turbo is running hot and the oil has to lube & cool it. yet some cars can apparently not be serviced for 20k miles ? I'll be steering clear of those....
So I agree with HJ, stuff the manufacturers recommendations, 10/12k or once a year.
Stu
|
|
Well, it looks as though HJ's supporters are in the majority here! However, most of the arguments in favour of annual changes for a 3K per annum engine seem to be based on the damaging effects of short journeys.
Great aunt Minnie's small modern engine will warm up quickly; is three or four miles a 'short journey'? Statistically, most journeys are short, so presumably those who disagree with me and make very regular but short journeys are changing their oil every three or four thousand miles, are they? The logic of their arguments dictates that they should do so.
Cyd, your post was excellent, and I agree that one or two of the engines you mention make more demands on the oil than Minnie's Fociesta. However, I have read nothing which makes me think of changing my mind. For those who remember my last posts on this subject I can assure them that my 1980 TR7 is still running sweetly after its recent fourth oil change since 1989. It has only done 16,000 miles since then so the oil hasn't had much work to do. Frankly, it would have been absurd to have changed it 25 times.
Someone asked about my qualifications. Mechanics was part of Additional Maths O level, then A levels in Physics and Chemistry aged 17, a lifelong love of machinery and interest in engines and 40+ years of servicing, repairing and maintaining my cars as economically as possible.
|
|
John, I wonder if you are missing the point deliberately. Any car that has an average mileage of less than say 5,000pa could be driven in one of two extreme ways; either no more than two miles every working day, or far less frequent but longer journeys of say ten miles once a week. The former car will need oil changes more frequently for reasons stated above and the latter, less frequently for the same reasons.
A car which is not driven at all for long periods clearly does not need oil changes as frequently but if used again after standing for more than one year, the first thing I would do is change the oil because oil absorbs water from the atmosphere and reduces its effectiveness.
|
|
John F (who started this thread) has stated (couple of posts above here) that he is running a TR7 on the oil change that was done in 1989, and has done 16k miles in the car since then. 25 years ago.
I hope to god I never have the misfortune of buying one of his old cars.
Edited by RobJP on 23/09/2014 at 22:13
|
|
|
A car which is not driven at all for long periods clearly does not need oil changes as frequently but if used again after standing for more than one year, the first thing I would do is change the oil because oil absorbs water from the atmosphere and reduces its effectiveness.
Blue, I am wondering how the oil in your sump will absorb much water from the atmosphere? I think the greater worry might be that every last trace of it has drained down fron the cylinders.
|
I think the greater worry might be that every last trace of it has drained down fron the cylinders.
Agreed
I used to switch off the fuel pump and block the intake trumpets on the rally car, then crank for 15 seconds before allowing it to start. Oil pressure would usually get to about 30psi during cranking.
I also found internal corrosion due to condensation to be a problem on spare engines sat in the garage.
|
|
Anyone who drives 16,000 miles in 25 years is ill suited to give advice to others based on his personal experience.
For all we know, his average 600 miles a year could - and probably is - all driven in summer to and from classic car rallies. And the car is garaged .
Frankly to discuss the matter further gives his advice credence which it does not possess.
And it's an engine designed at least 50 years ago so irrelevant to modern cars.
( I write as a qualified physicist who used to work in the car industry)
Edited by madf on 24/09/2014 at 12:30
|
|
I am quite happy running a car on extended oil changes provided the car does longish runs and uses the correct oil. My BMW was fine on the 18,000 mile or 2 year schedule but never did shopping trips and school runs. If it had I would have fitted in a simple annual oil change.
But if I was only doing 5,000 miles a year on short runs I wouild never leave the oil in for 10,000 miles/2 years even if it was the correct oil. Our Seat had the option of standard or extended intervals. We do about 8,000 miles a year in it so I went for the annual oil change schedule. Long term its costs no mkore since the oil for the annual service is cheaper.
My "classic" does about 2,000 miles a year. Would I ever consider letting it do 10,000 miles between oil changes. Absolutely no way. I change it every 3,000 miles using a good quality oil of the correct grade for the engine, costs about £25 for Motul 5w 30. And that engine only ever does decent runs. Never goes to the shop and back etc.
£25 for an oil change is about 150 miles of petrol. I simply don't know why the subject needs debating.
Not going to comment on anyone who is still using 25 year old oil.
Edited by skidpan on 24/09/2014 at 13:28
|
Not going to comment on anyone who is still using 25 year old oil.
Skidpan, if you read more carefully, this OP says he has changed the oil 4 times in those 25 years. Not ideal, but better than you are suggesting.
Edited by Andrew-T on 24/09/2014 at 15:00
|
|
Just to answer above points; he who bought my old 133,000m A6 2.8 for £800 [inc 10/12 tax and MoT] probably got a bargain. My TR7 is used all year - admittedly it might rest for up to three weeks during the 'salt' months. I have never noticed any 'mayonnaise' evidence of the above suggestion of 'water absorption' .Oil and water are immiscible and even if an invisible emulsion was formed from microscopic particles of water it would soon be destabilised by heat. [Non-chemists please google 'immiscible' and 'emulsion' if not familiar with these terms].
We used to do many miles - I got over 400,000 miles out of two second-hand Passats - both engines were OK when I sold them at 192,000 [GL5] and 242,000 [2.0 GL] , probably because of my careful economical maintenance schedules.
I still contend that for those living in poor or reduced circumstances like great aunt Minnie, who might take nine years for their six year old car to go from, say, 60,000 to 90,000, an annual oil change is an unnecessary hassle and a needless expense. I agree that the HJ supporters' regimen might prolong the engine life from, say, 150,000 to 200,000 - but is great auntie M really going to be bothered?
|
|
And it's an engine designed at least 50 years ago so irrelevant to modern cars.
Not really. The Triumph 'Slant 4' indeed appeared in Saabs of the 1960s but it had a several years of improvement and development before it appeared in the TRs of the 70s - and my TR is 1980. I suspect its bearings, rings and cylinder surfaces are of similar composition to great aunt Minnie's Fociesta. But whatever the age, we are discussing oil, not metal. Both have improved to a considerable degree, especially engine oil.
|
|
Virtually every reply has disagreed with you, and believes you are in the wrong.
They range from industrial chemists, (in my case an ex-oil chemistry specialist), to engine builders for rallying, and lots of other experience. And yet you are still harping on, trying to 'prove' your poin, but without any 'proof'. So you end up nitpicking, to make up for the lack of any proof.
You yourself have conceded that it might improve engine life from 150,000 to 200,000 miles. So that's 50,000 miles bonus lifespan, for the cost of a few oil changes. Maybe it won't make any difference to aunty Mabel. But if you told her that you concede that it MIGHT do that, then she would make a decision herself. And quite possibly move to annual oil changes.
Engines are expensive. Oil changes are pretty cheap. Even a main agent BMW oil change is less than £180, so I'd imagine most independent garages are £100 or so. You've got to go through a hell of a lot of oil changes to make up the cost of an engine, and the fitting of the same.
Maybe you should come up with a good reason why changing oil annually is NOT a good idea. Because your current argument has floundered quite badly.
|
|
My 1998 Octavia diesel engine was running fine at 222,000 miles, using very little oil, even though for the last three years it was only serviced every 20,000 miles.
|
|
Don't you as an "ex-oil chemistry specialist" have some proof to back up your assertions about oil life. Are there no published works comparing service regimes that would settle this?
|
Don't you as an "ex-oil chemistry specialist" have some proof to back up your assertions about oil life. Are there no published works comparing service regimes that would settle this?
As far as I'm aware, there are no published works.
Information, as they say, is power. If you pay £500k for a load of research to be done, are you really going to publish it, so your competitors get all that for free ?
Oh, and the bit of information in there (cost) is based on a piece of work that we did back in the early 90s. Probably 10 times that cost now.
If anyone is from the area, they might remember. Black VW Polo 'breadvan' types with roof boards fitted (to increase wind resistance and drag) continually running up and down the M56 in the early 1990s. That was part of a project that I was involved in. We had 10 of those cars, and they racked up huge mileage.
I'd still be bound by a confidentiality clause that I'm not prepared to break, so I'll just say that more frequent servicing means a LOT less wear on engines.
Don't believe me ? Fine. I don't give a hoot. Carry on as you are, getting cars serviced every 20k. Go for it.
|
Virtually every reply has disagreed with you, and believes you are in the wrong.
You yourself have conceded that it might improve engine life from 150,000 to 200,000 miles.
It's fun sitting on the fence in this discussion. Each side offers 'evidence' and then dismisses the other's 'lack of proof'. If this car does 150K miles without trouble, but might do a completely unnecessary 200K with annual oil changes, why do them?
We all accept that an engine will benefit from frequent oil changes: you can change every 1000 or 6 months if you have money (and oil) to burn. But anyone with a bit of interest and knowledge can choose to use a lower safety margin, especially if his engine does not rely on tight tolerances. Just agree to differ.
|
We all accept that an engine will benefit from frequent oil changes: you can change every 1000 or 6 months if you have money (and oil) to burn. But anyone with a bit of interest and knowledge can choose to use a lower safety margin, especially if his engine does not rely on tight tolerances. Just agree to differ.
V wise comment, Andrew-T, [unlike some in this most interesting debate]. I have searched the internet to find some evidence of how long an engine will last with rare oil change intervals, and found nothing much apart from anecdotal stories ranging from 'just keep it topped up' to 1000m changes.
However, it is a fact that decent oil these days is far better than it used to be, and both quality of metal and engineering tolerances are also much improved so that bearings and 'scraped' surfaces wear much less quickly than they used to. I do not know what the average mileage of a scrapped car engine is but I would guess that most of the reasons for scrappage are not worn engines [can anyone from the scrap car business enlighten us?].
What is absolutely clear is the widespread ignorance of differing engine longevity with differing oil change regimes. And what is absolutely plain is the vested interest of the motor industry [all those who vehemently disagree with me should declare any such conflict of interest] to encourage poor gt aunt Minnie to spend as much money on her car as possible.
|
|
<< I do not know what the average mileage of a scrapped car engine is but I would guess that most of the reasons for scrappage are not worn engines [can anyone from the scrap car business enlighten us?]. >>
I would guess that quite a few cars are scrapped with a good deal of useable life left. They have been scrapped because of lack of fashion, or in other words boredom. Their resale value may have dropped below £1000, so only dung-beetle traders might be interested, and owners throw them away because 'it costs more to fix than it's worth'.
At the height of that silly Scrappage Scheme about 7 years ago I remember a Pug dealer saying he had taken in a totally roadworthy 306 with about 15K miles on it. That was just criminal waste. And IFIRC it could not even be dismantled for parts.
|
|
And it's an engine designed at least 50 years ago so irrelevant to modern cars.
Not really. The Triumph 'Slant 4' indeed appeared in Saabs of the 1960s but it had a several years of improvement and development before it appeared in the TRs of the 70s - and my TR is 1980. I suspect its bearings, rings and cylinder surfaces are of similar composition to great aunt Minnie's Fociesta. But whatever the age, we are discussing oil, not metal. Both have improved to a considerable degree, especially engine oil.
That is John F's reply to my comment about the age of the design of his engine.
I regret you dispaly an apparent ignorance about engine design. Modern engines rely on high tolerances, and bearing materials much stronger than in the past. Bores are often coated with anti wear compounds as are piston rings.
Multi valve engines mean finer clearances and far cleaner oil- all of which mean better oil filtration is needed . The demand for improved mpg means the old 20W-50 oils are obsolete and 0W-20 is becong the new standard.
Add in DPFs and the requirement for lower emissions and not changing oils in arduous conditions is just crazy when a new engine can cost £8k plus.
Oh and multi valve multi cam engines often result in lots of smaller oil pathways... block those and you get rapid wear.
Frankly I think you are micturating into the wind. And refuse to comment further on a thread based on ignorance and lack of evidence.
Try reading about the scientific method.
Edited by madf on 25/09/2014 at 16:27
|
|
Oil change requirements are just a con created by oil companies to sell more oil. As long as it is kept topped up, no need to worry.
|
Oil change requirements are just a con created by oil companies to sell more oil. As long as it is kept topped up, no need to worry.
I hope that's a tongue in cheek comment
|
|
If you want to keep your oil in your car's engine sump for years because you think that regular oil changes are a conspiracy that's up to you-it's a free country(so far).
Me? I'm going to change mine, in all of my ten or so engines that I have to maintain, just as often as I like, and the engines will feel better for doing it.
Thank you and good night- have you changed your oil today?
|
Thank you and good night- have you changed your oil today?
Not a daily necessity. Have you?
|
If anyone is from the area, they might remember. Black VW Polo 'breadvan' types with roof boards fitted (to increase wind resistance and drag) continually running up and down the M56 in the early 1990s.
IMHO its a bit irrelevant to todays cars. In the early 90's I had a Golf GTI that I drove for 113,000 miles. The oil was changed every 10,000 miles as per the schedule using the correct VW Quantum oil which was a 10w 40 mineral oil. No doubt your Polo ran a similar oil. Todays oils are far removed from that specification. Most are semi-synthetic or fully synthetic, the best are Ester synthetic. No comparison to the early1990's which were not that long ago.
|
If anyone is from the area, they might remember. Black VW Polo 'breadvan' types with roof boards fitted (to increase wind resistance and drag) continually running up and down the M56 in the early 1990s.
IMHO its a bit irrelevant to todays cars. In the early 90's I had a Golf GTI that I drove for 113,000 miles. The oil was changed every 10,000 miles as per the schedule using the correct VW Quantum oil which was a 10w 40 mineral oil. No doubt your Polo ran a similar oil. Todays oils are far removed from that specification. Most are semi-synthetic or fully synthetic, the best are Ester synthetic. No comparison to the early1990's which were not that long ago.
If you say so we weren't using fully synthetic oils in the early 1990s in that test, then I'd beg to differ.
But hey ho. Obviously you were part of that test group, like me. One of us seems to have a better memory than the other one though.
Oh. One little point. Mobil 1 (AFAIK the first fully synthetic engine oil for 'general' car use) was introduced in the 1970s.
|
|
Was it available (without special order) in the UK at that time? Because I don't remember it until the 90s. (Not saying it wasn't there; just that I was unaware of it.)
|
|
I definitely recall ads for Mobil 1 around 1979/80.
|
|
Are you implying that the current Mobil 1 is the same formula as it was in the 70s?
|
Oil change requirements are just a con created by oil companies to sell more oil. As long as it is kept topped up, no need to worry.
Assuming that wasn't tongue in cheek as someone said...
Which is the con then - Long service intervals for fleet benefit, or short service intervals for oil/part companies/service departments?!
|
|
Not entirely tongue in cheek. Will post a longer reply when I have more time.
|
If you say so we weren't using fully synthetic oils in the early 1990s in that test, then I'd beg to differ.
But hey ho. Obviously you were part of that test group, like me. One of us seems to have a better memory than the other one though.
Oh. One little point. Mobil 1 (AFAIK the first fully synthetic engine oil for 'general' car use) was introduced in the 1970s.
I never said or suggested that synthetics were not available in the early 90's. I remember a mate using Mobil 1 in the late 80's, hugely expensive and very difficult to find. When he did a continental tour he was so worried about finding some should he need it he took a 5 litre with him. I used semi synthetic at this time in one of our cars because that is what was specified.
But in the Golf GTi I used what VW specified and at the time it was a mineral 10w 40.
The Mobil 1 sold today will be way better than the Mobil 1 sold in the 80's and 90's.
|
The Mobil 1 sold today will be way better than the Mobil 1 sold in the 80's and 90's.
Can you back that statement up with any proof at all ? Even some proof that it's better than the Mobil 1 sold in the 70's will suffice
|
|
www.overdriveonline.com/next-gen-oil-test-shell-hi.../
Here is a link some might find interesting, hope it comes out OK when posted. Not sure whether observations on presumably diesel truck engines run to >500,000m with 50,000m changes can be extrapolated to cars!
|
www.overdriveonline.com/next-gen-oil-test-shell-hi.../
Here is a link some might find interesting, hope it comes out OK when posted. Not sure whether observations on presumably diesel truck engines run to >500,000m with 50,000m changes can be extrapolated to cars!
Note that these were running 5000 miles per week, presumably mostly on Interstates/Highways, not pottering to the shops or Church on Sundays, like Aunt Minnie.
|
|
Modern truck engines are engineered for extended oil changes.
1. Like modern airplanes, trucks run virtually 24/7 and cover massive mileages.
2. They have massive oil sumps
3. Lab based Oil condition monitoring is carried out regularly to monitor both oil and engine condition.
4. Truck engines are not stressed in the same way as cars.
5. Modern truck engines require very expensive and very high spec oil. and have very large filters.
Edited by brum on 27/09/2014 at 21:36
|
|
Am i alone in wondering why they went to all that trouble to test a thinner oil, yet failed to mention fuel savings.
|
|
Because its American, and therefore not related to the real world we europeans live in. The article is typical Usa non scientific PR cack.
|
The Mobil 1 sold today will be way better than the Mobil 1 sold in the 80's and 90's.
Can you back that statement up with any proof at all ? Even some proof that it's better than the Mobil 1 sold in the 70's will suffice
Mobil 1 sold in the late 80's would have met SF or possibly SG specs.
Mobil 1 sold today comes in many varieties and meets SL, SM or SN specs depending on which oil you need.
The newer specs also have to meet various manufacturers requirements as well as the requirements for DPF's etc which did not exist in the 80's.
Put some 1980 spec Mobil 1 in a modern engine and you would be asking for trouble.
|
|
<< Put some 1980 spec Mobil 1 in a modern engine and you would be asking for trouble. >>
I'd like to know just what 'trouble' you are thinking of. Since that 1980 Mobil 1 was such good stuff I would have thought that as long as you changed it appropriately it would be more than OK in most cars?
|
<< Put some 1980 spec Mobil 1 in a modern engine and you would be asking for trouble. >>
I'd like to know just what 'trouble' you are thinking of. Since that 1980 Mobil 1 was such good stuff I would have thought that as long as you changed it appropriately it would be more than OK in most cars?
Back in the 80's cars did not have sophisticated emmission control systems, most in truth still had carburettors and a block breather that dumped oil into the air cleaner. Modern spec oils, as well as lubricating far better are designed to be compatible with the systems fitted to modern engines.
On diesels with DPF's its essential to use a low SAPS oil. These did not exist in the 80's. There are 3 types, C1, C2 and C3, the handbook will tell you which one you need.
VW, Ford, BMW, Mercedes etc all have their own specifications that have evolved over the years as the engines and control systems have changed. VW have a bewildering array of specs for different engines.
|
|
Do VW's Service Depts keep lots of different oils then, or do they have a bulk tank of "this is more or less right for nearly everything" with a hose and a trigger?
|
VW have a bewildering array of specs for different engines.
Not true. For the past few years they have standardised on two specs. 504 for petrol engines and 507 for diesel engines, both specs are covered by one oil (504/507). This one oil covers all VAG group passenger cars past and present.
Part of the problem is the practice by dealers not to follow manufacturer procedures but substituting cheaper and inferior oil to make a couple of quid extra profit and extra future work resulting from premature wear.
Edited by brum on 29/09/2014 at 19:05
|
Part of the problem is the practice by dealers not to follow manufacturer procedures but substituting cheaper and inferior oil to make a couple of quid extra profit and extra future work resulting from premature wear.
Do they really do this? You're saying that they'll list what type of oil they have used on the invoice but use a cheaper oil in reality?
I would have thought that the right oil used in bulk quantities would be quite cheap, but I don't use main dealers - I buy the oil and my mechanic changes it. Of course I suppose he could be substituting a different oil, but I like to think I can trust him, and I have seen him carrying out the job occasionally :)
|
Mobil 1 sold in the late 80's would have met SF or possibly SG specs.
Mobil 1 sold today comes in many varieties and meets SL, SM or SN specs depending on which oil you need.
The newer specs also have to meet various manufacturers requirements as well as the requirements for DPF's etc which did not exist in the 80's.
Put some 1980 spec Mobil 1 in a modern engine and you would be asking for trouble.
Usually high grade oils Exceed the current API ratings by a big margin. Quoting
API rating doesn't mean much TBH, Even knowledgeable Americans will admit that API are pretty poor compared to the ACEA grading of oils.
|
|
Mobil 1 is a marketing sub-brand name and does not refer to a particular oil but to a range of products. The same goes for Castrol Edge, Castrol GTX, and many other manufacturers oproducts.
Edited by brum on 29/09/2014 at 19:07
|
|
Except in the 1980s Mobil 1 was a single oil capable of replacing almost all other oils. I used the oil extensively.
Edited by Happy Blue! on 29/09/2014 at 22:28
|
VW have a bewildering array of specs for different engines.
Not true. For the past few years they have standardised on two specs. 504 for petrol engines and 507 for diesel engines, both specs are covered by one oil (504/507). This one oil covers all VAG group passenger cars past and present. Part of the problem is the practice by dealers not to follow manufacturer procedures but substituting cheaper and inferior oil to make a couple of quid extra profit and extra future work resulting from premature wear.
As per my original post I can assure you that the handbook for my 2013 Seat Leon contains more than 2 oil specs and one oil. For starters there are different oils for standard or long life. then diesels fitted with DPF's need different oils to non DPF models. Then PD diesels have a different oil.
Not exactly one size fits all is it.
Edited by skidpan on 30/09/2014 at 14:25
|
|
The current Peugeot service handbook lists four different oils.
|
|
In 2003. Toyota quoted four oils for my Yaris D4D
|
Part of the problem is the practice by dealers not to follow manufacturer procedures but substituting cheaper and inferior oil to make a couple of quid extra profit and extra future work resulting from premature wear.
Do they really do this? You're saying that they'll list what type of oil they have used on the invoice but use a cheaper oil in reality?
I would have thought that the right oil used in bulk quantities would be quite cheap, but I don't use main dealers - I buy the oil and my mechanic changes it. Of course I suppose he could be substituting a different oil, but I like to think I can trust him, and I have seen him carrying out the job occasionally :)
They do indeed. When the wifes Kia Ceed was due for its first service I rang the 4 local dealers (all within 12 miles) for a price. 3 said £160, the other £120. When questioned this dealer (who was a Ford dealer with a Kia franchise added during scrappage) admitted he used Ford Semi Synthetic oil when servicing Fords and Kia's. Kia require a fully synthetic C3 spec oil in our car since its a diesel with DPF, the Ford oil simply did not meet the standards. The dealer was quite happy to use the correct oil if we paid another £40.
Went to the closest dealer.
Afterwards I contacted Kia who were simply not bothered what their dealers were up to despite it clearly saying in the warranty book that incorrect grade lubricants would mean an end to the 7 year warranty. Or were they hoping to have a get out clause.
|
admitted he used Ford Semi Synthetic oil when servicing Fords and Kia's.
It will be wrong for some Ford's too, Later Ford requirements are for Fully synthetics to FORD WSS-M2C913-D spec.
|
|
<< Not exactly one size fits all is it. >>
Of course there will be differences between all these grades, and some will have been developed for special purposes. But as none of us drive space rockets, I remain to be convinced that using another oil of the correct viscosity will cause mission-critical failure in most cars.
|
As per my original post I can assure you that the handbook for my 2013 Seat Leon contains more than 2 oil specs and one oil. For starters there are different oils for standard or long life. then diesels fitted with DPF's need different oils to non DPF models. Then PD diesels have a different oil.
Not exactly one size fits all is it.
ONE oil does cover them all
If you knew anything about oil, bothered to research it, you would know that a 504/507 spec oil, such as Quantum longlife III, complies with all of VW's previous specifications such as 502.00 for petrol and 505.00 or 505.01 (PD) for diesels. It is backwards compatible.
The fixed/variable schedules as explained in the SEAT manual quote the MINIMUM OIL SPECIFICATION for useage/service regime, in case you can't obtain the 504/507 spec oil or are a cheapskate.
There are even oils that comply with the vw 504/507 spec and also other manufacturers specs e.g. BMW and Mercedes.
|
As per my original post I can assure you that the handbook for my 2013 Seat Leon contains more than 2 oil specs and one oil. For starters there are different oils for standard or long life. then diesels fitted with DPF's need different oils to non DPF models. Then PD diesels have a different oil.
Not exactly one size fits all is it.
ONE oil does cover them all
If you knew anything about oil, bothered to research it, you would know that a 504/507 spec oil, such as Quantum longlife III, complies with all of VW's previous specifications such as 502.00 for petrol and 505.00 or 505.01 (PD) for diesels. It is backwards compatible.
The fixed/variable schedules as explained in the SEAT manual quote the MINIMUM OIL SPECIFICATION for useage/service regime, in case you can't obtain the 504/507 spec oil or are a cheapskate.
There are even oils that comply with the vw 504/507 spec and also other manufacturers specs e.g. BMW and Mercedes.
I am only quoting what is in my handbook. It clearly gives the specs for different engines some of which are not available in the new Leon such as the PD engines.
For your information I know a great deal about oils, probably forgotten more than you know.
|
Not entirely tongue in cheek. Will post a longer reply when I have more time.
I'm still waiting, Trilogy, hope you have time soon. I think the Merc specialist advice in your first post is sensible.
|
Not entirely tongue in cheek. Will post a longer reply when I have more time.
I'm still waiting, Trilogy, hope you have time soon. I think the Merc specialist advice in your first post is sensible.
I do seem to remember an oil magnate once saying oil changes were a bit of a con fabricated by oil companies to sell oil. Not sure how long ago that was. Frankly, I do wonder how many people will keep a car long enough for any engine damage to become apparent.
IMO, I believe there will be more people causing damage by letting the oil run too low. Whenever I buy a car, I always check the oil level, with the dipstick. On two occasions I have found no oil on the dipstick, I just walked away. Way back in the 1980s I did ask a friend if he ever checked his oil . He said there was a warning light on the dashboard that told him when it was too low. Actually, this warning light was for low oil pressure!
|
|
Well, I assume that if I had no engine oil, the oil pressure light might be on?
|
|
I remember watching an episode of 'The Garage' some time ago when they had a Jeep with a wrecked engine caused by neglected oil changes and/or low oil level. What oil was left was a slimey gel.
|
I do seem to remember an oil magnate once saying oil changes were a bit of a con fabricated by oil companies to sell oil. Not sure how long ago that was. Frankly, I do wonder how many people will keep a car long enough for any engine damage to become apparent.
Many US motorists change their oil at 3,000 miles.
|
Many US motorists change their oil at 3,000 miles.
Yes with modern oils that's daft even by my standards.
|
|
GM's oil life monitoring system is supposed to be pretty good at determining oil life.
Dare I say it is the only thing I like about Vauxhall cars?
|
Many US motorists change their oil at 3,000 miles.
Yes with modern oils that's daft even by my standards.
And a prime example of getting people to spend as much as possible, a fundamental ethos of US capitalism - which I am not for one moment knocking.
But at last a bit of science/knowledge is creeping into this debate....
www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/77/gm's-oil-life-system-improves-timing-of-oil-change
..this link [from the US!] is worth a read.
|
But at last a bit of science/knowledge is creeping into this debate....
While the GM oil life monitoring system is quite good and well tested, It is still a system that works on an educated guess.
|
Whenever I buy a car, I always check the oil level, with the dipstick. On two occasions I have found no oil on the dipstick, I just walked away. Way back in the 1980s I did ask a friend if he ever checked his oil . He said there was a warning light on the dashboard that told him when it was too low. Actually, this warning light was for low oil pressure!
I suspect this is the etymological reason to use the word 'dipstick' as slang for a stupid person. A few years ago a girl whose daddy had bought her a brand new little Citroen offered to take my son back to uni. My kneejerk reaction was to check oil before a long journey. She had no idea why I was concerned that the level barely reached the end of the dipstick, let alone the minimum mark. Mileage? Less than 4,000, I think.
|
|
I've found that VAG cars, both petrol and diesel, need a litre of oil at some point during the first 10,000 miles, and then never again. Knowing this, Skoda gave me a free litre in a nice little pouch Velcro'd to the side of the luggage area.
|
|
Avant, beware. Although its true that many engines use more oil during the running in phase and then settle down to low or minimal useage, I have found that modern vw engines, tsi included, on (rare) occasions have spurious mystery losses of oil up to a litre, fortunately rare and one offs.(so far) They also develop an increasing appetite over time, especially if you are on the extended variable scheme and going over 18000 miles between oil changes.
Regular checkups advised.....not so sure about the variable regime any more...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
