Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 23:17:49 GMT, Brian Nystrom <brian.nystrom@verizon.net>
wrote:


>> Why not say:
>>
>> Dino oil... Change at 3000-5000 miles.
>> Syn oil... Change at 4000-7000 miles.
>
>There's one really good reason, Hyundai recommends changes every 7500
>miles with "dino" oil.

The 7500 is for normal conditions. Hyundai recommends changing oil more
frequently for severe conditions, thus the above range. Ya, I'm a little
conservative because I never know how people treat their cars or the
conditions in which they drive.
--
Bob

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

1996 Accord LX, 4-cyl. 176k, uses no oil, runs like a top. Change 7500,
using Amsoil Full Synthetic.

So what are people going to do now with the new Honda maintenance indicator?
Change when the guage tells you you have 60% life left on the oil?

Stop wasting oil people. The shops ALL want you to change at 3k! hell,
they are making 3 times the money off you!

G-Man

PS, I only quote the '96 because it's the oldest car I have now, the story
has been the same for all my Hondas, and I'm on number 14 now. If I get to
250k and find out that if I had changed every 3k I could have gone to 300k,
I still feel like I won :-)



"dbltap" <DoubleTap@37.com> wrote in message
news:1ucAg.2477$xp2.1947@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
> http://www.autoblog.com/2006/08/02/d...-via-analysis/
>

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

1996 Accord LX, 4-cyl. 176k, uses no oil, runs like a top. Change 7500,
using Amsoil Full Synthetic.

So what are people going to do now with the new Honda maintenance indicator?
Change when the guage tells you you have 60% life left on the oil?

Stop wasting oil people. The shops ALL want you to change at 3k! hell,
they are making 3 times the money off you!

G-Man

PS, I only quote the '96 because it's the oldest car I have now, the story
has been the same for all my Hondas, and I'm on number 14 now. If I get to
250k and find out that if I had changed every 3k I could have gone to 300k,
I still feel like I won :-)



"dbltap" <DoubleTap@37.com> wrote in message
news:1ucAg.2477$xp2.1947@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
> http://www.autoblog.com/2006/08/02/d...-via-analysis/
>

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

1996 Accord LX, 4-cyl. 176k, uses no oil, runs like a top. Change 7500,
using Amsoil Full Synthetic.

So what are people going to do now with the new Honda maintenance indicator?
Change when the guage tells you you have 60% life left on the oil?

Stop wasting oil people. The shops ALL want you to change at 3k! hell,
they are making 3 times the money off you!

G-Man

PS, I only quote the '96 because it's the oldest car I have now, the story
has been the same for all my Hondas, and I'm on number 14 now. If I get to
250k and find out that if I had changed every 3k I could have gone to 300k,
I still feel like I won :-)



"dbltap" <DoubleTap@37.com> wrote in message
news:1ucAg.2477$xp2.1947@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
> http://www.autoblog.com/2006/08/02/d...-via-analysis/
>

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 10:32:32 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <b4a9d2h68mivpv5kqvsmeig1ab3k1ftuus@4ax.com>,
> gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>
>> >http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/sludg...ng_sludge.html
>>
>>
>> Any engine that bad in 8700 miles has something seriously wrong other
>> than oil change intervals.
>
>You have absolutely no proof of that, therefore you cannot claim that.
>
>Until you have proof, you must shut up. That's the new rule around here.


You presented is evidence in an oil change discussion. You have no
evidence it was oil change related so shut up.

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 10:32:32 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <b4a9d2h68mivpv5kqvsmeig1ab3k1ftuus@4ax.com>,
> gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>
>> >http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/sludg...ng_sludge.html
>>
>>
>> Any engine that bad in 8700 miles has something seriously wrong other
>> than oil change intervals.
>
>You have absolutely no proof of that, therefore you cannot claim that.
>
>Until you have proof, you must shut up. That's the new rule around here.


You presented is evidence in an oil change discussion. You have no
evidence it was oil change related so shut up.

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 10:32:32 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <b4a9d2h68mivpv5kqvsmeig1ab3k1ftuus@4ax.com>,
> gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>
>> >http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/sludg...ng_sludge.html
>>
>>
>> Any engine that bad in 8700 miles has something seriously wrong other
>> than oil change intervals.
>
>You have absolutely no proof of that, therefore you cannot claim that.
>
>Until you have proof, you must shut up. That's the new rule around here.


You presented is evidence in an oil change discussion. You have no
evidence it was oil change related so shut up.

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

G-Man wrote:
>
> So what are people going to do now with the new Honda maintenance indicator?
> Change when the guage tells you you have 60% life left on the oil?
>

The oil change indicator on my new Honda (2004) reminds me to change
oil every 10,000 miles. It does not indicate % life left. Honda does
not require full synthetic oil. I think that after 10,000 miles an
owner shouldn't be concerned about wasting oil by changing it. What do
you think?

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

G-Man wrote:
>
> So what are people going to do now with the new Honda maintenance indicator?
> Change when the guage tells you you have 60% life left on the oil?
>

The oil change indicator on my new Honda (2004) reminds me to change
oil every 10,000 miles. It does not indicate % life left. Honda does
not require full synthetic oil. I think that after 10,000 miles an
owner shouldn't be concerned about wasting oil by changing it. What do
you think?

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

G-Man wrote:
>
> So what are people going to do now with the new Honda maintenance indicator?
> Change when the guage tells you you have 60% life left on the oil?
>

The oil change indicator on my new Honda (2004) reminds me to change
oil every 10,000 miles. It does not indicate % life left. Honda does
not require full synthetic oil. I think that after 10,000 miles an
owner shouldn't be concerned about wasting oil by changing it. What do
you think?

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 10:31:44 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <u9a9d2ptl4ea2k42f0irn43c378shc56tf@4ax.com>,
> gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>
>> Heck, at this rate, redirect the oil flow so it is never re circulated
>> ;) Add a 100 gallon fresh oil tank and 100 gal holding tank. Ship the
>> "used oil" off to be fully reclaimed to original purity.
>>
>> That seems the direction the ultra frequent changers really recommend ;)
>
>And if it cost, oh, $20 for every 3000 miles to do that, why wouldn't
>you?
>
>Oh--I see. In your world, there's no room for cost/benefit analysis.


Analysis of carefully collected data, sure. Wild speculation, no.

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 10:31:44 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <u9a9d2ptl4ea2k42f0irn43c378shc56tf@4ax.com>,
> gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>
>> Heck, at this rate, redirect the oil flow so it is never re circulated
>> ;) Add a 100 gallon fresh oil tank and 100 gal holding tank. Ship the
>> "used oil" off to be fully reclaimed to original purity.
>>
>> That seems the direction the ultra frequent changers really recommend ;)
>
>And if it cost, oh, $20 for every 3000 miles to do that, why wouldn't
>you?
>
>Oh--I see. In your world, there's no room for cost/benefit analysis.


Analysis of carefully collected data, sure. Wild speculation, no.

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 10:31:44 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <u9a9d2ptl4ea2k42f0irn43c378shc56tf@4ax.com>,
> gerry <gerrrry__net@gogood.com> wrote:
>
>> Heck, at this rate, redirect the oil flow so it is never re circulated
>> ;) Add a 100 gallon fresh oil tank and 100 gal holding tank. Ship the
>> "used oil" off to be fully reclaimed to original purity.
>>
>> That seems the direction the ultra frequent changers really recommend ;)
>
>And if it cost, oh, $20 for every 3000 miles to do that, why wouldn't
>you?
>
>Oh--I see. In your world, there's no room for cost/benefit analysis.


Analysis of carefully collected data, sure. Wild speculation, no.

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 18:29:44 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:

>gerry wrote:
>
>> [original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
>> On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 02:47:34 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>jim beam wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Matt Whiting wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>jim beam wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Matt Whiting wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>no matt - you're the one making the assertion that it makes no
>>>>difference. i know it does because i've done fleet testing. i think
>>>>where you're getting confused is reading glib little articles on the net
>>>>that cleverly avoid the distinction between phrases like: "wear is
>>>>reduced" and "wear is within acceptable limits". the difference is
>>>>huge. sure, wear at extended intervals /can/ be within acceptable
>>>>limits, but that doesn't mean that sorter intervals don't reduce wear
>>>>rates to a lower level.
>>>
>>>They may, but I've seen no documented proof as to when this is
>>>meaningful. Post some of your fleet testing results. If my engine will
>>>last 200K with 10,000 miles intervals and the body rusts off at 200K,
>>>what is the point of reducing engine wear?
>>>
>>>And why not change oil at 1,000 miles rather than 3,000 as that would
>>>reduce wear even more right? How about 500 miles? Why not change it
>>>every morning before going to work?
>>>
>>>
>>>Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> Heck, at this rate, redirect the oil flow so it is never re circulated
>> ;) Add a 100 gallon fresh oil tank and 100 gal holding tank. Ship the
>> "used oil" off to be fully reclaimed to original purity.
>>
>> That seems the direction the ultra frequent changers really recommend ;)
>
>I just sent in my patent application, Gerry, sorry, but you just weren't
>quick enough! :-)
>
>Matt


Bummer ;)

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots

Re: Determining oil change intervals via analysis
 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 18:29:44 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:

>gerry wrote:
>
>> [original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
>> On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 02:47:34 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>jim beam wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Matt Whiting wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>jim beam wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Matt Whiting wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>no matt - you're the one making the assertion that it makes no
>>>>difference. i know it does because i've done fleet testing. i think
>>>>where you're getting confused is reading glib little articles on the net
>>>>that cleverly avoid the distinction between phrases like: "wear is
>>>>reduced" and "wear is within acceptable limits". the difference is
>>>>huge. sure, wear at extended intervals /can/ be within acceptable
>>>>limits, but that doesn't mean that sorter intervals don't reduce wear
>>>>rates to a lower level.
>>>
>>>They may, but I've seen no documented proof as to when this is
>>>meaningful. Post some of your fleet testing results. If my engine will
>>>last 200K with 10,000 miles intervals and the body rusts off at 200K,
>>>what is the point of reducing engine wear?
>>>
>>>And why not change oil at 1,000 miles rather than 3,000 as that would
>>>reduce wear even more right? How about 500 miles? Why not change it
>>>every morning before going to work?
>>>
>>>
>>>Matt
>>
>>
>>
>> Heck, at this rate, redirect the oil flow so it is never re circulated
>> ;) Add a 100 gallon fresh oil tank and 100 gal holding tank. Ship the
>> "used oil" off to be fully reclaimed to original purity.
>>
>> That seems the direction the ultra frequent changers really recommend ;)
>
>I just sent in my patent application, Gerry, sorry, but you just weren't
>quick enough! :-)
>
>Matt


Bummer ;)

gerry

--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots