Determining oil change intervals via analysis

What!? You mean your wife does not do this for you now Matt? Man, we gotta
talk...

 

Well, between the sludge link posts and this reply, you've pretty much
proven yourself to be completely in the dark. Here - just for the sake of
accuracy, I've pasted in that part of Matt's original response to me which
states exactly what you babble about above. You know the part - it's the
part you snipped to make your post.

Matt said...

"Now, there were several shortcomings in their test, in my opinion, such
as taxis don't really represent how most people drive as they rarely get
thermally cycled and there is reason to believe that cold starts are
one of the highest wear activities an engine sees. And, again if memory
serves, they ran the engines for only 60,000 miles. This is hardly a
stress test for a modern engine.

However, imperfect as it was, this is about the only test I've seen that
was even close to scientifically conducted."

It pays to read what is posted and to give yourself that extra minute to
think about it before snipping relevant parts and running off on tangents
with misrepresentations of what was said.

 

No, Bob. It isnt easly to learn what it means. It is easy to learn the
basics
of what it MIGHT mean. I am quite aware of what the chemical analyses
MIGHT mean.

It isnt even easy sometimes to get the same numbers from several different
oil analysis labs. $20-30 is measly when it comes to doing competent
chemical
analysis, even with modern equipment. Some of the labs give more
reproducible
data than others.

But for me, you are right...it isn't worth the time and cost.

 

That all by itself does not

This is the way I feel about oil analyses.
There is a real shortage of hard data about how well synthetics and refined
petroleum
lubricants actually perform.

Flash points, and viscosity, and all the other bits of physical and chemical
data
mean little or nothing. I want statistical data, which -below the bottom
line - will
tell what it costs to deliver certain levels of protection and performance.

And you wont get this with cheapass chemical analyses, or even oil company
product
hype.

 

That's right. And with good oil, the difference isn't measurable until
way beyond 3,000 miles. And with synthetic oil, it is probably way
beyond 5,000 miles. So, show us the curve. Show us the data.


Matt

 

In the real world. You compared oil changes to homeowner's insurance.
Now tell us how they compare.

Actually, your analogy argues against your position. Homeowner's
insrurance doesn't protect my home from damage. That suggests that,
based on your own analogy, oil changes don't protect your engeing from
damage.

Got any other arguments or analogies?

Matt

 

I agree - the question is "what will you do with the information?" My #2 son
had a worn-out Toyota that was giving him intermittent oil pressure
warnings. We considered the situation and decided there was nothing we would
do differently if the oil pressure was failing or if the sensor was failing;
the car wasn't worth the effort to repair any oil problem. It threw a rod a
couple months later, but he had no regrets. A little extreme, but the
principle applies. Don't ask a question if the answer doesn't help you.

Mike

 

Which is exactly what I said. Did you read past the first two
sentences? I said this test was flawed, but it is the best test I've
seen and at least had some semblance of scientific rigor. You've posted
nothing even close.

Matt

 

You asked someone to show you something that could break inside the
engine due to insufficient oil changes. From that page: "If the owner
had left it long enough, the pickup would eventually have choked on the
sludge, causing oil starvation and engine seizure."[/QUOTE]

That is complete conjecture. And that post has enough questionable
things about it to make it meaningless.

Matt

 

Yes, the hardship is great.

Matt

 

Only if you have integrity. If you don't have integrity, you do what he
did. Clip the part you like and omit the rest.

I'd really love to see some real data on oil and engine wear and life.
I certainly have my opinions, and I've seen testing that shows
differences in oils, and I believe those differences have an affect on
service life, but I've never found any data to support my opinions or
anyone elses.


Matt

 

You can skew the results heavily just through the sampling procedure.
Take your sample of the first oil to leave the drain and then sample
again when it is barely dripping at the end. That can change the
results dramatically. Most analysis labs have pretty specific sample
taking instructions, but few people are able to follow them precisely
and they can make a big difference.

Matt

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]

http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/sludge/cleaning_sludge.html[/QUOTE]


Any engine that bad in 8700 miles has something seriously wrong other
than oil change intervals.

gerry

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]

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

gerry

 

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.

 

Any engine that bad in 8700 miles has something seriously wrong other
than oil change intervals.[/QUOTE]

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.

 

Yes, Gerry, that was my reaction as well. There is a lot more to this
story than is conveyed at that web site.

Matt

 

I just sent in my patent application, Gerry, sorry, but you just weren't
quick enough!

Matt

 

There's lots of room for that in my world, and I suspect Gerry's as
well. Now if you could just provide a cost/benefit analysis that is
based on data rather than conjecture, we'd love to read it.

Matt

 

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.[/QUOTE]

So you can learn. Excellent!

Matt