for the guys that are into recreational oil changing...

On the 96 Camry it would be easy (assuming a 4 cylinder) because of the
oil filter placement. On a lot of vehicles, changing just the filter
would be messy.

Of course the whole premise is wrong to begin with though. Using
"standard" filters has nothing to do with how often the oil needs to be
changed.

 

Yes I did. I understood that the two mileage requirements were 3750
(Severe) & 7500 (Normal). What I was commenting on was the line that
said - "Their definition of normal also pretty much leaves out
everybody."

While Nissan tends to push owners toward the "severe" schedule more
than than other companies, I was trying to make the point that the
regular schedule does not leave everybody out. I should have been more
explicit in what I was discussing. To be clear, I think most Nissan
drivers can use the regualr schedule. Honestly, why would anyone call
a schedule "Normal" and then claim it wasn't? If they meant for the
7500 mile schedule to apply to only a few owners, they should have
called it "light duty" or "unstressed" but certianly not "normal." I
think Nissan was trying to both claim extended maintenance
(competitive advantage for selling cars) and encourage people to go to
their dealer more often (aftermarket profit motive). Nissan explicitly
said you didn't need to use the "Premium Service" to maintain your
warranty.

Ed

 

I had two. Both were 1983, GM with the same 3.8 liter engine, one an Olds
Cutlass, the other a Buick Regal. Both died at about 120,000 and I put
rebuilt engines in both and the rebuilds lasted another 50,000 miles. It
was a crappy engine design and no amount of oil changing would help them.
The newer 3800 V-6 in my next Buick was running as good as the day it came
from the showroom after 15 years and almost 200k. At 75000 I changed the
plugs. At 85,000, the water pump.

 

I have one of the Chrysler 2.7 engines in one of my 2 Concordes. They
are known for sludging up and catastrophically failing at between 60k
and 80k miles. Many people learned the hard way not to go by the
recommended 7500k change interval on those.

Of course it depends on the service that the vehicle sees too - i.e.,
lots of stop-and-go short-trip stuff vs. mostly highway use.

Mine has over 230k miles on it now and runs great because it is used on
my daily commute of 80 miles total each weekday and I change oil and
filter every 3000-3800 miles. Though people on the Chrysler forums will
insist that that engine will not last unless you use synthetic, I've
disproven that by using non-synth Castrol and 8 oz. of Marvel Mystery
Oil at all times.

There are definitely some engines that can tolerate abuse (long oil
change intervals), but some are definitely intolerant of that. I think
it has to do with the crankcase breathing design.

ALSO - I can't help but feel that a lot of instances of engines failing
due to sludging up is because more places (dealers included) than you
would think actually do not change the oil or filter when the customer
pays for it - I have seen that twice personally - once on my elderly
mother's car, and once on a Jeep that my daughter had bought that had
supposedly had oil and filter changed religiously every 3k miles at a
chain, and I proved that to be absolutely false.

 

I've read more than one account on Chrysler LH car flrums where it was
claimed that Chrysler refused to cover a 2.7L engine failure when the
customer had receipts showing the oil was changed at the dealer on the
Schedule A. Reason for turning the claim down: There is no such thing
in the real world as Schedule A service. Everything is Schedule B.
Claim denied. I can't swear that the posters were telling the truth,
but that's what was claimed.

 

The smaller the particle the filter traps, the quicker it is going to
clog up.
Also, until you get to a point of saturation, the size of the
particles missed
by a "standard" filter are not large enough to do much engine wear.
I'm fairly anal about my vehicle, but I don't use filters that trap
very fine
particles. I use regular old standard filters. They are less prone to
being
clogged. And if that happens the bypass kicks in and you have no
filtering at all.

It would depend on the service. If it's all highway miles, maybe..
If not, pretty risky..

I think it's a waste of money, and also not the greatest idea as I
have already touched on.

If your Camry has 176k miles on it, you are probably doing something
right. Why change? :/

Myself, I use regular standard filters, half decent oil, "castrol
syntec blend",
and I change it every 5k miles like the manual and the blinky light
on
the dashboard says. I'm not a fan of "extended oil change skeds".
The purpose of changing the oil and filter is to remove the dirt,
acids,
moisture, and whatever else, and to replenish the additives in the
oil.
I'm not going much past 5k in any of my vehicles, and I don't care
what anyone thinks about it. My older trucks actually get dirtier
after 5k miles than my newer Corolla. It's so clean burning it is
really
not that bad after 5k.. But I change it anyway. Cheap insurance.
I don't use synth blend in the trucks though.. Just regular dino oil..
I only use the synth blend in the Corolla as extra insurance against
the dreaded gelling problem. Again, the extra cost is cheap insurance
the way I see it.

 

Ok, thanks for the info. Good points all around. Maybe the car can
go longer on multiple filters, but 5k miles is long enough. My use
might even qualify as "severe" come to think of it... mixed city/
highway driving.

Was using Castrol regular 10W-30, thinking of putting in regular Mobil
5W-30 for better fuel economy next change due in ~900 miles.

Thanks,

Michael

 

You said, "Exposure to all the chemicals also causes many health problems."

You didn't say, "harmful chemicals", you said, "chemicals".

So...what's a "chemical"? Answer the question.

 

How often should this freeway trip be made in order to minimize damage
to the engine by water-laden oil?

 

Look up Honda's manual.

We just have to disagree then.

 

I do not see this phrase in Honda's manual.

That's a big difference from just saying "is fine for most drivers."

Which one is it? "Occasionally" or "most of the time"?

 

Pardon? The manual is pointing out that one must drive "most of the
time" in the severe conditions listed to warrant following the severe
schedule. Only occasionally driving in severe conditions warrants the
normal schedule.

 

Those engines apparently aren't like the 3.1L and other GM engines that
get coolant leaks in their intake gaskets.

 

Not entirely true. The moisture and contaminants in the oil from the
short trip driving deteriorate the additives in the oil - and "drying
it out" once a week does not TOTALLY eliminate that damage.

Yes it is.

The oil change requirements stated in the US are the minimum required
change frequency for the oil available in America to get the car
through warranty most of the time.

 

And those of us who prefer to change the oil more often are villified
as liars and idiots by those who believe today's oils and engines are
SO VASTLY improved, in ALL ways, over the e ngines and oils of the
past.

Yes, there have been major improvements - but the higher specific
output and smaller bearing surfaces for reduced friction - and
therefor better fuel mileage - and numerous other design changes,
combined with the addition of Ethanol and other chemicals to the fuel
and the mandated removal of Zinc based extreme pressure
additives from the oil have ALL conspired to make the job of t he
engine oil more severe.

 

I BUY mine about then. (well, the last few have been 6 years old)
and generally SELL them at about 18.

 

And it also holds SUBSTANTIALLY more oil - and it is also a Diesel?

 

Use to be oil was change about 1500 miles and at 50,000 you had rings and
bearings done, at 100,000, the car was shot, both engine and body. I don't
know of anyone that has had an oil related problems on a car built in the
past 20 years. Given that track record, there is no compelling reason for
me to change oil more often. Your money, your choice, but I'm not wasting
mine.

 

Chrysler and Toyota, among others, have seen LOTS of oil related
engine failures over the last number of years due to oil breakdown
(they call it COKING) which is not a problem with more frequent oil
changes.
The 2.6 Mitsubishi engine timing chain problems were almost
non-existent with frequent oil changes and the right oil, yet very
common with 5000 mile changes and the 5W30 oil recommended by the
manufacturer. Same with the seized ballance shaft problems. The tail
end of that fiasco was about 20 years ago.

I also see a lot of cars blowing blue smoke - ring or valve-guide
failure CAN be oil related failures. Also timing belt tensioner
problems on Mazdas. They are hydraulic tensioners - and they fail
significantly more often on vehicles with extended drain intervals.

The examples could go on, and on, and on - but you are right. It's
YOUR car, and YOUR money.

On MY car, MY money get's spent on preventative maintenance, not
breakdown repairs.

 

Hmm, right now our vehicles are 14, 9, and 2 years old. All had oil
changes that followed the manual. None ever had 3K changes of course
since every expert in the field of automotive engines and lubrication
agrees that there is absolutely no benefit to them. And of course none
have ever had any trouble related to the oil. The only problems on the
14 and 9 year old vehicles have been with exhaust sensors needing
replacement, and the IAC valve on the '96 Camry (a known recurring problem).

You can't get less than minimal trouble by needlessly changing the oil
more than is necessary.