Proper oil level checking

But if the oil was mid-way between min and max, why would you top it off?
Midway between those 2 levels is perfect.

I still with what the handbook says. It was written by people who know a
hell of a lot more than me or anonymous Internet posters about how the car
was designed and under what conditions those marks were calibrated for.

 

good one!

 

When is that new 2010 Honda tractor coming out?? hehe

BTW, we are fortunate to have such a thread as this ... just think
about those poor guys with Mercedes, BMW's, etc that have no dipstick
at all. They will only be able to discuss the computer and its
calculation of oil level, life remainging, etc.

 

rhetorical question! of course they don't know - they haven't read the
owners manual!

i find this bullshit fascinating - here we are, with literally
generations of alleged gearheads that have no disagreement about the
correct method of measurement dipping some detroit dinosaur's automatic
transmission i.e. whether it's with the engine running or not. but when
it comes to a honda, for reasons i simply cannot understand, all
sensibility leaves, and they fall over themselves to present themselves
as experts that know better then the guys that designed and tested the
car [over literally millions of miles] or wrote the owners manual. and
let's ignore the fact that provided the oil levels are within the common
usage bands, the actual precise micrometer measurement of oil level is
simply a fredly form of masturbation. just like ignorants changing
their oil every 3000 miles - no science, simply recreation.

 

frankly, that's the way it should be. the computer can be relied on -
"my grandpop used to do it this way, so i'm doing it this way too"
usenet ignorants cannot.

 

OK. I give up. As much as I hate to admit it, I agree with Beam - this is
a retarded thread.

 

it's retarded because some people [like you] don't want to learn. all
this "I've been driving for 45 years and have yet to encounter a car
with a dipstick calibrated in that way" bullshit is completely ignorant
of the facts. just open the freakin' manual and learn what the freakin'
manufacturer has taken the trouble to write down for you. any reading
that is /not/ taken in accordance with the manufacturer spec is WRONG.
if you measure with the vehicle on a slope, it's WRONG. if you measure
with the engine running, it's WRONG. if you measure cold, it's WRONG.
again, open the manual and LEARN how that manufacturer wants you to do
it RIGHT.

 

Yessir. Love those (relatively new) snail mail oil tests, along with
onboard monitors on newer cars, proving the myth of the necessity of
the 3k mile oil change.

I am still chuckling about Wade's query on the 2010 Honda tractor. I
think the levity goes hand-in-hand with the rest of the silliness
here. ;-)

 

I can only repeat (and rely) on personal experience built up over 50 years
of owning and servicing my own vehicles. I accept what you say but I don't
necessarily have to follow or agree with it. It works for me and that is
my main concern. The only other point that I would add is that the vehicle
had been serviced by Trident Honda in Ottershaw only a week or so previous
to my check and they would have put in the correct amount of oil. Whilst
the oil showed a level midway between min and max after stopping the engine
and standing for the aforementioned three to four minutes (actually it was
nearer fifteen), it showed smack on max the next morning. You may call it
superstitious bullshit but it would have resulted in overfilling had I
followed it.

 

it's not "overfilling"!!!! dude, please try to understand, any reading
that is /not/ taken per the owners manual is not correct. there's a
massive difference in oil level between the correct and incorrect way to
read a detroit auto transmission level, but you wouldn't try to are that
they're both right would you?

this is why the manufacturer spends the time and money providing you
with a manual. if you didn't need it because all your 1950
superstitions were relevant, it wouldn't be necessary!

 

correction: "argue"

 

But HOW would it have resulted in over-filling? If the reading was between
min and max, why would you add anything?

Where does it say you should add oil when observing a midway reading? You
only add at min or below.

 

I am not arguing either way. Simply saying that I will use the method I
have always used. I see what you are saying about the manual but I still
come back to the fact that the oil only reaches the full mark when it has
stood for a long time. The undeniable fact is that I only got that reading
by leaving it. I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one
because my own experience of my Honda makes me regard the manual, however
expertly written and well meant, as questionable on this point. Curiously,
the manual for our other car, a Peugeot 406, advises checking the oil
before the car is started and warns that checking when the car has recently
been used will give inaccurate readings.

 

Where does it say that you shouldn't? I suspect that many people, having
taken a reading on the garage forecourt and finding it halfway down to the
minimum, would indeed put more in to avoid it dropping too far. You may
know that you should only add at the min level but the average motorist
would probably regard halfway down as needing a top up.

 

Maybe it's a logic issue then. I see no reason to add when it's "between
the lines". If I was supposed to add when it's below the "max" line, then
the shaded area between the lines would be labeled "add oil" while the line
below min would be labeled "holy crap that's low".

I see max and say to myself, stay away from there cause you could go over.
Between the lines is the "perfect medium". Not too high, not too low.

 

dude, that's not "full". that's "been standing a long time". "full" is
when it's at the top mark a couple of minutes after switch off. like it
says in the book.

so how do you dip the transmission on a detroit vehicle? what reading
do you "believe"?

that's because /that/ vehicles system is calibrated that way - the honda
is not!!! that's why you need to do it the way it says in the book!!!

 

Then why have a Max marking when the level is supposed to go above that
later on? Surely that is a nearly Max mark, which makes no sense at all.

I haven't the foggiest idea what a Detroit vehicle is. I assume you are
referring to automatic transmission which is rare over here as we mainly use
manual gearboxes. You check the oil in those by crawling underneath the
vehicle and squirting oil into the filler hole (which is in the side of the
box) until it starts to run out. Simple but your back aches afterwards.

Which leaves the question of why, when it had only a few days before been
serviced by a reputable Honda agent, does it reach the Max mark only after
standing for a longer time. By that reckoning it should be above the mark
by then.

To be honest, I don't think, from what we have discussed, that it makes that
much difference. Next time I am at the agents I will quiz them on it.

I am not trying to be bloody minded. I am, more than anything, puzzled why
Honda should be different to every other car I have owned. I have also
seen the problems that can be caused by over filling, something to be
avoided like the plague.

Keith

 

it makes sense if you read the manual!!! the whole point of measuring
/anything/ is that you're able to do so in a way that is not only
accurate, but consistent. you don't use a rubber tape measure for this
reason. you get much more consistency measuring oil level at full
working temp, on level ground, a couple of minutes after shutdown - just
like it says in the honda book! all other readings, as you have proven,
are arbitrary and INCONSISTENT.

jeepers. logic. get some..

the point is, detroit transmissions typically require dipping with the
pump working. if you dip with the engine off, the level is /way/ above
the mark. you have to dip according to instructions to get it right!

have you ever considered the possibility that it's because they actually
know what they're doing???

like avoiding the owners manual like the plague?