Repeatedly Running On A Low Tank?

Those two links are very interesting. Who would have thought that
dirty, old oil was better at lubricating an engine than clean fresh
oil? How much sand would you recommend I add to the crankcase when I
change my oil to eliminate that dreaded first 3000 km of wear? I
wonder if just not replacing the oil filter would help reduce engine
wear?

How did I get engines to last over 100,000 miles changing the oil and
filter every 3,000 to 3,500 miles?

In case you haven't guessed, I think the above is BS. Looks like an
April fool article to me.

Jack

 

IIRC, they were shooting for 200+k miles. Seriously - the pressure was
not on us to design for limited life per-se. The direction was
maximizing that life within the myriad of constraints that always come
into play (cost, weight, volume, etc.). Unfortunately it seems the
MBA's are always doing the prioritization of those constraints.

The quality and longevity of parts would have been better if tier 1 had
not put so much emphasis on quality systems that were the buzz word of
the decade and in the end only caused faking of data because the ever
decreasing price structures (think Lopez,; think GM PICOS; think Ford
demanding - no - unilaterally *taking* - 5% out of what they paid your
for each part year after year after year with no basis in reality for
doing so) wouldn't support the ever increasing complexity and costs of,
in the majority of cases, no-value-added make-work CYA (for them)
so-called quality documentation and paperwork (sorry for the run-on
sentence). IOW, there was no way to meet the b.s. fake quality system
requirements (unnecessarily increased overhead costs like crazy) *and*
deliver a true quality product with the forced decrease in accounts
receivables. The supplier had a choice to either fake it or go out of
business (or possibly fake it *and* go out of business anyway - like the
company I worked for eventually did).

The above is an over-simplification. I could add many details and
war-stories that would reinforce what I'm saying.

Fair enough. However, having been somewhat of an insider in the
industry, the part about Firestone faking the QA data in production
leading to bad product getting out the door has a tremendous ring of
truth to my ears - someone making up b.s. for the public spin wouldn't
have included that particular part if it had not been true, IMO. You
know how it is when you hear a story that is part b.s. and part truth,
and having had experience in the area, you can separate the two with
surgical accuracy?

Wow - was it really that many? I did not realize.

Well thanks. I try.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Gas dispensers (pumps) have a sort of basket filter and nothing more. The
screen on the filter is fairly crude, maybe four times smaller than a
window screen. Small rust particles could easily get through that, but
would be caught by the sock, which is a much finer mesh than the pump
filter.

Having said all that, the gas station tanks I've seen appear not to be made
of metal. Maybe they do have a metal inner lining. But if they did, these
would either be awfully big stampings or have lots of leak-prone weld
seams. Anybody know for sure?

 

Sloshing around is no problem. Copying my comments from a previous post
9that you inluded above):
As far as condensation - it is not the problem it used to be. It used
to be that the tank was "open" to the air, and was able to "breathe" as
the ambient temperatures warmed and cooled (and air moved in and out of
the tank) with time of day. This brought in a continuous fresh supply
of moisture-laden air to condense out in the tank. With sealed tanks,
you do get moisture coming in, but only as the tank emptied as the level
dropped. That amount of moisture is a fraction of what would come in in
a "breathing" system. The small amount generally does not overload the
fuel and is able to be handled without noticeable symptoms. In some
colder climates, it might be advisable to put in a can of Dri-Gas
periodically. Also - don't forget plastic tanks (that don't rust.

However - it's certainly fine with you keeping your level above 1/4 - no
harm, and arguably some extra margin against problems.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Only if the filter isn't working properly. Filters have tiny holes in
them that dirt is able to flow through when a filter is new. After a
while, the hole plug up, and the filter does a better job of filtering oil.

You appear to be making the false assumption that the engine would not
have lasted 100,000 mi if you changed the oil at say 5000 mi intervals.
My Contour has gone over 150k mi with 5,000 mi intervals and synthetic oil.

 

There must be some reason for going from in-line to in the tank.

My guess is to keep the pump bathed in gasoline.

So I do.

 

But inconclusive:

Although based on limited data, the finding could be significant, and
verification should be pursued. If the finding is verified, the mechanisms
should be determined, and ramifications with respect to oil change
intervals, filter involvement, and additive packages should be considered.

 

Three engines over 240,000 miles...

 

I don't have a problem. Yours is obvious:

http://www.blackfive.net/main/images/2007/11/07/head_up_ass.jpg

 

You know, maybe you're right.

But I don't really care, becuase you're so friggin' smug about it. You
have the personality of a Grizzly Bear. I say "I'm not always right, but
I'm never wrong", but I'm kidding.

You think it applies to you as Gospel.

Get some civility.

 

You got that right! The first winter was murder! But I ran the tank so far
down that it stopped smelling after a few weeks.

No problem now! I can fill the tank to the top!

 

It's to save money for the manufacturer. Anytime they can have a
supplier consolidate multiple parts/sub-assemblies into a single larger
assembly, it is cheaper for vehicle manufacturer, which is actually just
an assembler of the components and assemblies that the suppliers
actually manufacture and ship to them. Think of the steps in assembling
an in-line pump *plus* the sender unit *plus* the regulator *plus* the
filter vs. assembling the one sender/pump/regulator/filter assembly into
the tank. Plus the vehicle manufacturer has greatly cut their costs of
negotiating and administering contracts by having one line item to deal
with vs. many line items of the multiple components/subassemblies.

Keep in mind that the overhead and labor costs of the suppliers are much
less than the cost of the vehicle manufacturers (for several reasons:
union/non-union, regional labor rates, Mexico labor rates, etc.). So
there is a net gain with having the supplier deal with the multiple
parts than the vehicle manufacturer receiving them in, inventorying,
unpacking, shuttling around, and installing in their plant. I know this
for a fact first hand.

The bathing of the pump in fuel certainly doesn't do it any harm. But I
strongly suspect that the overwhelmingly primary motivation on moving
the pump to the tank was consolidating more parts into fewer assemblies
to be installed into the vehicle.

Also, high level of integration and overall compactness is a real
premium in cars these days (space and weight are at premium) - they're
trying to pack 10 pounds of crap into a 5 pound bag so to speak.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

None of the above silliness. That's clearly not how it works.

Easy. You've got only slightly more wear than you otherwise
_could_ have.

You're welcome to cling onto your own preconceptions, of course.

I've followed manufacturer's recommendations for oil change
periods always. The only car I ever had engine wear problems
with at anything like such a low mileage (100,000) with was an
air-cooled VW Beetle back in the early 60s, with oil changed at
the recommended 3,000 miles. And that involved overheating in
the dry tropics.

John

 

Hmmm,
I don't think you have an experience living in an extreme cold climate.
Ever used a gas line anti freeze? Ever experienced frozen up carburetor
in old days?
You have to open the cap to fill, some times it rains/snows, etc. Tank
is metal, when cold it always causes cendensation. Does your car have
insulated tank? I am talking about at least -30 degree temperature.
I guarantee any fuel tank has some water at the bottom. Sloshing around
means driving in rough terrain, winding mountain roads, up and down
hill, etc. Just running low on fuel too often is generally bad thing to
do. What if you got stuck in a traffic jam? You may run out of gas, right?

 

2 big fuel dispenser brands around here are Gilbarco and Tokheim, and it
looks most of their models take fuel filters like these
http://www.jmesales.com/department/1888/1/Filters.aspx so my guess is that
in addtion to the pickup screen/sock, they also have a replaceable filter.
Of course, that assumes that gas stations replace the filters on a periodic
basis and that there is no bypass mechanism if flow through the filter is
diminished.

The tanks being installed around here appear to be made of fiberglass like
the ones on this site: http://www.rng.com/rng/zcl/rngss31.html

 

no, its vapor lock avoidance. if the pump is at the top of a long
suction column, the liquid in the column can separate and once there's
vapor, pumping is seriously impaired. you could draw from the bottom of
the tank, but then you get guaranteed particle blockage and much greater
chance of damage.

 

but you do - you just posted three different replies the same comment -
that's definitive evidence of a problem with your cognitive function.

but you, somewhat hypocritically, just wrote, quote:

"Get some civility."

now, shall we go back to you supposedly not having a problem again?

 

and around here. there's been a huge tank replacement program here in
california for some years now. very few metals tanks left, if at all.

 

interesting links!

 

Vapor lock was not a problem when electric fuel pumps for fuel injected
engines were not integrated in the fuel tank, so it doesn't make sense to
make a change for a problem that didn't exist. Vapor lock could occur in
the old mechanical fuel pumps that produced less than 10 PSI. Electric
fuel pumps for fuel injected engines run over 40 PSI so vapor lock is not a
problem.

Bill Putney's explanation is much more feasible.