Oil Change Frequency

[Brian_B]

$65, but 15 and 65 are close if you cross your eyes gard enough.

I was speaking per oil change - which, if I look at it right - is just the cost of the filter in price difference. But only if I take off my glasses and cross my eyes.

I’m not in camp “change oil every fillup” but I’m also not in camp “test your oil” - at least not without context. Sampling should be used to establish frequency. If your sample comes back good - you shouldn’t have changed your oil. If it comes back bad - well, hopefully you’ve been sampling previous to this and are establishing a time line, and you are changing the oil right when it goes bad.

If you really wanted to establish a parody here - figure in the price of a dealership service. That makes changing oil too frequently look absurdly insane.

Sponsored

 

[Squatch]

I was speaking per oil change - which, if I look at it right - is just the cost of the filter in price difference. But only if I take off my glasses and cross my eyes.

I’m not in camp “change oil every fillup” but I’m also not in camp “test your oil” - at least not without context. Sampling should be used to establish frequency. If your sample comes back good - you shouldn’t have changed your oil. If it comes back bad - well, hopefully you’ve been sampling previous to this and are establishing a time line, and you are changing the oil right when it goes bad.

If you really wanted to establish a parody here - figure in the price of a dealership service. That makes changing oil too frequently look absurdly insane.

I'll try to proofread my silliness this time to prevent "gard" from happening again, lol.

Hypothesis
In terms of cost:
Dealership Oil Change > Oil is Cheap > 9k w/testing

Given:
Cost of oil = x
Cost of filter = y
Dealership labor = d
Cost of testing is $35

Per 9k miles driven:

Dealership vs. Oil is Cheap
3x+3y+3d > 3x+3y if d>0

Oil is Cheap vs 9k Testee
3x + 3y = x + y + 35
2x + 2y = 35
x + y = $17.50
*In order to be cheaper using the Oil is Cheap method, you'd have to source oil and a filter for less than $17.50 assuming your time is worthless.

 

[Brian_B]

Dealership vs. Oil is Cheap
3x+3y+3d > 3x+3y if d>0

Oil is Cheap vs 9k Testee
3x + 3y = x + y + 35
2x + 2y = 35
x + y = $17.50
*In order to be cheaper using the Oil is Cheap method, you'd have to source oil and a filter for less than $17.50 assuming your time is worthles

Next I require a 3D plot and convert this to radians.

 

[Sgt Badlands]

True I have no proof that changing it every 3k miles has any benefits, but I have a strong hunch that clean fresh oil is much better than nasty dirty oil with 7-10k on it! Ford also has no problem putting plastic oil pans on their engines and transmission but I have another hunch that it's probably not the best thing to do!

How many people are having engine failure due to changing their engine according to Ford recommendations? Nobody.

 

[Sgt Badlands]

You say this without any sense of irony. We have objective data, using the same testing methodology that manufactures and the API use to come up with the recommendations and measuring standards.

All you have is your personal habits and anecdotal "nothing bad has happened to me yet that I know of" testimony.

Look I get it, you're cheap and want to stay cheap and argue with others that your cheapness should be normative.....but as a wise man said, cheapness is not a virtue

No, I just don’t waste my money to make myself feel better.

 

[Sgt Badlands]

Some people will also tell you "I don't wear seat belts and nothing bad has ever happened to me..."

You think this is a comparable analogy?

 

[Sgt Badlands]

I have never had an engine go bad, and I follow the manufacturer’s suggestions.

Most trouble free car I’ve had with extended usages had both a turbo AND a supercharger on it. Oil changes only per manufacturer instructions.

They wouldn’t be able to sell extended warranties if the guidance was bad, because no company would underwrite them.

Stop making sense. Some people want to waste their money for a false sense of security.

 

[Brian_B]

How many people are having engine failure due to changing their engine according to Ford recommendations? Nobody.

So I'd say this -
Ford engineering certainly evaluated their specification for the base, and most extended, warranty periods.

They probably know all about fuel dilution, and the fact that if you do run out to the light every time, the viscosity has probably broken down somewhat.

And for them, it was within acceptable parameters. They predict, that barring something else occuring, like a class-wide cam phasor issue or something, that most engines will sit comfortably in their MTBF curve and, there will be some warranties, but it's all to be expected.

So, I would say pretty confidently that Ford Engineering is looking at the engine lasting at least as long as most extended warranties will cover - 100k, a bit beyond. Past that, though... and Ford does eventually want to sell new cars, or at least replacement parts... It's not that an engine will instantly impode once it hits 100,001 miles - but rather that MTBF curve starts to tick up, and statistically repairs will become more necessary.

The first few Broncos are just now passing 100k. And the first one I read about (a couple of years ago) -- he had to do an engine replacement at around 92k miles. So... yeah. it happens.

If you flip to new cars every few years, yeah, change when the light pops up, you'll be fine. If you bought your vehicle intended on it to sit in the garage for a really long time... I don't think it would hurt anything to be a bit more aggressive about the maintenance.

 

[adam1991]

You think this is a comparable analogy?

I may not think so, but plenty of people would. After all, if nothing bad has happened, nothing bad will happen, right?

The depth of sand surrounding their heads is astounding.

 

[adam1991]

assuming your time is worthless.

but you neglect to take into account the "I enjoy doing that as a way to spend my time" hobby aspect, which is a soft cost that's difficult if impossible to measure.

 

[MD24Bronco2.3]

The first few Broncos are just now passing 100k. And the first one I read about (a couple of years ago) -- he had to do an engine replacement at around 92k miles. So... yeah. it happens.

Of course things happen, however, consider that these engines have been around--in one form or another--a bit longer than the 6G Bronco.

 

[bassist]

I'm glad you've never owned a Mopar product. My engine and transmission both failed with manufacturer suggested fluid intervals.

I have.

The problems were many, but not related to anything engine oil related.

 

[Eljohno]

$65, but 15 and 65 are close if you cross your eyes gard enough.

It was really just a silly post to poke fun at the overly simplistic statement that "oil is cheap."

More ridiculousness:

• What if we could reduce oil consumption to 1/3 of current usage on a global scale? Would "oil is cheap" still hold up?
• I ran an experiment on my personal Bronco. What will I do if the lab results come back "bad" after 9k miles? I'd drive it off a cliff, but that's been done.
• Bigger engines? You know that tells me absolutely nothing, right? Break out the physics, the chemistry, etc.
• Who thought Zeno's paradox was a good method to testing the oil?
• Remember those weird commercials where they'd drain the oil and run the engines on stands and some additive was supposed to make the engine still run after like 50,000 moles or something?
• What if you used 3 times what you needed to use in every aspect of your life? Three times the food on your plate than what you'll eat. Three times the toilet paper that you need. Drive three times the distance that you need to get to work, etc., every day... sounds fun. You get surgery to have six arms, but you can only use two of them.

How many people are having engine failure due to changing their engine according to Ford recommendations? Nobody.

Do you have proof of your statement? And possibly it's true, but I'll standby that changing oil at 3k miles is better on turbos than letting dirty oil lubricant those turbos with 7,8,9,10k miles on it!

 

[adam1991]

Do you have proof of your statement? And possibly it's true, but I'll standby that changing oil at 3k miles is better on turbos than letting dirty oil lubricant those turbos with 7,8,9,10k miles on it!

why not 2K miles? Or 1K?

I would argue, your statement would say 1K is better than 3K.

 

[Eljohno]

why not 2K miles? Or 1K?

I would argue, your statement would say 1K is better than 3K.

You are probably right, think I'll start doing it every 1500 miles!

Sponsored