changing your oil too often will harm your engine

[spasm3]

Originally Posted by Direct_Rejection
"...change the oil filter, not the oil."

Dave Newton has used
study of mountains of data
to come to the conclusion
that oil filters
are at their most efficient,
not when new,
but after thousands of miles of service.



I've always thought that too, but many here say its not. i'm not an engineer so i really don't know. But i would think that air filters and oil filters would filter a bit better as they load up, but well before they are in bypass.

 

[Angrypenguin]

So the way I see it, lots of conjecture but a lack of scientific tests on this topic. This is really unfortunate!!

 

[330indy]

Originally Posted by superangrypenguin
So the way I see it, lots of conjecture but a lack of scientific tests on this topic. This is really unfortunate!!

LOL
That about sums up BITOG in general !

 

[pitzel]

Originally Posted by ekpolk
. And if it is as serious as the author implies, why aren't car makers saying, "DO NOT change more frequently than..."?


They basically are. Most manufacturers have moved to OLM's and are actively pushing increasingly long drains if done "by the book".

I haven't heard of a warranty claim denied due to overly frequent oil changes, but evidence is mounting that the root cause of the GDI intake contamination/occlusion issues is overly frequent oil changes and/or low quality oil being used. Whether deliberate (ie: improper maintenance), or due to implicitly fraudulent behavior on the part of the maintainer (ie: the use of bulk dino when an expensive synthetic has been spec'ed by the mfg).


Quote
The volatiles don't make sense to me, if it was that bad, why not just heat your oil up a couple of cycles and then use it.


Takes too long, costs too much. There are some oils that are known to have low volatility (per the NOACK tests), but they tend to be more expensive than most consumers will accept.

 

[Patman]

DI engines that have these big carbon buildup issues aren't caused by frequent oil changes, they are caused by a poorly designed fuel system. When you see massive carbon buildup on some DI engines that have only 20,000 miles on them, you can't blame that on frequent oil changes. That's a design flaw.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted by pitzel
Originally Posted by ekpolk
. And if it is as serious as the author implies, why aren't car makers saying, "DO NOT change more frequently than..."?


They basically are. Most manufacturers have moved to OLM's and are actively pushing increasingly long drains if done "by the book".


Interesting point, I hadn't thought of it that way. Wouldn't it be cool if someone would offer an "unofficial translation" of the various car owner's manuals. Sort of applying a syntactic (not Syntec-tic...) solvent that washes out all the weasel words and replaces them with plain, understandable English that would leave little room for confusion. Ex: "Do not change your oil early. Use only the x oil (or oil type) and don't change it until the computer says so, or you will probably cause your valves to gum up with deposits." Please, nobody hold your breath waiting for this to happen...

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by spasm3
Originally Posted by Direct_Rejection
"...change the oil filter, not the oil."

Dave Newton has used study of mountains of data to come to the conclusion that oil filters are at their most efficient, not when new, but after thousands of miles of service.


I've always thought that too, but many here say its not. i'm not an engineer so i really don't know. But i would think that air filters and oil filters would filter a bit better as they load up, but well before they are in bypass.


Some filters get less efficient as they load up because the increased delta-p across the media causes captured particles in the media to break away and flow back into the engine. This is one aspect of oil filters that not everyone knows about.

If anyone has seen the ISO 4548-12 test procedure, you would see that the ISO efficiency calculation is the average from start to end of the test. So a filter that has a high ISO efficiency can't (by definition) be sloughing off many particles as the filter loads up. Filters that have a low efficiency rating are most likely becoming less efficient as they load up, as the graph below shows. If the the filter in the graph was ISO rated at 20 microns, the efficiency would be the average of 90% and 60%, which would be 75% @ 20 microns. Graph was test data produced by Purolator/Mann+Hummel company.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

I tried to take my RS3 into Audi for my included oil change at 6k miles. They told me they wouldn't do it. I tried again at 7500 and they reluctantly did it.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
I tried to take my RS3 into Audi for my included oil change at 6k miles. They told me they wouldn't do it. I tried again at 7500 and they reluctantly did it.


That has nothing to do with them thinking it'll cause more deposits, it's simply a money issue. When a car maker gives you a certain number of oil changes for free, they won't do them any earlier than scheduled because it costs them too much money.

My dad had a 1991 Audi Quattro that he bought brand new (with 3 or 4 years of free maintenance) and that dealer also would not do the oil changes any earlier than the book said and that engine wasn't DI.

 

[DGXR]

Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
I tried to take my RS3 into Audi for my included oil change at 6k miles. They told me they wouldn't do it. I tried again at 7500 and they reluctantly did it.


That has nothing to do with them thinking it'll cause more deposits, it's simply a money issue. When a car maker gives you a certain number of oil changes for free, they won't do them any earlier than scheduled because it costs them too much money.

My dad had a 1991 Audi Quattro that he bought brand new (with 3 or 4 years of free maintenance) and that dealer also would not do the oil changes any earlier than the book said and that engine wasn't DI.

It sounds like we are confusing "free maintenance for [a period of time]" vs "a certain number of free oil changes."
If the dealer or carmaker gives you 5 free oil changes, it doesn't cost them more to do them in all in one year, or over a period of 3 years.
Maybe I missed something?

 

[StevieC]

I'd like to see the evidence that is supposedly mounting that supports the claim that changing the oil too frequently is creating this issue.
Honestly, I would like to see it, I'm not being a "richard".

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Originally Posted by DGXR
Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by Jimmy_Russells
I tried to take my RS3 into Audi for my included oil change at 6k miles. They told me they wouldn't do it. I tried again at 7500 and they reluctantly did it.


That has nothing to do with them thinking it'll cause more deposits, it's simply a money issue. When a car maker gives you a certain number of oil changes for free, they won't do them any earlier than scheduled because it costs them too much money.

My dad had a 1991 Audi Quattro that he bought brand new (with 3 or 4 years of free maintenance) and that dealer also would not do the oil changes any earlier than the book said and that engine wasn't DI.

It sounds like we are confusing "free maintenance for [a period of time]" vs "a certain number of free oil changes."
If the dealer or carmaker gives you 5 free oil changes, it doesn't cost them more to do them in all in one year, or over a period of 3 years.
Maybe I missed something?



You're not. I even asked if they included one free oil change with the car why it mattered when I wanted it done. Still said no, lol.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by StevieC
I'd like to see the evidence that is supposedly mounting that supports the claim that changing the oil too frequently is creating this issue.
Honestly, I would like to see it, I'm not being a "richard".


https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2007-01-4133/

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3254390/1

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by StevieC
I'd like to see the evidence that is supposedly mounting that supports the claim that changing the oil too frequently is creating this issue.
Honestly, I would like to see it, I'm not being a "richard".


https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2007-01-4133/

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3254390/1



This isn't conclusive... It's a bunch of bickering.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by StevieC
I'd like to see the evidence that is supposedly mounting that supports the claim that changing the oil too frequently is creating this issue.
Honestly, I would like to see it, I'm not being a "richard".


https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2007-01-4133/

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3254390/1



This isn't conclusive... It's a bunch of bickering.


Buy the SAE paper then. The summary is pretty clear that changing oil too soon can result in more engine wear.

Or go do some Googling, or searching on the SAE website.

 

[pitzel]

Originally Posted by Patman
DI engines that have these big carbon buildup issues aren't caused by frequent oil changes, they are caused by a poorly designed fuel system. When you see massive carbon buildup on some DI engines that have only 20,000 miles on them, you can't blame that on frequent oil changes. That's a design flaw.



Are you sure this 20k instance wasn't some Corvette owner (Corvettes or other 'performance' cars often have very low miles put on them, I say "Corvette" because I know that's your fancy, but could easily be any other brand) who basically fed the engine a very frequent (ie: 1000 mile) diet of oil changes? I'd expect something like that to show up on an enthusiast-driven performance car, especially since there's lots of types who will go for a day at the track and immediately change their oil under some altruistic belief that 'racing' placed extreme 'damaging' stress on such. So 20k miles could very well be 20 x 1k mile OCI's. If that oil has a NOACK of 10% , that's an awful lot of virgin motor oil distilled and recirculated back into an intake with predictable issues in a DI scenario. Higher-displacement "Performance" car engines may be more susceptible due to their relatively lower intake mass flow density during most of their operating life. The intake "porting" that is valued by performance enthusiasts for performance engines (whether such is done after-market or in a factory design), results in lower mass flow density in such and may accelerate deposit formation.

I'm not making the accusation that such is the scenario you're specifically citing, but there are certainly scenarios of operation and maintenance so distant from those intended by the manufacturer in their validation process that such issues could occur and really wouldn't be considered a design flaw. The reason this issue has been so vexing is that its simply very difficult to actually design test scenarios at the manufacturer level -- as manufacturers themselves haven't really had reason to understand the extent of improper or "over"-maintenance that some people subject their vehicles to. The classical scenario of under-maintenance and lubricant quality inadequacy is probably better understood and studied in the validation scenarios used by manufacturers.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by StevieC
I'd like to see the evidence that is supposedly mounting that supports the claim that changing the oil too frequently is creating this issue.
Honestly, I would like to see it, I'm not being a "richard".


https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2007-01-4133/

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3254390/1



This isn't conclusive... It's a bunch of bickering.


Buy the SAE paper then. The summary is pretty clear that changing oil too soon can result in more engine wear.

Or go do some Googling, or searching on the SAE website.


There are piles of Toyota's that see 5K mile oci's thanks to their built in idiot lights and they seem to achieve great miles. I think even if this were true it wouldn't show up as a benefit until far out past junk points for most vehicles.

 

[bbhero]

Strange yet noticeable phenomenon I have done like 50 times... My mpg is 1 mpg better with new vs oil with even only 3k miles. Same road Rte 5 west road straight as a arrow for 3 miles... Conditions quite similar each time.. Only time there was noticable variance I was getting 31.4 mpg with a tail wind and 27.6 against the wind... Which made me laugh and knew that didn't count

New oil in my car is typically 29.4-29.8. the oil with 3k miles was 1 mpg less. Every single time muliplied 50 times. That ain't no coincidence. Less friction with new oil?? Less windage?? More lubricity with new oil so it helps increase fuel mileage??

I am not saying we should go back to short short runs of 3k miles... I have just noticed a difference that has been remarkably consistent many, many times...

 

[y_p_w]

There are a few odd possibilities. I remember hearing almost an aside from a motor oil testing lab engineer that wear often went up in the first 500-1000 miles after an oil change, which was attributed to the ZDDP content not being activated. Apparently ZDDP needs to be oxidized via heat to do its thing. And I suppose it can't be pre-activated some way because that would just stick to the bottle.

Still - one of the oddball discussions I remember from Car Talk was about whether or not it would be harmful to a car to have its oil changed every day. The setup was a shop in NYC that apparently had a $10 oil change special in a city where daily parking would often be around $50-$60 or more. So the question was whether or not it would hurt to bring it in every day while the special lasted, leave it there all day, and pick it up at the end of the day. And the way I understand it, right after an oil change might not be the best time for wear. Of course you need to change the oil eventually, but too often might not be the greatest idea either on the basis of engine wear.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix

https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2007-01-4133/

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3254390/1


There are piles of Toyota's that see 5K mile oci's thanks to their built in idiot lights and they seem to achieve great miles. I think even if this were true it wouldn't show up as a benefit until far out past junk points for most vehicles.


The "empty junk yards" defense ... it's so much better "proof" than technical SAE papers on wear.