Do I really need to change my oil, less than 500 miles in 2.5 years?

[ZeeOSix]

Just contact your oil manufacturer. I also personally know two high end large business engine builder's who have enquired on the information from their oil manufacturers with both saying the add pack starts to degrade after 12 months in engine. That was at least 2 different manufacturers.

So is there any technical reference that says the oil is "no good" if the TBN is still way above the point where it's losing the ability to protect and prevent corrosion, etc.

I'm sure Blackstone has probably touched on this, and doubt they say the oil is "no good" if the TBN is still high.

 

[adams355]

So is there any technical reference that says the oil is "no good" if the TBN is still way above the point where it's losing the ability to protect and prevent corrosion, etc.

I'm sure Blackstone has probably touched on this, and doubt they say the oil is "no good" if the TBN is still high.

From what I have seen from Blackstone I don't believe they are a top tier lab. Sorry no 'links' to support basic oil knowledge that can be gained from your oil manufacturer. I do have a link that questions Blackstone's TBN claims. Most oils should be replaced at 50% of starting TBN not the average 10% that's accepted here.

Optimizing Drain Intervals Using TBN vs. TAN

Safely extending oil drain intervals by using fluid analysis to monitor oil condition and engine wear has always been a significant means for reducing a maintenance department’s consumable costs....

www.machinerylubrication.com

Oh hang on here is a link:

Why Motor Oil Deteriorates

Like just about everything else, motor oil has a lifespan. Even the best oils eventually require periodic changes. Motor oil can deteriorate by becoming contaminated, the additives depleting over time or both.

www.amsoil.com

 

[AEHaas]

Why, does temperature cycling oil cause degradation or impaired performance?

Evaluation of Oil Performance Using the Tu High Temperature Engine Test With a View to Extending Oil Drain Intervals, Bouvier et al:
Oxidation and thickening is the limiting factor for oil longevity. Generally modern oils thin only 10 percent then thicken up to 60 percent within as little as 96 hrs. of operation ( -in the accelerated test engine. Let me comment that all test criteria are designed to mimic real engine operating conditions but at an accelerated rate).
There is accelerated acidification and corrosive wear that occurs.
Oil thickening was also time dependent. Thickening at 30,000 km was 2 times more when done over 21 months than over a 10 month period. (Change your oil every spring as I suggested before. Oil forms gels and waxes just sitting on the shelf in cold garages).

 

[dnewton3]

I have run OCIs out ot 5 years in low-mileage/low-use applications. All the UOAs I've done on those engines (car/truck/tractor) have shown no difference in wear rates than those which are operated frequently. I have also seen longer duration UOAs from other people's applications which echo my own experiences. My conclusion: oil ages with exposure of use, not days counted on a calendar.

Additionally, the oil filters were fine as well, per dissection observations. Further, when our member Jim Allen toured the Fram engineering labs, he asked the question about how long a cellulose-based filter could be left in service. 5 years was a bit iffy in their opinion, but 3 years was very doable, but not something they were willing to "officially" claim for obvious reasons. Just last month, my son and I resurrected an old Case 970 Agri-King from 10 years of outdoor storage. We changed the fluids and filters because we knew nothing of the previous owners, had no idea of the use factors, and no idea how long the OFCIs had been prior to its storage date (though we suspected they were "normal" because the oil was black and the hydraulic oil was darker than new. Though we were happy to have changed them, they actually looked perfectly fine when we cut open the engine/hydraulic/trans filters; they were not brittle, they were no tears, the seals were intact, there was no sign of rust on the metal parts, etc. I'm not advocating for 10 year filter changes; I'm merely pointing out that anecdotally I've seen evidence that suggests there no horror to long term storage. I admit I was unwilling to leave those filters in place, but it does put a 3-year/low-use FCI in perspective.

The only concerns to doing longer duration OCIs are the things that would also affect shorter duration OCIs, such as ... does the car have an internal coolant leak? Does it have a leaking injector? Those things would affect the quality of the lube no matter how long it sits in the crankcase.

From all my real world research, OFCIs done every 3 years is a no brainer and can be safely done, and 5 years is not a big threat. That's where my research stops, so I cannot advise past that.

OP - why not simply experiment? If you are confused by the wide variety of answers you're getting, then by gosh, go try something. Do a 1 year OFCI and get a UOA and cut open the filter. Then do a 2 year OFCI. Then 3 years. I think you'll find the same observations that I have.

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Fwiw, for the price of a UOA, you could change the oil and filter. Then you know for certain you're good to go.

Not so sure about that I got my Wix UOA for 9.95 a kit from RA. My average OCI and filter cost me pretty close to $25 with full synthetic. But I don't do a UOA always just if I have some question.

 

[adams355]

@dnewton3
You are talking about a tractor that you assume merely by viewing the fluids that everything is fine. The OP has a hi spec Japanese inline 6 cylinder DOHC motor with twin turbo's and alloy head. It is a very sought after machine till this day. I wouldn't be doing 5 year oil changes on it that is crazy, I understand you are a staff member here but some of us work in these fields.

1994 Toyota Supra Turbo fetched an amazing $173,600 at Amelia auction

It appears the introduction of the fifth-generation Toyota Supra has inflated values of classic examples. We say that because this 1994 Toyota Supra Turbo sold for an outrageous $173,600 at auction this past weekend. Let's break down that figure. A 1994 Toyota Supra Turbo with the targa top cost...

www.motorauthority.com

 

[Leo99]

Evaluation of Oil Performance Using the Tu High Temperature Engine Test With a View to Extending Oil Drain Intervals, Bouvier et al:
Oxidation and thickening is the limiting factor for oil longevity. Generally modern oils thin only 10 percent then thicken up to 60 percent within as little as 96 hrs. of operation ( -in the accelerated test engine. Let me comment that all test criteria are designed to mimic real engine operating conditions but at an accelerated rate).
There is accelerated acidification and corrosive wear that occurs.
Oil thickening was also time dependent. Thickening at 30,000 km was 2 times more when done over 21 months than over a 10 month period. (Change your oil every spring as I suggested before. Oil forms gels and waxes just sitting on the shelf in cold garages).

Hmm, you say oil gets thicker over time. The Amsoil link above says it gets thinner over time. I'm more of an empirical person. How different will this engine in the Supra be next year at this time with an additional 500 miles driven using fresh oil today vs keeping the same oil?

Also, this is the first that I've heard that oil degrades due to temperature sitting in the bottle or are these gels and waxes reversible?

 

[ARB1977]

Get a uoa done. That might put your mind at ease. My mother inlaw has a 95 BMW 540 with 17000 miles. It’s been 5 years since the last oil change. It’s her car so I don’t really touch it unless I need too. Would like to do a uoa, lol.

 

[EEE]

That's a nice car. Even if it was a POS corolla I would change the oil. I don't understand the logic behind not doing it. Oil/filter $30 bucks. Mobil1 has a $30 rebate. Take advantage of it.

 

[MrLemonade]

Get a uoa done. That might put your mind at ease. My mother inlaw has a 95 BMW 540 with 17000 miles. It’s been 5 years since the last oil change. It’s her car so I don’t really touch it unless I need too. Would like to do a uoa, lol.

A UOA costs more and takes longer than just changing the oil out, and a UOA does not resolve the ultimate issue that there's oil in the car for an exceptionally long period of time.

I don't understand the UOA advice at all. Sure it's some data, but it doesn't address the known problem nor provide a solution.

If your house was on fire, you're not going to get a thermometer to gauge how hot the fire is. You get suppression to stop the fire. Same thing.

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

A UOA costs more and takes longer than just changing the oil out, and a UOA does not resolve the ultimate issue that there's oil in the car for an exceptionally long period of time.

I don't understand the UOA advice at all. Sure it's some data, but it doesn't address the known problem nor provide a solution.

If your house was on fire, you're not going to get a thermometer to gauge how hot the fire is. You get suppression to stop the fire. Same thing.

I don't think you understand UOA. What is TBN representative of? Hint: Nothing to do with a house fire. For years, Total Base Number (TBN or BN) has been used as one of the key measurements in the field to help determine remaining oil life by indicating the amount of performance-related additive left in the engine oil. In short, it helps you know when engine oil needs to be changed. Source: https://www.chevronlubricants.com/c...YSIS UNDERSTANDING TAN AND TBN 01-28-2019.pdf If the wear and contaminant metals are low and the TBN is good, why throw away good oil? Ignorance or too cheap to want to know what the condition of the oil is? A few UOA to determine trends is an invaluable tool to figure out what a "sensible" oil change interval IS. UOA will certainly give you a lot more data points than "oil is dark, change it."

 

[MrLemonade]

I don't think you understand UOA. What is TBN representative of? Hint: Nothing to do with a house fire. For years, Total Base Number (TBN or BN) has been used as one of the key measurements in the field to help determine remaining oil life by indicating the amount of performance-related additive left in the engine oil. In short, it helps you know when engine oil needs to be changed. Source: https://www.chevronlubricants.com/content/dam/external/industrial/en_us/sales-material/sales-sheet/ENGINE OIL ANALYSIS UNDERSTANDING TAN AND TBN 01-28-2019.pdf If the wear and contaminant metals are low and the TBN is good, why throw away good oil? Ignorance or too cheap to want to know what the condition of the oil is? A few UOA to determine trends is an invaluable tool to figure out what a "sensible" oil change interval IS. UOA will certainly give you a lot more data points than "oil is dark, change it."

In a different thread, you quoted something like a range of $30 to $60 for a UOA, plus $11 shipping, so let's call it ballpark $60 total to be told the oil is good or needs changing.

A careful shopper can get quality Wix oil filter for $10, a new $1 gasket, and premium synthetic for $3 per quart. Let's say the vehicle is a 6 qt. oil change for a DIY job, that's ~$30.

A silly UOA costs roughly two oil changes. Total waste of money if it's just telling you whether you need to change it or not.

Why would anyone pay roughly twice the cost of simply replacing the oil, to know whether the oil needs replacing? If you work on a miles and/or calendar routine, it's a simple task. And if unsure, it's 1/2 the cost to know whether it needs replacing to simply replace it and restart the time/miles clock anew.

IOW: Let's just take the OPs situation as the example.
Scenario 1: OP runs the UOA and is told to change the oil. Cost is now $60 for the test and another $30 to change it. $90 total.
Scenario 2: OP runs UOA and told the oil is fine, no need to change it. $60 total. Oil still likely needs changing at some point in the near term. So does he spend another $60 next year on another UOA, or spend $30 on a change? Either way, he's out $60 and has not advanced the ball 1 inch. Still needs to at some point, spend the $30 on a change.
Scenario 3: OP simply changes the oil. He'll be able to ascertain some information visually, but setting that aside, the oil is now fresh. Total cost, $30.
Scenario 4: Roll the dice, sit on old oil, and risk destroying the valuable car, being penny wise and pound foolish.

This is truly a no-brainer. The best option is to change the oil for $30. If one is particularly curious, he can spend another $60 to determine but that's really just wasting money totaling the price of 2 more oil changes...

I'll simply add to the above, if you did a UOA on every oil change before changing it, you'd effectively be tripling the price of this maintenance item and adding significant time as well. Makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

Yes, I did state in a previous thread the costs of what I spend on UOA, because you asked. But there are other places and other price lists for UOA, I'm sure higher and lower than what I spend. So what? I've been on this forum for going on 7 years, and your post (excerpt) phrase of "silly UOA" is the first time I've heard/read that phrase. You sir, are the one who makes absolutely no sense. Neither I nor anyone else that I can see said anything about a UOA on EVERY oil change. In fact, I stated quite clearly "A few UOA to determine trends is an invaluable tool to figure out what a "sensible" oil change interval IS." The investment of a few UOA will inform and educate the OP as to what is a "sensible" oil change interval, and to quote yourself to you, you did refer to the OP's possession as a "valuable vehicle." So, on a classic vehicle possibly worth upward of $100K, you think $30-$60-$90 on a few UOA TO SET PRECEDENT for OCI is "silly?" I won't post what I think of your opinion, but it isn't much. Nevertheless, this doesn't mean I think less of you as a human being, and I've no doubt we could find common ground over a drink or two.

 

[MrLemonade]

Yes, I did state in a previous thread the costs of what I spend on UOA, because you asked. But there are other places and other price lists for UOA, I'm sure higher and lower than what I spend. So what? I've been on this forum for going on 7 years, and your post (excerpt) phrase of "silly UOA" is the first time I've heard/read that phrase. You sir, are the one who makes absolutely no sense. Neither I nor anyone else that I can see said anything about a UOA on EVERY oil change. In fact, I stated quite clearly "A few UOA to determine trends is an invaluable tool to figure out what a "sensible" oil change interval IS." The investment of a few UOA will inform and educate the OP as to what is a "sensible" oil change interval, and to quote yourself to you, you did refer to the OP's possession as a "valuable vehicle." So, on a classic vehicle possibly worth upward of $100K, you think $30-$60-$90 on a few UOA TO SET PRECEDENT for OCI is "silly?" I won't post what I think of your opinion, but it isn't much. Nevertheless, this doesn't mean I think less of you as a human being, and I've no doubt we could find common ground over a drink or two.

I'm open to learning and that's why I am here. I'm just not understanding what possible benefit spending triple the cost of an oil change (IOW, the cost of the next 2 year's worth of oil changes), to pay for a report that tells you that at 2.5 years the oil is in fact stale and needs to be changed, for yet another $30...

Changing the oil, is the better more direct solution.

I have a very logical brain, so if you can tell me what benefit this is I'm all ears. I have 7 vehicles. The costs of doing tests at $60 per pop would be the the equivalent of oil changes for the next 2 years, given that I change annually because I cannot get sufficient miles on any of them, so the changes are the recommended annual intervals. I don't care what a test might suggest for extending these, I'm going to spend the time/money to do at least an annual change. So I truly do not see a benefit in MY case. Nor in the OPs case at hand... his oil has been sitting in the car for 2.5 years. I would IGNORE test results regardless of what they say, and still change the oil.

Let's take the opposite, a "high miles" driver putting 15k miles on in 3 months. Would you suggest he pay $60 for a UOA and then heed the information stating he can go another 5k miles before a change? Or would you just say he should do a $30 change?

This would be like paying a different dentist twice the cost of a cleaning, to go in and inspect your mouth to tell you whether you need a cleaning. Just get a cleaning for 1/2 that fee...

I'm not seeing any real world application or benefit under normal circumstances when the test costs twice what the oil change costs. Unless one is just really curious to know the composition or testing for something specific. I'm here to learn so if you have some gem, I'd love to know.

 

[Leo99]

I'm open to learning and that's why I am here. I'm just not understanding what possible benefit spending triple the cost of an oil change (IOW, the cost of the next 2 year's worth of oil changes), to pay for a report that tells you that at 2.5 years the oil is in fact stale and needs to be changed, for yet another $30...

Changing the oil, is the better more direct solution.

I have a very logical brain, so if you can tell me what benefit this is I'm all ears. I have 7 vehicles. The costs of doing tests at $60 per pop would be the the equivalent of oil changes for the next 2 years, given that I change annually because I cannot get sufficient miles on any of them, so the changes are the recommended annual intervals. I don't care what a test might suggest for extending these, I'm going to spend the time/money to do at least an annual change. So I truly do not see a benefit in MY case. Nor in the OPs case at hand... his oil has been sitting in the car for 2.5 years. I would IGNORE test results regardless of what they say, and still change the oil.

Let's take the opposite, a "high miles" driver putting 15k miles on in 3 months. Would you suggest he pay $60 for a UOA and then heed the information stating he can go another 5k miles before a change? Or would you just say he should do a $30 change?

This would be like paying a different dentist twice the cost of a cleaning, to go in and inspect your mouth to tell you whether you need a cleaning. Just get a cleaning for 1/2 that fee...

I'm not seeing any real world application or benefit under normal circumstances when the test costs twice what the oil change costs. Unless one is just really curious to know the composition or testing for something specific. I'm here to learn so if you have some gem, I'd love to know.

Bolded for that's not logical. If the data says the oil is fine for another year, what logic says to ignore the data and follow the blanket recommendations in the manual? It's like going to the dentist, having the dentist inspect your mouth and say you don't need a cleaning and then insisting that the dentist cleans your teeth because a certain arbitrary time interval has passed.

 

[MrLemonade]

Bolded for that's not logical. If the data says the oil is fine for another year, what logic says to ignore the data and follow the blanket recommendations in the manual? It's like going to the dentist, having the dentist inspect your mouth and say you don't need a cleaning and then insisting that the dentist cleans your teeth because a certain arbitrary time interval has passed.

Except let me modify your example with reality.
* Cleanings are recommended every 6 months.
* Cleanings are $100.
* You go to the Dentist at 6 months for a cleaning. He refuses claiming you don't need a cleaning, which you probably do, and charges you $200 for this information.
* You still don't have a cleaning.

Or here's another.
* You want your house treated annually for insects and termites for $1000.
* The inspector comes, claims you don't need it, and hands you a bill for $2000. So you got nothing accomplished yet paid twice as much as just doing the job...

Totally illogical actions. Get the cleaning or termite prevention for 1/2 the price of the "diagnostic." I cannot think of a single real world application where I would pay twice the cost of the non-invasive routine procedure that is probably needed or will ultimately be needed, to be told I don't need the procedure.

Fresh oil is probably almost ALWAYS beneficial, even if just run or used for a short time and replaced. Heck, just doing an oil change gets some of the really really old oil out of the motor, which could be diluted in there from several oil changes prior. We all know that some amount of oil remains even after and oil change so it gets diluted and removed over time... An oil change, followed by an oil change the next day, is of some benefit.

Is this a spoof of some sort, because I cannot believe how elementary this stuff is.

 

[blufeb95]

I still want to know, how has the OP driven it, was it just idled and driven on tons of very short trips, or was it taken out on the highway and gotten up to temp and parked again, if it's the latter and the oil still looks newish on the dipstick then it should be fine. I know a dark color is not necessarily and indicator that oil is too far gone, but if oil still looks brand new it's just sat in the sump for 2 years is there anything wrong with assuming that since the oil still looks new then it's probably still good.

 

[Leo99]

Except let me modify your example with reality.
* Cleanings are recommended every 6 months.
* Cleanings are $100.
* You go to the Dentist at 6 months for a cleaning. He refuses claiming you don't need a cleaning, which you probably do, and charges you $200 for this information.
* You still don't have a cleaning.

Or here's another.
* You want your house treated annually for insects and termites for $1000.
* The inspector comes, claims you don't need it, and hands you a bill for $2000. So you got nothing accomplished yet paid twice as much as just doing the job...

Totally illogical actions. Get the cleaning or termite prevention for 1/2 the price of the "diagnostic." I cannot think of a single real world application where I would pay twice the cost of the non-invasive routine procedure that is probably needed or will ultimately be needed, to be told I don't need the procedure.

Fresh oil is probably almost ALWAYS beneficial, even if just run or used for a short time and replaced.

Is this a spoof of some sort, because I cannot believe how elementary this stuff is.

You're missing the point of diagnostics. If the dentist says annual cleanings are sufficient for your teeth and oral care habits, you've gained valuable information. You can now go for annual cleanings thereby saving $100 every year assuming you maintain the same habits. After the 3rd year, you're pocketing $100 per year. That's the value of diagnostics and the same applies to oil.

 

[MrLemonade]

You're missing the point of diagnostics. If the dentist says annual cleanings are sufficient for your teeth and oral care habits, you've gained valuable information. You can now go for annual cleanings thereby saving $100 every year assuming you maintain the same habits. After the 3rd year, you're pocketing $100 per year. That's the value of diagnostics and the same applies to oil.

Nope. Eating habits, infections, health, injuries, illnesses, accidents, etc. all can impact dental care and advice from day to day, month to month, and year to year. What my doctor/dentist recommended for me 1 year ago might be different than today.
Your analogy, not mine.

Likewise, driving habits change, car storage changes, weather patterns change, and so forth. People cut their driving probably in 1/2 from 2019 to 2021. So you'd be starting back at zero with needing refreshed data, spending needless money twice the cost of just doing the regular changes. My changes from 2019 to 2021 for ownership and driving are remarkable different. There's no way I'm spending 7x$60 to get my oil analysis done. Zero. That's two years worth of just doing routine changes.

This is so obvious I feel like I'm being pranked.

 

[JHZR2]

I don’t. I would have some slight concerns about the oil filter glues getting soft, but the oil is likely fine, assuming that when the vehicle is run, it isn’t short tripped.