Frequent oil changes cause more wear?!

Messages
1,694
Location
CA, USA
Cujet, I'm asking because I'm curious: In your opinion, would shorter oil change intervals have saved that camshaft? Or was this simply a design issue that no oil could have saved? I realize you were offering that as evidence of UOAs not showing the whole story. I'm just wondering about the OCI, that's all.

To equate UOA results with wear rates is absolutely and utterly incorrect. We've known for years that worn out engines with infrequent oil changes often have a lifelong history of superb UOA results.

UOA results are a tool, and are quite useful when properly used (trend monitoring, for example) (monitoring for known component failure, with a specific signature is another example)

The aircraft engine this came from had excellent UOA results, but debris in the filter. The wear rate was never seen in the UOA.

DSC00149_resize_with_arrow.jpg


UOA results are where the "infrequent oil change is better" urban-legend comes from. It's provably wrong. I regularly post about timing and balancer chain life, low tension piston ring wear and the direct association with particulate matter, fuel dilution, wear rates and premature failure. Bottom line, oil with a heavy particulate load and/or fuel dilution markedly increases wear rates. The frequent oil change is the right way to reduce operating time under these conditions. Additionally, the proper oil choice matters too.

Look up Ford's timing chain/phaser and Honda's ring wear issues, the oil change intervals and the fuel dilution/particulate matter rates.
 
Messages
30
Location
South Dakota
To equate UOA results with wear rates is absolutely and utterly incorrect. We've known for years that worn out engines with infrequent oil changes often have a lifelong history of superb UOA results.

UOA results are a tool, and are quite useful when properly used (trend monitoring, for example) (monitoring for known component failure, with a specific signature is another example)

The aircraft engine this came from had excellent UOA results, but debris in the filter. The wear rate was never seen in the UOA.

DSC00149_resize_with_arrow.jpg


UOA results are where the "infrequent oil change is better" urban-legend comes from. It's provably wrong. I regularly post about timing and balancer chain life, low tension piston ring wear and the direct association with particulate matter, fuel dilution, wear rates and premature failure. Bottom line, oil with a heavy particulate load and/or fuel dilution markedly increases wear rates. The frequent oil change is the right way to reduce operating time under these conditions. Additionally, the proper oil choice matters too.

Look up Ford's timing chain/phaser and Honda's ring wear issues, the oil change intervals and the fuel dilution/particulate matter rates.
While I agree with everything you stated, I think Ford's cam phaser issues are a design flaw more than anything. Mine failed at 14k with the first oil change at 1,250 miles and every oil change at 5k or less (with full synthetic) there after. The pickup had 4 oil changes by 14k and the phasers still failed.
 
Messages
10,631
Location
Jupiter, Florida
The general findings were yes, the cleaning additives at initial fill remove the AW additives from the previous fill and then it takes time for the AW additives in the fresh oil to be "put down" again.

Is it a drastic increase in wear? I don't think there is any evidence to indicate that but there was plenty of evidence to support longer drain intervals "can" lead to lower wear rates.
An oil's viscosity provides the majority of the protection. Additives are only part of the equation. In fact, engine life can be superb on straight mineral oil of adequate viscosity, devoid of any additives what so ever.
 
Messages
27,184
Location
PNW
An oil's viscosity provides the majority of the protection. Additives are only part of the equation. In fact, engine life can be superb on straight mineral oil of adequate viscosity, devoid of any additives what so ever.
True ... and thinner oils theoretically may have some added AW/AF additives to help mitigate wear when the viscosity fails to do it's job. Viscosity is the first line of defense against wear, and AW/AF additives is the 2nd line of defense against wear when the viscosity fails to do it's main job to keep moving parts from contacting and rubbing against each other.
 
Messages
1,036
Location
New York
I was looking at a few BMW and Mercedes forums and some people say that short drain intervals will cause more wear because the antiwear additives need time to cling to the surfaces and are washed off with "too frequent" oil changes. I'm not advocating unnecessarily short OCIs but if there's proof that clean oil will cause more wear, i want to know about it, that is new to me. Would it be because different additives are temporarily working against each other if you switch brand/viscosity? I know a few people changing their oil every 5k km (3k miles) and and while i tell them to run it longer, they all have the healthiest never opened high mileage engines i know, some well over 500k km. Educate me because i am not gullible enough to believe that without proof.
Do they know that this may in fact be based in large part on a study conducted in the 1970's on Ford Pintos? :D:ROFLMAO::LOL:
 
Messages
235
Location
Australia
Wear is mostly caused by containments of less than 10 microns which no normal oil filter will remove to a decent degree. Changing the oil is the only way to remove the most damaging particles. Long live the short OCI.
 
Messages
2,810
Location
Illinois, U.S.A
Does that include fuel dilution percent comparisons? or how to create a change interval point to minimize that make believe wear? or the prefilled vs not prefilled filters(hint hint)? or just another useless silly blanket statement trying to cover all engines, all filters, all oils types/grades, all driving styles, all vehicles???

Statement was created by environmentalists wanting to save a few gallons of motor oil while you destroy your engine. Same fools attacked jippylubes 3k/3mo marketing. That worked out great for a few class action lawyers.

I haven't seen engines wear out with more frequent maintenance. Have seen plenty sludged/varnished/crudded engines that had textbook/dealer maintenance, along with worn out timing chains/tensioners/guide/vvt's.... along with the engine rattlers/knockers/clatterers, and way too many oil burners. When does your warranty expire? You will be visiting me afterwards!

Please don't maintain it. I need a new RV paid by replacing your engines and transmissions, and the wife wants to sell the beach condo and buy a beach house. You will pay for it later if you don't lease or trade in regularly.

You ok bro?
 
Messages
17,034
Location
Upper Midwest
True ... and thinner oils theoretically may have some added AW/AF additives to help mitigate wear when the viscosity fails to do it's job. Viscosity is the first line of defense against wear, and AW/AF additives is the 2nd line of defense against wear when the viscosity fails to do it's main job to keep moving parts from contacting and rubbing against each other.
True.
 
Messages
35,625
Location
NY
True ... and thinner oils theoretically may have some added AW/AF additives to help mitigate wear when the viscosity fails to do it's job. Viscosity is the first line of defense against wear, and AW/AF additives is the 2nd line of defense against wear when the viscosity fails to do it's main job to keep moving parts from contacting and rubbing against each other.
I agree but I would think most modern "thicker" oils have AW/AF additives to do the same job as they'd do in the "thinner" oils if the viscosity failed to do its job.
 
Messages
27,184
Location
PNW
I agree but I would think most modern "thicker" oils have AW/AF additives to do the same job as they'd do in the "thinner" oils if the viscosity failed to do its job.
All moderen oils have AW/AF additives, but might be that as the oil viscosity goes thinner and thinner that some different and/or more additives are used. Seen it mention in papers about 0W-8 development eluding to that, so maybe both 0W-8 and 0W-16 are in a different AW/AF additive formulation realm. Would like to find some technical info showing AW/AF additive differences across the viscosity range for some major oil brand lines.
 
Last edited:
Messages
1,829
Location
Southwest
Suspect that the difference is theoretical more than real.

Obsessively changing the oil but doing minimal or neglectful maintenance elsewhere is not helpful. I’m a lot more skeptical of the extravagantly liberal recommended change intervals I see for the Differential and Transmission in my Ford than the recommended oil OCI.
 
Last edited:
Messages
35,625
Location
NY
All moderen oils have AW/AF additives, but might be that as the oil viscosity goes thinner and thinner that some different and/or more additives are used. Seen it mention in papers about 0W-8 development eluding to that, so maybe both 0W-8 and 0W-16 are in a different AW/AF additive formulation realm. Would like to find some technical info showing AW/AF additive differences across the viscosity range for some major oil brand lines.
Yes, the technical info would be very interesting.
 

4WD

Messages
16,640
Location
Texas
Suspect that the difference is theoretical more than real.

Obsessively changing the oil but doing minimal or neglectful maintenance elsewhere is not helpful. I’m a lot more skeptical of the extravagantly liberal recommended change intervals I see for the Differential and Transmission in my Ford than the recommended oil OCI.
Yeah, I bought a 2005 GMC Z71 a few years back. They left a pile of the 3k oil change receipts in the glove box !
Now the rear end oil was silver molasses … 4L60e brownish metallic ATF ! But clean engine oil 😷
 
Messages
666
Location
CA
I doubt that an OEM OCI is going to result in appreciable wear rate increases. Even at “severe use” intervals.

Certainly not during the typical lifespan of a modern engine. In all likelihood it will be scrapped or wrecked far before the engine gives out.
 
Messages
133
i will happily cause "more wear" in my vehicles cuz i'm a psycho like that. changing at 5k or 6 mo. i don't care what the manufacturers recommend. there "recommendation" is just that... it doesn't say "REQUIRED"

for fun i dumped the oil in my new 4Runner at 250 miles, then again at 1000 miles. when i hit 2500 miles i'll do it again, and then at 5,000 miles. might stick to 3,000-5,000 OCIs depending how bored i am.

"bUt YouRE wAsTinG yOuR mOniEs"

bro, I DON'T CARE. i enjoy changing my oil and am not a normie. if i were a normie i wouldn't be on this god forbidden site arguing with anons about which viscosity is better "THICKER OR THINNER"

if in your mind changing the oil too frequently causes "more wear" then by all means, run that oil for 15,000-20,000 cuz the bottle says so. if you're in the, holy smokes, my timing chain needs adequate protection and i sleep better at night with low mile OCIs, then you'll experience "lower wear" in your engine because your mind will convince you so.

"bUt yOu nEEd aN oIL aNaLySis tO mAke sUcH bOLd cLAimS". nah you go ahead and make Blackstone richer. i'll make Castrol and Walmart richer by buying more of their oil.
 
Top