Frequent oil changes cause more wear?!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 12, 2019
Messages
478
Location
Sun and snow
I try not to do maintenance on a car if it doesn’t need it. I like to get the most out of brakes, tires, fluids etc. change fluids at the manufacturer’s recommended intervals and sleep well. I don’t change tires, bakes, wheel bearing, tie rod ends etc…..unless they are worn out. Same with oil.
 
Joined
May 30, 2010
Messages
15,812
Location
North Carolina
I'll chime in here with actual facts ...

- The Ford/Conoco SAE study (2007-01-4133) clearly showed that wear rates are higher at the front of every OCI. Undeniable in the results. They not only used UOA data, but backed that up with a completely separate methodology (IIRC it was component weight analysis), which showed the same wear rate conclusion; that shorter OCIs make for higher wear. Extending the OCIs out actually took the wear rates to their lowest levels.

- This UOA study covering (literally) thousands of UOAs shows the same conclusion; that shorter OCIs have slightly higher wear rates and longer OCIs see the wear rates drop (out to 15k miles, where my data stopped). This phenomenon was present in every engine series I looked at; 4.6L Ford, 6.6L Dmax, Toyotoa V-6, Detroit D60. This wasn't a few UOAs; this is thousands of UOAs studied with macro statustical analysis. https://bobistheoilguy.com/used-oil-analysis-how-to-decide-what-is-normal/

It is completely accurate to say that significantly short OCIs do cause some manner of wear excalation, BUT, that should not be construed to mean it's overly detrimental. Changing oil every 3k miles isn't going to destroy your engine; not by a long shot. It's just that by doing so, you're cheating yourself out of the even lower wear rates of the longer OCIs, as well as the fiscal savings of fewer oil changes. It's not that anal retentive oil changes will kill the engine; it's that they simply don't improve anything, despite the theory to the contrary. There's ZERO PROOF that shorter OCIs reduce wear. There is PLENTY OF PROOF that shorter OCIs do elevate wear. I challenge anyone to show me that data which exhibits facts otherwise. Don't throw theory at me; SHOW ME THE DATA from a credible study.
However, there are things to understand and acknowledge in these general comments:
1) this does not address "new" engines; it's probably a good idea to do a couple "flush" OCIs on brand new equipment
2) this only addresses OCIs ranging from 3k to 15k miles; shorter and longer intervals past those limits were not studied
3) no oil can stop a design flaw in the equipment; it may or may not be able to delay the effects of a design flaw, depending on the severity and propensity of the flaw to reveal itself
4) the OPs question and the focus of the wear-studies was just that - to understand OCIs effect on wear. If someone wants to pay for UOAs studies on OCI effects on cleanliness, that'd be great !!! But let's stick to the topic at hand; OCIs and wear rates.
5) these studies are predicated on normal FF filtration and not use of BP, though data also shows that BP filtration has diminishing effect with shorter OCIs
6) these generalities are based on engine series, not individual engines. To know how your own engine responds, you need to confirm it with data

Side bar on the "yabut" denial of UOAs ...
It is 100% true to stay that UOAs are not a perfect tool, but they are BY FAR the cheapest and quickest means of estimating wear, and when used properly and with the understanding of their limitations, they do as good a job as any other means of estimating wear. They will never catch all means of failures; catastrophic engine failures may not exhibit the means for the UOA to detect it (UOAs need particles less than 5um in size, generally). But for every example of a failure they missed, there's probably 10 examples of impending failures they caught. Many SAE studies that use UOAs as a means of wear analysis also use a secondary independent means to also confirm wear. Whether it be component weight, electron bombardment, or something else, they typically don't rely soley on UOAs, but rather they use multiple methods to track wear metals. Every single means of measuring wear has it's pros and pitfals; not one method is perfect. When you can get two methods to comfirm the same resultant conclusion, that's as good as most any "expert" needs it to be.

If there are a few simple take aways from this topic, they would be these:
Shorter OCIs are not proven to reduce wear rates; though they are not "harmful" in a truly meaning manner.
Longer OCIs are indeed proven to reduce wear rates; obviously not the risk people perceive them to be.

If you're changing oil anywhere from 3k to 15k miles, it's "good enough" that the engine is not at risk. If you're chaning it towards the shorter end, and you feel good about that, well that's just fine. If you tend to the longer end, that's OK to. Anything in that range is going to be good enough for the engine.
Do you think that DI fuel dilution in newer engines will have a different wear curve than the data you have collected ?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
7,617
Location
Cali
I try not to do maintenance on a car if it doesn’t need it. I like to get the most out of brakes, tires, fluids etc. change fluids at the manufacturer’s recommended intervals and sleep well. I don’t change tires, bakes, wheel bearing, tie rod ends etc…..unless they are worn out. Same with o
Preventive Maint. stay a step ahead of trouble. ;)
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2015
Messages
10,746
Location
Virginia
That's two strikes for me.

1. Our Santa Fe Sport 2.0T is a Hyundai who's engine should have blown long ago.
2. The oil is changed every 3K miles/4 months since new. Even a few conventional Valvoline changes here and there.

Currently into the 230,000's. (miles)
Wife drives it in rush hour traffic daily and now sees little hwy time.

^^^^↑^^^^^↑^^^^^^^^^
In my opinion this is a very good post.

I'm at 347,400 miles not doing super long runs on my oil either. Still running strong and not hardly burning any oil.
 
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
1,381
Location
central europe
Do you think that DI fuel dilution in newer engines will have a different wear curve than the data you have collected ?
funny how this is already making damage to "belt in oil" tech. (cold climate+longlife+short trips= :poop: -storm)
even the metal parts themselves are not spared.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
1,025
Location
Massachusetts
^^^^↑^^^^^↑^^^^^^^^^
In my opinion this is a very good post.

I'm at 347,400 miles not doing super long runs on my oil either. Still running strong and not hardly burning any oil.
I've yet to hear someone boast how their cars go in excess of 200k while significantly extending drain intervals, especially without significant oil burning. It's like smoking, lots of people smoke and live till they're 80, if you start smoking you might be fine, or you might not, and you won't know it until it's too late.
 
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
1,381
Location
central europe
they said synth rubber can withstand that... according to latest news, di soot is more abrasive and different than diesel soot...
aaand it f**ks the synth rubber more.
increasing aromatic content in gas+di dilution is making situation even worse....
 
Joined
Jul 10, 2012
Messages
9,297
Location
South Carolina
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.

Here is the problem = "I was looking at a few BMW and Mercedes forums ..." and you will not find factual information that clean oil, without the grit, dirt and sand in it will cause more wear. I suggest to listen to the manufacturer of the engine.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,237
Location
Upper Midwest
I've yet to hear someone boast how their cars go in excess of 200k while significantly extending drain intervals, especially without significant oil burning. It's like smoking, lots of people smoke and live till they're 80, if you start smoking you might be fine, or you might not, and you won't know it until it's too late.
Well this is not a boast but I've run an average of 10,000 mile OCI on my ECHO and it has nearly 300,000 miles on the vehicle. It burns about a quart every 5000 miles which is pretty much what it has always done since new. Perhaps 10,000 mile OCIs are not "significantly" extended drain intervals.
 

4WD

$50 site donor 2023
Joined
Sep 21, 2010
Messages
21,264
Location
Texas via IAH
Well this is not a boast but I've run an average of 10,000 mile OCI on my ECHO and it has nearly 300,000 miles on the vehicle. It burns about a quart every 5000 miles which is pretty much what it has always done since new. Perhaps 10,000 mile OCIs are not "significantly" extended drain intervals.
That and Tig’s decades of 10k matter …
We do 10k on the Fusion (150k and no oil consumption) … and OLM on GM 5.3L +/- 6k-7k … (DI engine)

The one I have not settled on is the 2020 Pentastar … doing 5k for now … FCA dropped oil capacity from 6 quarts to 5 quarts … and it’s such an easy oil change … guess I over do it for now … Do run the XG filter two rounds …
 
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
1,381
Location
central europe
if early changes are bad, then it needs to be figured out why.. (mechanism behind it)
my 2c are that maybe "keep clean" additives are not yet depleted and are fighting the aw-ep additives much..

but still i don´t get this whole thing.
it could be understood like: in the beginning of interval, more wear metals are created. but over time, wear metals get less...
how is this possible? did the wear metals just disappear or what ???? :ROFLMAO: as you see it makes no sense :ROFLMAO:

or really its just the way you take the samples...made by human error...
another simple explanation may be- dispersants are so tired at the end, so they will let precipitate the dirt (in the pan), and analysis will show less :ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
1,351
Location
montreal ,canada
Seems like dnewton wasted his breath and his 15k UOA's in his data base. For those who want to continue doing 3-5k oci's on a port injected engine go ahead and spend your time and money. We all should know by now that more is Not always better.
 
Joined
May 18, 2021
Messages
1,381
Location
central europe
debate is about wear mechanism, which gets less over time. (that´s what y´all telling)
madman could say that you just keep the oil forever, and wear gradually goes to zero..
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
1,025
Location
Massachusetts
they said synth rubber can withstand that... according to latest news, di soot is more abrasive and different than diesel soot...
aaand it f**ks the synth rubber more.
increasing aromatic content in gas+di dilution is making situation even worse....
I just don't see the point of a wet belt. That's what a timing chain is for.
 
Joined
Dec 10, 2013
Messages
862
Location
Kuala Lumpur ,Malaysia
I try not to do maintenance on a car if it doesn’t need it. I like to get the most out of brakes, tires, fluids etc. change fluids at the manufacturer’s recommended intervals and sleep well. I don’t change tires, bakes, wheel bearing, tie rod ends etc…..unless they are worn out. Same with oil.
I changed my tires even though there is still plenty of tread because the wet grip was terrible and could be dangerous.
 
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
1,025
Location
Massachusetts
I changed my tires even though there is still plenty of tread because the wet grip was terrible and could be dangerous.
I just did the same for my front tires. Weren't even down to the wear bars but I was getting tired of doing burnouts at stop lights with all the rain we've been getting.

I had my rear shocks and front struts replaced because their performance was suffering, even though they weren't broken or leaking and would've likely passed the strict MA safety inspection.

I like having maximum performance from my vehicle. If I need to floor the gas and make a hard left turn with a narrow margin in heavy traffic I don't need my tires spinning and slipping and I don't need the chassis bouncing and rolling excessively over the multiple potholes while I'm doing so.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 3, 2005
Messages
38,070
Location
NY
I changed my tires even though there is still plenty of tread because the wet grip was terrible and could be dangerous.
That's smart. Over the years I swapped out a few sets of tires because they were dangerous, even though my little tread depth gauge said they were fine. PM is a good idea, imo it keeps vehicles safer and can extend their lives.

In the case of extended OCIs, I'd rather not follow blanket statements on a message board. I'd rather gather my own data and decide for myself if my vehicle is a candidate for extended OCIs. As it turns out I do not fall into that category. Had I followed the blanket statement a good synthetic oil can go 10k miles I'd be setting myself up for some big problems as the vehicles got older. Nothing wrong with 10-15K OCIs if the data for the vehicle in question says it's OK. Common sense tells me vehicles that are prime candidates for extended OCIs are not driven under severe services conditions. They should have lower wear numbers for longer drain intervals than a vehicle used for severe service duty. Maybe there's an exception or two but I'd say that's just how it goes.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top