My cousin is a total soccer-mom. Her Montana w/3400cc sees NOTHING except short trips, 2 miles to the Catholic Grade School where she teaches. She tends to hammer it right off the line as well. Anyway, the OLM was on and I calculated backwards from the window sticker and it was only 2200 miles. Seems kinda short, but that represents at least 3 months driving. I guess I should look at the date to see if that was possibly the trigger. Anyway, 2200 miles tells me that short trippers who don't have an OLM should keep their maintenence schedule at a regular 3000 miles or less.
GM OLM came on at 2200 miles
- Thread starter Audi Junkie
- Start date
- Status
2 mile trips! That oil must be looking pretty nasty. Here is where an electric vehicle would pay off.
Funny side note is the her young boys would cold start it for her in winter. I can see them "warming it up" for her at 1/2 throttle ice-cold. That's a good thing...I guess.
Perfect case of the oil life monitor reacting (correctly) to short trip driving and a perfect case of why standardized oil change intervals (such as the oft recommended 3000 miles) are inaccurate and can cause engine damage...!!!
I must say that the OLM did really good. Impressed.
A UOA is needed to confirm our human reactions, however. AJ - you paying?
A UOA is needed to confirm our human reactions, however. AJ - you paying?
You just cannot believe the tens of thousands of oil samples that GM did in the process of developing and validating the oil life monitor, can you...???...LOL LOL
Keep in mind that a commercial oil sample may very well miss the reason that the oil is due for a change depending on exactly what is analyzed, how the sample was taken, etc. We found, for example, that it was nearly impossible to get accurate readings of water, fuel, coolant, etc.. contamination unless the oil sample was taken from oil circulating thru the system. Vehicles used for testing were set up with "taps" that would allow oil to be drained from the main oil gallery after (purging the oil thru the tap) while the engine was running. Otherwise, taking a sample from the drain oil is pointless in many cases as the contaminants stratify in the drain oil and the sample analysis will then not detect the contaminate depending on where the sample came from. We would usually put a 1/8 line tee'd from the oil pressure switch port to an underhood area. While the engine was still running we could put the 1/8 tube in the dipstick, flush oil thru the sampling port until we were getting representative oil from the system and THEN take the sample immediately from the running engine system so that any contaminates would be stirred up and circulating.
[ April 20, 2005, 12:15 AM: Message edited by: bbobynski ]
Keep in mind that a commercial oil sample may very well miss the reason that the oil is due for a change depending on exactly what is analyzed, how the sample was taken, etc. We found, for example, that it was nearly impossible to get accurate readings of water, fuel, coolant, etc.. contamination unless the oil sample was taken from oil circulating thru the system. Vehicles used for testing were set up with "taps" that would allow oil to be drained from the main oil gallery after (purging the oil thru the tap) while the engine was running. Otherwise, taking a sample from the drain oil is pointless in many cases as the contaminants stratify in the drain oil and the sample analysis will then not detect the contaminate depending on where the sample came from. We would usually put a 1/8 line tee'd from the oil pressure switch port to an underhood area. While the engine was still running we could put the 1/8 tube in the dipstick, flush oil thru the sampling port until we were getting representative oil from the system and THEN take the sample immediately from the running engine system so that any contaminates would be stirred up and circulating.
[ April 20, 2005, 12:15 AM: Message edited by: bbobynski ]
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Her Montana w/3400cc
I will assume that 3400cc you wrote means engine size.... not total odometer reading.
Perhaps the last outfit or person who changed her oil did not reset the OLM?????????????
I will assume that 3400cc you wrote means engine size.... not total odometer reading.
Perhaps the last outfit or person who changed her oil did not reset the OLM?????????????
JHZR2
Staff member
Not necessarily. My mother's 97 plymouth breeze gets 5 BLOCK commutes, 6 times a day, and then a trip to the grocery store once a week. UOAs running standard 5w-30 M1 have shown to be excellent, given the driving profile, out past 5000 mi OCIs! Granted there was some highway driving in there, but IMO it means that it is doable.
However, it is apparent that the GM OLM is doing its job well, and being a little bit conservative to ensure engine life. Given how she drives it, Im sure it is VERY hard on the oil, and that ought to kill the life of it.
JMH
My thoughts exactly. My wife has a 2000 Tahoe with only 25,000 miles. Her typical drives are almost always less than 5 miles. The only time the things gets any heat in the engine is when I occassionally drive it close to 8 miles to the home improvement center. I keep a close eye on the condition of the oil but have never seen the OLM light come on. I have changed the oil every 6 months. I wish her OLM had a % scale like my Deville does.
I would say that even though that sounds like brutal trips for the oil, it was most likely not reset at its last change.
The OLM is not triggered by time.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
The OLM is not triggered by time.
What hasn't been said in posts above that does trigger the OLM? Also... what poster mentioned that "time" triggers it?
What hasn't been said in posts above that does trigger the OLM? Also... what poster mentioned that "time" triggers it?
Her OLM was reset last time. She gets Pontiac dealer service and the oil light is like 3" x 3" bright red...woulda noticed if it was still on after last service.
Wow. 3 cheers for the OLM. At last a useful feature instead of idiot lights. Maybe GM resale value will go up.
I see the original post came from NE PA; plenty of sub freezing weather up there. Lots of short trips in the cold climate will certainly shorten oil life, I had a short commute in 1989 and the NJ winters were enough to turn the oil milky in no time.
If the OLM algorith accounts for cold starts, ambient temps, and trip duration then I can easily see 2200 miles in cold weater tripping the light on.
If the OLM algorith accounts for cold starts, ambient temps, and trip duration then I can easily see 2200 miles in cold weater tripping the light on.
Tell your cousin to consider riding a bicycle if possible to school.
Audi Junkie....good post. This is the first time that I have heard of the GM OLM light coming on due to short trips. It seems like it is doing its job and I might have more confidence in my OLM this time.
I didn't reset the OLM in my Tahoe after the last oil change. I put M1 in it and I am going to see how long I can run it before the OLM comes on. It is already up over 6K....but it is 95% Interstate at 70MPH. It seems that the OLM can differentiate between my long trips at highway speeds and your cousins short (murderous) trips.
Good info!!
I didn't reset the OLM in my Tahoe after the last oil change. I put M1 in it and I am going to see how long I can run it before the OLM comes on. It is already up over 6K....but it is 95% Interstate at 70MPH. It seems that the OLM can differentiate between my long trips at highway speeds and your cousins short (murderous) trips.
Good info!!
bbobnski, I guess we should trust them when they tell us rod knock on the V6's is not a durabilty factor either! Let us not forget how many people had to fight to get oil consuption study done as well because they were told that their oil consuption was normal on Y bodys and F bodys for along time! Then you had the same thing with the Saturns and Cadilac as well at first everyone was given the run around! You would think that valdation testing would have exposed these issues before the owners had to tell them about it! How about all of the truck owners with that crapy CPI design that always plugs up at about 50,000 miles intervals etc.....
I would not belive a darn thing GM says unless I prove it my self or they show me all their data from the valadation testing!!!
While tee'ing into the an oil galley is easy enough I find it hard to belive that a FOMOTO valve or Sure Drain valve on the pan could not accomplish close to the same thing! Once the engine is up to operateing temp from being driven and with it still running you can take a sample from the pan. The oil is continously be turned over in the pan and it is free flowing back into the pan so stratified contaminets should not be a problem. This could be done with the car running on a dyno as well if one really wanted to do it!
bbobnski, Your responce to an inquiry about Auto-Rx was stunning! I have no idea how it is you can call it a snake oil when you have not evaluated it and have no idea what it is or how it is made! Engineers like you are reason most Technicians think all Engineers are morons!For all the education you must posses you seem to be preety closed minded! Luckily for man kind most true inovation comes from the minds of tinkers and un learned men!!!
You might want to take the time to eduacate yourself on the topic before revealing how little you know about it!!! When you tell some you are an Engineer or Chemist or tribologist for GM your representing the company!You are useing your postion at GM to lend credability to what you say! It puts you in a postion of authority for a while until people figure you out! People might take you opion for fact. I know you are not saying that GM officaly tested AUto-Rx and found it to be a snake oil!!
We have done too much testing here at bithog for any one to belive it is snake oil. We also know that Lubrizol was involved in testing it.We know that Valvoline consider it at one time. We know it was issued a patent. We know that the Chineese have been trying to reverse engineer it as well! Then you have it's wide spread use in the printing industry! To have an opion informed or otherwise is fine but to represent GM and call it snake oil is another thing entirely!
I suspect that you do not even know what is in Auto-Rx? If you thought no one respected you before you have really lost creadability now!
I am an engineer
I am an engineer
I am an engineer
[ April 21, 2005, 09:53 PM: Message edited by: JohnBrowning ]
I would not belive a darn thing GM says unless I prove it my self or they show me all their data from the valadation testing!!!
While tee'ing into the an oil galley is easy enough I find it hard to belive that a FOMOTO valve or Sure Drain valve on the pan could not accomplish close to the same thing! Once the engine is up to operateing temp from being driven and with it still running you can take a sample from the pan. The oil is continously be turned over in the pan and it is free flowing back into the pan so stratified contaminets should not be a problem. This could be done with the car running on a dyno as well if one really wanted to do it!
bbobnski, Your responce to an inquiry about Auto-Rx was stunning! I have no idea how it is you can call it a snake oil when you have not evaluated it and have no idea what it is or how it is made! Engineers like you are reason most Technicians think all Engineers are morons!For all the education you must posses you seem to be preety closed minded! Luckily for man kind most true inovation comes from the minds of tinkers and un learned men!!!
You might want to take the time to eduacate yourself on the topic before revealing how little you know about it!!! When you tell some you are an Engineer or Chemist or tribologist for GM your representing the company!You are useing your postion at GM to lend credability to what you say! It puts you in a postion of authority for a while until people figure you out! People might take you opion for fact. I know you are not saying that GM officaly tested AUto-Rx and found it to be a snake oil!!
We have done too much testing here at bithog for any one to belive it is snake oil. We also know that Lubrizol was involved in testing it.We know that Valvoline consider it at one time. We know it was issued a patent. We know that the Chineese have been trying to reverse engineer it as well! Then you have it's wide spread use in the printing industry! To have an opion informed or otherwise is fine but to represent GM and call it snake oil is another thing entirely!
I suspect that you do not even know what is in Auto-Rx? If you thought no one respected you before you have really lost creadability now!
I am an engineer
[ April 21, 2005, 09:53 PM: Message edited by: JohnBrowning ]
- Status
Similar threads
