Should I follow the 3 months/3,000 miles rule?

[dnewton3]

If your car is brand new (or nearly new) then I'm a fan of a few short OCI dumps to flush out the residual machining/assembly issues.

After that, follow your OLM. There's a UOA on a Honda Fit in the UOA section that shows 3k mile is GROSSLY underutilizing your oil. Check it out.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: RacerE7773
Do what you feel is right. I still go by the 3 and 3. Especially when I changed it yesterday and it looked like semi gloss black paint.

I have a UOA that shows totally black oil as being good for continued use and another that was honey colour and it was spent.

Can't go by the colour... Only a UOA will tell for sure.

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: buster
NO. It's 2010. 3,000/3 months makes little sense.

It depends.

For a newer engine with low mileage, the extended intervals are probably OK until the engine gets older (75k or more). In theory, older engines have more blowby and will contaminate oil more quickly.

However, we still don't know what effect extended drains on dino have on an engine, at least in the long-term. The UOAs may be OK, but what about oil consumption? Or seal life? This is purely my and my mechanic friends' observations, but engines that were subjected to longer (but still within OEM limit) drains tended to consume some oil and had a greater tendency for oil leaks as the engines got older.

So for now, I would say the OLM is probably OK. But if you want the engine to remain in the best condition, then changing the oil every 3,000 to 4,000 miles or six months may be your best defense against oil consumption and oil leaks in the future.

 

[buster]

Plenty of people have gotten long engine life out of using moderate extended drain intervals. 3,000 miles is an arbitrary number. It has little meaning. Oil should be changed when it's depleted, and that depends on the engine type, oil type, and driving conditions.

Also,changing your oil too frequently has been shown to be worse for your engine.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: buster
Plenty of people have gotten long engine life out of using moderate extended drain intervals. 3,000 miles is an arbitrary number. It has little meaning. Oil should be changed when it's depleted, and that depends on the engine type, oil type, and driving conditions.

Also,changing your oil too frequently has been shown to be worse for your engine.
Buster I would like to see this information. (Not being a jerk, but serious)

I agree with you that 3,000 is an arbitrary number used to make the OC industry more money and a blanket statement that can't cover every engine/driving condition properly.

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: buster
Plenty of people have gotten long engine life out of using moderate extended drain intervals. 3,000 miles is an arbitrary number. It has little meaning. Oil should be changed when it's depleted, and that depends on the engine type, oil type, and driving conditions.

Also,changing your oil too frequently has been shown to be worse for your engine.


Yes, plenty of people have gotten long life out of their engines with extended intervals. But at what cost? Oil consumption as the engines aged? Small oil leaks? Lowered performance due to increased engine wear?

3,000 miles seem like an arbitrary number, but it really isn't. Many OEMs recommended an oil change every 3 months or 3000-3750 miles for severe service up until a few years ago. Some still do, such as my Nissan and all Hyundai products. So 3,000 miles likely came as an industry recommendation as it covers the severe service requirement for most OEMs.

The information about changing oil too frequently and accelerating engine wear is questionable. I have yet to see the study for myself. Also, the other benefits of new oil still far outweigh any small amount of wear from the 1-2 sec dry start after an oil change.

Originally Posted By: StevieC
I agree with you that 3,000 is an arbitrary number used to make the OC industry more money and a blanket statement that can't cover every engine/driving condition properly.


See the response I gave buster. Many OEMs recommended 3 months or 3,000 to 3,750 mile intervals for severe service up until several years ago. Nissan and Hyundai still do.

 

[StevieC]

I can see why they do it on my truck (Hyundai) because I have no EGR valve and the nitration in the oil builds up very quickly... After about 10K KM's on any synthetic it's about toast in most cases and I do a lot of highway driving.

 

[The Critic]

Also, 3,000 miles IS a proven, fail-safe interval. Even GM recommends 3,000 miles in the event that the OLM was accidentally reset or was not reset at the time of an oil change.

 

[daves87rs]

I'd just follow the OLM...I'm just hitting the 3 month/3,000 mile time.

I don't have 3k in miles yet (close), and the PP still looks great. At this point, I'm not going to touch it until the end of summer..

 

[mechtech2]

He probably meant 3,000 miles in 3 months, not 300 miles.
But the 3K 3M oil change?
Today's engines and oils almost always can go longer.
OLMs have to be used with wisdom - add their input to your own .

 

[dparm]

You can change it at 3/3000, if you want. For a basic conventional or syn-blend, that's probably fine. If you move to a synthetic, you can easily go 5000, maybe even 7500.

Here's the test: change it at 3000 and get the analysis done. They'll tell you if the oil can go longer.


IMO, go with a full synthetic and change it every 6000 and don't give it a second thought. It's a Honda, it will run forever.

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: dparm
Here's the test: change it at 3000 and get the analysis done. They'll tell you if the oil can go longer.

Maybe.

But it won't tell you if any deposits are building up. Or if repeated extended oil drains are slowly resulting in seal damage.


Originally Posted By: dparm
It's a Honda, it will run forever.

Fat chance. Any car will run forever, it's just a matter of how diligent one is about maintenance and repairs. You could probably make a yugo last forever if you tried hard enough.

 

[StevieC]

Critic:

That's not entirely true... If you know how to read the numbers on a UOA and have the right tests done like TBN, TAN and KFW which are all done on Terry's tests and have it analyzed by him with his expertise he would be able to tell you without a doubt.

Problem is an ordinary BITOG-er that doesn't have the right tests done, or done at a lab that is questionable, or doesn't have the expertise to add up the results and make a decision then yes you are right.

 

[The Critic]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
Critic:

That's not entirely true... If you know how to read the numbers on a UOA and have the right tests done like TBN, TAN and KFW which are all done on Terry's tests and have it analyzed by him with his expertise he would be able to tell you without a doubt.


It's possible, but unfortunately Terry's credibility is not high on my list as I am not convinced he has the proper mechanical or chemical engineering background to accurately understand and handle lubricant analysis and engineering. His record in the past of strongly advocating certain products for a short period of time, then switching, raises the question of his independence as a third party source. In addition, if Terry's skills are truly as great as he claims, then why isn't he working in the lab at a major oil formulator?

Originally Posted By: StevieC
Problem is an ordinary BITOG-er that doesn't have the right tests done, or done at a lab that is questionable, or doesn't have the expertise to add up the results and make a decision then yes you are right.

Unfortunately that's probably true with 99% of the enthusiasts who think they are doing themselves a favor by having an oil analysis done. They are probably better off saving their money.

 

[StevieC]

Critic,

You do know that Terry is working for major oil companies in North America and Europe doing independent analysis and contributing to new formulations. The UOA's and analysis that he is doing is just a side business to what he does everyday.

He also has been to court numerous times in the defense of people who have been facing a major battle with warranty claims when an engine grenades because of extended OCI's or non API brands and has always won.

The guy has always been straight with me, knowledgeable, scientific and always has been bang on in his recommendations and I completely trust him as do others that are also on here.

I wish everyone here had access to his private blog. There is really great info over there that would convince you of how well connected and respected he is.

To each their own though...

 

[fdcg27]

Honda recommends following the OLM or one year, whichever comes first.
Do that, and the engine should be fine.

 

[fdcg27]

My friend,
You often express opinions that go well beyond any experience you might have to back them up.
For you to actually question the credentials of Terry Dyson defies belief.
The post to which I reply is an exemplar of why Terry no longer bothers with this site.
I don't think anyone who has been here any length of time cares how high Terry Dyson's credibility ranks on your list.
You should instead wonder how credible the average member finds you.

 

[Sayjac]

NO!

If you choose not to follow the MM/1year Honda recommends, or not comfortable with, then a 5k/6month OCI would be the least I would consider. Nice happy medium, and a general OCI I've adopted for most OC's since reading Bitog.

That said, Honda MM/1year OCI should be fine. Just finished an Accord 3.0L 10%MM(7K)/1year OCI using QSHP Syn.

 

[daves87rs]

Originally Posted By: fdcg27

I don't think anyone who has been here any length of time cares how high Terry Dyson's credibility ranks on your list.
You should instead wonder how credible the average member finds you.



Very good point there.

 

[RacerE7773]

Changing often being bad for the engine; that's a new one for me.