What Happens When Oil Changes Are Ignored, Poor Care?

[AEHaas]

So often the car that is dying early is written off because of a lack of proper oil changes. What happens? There is evidence that there is LESS wear with extened oil changes.

Certainly the oil oxidatively thickens increasing the MOFT. So wear should go down. The longer you run, the thicker the oil, the thicker the MOFT, ultimate wear control according to some. Wear should be zero.

What is wearing out and why?

Ali

 

[FCD]

The longer you run, the thicker the oil, the thicker the MOFT, ultimate wear control according to some. Wear should be zero.

Nobody is saying that

 

[kschachn]

So often the car that is dying early is written off because of a lack of proper oil changes. What happens? There is evidence that there is LESS wear with extened oil changes.

Certainly the oil oxidatively thickens increasing the MOFT. So wear should go down. The longer you run, the thicker the oil, the thicker the MOFT, ultimate wear control according to some. Wear should be zero.

What is wearing out and why?

Wear is never zero. You can see this in the same data that shows that increased HT/HS causes less wear. But it is never zero.

Do you know what is oxidizing in the oil exactly? I’m asking if you understand that mechanism. Does this help or hinder lubrication?

This is another attempt to prove some extraneous point but again using faulty reasoning and only partial understanding.

Please don’t take this the wrong way, but let me ask you a question. When you make a medical diagnosis do you start with a preconceived determination of the cause? And do you use tests to verify that already determined diagnosis that aren’t definitive or even technically applicable to the condition? Because that’s what you’re doing here and in many of the other threads you’ve started.

 

[Sayjac]

......

 

[oggb]

Test it in the Ferrari

Make us proud

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

You mentioned acids in another thread. Once TBN is depleted, corrosive wear will skyrocket. All that additional metal in the “lubricant” will create a nice slurry to help slough off even more material. Combine that with varnish and sludge formed by oxidation and evaporation of base oil, and that pretty much paints an ugly picture. Scrapyard time.

 

[gman2304]

This is another attempt to prove some extraneous point but again using faulty reasoning and only partial understanding.

Has anyone noticed that scrolling down to the ‘similar threads’ posts, it’s the same folk’s repeatedly posting about the same topic over and over again? Trying to prove their point, or do they just love being shot down over and over again?

 

[joekingcorvette]

Hmmm I never heard of less wear with extended changes.............

 

[wpod]

So often the car that is dying early is written off because of a lack of proper oil changes. What happens? There is evidence that there is LESS wear with extened oil changes.

Certainly the oil oxidatively thickens increasing the MOFT. So wear should go down. The longer you run, the thicker the oil, the thicker the MOFT, ultimate wear control according to some. Wear should be zero.

What is wearing out and why?

. I worked on semi trucks, forklifts Back hoes, sweepers , semitrucks and fleet owned cars and pickups for a living . I see lots of hard working engines with lots of hours and miles on them because of two reasons, the first is an aircleaner , the second is oil changes on a regular basis . There is so much garbage on the internet that people believe . We have a nation of people that are so, so gullible and believe anything .

 

[Cujet]

There is evidence that there is LESS wear with extended oil changes.

That is simply not so! First, we must go back to the undisputed fact that UOA results do not indicate the rate of engine wear. Furthermore, general UOA results don't indicate rates of cylinder, bearing, chain or cam/follower wear.

There is only one viable way to rate engine wear, and that is disassembly and careful measurement. In particular, using very specific tools such as an scanning electron microscope, to measure incredibly minuscule rates of wear of specific components. Scientific methods are required.

The fact is, circulating dirty and diluted oil increases wear rates, as does inadequate viscosity. Period, end of story.

As I've mentioned here before, I did work for Mobil Oil in their flight department and was involved in HTS turbine oil and aviation grease testing. Yes, they used spectrometer based analysis back then too. And it was useless. The microscope was the valuable tool.

 

[BISCUT]

So often the car that is dying early is written off because of a lack of proper oil changes. What happens? There is evidence that there is LESS wear with extened oil changes.

Certainly the oil oxidatively thickens increasing the MOFT. So wear should go down. The longer you run, the thicker the oil, the thicker the MOFT, ultimate wear control according to some. Wear should be zero.

What is wearing out and why?

Ali

Why post a topic stating there is evidence yet not providing the evidence? This isn't the site to be baiting.

 

[wpod]

That is simply not so! First, we must go back to the undisputed fact that UOA results do not indicate the rate of engine wear. Furthermore, general UOA results don't indicate rates of cylinder, bearing, chain or cam/follower wear.

There is only one viable way to rate engine wear, and that is disassembly and careful measurement. In particular, using very specific tools such as an scanning electron microscope, to measure incredibly minuscule rates of wear of specific components. Scientific methods are required.

The fact is, circulating dirty and diluted oil increases wear rates, as does inadequate viscosity. Period, end of story.

As I've mentioned here before, I did work for Mobil Oil in their flight department and was involved in HTS turbine oil and aviation grease testing. Yes, they used spectrometer based analysis back then too. And it was useless. The microscope was the valuable tool.

It is easy to discern the industry professional we have on board regardless of what industry or trade to know their Knowledge, opinion and skill is valid. Again I thank our professionals for their inputs.

 

[FishFry]

There is only one viable way to rate engine wear, and that is disassembly and careful measurement. In particular, using very specific tools such as an scanning electron microscope, to measure incredibly minuscule rates of wear of specific components. Scientific methods are required.

The fact is, circulating dirty and diluted oil increases wear rates, as does inadequate viscosity. Period, end of story.

When you need special equipment just to measure "incredibly miniscule rates of wear" at all, it's pretty much a nothingburger as long as the engine runs fine.

 

[doitmyself]

There is evidence that there is LESS wear with extened oil changes.

Ali

Is this in reference to the Ford SAE study 2007-01-4133" : https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2007-01-4133/

"In one of our previous studies it was observed that engine oil samples collected from fleet vehicles after 12,000 mile drain interval showed 10-15 % lower friction and more importantly, an order of magnitude lower wear rate than those of fresh oils."

"As in the previous study, the results showed that the aged engine oils provide lower friction and much improved wear protection capability. These improvements were observed as early as the 3000 mile drain interval and continued to the 15000 mile drain interval. The composition of tribochemical films formed on the surface with the 3000 mile drain interval is similar to that formed with the 12000 mile drain interval as seen before. These findings could be an enabler for achieving longer drain interval although several other factors must to be considered."

 

[OVERKILL]

I think this posit is the result of that study that showed an uptick in wear rates after an oil change, which was believed or indicated to be due to the establishing of new tribofilms on the surfaces. I don't recall how this was measured, whether it was simply via UOA or something more technical.

One thing to keep in mind is that contaminants such as soot, wear particles...etc, if they are too small to be caught by the filter, they will stay in circulation as long as the detergents and dispersants are able to do their job. This stream of contaminants is a significant component of what is being sampled when you get a UOA. If the additive package has been overwhelmed and these contaminants are no longer able to be held in suspension, plating-out and forming deposits, then what you are seeing in the analysis is not representative of what went on in the engine over that OCI. Also, at that point new contaminants aren't even making it to the filter to be captured, as the oil is no longer able to suspend particles and prevent agglomeration, so they may just immediately end up in these deposit accumulations.

This can be evidenced by a significant uptake in "wear rates" when using a lubricant or additive that works at removing these deposits, if you were to take a sample of it and have it tested. Often, there are visual cues to this taking place as well, such as material accumulating in the filter.

As I've noted before, while the ring land area is probably most likely to accrue deposits due to the low flow through the area and worst possible conditions, once the additive package is no longer able to do its job and deposits start forming elsewhere, how do you think the ring pack fairs?

 

[Jackson_Slugger]

Hmmm I never heard of less wear with extended changes.............

Not speaking for anyone else or addressing the OP, but he may be referring to the famous (or infamous?) Ford study (possibly using Pintos of all things?) back in the 70's that showed an oil change seemed to generate more wear particles than the existing oil had, shortly after the change. Of course there are different hypothesizes like: "maybe the increased wear particles were already in the engine and the fresh detergent/dispersants picked it up" or on the flipside "maybe the fresh oil depletes the zinc and it takes a few hundred miles for the new additive package to re-adhere, or zinc becomes more effective with age and miles"...

There was a far more recent study here showing lower wear rates changing oil with used synthetic oils with the thinner ones like M1 0W-20 actually showing the least amount. But again, a small sample size and maybe a short duration of the testing making it also interesting but inconclusive...

 

[Jackson_Slugger]

I think this posit is the result of that study that showed an uptick in wear rates after an oil change, which was believed or indicated to be due to the establishing of new tribofilms on the surfaces. I don't recall how this was measured, whether it was simply via UOA or something more technical.

One thing to keep in mind is that contaminants such as soot, wear particles...etc, if they are too small to be caught by the filter, they will stay in circulation as long as the detergents and dispersants are able to do their job. This stream of contaminants is a significant component of what is being sampled when you get a UOA. If the additive package has been overwhelmed and these contaminants are no longer able to be held in suspension, plating-out and forming deposits, then what you are seeing in the analysis is not representative of what went on in the engine over that OCI. Also, at that point new contaminants aren't even making it to the filter to be captured, as the oil is no longer able to suspend particles and prevent agglomeration, so they may just immediately end up in these deposit accumulations.

This can be evidenced by a significant uptake in "wear rates" when using a lubricant or additive that works at removing these deposits, if you were to take a sample of it and have it tested. Often, there are visual cues to this taking place as well, such as material accumulating in the filter.

As I've noted before, while the ring land area is probably most likely to accrue deposits due to the low flow through the area and worst possible conditions, once the additive package is no longer able to do its job and deposits start forming elsewhere, how do you think the ring pack fairs?

What he said...

 

[Jackson_Slugger]

Hmmm I never heard of less wear with extended changes.............

I've personally seen a lot of sludge and heard a lot of ticking from them if using old SH/SG oils and maybe doing the first oil change at 12K because it was a lease and the owner was a d-bag that not only didn't care, probably more than made up for the money he had "saved" not changing the oil with poor performance and reduced fuel economy. The ticking sound it made did appeal to the musician in me though I must admit...

A first oil change at 40K (even with consistent top-off) shows a nice piddle of sludge, even when warm...

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Is this in reference to the Ford SAE study 2007-01-4133" : https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2007-01-4133/

"In one of our previous studies it was observed that engine oil samples collected from fleet vehicles after 12,000 mile drain interval showed 10-15 % lower friction and more importantly, an order of magnitude lower wear rate than those of fresh oils."

"As in the previous study, the results showed that the aged engine oils provide lower friction and much improved wear protection capability. These improvements were observed as early as the 3000 mile drain interval and continued to the 15000 mile drain interval. The composition of tribochemical films formed on the surface with the 3000 mile drain interval is similar to that formed with the 12000 mile drain interval as seen before. These findings could be an enabler for achieving longer drain interval although several other factors must to be considered."

What special filtration methods were used to keep the circulating oil free of particulates? Bypass filtration? Fram orange can? Was top-up oil used? This data provides an incomplete picture at best. Were the test engines tiny Japanese engines with 4 quart sumps, or German engines with 10+ quart sumps? Details matter.

 

[kschachn]

That was a very flawed study.