Let's try to make it real simple. Let's say both oil and filter in question can go 7,500 miles. Let's say only one can be change midway ie.. 3,750 miles

1) Ice: wants to change the OIL and not the filter
2) Jeff: wants to change the FILTER and not the oil

Ice wants to change the part that holds the very small particles that are suspended by the oil and don't cause harm.

Jeff wants to replace the part that filters out the particles that WOULD harm the engine.

Which one makes more sense to change?? The choice is yours.

 

I like:

3) No matter what you do, you take an oil sample and send it to evilbill.

 

Any late model BMW. Open hood, suck out oil through dipstick. Spin off cover over filter cartridge, remove and insert new cartidge. Spin cover back on, fill crankcase with 7 quarts Amsoil and be done with it

 

I am doing exactly the same thing as you did below.......I share your pain... even though I don't have a front lip.

 

I certainly don't condone this, as I think it's outright abuse, but it's a good story. There's a guy who has a 96 VW Passat Diesel. He changed over to Amsoil at 10,000 miles. He changes the filter every 25K and the oil every 50K. There is no bypass system on the car it has 287K on it with no problems. Again, this is WAY outside the recommended intervals, but I thought I'd share.

 

hey, the mercedes dealer probaly uses it because it may be faster thus saving them $$. That might be why a "dealer" is using the equiptment. We all know dealers are concerned about $$ and not whats best for your car!

Another issue is most oil drain plugs are magnetic and when you change your oil you should wipe the tip of the plug to get any larger particles that may harm your engine. This will not get cleaned with top sucker machine.

 

<-----Me

Not you too. I figured you of all people would be open minded to looking into something different.

Oh well, your still my oil GOD.

 

The filter is PERFECTLY able to still provide filtration, so why bother? Prove that a filter change is more beneficial than just changing the oil.

The transfusion method replenishes used/broken down additives that are crucial in preventing engine wear, corrosion, and acidity. I could care less about the environment or cost.

I'm not saying it's the absolute BEST way, just a BETTER way than using OEM recommendations with dino oil. I agree using a better quality oil and changing BOTH is simpler, but NOT necessary. Yes, I know the difference between "Schedule A" and "Schedule B", too bad a lots of owners don't. The sad thing is most dealers don't care and try to cut costs when they offer "FREE oil changes for X-years with a new car purchase".


So therefore you know EVERYTHING there ever was about oil and engine maintenance?

 

Cool.

You simplified that a little too much. Ice, btw my name is Alex, wants to replenish broken down and degraded engine oil additives that are crucial in preventing engine wear, while removing most of the insoluables.

Don't forget your also running with a decreased additive package and your NOT removing "particles that WOULD harm the engine". The oil filter is still providing good filtration. Plus, once the engine is past the break-in period, there are minimal larger particles suspended in the oil therefore of minimal concern.

Which ever makes you sleep well at night, because most people will never own the car long enough to see which makes a difference.

 

Modern engines that are past the break-in period shed very little metal unless there is an engine problem. The "transfusion" method I have suggested replaces 90% or more of the old oil and renews the additive package required to prevent engine wear, corrosion, and acidity.

Todays TINY Maxima filters can only hold a small amount(<0.5qt) of "dirty" oil, which is not enough to handicap the fresh oil from performing with it's new additives.

 

I'm just giving you an opinion, and cited my reasons why I believe your "old school" method really isn't all that valid or practical anymore.


It's your car. Do what you like.

 

Thanks!

 

A) Sure. No problem.

B) You're welcome to use this approach in future sampling to prove Jeff and me wrong.

C) It could be worse. You could think doing this is beneficial to your car:

http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=137433

 

A) Cool.

B) Not trying to prove anyone wrong.

C) Man, I got 26K download speeds, got Cliff Notes.

From the title, I'm surprised it hasn't been locked yet.

 

Not really valid as the oil is good up to 7,500 right? So it's still has PLENTY of everything.




Then what is the oil filter's function if NOT to filter out particles that are large enough to harm the motor's bearings etc?? Why have particle size filtration ratings on filters??

What the argument is really about is what is "more" worn out by 7,500miles? Given both are quality products. How do we argue this? Opinion. Obviously that goes nowhere.

Let's say the oil is more worn out. Well by your own references, the oil is fine. Like your sig references state, oil analysis shows most quality oils are fine until 7,500.

Okay now to the filter. The only reference you state is the same OIL analysis. But there is NO direct reference to the filter's life via reduced flow rates, how close the filter is to it's bypass stage, to what micron the filter is now filtering at....you know filter stuff. So using an OIL analysis sheet to determine FILTERING ability is a terrible test. So I point to the Amsoil reference(yet again). They use high quality filters(and oil). So why do they recommend a 5,000 mile filter change interval even on their highest quality oil??
Your bmw dealer example only states 7,500 mile change for both. This is under "best driving" conditions. When is the last time you drove under "best driving conditions" for 7,500 miles?

 

Don't have to right? Because Amsoil recommends a 5k change even on their top of the line synthetics. Why would it be any different w/ your filters or oils. I would consider Amsoil to be just about the best case situation. Just like your dealer recommendation for oil changes.




Again not a valid reason. Again for the 10th time, YOU YOURSELF HAVE ALREADY ADMITTED THAT THE OIL IS FINE AT 7,500 MILES. SO WHY DO YOU WANT TO "TRANSFUSE" OIL THAT'S ONLY 1/2 WORN? You change your tires when they are 1/2 worn also?



I agree, too bad it's not what my point was.



Actually leaving the oil and filter until 7,500(on good oil/filters) would be the most simple. But more to your point, changing the oil is also NOT necessary(if by using your bmw example, they are using the right oil)

Again missing the point. Never said or implied. But it seems I know more than you. Why? By two simple reasons. You lay all your cards on two things:
1) Links in your sig(which come from Bill, me, many others). But at the same time your ignore the info and contradict yourself. ie why change the oil if it's still good.
2) Use some bmw mechanic's word without any other references? Although okay to use a point of reference, you should only use that info if you can confirm his theories with published articles. Which you have not provided??

 

Blah bleh blah blah blah blah bleh blah blah bleh blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah bleh blah blah blah blah blah blah blah bleh blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah bleh blah blah.
Bleh blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah (blah blah ) blah bleh blah blah blah blah blah blah. Bleh blah blah blah? Blah blah blah bleh blah blah .


Did everyone get all of that?

Why do any of us even bother discussing engine oil? This is a pointless waste of time and space. NO one want's to listen to anyone else or come to any type of agreement. These same arguments seem to find their way into every car forum ever made and the results are always the same; no one agrees on anything.
So why don't we just drop it altogether because you guys aren't going to get me to change my habits and Im not going to get you to change yours. I use Valvoline synthetic and I change it every 3000 miles along with a NEW oil filter. My new favorite filter is the Purolator L24458 which is much larger than the Nissan filter that looks like it belongs on my RC car. So

 

Then don't click the thread. We discuss oil because there is alot of misinformation out there. Like changing a synthetic at 3,000

 

Misinformation based on your opinion. Everyone claims to be an expert on motor oils but no one here works as an engineer or chemist for an oil company. The point is that everyone has their own verison of the story and that instead of arguing everyone should just stick to what they know what works for them.

There are countless reasons for changing an engine oil that arent breakdown related. I seriously doubt I breakdown a synthetic at 3000 miles so thats not why I choose to change it.

 

So there isn't any misinformation out there? Poor choice of words to strengthen your rather weak argument.



Who the hell in this thread is claiming to be an "expert" about anything? Application of common sense and personal experience that formulate opinions don't need being p!ssed on from people like yourself. Go away if you don't like it.

The new spreadsheet makes it fairly easy to see how you should change your oil. In most cases, it ain't 3k. But, why bring up pesky facts or my experience and tireless work on this endeavor? I would just be labeled a stupidass "expert".

Well that, and Valvoline SynPower is one of the weaker synthetics anyway, from an empirical standpoint. At least you are using an oversized filter.

You're gonna be real mad when the Oil Discussion forum is born here and I run it. But, then, I'm sure you'll just avoid it like the plague anyway.

 

No im not going to be mad cause i'll have no reason to be. Im going to do what should be done and get in contact with engineers from various oil companies so I can present the facts.

 

And we all know those guys won't be biased.

 

Maybe you don't comprehend the word 'Various'. I suppose thats why you wouldn't have already tried. You get several of them to answer generalized questions. Then let them include their speal after the fact. Draw up a data sheet based on information they've given you.
You don't ask brand specific questions if you want to avoid the biasedness.

 

Look. Do your thing with your engineers, formulations, BLAH BLAH BLAH.

I'll stick to the real world values done by independent labs on real world cars and use common sense with the contribution of others to draw real world conclusions.

 

And what real world values are you talking about? I have seen you present nothing of the such. Perhaps you've done lots of engine tear downs and rebuilds and have seen first hand the consequences of improper maintenance that lots of people claim to be proper.

 

I guess that HUGE oil analysis sheet that Bill worked on is just a load of crap??http://forums.maxima.org/showthread....hreadid=100060
You don't "see" very well apparently.

And no matter what you ask of any engineer of an oil company, they will NEVER say anything contradictory to their product. So it's gonna be biased from the get go.

 

Ignorance is bliss.

 

 

Come to my crib, I'll show you my hood

 

Now I have experienced first hand what many of the org members have complained about. This forum seems to operate bass ackwards compared to other message boards I have seen. Other message boards seem to be a waste of time because they're overrun with 'kiddie' posters who argue with anyone at the drop of a hat. However their moderators conduct themselves in a professional manner.

This forum has a wealth of knowledgeable posters who arent narrowminded and choose to debate rather than argue. Member wise I haven't found a better forum than this one. But you moderators seem to be the ones who love to argue and make attempts to belittle your members instead of presenting the facts in a professional manner. This isn't directed at Y2KevSE or some of the other moderators that I haven't been in contact with. How difficult was is for you to simply say "I have compiled a list of facts and data and here is the link." But you would rather argue and lure people into a trap. For the record I don't believe i've completely fallen into your trap because your data is still inconclusive albeit very imformative and a great read. But I will plea ingorance on the part of not knowing you're in the process of conducting that study.
So now the question remains, do you guys still want to continue this pointless debate (the one i have called pointless from the start) or would you like contributions from someone who has been using something other than Mobil1 or Amsoil. Becasue the one thing I never mentioned was that I had already found a local Amsoil dealer and told him I would be making a purchase for my next oil change. I would personally love to see the effects of my actions on my engine as it is right now.

 

Please grow up. You stuck your nose in to the conversation while there was a debate going on and turned it into an argument by firing the first shot with your "BLAH BLAH BLAH" smartass response. You could have just stopped after your previous response and let Jeff and Ice settle things themselves. Don't expect us to bend over and take shots with a smile. You fire, you will be fired upon.



You seemed to speak with authority and experience about our oil efforts here, so it had to be assumed you already were aware of our pursuits.



You dug the grave, not me. Information will always be inconclusive. But, as this thread originally tried to articulate, it's not rocket science to put some facts together with common sense and use that to choose your own oil filter.


It's not just Mobil 1 and Amsoil. ULX-110, Castrol GTX, Castrol Syntec Blend, Castrol Syntec, Mobil 1 Drive Clean Blend, Valvoline MaxLife, Valvoline SynPower, Redline, BMW synthetic are in there.

If you want to contribute, it's your choice and it will be appreciated.

 

All work and no play makes Kev/Bill/Clee dull boys.



Wow. Narrow minded. Hmmm let's think about that for one sec. We've given all types of links to our "data". Formulated our opinions based on our research. How is that narrow minded? Sounds pretty open minded to me.



You take the previous conversation that didn't really involve you(specifically) and took it out of context. If you read the conversation, it boils down to details really. Because we both already agree on the facts presented. I think he misunderstands what the oil filter's purpose is but I digress.
As far as presenting the facts in a professionla manner. Already did that(about 10 times) But you know that because you have researched all my previous posts correct?



What trap? The truth trap?



Inclusive in what way? Because Bill is not done w/ his research or because of the way we are going about the process?? If you think taking the engine apart every 5,000 miles is the correct way, you might actually be right. But unfortunately that "fairly" inconvenient and costly. Using other's reports of their engine teardowns aren't really reliable either. Because the history of maintance is almost always in debate(read unreliable)



There are contributions from others that use lots of different oils including dino. But we would welcome your oil analysis sheets most definately. Contact Bill.

BTW. When a debate ends is really up to you right?

Congrats. Amsoil is a great oil. But given the fairly high cost of the oil, I suggest you reevaluate your 3,000 mile filter/oil change. I like Amsoil very much but if you are going to change your oil that frequently, Mobil "might" be a better cost effective choice. If you are turbo'd/nos'd/Sc'd, then ultimate protection is needed and it's really up to you what you want to run and when you want to change the oil.

 

You know what they say about arguing on the internet(picture a retarded person running down the track).....

 

I called no one here narrowminded. Perhaps you should take a reading comprehension class.


Bill had already stated correctly that the information will always be inconclusive. And I didn't imply there were any problems with the way the study has been conducted. The 5k mile teardown comment is a bit ludicrous and I wouldn't have even suggested it becasue just like you said it's inconvenient. Lets make that VERY inconveinent.
But the more data that is gathered, the less inconclusive the study becomes. Once there are say a hundred or so entries some hard evidence could be extrapolated and there wouldn't be much room for debate. Thats all I'm looking for, facts not opinions. I have enough opinions of my own.


Thats a completely different discussion. I never stated I wasn't going to re evaluate the intervals with such an expensive oil.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by SR20DEN
[B] I called no one here narrowminded. Perhaps you should take a reading comprehension class.[/quote/b]



Since you accuse us of arguing, you are calling us "narrowminded" yes?



But didn't you just ask Bill if he tore down a bunch of engines to verify his "claims" about oil? Yes, I know it's ridiculas to tear down an engine all the time. But then again, you presented to Bill as the only way to verify the engine's condition correct? So let's put it to rest. Tearing down an engine is not really the way to go.



yes, this might work if there were ACCURATE histories of the maintance and driving habits of the engines in question. Getting this type of data base is going to take how long? It's all fine and dandy in theory, let me know in about 5 years when you have finished your study. Not really practical. Or give us a link to where this process has begun with others and I'll take a look at it.


I wasn't saying you were not. I just was giving an suggestion so you wouldn't waste money unnecessarily. Your last reference to oil changes was change oil/filter every 3,000 miles correct? Since this was with synthetic, wasn't it safe to conclude you were going to act the same way with this synthetic?

I'm curious though. How are you going to "re-evaluate" your oil change intervals?

 

.No. I only accused you of being argumentative (and so am I). I wouldn't call you guys narrominded seeing as how you seem to be in search of the facts.


Incorrect, I was merely giving that as only of example of doing so.

So now you're speaking negative of your own study? Even after I went along with the idea? And what other process are you speaking of? I was talking about evaluating YOUR study. I honestly think it's a great idea and I intend to participate.

Fair enough. My last comment there was unwarranted. But I do understand your concern and will re evaluate my intervals.
The way I intend to do it is by immediately switching to a 5k mile interval and go from there based on the data I recieve from the lab.
Part of the reason I still do the 3k mile on the Valvoline is because I suspect it leaves more deposits than it should. A shorter change interval keeps the internals much cleaner, less coking everywhere. I have seen many (including Mobil 1) engines that have been run way too long between changes and are a pain to clean and have excessive wear. Thats why I am skeptical of the long change interval.

 

Ah good. I can get behind this. Submit a sample to Blackstone at 5k or whatever and go from there. I might even suggest taking a sample at maybe 4k but leaving the oil and filter there. Then if the analysis comes back neg, go change it. But if it comes back positive, you might entertain only a filter change at 5k and keeping the oil in there longer. Just some different ideas.

 

Thank you

 

Nope, never said the oil was good to 7500. I said the FILTER! Yes, newer oils are able to last longer, but that doesn't mean that the additive package is still providing OPTIMAL wear protection.

I agree, however I argue that the filter is STILL PERFORMING. Filters just don't have to work as hard anymore and they FAR EXCEED required filtration capabilities.

Good point, I'm arguing the oil is more worn and that the filter is fine. Therefore, replacing the oil is better than the filter at 3000-3750 miles IF you change the filter by at least 7500(OEM concerns).

No, I don't believe I said the oil was still fine. If I did I wouldn't be arguing to CHANGE it more frequently. NOT ALL OILS ARE PROVEN to not degrade by 3000 miles. I've even seen analysis showing a significant reduction in additives by 2000 miles in some tests. No I don't have them. If I find them again, I'll let you know.

MONEY!!!!! No other reason on a MODERN post break-in engine with adequate air filtration and NO engine problems. Bills' quest for cheaper filters that perform equally well continues.

 

Already answered.

Nope, I didn't. Engine protection and tires? Come on. Stick to the point.

Cool. What was the point again? That's right, as you nicely summarized, is the filter or oil MORE worn by 7500 miles. I'd like to clearify the point by adding, which promotes less engine wear, changing the filter or the oil by 7500 miles with an unproven/tested brand of dino oil and OEM filters.

Agreed, and I've said the same already. BMW example? Not sure what's your referencing.


I concede you KNOW EVERYTING THERE EVER WAS ABOUT OIL because you've been here the longest, even before Bill and iwannabmw. Still can't believe you said that.

Ignore the info? Contradict? No, already replied to "change the oil if it's still good". Same arguement for BOTH sides, except I'm more concerned with the antiwear additive package of the oil than the filtration capabilities of the OEM filter.

Sorry, if I could put them in here I would. However, experience, SAE journals($$$$), customer testimonials, and 20-30yrs of field tests on engines is not possible. I'm just adding it for what it's worth(maybe nothing to you, but a lot to me), so take it as that.

Jeff, I agree you have a GREAT point(or many points), but I'm just not willing to accept that one way is BETTER than another. I as yourself will not be satisfied until there is 100% proof, but that's not possible. I feel Bill and his contributors are GREATLY expanding the available data and at this point there is NOT enough to rule out a true winner.

Sorry but I've pretty much exhausted all my interest in this debate. If I end up persuing this matter with testing I'll keep you posted. Thanks.