From: clifto on
Fred G. Mackey wrote:
> I remember when people used to make fun of people who drank Evian, which
> of course is naive spelled backwards.

And Stroh's is shortS backward, as well.

Pork: It's the other white flag!
-- James Lileks
From: SMS on
Brent P wrote:

> Funny how the same people who demand that 3,000 mile oil changes are
> needed just to prevent engine damage feel that changing oil weight from
> recommended is just fine and dandy. Afterall, the engine was extensively
> tested by the manufacturer with the weight of oil specified.... and you
> just 'know' what will work 'better' in it without so much as engineering
> drawings of it.

The multi-weight oil reduces engine wear at start-up, since the
viscosity is lower when cold. However if you don't care all that much
about long engine life, then using single weight oil is going to work
okay. However the advantage of a single weight oil, which has more base
stock and less viscosity modifiers, is lost with 3K oil changes anyway,
so unless you're trying to save a tiny amount of money, avoid single
weight oils, and do your engine a favor.
From: HLS on

"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)> wrote in message
> jwardl wrote:
> > How can oil be changed TOO often? Personally, think I'll stick with
> There is some point at which changing it more often has absolutely no
> benefit at all in terms of engine wear. It's not 500 miles, 1000 miles,
> or even 3000 miles. It's probably somewhere around 7000-8000, but to be
> absolutely safe, many people change it at 5000. 3000 is an absolute
> waste of money, no study has shown any benefit to such frequent oil

You are repeating yourself. Show me data from a reliable source. Data, not

From: HLS on

"John Henderson" <jhenRemoveThis(a)> wrote in message
> jwardl wrote:
> > How can oil be changed TOO often? Personally, think I'll stick
> > with 3/3k.
> Because there's more wear with new oil than with moderately
> stressed oil.

> John

Again, show proof, not just claims. Some oil analyses show higher
iron content just after a change. It is not necessarily related to engine

From: jim on

Brent P wrote:
> In article <5e7m03h7jbpfh502qbt6nepp7ic8rsh94e(a)>, clare at wrote:
> > Minimum 20 minutes to get the oil to full operating temperature, and
> > then about another 10 minutes for every day of short run cold morning,
> <snip>
> When your coolant has reached OT and the thermostat is open, the oil has
> reached operating temperature some time before that. It's basic heat
> transfer. If it had not, the coolant and engine block would still be
> warming the oil and the Tstat would remain close.

The thermostat does not remain closed until the engine is warmed up it
opens proportionate to the coolant temperature. Ideally it never opens
all the way. That way you have some excess cooling capacity just in case
you should get stuck in the sand in Death Valley in the middle of July.
As a result of the way the thermostat works operating temperature as you
call it is an equilibrium point where the coolant flow and engine temp
reach an equilibrium. That pretty much means that it usually quite a
while to increase the last degree to reach a stable temperature.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----