I was going to ask, “how much of the time does the gas engine run in a hybrid,” but oblivion answered that.
Meanjoe, that was what I was thinking. If you generated lets say two pints of junk in 10,000 miles, stands to reason you would generate 1 pint in 5000 miles, so the total junk is the same regardless of how often changed. Doesn’t matter anyway, an engine is more important than a pint or two of polutants.
"This forum is plagued with the ‘sorry’ cases now due extended oil change intervals or running an engine out of oil due to faith in the OLM and so on."
ok4450 November 22, 3012
Isn’t that the truth. A certain number of vehicles won’t make it for more than 5,000 miles without checking and replenishing oil, some won’t even do 3,000 safely. Many more “neglected” engines will die an untimely death because as cars get “smarter” (no Owner’s Manual, OLM, warning lights for everthing, including loose gas caps, etcetera) many unsuspecting owners don’t realize that their cars can become scrap without so much as whimper or message sent to their I-Phone.
Some of my cars hold 5 or 5 1/2 quarts of oil, but the newer Impalas and other newer cars hold as little as 4 quarts. I don’t like that small volume and I’m sure that will lead to more engine trouble for folks who don’t pop the hood and check levels regularly and drive until their car taps them on the shoulder.
10,000 mile intervals could finish off many more engines, some healthy, fairly low oil consuming engines, leaving owners scratching their heads and arranging for rental cars and loans.
Although I never plan on using the “low Oil Level” warning that is triggered by a sensor in my Bonneville’s oil pan, I really think all cars should be equipped. Low level trumps low pressure as a first early warning device. Both are great though, because you can have low pressure without a low oil level.
Heck, my B&S powered 120v/240v back-up generator has low-oil shut-down and light that will save the engine’s life if it gets too low. I personally would give the car manufacturers permission to install low-oil shut-down on every one of my cars. If I run the puppy almost out of oil then I deserve to be on foot.
CSA
CSA, good point if you can have low oil shut down on a portable generator - you can certainly have same on a car or truck engine. So, how much would such a device add to the cost of the average car?
Uncle Turbo, I’m Pretty Sure If These Were Put On All Cars, Some Clown Would Sue The Manufacturer When Their Car Shut Down In A Dangerous Place Or A Dangerous Time Because It Was Low On Oil And Probably Convince A Jury They’re Entitle To Millions.
Of course, shutting the engine down by running it out of motor oil in a dangeerous place or at a dangerous time would be alright.
CSA
I don’t want a car to shut off the engine for low oil. I want it tp warn me of low oil. I had a car with an oil level monitor and wide “performance” tires.
There was a long sweeping ramp from one expressway to another on the way to work that I occasionally had fun with. I was taking that ramp at 85 one day and the monitor decided I was out of oil just because all the oil was plastered against the right side of the pan.
It shut off the engine in the middle of the turn! Only the idiots at GM would build a model capable of generating that much side force and not put baffles in the oil pan.
Well if toyota told you to that is fine. It is in fact their problem if they are wrong. As you likely have at least 10 other oil replacements on this warranty schedule follow these well. After the warranty you might do them sooner but That will not replace your engine for free in the warranty.
“I was taking that ramp at 85 one day and the monitor decided I was out of oil just because all the oil was plastered against the right side of the pan.”
“Only the idiots at GM would build a model capable of generating that much side force and not put baffles in the oil pan.”
I’ll bet that only the idiots at GM would build a car that would go out of control and/or roll over while taking a ramp at 85 mph, too, eh ? (Not to mention that only these idiots would make a car that allows a driver to endanger others or get a citation for illegal driving.)
CSA
Whether we like it or not, the world is moving toward extended oil change intervals (10K+). Europe has been there for many years. Cars built for the USA are moving in that direction now.
It won’t be a smooth problem free path to 10K+ oil changes. Many of the concerns raised on this forum are valid. But in a few years, the conversations we’re having today about 5K vs 10K intervals either won’t exist, or they will be about 10K vs 15K oil changes.
Maybe They’ll Bring Us Good Old Lucas Electrics For Our Little Clown Cars, Too. The Oil Intervals Could Be Extended Because The Cars Will Have Much More Down Time. I’ve Never Been One To Want To Emulate Europe Or Asia, Especially When It Comes To Cars.
CSA
I don’t think they shut down for low oil but low pressure. My Rivera had a low oil message that would come on when it was a quart low-at the standard add mark. It also had the low oil pressure shut off that would shut the fuel pump down if oil pressure was lost. Whether dangerous or not to shut the car down for no oil pressure, you wouldn’t get much farther anyway and would have a ruined engine. I think this was pretty common on the GM oil pressure sending units.
“Whether dangerous or not to shut the car down for no oil pressure, you wouldn’t get much farther anyway and would have a ruined engine.”
Exactly.
CSA
My 1975 Civic shut the electric fuel pump off when the oil light came on.
I think it was mainly to keep the carburetor bowl from boiling and flooding the engine.
OK “Two is that the manufacturer is not always right. They have a vested interest in proclaiming your car needs little in the way of service. It helps to sell the cars.”
Talk to any manufacture rep. They have more of a vested interest in not having one of their cars break down prematurely on the side of the road. This and a poor review from testers like CR for motor and transmission weakness is like a billboard sign saying “don’t buy this car.”
Changing oil before the manufacturer says is a waste of money and resources. Theoretically, they could say the motor is sealed and needs no maintenance for the life of the car…I have never seen an advertisement for a car tout that it needed infrequent oil changes.
"This and a poor review from testers like CR for motor and transmission weakness is like a billboard sign saying ‘don’t buy this car.’ "
I enjoy my CR subscription. I have subscribed to CR for many decades, but I don’t recall them testing car engines or transmissions. They test tires, vacuum cleaners, coffee makers, and other consumer products.
They do “evaluate” cars, but their car ratings, as far as I know, are generated from surveys that are sent to subscribers. I could write anything old thing on mine before I send it in. That’s far less scientific than actually testing. The car evaluations for every car I’ve ever had does not match with my cars of the same make and model. I ignore their car ratings.
That’s a perception that some people have, that they do all this testing of cars. So, correct me if I’m wrong, CR does not test engines and transmissions as stated above. Also, a poor review from them means nothing in my selection of a car. My own investigation does, however.
CSA
Dagosa, I have talked to car manufacturer reps many times. I’ve only known one who who could be considered mechanically proficient and that was a VW guy whom I have great respect for.
As a matter of fact, one factory rep flat out admitted to me what was really going on when I bluntly stated to him the reason why they were doing car modifications on customer car and keeping the mechanics out of the equation. It was to prevent a paper trail which could cause a mandated Recall.
Shhhhhhhhh was the key word…
As to CR, they have a certain amount of bias combined with a small sampling so I don’t read much into what they have to say.
One year a certain model is outstanding and the next year it’s garbage even though nothing’s changed.
If I remember correctly, CR ripped Ford’s My Touch for lack of buttons but praised Tesla for lack of them.
I might add that some of their testing is done by office help and so on who may have little automotive expertise and are providing a biased opinion based on a few test spins around a track.
CSA…I think you miss read my comment. Included in CR car reviews in their automotive section, they include their surveys which most assuredly includes engine and transmission major and minor Catagories for frequency of repair. They then comment in their reviews on any glaring weaknesses in any areas. . They do review and do tests on cars motors and transmission performance and comment on their performance and reliability when it’s an issue. “car testers like CR” is identifying phrase for what CR does. They put cars through a series of test, including tests which reveal engine and transmission performance.
They have commented on relibility of drive trains in the past with some cars including in their recall section and including Honda and others in the past. So, do they test transmissions and motors…yes, they test their performance and comment on their reliability from their consumer ratings.
Before you belittle their tests, take a tour of their tracks and talk with their testers. They are as knowledgable as any from any other testing publication facility. Plus, they have no skin in the game and are apt to have their results published as they see it. All car manufacturers are keenly aware of CR tests and reviews…and take many of their results to heart in their next models.
If they rated the cars we all owned a little better, we might not belittle their efforts so much. Btw, I am not arguing how valid CR’s tests are as I have had differences with their findings too…but manufacturers do read their result, good or bad as they hold sway with lots and lots of buyers. They deal with it.
Ok4450…
I hear what you say, but other then telling me how incompetent the people who represent the makers of cars are in your experience, I still don’t see in my conversations why they would " plan" on a strategy which would decrease the reliability of their products. I have seen nothing in any car manual that is inconsistent with good general guild lines for oil change intervals.
A good friend and cousin was a general service manager for 7 different dealerships at one time. In our conversations, dealers do encourage extreme condition use for oil change intervals but manufacturers who aren’t as dependent on the service profit, but still have to pay the dealership for warranty work, discuss change interval requirements much differently. The manufacturer still has to pay for failed motors and transmissions still under warranty and suffer the poor reputation from their failures. They don’t cut their own throats and they don’t give unreasonable recommendations.
btw, CR head of automotive division
Dagosa, You Used A Lot Of Ink, But CR Says That Their Reliability Ratings Are Based On Their Annual Car Reliability Survey, Mailed To Subscribers. They Base Their Ratings For “Predicted Reliabilty” On That, Too.
Testing ? Oh, Yeah, They “Road Test” The New Cars.
Again, I have never found that the reliability ratings, nor the predicted reliability ratings even remotely match my findings.
I will say, as I have in the past, that I find their impressions of new cars to be helpful. They comment on ease of entry/exit, back seat room, controls, trunk space, etcetera.
I still enjoy my CR and advise everybody to read it and subscribe.
I get my survey every year. What do you think I write on my Annual Car Reliability Survey before mailing it back and do you think they’re all done accurately ?
CSA
No one is saying CR is perfect. No sampling process is. But when you reach a sufficiently large sample size like CR does for its auto surveys, it becomes pretty evident where the bulk of your bell curve and your outliers reside. It does make it difficult to discount CR’s data in favor of an individual’s experience with a handful of cars.