Maintenance Reminders redux

Page 2 of 2  
Elliot Richmond wrote:


This page might be of interest to you... http://www.high-road.com/maintenance/maintenance.htm
Eric
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It is interesting, but this is from a company that provides (sells) service. For example, it has that 3000 mile oil change recommendation. No automobile manufacturer has a recommended oil change interval that short. Most are going to longer intervals.
Here is another approach:
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/interval.html
And still another
http://ask.cars.com/2007/05/oil_change_main.html
And still another.
http://greenmesh.com/2007/07/oil_changes_intervals_get_long.php
Only one thing is clear. Whatever is being "sold" has a great effect on the recommended oil change interval.
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Elliot Richmond wrote:

So, you asked for service mileage recommendations and I gave you a link for a well researched list based on roughly 25 years of empirical evidence (one of the owners of that shop is not just a "salesman" but also has a degree in mechanical engineering). However, all you appear to have done is shoot it down since you have already made your mind up about oil change intervals. While I'm not going to argue over the recommended length of oil change intervals, I really don't care when you change your oil or if you never do, one thing seems clear to me, you have already made up your mind and really didn't want a list of service mileage recommendations or you wouldn't have shot it down simply because you disagreed with only 2.5% of the information in the list.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I did not ask for recommendations. You supplied some, I assume, in the interest of continuing the conversation. I replied with some alternative viewpoints, also in the interest of continuing the conversation.
Do with them as you wish. Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:41:58 -0700

He asked for Honda's recommendation. You did not provide that in the least. Any recommendation of 3000 Miles on today's engines is not well researched. Not a single auto manufacturer recommends 3000 miles anymore, and there is a reason.
It is silly to suggest that they give longer recommendations in order to compete with other manufacturers. Especially for Hondas and Toyotas, which sell (largely) on a history of longevity. It is not in their best interest to give a service recommendation that will decrease said lifespan. That reputation took decades to develop, and can be destroyed in just a few short years. It would likely be the death of the products future sales.
--
Joe - Registered Linux User #449481

"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You've never lived in the marketing world, have you?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A reputation which they don't hesitate to throw down the toilet.
Case in point: Honda automatic transmissions hooked to V6 engines. Those transmissions were CRAP for a solid 6 years. Honda knows it. Everybody knows it. Honda was run by beancounters who threw away that Honda reputation for the sake of a few shekels.
Case in point: Toyota sludge.
They may have reputations for longevity, but when it comes to saving a few pennies, they will throw those reputations away without another thought.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 02:19:53 -0400, Joe LaVigne

Thanks, but actually, I did not ask even for that. I told a tale, which included a report of my lack of success in finding a recommended service interval, but that is not the same as asking for one. It may be a fine point, but recounting an anecdote is not the same as requesting information.
I am sorry that Eric was offended. Sometimes these things just happen. I noticed he did reply to the list, but the reply showed up in my Agent as a graphics file which I did not open. So I do not know what Eric's reply was.
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Depending on how you recount the tale, it is.
Look up "conversational implicature".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Elliot Richmond wrote:

The reply was html formatted to highlight the following quotes from your original message.

Well, I dug out the owners manual, and looked for a schedule. Instead, it told me that the computer would tell me when the car needed service. No mileage schedule. I remembered the collective wisdom of this group and that this subject was *discussed, so I dug through the archives. No mileage schedule.* *I searched the internet. No mileage schedule.* So, I replied to the email from the service facility, explaining that all of the information I had was that the car would tell me when it needed service and if the service manager knew something I did not know, then he should share it with me. *Particularly, I wanted to know if there really was a mileage* *schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders.*
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Okay, if you think I was asking for somebody on the list to supply a maintenance schedule and you thought you were doing a favor for me by supplying such a list, then I can see how you might have been offended.
I have already apologized. Thanks for your help.
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, let's see. What are we supposed to take from what you originally said:

When you come to the newsgroup and say something like that, the implication (remember "conversational implicature"?) is that you're asking the readers if THEY know of a mileage schedule.
The implication is NOT that you're just talking to hear yourself talk.
But, apparently you were talking just to hear yourself talk.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 06:39:21 -0400, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"

The only implication I can construct is that the statement was directed to the service manager at the facility that had sent the message to me.
Here is the original paragraph in question:

You did not quote that part about "replied to the service facility."
The question of whether I thought there really was a mileage schedule had, I thought, already been settled. Here is the previous paragraph:

Notice the repetition for emphasis: "No mileage schedule." It was not a question; it was a statement.
Eric, and possibly others, were misled by my message and interpreted it as a request for information, in spite of the fact that I began the message with.

Clearly, my "tale" was not clear to some. But, I am now done with it. The rest of you may continue to discuss it if you wish, but I would suggest moving on to some other subject. Such as:
Do synthetics really extend the life of an engine when coupled with an extended oil change interval to compensate for the extra cost of synthetics over conventional oils?
Do synthetics really reduce dependency on petroleum based products to any significant degree considering that in the time it takes to "consume" five quarts of oil, which can actually be recycled, the car will consume over 300 gallons of gasoline.
Elliot Richmond Itinerant astronomy teacher Freelance science writer
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Elliot Richmond wrote: <snip pedantry>

run doubled service intervals on conventional in your own car, then report back.

they can, yes. true synthetics can offer better lubricity and therefore lower gas consumption. what's the break-even? 0.3% better gas consumption? anything better than break-even is a benefit. that's not including lower oil burn-off rates either.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So, what you're saying is that there was nothing implied in what you said--that we were to take what you said solely and completely at face value.
In other words, you came to a discussion newsgroup, one with the goal of sharing information, simply to tell a story.
You were wrong in thinking that people here would want to hear your story and would know automatically to take it completely at face value. The people here are, generally, involved in DISCUSSING things. When you come here, the implication automatically is that you're looking to DISCUSS things.
But apparently you want this newsgroup to be like a newspaper or a magazine--strictly one-way expression, strictly the reader telling his story, with absolutely no actual discussion of the topic.

It was immaterial.
Look bub. Nobody cares about hearing your stories for the sake of hearing your stories. We don't know you, so when you came here to tell your story, you were doing one thing--telling a story with absolutely no expectation of discussing its details of the facts thereof--while the rest of the newsgroup was doing what we normally do in a newsgroup, which is discuss things. Further, we assumed--quite rationally--that you also wanted to discuss things, because coming to a newsgroup to spout a story without wanting to discuss it is just plain nonsense.
So when you said, "Particularly, I wanted to know if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders," there was no question in any rational person's mind: you wanted to know if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders.
We were wrong, but only because your expectations in coming here were TOTALLY out of whack. So actually, the people who thought you wanted to know that information *in general* were correct in their assumptions.
You came to Rome, but wanted to do what the Japanese do. Well, when in Rome, do as the Romans do.

No, because as you say that's the previous paragraph. Allow me:
* first you dig out owner's manual, look for schedule. * you don't find one * it says to pay attention to the computer instead * you searched the newsgroup, found no schedule * you searched the internet, found no schedule * emailed the service facility, saying explicitly that you're looking for a schedule * came to the discussion newsgroup and said explicitly, within the context of telling your story, "I'm looking for a schedule" * received some discussion about a schedule * started telling people here off about how you weren't looking for a schedule from them at all
So why did you come here if you weren't looking for information from us? 'Cuz we just don't care about your pathetic story about "I emailed the service department. I'm looking for a schedule."

YOU were misled--or rather, misled yourself--into thinking that this is a STORY newsgroup, where one tells STORIES.
You told a story, and within that story made it plain that you were looking for information that you had not yet found. What did you expect out of a DISCUSSION newsgroup?
And then, to make matters worse for yourself, you get mad at people who are doing what comes naturally in a DISCUSSION newsgroup. You get mad at the people who are DISCUSSING it, and who are TRYING TO HELP YOU. You tell them, pretty much in so many words, to fuck off, you weren't asking them for anything.
You have just made the hall of fame for some newsgroup members, no doubt.

Clearly, you (a) came to the wrong place, (b) had the wrong expectations, and (c) were not clear in expressing what you wanted out of your post.
The ball was, and is, squarely in YOUR court to communicate clearly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Absolutely there was. Go back and read what he wrote.
When he comes into a DISCUSSION group and expresses a desire to know something, he should expect it to be DISCUSSED.
But when he comes in and slams the group for daring to discuss it, he should be told to fuck off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 15:23:23 -0500

Part of your original post was: "Particularly, I wanted to know if there really was a mileage schedule that supplemented the maintenance minders." Since this is a discussion group, rather than a storytelling one, I am sure that several people assumed you actually wanted to know the answer...
--
Joe - Registered Linux User #449481

"Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.