The scheduled oil change intreval on my Accord calls for every 3,750 miles or 3 months, whichever occurs first. Until recently it usually occured before 3 months but lately I drive a lot less and sometimes it takes even 5 months to get another 3,750 miles into my car. This causes a dilemma, because I also have some other maintenance items at every
7,500 miles, which would be normally at every other oil change. Since I still want to have only one oil change in midway of the 7,500 mile maintenance interval (i.e. at every 3,750 miles,) I am in conflict with the 3 month maximum interval. So I've been thinking of switching from natural oil to synthetic which would not degrade as fast. What do the experts here think about it and which synthetic oil would they recommend. Right now I use the same 5W-30 Castrol oil that Honda dealers use.
I've been doing this oil change at every 3,750 miles for such a long time with the intervals shorter than 3 months that I never even bothered to recheck this in my Owners Manual. Now I did and you're right. Again. Thanks.
I see no reason to worry about the 3 month interval even using conventional oil. I don't even understand why are you chaging oil at 3750 miles. That seems like the severe service schedule and if you are in the US, it is unlikely that you actually meet the requirements of that schedule. Honda says the following:
Which Schedule to Follow: Service your car according to the time and mileage periods on one of the Maintenance Schedules on the following pages. Select the schedule for "Severe Conditions" if most of your driving is done under one or more of the conditions listed on that page. Otherwise, follow the schedule for "Normal Conditions."
U.S. Owners Follow the Normal Conditions Maintenance Schedule if the severe driving conditions specified in the Severe Conditions Maintenance Schedule do not apply. NOTE: If you only OCCASIONALLY drive under a "severe" condition, you should follow the Normal Conditions Maintenance Schedule.
Canadian Owners Follow the Maintenance Schedule for Severe Conditions.
U.S. Owners Follow the Severe Conditions Maintenance Schedule if you drive your vehicle MAINLY under one or more of the following conditions: Driving less than 5 miles (8 km) per trip or, in freezing temperatures, driving less than 10 miles (16 km) per trip. Driving in hot [over 90° F (32° C) conditions.] Extensive idling or long periods of stop-and-go driving. Driving with a roof-top carrier, or driving in mountainous conditions. Driving on muddy, dusty, or de-iced roads.
Canadian Owners Follow the Maintenance Schedule for Severe Conditions.
It seems to me that unless you are in Canada or Florida (and then only in the summer) or you are using your Honda as a taxi, you probbaly don't need to follow the severe sevice schedule. We are in North Carolina and my Sister has owned two Hondas. She only ever used the normal service schedule (and then only sparatically - often she forgot to change the oil on schedule) and although both of her Honda were horrid piece of crap to drive after 150k miles, neither had any engine problems. Changing oil more often than necessary just wastes your money. Oil is much better than it used to be. Fuel injection system are much better at maintaining the correct mixture and this means that dilution of the oil with unburned fuel is much less of a problem than in the past. Air filters are better, meaning less contamination gets into the oil. Despite all of this, people still fall for the line about needing to change oil every 3000 miles. To be honest I shocked that Honda specifies the severe change schedule for Canada under all conditions. At least for a few monthes each year Canada is hardly an ice box. Is there really a lot of difference between Detroit and Windsor, or Seattle and Victoria? And why in Europe does Honda allow for 12,500 mile oil changes for similar engines?
Seems to be he has mostly been doing Castrol (BP) the big favor. I doubt engine failure will be the reasion the car goes to it eventual resting place, even if the normal maintenance schedule is followed.
Which has NOTHING to do with the piece of shit transmission that Honda put in my $30K 2002 model van, the transmission that--despite maintenance--failed at 73K gentle in-town miles of my wife driving the small children around.
And my story is the rule, not the exception.
Fuck Honda. Whatever they are now, it has nothing to do with who they used to be.
"Cameo" wrote in news:ikjkrf$mf6$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal- september.org:
I'm not sure. There are a lot factors at work here. If I pass smog in two months, that buys me at leat two years, provided the engine and tranny hold up.
Actually, I do. I have inside information from an engineering source. Things are NOT good withing Honda, and the cars that come out today truly have nothing in common with Honda's roots other than the nameplate on the back.
CR isn't doing actual research into any of this. They just tell us what their surveys say. And they survey ONLY people who have bought within the last few months.
Not only is nothing apt to go wrong with the car or is any bad engineering apt to show up in so short a time, anyone who has spent that kind of money on a car is loathe to tell the world that he made a $30,000 mistake.
I find it interesting that Chevies are junk, but Buick ranks RIGHT UP THERE with Lexus in the JD Power ratings. Let's think about that, shall we? Imagine the typical Buick buyer. He drives about 3000 miles/year, and does so at 25mph or so. His car is perfect. The very same Chevy, with the very same engine and transmission and platform and is built by the same union workers, but which is driven by Joe Sixpack and his wife hauling the dog and the kids around, gets poor ratings.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.