What factors go into the oil life indicator: 2006 Civic

Things positively known:

- RPM speed/duration

- idle time

- engine temperature

The OLM does NOT measure the oil directly; that is to say, it cannot detect how "dirty" the oil is, nor can it tell the difference between dino or synthetic.

Please, follow my advice: use synthetic and change your oil every 5,000 miles, regardless of what the OLM says.

But what is that advice based on? I use dino oil (or really whatever synth-blend is currently offered) and change my oil every 7000 to 7500. At

165,000 miles, my Accord is still going strong.

Changing synthetic every 5000 won't hurt anything on a mechanical level, but it sure takes away a good deal of economical value by shifting the expense to over-frequent oil changes.

Based on what? Are you saying that you have put more research into this topic then Honda's engineering team has?

Your advice sounds like little more than a repetition of conventional wisdom. Usually what "everyone knows" is at best incomplete and often simply wrong.

John

While I understand your hesitation to follow my advice blindly, I assure you I have spent countless hours researching the topic. I do not agree that a 5,000 oil change interval is "too frequent"; I reserve that statement for those 3,000 OCI fanatics. Honda's OLM is very liberal on oil life because they pride themselves in "low cost of ownership". After 5,000mi on conventional oil, the EP and AW additives in the oil break down and the engine is running on a minimal level of protection. The Molybdenum/Phosphurous content settles out of suspension, and the engine may utilize ZDDP (a zinc additive) as its last line of defense against metal-to-metal contact. When the oil is in a weakened state, varnish begins to form; if you go even further, sludge becomes a serious issue. While a 7,500mi OCI is okay for the average cost-sensitive consumer, it is unacceptable to car enthusiasts.

A synthetic blend is not a good way to go. It is just regular oil with synthetic additives, making up about 20% of the total volume. You should either stick to conventional oil (for lower cost and near-equal performance) or full synthetic (for superior protection). I highly recommend Mobil 1 full synth or equivalent. I am also against boutique synthetic oil companies, such as Redline or Amsoil; their prices are nearly double the average synthetic for a small increase in performance. It is totally unnecessary unless your engine will be seeing race conditions.

Also, I should point out that there is no solid evidence that synthetic oils are capable of lasting much longer than conventional oils. Many companies sell "15,000mi OCI" oils because they have complete faith in synthetic products; however, most industry professionals agree this extended OCI concept has not yet been proven. The same additives used in dino oil are used here, and they break down at about the same rate. Synthetic has better cleaning abilites and viscosity stability at high temps due to a lab-made base stock, but it's no miracle product for your engine. Save your money and get the standard full synthetic.

and its forum, are excellent places to learn about thesubject. There are many misconceptions about engine oil and itscapabilities, so learn up and buy smart.

And yet none of what you say takes any REAL WORLD factors into account. How about at what percentage the oil spends at optimum operating temperature vs. "warming up"? Someone who takes many short trips, hardly ever completing warm up will "spoil the oil" much faster (i.e. in less miles) than someone who drives many highway miles in a single trip. The first person spends say

10% at operating temperature while the second spends 90% at operating temperature. This is a MAJOR factor and yet you don't take it into account at all when you give a BLIND recommendation of "change oil every 5000 miles". To not take all the factors that oil life depends on into account is total bunk. Even the Honda manual, before the oil minder computer system at least gave 2 major scenarios. Normal and severe driving. The oil life minder takes the rest of the important factors that you choose to ignore into account.

To give a recommendation without knowing all the factors is like pulling numbers out of air. Yeah, 3 or 5k is a safe guideline that will hurt nothing but ones wallet. But to give a REAL guideline (what the oil life minder systems is programmed to do) many factors are required. You want to piss extra money away, go for it. But try not to tell other people how to spend their money unless you factor in all the variables, otherwise it's advice no better than the fortune card you get at the carnival for $.25.

Blind recommendations? Carnival fortunes? Such eloquent criticism, for a car forum. I apologize if my advice was offensive; I'm only sharing the information I've learned about oil through personal research. But of course, you're free to spend your money as you please. I can't see why you're so angry over a stranger's suggestion to learn more about engine oil.

Alas, I must present my rebuttal: I am accounting for "real world" factors when I discuss oil; it's the oil companies that cite ideal conditions when they advertise the capabilities of their products, in the vein of traditional marketing techniques. While I do agree that there is no single oil change interval that works for everyone, 7,500 miles will wreak havoc on an oil regardless of the severe or normal conditions it's put through. While it's true that a person who spends most of their time in stop-and-go traffic and short trips will need a more frequent OCI, the 5,000mi interval is a nice round number that will accomodate all (but race) conditions. There is nothing Honda states about oil life that I've "ignored"; I only choose to supplement it with more research. Car manufacturers take into account that the average driver knows very little about cars, and much less about engine oil. This is why they included the OLM on their newer models; they don't expect consumers to educate themselves on the application of oil for their particular scenario.

Like I stated before, the 7,500mi OCI works for a person who considers their vehicle as a tool to take them from one place to another. In the end, it will translate into lower maintainance costs, which is a big plus for those with shallow pockets. However, if you compare a Virgin Oil Analysis to a Used Oil Analysis of the Honda OEM oil, you can see the stages of degradation that occur. I believe Honda ranks as one of the greatest engineering firms in the world, but they adjust their vehicle market to suit the average person. Check out the link I posted before, and you can learn some more.

I also disagree with your statement that a 5k OCI has no benefits, and only drains money. It's true that it's a considerable increase in cost (especially using synthetics), but it all comes down to how much you care about your vehicle. Judging from your statements, I doubt you took the time to learn about the value of a UOA; it can show you the "real world" statistics that you so crave. You're thinking like a shopper, not an enthusiast.

My suggestions are passionate because I care about my vehicle to the point where money is no object. If you feel the tradeoff in costs are not worth the added protection, then you should stick to what you think is best. All I ask is that you educate yourself before placing all your faith into a single belief.

Who said anything about being angry?

And yo continue to ignore other factors such as trip duration which directly affects at what operating temperature the oil spends the majority of it's useful life at which directly relates to the length of it's useful life.

The "stages of degradation" occur at DIFFERENT rates for different people due to driving habits practices and conditions. None of which can be addressed in a general guideline.

I didn't say it has no benefit. It will have benefit for someone who drives many short trips with their oil spending very little time at operating temperature. I did state that it will be a waste of money for people sho's oil is allowed to get to operational temperature and spend most of it's use there.

I have educated myself and you have chosen to ignore my entire point. My point is that there is no "magic number" in regards to oil life/mileage and that it will vary from car to car based on use.

"But try not to tell other people how to spend their money unless you factor in all the variables, otherwise it's advice no better than the fortune card you get at the carnival for $.25."

Seems pretty demeaning to me.

"While I do agree that there is no single oil change interval that works for everyone, 7,500 miles will wreak havoc on an oil regardless of the severe or normal conditions it's put through. While it's true that a person who spends most of their time in stop-and-go traffic and short trips will need a more frequent OCI, the 5,000mi interval is a nice round number that will accomodate all (but race) conditions."

OCIs can't be addressed in a general guideline? What do you think car manufacturers have been doing before the invention of the Oil Life Meter? You stated yourself, they recommend two different mileages based on normal and severe service.

You haven't looked at

have you?

No, it's my opinion and was said/typed with zero anger.

Ah, so there is a difference! But 7500 is very easy for a highway car to acheive. Cars and oils are better today than they were 30 years ago. Progress. Even the 5000 mile interval can't be trusted as a general number. What about the person who hardly ever drives and it takes 2 years to acheive

5000 miles? For those people, time is a bigger factor than mileage and once again the "raw number" is not appropriate.

Yup, it's called progress. Many years ago people peed in a small vessle they kept under their beds cause it was easier than trudging to an outhouse in the middle of a winter night. Then technology brought us indoor plumbing and the chanmber pot disappeared.

Now we have computers that take ALL the factors affecting oil life into consideration and thus the 3000 OCI of old has morphed into "change the oil when the computer says to" with a stage of "here are some different intervals based on use" in between.

It's a web forum no different than this newsgroup other than it's using HTTP instead of NNTP.

>

I would be happier if the computer gave me even a few simple options for explaining whether I was a conservative worrywart who wanted a very conservative interval, or whatever.

Maybe next version?

My wife's mini-van rather than a simple light, gives it in a percentage. Worriers can do it and reset it at say, 20%???

This is part of my argument: the Oil Life Meter should NOT be considered the end-all be-all indicator. Like I said, they are very liberal on oil life because of the "cost of ownership" concerns. Honda wins that category in many car magazines (especially the Civic and CR-V), so they are very conscious of the issue.

Also, I thought we were talking about Honda's Oil Life Meter the entire time. It measures oil life in percentages; they recommend oil to be changed at 15%. Another reason I don't trust it is because my car sees the rev limiter very frequently (8,200 rpm) and I have been at 6200mi when the OLM reads 20%. I often drive fifteen minutes or less (small town), so one would assume the large number of cold starts would wear out the oil faster. That was the first red flag that made me think twice about the meter.

Repairs due to maintenence are part of the "cost of ownership" equation. Part of why they wil in that category is by not breaking down as much thus requiring costly repairs.

What does it matter who's oil life meter we're talking about? They all may be a little different from each other, but they will all take more factors other than just mileage into account.

If you weren't hitting the rev limiter, the meter might have shows 30% at

6200 instead of just 20%. That means it's working as it should looking at all the factors.

You want to change your oil earlier than recommended, go ahead. My entire point in this thread has been that blanket advice without using all the factors is bunk. And when people give advice that differs from others they will be challenged on it. You could go ahead and change your oil at 1500 and I won't care. When you recommend others do the same despite changes in modern engineering (i.e. engines are better, oil is better and we have better ways of predicting it's condition), someone will challenge that advice.

Not much of what I said has stuck with you. No way would I ever recommend changing oil regularly at 1,500 miles; that is an inexcusable waste of oil and money. Maybe it's worth it if you drive your car once a year, or twenty hours per day. Granted, a car with it's oil changed every 500 miles will last much, much longer than a car with oil changed every 7,500. It's an issue of ethics; hopefully, no one is that desperate to become an enemy of the environment.

I welcome opposing opinions, it gets a good discussion going. So here:

Engines are "better", yes; advances in technology allow tighter tolerances, hotter temperatures, and more complex moving parts without risk of failure. This puts even more strain on engine oil, and car manufacturers can do this because they know that the easily available motor oils on the market have improved and can handle this. But the only major improvement in engine oil is the quality/price of synthetic oil since its first appearance in the seventies; traditional oil companies have changed their additive packages (sometimes up to three times a year), but their base stock hasn't improved. In fact, most oil companies don't create their own stock, but buy it from other well established companies in bulk. Pennzoil buys stock from Mobil 1, for instance. Group IV and V stock is superior to anything on the market, but the *endurance* of the oil has still not been proven to last longer than dino oil. Thus, engines have become tougher on oil, and while non-synthetic oil has improved greatly in the area of extreme pressure/anti-wear additives, the advances in oil longevity are negligent! This is why most car companies have been suggesting the

3,750/5,000mi service interval since the eighties, and still do, regardless of using dino or synthetic.

"televascular" wrote

At some point, more frequent changes add no further life to the engine. That point may very well be around 3000 miles per oil change (with a commensurate time limit).

I think there is no basis (data, common sense, or otherwise) for saying an engine will last "much, much longer" the more often one changes the oil.

I would agree.

In fact, a change every 2,500 miles including the filter will suffice for even the most poorly rated motor oil.

Use of Castrol or Valvoline dino oil should easily be good for 5,000 miles with maybe an filter change half way in between.

I don't really see a great advantage with synthetics for engine lubrication but in transmissions/differentials, they can make a considerable difference in performance and extended length of service life.

JT

Nope. That's cause I don't agree.

I never said you stated it. I said if you did state that's the interval you use, I don't care. But when you post that others should in an open forum, there will be active debate on it.

Which cap companies are currently suggesting a 3750/5000 interval? I know that it isn't the case on the '01 Accord, '02 Venture, '03 SRX and '06 Passat. Nor is it suggested on the '06 which is what started this thread. So which manufacturers are? The only ones that are suggesting it are the oil change places and we know what their motivation is.

The 500mi vs. 7,500mi OCI was an extreme example to illustrate how oil affects engine life. But to whoever said there's no data relating oil change intervals to engine longevity, you're wrong. There is a DIRECT relationship, though not stated through specific mileage numbers. There was a contest in California decades ago about which organization could put the most mileage on a car within one year. Not sure about the specifics, but a Civic won with 1,000,000 miles. They changed the oil every 1,000mi as one of the factors in ensuring a long life. I'm sure a quick search will yield an article.

I can't stress this enough, go to

"You could go ahead and change your oil at 1500 and I won't care. When you recommend others do the same despite changes in modern engineering (i.e. engines are better, oil is better and we have better ways of predicting it's condition), someone will challenge that advice."

Grumpy AuC> In fact, a change every 2,500 miles including the filter will suffice

Yes, I agree.

Agreed, though I feel the extra filter change isn't neccessary. This entire discussion was sparked when Seth disagreed that 7,500mi OCIs were too lengthy. He argued that the Oil Life Meter is entirely accurate, so if it suggests 7,500, then the oil life meter is correct. I suggested 5,000mi changes regardless of the OLM, and he argued that the oil is capable of providing adequate protection until the meter says it can't.

I use Specialty Formulations' MTL-P synthetic transmission fluid in my

6spd Civic Si. Aside from the peace of mind, I have noticed a true improvement in shift quality; the infamous notchiness in 3rd gear is gone! And no, this is not my imagination, many people have noted shift feel improvement after switching to ANY synthetic tranny fluid in the '06 Si. The MTL-P is very similar to Honda MTF viscosity (11.5cSt), but the synth stock/additive package is way superior. A VOA shows Honda MTF to be similar to engine oil, with an increased calcium content... But I'm curious to see what Acura's newly reformulated tranny fluid is all about.

And again, I must disagree; synthetic engine oil does provide great advantages over dino oil. It may not be worth the extra money for, say, a family-carrying Camry, but for high-rev, high performance applications, there is a significant improvement. Synthetic oil not only coats better and retains viscosity at extreme temps, but its cleaning abilities are well documented. The synthetic advantage may be greater for tranny fluid, seeing as how much more stress is exerted on transmission components, but synth motor oil is worth every penny.

Of course, this is all my opinion.

"televascular" wrote

Sorry, I do not buy the proposal that even a 500 mile interval is necessarily superior to a 7500 mile interval.

That's not what I said.

You have to read carefully. You have to write even more carefully.