Synthetic Oil

I have a 1990 LS400 clocking about 212K ... I have changed the oil (good o' standard 5w30 ) about every 5000 miles ... give or take ... and have noticed absolutely no deterioration in performance whatsoever. The car has had it share of maintenance costs, but none relating to the engine other than scheduled stuff. The car doesn't get great city gas mileage (16 mpg), but consistently gets just shy of 25 mpg highway.

I own 2 Lexus's, a 99 ES300 and a 00 RX300 and I use Amsoil Series 2000

Wayne

synthetic is the way to go. Use the factory suggested weight, change every 7500 miles. You'll be fine. For a daily driver I suggest Mobil1 or Amsoil. If you like to drag race then go Royal Purple :-)

When I was in college we ran an experiment by having 2 brand new taxis, one with full synthetic the other with Dino oil since the first oil change. Both vehicles worked the Atlanta airport for 1 year, both had the oil changed at factory suggested interval, and both had about 26k miles at the end of the year. Environment was summer above 90 degrees, winter below freezing, and several hours of idling.

Both motors were pulled at the end of 12 months and the valve train, oil pan and cylinder walls were examined. The vehicle with full synthetic was noticebly better across the board. These were all "naked eye' and "feel" tests but you could see less wear and cleaner internals on the synthetic engine. These were a pair of Crown Vics by the way.

The factory recommended interval for oil changes is the same for conventional and synthetic oil. Others may suggest longer oil change intervals with synthetic, but I suspect that the folks who engineered, designed, built, and will warrantee your car know more about servicing and maintaining your car than your average car enthusiast.

I am not that familiar with the process of producing synthetic oil, but I believe that it is also based on crude oil so there is probably little, if any reduction in crude oil use.

I don't where you get your info from but it like nothing that I've ever heard before, I go about 12k mile between changes on my MB, that what the manufacturer recommends

I get my info from Toyota's U.S. web site.

I have owned several different makes of vehicles and never heard of a recomendation of 12K no matter how little or severe the usage might be. I treated my rusted out 1972 Ford Torino better than that, not to mention that it was more reliable than the MB products currently being produced.. Why spend big bucks on a luxury car only to be a cheap ass on something as inexpensive as an oil change? The oil is recycled so enviomental issues are irrelevant.

just because *you* never heard of it does not mean it isn't true, does not mean it is a bad thing. The manufacturer calls for that interval and that is good enough for me

Your point is duely noted. Just because I have have not heard of does not mean it does not exist. But I noticed you did not dispute that the old Torino was more reliable than current Mercedes products. I might add it was also quite cheaper and easier to maintain.

whatever

"Ice" quipped:

although *some* modern oils (and the proper oil filters) can go significantly longer between oil changes I personally, wouldn't let it go as long as 12k miles.

I also read that the quality of Mercedes automobiles have not been as high as they were prior to the Chrysler merger. In fact, it seems to be a major topic of discussion in numerous MB groups.

I will give you a hint, the quality of MB ... or more properly the maintenance costs to keep them running, are incredibly high. This fact has no correlation with their merger with Chrysler - they have always been that way. When they are working however, they are still one of the most enjoyable cars to drive (The BMW 6 & 7 series give them a run for the money ... in terms of driving fun ). Lexus is very reliable, but pretty much lack any driver excitement.

"Jerohm" quipped:

I agree that maintenance costs for MB are and always have been expensive, however the *frequency* of warrantied repairs have gone significantly up since the merger.

I subscribe the Automotive Daily News, an e-zine for dealers (I'm not one but got a subscription through someone who is), and it has been mentioned several times the quality control issues that has plagued MB since the merger.

One of the problems that has arisen is that unlike the past, where many parts were subcontracted to either German companies or Asian companies to manufacture, many parts are now subcontracted to post eastern block countries where quality control has been horrendously poor.

Add to that, DC's plan to jam their cars with the latest technology and it's been a recipe for disaster.

BMW has always been plagued with electrical and mechanical problems in their 7 series cars

If you define excitement as breakdowns and frequent visits with your mechanic, well, then I prefer as little excitement as possible.

OTOH, if you define excitement as a smooth, quiet, comfortable and reliable ride that lessens the stresses of the day and allows me to enjoy the good things in life (including the nice sound system, etc.), as opposed to feeling like I'm in a land yacht or like I just had a workout at the gym, then, yes, I prefer some excitement.

It all depends on how you define excitement...

I OWN a Lexus because I have little tolerance for addressing adversity, but I have enough objectivity to admit when a Benz or BMW ARE working the way they are SUPPOSE to, they offer FAR more of a 'drivers' experience. Driving a Lexus is a little like going though life surrounded in bubble wrap ... NOT that, that is necessarily a BAD thing .... ;^)

adversity, but

It all depends on what kind of "driving experience" you want to have. I suspect you COULD have bought a BMW or MB, but instead you CHOSE the Lexus experience.

It's not a matter of OBJECTIVITY. It's SUBJECTIVE.