Who was it who mentioned Fram oil filters and dropping oil pressure?

You don't seem to quite grasp the concept of insurance. Is buying fire insurance stupid for those who are among the vast majority that never collect a benefit?

-jim

As I have said earlier, the book says 5000, less under severe conditions. The two different dealerships I have bought from recommend 3500. It is a small price to pay,and I am content with it.

Our 1998 Buick LeSabre actually had a reset button in the glove compartment area.

There were occasions it came on at less than 3500 miles, but not often.

I have heard the GM algorithm strongly defended as far as its ability to predict oil change intervals, but like most everything else in this entire thread, there is no hard proof that I have ever seen.

I am sure these studies must exist, on filters, oil change intervals, effect of particulates of different size distributions in the oil, etc etc, but I have never seen them. (And I HAVE looked for them)

Then you should be changing your oil every 100 miles. It will have the same benefit on the longevity of the engine versus changing the oil every 1000 miles, 3000 miles, or 5000 miles--no effect at all. But it'll make you feel better.

"Recreational Oil Changing

The term "recreational oil changer" was coined to define people that change their oil far more than necessary because they actually enjoy doing it. It's easy to understand the psychology behind the recreational oil changing. It's the visceral feel of the tools, the victory when that old oil filter breaks free, the hot dark oil pouring out, the joy of oiling of the gasket on the new filter, that new copper or fiber gasket on the drain plug, the clean clear oil going in, and the sense of accomplishment when you start the car, the oil pressure light comes on for a moment, then goes out. For $8-10 in oil and parts, it's pretty cheap entertainment, but if people would be content to do it only when it provides some benefit to the vehicle it would be better."

I'm not the one claiming to have knowledge of what is going on inside an engine with nothing to go on but fairy tales and superstition.

Lets examine your claim that Ford went to great expense to improve the design of their filters in order to fix the problem you experienced with your engine. This story is nothing but a fairy tale. Its purpose is not to inform but to comfort the ignorant. The main purpose of this fairy tale is probably intended to divert you from noticing that there are design flaws in Ford's engines. The fact is many owners of these engines have had the exact same complaint even when they were using the magic filters and magic oil that Ford sells.

Do some research on Nitrile and Silicone:

You have absolutely no evidence that Silicone is a better material choice for this application. It's not as if no one has ever tested how these materials perform as ABDV valves in automotive oil filters. All the test results that I have encountered have not shown the use of silicone to be a superior material for automotive oil filter ABDV than nitrile. Comparisons that I have seen show nitrile ABDV valves to be generally superior to silicone. I seriously doubt that you have seen any real evidence at all that contradicts that. There is no evidence that nitrile will degrade faster than silicone. In fact all the evidence from testing done by material scientists say that silicone will degrade faster than nitrile in motor oil. Many engines use nitrile where a dynamic seal is needed for motor oil. There is no evidence it doesn't hold up well - nitrile has been shown to provide reliable seal that will hold up for dozens of years. There is lots of nitrile used in existing engines where a dynamic seal is needed so it is absurd to claim it won't last in an application where it gets replaced in 1 year at the most. There is no evidence that silicone makes a better or more reliable seal

- again all the test results show the opposite in motor oil applications. And finally there is no evidence that it costs more for Ford to put a piece of silicone rubber in their filters instead of a piece of nitrile rubber. And even if that part of the story was true there is no evidence that throwing more expensive parts inside a tin can makes a better filter.

There is no part of your story that has a single factual basis. The entire story and all its parts are based on myth.

-jim

Probably I can find it again, C.E

I have never seen that, in all my days. It takes one hell of a lot of pressure (or very weak threads) to do something like this.

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 08:22:45 -0600, "hls" wrote:

My son told me that he has been resetting it when he changes oil, but has also changed the oil before it came on, because we about to take a long trip. And if it isn't on, he doesn't reset it. That raises some questions. Personally, I don't see it as useful unless you're willing to let it be your sole guide to oil changes. Since we jot down mileage at changes, then change again after 3k miles and no later than 4k miles, the light is just an irritation.

Agreed. If I feel like it later, I'll take a look at the shop manual to see if says anything about it. Don't hold your breath.

I don't think they exist in a useful form. Imagine the logistics and expense of testing so many engines under many conditions and miles, with controls. Even if one were to test the oil filtration characteristics of many filters, using one engine to do it would not necessarily reveal how another engine would do with the same filters. Then you'll naturally get mechs and internet pundits saying stuff like "Sure, the Fram might be OK the Chevy, but the Ford really needs a Purulator." The CR report was the most extensive I've seen, but had many flaws. I consider it useless except as an interesting read. The auto manufacturers have the best somewhat controlled ability to get a handle on it with their maintenance schedules and dealership networks. Besides that, when I worked at IH there were engines constantly running on stands in the engine test area, and I'm sure all manufacturers do the same. I don't know what tests they do, but it's a safe assumption they are using their own oil change recommendations to run some amount of miles, teardown, and look for wear. Doubt they tinker too much with the oil beyond that. And as far as I saw, testing was done under constant external air temperature. Could be wrong about that though. As an aside, when I was at IH in Melrose Park, IL, an engine test tech was killed when an engine flew apart. There was quite a stink with the UAW about flawed test equipment that allowed the engine to go full throttle. About 1973. In any case, a car on the road, driven under diverse weather conditions, and varying warm-up and acceleration modes, is best left to the owners own judgement regarding when to change the oil. My opinion.

--Vic

Quoting your ideas as facts, with no scientific supporting information. You do what you want, and I'll do what I want, okay?

I believe that the ad copy for any good preoiler has this information, but I don't have time to find an example at the moment. maybe on CM's web site?

nate

******* I dont know. I can look, but I have never seen any hard data on this.

I have no idea, Ed. These statements have been made as fact by others than you, but the apparent obvious will come back to bite you in the ass. I want to see some data....scientific significant data.

And I fully agree.. It is the owner/driver, at the end of the day, who has to assume the responsibility for his maintenance diligency. (Except when someone dogs one unmercifully and dumps it on an unsuspecting used car buyer.)

I just changed oil and filter on both cars today and reset the electronics. Total time 55 minutes.

Bosch filter plus 5 quarts of Valvoline 5W30 was $19.63, for the Solara. Napa Gold filter and 6 quarts 4 oz of the same oil was $4.00 more.

Cheap enough, and I am good to go for about another 3 months on each car.

You could start dropping hints that this is what you want for Xmas:

I'd wait for an analysis...

Yeah, my sweetie would love to put that under our tree ;>)

There are some good engine test labs here in Texas, and I have gone onto some of their sites, also SAE, but in most cases when there appears to be data, there is first a $$ charge.

I posted earlier that I just changed my Solara oil and filter today, total expense $19.63. If I paid $20.00 for an oil analysis, that would be money rather poorly spent, woundnt it.....

Here is a link to the Fram FAQ, which gives a minute bit of information on how the filters are tested and certified....Still no hard data, but worth an insomniac's second glance:

Hmm, a place that makes money by selling parts and service recommends short oil change intervals.... how surprising.

As long as I get the change in under 5000k, I have a paper trail to support my warranty, and that is important to me. Although, on the Avalon, we have now had it nearly three years and there has been nothing falling off, no rattles, absolutely nothing to complain about. The warranty on this one goes 7/70.