From where I sit, spending extra for slightly more frequent oil changes costs about the same as regular UOAs.
It would be different if I were managing a fleet. Well, my wife considers 3 vintage muscle cars and 3 daily drivers a "fleet," but I don't... :-)
Reality check - what percentage of cars do you think are retired from service because of an engine "worn out" due to oil related wear (as opposed to failures related to the fuel, ignition, sensors, or other non-lubricated component)? I am guessing it is a very low percentage. I think rust, accidents, and transmission problems are all a lot more likely to be the reason that a car is junked than a worn out engine (well unless you are driving a Toyota with one of the sludge prone engines). No one I know has ever gotten rid of a car because the engine was worn out. I know it happens, but just not very often. My older sister is the queen of ignoring maintenance, and even she has never worn out an engine. The engine in the 12 year old Honda she just sold ran just fine. The rest of the car was crap, but the engine was fine and it never had oil changes more often than 7500 miles and often a lot less often. Nothing better than conventional Havoline was every used in the crank case (but she did get decent Wix filters).
Ed
And I suspect the ones retired from service for all non-engine problems combined is far smaller than those retired from service because the owners just wanted something newer and flashier.
Just simply conserving by doing any number of things would have a far far greater impact. But nothing gets the people who are pretty much careless in conserving in almost every other respect so riled up as finding out someone is changing oil at 3000 miles.
-jim
----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
This is unfortunately a known issue on these cars. But in Driver's Ed, didn't your nephew get taught to run his eyes across the gauges every couple minutes and make sure everything was okay? You gotta watch them.
Look, if the driver isn't watching the gauges, who is to say a red light or a buzzer or a gadget that pokes him in the side is going to do any good either? I recently saw a Corolla whose engine had melted down into slag. The owner noted that the oil light had been on for a couple weeks and he kept meaning to have it checked.
It's important to pay attention to the gauges.... that's what they are there for.
Your nephew's problem MAY have been accelerated by the fact that a lot of newer BMWs don't have real temperature gauges any more, just gadgets with a needle that indicate three positions. Seems BMW doesn't trust modern drivers either.
--scott
Please God, Make it stop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Our local high school still offers driver's ed.
And the first time someone gets killed because he didn't have the choice of sacrificing his engine to get to a safe spot....
The final decision should rest with the driver. But the driver should KNOW what the implications of that decision are.
You'd expect that to be true in every aspect of motoring, and "on average" it's true -- isn't it? Seems to be working out satisfactorily, or the society would change standards for participation as a driver -- wouldn't it?
I wasn't implying a hard cut off, 'now' meant in the present day.
Yes... but does it make a difference? If the computer shuts the car off 'now' or 'in 30 seconds,' its still out of the driver's control. I know you mentioned an override switch, but I can still see the lawsuits flying. "I got all scared when the warning went off, I couldn't find the switch, so I looked around for it and hit a guardrail while I was looking down, and then a truck hit me, my passenger was killed and I'm paralyzed. The carmaker owes me 300 million dollars."
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.