dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: RF Overlord
Although intellectually I know that changing oil around like that is meaningless, I still felt weirded out reading that article.
Originally Posted By: Phishin
If you are 100% committed to doing what's absolutely the BEST for your engine, I've always thought that 1k mile OCI's with SuperTech is better for your car than 8-10k mile OCI's with Red Line, Motul, PU, M1, etc.
I thought I read here that there was anecdotal evidence that changing oil TOO often could be detrimental...something about the AW layer needing time to plate properly...
Ultra frequent OCIs are a good idea if you're intending to flush out some known contaminant. If you've fixed a leaking injector, or had a recent silicone bead on a valve cover, then doing a few quick full drain/fill cycles can be a good thing to rid the system of the unwanted trace element(s). There are some really good reasons to do a few short OCIs to rid the system of contamination.
But doing this as an overall practice is a bad thing. The typical high-detergency of oils today would destroy the tribochemical barrier and never allow it to re-develop. It is the major player in wear reduction.
Read both the SAE study (2007-01-4133) and my UOA normalcy article. The longer you use oil, the lower your wear rates go. Yes - there most certainly is a practical limit to that approach. But it is FAR, FAR beyond what any typical BITOGer is going to try. Ford's data, my own personal experiement, and literally more than 10,000 UOAs in my database all point to this being true. It's not just anecdotal; it's proven.
I would challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to bring forth the proof for an opposing viewpoint. I'm not asking for, nor would I accept, simple rhetoric or opinion. I'm talking about PROOF! It's fine to disagree, but when you do, don't just blabber; bring real data, show causation, eliminate all but root origin, and firm up conclusions.
Although intellectually I know that changing oil around like that is meaningless, I still felt weirded out reading that article.
Originally Posted By: Phishin
If you are 100% committed to doing what's absolutely the BEST for your engine, I've always thought that 1k mile OCI's with SuperTech is better for your car than 8-10k mile OCI's with Red Line, Motul, PU, M1, etc.
I thought I read here that there was anecdotal evidence that changing oil TOO often could be detrimental...something about the AW layer needing time to plate properly...
Ultra frequent OCIs are a good idea if you're intending to flush out some known contaminant. If you've fixed a leaking injector, or had a recent silicone bead on a valve cover, then doing a few quick full drain/fill cycles can be a good thing to rid the system of the unwanted trace element(s). There are some really good reasons to do a few short OCIs to rid the system of contamination.
But doing this as an overall practice is a bad thing. The typical high-detergency of oils today would destroy the tribochemical barrier and never allow it to re-develop. It is the major player in wear reduction.
Read both the SAE study (2007-01-4133) and my UOA normalcy article. The longer you use oil, the lower your wear rates go. Yes - there most certainly is a practical limit to that approach. But it is FAR, FAR beyond what any typical BITOGer is going to try. Ford's data, my own personal experiement, and literally more than 10,000 UOAs in my database all point to this being true. It's not just anecdotal; it's proven.
I would challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to bring forth the proof for an opposing viewpoint. I'm not asking for, nor would I accept, simple rhetoric or opinion. I'm talking about PROOF! It's fine to disagree, but when you do, don't just blabber; bring real data, show causation, eliminate all but root origin, and firm up conclusions.
Last edited:
