The problem with recommending oil change intervals is motivating drivers to check engine oil level at reasonable intervals.
Bill Targets Oil Drain Intervals
- Thread starter supercity
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: surfstar
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
California is broke, so goes the rest of the nation.
Your kids can pick up the tab.
Have Flint and Detroit been re-located to California?
Now you're arguing my side again. Detroit and Flint have been run by Democrats for 60 years. Hence the bankruptcies.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
California is broke, so goes the rest of the nation.
Your kids can pick up the tab.
Have Flint and Detroit been re-located to California?
Now you're arguing my side again. Detroit and Flint have been run by Democrats for 60 years. Hence the bankruptcies.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Astro14
It would make more sense if they were:
1. Required to tell you the manufacturer recommended interval
2. Actually required to use the manufacturer specified oil
They often use bulk oil, that may not meet long drain specifications. Since they don't, the bill would actually cause many consumers, who are ignorant of specifications, run that oil TOO long.
Sure, put the bulk Dino in my BMW...see you in 15,000 miles!
Totally agree. The key words are "Manufacturer Specified", not 'recommended' or 'suitable', etc.
It would make more sense if they were:
1. Required to tell you the manufacturer recommended interval
2. Actually required to use the manufacturer specified oil
They often use bulk oil, that may not meet long drain specifications. Since they don't, the bill would actually cause many consumers, who are ignorant of specifications, run that oil TOO long.
Sure, put the bulk Dino in my BMW...see you in 15,000 miles!
Totally agree. The key words are "Manufacturer Specified", not 'recommended' or 'suitable', etc.
I think that if we are going to protect vulnerable mothers with the wolf at the door, they need to g the next step, and ban those drug ads that permeate your TV too.
and the home shopping network.
Both are pushing products and services that aren't needed to the vulnerable.
and the home shopping network.
Both are pushing products and services that aren't needed to the vulnerable.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
How about adding a background check as well? LOL
And a waiting period and a license fee.
sir1900: Of course. BC is Canada's California.
How about adding a background check as well? LOL
And a waiting period and a license fee.
sir1900: Of course. BC is Canada's California.
This is not bad at all. Those dishonest lube places can't trick my in laws into believing that if you don't change it every 3k the car will blow up.
Originally Posted By: Kestas
Calm down. It's not as bad as you think. They only want to require the oil change places to inform the owner what the manufacturer recommended drain intervals are. Nothing in the bill forces vehicle owners to extend their drain intervals. It's no different than forcing manufacturers to display the EPA mileage rating on new vehicles.
It's not that bad, just stupid. I would imagine it will take a considerable amount of time to verify the spec for all the different cars on the road, this will hinder the shops ability to complete work and do business.
They're also infringing upon the shops right to have their own recommendation for an oil change interval in a state with some of the most severe duty driving in the Country. OLM's exist because flat recommendations are not accurate.
Calm down. It's not as bad as you think. They only want to require the oil change places to inform the owner what the manufacturer recommended drain intervals are. Nothing in the bill forces vehicle owners to extend their drain intervals. It's no different than forcing manufacturers to display the EPA mileage rating on new vehicles.
It's not that bad, just stupid. I would imagine it will take a considerable amount of time to verify the spec for all the different cars on the road, this will hinder the shops ability to complete work and do business.
They're also infringing upon the shops right to have their own recommendation for an oil change interval in a state with some of the most severe duty driving in the Country. OLM's exist because flat recommendations are not accurate.
I had thought of that, but it doesn't hold water. If their literature or their computer covers refill capacity for several fluids and oil specifications and oil filter specifications for each application, being able to augment that with severe service intervals or a notation that the vehicle has an IOLM is rather trivial.
Originally Posted By: Garak
sir1900: Of course. BC is Canada's California.
Which BC are you talking about? The one I live in has some of the lowest personal and corporate taxes on the continent and the strongest economy in Canada. I guess you must mean the weather - the forecast is for sun and 50+ degree weather next week ;-)
sir1900: Of course. BC is Canada's California.
Which BC are you talking about? The one I live in has some of the lowest personal and corporate taxes on the continent and the strongest economy in Canada. I guess you must mean the weather - the forecast is for sun and 50+ degree weather next week ;-)
Originally Posted By: Garak
I had thought of that, but it doesn't hold water. If their literature or their computer covers refill capacity for several fluids and oil specifications and oil filter specifications for each application, being able to augment that with severe service intervals or a notation that the vehicle has an IOLM is rather trivial.
The law puts the responsibility on the shops, most of which will be stand alone businesses that go off knowledge in their memory or a label that is almost always under the hood for capacity. This invites error, takes time, and costs businesses money via slow down or through forced adaption to buy software with such information. Regardless, the law doesn't force software writers to update their software or whoever is making this "literature" you think shops have for every car made in the last 20 years to send out updates. Considering how many vehicles this would apply to I don't think it is trivial at all, sounds quite daunting, and invites error and thus liability for shops.
I had thought of that, but it doesn't hold water. If their literature or their computer covers refill capacity for several fluids and oil specifications and oil filter specifications for each application, being able to augment that with severe service intervals or a notation that the vehicle has an IOLM is rather trivial.
The law puts the responsibility on the shops, most of which will be stand alone businesses that go off knowledge in their memory or a label that is almost always under the hood for capacity. This invites error, takes time, and costs businesses money via slow down or through forced adaption to buy software with such information. Regardless, the law doesn't force software writers to update their software or whoever is making this "literature" you think shops have for every car made in the last 20 years to send out updates. Considering how many vehicles this would apply to I don't think it is trivial at all, sounds quite daunting, and invites error and thus liability for shops.
Exactly!
If the consumer cared about this, they would read the manual.
Most don't care.
I don't expect them to read the printout from Iffy Lube any more than them reading the owners manual.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: JerryBob
Originally Posted By: Nitronoise
I change my own oil . Will be DA*&^%$%%ed if they will tell me how to run my vehicles here in Illinois the 2nd worse state for libtards in the union , California being #1
Did you actually read the bill?
"Service providers would be prohibited from advising intervals shorter than those listed in the owner’s manual, for example, when placing a sticker on the windshield indicating when the next oil change should occur. Installers would also need to list the oil grade and viscosity that the original equipment manufacturer recommends for the vehicle “in order to prevent deceiving or misleading consumers with unnecessary and costly oil changes,” states Senate Bill 778, submitted by Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica)."
Thanks for the confirmation that this bill adds no value to the process of a consumer getting an oil change. All of the required information that the car owner needs is already provided in the owner's manual.
If the consumer cared about this, they would read the manual.
Most don't care.
I don't expect them to read the printout from Iffy Lube any more than them reading the owners manual.
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: JerryBob
Originally Posted By: Nitronoise
I change my own oil . Will be DA*&^%$%%ed if they will tell me how to run my vehicles here in Illinois the 2nd worse state for libtards in the union , California being #1
Did you actually read the bill?
"Service providers would be prohibited from advising intervals shorter than those listed in the owner’s manual, for example, when placing a sticker on the windshield indicating when the next oil change should occur. Installers would also need to list the oil grade and viscosity that the original equipment manufacturer recommends for the vehicle “in order to prevent deceiving or misleading consumers with unnecessary and costly oil changes,” states Senate Bill 778, submitted by Sen. Ben Allen (D-Santa Monica)."
Thanks for the confirmation that this bill adds no value to the process of a consumer getting an oil change. All of the required information that the car owner needs is already provided in the owner's manual.
Originally Posted By: JerryBob
Put yourself in the shoes of a single mother who is frazzled and spends her time shuttling her kids around while trying to keep the wolves away. Do you think she is going to take the time to RTFM? Try some empathy. Not everyone is like you.
She's probably too busy watching Housewives of... and reading 50 Shades of Grey. She doesn't have the time to fit reading any bit of her owners manual into that massive reading list.
Put yourself in the shoes of a single mother who is frazzled and spends her time shuttling her kids around while trying to keep the wolves away. Do you think she is going to take the time to RTFM? Try some empathy. Not everyone is like you.
She's probably too busy watching Housewives of... and reading 50 Shades of Grey. She doesn't have the time to fit reading any bit of her owners manual into that massive reading list.
Originally Posted By: JerryBob
Put yourself in the shoes of a single mother who is frazzled and spends her time shuttling her kids around while trying to keep the wolves away. Do you think she is going to take the time to RTFM? Try some empathy. Not everyone is like you.
This is 2016 women have been educated since the beginning of the last century,Nope no sympathy from me. It is not my fault they are single parents.
Put yourself in the shoes of a single mother who is frazzled and spends her time shuttling her kids around while trying to keep the wolves away. Do you think she is going to take the time to RTFM? Try some empathy. Not everyone is like you.
This is 2016 women have been educated since the beginning of the last century,Nope no sympathy from me. It is not my fault they are single parents.
Originally Posted By: jaj
I guess you must mean the weather - the forecast is for sun and 50+ degree weather next week ;-)
I'm talking the general feel and attitude.
Gasbuggy: If they can be expected to use specified oil and capacities, which aren't always posted somewhere on the vehicle, they can handle more than, "See you in 3000 miles." If they can't they're in the wrong business. I appreciate that it's difficult to get everything correct in a few short minutes for a few dollars, but that's the nature of the beast.
I guess you must mean the weather - the forecast is for sun and 50+ degree weather next week ;-)
I'm talking the general feel and attitude.
Gasbuggy: If they can be expected to use specified oil and capacities, which aren't always posted somewhere on the vehicle, they can handle more than, "See you in 3000 miles." If they can't they're in the wrong business. I appreciate that it's difficult to get everything correct in a few short minutes for a few dollars, but that's the nature of the beast.
Originally Posted By: javacontour
[
She's probably too busy watching Housewives of... and reading 50 Shades of Grey. She doesn't have the time to fit reading any bit of her owners manual into that massive reading list.
I'll take the ones reading 50 shades. You can have all the OM reading ones.
[
She's probably too busy watching Housewives of... and reading 50 Shades of Grey. She doesn't have the time to fit reading any bit of her owners manual into that massive reading list.
I'll take the ones reading 50 shades. You can have all the OM reading ones.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: jaj
I guess you must mean the weather - the forecast is for sun and 50+ degree weather next week ;-)
I'm talking the general feel and attitude.
Gasbuggy: If they can be expected to use specified oil and capacities, which aren't always posted somewhere on the vehicle, they can handle more than, "See you in 3000 miles." If they can't they're in the wrong business. I appreciate that it's difficult to get everything correct in a few short minutes for a few dollars, but that's the nature of the beast.
It's not the nature of anything, aside from this being the nature of nanny state. As a BITOG'r you should know that putting long suggested change intervals in from the manual will lead to more engine wear and possibly sludge and other damage for consumers. Do you agree that it will lead to some drivers ignoring their OLM and defaulting to the sticker/shop suggestion? Yes/No. Do you agree that factory recommendations can fall short of protecting the engine? Yes/No. Do you agree that some oils will fall short of blindly meeting a mileage spec? Yes/No. Do you believe these blasphemous short interval suggestions save a portion of inept non oil level checkers from engine failures? Yes/No.
For this bill to make sense the answer to all should be No. California wants to stick it to shops and try to prevent more waste oil from being recycled. It's the ignorant consumers they're supposedly protecting who will also be the ones suffering. Perhaps they need a bill that makes it illegal to run past the mileage recommendation or to not maintain a safe oil level in your engine, that will solve some of the new problems this creates.
This is idiocracy all around. They will have countless different model years with identical engines running the same oil and receiving varying change recommendations based on the manufacturers suggestion for that given year. Hopefully the bill allows shops to opt to make no suggestion, and let the consumer figure it out, rather than be forced to provide one and accept liability for what may occur from making it.
Originally Posted By: jaj
I guess you must mean the weather - the forecast is for sun and 50+ degree weather next week ;-)
I'm talking the general feel and attitude.
Gasbuggy: If they can be expected to use specified oil and capacities, which aren't always posted somewhere on the vehicle, they can handle more than, "See you in 3000 miles." If they can't they're in the wrong business. I appreciate that it's difficult to get everything correct in a few short minutes for a few dollars, but that's the nature of the beast.
It's not the nature of anything, aside from this being the nature of nanny state. As a BITOG'r you should know that putting long suggested change intervals in from the manual will lead to more engine wear and possibly sludge and other damage for consumers. Do you agree that it will lead to some drivers ignoring their OLM and defaulting to the sticker/shop suggestion? Yes/No. Do you agree that factory recommendations can fall short of protecting the engine? Yes/No. Do you agree that some oils will fall short of blindly meeting a mileage spec? Yes/No. Do you believe these blasphemous short interval suggestions save a portion of inept non oil level checkers from engine failures? Yes/No.
For this bill to make sense the answer to all should be No. California wants to stick it to shops and try to prevent more waste oil from being recycled. It's the ignorant consumers they're supposedly protecting who will also be the ones suffering. Perhaps they need a bill that makes it illegal to run past the mileage recommendation or to not maintain a safe oil level in your engine, that will solve some of the new problems this creates.
This is idiocracy all around. They will have countless different model years with identical engines running the same oil and receiving varying change recommendations based on the manufacturers suggestion for that given year. Hopefully the bill allows shops to opt to make no suggestion, and let the consumer figure it out, rather than be forced to provide one and accept liability for what may occur from making it.
I'm not suggesting anything about OCIs that are too long. If an oil change place knows the specifications and capacities for a vehicle, then they can know the OCI. And, the customer can follow the OLM. I'm not saying that the oil change shop should slap 15,000 miles on every vehicle, and I don't think anyone is. Match the sticker to the severe service interval on the vehicle in question.
Yes, people often follow the stickers; of course, some ignore them anyhow. There's no reason, however, not to have accurate information on the stickers.
Yes, some factory OCIs are overly optimistic. However, I've never seen it suggested before that the quick lube industry is a fix for an OEM screwup.
And yes, a short interval might protect someone who isn't checking their oil regularly. But, how many people get their oil changed regularly yet refuse to actually check it?
Nothing is getting "stuck to" the shops, other than providing truth in marketing. And, the shops won't be liable for following OEM directions. They will be liable, however, if they don't follow specifications in the first place. Shops aren't at risk from following OEM OCIs. They're at risk from not refilling engines, using wrong filters, using the wrong oil, and so forth. Those are the issues that endanger shops' bottom lines.
Yes, people often follow the stickers; of course, some ignore them anyhow. There's no reason, however, not to have accurate information on the stickers.
Yes, some factory OCIs are overly optimistic. However, I've never seen it suggested before that the quick lube industry is a fix for an OEM screwup.
And yes, a short interval might protect someone who isn't checking their oil regularly. But, how many people get their oil changed regularly yet refuse to actually check it?
Nothing is getting "stuck to" the shops, other than providing truth in marketing. And, the shops won't be liable for following OEM directions. They will be liable, however, if they don't follow specifications in the first place. Shops aren't at risk from following OEM OCIs. They're at risk from not refilling engines, using wrong filters, using the wrong oil, and so forth. Those are the issues that endanger shops' bottom lines.
You have to consider the length of some OCI's being too long to fully assess the consequences of this law, otherwise what is the point in commenting in here? This does increase liability for shops because there are bound to be mistakes, for the first time they are not going to err to the side of caution because they are not allowed to. This will also lead to increased engine failures and thus frivolous civil lawsuits thrown at shops from very same dumb consumers this aims to protect.
A business should be entitled to make their own suggestion on their oil change sticker and not have to provide information that is already located inside most vehicles (in the owners manual in the glove box). The bill has highlighted the extreme, 3000 OCI suggestion, and turned it into an excuse to interfere with every business. Plenty of shops provide reasonable service interval suggestions. Now they will replace these reasonable suggestions with unreasonable ones.
We have knowledgeable people making recommendations for OCIs everyday on this very site that are shorter than factory recommendations.
I hope to see little footnotes now from our members in California who post OCI suggestions to someone else.
A business should be entitled to make their own suggestion on their oil change sticker and not have to provide information that is already located inside most vehicles (in the owners manual in the glove box). The bill has highlighted the extreme, 3000 OCI suggestion, and turned it into an excuse to interfere with every business. Plenty of shops provide reasonable service interval suggestions. Now they will replace these reasonable suggestions with unreasonable ones.
We have knowledgeable people making recommendations for OCIs everyday on this very site that are shorter than factory recommendations.
I hope to see little footnotes now from our members in California who post OCI suggestions to someone else.
I've owned and maintained a fleet of family vehicles of all sorts over the past forty years plus, so I might count as a knowledgeable member.
I probably change oil and filters more often than needed, since I pay nobody to do it and I have at any given time a few hundred quarts of mostly syn oil and a couple of dozen oil filters bought on the cheap.
Factory OCI recommendations are typically very conservative and the factory has greater knowledge of what OCI is appropriate to any engine than does any shop.
Every OM I've ever seen directs the user to check the oil level on a regular basis.
Since most engines will not consume enough oil through the recommended OCI for this to be a problem, it likely wouldn't matter.
A law directing shops not to recommend OCIs shorter than what a vehicle manufacturer recommends seems like a reasonable effort toward preventing unnecessary expense to the consumer as well as unnecessary environmental damage from oil not needing to be replaced entering the waste stream.
It doesn't matter whether this drained oil is re-refined, burned in a cement kiln or landfilled, it still causes environmental damage, in addition to the damage done to owners' pocketbooks.
I've yet to see any engine die due to excessively long OCIs, although I have seen some die due to being run dry of oil.
That's a user problem, though.
I probably change oil and filters more often than needed, since I pay nobody to do it and I have at any given time a few hundred quarts of mostly syn oil and a couple of dozen oil filters bought on the cheap.
Factory OCI recommendations are typically very conservative and the factory has greater knowledge of what OCI is appropriate to any engine than does any shop.
Every OM I've ever seen directs the user to check the oil level on a regular basis.
Since most engines will not consume enough oil through the recommended OCI for this to be a problem, it likely wouldn't matter.
A law directing shops not to recommend OCIs shorter than what a vehicle manufacturer recommends seems like a reasonable effort toward preventing unnecessary expense to the consumer as well as unnecessary environmental damage from oil not needing to be replaced entering the waste stream.
It doesn't matter whether this drained oil is re-refined, burned in a cement kiln or landfilled, it still causes environmental damage, in addition to the damage done to owners' pocketbooks.
I've yet to see any engine die due to excessively long OCIs, although I have seen some die due to being run dry of oil.
That's a user problem, though.
- Status
Similar threads
