But what is problematic? I believe I read an article (here?) that showed that on average, current vehicles are much more reliable than those in the past. Folks have a false sense that what is older was better...it really wasn't.
Are the days of the 10k OCI over with?
- Thread starter zerosoma
- Start date
It all depends on what your definition of "reliable" is? Yes, they'll get you from point A to B. But I don't call oil dilution, and consumption in the process of doing it, as being "reliable".
I never had a vehicle in over 50 years of driving either burn or dilute oil. Today it seems to be rather commonplace.
Not to mention how stupid the concept is, of having it all happen under the banner of trying to achieve less pollution. That in itself makes it a sick joke.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
I find it amazing how low-tension rings keep getting blamed. Toyota sludger engines were notorious for coking up the ring lands and consuming obscene amounts of oil, this is long before TGDI. GM had the same problem at Saturn, insufficient and insufficiently sized oil return holes in the oil control ring region.
If low tension rings were the smoking gun some folks on here keep claiming they are, then every manufacturer using them, some of which have been doing so for decades, would be having the same problems, but they aren't.
It seems wholly inconceivable for some that Honda or Toyota could bugger up the engineering on something, despite there being plenty of evidence of this happening in the past. Instead, we get the blame placed on CAFE or some other conspiracy, anything that avoids admitting that TOYONDA could ever make an engineering/design mistake.
If BMW of all marques, can manage to make a TGDI engine that doesn't dilute or use oil, one blaming CAFE should really reconsider the position they've taken on this matter.
Toyota doesn't even use a real oil life monitor, it's an Oil Life Moron, just counting mileage, while most of its peers are using complex algorithms factoring in all manner of operating parameters and conditions to determine when the lubricant should be changed.
I have 3 modern vehicles with DI (see sig). None burn or consume any oil. They get a bit of minor fuel dilution that is a non-issue.
I would actually prefer a mileage only monitor. I have the "full version" on my Jeep, and that thing is ridiculous. I would never leave oil in as long as that thing says to.
It's a 2015, and I would only be on my 2nd oil change if I went by that goofy, "percentage of life left".
How many miles are on them? And what do you consider to be, "minor fuel dilution"?
In the past, mine had me on-track for a 10K OCI. However, I recently changed my driving pattern a bit and it started dropping very aggressively. The only change was that I started making a handful of 2-3 mile trips over the last few months...plus a little bit of idling. The oil temp still gets up to 200-210f during these trips so I'm curious what other factors are driving it.
I'm now on track for a 8K OCI after 2K miles.
Look at my signature please - all info is there.
I consider minor fuel dilution to be represented by a flash point of 380-390; BS calls his
I don't know anyone that has a vehicle that has issues with any of these in my circle of personal friends and in my dealings on social media which are quite extensive w/r to FB groups, modding forums, etc. This is interent boogieman primarily but sure, some engines seem to have some issues (Honda 1.5 comes to mind).
Interesting perspective coming from someone who lives on reservoir which was paid for by the taxpayer.
Last edited:
How does all of this translate into how it reads on the dipstick? Do you find your oil level is rising as you drive?
What does living on a river have to do with anything? Other than you like to stretch things.
Your rant (post 219). Just give it a rest.
Never.
You're trying to compare the stupidity of CAFE, to the Colorado River dam projects? Seriously?
Some of us, everyone I know is sick of it and their votes are not going to those pushing this nonsense. A few of their votes did go to those pushing it, they won't in 2024.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Aye, so IOLM's are ridiculous because you don't understand the technical basis for how they operate, and this in turn prompts you to not trust them? If your plan is to come across as an overtly paranoid luddite that nobody should be taking seriously, you are doing a bang-up job.
Yes because one could argue that there's no right to subsidized desert living. It's hypocritical. Just because you personally don't experience negative externalities doesn't mean other people don't either.
Yes one could argue. But it's a stupid comparison that makes for an even dumber argument.
Similar threads
