I would wager your debate style leaves not much room for argument......
I'm not trying to argue. Just pointing out, that this is
ALL environmentally driven. If that 24 year old document doesn't prove it, nothing will. This is all about politics, along with an agenda driven government agency, wanting you to make your oil last longer... Not your engine.
They're simply trying to prove to you how they have established a method so that you can get away with it.... Maybe. If that was published by the SAE instead of the EPA, there is room for argument. But it isn't, because it wasn't.
They even prove it in the first paragraph :
"This fact sheet describes how a testing program can extend engine oil life and thus lower oil consumption, and reduce used oil generation..."
I'm not saying there is anything wrong with trying to do that. But this is all no different than what the government and CAFE is pushing, with all of these super thin oils. None of it is going to keep your engine running longer, because the government doesn't care what you are forced to spend on what their mandates generate.
None of this is offering better protection for your engine. Regardless of how you drive. Under some circumstances I can possibly see it for the Post Office, UPS and Fed Ex. Who operate thousands of vehicles, millions of miles every year.
Simply because it can and does reduce their operational expenses, and increases their profitability by pushing their oil further..... Assuming it doesn't shed life from their vehicles. Or generate increased expensive repairs.
But for the people on this forum who operate a few personal vehicles, a few thousand miles a year, the risk vs. reward factor simply isn't there. Especially with today's high vehicle costs, along with the people who are keeping them longer.
Oil changes are still the cheapest protection you can give your engine. Not letting it go based on advice from a government agency.
