Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: Raidin
I hope I got this right, but...
If the engine is running clean (no unusual issues), and the additives are still present, and the filter is rarely seeing large particles to filter, then is it really necessary to change the filter when the oil is changed? Or is this just the way we've been asked to do it by the manufacturers?
If the oil lasts a long time, and the only reason it gets changed is because the additive pack will run out at some point, then couldn't you just keep the same filter going until it is close to clogging up? (visual inspection?)
It is not necessary to change oil, presuming the conditions you state exist. The way to help assure these stay in check is to UOA. Low contamination, low wear, and additives present make for a good reason to extend.
Yes - OEMs set ultra conservative OCIs for two reasons: 1) they can reduce their warranty risks with frequent OCIs and 2) they don't pay a penny for the benefit of item #1; you do!
Note that you cannot reduce YOUR warranty risk with frequent OCIs, because it's not you who pays for services/parts should a warranty claim happen. You are paying to reduce the OEMs risk of warranty in claims.
The add-pack is NOT the only reason to change oil. There are contamination issues from internal sources (soot/insolubles) and the potential for massive vis shifts, etc.
How is it do you propose you can do a "visual" on filter pores and clogging? Can you see down to 10um easily on a mat-black corrugated surface with the naked eye? I know I cannot. For that matter how do you get the media out of the filter canister (typical FF or BP element ....) and then get that Genie back into the bottle?
One way you could monitor the filter is by knowing the PSI BP relieve value, and then using a PSID gage system like Jim Allen did to track the PSID. As long as you can operate a few PSI below the crack-open value, then there's no reason to FCI. Essentially, this is similar to those air-filter gages seen on tractors, diesel engines, etc.
Soo....If I remain silent for awhile, you agree with me eh? Interesting...
Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
Tomato, tomoto...
My hypothesis is that the technology exists to eliminate oil changes altogether. This can be done only (for now) with a combination of bypass filtration and a steady supply of "top up oil" added when the level falls below full and when the filter(s) are changed. At this moment, the oil in my car has 27K on it, and I last had UOA done at 25K, the lab said it was "suitable for continued use." There are other BITOG posters that are doing similar things with trucks. I may never change my oil...I'm going to go by test lab results, not any armchair tribologist opinion on BITOG
vs:
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
It is not necessary to change oil, presuming the conditions you state exist. The way to help assure these stay in check is to UOA. Low contamination, low wear, and additives present make for a good reason to extend.
Yes - OEMs set ultra conservative OCIs for two reasons: 1) they can reduce their warranty risks with frequent OCIs and 2) they don't pay a penny for the benefit of item #1; you do!
Note that you cannot reduce YOUR warranty risk with frequent OCIs, because it's not you who pays for services/parts should a warranty claim happen. You are paying to reduce the OEMs risk of warranty in claims.
The add-pack is NOT the only reason to change oil. There are contamination issues from internal sources (soot/insolubles) and the potential for massive vis shifts, etc.
You still don't get it, Mr. Newton. It's a fundamental difference of view point. I've been doing UOA, changing oil filter(s), adding top up oil, monitoring conditions, etc....And
HAVEN'T changed oil...Look at this thread to see someone else doing similarly:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4445186/1
Additionally,
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
We have to start with a few fair assumptions here...BP systems only "sample" the full volumetric flow; typically it's about 10%. So while 1 gallon will go through your BP filter, there are 10 gallons going through the FF filter! Any particle that is 8um in size has a HIGHLY likely chance to do damage to the engine, because 9 times out of 10, it will go through the MAIN circuit and not the BP loop! Here's a new flash ... Filters cannot catch what is not directly ahead of them! So a BP filter will only be presented a damaging particle about 10% of the time; the rest of the time that same particle is heading right for your engine!
I'm running multiple bypass filters and other devices, and my total (bypass volume) is over 30% of total flow...And my
FLOW has been raised significantly from stock (with a calibrated pressure gauge inline)...So where does your "9 times through the engine prior to 1 pass through the bypass media" fit into my paradigm?!?!?
Disprove this
HYPOTHESIS (if you can)
My hypothesis is that the technology exists to eliminate oil changes altogether.
My hypothesis is that the technology exists to eliminate oil changes altogether.
My hypothesis is that the technology exists to eliminate oil changes altogether.
I'm no longer naming by brand name the filters (and other things) in my filtration system, and I'm tired of posting links no one reads, but I'm doing UOA as evidence and if I'm successful, I will be applying for a US Patent. As a technical consultant for various utilities, I have no on-the-job interaction with Statisticians such as yourself, but I do share office space with Mechanical and Lubrication engineers who have seen under the hood on my vehicle and my UOA, and they do NOT disagree with my hypothesis. Keep changing your oil as often as you like...But I really don't need you to put words in my mouth or do my thinking for me, thank you sir.
This is 2017, not 1950.
This is 2017, not 1980.
This is 2017, not 1999.
This is 2017, not 2007.
Neither oils nor filtration are what they "used to be." The oil protects the engine from wear. “Super fine filtration” leading to “super clean oil” has never been PROVEN to extend equipment life; neither has it been
DISPROVEN…Why do you think this is?
I WILL say that I can post examples of “million mile engines” using bypass filtration ten to one of your examples of “million mile engines” using “everyday filters and oil.” I’ve never seen heard or read you admit that “million mile engines” are the RULE with bypass filtration and the EXCEPTION with “normal” products. Why do you think this is?
I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you.