Do we have a new leader in oil filters now?

[stang99x]

Please share this warranty data.

I won't sit here and research this for you, but you can goto www.f150online.net and find and read it for yourself. The basic point of it is, you run say 10K or more miles on one oil change, the motor warranty is gone. No questions asked, and they don't care what kind of oil you use. Amsoil also doesn't meet most API standards, which are required for warranty purposes as well. Yet another reason. Read the rest on your own (informing the uniformed)

Quote:
Ford 4.6 and 5.4 engines both have statements written that up to 1 quart of oil may burn per 900 miles.

Care to share these?

Again, www.f150online.net will yield amazing search results. 1 quart per 900 miles is statistically normal by ford standards

This fool goes 25k miles with UOA to back up the vality of that OCI.

I have yet to see you mention a UOA.

25K is a deathwish to a motor, and UOA is a complete waste of money. Micromanage your oil instead of just doing it as its supposed to be done.....Ever wonder why the mobil1 15K miles increment oil went away?

Wonder why they say that? Hummm, me thinks they sell oil. Maybe its the uninformed ( I refuse to call one an idiot ) that are foolish by pouring perfectly good oil down the drain at 3k OCI.

Me thinks maybe because they make the product, they test the product, they abuse the product until it fails and find a failsafe point that they know will protect engines without fail. Then, stupid people come up with BS like UOA and try to overextend such and then boom. THe manufacturer is expected to pick of hte tab, the cost of vehicles rises, and we all get F'd in the end so you could save $30 a year. Great idea

Quote:
The oil filter is tested by the oil manufacturer, and recommended to be changed at the same interval.

Care to share that test data?

Really, do you have an issue with searching for data on your own. Need you be linked to everything? Look it up your damn self for once. How the hell do you think they have test motors running tests, with a bucket and return line?

Quote:
And on the original topic, there is absolutely nothing wrong with Fram filters.
Many disagree with you, sorry. Try cuttion open a Fram and say a Mobil 1 or Amsoil.
Quote:
I've installed 10's of thousands of pennzoil filters myself in all my years doing automotive work, and never seen one fail.
Tens of thousands, wow. Pretty impressive for someone so young. You wouldn't be inflating the numbers, would you.

Get all that in one quick one. Pennzoil sells fram filters labeled pennzoil. Fram sells fram filters. Every single major autoparts store sells fram, most sell pennzoil. Jiffy lube, shell owned facilities, quaker state, and so on are all the same filters. If there was this mystic problem that so many talk about, then there would be a ****load of blown motors out there due to these failure prone filters in use. But these failures don't exist. There are no big grouping of failures, cause if there were we'd have seen it on the news and fram would be held liable and there'd be firestone/ford sized dilema out there. But there isn't, cause there is no problem. I have worked on cars for the past 10 years. The first jiffy lube that I worked at I worked 6 days a week. we averaged 150 cars a day during the week, 200 on saturday. Now, I was the pit man. Even you mathematically challanged can see how fast that could add up. 100 cars a day for 10 days is 1000 cars. I worked at that location for over a year, before I moved to a competitor once known as Quick10, where we did about the same volume and I was there for about 9 months. After a stint in college, I began running my dads place. I dont' ahve my work computer in front of me now, and obviously I haven't done all of the cars we have done in the last 6 years, but I have done quite a few and my techs have installed the rest. I have never seen or heard of a failure

 

[Dan Whitaker]

The first jiffy lube that I worked at I worked 6 days a week. we averaged 150 cars a day during the week, 200 on saturday. Now, I was the pit man. Even you mathematically challanged can see how fast that could add up. 100 cars a day for 10 days is 1000 cars. I worked at that location for over a year

So because you worked for Rippy Lube you are an expert?

 

[aldive]

So because you worked for Rippy Lube you are an expert?

Thats a high point on any resume.

 

[rizzjc]

I won't sit here and research this for you, but you can goto www.f150online.net and find and read it for yourself. The basic point of it is, you run say 10K or more miles on one oil change, the motor warranty is gone. No questions asked, and they don't care what kind of oil you use. Amsoil also doesn't meet most API standards, which are required for warranty purposes as well. Yet another reason. Read the rest on your own (informing the uniformed)

OK, first, your "source" has no affiliation with Ford Motor Company. Hmmm, says so right at the bottom. So, some person posting that you void your warranty by running 10k or more OCI, means just as much as reading the same or the opposite on this site. It's NOT no questions asked. There would have to be proof that the oil, or not changing it, was the cause of the failure. Plain and simple. I could change my oil at 1k intervals and they could claim that a failure is the result of the oil. They'd still have to prove it.

And I think you are mistaken. Not meeting API standards, and not having an API seal, are two different things. The seal that is on a bottle of oil is something that basically costs money to put there. Amsoil doesn't spend the money on it. It's really that simple. It meets all the standards that they say it meets. And they do have an API seal on some of their oil, if that makes buyers feel better.

 

[old mechanic]

You guys are amusing to say the least.

But if you want some meat on the problem list, I more than have it for you.
You want to run that high dollar amsoil, go ahead. Ford will counter your claim with the facts stated in their warranty.

Ford 4.6 and 5.4 engines both have statements written that up to 1 quart of oil may burn per 900 miles. So, if you take your (whatever the increment the foolish use) say 6000 mile change interval, and divide that by the 6 quarts a 5.4 or 4.6 holds, then you efficiantly are no running on.......less than a quart. So you could theoretically continuous fill'r up with amsoil, at the excessive cost per quart it is, and burn your wallet to the ground in no time. Realistically no it isn't likely, but if you had the hard case motor you'd be F'd.

Ford 5.4 is nortorious for piston slap at start-up, and especially after an oil change. It slaps hard enough that you'd think the bottom end would come out in a matter of a second, while it sometimes will last up to or over 10 seconds.

I'm not here to burn Ford down, I love ford and it is all I own. The problem isn't the oil, or the filter, its the idiots who don't follow the oil manufacturers own words. The oil manufacturer says change it every 3000 miles, then do it. The oil filter is tested by the oil manufacturer, and recommended to be changed at the same interval. When the dr gives you a prescription, do you take it every other day rather than every day as directed? Hell no, then it wouldn't work as efficiantly and you'd remain F'd up longer. I saw a Taurus yesterday in my place, with a K&N filter on it, that ran 8000 miles on dino oil. We crushed the filter and dino sludge oozed out of it. Thats just great for your engine.

And as for your recall of toyota engines, be a little more specific of what you think is recalled. A simple search shows no major recall of that engine. An alldata search shows no engine recall from 92 through 98 on camry (the quick shot I looked at) As a matter of a fact there was only 1 recall in 92, and 2 in 1998 and neither one was engine related. There is no toyota engine recall. They never recalled it. The biggest recall ever was done by none other than Ford. You boneheads need to get your info straight before you claim soemthing you think is true to be fact. Try edmunds next time, they do free recall information. All you have to do is enter the year make and model and walah, no engine recall on a yotor 4 banger.

I'm not trying to start a fire, just inform the uniformed

And on the original topic, there is absoltuely nothing wrong with Fram filters. Pennzoil and fram are the same, and probably the most widely used filter in the united states, without complaint enough to make a recall or any headlines. It is a myth that they are somehow not good filters. This is no different than people who want to discredit K&N filters for allowing crap into your engine for improved flow. I've installed 10's of thousands of pennzoil filters myself in all my years doing automotive work, and never seen one fail.
----------
You are right, I guess i am a bonehead. Toyota screwed around with the WORDING. Toyota NEVER RECALLED the 97-01 Camrys. They issued a 8 year unlimited mileage "GOOD WILL" repair for this condition.
As I previously posted go to www.autos.msn.com click on used cars then Toyota, then Camry and click on any Toytoa year from 1997-2001, then click on "reliability" and you will see the "GOOD WILL" issued for them.
That "GOOD WILL" was just another way of saying they RECALLED them but it will never show up as a "RECALL"! Smart move on Toyota's part.

 

[William Schumacher]

i've had Amsoil series 2000 in my '99 SOHC for over 5 years now,I've been using a dual bypass filter setup and getting solid results ! I change my oil about once a year {sometimes longer}, I'm actually going to change it in a few days !

I just received the new line of standard filters to go along with the bypass filter.
the EA series filter is supposed to go much longer than the SD filters I've been running !!
and as part of a dual bypass system,the filtration will be fantastic !!

most good quality synthetics can go a long way,but you have to have exceptional filtration. amsoil filters are the best I've ever used,they flow very very well and capture just as well.
anyone can produce a can of solid media ?,
but will it flow ?.

 

[ma96782]

You are right, I guess i am a bonehead. Toyota screwed around with the WORDING. Toyota NEVER RECALLED the 97-01 Camrys. They issued a 8 year unlimited mileage "GOOD WILL" repair for this condition.
As I previously posted go to www.autos.msn.com click on used cars then Toyota, then Camry and click on any Toytoa year from 1997-2001, then click on "reliability" and you will see the "GOOD WILL" issued for them.
That "GOOD WILL" was just another way of saying they RECALLED them but it will never show up as a "RECALL"! Smart move on Toyota's part.

Thank you for the CARIFICATION.

Taken from MSN site:

Problems with the Engine are caused when the engine oil gels. Engine oil gelling can also cause excessive engine oil usage. When proper maintenance schedules for oil changes are followed, oil gelling should not occur. Toyota has issued an 8 year unlimited mileage goodwill repair for this condition.

And

The cost to repair the Engine is estimated at $4500 for parts and $1384 for labor.

I still say TOYOTA is an honorable company (on this issue). Unlike, the newest claims by some American car MFNs that say a quart of oil per 900 miles (or 1000 miles) is NORMAL.

Yes, I read that, GM says that 1000 mile oil consumption is NORMAL, claim........from a poster on a Chevy truck site.
_______________________________________________________________

See what happened here??

I just believed that there was a re-call, cause someone said it, on the internet..........thus:

"Do you always believe in, what is posted on the internet?"

I should have took my own advice.

Yes, it is helpful to have links to support claims. Though, I must admit, it's not always easy to remember where someone read it (to quote).

________________________________________________________________

OK, first, your "source" has no affiliation with Ford Motor Company.

I'd wouldn't even trust a site sponsored by the Ford Motor Company. The company, is only as good as the people it employs.........some are better than others. Think, of all the complaints one hears about, the techs, at the dealership. And, I'd also be suspect of, a source from the Ford Motor Co. (company spokesperson). Who knows, what an individual will say, to pull the company line.

I used to work for the government and the lord only knows, how many times I pulled the line.

But, a real printed document would go a long way.

Then again.....FORD did say to put 26 psi. of air, into your Firestones, for your Explorer.

_________________________________________________________________

Not meeting API standards, and not having an API seal, are two different things. The seal that is on a bottle of oil is something that basically costs money to put there. Amsoil doesn't spend the money on it. It's really that simple. It meets all the standards that they say it meets. And they do have an API seal on some of their oil, if that makes buyers feel better.

Me.....I'd feel more comfortable buying oil, IF the API seal were on it......that's just me.

Loss sales, because of the lack of a seal..........the Marketing Dept should be, thinking, along that line........IF, they haven't already.

_________________________________________________________________

Aloha, Mark

 

[GJarrett]

I'm suprised I've heard no one talk about the importance of the check valve in an oil filter. I saw someone post about how most engine damage comes from start up. This is true. Thats why I beleive the check valve is the most important part of the oil filter. Just my opinion. My opinion, if your finding chunks of metal in your oil filter, time to sell it.

Possibly because we've already talked about it. Like I posted, this has been covered several times in much older threads here (and I'm surprised I'm spending time again on this one) and some of us get tired of reposting the same thing over again that we spent time doing years ago. But yes, if you find those old threads and read those oil filter studies, one issue with the Fram is precisely that; the check valve doesn't operate efficiently so there's less oil (or no oil) being sent to the top of the engine at startup. That is what I had read back then and what clued me in to why mine might have that startup clicking/tapping.

The fact that I've used other filter brands and none of them produce the startup clatter in my SOHC, but the Frams do, was enough to convince me to take the same money I'd spend on a Fram and spend it on another brand. Even if I spent another buck or two, it makes sense to me. Including the prior threads I joined, I think I've spent enought time on this issue now. Ya'll have a nice day

 

[glfredrick]

I have one question though. How do you "SEE" an oil filter fail? Tests have been done on filters to see how well they ... filter, to see if oil drails back out of them when you shut down, to see what they are made of. Paper don't last that long. It's pretty simple. I don't claim to know in reality what difference all of this makes, and I *choose* to use something that I *perceive* to be of higher quality, and better filtering, and better at cold start. It's my opinion, and my option. It doesn't mean that I am right, or wrong.

Oil industry specialists have a number of tools to "see" if oil filters are working correctly. One is the Royco Particle Counter, and there are others, including, but not limited to viscosity testers, additive tests, re-circulating ball tests, etc. The Royco test measures actual particulat matter in an oil sample to parts per million with categories for the size range of the particulate contaminates. This is a standard test in high end oil industry to make sure that 1) Oil sold is within corporate specs 2) That oil and filters in use in test equipent are within specs 3) To insure that production cleaning of castings and assemblies is adequate 4) As a test between various quality factors, including filtration capacity.

I was the #2 man in a major hydraulics firm quality control department. I tested oils and filters on a daily basis, and for fun, ran some tests on consumer grade oils and filters. I had just over a million dollars worth of oil testing equipment at my disposal, and the results of my tests have remained with me -- in other words, I run the products I learned of from my own hands-on testing.

Some retrospective issues:

1) All filters are not created equally. Some have finer-graded filtration material, but conversely can plug faster and ultimately allow more particulate matter into the assembly once by-pass pressures are reached. Changing filters before this event is critical for life of the assembly. Maximum filtration occurs when the most oil can circulate through the finest filter that is changed before it goes to by-pass.

2) Some filters are not much better than a sheet of toilet paper (and in fact, some ARE toilet paper inside a filter housing!). Some, (the Fram in particular) have large pores in their filtration media that allow for more particulate matter to pass through the filter. A bypass valve is generally not needed in this type of "open pore" filter, as it is virtually impossible to plug it. Additionally, some filters that are "tight" in pore density can "tunnel" i.e., the oil digs grooves through the filter and passes the main filtration material. This was seen on some of the fiber filters.

3) After testing oil of a known particulate level, then filtering that oil, one can arrive at the functional level of filtration for any given filter. If there is also a pressure mapping device attached pre- and post-filter, delta v can be observed (pressure drop across the media) in the filter, and the opening of the by-pass valve can easily be seen, alerting the tester to when the filter is clogged. Plots on an X-Y graph will show the relationship to filtration/pressures. Fast flow, with low pressures indicate one of two things: Little actual filtration or adequate filtering capacity to flow the desired volume of oil (enough surface area in the filter). Finding the difference between adequate filtration media and a poor filter is easily discovered by a pre- and post- Royco count of the oil. The differences can be startling.

On the level of the oil itself:

1) No manufacturer makes perfectly consistent oil. Some do not even produce their own oils (Castrol). They buy on the spot market and add additives to make it "their" oil.

2) Manufacturing procedures generally produce "consistent" oil, that is within the manufacturing limits as governmentally mandated, or above, by company discression. I.e., most companies want to ship a quality product and work to insure that their oil is consistent from bottle (or tanker) to bottle. That being said, it should be possible to test samples of any given company's oils to see where they rate in several tests -- which I did, for my own use.

3) Pennzoil was "dirty" enough to clog my particle counter requiring a service call from the factory rep. Quaker State was next worst (and this was when both companies were still separate entities, they are now combined). Middle of the road oils -- that were "good" -- were Shell, Mobil, Havoline, 76, Mystic, and some other local or regional brands. Best in test were Valvoline, and by far and away superior was Amsoil.

4) Viscosity testing (the 10W30 part of the oil) was difficult, as every manufacturer adds additives to make their oil flow better under certain characteristics, but certain trends were seen, primarily that Amsoil synthetic was off-the-grid as far as percieved viscosity at both low and high tempratures. Real world tests (simple "pour" tests) outside in -20 temps proved Amsoil the real winner in cold climate areas. (It came out of the bottle in a similar state to warm tests, unlike "dino" oils, which slowly ran out like honey. Amsoil would not "puddle" but quickly flowed. Other "dino" oils puddled and sometimes even "stacked" before slowly oozing out to fill the container.) It also retained viscosity better at 250F than any other oil, most of which changed color, and began "thickening". Amsoil just kept on flowing as if nothing happened at tempratures above 250F.

5) The re-circulating ball test was the final foray into the oil examination. Here, a ball bearing was pressed by a spring onto a spinning shaft. Oil was dripped onto the ball at a rate of 1 drop per 10 seconds. All springs were balanced for each ball, and all oil rates were within 10% flow by CC measure. The test was halted with the Pennzoil because the shaft was cut in two after several hours of running. This was the first incident of actual "cutting" we had seen after testing many thousands of oil samples in this fashion (and this was "new" oil, out of the bottle). Quaker State was next worst, with serious shaft wear in several hours. The "middle of the road" oils in the particle test tested adequate on the recirculating ball test, each marking the shaft, but not cutting it. The marks were measurable, indicating wear, but they were within our company's current specs for hydraulic oil wear. Fantastic were the Valvoline and Amsoil products. Valvoline, after one week of running merely "marked" the shaft, with no appreciable wear to measure, while the Amsoil even refused to "mark" the shaft unless observed through a microscope.

From the results of those tests, a lot of the men in that shop changed their oil and filter habits. I've run either Amsoil, Mobil 1 (unfortunately not available to test at that time) Valvoline in all my vehicles since that time.

 

[rizzjc]

Great info! Thanks. Part of my point was that the vehicle manufacturers don't appear to ever do this type of testing. And they certainly are not going to run every oil out there. They say that an API rating is what they require, and you showed that it doesn't necessarily matter. Something has to be said for Amsoil who actually runs these tests, and even reports when an oil performs better than theirs in a particular test.

 

[glfredrick]

Great info! Thanks. Part of my point was that the vehicle manufacturers don't appear to ever do this type of testing. And they certainly are not going to run every oil out there. They say that an API rating is what they require, and you showed that it doesn't necessarily matter. Something has to be said for Amsoil who actually runs these tests, and even reports when an oil performs better than theirs in a particular test.

Of course they do! They run a specific filter and oil in their vehicles and expect the consumer to do likewise.

They have to "give in" to the general industry, or risk being singled out (as some manufacturers have discovered), so they give a general rating, but if you read your owner's manual, they DO recommend that you go back to the stealership for all service so that you get "factory recommended service."

As a for instance, did you know that Chevy runs Mobil 1 in the Corvette, and specifies that oil for the car?

Also, check out the factory "skunk works" (those behind the scenes racing and engineering exercises) and see what they are running... Betcha it is GOOD STUFF...

Some of the above stuff was learned in connection with tests that I had to perform and certify for major manufacturers, included among them was Ford. They have huge R&D labs and other's signed on as outside shops that test, advise, and otherwise consult for recommendations, some of which happens in the big-boy engine shops, like Penske, etc., that are building Formula 1 and Indy cars. Do you think for one second that they are going to build $100,000+ engines and not know what sort of oil they'll run?

 

[ma96782]

glfredrick,

That was really informative..........though, I'd also like to see a............ widely available and circulated published report that would mirror your conclusions. Testing and results of this revelation.............should be.

......vehicle manufacturers don't appear to ever do this type of testing.

And, of course, as with any scientific test, verifiable.

It's not really that I doubt your word. And, I do believe that major MFNs and racing teams run tests.

Then we come to the, "good enough and reasonable quality issue." So, what are the parameters for a vehicle's engine. A spring loaded steel ball bearing running against a steel rod, is not the same as, a steel crank running on a motor bearing.

And, Remember:

OR, AS AN EXAMPLE: We tested similar products and this one tested to 550,000 psi and the other brand only tested to 549,999 psi......(govt. spec says any product testing above 400,000 psi is suitible)

And lastly, the cost benefit equation.

Example:

A Corvette ($60K) and Explorer ($30k) will under normal conditions get you from point, A to B, safely.........but, there are situations in which, one vehicle may get you there faster (road conditions being the largest factor).

Cost Benefit Test Challenge: Changing oil and filter (Amsoils products vs. cheap filter and dino) at 3K miles (or 5K, or whatever the major car MFNs will stand behind)?

Aloha, Mark

 

[stang99x]

Thank you for the CARIFICATION.
Taken from MSN site:

I am glad that has been clarified. I used a reliable automotive source, Alldata, and you used MSN (MicroSoft Networks) as your source. Brilliance. Why don't we call charmin and ask them too?

As for f150online, no they are not affiliated with ford nor did I saythey were. I said if you look there you will find the information. (finding the information includes finding the links to the source, as they link directly to Ford in several threads about the oil consumption issue) F150online was started and has been run by the same guy for the past 11 years. He just so happens to live 20 minutes down the road from me. The amount of knowledge in those forums far surpasses your local dealership or mechanic shop. There are more Ford Certified mechanics on those forums than at a dealer. They know the problems and know how to fix them. None of them take issue with the Fram filter, although they have all heard the myth. Allied Signal Owns the filter line you so unfondly speak of. They produce Fram, Pennzoil, Quaker State, Jiffy Lube Intl, and Purolator. They also produce other brands that are labeled for retail sale specifically. Shell Royal Dutch also now owns Pennzoil, Quaker State, Rain-x, etc... (read at their web site, they own just about everything, including Rotella)

As for the base stock of oils. All base stocks are manufactured the same. Sure, there will be a small variance from time to time, no different than two pieces of granite will never be identical on your kitchen counter. Its still granite, and thats still oil. Individual oil companies add thier own additives, be them what they may, and thats whay makes it their oil. Amsoil can't even provide the API with a producer of its basestock because it is constantly changing, which is why they won't ever get certification from the API on their products that they don't have it on, which will still void your warranty. If you get a 100,000 mile warranty, and your motor blows at 90,000 miles, and you have changed the oil 9 times, rest assured Ford is going to tell you to FCK OFF when you try to get that motor warranted. 10,000 mile increments do NOT meet warranty requirements, nor do they meet engine needs, no matter what type of oil you run. I don't care if little green men give you an oil advanced 10,000 light years past todays technology, I wouldn't run it over 3K miles. The perfect example is a customer of mine with a 1997 Yukon. 475K miles, same motor. And that motor is still warranted by pennzoil because he changes his own every 3000 miles as required for their warranty. Thats right, pennzoil warrants your motor if you change the oil within 3500 miles everytime with pennzoil oil products. This guy has almost half a million miles, and shhould it go tomorrow, pennzoil will buy him a new one. Thats what 3K miles increments get you, something that was thought not to exist in American cars anymore, half a million miles still going strong.

 

[glfredrick]

Starting to be a lot of mixed metaphors going on in this post...

Let me clarify MY definition of "good enough" versus "reasonable quality."

I see "good enough" as a negative, the glass is half empty. The product doesn't really meet any standards, but for a one-time use, etc., it is "good enough" -- in other words, a throw-away product.

On the other hand, I see "reasonable quality" as positive, the glass is half full. This product beats the minimum threshold standard, and it is a product that I will have for some time, use often, etc., but it is not exactly the TOP possible product, nor the TOP possible buck.

An example might be the Corvette stacked against one of the Italian super-exotics. The Corvette, in its class, would meet my standard of "reasonable quality" for it will run virtually as fast as any of the exotics (indeed, it will eat their lunch if but a fraction of the extra expense in purchasing the exotics is brought to bear on the Corvette's performance) but it costs WAY under the top dollar rides -- like $100 K less. That, in my book is "reasonable quality." Good enough, on the other hand, is a 1993 Honda Civic, which will get me from point A to point B, with no frills, no excitement, and no performance.

In my world, with my expectations and life-definitions, Fram and Dino oils are just "good enough" which may be great for some people, but I prefer "reasonable quality." I've done my own testing, I've cut apart filters from EVERY manufacturer, both before and after running them, and I've ran the Amsoil products since the very early 1980s with stellar performance. I know where I come down on the issues, and why I do.

Your opinion may differ -- so be it.

Oh, most of my vehicles run in excess of 300K before I part with them -- and I've never had a motor come apart unless I was doing something stupid. Along the way, I've built Chevy, Olds, Pontiac, Ford, Honda, Mitsubishi, Dodge, Farmall, International, Cummins, Detroit, John Deere, Briggs and Straton, Tecompsi, Yamaha, motors.

The most recent overhaul I did was on a Dodge Dakota truck with the v6. The truck was owned by my 87-year-old church deacon. He changed the oil and filter RELIGIOUSLY at 2000 miles. The truck had 92,000 miles. The rod bearings were GONE on two rods and worn through on 2 more. The cam bearings were half-shells. The rings were locked solid into their grooves. The ridge on the top of the piston bore requried an air grinder to remove so I could pull the pistons.

This truck was never beat -- never even hauled a load! It is MINT inside and out, just what you would expect an 87-year-old churchman's truck to look like -- your Grandpa's truck that you can't wait to get when he passes on...

I pulled the motor, disassembled it for rebuild and hauled it down to my local engine builder, who does most of the engine work on the South side of Louisville (no small town hick here...). He took a look, asked me the miles and said, "Yup -- another Pennzoil, Fram user..." He then took me on a tour of the shop and showed me ALL the other engines in his shop that looked exactly the same way. Virtually all of them, die-hard Pennzoil/Fram users. He LOVES it -- it is good for business.

Note that I did not tell him what oil and filter this man ran -- he told me... and he was right.

In talking to the man who owns the truck, know what he said? "I've been using Pennzoil and Fram filters all my life... Never had a problem with them. Don't know what happened..." He then proceeded to tell me about all the OTHER cars that had motor problems that he has owned... His 47 Chrysler ("smoked like the dickens..."), his 52 Ford ("blew up the motor"), his 59 Chevy ("blown rod"), his 65 Chevelle ("right through the oil pan..."), his 69 Pontiac ("started knocking...")... By then, he started to realize that he HAD many problems with his cars over the years -- and in fact, there were only a COUPLE that he owned that DIDN'T have problems... He just thought that motors did that...

Again, that is just anecdotal. I can't produce a "scientific study" like some of you want, but I'm convinced.

 

[aldive]

I don't care if little green men give you an oil advanced 10,000 light years past todays technology, I wouldn't run it over 3K miles.

YOU wouldn't, but I do and I have science ( UOA ) to prove that it is perfectly safe to do so.

 

[old mechanic]

I am glad that has been clarified. I used a reliable automotive source, Alldata, and you used MSN (MicroSoft Networks) as your source. Brilliance. Why don't we call charmin and ask them too?

As for f150online, no they are not affiliated with ford nor did I saythey were. I said if you look there you will find the information. (finding the information includes finding the links to the source, as they link directly to Ford in several threads about the oil consumption issue) F150online was started and has been run by the same guy for the past 11 years. He just so happens to live 20 minutes down the road from me. The amount of knowledge in those forums far surpasses your local dealership or mechanic shop. There are more Ford Certified mechanics on those forums than at a dealer. They know the problems and know how to fix them. None of them take issue with the Fram filter, although they have all heard the myth. Allied Signal Owns the filter line you so unfondly speak of. They produce Fram, Pennzoil, Quaker State, Jiffy Lube Intl, and Purolator. They also produce other brands that are labeled for retail sale specifically. Shell Royal Dutch also now owns Pennzoil, Quaker State, Rain-x, etc... (read at their web site, they own just about everything, including Rotella)

As for the base stock of oils. All base stocks are manufactured the same. Sure, there will be a small variance from time to time, no different than two pieces of granite will never be identical on your kitchen counter. Its still granite, and thats still oil. Individual oil companies add thier own additives, be them what they may, and thats whay makes it their oil. Amsoil can't even provide the API with a producer of its basestock because it is constantly changing, which is why they won't ever get certification from the API on their products that they don't have it on, which will still void your warranty. If you get a 100,000 mile warranty, and your motor blows at 90,000 miles, and you have changed the oil 9 times, rest assured Ford is going to tell you to FCK OFF when you try to get that motor warranted. 10,000 mile increments do NOT meet warranty requirements, nor do they meet engine needs, no matter what type of oil you run. I don't care if little green men give you an oil advanced 10,000 light years past todays technology, I wouldn't run it over 3K miles. The perfect example is a customer of mine with a 1997 Yukon. 475K miles, same motor. And that motor is still warranted by pennzoil because he changes his own every 3000 miles as required for their warranty. Thats right, pennzoil warrants your motor if you change the oil within 3500 miles everytime with pennzoil oil products. This guy has almost half a million miles, and shhould it go tomorrow, pennzoil will buy him a new one. Thats what 3K miles increments get you, something that was thought not to exist in American cars anymore, half a million miles still going strong.

-----------
1-MSN and Consumer guide are the 2 most popular and informatable sources around when researching new or used vehicles. FUNNY! You DID NOT find out about the motor problems on Alldata so how would you or anyone else know about the bad Toyota motors if you went to buy a used one that is over the Toyota warranted period??? From CHARMIN perhaps??? BRILLIANCE!!!
2- Please provide us with a link to your oil posting. IF you have one.
3- If you change your oil every 3,000 miles then you have fallen into the quick lube oil chains trap.
4- I think you may be correct stating that the manufacturs will not warrantee their vehicles if you change your oil every 10,000 miles. All of my vehicles factory books recommend changing the oil every 7,500 miles. NOT 3,000 miles. Hummmm, I wonder how they can do that and still give out warrantys on their vehicles?

 

[aldive]

All of my vehicles factory books recommend changing the oil every 7,500 miles. NOT 3,000 miles. Hummmm, I wonder how they can do that and still give out warrantys on their vehicles?

They must not have consulted the alchemists at Jiffy Lube.

 

[old mechanic]

Starting to be a lot of mixed metaphors going on in this post...

Let me clarify MY definition of "good enough" versus "reasonable quality."

I see "good enough" as a negative, the glass is half empty. The product doesn't really meet any standards, but for a one-time use, etc., it is "good enough" -- in other words, a throw-away product.

On the other hand, I see "reasonable quality" as positive, the glass is half full. This product beats the minimum threshold standard, and it is a product that I will have for some time, use often, etc., but it is not exactly the TOP possible product, nor the TOP possible buck.

An example might be the Corvette stacked against one of the Italian super-exotics. The Corvette, in its class, would meet my standard of "reasonable quality" for it will run virtually as fast as any of the exotics (indeed, it will eat their lunch if but a fraction of the extra expense in purchasing the exotics is brought to bear on the Corvette's performance) but it costs WAY under the top dollar rides -- like $100 K less. That, in my book is "reasonable quality." Good enough, on the other hand, is a 1993 Honda Civic, which will get me from point A to point B, with no frills, no excitement, and no performance.

In my world, with my expectations and life-definitions, Fram and Dino oils are just "good enough" which may be great for some people, but I prefer "reasonable quality." I've done my own testing, I've cut apart filters from EVERY manufacturer, both before and after running them, and I've ran the Amsoil products since the very early 1980s with stellar performance. I know where I come down on the issues, and why I do.

Your opinion may differ -- so be it.

Oh, most of my vehicles run in excess of 300K before I part with them -- and I've never had a motor come apart unless I was doing something stupid. Along the way, I've built Chevy, Olds, Pontiac, Ford, Honda, Mitsubishi, Dodge, Farmall, International, Cummins, Detroit, John Deere, Briggs and Straton, Tecompsi, Yamaha, motors.

The most recent overhaul I did was on a Dodge Dakota truck with the v6. The truck was owned by my 87-year-old church deacon. He changed the oil and filter RELIGIOUSLY at 2000 miles. The truck had 92,000 miles. The rod bearings were GONE on two rods and worn through on 2 more. The cam bearings were half-shells. The rings were locked solid into their grooves. The ridge on the top of the piston bore requried an air grinder to remove so I could pull the pistons.

This truck was never beat -- never even hauled a load! It is MINT inside and out, just what you would expect an 87-year-old churchman's truck to look like -- your Grandpa's truck that you can't wait to get when he passes on...

I pulled the motor, disassembled it for rebuild and hauled it down to my local engine builder, who does most of the engine work on the South side of Louisville (no small town hick here...). He took a look, asked me the miles and said, "Yup -- another Pennzoil, Fram user..." He then took me on a tour of the shop and showed me ALL the other engines in his shop that looked exactly the same way. Virtually all of them, die-hard Pennzoil/Fram users. He LOVES it -- it is good for business.

Note that I did not tell him what oil and filter this man ran -- he told me... and he was right.

In talking to the man who owns the truck, know what he said? "I've been using Pennzoil and Fram filters all my life... Never had a problem with them. Don't know what happened..." He then proceeded to tell me about all the OTHER cars that had motor problems that he has owned... His 47 Chrysler ("smoked like the dickens..."), his 52 Ford ("blew up the motor"), his 59 Chevy ("blown rod"), his 65 Chevelle ("right through the oil pan..."), his 69 Pontiac ("started knocking...")... By then, he started to realize that he HAD many problems with his cars over the years -- and in fact, there were only a COUPLE that he owned that DIDN'T have problems... He just thought that motors did that...

Again, that is just anecdotal. I can't produce a "scientific study" like some of you want, but I'm convinced.

----------
I guess we all have our own thoughts about something being "good enough".
I too did all my own testing. Yup! Every vehicle I have owned lasted for quite a long time using low priced oil and filters. The only difference being with the older but brand new cars and trucks I changed the oil about every 3,000 miles because 3,000 miles back then was a lot of miles on those engines but the newer ones (1990 & up) I faithfully change at 7,500 miles with no problems what so ever.
As a matter of fact I used dino oil and fram filters in my racing cars and truck too. I had only 2-3 blown motors with about 200+? trips down the 1/4 mile strips.
GEEZ! What did we ever do without Amsoil, Mobile1 and other synthetic oils around then. What did we ever do when Fram was about the only oil and air filters around.
The strangest thing is how did my friends (K&M racing) get their dragster to ever become the FIRST one to break the 4 second barrier in the Winter Nationals using dino oil and fram filters????
Then again maybe Fram filters were better then but the dino oil was still just dino oil.
One thing I will never do is to try to convince anyone to do as I do. I am just stating what I do, what products I use and how they worked for me.
BTW: Why would I spend all that money on my 3 older vehicles? I would love to do some mods-Amsoil oil and filters- Amsoil gear fluids-new rims-custom interior-new paint-ETC. to my 92 EX but what would I do when the trannie or motor went? Then I would be forced to spend thousands of $$$ on them because of all the $$$ I alwready spent on them. I would just as soon get what I can get out of them the way they are then up grade them when the time comes. However for those of you that are going to keep your EXs no matter what, go for it! Use what you think is best for your EX.

 

[rizzjc]

I'd have to quote the manuals directly from each of my cars, but I'm pretty certain that NONE of them have a REQUIRED oil change interval. None of them. The word is RECOMMENDED. That's a lot different from REQUIRED. Any claim that a manufacturer tries to deny has to come along with proof that something that I did was the cause of the failure. It's that simple. You can say all you like that i HAVE to change my oil every 3000 miles (although I doubt you'll find many cars that RECOMMEND that either), but it's just not true. I don't have to. A pointless argument now anyway, since I have 140k miles on my Explorer, and have changed the oil less that 15 times, and guess what? Still running strong. I do UOA now to back it up even further. I just don't understand how people can turn around and keep saying that what is published in your manual is the law. Heck, I had the same argument with the car dealer when I bought my new car, and he knew darn well that the extended drain interval wouldn't void my warranty .... unless they could prove that a failure was the direct result of my extended drain interval.

 

[ma96782]

Change oil when you feel like it......it's your car.

IF, I remember correctly GM had a recommended schedule based on the type of driving conditions you subject your vehicle to.

But, since we were on the subject (Ford Explorer 1991 thru 2001 Haynes Manual p.1-6):

Every 3,000 miles or 3 months
whichever comes first
______________________________

All items listed above, plus...
Change the engine oil and oil filter (Section 6)
Check the power steering fluid level (section 7)
Check the automatic transmission fluid level (Section 8)
Rotate the tires (section 9)

Aloha, Mark