Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:05:59 -0500
Reply-To: mcneely4@COX.NET
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Dave Mcneely <mcneely4@COX.NET>
Subject: Re: Motor Oil (Synthetic)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed; delsp=no
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Robert Fisher wrote:
> I wouldn't get too wound up about what Click and Clack thought of
> anything in any event.
>
> Cya,
> Robert
Thanks Robert. My reason for consulting the "Car Talk" web site was to
try and locate a link or other means of getting hold of the CR report on
oil changes. Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vanagon Mailing List [mailto:vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com] On
> Behalf Of Dave Mcneely
> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 8:51 AM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: Re: Motor Oil (Synthetic)
>
> Well, still looking. I did find that any number of sources consider
> taxicab service as "severe," due mainly to the low speeds and long
> idling times. The "Car Talk" web site has lots of references to the
> CR
> study, but no link or definitive statement concerning the methods or
> results that I could find. Mainly just a bunch of people on their
> forum
> commenting on it, some of whom remember the results differently from
> how
> I do. At least one claimed that the results showed a need for
> adhering
> to factory or more frequent oil change intervals. I do remember that
> that was not the case. Oh, I did find that whenever the hosts for the
> "Car Talk" show recommend oil change intervals, they still stick with
> fairly frequent changes, and do not approve the extended frequency
> changes of some manufacturers, despite the results of the CR study.
>
> Dave
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 10:09 AM, Dave Mcneely wrote:
>
>> I found a link, but was denied access:
>> http://www.xs11.com/stories/croil96.htm
>>
>> I also found that the report was in 1996. Wow, how time flies. I'll
>> look a bit more, but not forever. David
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:53 AM, mcneely4@cox.net wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, the vehicles used in the study were NYC taxicabs.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 9:12 AM, Allan Streib wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:27 -0500, "Dave Mcneely" wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Well, for what it's worth, when consumer reports, using modern
>>>>> nonsynthetic oils, ran vehicles under severe conditions in New
>>>>> York
>>>>> City, and extended the oil change interval long beyond the factory
>>>>> recommendations, they found no difference in wear compared to
>>>>> engines
>>>>> that were treated according to factory recommendations.
>>>>
>>>> Was this the taxicab service test? Remember that NYC taxicabs run
>>>> pretty much 24x7, or at least for many hours at a time. That's
>>>> actually
>>>> better for the motor and oil than a lot of short trips where the
>>>> oil
>>>> is
>>>> cold half the time.
>>>>
>>>> Allan
| 
