"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message news:Hs-dne3qiY--
> you don't wait for a plane's engine to fail in flight [if you can avoid
> it!] do you?

Are you saying that aircraft turbines are serviced based on oil analysis?

 

jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:

Okay, then...
Let's say this:

I can see getting a 'wear test' on an engine at about the third oil
change.

Plus a test to see how an oil-brand is doing....

I'll just spend that last money on another case of Mobil 1, though.



> rmac wrote:
>> "dbltap" <DoubleTap@37.com> wrote in message
>> news:1ucAg.2477$xp2.1947@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>>> http://www.autoblog.com/2006/08/02/d...ge-intervals-v
>>> ia-analysis/
>> Interesting how some people spend $30 for an oil analysis in order to
>> avoid a $20 oil change. hmmmm.
>>
>>
> you're not "avoiding an oil change", you're getting a checkup on the
> health of the engine. chemical content tells you a lot about how the
> motor is running, too hot, too cold, contamination, wear, imminent
> failures, etc. if you could predict whether the motor was going to
> fail in the next 6 months, and you were planning a major road trip,
> would you just go anyway and get the car fixed along the way, or would
> you get it done now while you have the time and resources to do the
> job properly? you don't wait for a plane's engine to fail in flight
> [if you can avoid it!] do you?
>



--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

 

jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:

Okay, then...
Let's say this:

I can see getting a 'wear test' on an engine at about the third oil
change.

Plus a test to see how an oil-brand is doing....

I'll just spend that last money on another case of Mobil 1, though.



> rmac wrote:
>> "dbltap" <DoubleTap@37.com> wrote in message
>> news:1ucAg.2477$xp2.1947@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>>> http://www.autoblog.com/2006/08/02/d...ge-intervals-v
>>> ia-analysis/
>> Interesting how some people spend $30 for an oil analysis in order to
>> avoid a $20 oil change. hmmmm.
>>
>>
> you're not "avoiding an oil change", you're getting a checkup on the
> health of the engine. chemical content tells you a lot about how the
> motor is running, too hot, too cold, contamination, wear, imminent
> failures, etc. if you could predict whether the motor was going to
> fail in the next 6 months, and you were planning a major road trip,
> would you just go anyway and get the car fixed along the way, or would
> you get it done now while you have the time and resources to do the
> job properly? you don't wait for a plane's engine to fail in flight
> [if you can avoid it!] do you?
>



--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

 

jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:

Okay, then...
Let's say this:

I can see getting a 'wear test' on an engine at about the third oil
change.

Plus a test to see how an oil-brand is doing....

I'll just spend that last money on another case of Mobil 1, though.



> rmac wrote:
>> "dbltap" <DoubleTap@37.com> wrote in message
>> news:1ucAg.2477$xp2.1947@newsread1.news.pas.earthl ink.net...
>>> http://www.autoblog.com/2006/08/02/d...ge-intervals-v
>>> ia-analysis/
>> Interesting how some people spend $30 for an oil analysis in order to
>> avoid a $20 oil change. hmmmm.
>>
>>
> you're not "avoiding an oil change", you're getting a checkup on the
> health of the engine. chemical content tells you a lot about how the
> motor is running, too hot, too cold, contamination, wear, imminent
> failures, etc. if you could predict whether the motor was going to
> fail in the next 6 months, and you were planning a major road trip,
> would you just go anyway and get the car fixed along the way, or would
> you get it done now while you have the time and resources to do the
> job properly? you don't wait for a plane's engine to fail in flight
> [if you can avoid it!] do you?
>



--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:Hs-dne3qiY--YUzZnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@speakeasy.net...

> you're not "avoiding an oil change", you're getting a checkup on the
> health of the engine. chemical content tells you a lot about how the
> motor is running, too hot, too cold, contamination, wear, imminent
> failures, etc. if you could predict whether the motor was going to fail
> in the next 6 months, and you were planning a major road trip, would you
> just go anyway and get the car fixed along the way, or would you get it
> done now while you have the time and resources to do the job properly?
> you don't wait for a plane's engine to fail in flight [if you can avoid
> it!] do you?

There are a lot of "ifs" in your argument Jim. If those "ifs" were borne
out by time it might be one thing but they really are not. Regardless of
what one perceives as the value in the small incremental knowledge or
insight into the health of their engine, the overwhelming number of vehicles
on the road today that are simply driven with some sort of traditional oil
change, and none of the feared problems that you suggest is just far more
compelling than the limited information from the analysis.

Simply - that analysis does not, cannot, and does not pretend to predict or
to even offer the foundation for a prediction that an engine may or may not
fail in six months. If it were true and one could count on the analysis as
a predictor, what would you expect to see? Evidence of rings or bearings
wearing? That could be good - but, at what rate? How much wear is
tolerable before a catastrophic failure? Is the wear even an indicator of
pending catastrophic failure? Is the wear an indicator of shortened engine
life from 200,000 miles to 175,000 miles? Is that even important?

Of the more common problems which tend to incapacitate a vehicle and which
one might want to be mindful of when planning a road trip, does the analysis
predict an alternator failure? A flat tire? A broken belt? A failure in
the ECM? A failure with the fuel pump? All of these are more than
significantly more likely to happen and leave you stranded than any engine
wear that will be made evident by an oil analysis. Cam failures? Do you
expect a sudden and catastrophic cam failure with no prior warning via the
performance of the engine? Not likely. If an engine oil analysis suddenly
makes you aware of an immenent failure in any internal part of your engine,
that is only evidence that you have totally ignored every other indicator
that should have been more of an alert to you. The operative part of this
statement is "immenent"

Airplane engines do not make a very good argument in this discussion. The
rigors of an airplane engine's life are so very different from those of a
car - not to mention the ramifications of any failure, that comparison is
totally irrelevant. There are a multitude of maintenance practices that
airplane undergo that are unique to them and have no associated practice in
the automobile sector. Apples and oranges.

To each his own as it relates to engine oil analysis, and as has been said -
it's your money. It's foolish to think though that this analysis is going
to offer the protection you are suggesting here.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:Hs-dne3qiY--YUzZnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@speakeasy.net...

> you're not "avoiding an oil change", you're getting a checkup on the
> health of the engine. chemical content tells you a lot about how the
> motor is running, too hot, too cold, contamination, wear, imminent
> failures, etc. if you could predict whether the motor was going to fail
> in the next 6 months, and you were planning a major road trip, would you
> just go anyway and get the car fixed along the way, or would you get it
> done now while you have the time and resources to do the job properly?
> you don't wait for a plane's engine to fail in flight [if you can avoid
> it!] do you?

There are a lot of "ifs" in your argument Jim. If those "ifs" were borne
out by time it might be one thing but they really are not. Regardless of
what one perceives as the value in the small incremental knowledge or
insight into the health of their engine, the overwhelming number of vehicles
on the road today that are simply driven with some sort of traditional oil
change, and none of the feared problems that you suggest is just far more
compelling than the limited information from the analysis.

Simply - that analysis does not, cannot, and does not pretend to predict or
to even offer the foundation for a prediction that an engine may or may not
fail in six months. If it were true and one could count on the analysis as
a predictor, what would you expect to see? Evidence of rings or bearings
wearing? That could be good - but, at what rate? How much wear is
tolerable before a catastrophic failure? Is the wear even an indicator of
pending catastrophic failure? Is the wear an indicator of shortened engine
life from 200,000 miles to 175,000 miles? Is that even important?

Of the more common problems which tend to incapacitate a vehicle and which
one might want to be mindful of when planning a road trip, does the analysis
predict an alternator failure? A flat tire? A broken belt? A failure in
the ECM? A failure with the fuel pump? All of these are more than
significantly more likely to happen and leave you stranded than any engine
wear that will be made evident by an oil analysis. Cam failures? Do you
expect a sudden and catastrophic cam failure with no prior warning via the
performance of the engine? Not likely. If an engine oil analysis suddenly
makes you aware of an immenent failure in any internal part of your engine,
that is only evidence that you have totally ignored every other indicator
that should have been more of an alert to you. The operative part of this
statement is "immenent"

Airplane engines do not make a very good argument in this discussion. The
rigors of an airplane engine's life are so very different from those of a
car - not to mention the ramifications of any failure, that comparison is
totally irrelevant. There are a multitude of maintenance practices that
airplane undergo that are unique to them and have no associated practice in
the automobile sector. Apples and oranges.

To each his own as it relates to engine oil analysis, and as has been said -
it's your money. It's foolish to think though that this analysis is going
to offer the protection you are suggesting here.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

"jim beam" <nospam@example.net> wrote in message
news:Hs-dne3qiY--YUzZnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@speakeasy.net...

> you're not "avoiding an oil change", you're getting a checkup on the
> health of the engine. chemical content tells you a lot about how the
> motor is running, too hot, too cold, contamination, wear, imminent
> failures, etc. if you could predict whether the motor was going to fail
> in the next 6 months, and you were planning a major road trip, would you
> just go anyway and get the car fixed along the way, or would you get it
> done now while you have the time and resources to do the job properly?
> you don't wait for a plane's engine to fail in flight [if you can avoid
> it!] do you?

There are a lot of "ifs" in your argument Jim. If those "ifs" were borne
out by time it might be one thing but they really are not. Regardless of
what one perceives as the value in the small incremental knowledge or
insight into the health of their engine, the overwhelming number of vehicles
on the road today that are simply driven with some sort of traditional oil
change, and none of the feared problems that you suggest is just far more
compelling than the limited information from the analysis.

Simply - that analysis does not, cannot, and does not pretend to predict or
to even offer the foundation for a prediction that an engine may or may not
fail in six months. If it were true and one could count on the analysis as
a predictor, what would you expect to see? Evidence of rings or bearings
wearing? That could be good - but, at what rate? How much wear is
tolerable before a catastrophic failure? Is the wear even an indicator of
pending catastrophic failure? Is the wear an indicator of shortened engine
life from 200,000 miles to 175,000 miles? Is that even important?

Of the more common problems which tend to incapacitate a vehicle and which
one might want to be mindful of when planning a road trip, does the analysis
predict an alternator failure? A flat tire? A broken belt? A failure in
the ECM? A failure with the fuel pump? All of these are more than
significantly more likely to happen and leave you stranded than any engine
wear that will be made evident by an oil analysis. Cam failures? Do you
expect a sudden and catastrophic cam failure with no prior warning via the
performance of the engine? Not likely. If an engine oil analysis suddenly
makes you aware of an immenent failure in any internal part of your engine,
that is only evidence that you have totally ignored every other indicator
that should have been more of an alert to you. The operative part of this
statement is "immenent"

Airplane engines do not make a very good argument in this discussion. The
rigors of an airplane engine's life are so very different from those of a
car - not to mention the ramifications of any failure, that comparison is
totally irrelevant. There are a multitude of maintenance practices that
airplane undergo that are unique to them and have no associated practice in
the automobile sector. Apples and oranges.

To each his own as it relates to engine oil analysis, and as has been said -
it's your money. It's foolish to think though that this analysis is going
to offer the protection you are suggesting here.

--

-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

In article <VrnAg.702$o27.199@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
<HLS@nospam.nix> wrote:

> I maintain my cars regularly and don't waste money on an oil analysis to
> predict how long I might be able to put off an oil change. (FYI,
> I am a professional chemist, and have been for over 40 years.) Chemical
> analysis can be interesting, but it does not necessarily predict, or
> postpone,
> fate.

That's correct. It simply tells you what the state of the oil is--which
can indicate conditions within the engine.

 

In article <VrnAg.702$o27.199@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
<HLS@nospam.nix> wrote:

> I maintain my cars regularly and don't waste money on an oil analysis to
> predict how long I might be able to put off an oil change. (FYI,
> I am a professional chemist, and have been for over 40 years.) Chemical
> analysis can be interesting, but it does not necessarily predict, or
> postpone,
> fate.

That's correct. It simply tells you what the state of the oil is--which
can indicate conditions within the engine.

 

In article <VrnAg.702$o27.199@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
<HLS@nospam.nix> wrote:

> I maintain my cars regularly and don't waste money on an oil analysis to
> predict how long I might be able to put off an oil change. (FYI,
> I am a professional chemist, and have been for over 40 years.) Chemical
> analysis can be interesting, but it does not necessarily predict, or
> postpone,
> fate.

That's correct. It simply tells you what the state of the oil is--which
can indicate conditions within the engine.

 

"Mike Marlow" <mmarlow@alltel.net> wrote in message
news:199f7$44d20ee2$471fbb8f$9824@ALLTEL.NET...

> To each his own as it relates to engine oil analysis, and as has been
said -
> it's your money. It's foolish to think though that this analysis is going
> to offer the protection you are suggesting here.
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

Very well spoken, Mike.

 

"Mike Marlow" <mmarlow@alltel.net> wrote in message
news:199f7$44d20ee2$471fbb8f$9824@ALLTEL.NET...

> To each his own as it relates to engine oil analysis, and as has been
said -
> it's your money. It's foolish to think though that this analysis is going
> to offer the protection you are suggesting here.
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

Very well spoken, Mike.

 

"Mike Marlow" <mmarlow@alltel.net> wrote in message
news:199f7$44d20ee2$471fbb8f$9824@ALLTEL.NET...

> To each his own as it relates to engine oil analysis, and as has been
said -
> it's your money. It's foolish to think though that this analysis is going
> to offer the protection you are suggesting here.
>
> --
>
> -Mike-
> mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

Very well spoken, Mike.

 

Mike Marlow wrote:

> Simply - that analysis does not, cannot, and does not pretend to predict or
> to even offer the foundation for a prediction that an engine may or may not
> fail in six months.

I got an oil analysis done at Blackstone Labs just a few weeks ago. It
showed elevated levels of silicon. A third party analyst, Terry Dyson,
suggested that I had an air filtration problem, possibly that the air
filter was being bypassed. I pulled the air filter and found peanut
shells in the floor of the airbox. It turned out that a squirrel had
chewed a hole in the underside of the hose connecting the airbox to the
intake manifold. The hole was not visible to a casual inspection; I
needed a mirror to find it.

Had it not been for the oil analysis, I would have been feeding
unfiltered air and nut shells to the engine for the rest of its
(certainly shortened) life. It was worth the $30 to find this out.

 

Mike Marlow wrote:

> Simply - that analysis does not, cannot, and does not pretend to predict or
> to even offer the foundation for a prediction that an engine may or may not
> fail in six months.

I got an oil analysis done at Blackstone Labs just a few weeks ago. It
showed elevated levels of silicon. A third party analyst, Terry Dyson,
suggested that I had an air filtration problem, possibly that the air
filter was being bypassed. I pulled the air filter and found peanut
shells in the floor of the airbox. It turned out that a squirrel had
chewed a hole in the underside of the hose connecting the airbox to the
intake manifold. The hole was not visible to a casual inspection; I
needed a mirror to find it.

Had it not been for the oil analysis, I would have been feeding
unfiltered air and nut shells to the engine for the rest of its
(certainly shortened) life. It was worth the $30 to find this out.