Like I stated earlier...I'm sure you have studied oil etc, better you then me!! LOL....I personally do not believe in a MM. And as I stated if money was not an issue....I'm sure more people would be changing there oil more often....same issue as using a higher octane...but people still think 87 is GREAT .... These are my thoughts...just wanted to share!!


tonyd3773 (Video Guru)

 

That's fine...keep wasting your money....but more importantly...keep producing prolific amounts of oil waste, which I am sure, is far less important than your wallet.

Money isn't an issue...people don't seem to mind blowing $50-60 a week on fuel...so a $20 oil change every 3-5 months doesn't even factor. I honestly am not sure what your thinking process is here. But it is rather puzzling.

I'm not sure what MM means but what I do know is that there is enough testing and evidence (practical racing included) that has demonstrated that using synthetic oils improves oil longevity and engine protection.

Also, as far as 87 goes, where do you get your data on that? It's fine to have an opinion but back it up with fact. Unless your engine is knocking or pinging, why would you NOT use 87? I'd like to hear your answer.

 

MM is short for maintenance minder. As far as Octane goes, I tried one tank of higher Octane, it resulted in lower MPG's and a rough feeling drive. Far from scientific proof, but enough that I have no interest in pursuing it.

 

Thank you for being honest about that. I called you out, not to put you on the spot, but more to see if this was more BS or maybe you had some facts. Break in oils do exist, but they are used in race Eng's because of the extreme pressure and tolerances. Joe Gibbs is about the best one I know of and it's used by all the Nascar and serious race teams.

I'm glad to see you are spending time on BITOG. I have been a sponsoring member on that site for many years. Started the race area and watched it turn into the BS it is now.

I used Blackstone Lab test results with consultation with Terry Dyson to get my race Eng oil program on target and learned a great deal. I extended that to my street cars. From that testing I found I could take the humble Shell Clean Formula 10W-30 oil (from Costco) in my wifes 99 Accord to 6000mile with no issues. Additive package in tack, not sheared out of grade, insolubles low and no water or fuel dilution. Same with my 200k mile 5.7l Suburban I just sold. That eng was perfect when I sold it. The range was not as good with 4500 miles, but that was because of the work it had to deal with. Pulling my 28' tag trailer was all she could do.

Like I said, I have no clue what algorithm is really behind the Honda oil minder, but may look into it. My feeling is it's a great idea for anyone not into oil or maintenance and would like to see some reason to change the oil. For myself, I will send in samples to the lab and see how it's doing and track the data with trends. The cost will be less than $100 for 4 samples, but will give me real data to support the correct interval I need to use.

One got-ya on that I'll share is, if you change oil brands you have to start over. One other little comment. Just like running Hi test gas in an Eng designed to run regular, like out Fits, using Synthetic oil for normal oil intervals is a total waste of money. Folks that understand eng oil run synthetic for one reason. They want to extend the change interval. For street car like out Fit, you will never ever come close to the qualities it can offer other then longer change interva. Stuff that you pay for. Like higher temp capability.

Hope this helps.
Just sharing and being honest with you.

 

I guess we're going through this topic again.. so let me agree, again, that the "change your oil every 3,000 miles" is nothing more than a marketing strategy designed to bring customers in more frequently. This is especially true for cars newer than 1995 (when the U.S. switched to OBDII)

 

I'm still not 100% convinced that Honda factory-fill break-in oil is a myth - although I can't find anything specific on the Interweb about it.

The owners manual for my wife's 2005 Honda Accord, in the break-in section, specifically says "DO NOT CHANGE THE OIL UNTIL THE SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE TIME".

I'm pretty sure my 2007 Civic Si manual said the same thing.

I think this is true for most Honda's. (If anyone has another Honda owner manual - please check.

 

Try and find of bottle, lab test or MSD sheet or anything other than word of mouth, and I too will believe.
I did not say it was not a fact, just wanted to know what it was.

 

Guys . . . . cut and pasted from the Honda Owner's Link site; this was not a hard one to find:

"Why should I wait to change the oil the first time?

Your Honda engine was delivered with an oil that is specially formulated for new engines that have not yet developed their "natural" wear patterns and may contain minute particles from the manufacturing process.

American Honda strongly recommends this special oil be left in the engine long enough for these wear patterns to develop, usually until the first maintenance interval specified in your Owner's Manual, based on your specific driving conditions."

'Nuff said.

 

In the UK the first oil change for a Jazz (Fit) is at 12,500 miles or 12 months. I can't believe that Honda uses different oil for diferent markets. The UK vehicle doesn't have an oil monitoring system.

 

I've switched from dino to synthetic oil at the first oil change on my last 5 vehicles, and gone 5000 mi between changes with excellent results. I also always change the filter at each oil change. I plan on doing the same with my Fit.

On a side note, and a bit off topic...

The talk of wasting resources with 1000 mile oil changes got me thinking, are you wasting a natural resource if you use a synthetic oil? And, if they can produce a man-made synthetic oil that's better than dino oil (an expendable natural resource), why can't they produce a man-made synthetic gasoline? Afterall, isn't gasoline derived from dino oil?

Anyway, didn't mean to hijack the thread, just curious...

 

It's a good question and a legitimate one. But it takes resources to make synthetic oils...and resources to process the waste afterwards.

Even if it's synthetic, it's still waste....it's still very toxic. And it needs to be processed. Or in most cases, simply dumped.

Synthetic gasoline does exist and alot of military aviation uses it...B52's sometimes run on synthetic fuel. But it's even a worse concoction than the real stuff. And it still takes resources, materials, etc to make it.

And off topic...I really believe now that man is rather stupid. Far more so than what we keep telling ourselves about how smart we are. All we need to do is stand still for one moment and take in all the stupidity, waste, illogical-ness, etc we exhibit as a species. Totally wasteful, totally destructive, totally unaware...even though it is in front of our eyes every single day.

The answer to sustainability lies right under our noses. Purely being nature...and natural processes. Photosynthesis...100% efficient. Solar cells...10% efficient (maybe more now). ICE engines...10-15% efficient. Did you know that a mere 20% (at best) of the fuel you have in your tank actually ends up doing the work to move your car? The rest is gone to waste heat, friction, mechanical losses, etc...isn't that astounding and pathetic?

What's preventing us from doing things is US...nothing else. We are our own worst enemy.

OK...now back to our topic.

 

I originally started this thread because I was amazed at how easy it was to change the oil due to the engine's layout.

What I think (and hope) everyone should take from the posts that followed - is that changing your oil more often than the Honda Maintenance Minder suggests is not needed in the Fit (unless you have modified the engine), and is probably a waste.

Reduce - Reuse - Recycle

For my family - moving to the Fit was a way to reduce. My wife loves the way she feels when she drives it through the school parking lot, dropping off the kids. All the other moms have the Suburban-type tanks. She can't wait to get her own BOM Fit.

 

This will always be a debate. Yes I agree...under normal driving conditions...i.e..taking the kids to school in the morning / picking them up and parking the car at work DOES NOT call for changing your oil until MM tells you to do so.
On the other hand, people who have modified there FIT's to track or street race or even drive 500 - 1000 miles a week like me ....need to change more often.


tonyd3773

 

That's true...you need to change more often...because you'll rack up miles sooner..but the you can still easily maintain a 10K drain interval with synthetic oil with no problems whatsoever.

 

I already have a guess on when the Maintenance Minder will remind me to get my Fit serviced. I saw that it changed from 100% to 90% at around 700 miles on the odometer. It'll be around 7000 miles when it gets its first service. I do tend to follow these things, and it does save money in the long run.

I've owned 2 Saturn IONs beforehand, and both of them had GM's Oil Life Monitor. They both let me go around 7000 miles before displaying the "CHG OIL" message. Then, I just followed the service intervals and had it done.

Also, I do take my cars to the dealership. I don't trust these quick oil changes places. They'll find a way to make more money off you. Honda dealerships have more to loose if they screw you over on the service side. They not only lose you as a customer getting your car serviced there, but also risk losing your business the next time you are in the market for a new/used car.

 

I have read so many posts on various car forums about oil change interval, but I have not encountered anyone actually had experience problems due to NOT changing their oil earlier than recommanded. Have anyone had problems or have links other people that had?

 

First off, changing your oil at a shorter interval isn't going to hurt anything - except your wallet. Using higher octane gas, well, it's a waste and doesn't get you anything (there are other discussions on this)

Climatologist,

You're right about quite a bit. We are screwing ourselves and future generations by not developing alternative energy sources. I come from more of an 'energy independence for the U.S.' standpoint, so I'm all for drilling in ANWR and more nuclear power plants supplemented by more efficient and cost effective wind and solar. I also support electrically powered vehicles (such as the Chevrolet Volt) to get us to an independent state.

I did want to rebut a few things. First plants don't convert sunlight into electricity, so the efficiency argument is comparing apples to oranges. On the sun subject, tho, last year, there was a panel made that was ~42% efficient. I don't think we'll ever get to 100%, but at 1.36kW per meter squared, even at 50%, it wouldn't take many panels on the average house to power it.

Internal combustion engines are more around 20-25% efficient. But I agree, it's still a big waste. I'd rather see an electrically powered car with a small gas/diesel/alcohol/whatever burns turbine that is only used to generate power to charge the battery system, and only when needed.


On topic, I just bought oil on my lunch, and I should have a couple filters waiting at home. The Fit gets her first oil change tonight or tomorrow afternoon!