Wrapper

"Phisherman" <noone@nobody.com> wrote in message
news:p4egs1lbogvshja3n5ic34dikqiuiubcsv@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 05:42:13 GMT, Jeff Olsen
> <handywired@earthlink.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>That seems too long, but that's what they are telling me.
>>
>>I'd be more inclined to change it at 500 miles, then again at 3000.
>>
>>Also the dealer said not to worry about engine break-in, but to "just
>>drive
>>the hell out of it".
>>
>>What do you all think?
>>
>>-jeff[/color]
>
> I think waiting until the first 3000 miles for the first change is too
> much. The initial oil change will contain lots of metal.[/color]


I'm not sure I agree with that position. The factory has to support a
warranty for upwards of 100,000 miles, do you really think they will leave
stuff inside the motor that can do harm and increase the warranty claim
exposure they are facing? I think they would easily spend a few bucks -- and
pass the cost on to the consumer -- to be sure the motor is cleaned out.

Back when this concern came about, they did much of the machine work pretty
much by hand, and the steps needed to clean the metal flakes out were labor
intensive. But, today most of this work is done by robots, and spinning the
motor over to squirt solvent through it doesn't take much effort at all.

I see no problem with changing the oil early, but if there was any real
benefit, the factory would have the dealers call the vehicles in and do it
to avoid the warranty issues that can result if it isn't done.

I have to question any instruction of "drive the hell out of it." That
sounds of pure folly to me, but observing the normal oil change interval
seems reasonable to me.





I plan on[color=blue]
> changing mine at 800-1000 miles, then every 3000 after that (the
> maintenance guide recommends every 5000 miles). A new engine consumes
> more oil, since its pistons, rings, and cylinder walls have not been
> conditioned. My dealer recommended to "go easy" the initial 500 miles.[/color]