I too use synthetic oil, collect it in a large drum, drain it at an oil recycling depot once a year.

For the money it costs me to do it myself I get Mobil1 oil for the price of crapo cheapo oil if I had of went to the lube places.

I change it anywhere from 3k-5k miles, depending on if I feel like doing it or time available.

Yes, there are probably a few dumb m*therf*ckers who dump the oil in their back yard but these are generally also the type of people who empty their ashtray at the stoplight, throw chip bags and candy wrappers out the window while driving, etc. Extending the oil change interval really won't improve their attitude. But, I can understand your thinking Corpsie.

 

...And the used oil is somehow processed, which requires energy. The new oil is processed, which requires energy.

It doesn't matter if 90% of the pollution comes from other sources, it all adds up in the end. If 80% of the people you knew stole candy from the blind, does that make it ok as long as you don't steal as much candy as they do?

Just think "the straw that broke the camel's back"

 

Until Ford recommends an extended oil change interval, I will continue with my 3,000 mile oil changes, as indicated under Ford's Severe Duty Maintinence schedule. I meet two of the four criteria, good enough for me. Otherwise 5,000 miles is fine if thats meets the requirements of your use.

Lets see, 145,000 miles, 3,000 mile intervals = 48 oil changes

48 Oil Changes x 6qts per change = 288 quarts oil oil

4 quarts to a gallon, 288/4 = 72 gallons of oil to date

Gas consumption:

145,000 miles at 17 mpg ( 5 1/2 year long term average mileage) = 8530 gallons of fuel

My oil use has been 0.8% percent of my fuel consumption.
A 5000 mile interval would change it to 0.5% of my fuel consumption.

Just pointing out that in the gand scheme of oil use, a simple change in fuel mileage would result in a much greater decrease in oil consumption. I'm not saying that every bit doesn't help, just pointing out the relativeness of the arguement...

If we were truly concerned about oil consumption, why are we here talking about full size trucks?

 

He recycles his oil Corpsie, so he's not a candy thief... Where did all this save the whales BS start anyways?

 

Hence the reason I use by-pass filtration along with the best synthetic that I can buy.

I'm sure the rest of my truck will wear out before me engine. Oh well, What can I say with 1 oil change per 100,000 miles

 

Changing oil every 7500 miles.....I would not agree with that.
I chance my oil every 5000 miles and have done so since 1990.
Changing oil every 3000 miles is a waste of money....I agree 100% with that.

 

Yes, it is all you other people using resourceses that causes so much damage to the environment and clog the highways that I have to travel on. Please conserve so I don't have to.

 

Except for the 3 months I was in Europe when my parents put a total of about 400 miles on the truck mostly in the city in stop and go traffic. Then I changed it soon as I got back at 77,500 even though it had only gone 3K since the last one. I'll probably change it again in 5 thousand miles at 82 and then 3 after that at 85 thousand so I can get back on the 5 thousand mile schedule. I'm sure if I changed it at 3 thosuand miles it might make the truck last a bit longer. And if I changed it at 1000 miles it'd last even longer than that. And at 500 miles the oil would probably never even get dirty and the truck might go several hundred thousand miles. But i figure 5000 is an OK compromise between making my truck last and conserving cash and fuel. Plus, many of the people on this board upgrade with every redesign or every time they get a new trailer, so I don't see why they wanna spend money and time on monthly oil changes when the effects on such small differences in oil change frequency probably won't show up for at least 100,000 miles.
I think the 3000 mile oil change interval is a throw back from the days when both engines and cars didn't last as long and needed more attention.

 

Whatever works for you is great. Each person has their own argument each way. There are much greater "ecological" problems then using a few extra quarts of oil in your truck over the lifetime of it's use. If it provides you piece of mind, it's worth it. Look at it like this, it's like insurance, you never need it, till you need it.
Yes, it's true anywhere from 3-7.5k is good, depending on driving conditions, and habits etc. . . I'm kinda thinking that this will go down as one of those, "Which came first, the Chicken, or the egg?" arguments.

 

Actually even if you did change at 500 miles that will not stop dirt particles from wearing your engine.

Since most engine wear is caused by particles that are between 2 and 20 microns and most regular oil filters don't even filter to 20 microns you are not even beginning to reduce wear.

Most filters will stops boulders that would cause a catastrophic failure, but unlike you use a filter that removes small particles you are getting wear, no matter what oil and how often you change it.

Here is an informative article on the subject:
http://www.dieselsite.com/prodrev/microntest.htm

Hence the reason I have a by-pass filter!!

 

so why then does my 98 owners manual recommend 8000 kms (5000 miles) between changes for regular use and double if the distance is all highway?


I can't see Ford understating the maintenence requirements. They have enough problems with cheap parts and engineering defects without the added headache of all their owners getting blown engines prematurely. Chevy and Dodge would jump all over that.

 

Couldn't have said it better gopher!!

Oil is a finite resource. It's gonna run out sometime, no matter how much we try to conserve it...... Until V8's and full size trucks are outlawed, I'm gonna use what I use.

 

One quart of oil doesn't hurt? Let me put it this way. Every quart of excess oil that you use is one less quart of oil for the future. Every quart of oil dumped on the ground can contaminate thousands, if not millions, of gallons of water. Every quart of oil lines the pockets of the rich oil companies. Every quart of oil is money funneled to the rich oil companies that could have been used to benefit a local entity. Every quart of oil required pollution producing vehicles to move from the oil fields to your garage.

Now, multiply that quart of oil by the thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people who still believe that it's necessary to change oil every 3,000 miles and you have a enormous amount of wasted oil. Now, multiply that by 5 or 6 quarts that goes into the typical engine... The amount of wasted oil is staggering.

I can see doing 3,000 mile and/or 3 month oil changes in the 40s through the 60s and maybe even into the 90s. Back then oil technology was not what it is now. Back then, oil failed in just a few thousand miles. Back then, oil couldn't deal with water contamination the way modern oils can. So, back then, if you wanted an engine to last you did 3,000 mile changes.

These days, oil technology is way different from even 10 years ago. Engines are different too. So, follow the manufacturers' rec's.

Join the present. Quit living in the past.

 

threeforks

I would like to respond to your comment, as it is not often presented. I'm not sure that it truly affects the enviroment (above average number of oil changes) as much as people think it does. I am a firm subscriber to the "heat-sink" theory as opposed to the global warming mob mentality that runs rampant. At core to the issue really is the fact that a massive volcanic eruption can (and ultimately will) belch much more CO2 into the atmosphere in one hour than we have in the history of industrialized civilization. There is evidence that our emissions are palty compared to Mother Earth's, but they never get paid any attention because people won't give money to the "Screw Exxon Foundation" where foundation presidents and staffers draw their salary from. Then there's also adequate evidence that a rise in temperature would be good for the world climate in the form of creating more places which would sustain agriculture which do not currently. But again, another topic and it get's no airplay anyway.

So, I do understand what you are saying about recycling the oil, and as a personal viewpoint I believe there is a non-issue regarding emissions and pollution (from global warming caused by auto exhaust and from the energy necessary to reprocess the oil that Corpsie pointed out). But I do lend credence to the point that Corpsie brought up that it is indeed a depleting asset. So, in that respect, why not deplete it as little as possible. I don't know if it's like stealing candy from blind people though, amusing analogy though.....

 

Dennis

1) I don't know if using what uninformed or uncaring people do (re/every quart of oil dumped on the ground) is a fair and reasonable basis for attempting to alter the behavior of informed and caring people. I am personally feeling the repercussions of such an argument when my rights with regards to firearms are restricted because 10 idiots a day blow the heads off themselves and loved ones due to carelessness. Why not ban oil all together? Then no one can dump any of it on the ground. Punish everyone for the sins of a few.

2) In the finest country in the world which demonstrates the finest form of economic policy (i.e. capitalism) in the world, there isn't anything wrong with pockets getting "lined" for products they sell. Why should a sinister ring be added ("rich oil companies") when a company is simply profiting from a supply/demand determined price in a free-market economy? I like your imagery - "rich oil companies", "money funneled" Sounds very sinister, like a drug cartel. Did I "funnel" money to the "rich doughnut company" when I picked up a box of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts tonight? Shound I feel bad for "lining their pockets"? Should the entire free-market society feel bad for recommending Krispy Kreme stock and selling it at $40 + a share, clearly 90 times its earnings. Shoot, that money could have benefited a local charity.

And I don't mean to be antagonistic, I have just never heard that argument before (i.e. don't do an oil change because it benefits rich oil companies). What is your full and expounded position if you don't mind me asking?