http://www.7thgencivic.com/forums/showthre...06&page=5&pp=15

just curious if anyone has anything to add. i'm S2000man01.

 

Moving to UTH main. I don't want Technical for a 3rd party discussion from another forum.

Regarding your quote:
You are going to get stomped on this one. Oil doesn't get "better" with age. It's as good as it gets when fresh and new. It's a matter of how long it'll take before it degrades and gets contaminated enough to dump. For an S2000, driven in conditions that would be deemed "severe" (and most owners will be in this catagory), the 3000 miles (3750 to be precise) is what is called for by Honda, no matter how good you think your oil is. Abandoning this schedule is risking warranty claim denial.

 

yeah i have that worded funky.

i'll go back and edit it.

i had pointed out what road rash said about doing damage to the cat by changing your oil too early or too often.

 

Or was it "Road Rage"? In any case, I'm very curious about what he said exactly that would be harmful to the cat. I'm not doubting this but it would be nice to see it. Can you find it and link his post?

 

sure it's in the oil diaries, under "can i change my oil too often?"



https://www.s2ki.com/forums/index.php?act=S...=0#entry4205938

 

Thanks. Interesting info to be reminded of. Yes, your statement is a little misleading in that when one associates "oil" and what it does to the "car", one always relates this to the engine. I never even considered the cat. However, being one of those who change oil every 3000 miles on every car I've ever owned in the last 35 years, some of which have had catalytic converters and have reached almost 130,000 miles in my possession, I must say that any accelerated deterioration of the cat was still an acceptable cost. On only one car, did the cat actually plug up and need replacement, but it got to 100,000 miles before it went. Had I went with longer oil changes, maybe the cat could have lasted, who knows, maybe all the way to 130,000 miles? But I wonder if the engine would have faired as well. Quite honestly, a cat lasting for 100K miles didn't bother me in the least, knowing that the engine continued to run for many years more for the owner after me.
To me, keeping my engine healthy is the most important thing that my oil does for me. If it harms the cat a little, I can live with that.

 

yeah i didn't really think of how my statement about it hurting the car would be interpreted as "engine". i should have explained that a little better at first.

I agree on the part of keeping the engine more healthy by changing the oil, even if it harms the cat a little. haha, i'd rather replace a cat than replace damaged engine internals.

thanks for the input.

 

Phosphorous is bad for the cat. It blinds the cat, preventing the catalyst from doing its thing. If Phos burned out quicker in the initial miles as RR suggests, you'd see it in the difference between virgin oil analyses and UOAs. And I haven't seen a big drop - check BITOG. I'm not saying that RR is wrong, just that I don't know where he's getting his info from.

But when you burn oil, you are letting this phosphorous get to the cat and you will likely blind the cat quicker. Not because of your OCI, but because you're burning oil. The more oil your engine burns and the higher the phos levels in your oil, the faster your cat will go bad.

I've read about a test that was done on a car that had UOAs pulled every 1000 miles using Mobil 1 and it implied that the oil filter gets more efficient up to about 3000 miles. On this point, one might suggest that changing your oil and filter too soon is detrimental.

I have a '95 Corolla with 239,000 miles on it. I've changed the oil roughly every 3000 to 3500 miles using primarily cheapo SuperTech oil and filters. I live in Ohio - presumably one of the worst states for Sulfur in gas. My cat - and the rest of the car - still work fine.