Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Lexus Cars / July 2006

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Synthetic Oil

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
AlanW - 21 Jul 2006 00:49 GMT
I currently have a 2002 ES-300 and regularly change the oil every 5000
miles. I am thinking of getting a new Lexus ES-350. I drive about
15000 miles per year. Would it make sense to use synthetic oil? if so,
what would the recommended interval be for oil changes? Finally, other
than the benefit of using less crude oil to produce it, are there
engine performance benefits to using synthetic versus regular oil?

Thanks,
Alan
Jerohm - 21 Jul 2006 01:25 GMT
>I currently have a 2002 ES-300 and regularly change the oil every 5000
> miles. I am thinking of getting a new Lexus ES-350. I drive about
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Thanks,
> Alan

I have a 1990 LS400 clocking about 212K ... I have changed the oil (good o'
standard 5w30 ) about every 5000 miles ... give or take ... and have noticed
absolutely no deterioration in performance whatsoever.  The car has had it
share of maintenance costs, but none relating to the engine other than
scheduled stuff.  The car doesn't get great city gas mileage (16 mpg), but
consistently gets just shy of 25 mpg highway.
Wayne - 21 Jul 2006 01:53 GMT
>> I currently have a 2002 ES-300 and regularly change the oil every 5000
>> miles. I am thinking of getting a new Lexus ES-350. I drive about
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> scheduled stuff.  The car doesn't get great city gas mileage (16 mpg), but
> consistently gets just shy of 25 mpg highway.

I own 2 Lexus's, a 99 ES300 and a 00 RX300 and I use Amsoil Series 2000
0W-30 oil and their oil filters since they were new. Both vehicles get
very good gas mileage, well in the 20 mpg range. I must say they run
like the day I bought them.

Wayne
Road Rage - 21 Jul 2006 15:08 GMT
> I currently have a 2002 ES-300 and regularly change the oil every 5000
> miles. I am thinking of getting a new Lexus ES-350. I drive about
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Thanks,
> Alan

synthetic is the way to go.  Use the factory suggested weight, change
every 7500 miles.  You'll be fine.  For a daily driver I suggest Mobil1
or Amsoil.  If you like to drag race then go Royal Purple :-)

When I was in college we ran an experiment by having 2 brand new taxis,
one with full synthetic the other with Dino oil since the first oil
change.  Both vehicles worked the Atlanta airport for 1 year, both had
the oil changed at factory suggested interval, and both had about 26k
miles at the end of the year.  Environment was summer above 90 degrees,
winter below freezing, and several hours of idling.

Both motors were pulled at the end of 12 months and the valve train,
oil pan and cylinder walls were examined.  The vehicle with full
synthetic was noticebly better across the board.  These were all "naked
eye' and "feel" tests but you could see less wear and cleaner internals
on the synthetic engine.  These were a pair of Crown Vics by the way.
Ray O - 22 Jul 2006 03:26 GMT
>I currently have a 2002 ES-300 and regularly change the oil every 5000
> miles. I am thinking of getting a new Lexus ES-350. I drive about
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Thanks,
> Alan

The factory recommended interval for oil changes is the same for
conventional and synthetic oil.  Others may suggest longer oil change
intervals with synthetic, but I suspect that the folks who engineered,
designed, built, and will warrantee your car know more about servicing and
maintaining your car than your average car enthusiast.

I am not that familiar with the process of producing synthetic oil, but I
believe that it is also based on crude oil so there is probably little, if
any reduction in crude oil use.
Signature


Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

jdoe - 22 Jul 2006 04:47 GMT
>>I currently have a 2002 ES-300 and regularly change the oil every 5000
>> miles. I am thinking of getting a new Lexus ES-350. I drive about
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>believe that it is also based on crude oil so there is probably little, if
>any reduction in crude oil use.
I don't where you get your info from but it like nothing that I've
ever heard before, I go about 12k mile between changes on my MB, that
what the manufacturer recommends
Ray O - 22 Jul 2006 05:09 GMT
>>>I currently have a 2002 ES-300 and regularly change the oil every 5000
>>> miles. I am thinking of getting a new Lexus ES-350. I drive about
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> ever heard before, I go about 12k mile between changes on my MB, that
> what the manufacturer recommends

I get my info from Toyota's U.S. web site.
Signature


Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

Ice - 22 Jul 2006 05:54 GMT
I have owned several different makes of vehicles and never heard of a
recomendation of 12K no matter how little or severe the usage might be.   I
treated my rusted out 1972 Ford Torino better than that, not to mention that
it was more reliable than the MB products currently being produced..  Why
spend big bucks on a luxury car only to be a cheap a.s on something as
inexpensive as an oil change?  The oil is recycled so enviomental issues are
irrelevant.
jdoe - 22 Jul 2006 12:50 GMT
>I have owned several different makes of vehicles and never heard of a
>recomendation of 12K no matter how little or severe the usage might be.   I
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>inexpensive as an oil change?  The oil is recycled so enviomental issues are
>irrelevant.

just because *you* never heard of it does not mean it isn't true, does
not mean it is a bad thing. The manufacturer calls for that interval
and that is good enough for me
Ice - 22 Jul 2006 17:53 GMT
Your point is duely noted.  Just because I have have not heard of does not
mean it does not exist. But I noticed you did not dispute that the old
Torino was more reliable than current Mercedes products.  I might add it was
also quite cheaper and easier to maintain.
jdoe - 22 Jul 2006 18:03 GMT
>Your point is duely noted.  Just because I have have not heard of does not
>mean it does not exist. But I noticed you did not dispute that the old
>Torino was more reliable than current Mercedes products.  I might add it was
>also quite cheaper and easier to maintain.

whatever
amstaffs@home.com - 22 Jul 2006 20:38 GMT
"Ice" <iceplanet2@comcast.net>  quipped:

>Your point is duely noted.  Just because I have have not heard of does not
>mean it does not exist. But I noticed you did not dispute that the old
>Torino was more reliable than current Mercedes products.  I might add it was
>also quite cheaper and easier to maintain.

although *some* modern oils (and the proper oil filters) can go
significantly longer between oil changes I personally, wouldn't
let it go as long as 12k miles.

I also read that the quality of Mercedes automobiles have not been as
high as they were prior to the Chrysler merger.  In fact, it seems to
be a major topic of discussion in numerous MB groups.
Jerohm - 22 Jul 2006 20:47 GMT
> "Ice" <iceplanet2@comcast.net>  quipped:
>
> I also read that the quality of Mercedes automobiles have not been as
> high as they were prior to the Chrysler merger.  In fact, it seems to
> be a major topic of discussion in numerous MB groups.

I will give you a hint, the quality of MB ... or more properly the
maintenance costs to keep them running, are incredibly high.  This fact has
no correlation with their merger with Chrysler - they have always been that
way.  When they are working however, they are still one of the most
enjoyable cars to drive (The BMW 6 & 7 series give them a run for the money
... in terms of driving fun ).  Lexus is very reliable, but pretty much lack
any driver excitement.
amstaffs@home.com - 22 Jul 2006 21:04 GMT
"Jerohm" <jDrEmLoEhTrE@snet.net>  quipped:

>> "Ice" <iceplanet2@comcast.net>  quipped:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>... in terms of driving fun ).  Lexus is very reliable, but pretty much lack
>any driver excitement.

I agree that maintenance costs for MB are and always have been
expensive, however the *frequency* of warrantied repairs have gone
significantly up since the merger.

I subscribe the Automotive Daily News, an e-zine for dealers (I'm not
one but got a subscription through someone who is), and it has been
mentioned several times the quality control issues that has plagued
MB since the merger.  

One of the problems that has arisen is that unlike the past, where
many parts were subcontracted to either German companies or Asian
companies to manufacture, many parts are now subcontracted to
post eastern block countries where quality control has been
horrendously poor.

Add to that, DC's plan to jam their cars with the latest technology
and it's been a recipe for disaster.

BMW has always been plagued with electrical and mechanical problems
in their 7 series cars
David Z - 22 Jul 2006 23:59 GMT
> I will give you a hint, the quality of MB ... or more
> properly the maintenance costs to keep them
> running, are incredibly high.

> Lexus is very reliable, but pretty much lack
> any driver excitement.

If you define excitement as breakdowns and frequent visits with your
mechanic, well, then I prefer as little excitement as possible.  <G>

OTOH, if you define excitement as a smooth, quiet, comfortable and
reliable ride that lessens the stresses of the day and allows me to
enjoy the good things in life (including the nice sound system, etc.),
as opposed to feeling like I'm in a land yacht or like I just had a
workout at the gym, then, yes, I prefer some excitement.

It all depends on how you define excitement...
Jerohm - 23 Jul 2006 13:48 GMT
> If you define excitement as breakdowns and frequent visits with your
> mechanic, well, then I prefer as little excitement as possible.  <G>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> It all depends on how you define excitement...

I OWN a Lexus because I have little tolerance for addressing adversity, but
I have enough objectivity to admit when a Benz or BMW ARE working the way
they are SUPPOSE to, they offer FAR more of a 'drivers' experience.  Driving
a Lexus is a little like going though life surrounded in bubble wrap ... NOT
that, that is necessarily a BAD thing .... ;^)
David Z - 23 Jul 2006 14:06 GMT
> > If you define excitement as breakdowns and frequent visits with your
> > mechanic, well, then I prefer as little excitement as possible.  <G>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> a Lexus is a little like going though life surrounded in bubble wrap ... NOT
> that, that is necessarily a BAD thing .... ;^)

It all depends on what kind of "driving experience" you want to have.  I
suspect you COULD have bought a BMW or MB, but instead you CHOSE the
Lexus experience.

It's not a matter of OBJECTIVITY.  It's SUBJECTIVE.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.