+1. Same oil put in at the factory as found in the 0W-20 bottle.

 

Really . . . there you go again with cherry-picked sentence quotes out of context. Now annual oil change requirements are like lifetime, no change transmission oil?

And what is it you're surprised I don't see? One more time--what I said is I don't see any credible scientific evidence that more frequent oil changes will solve the particular timing chain wear issues now being linked to GDI engine designs. The evidence that does exist simply suggests that today's best oils may not provide adequate protection for today's GDI engines. No data have surfaced on optimal oil change intervals for GDI engines.

I also said I experienced excessive carbon build-up on the valves of my GDI 4.2 V8 in an '07 Audi RS4. That car received oil changes at an Audi dealer with the recommended Audi oil every 3K miles. I dumped it shortly after 20K miles because it had multiple other "issues."

And, just for the record, in a couple of weeks, my F-Type will receive it's 3rd fill of fresh oil in 9K miles.

 

There have been far more blunders in automotive design and recommendations than debunked hypothesis of consumers. in fact its the other way around, consumers are the test guinea pigs. The only way Jaguar found out that 0w20 was the right oil viscosity for the DI AJ133 engine was to let the early adopter dummies like me use 5w20 for 5 years. I am not convinced they still have it right. SinF is right, there will be lots more changes down the road.

 

A thing to keep in mind is that until recently manufacturers did not even know that there is a monster called carbon nano-particle eating away engine components. And you have to also answer, did you? many of the remedies like oil catch cans, bypass oil filters were discovered and first used by us consumers. Because even when they do find there is a problem, they only fix it in subsequent designs.

 

Speaking of, anyone installed oil catch can on F-type, and if so how much collects between oil changes?

 

Bad news ole chap. GM has concluded that shortening the oil change interval is required in preventing timing chain wear.

They have gone as far as to issue a recall and reprogram the onboard oil computer to remind of oil changes much sooner than previous. (Half the time by some accounts- down to 5k from 11k)

Bear in mind, typically, 20+ people have to lose their lives before OEMs fess-up or they have to be on the hook for the liability- as GM was since its their computer telling folks when its best to change oil.

 

Bad news? No, not as far as I'm concerned, but a reference would be nice. Do you have one?

You still seem to be having trouble understanding the position I have taken in this thread. I am agnostic about whether oil change intervals should be changed or not, absent compelling evidence of benefits. I would welcome new evidence one way or the other.

 

I was truly agnostic whether oil change interval made a difference or not. You were adamant there was no evidence supporting more frequent oil changes than originally prescribed. Even though both hands of intuition and science pointed at soot loading.

I cannot believe you are asking me for a reference. We should have asked you if you had any evidence of your absolute claim that there was no evidence supporting reducing oil change frequency reduced timing chain wear. I did my due diligence and reporting back that there is tons of it.

But again I assert that this is about timing chain wear for me and not OCI. I would like to discuss additional methods of reducing it.

 

Actually, the onus to provide evidence is on you Q&C since your position that status quo must change. (and I do agree it must change)

 

I'll do it with the protest and preface that we should make note on how we humans take a stance based on emotions and not facts. Its a good thing I chose to verify. The evidence exists as far back as 2010!

In a letter to customers and dealers. Note GM cars come with a sophisticated system for determining oil life. Obviously, even it was unaware of the soot loading problem in DI- which is the only engine this recall was issued for, across the board. Also note their apology for ingnition shutdown was not this unambiguous.

"We have determined that under certain driving conditions, and with extended oil change intervals, the timing chain could wear prematurely and cause the illumination of the Service Engine Soon light. Timing chain wear can be affected by the age of the engine oil and driving conditions.

What We Will Do:
To ensure that your vehicle will not experience this condition, your GM
dealer will change the calibration of the engine control module, including the engine oil life monitor, which in most cases will recommend more frequent oil changes. This calibration
change will be performed for you at no charge until February 28, 2013."

 

Aren't you the guy that just berated me for quoting experience from one Jag model and applying it to another?

The GM engine you refer to above is a 3.6L V6 that is available in both DI and non-DI versions in a wide variety of vehicles.

So it's not a Jag engine and not a V8 and in most cases not DI, but we're supposed to accept that this is credible technical substantiation that can be applied directly to the Jag V8 with DI.

Sure...............

 

I wonder that this may have become a rather 'circular' argument or another way to look at it, is it possible for someone to be in a room by themselves and still start and maintain an argument.
Lawrence

 

reminds me of the old Monty Python sketch.

 

No it doesn't.

 

 

Hopefully he only paid for the five minute argument and not the full half hour.

 

Like my parrot, this discussion is bereft of life.

 

I started this post with a simple inquiry about service intervals. It escalated (or degraded) to a technological pissing contest. I'm old enough to remember when "manufacturers" said smoke Camel non filters they'll cure that sore throat. I don't trust JLR. Their recommendation will certainly get you through to the warranty period with the least expense on their part as possible. I think I'll just change my oil at 5000 mile intervals thank you.

 

I don't think anyone in this thread actually changes oil at full JLR recommended interval, not even people that do oil analysis. So it is rather strange that some individuals give Q&C such hard time over what is in my mind a plausible (but not definitively proven) theory as to why shorter change intervals are absolutely necessary.

Personally, I am about to hit 5000km and scheduled my second oil change.

 

This is my last attempt to try to explain, after which I'm exiting this discussion once and for all. It has become completely circular and arcane.

The reason "some individuals" like myself have questioned Q&C's rather strident pronouncements is that there is no evidence that more frequent oil changes will resolve timing chain issues seen in certain DI engines. As clearly stated in his own posted references, many experts believe that it may be a shortcoming w/ current oils (clean or dirty), period.

It is a plausible theory, but it is an unproven one. Maybe shorter intervals will prolong the life of timing chains, maybe they won't, but it's just pure speculation at this point. I can see why some manufacturers may have decided to change their recommendations because it's worth a shot to see if it helps.

I also change my oil about every 5K miles, but I have no evidence that I'm gaining any benefit from that. However, I'm willing to pay extra, much like purchasing insurance that I probably will never need.

There's also no evidence that GM's move to shorten their recommended oil change interval for certain engines has resolved their problems. In fact, in looking through the articles written regarding the GM problem last night, it appears that not even GM thinks it's a definitive solution. Subsequent to the problem being identified several years ago, they have discontinued some of the involved engines, and substantially redesigned others.