Honda Car Forum

"eraser" <whoever@wherever.ever> wrote in message
news:mWdqb.119648$%C5.35144@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Don't really want to add any more flame into the discussion, however:

I didn't think we had any flames yet.

> 1. do you know that warm-up time while idling is at least 2-4 times longer
> than under reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm under 45 mph), therefore
engine
> is exposed to the clearances you mentioned for A LOT LONGER when you idle.

A slight bit longer yes...but a lot less load too...which is more important.

> 2. do you think that reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm, under 45 mph)
hurts
> A LOT?

"A LOT" is subjective. I do know that the engines we tore down that were not
warmed up, showed increased ring wear, and piston scuffing.

>Do you think that going 40 mph at 2.5 k rpm is a "load" per se at
> all? (Flat terrain, please)

Yes...it is in fact by definition a "load".

> 3. do you really think that oil system for 1.5-2.5 l engine needs a whole
> lot time to boost the pressure back after sitting overnight or starting
> "dry" after oil change?

No...that's not what I'm talking about. IM talking about decreased
tolerances throughout the engine. This is what causes the excessive wear.

> TNX

U r welcome.


--
'03 S2000
'94 Accord

It's just about going fast...that's all...

http://home.insight.rr.com/cgreen/

"Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:mcmurtri-1602EB.01021706112003@corp-radius.supernews.com...
> Ever tried to idle a small car up to temperature on a cold day? It will
> never happen in some cars.

Correct...that's why I said the "maximum".

> It doesn't in my 97 Civic and it sure as
> hell wouldn't in my 88 Tercel. Trying to idle them warm is just wearing
> out the engine without getting a single mile from it.

"Wear" on a piston engine is nil at idle.

> My Civic has 135K miles and I've never idled it warm. It still runs as
> good as new too.

Great...take care.

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:13:58 -0500, "NetSock" <NetSock@nospam.com> wrote:
>"A LOT" is subjective. I do know that the engines we tore down that were not
>warmed up, showed increased ring wear, and piston scuffing.

Which allows me to bring up piston slap. My 93 Civic, 175,000 miles, has it
when cold. My thoughts on it developing is from driving without allowing it to
warm up before loading it. As of about 150,000 miles I now allow it to warm up
at idling or slight revving before driving and it doesn't seem to be getting
worse. Time and more miles will tell.
Whether loading cold is the cause or not, I don't know. It's just a gut
feeling.


John M.

"Kevin McMurtrie" <mcmurtri@dslextreme.com> writes:

> Ever tried to idle a small car up to temperature on a cold day? It will
> never happen in some cars.

Yep - I remember one time, it was about -15F outside, and my old '90 Grand
Am (which took forever to warm up anyway) actually started COOLING OFF if I
was idling!

I was pretty impressed by that

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:29:28 -0600, "eraser" <whoever@wherever.ever>
wrote:

>Don't really want to add any more flame into the discussion, however:
>
>1. do you know that warm-up time while idling is at least 2-4 times longer
>than under reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm under 45 mph), therefore engine
>is exposed to the clearances you mentioned for A LOT LONGER when you idle.
>2. do you think that reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm, under 45 mph) hurts
>A LOT? Do you think that going 40 mph at 2.5 k rpm is a "load" per se at
>all? (Flat terrain, please)
>3. do you really think that oil system for 1.5-2.5 l engine needs a whole
>lot time to boost the pressure back after sitting overnight or starting
>"dry" after oil change?

Bottom line, idling to warm up is a bad idea and a waste of time.

agree

"dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:as1mqvcf5irrcner6pcolqboo23ho7pvoj@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:29:28 -0600, "eraser" <whoever@wherever.ever>
> wrote:
>
> >Don't really want to add any more flame into the discussion, however:
> >
> >1. do you know that warm-up time while idling is at least 2-4 times
longer
> >than under reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm under 45 mph), therefore
engine
> >is exposed to the clearances you mentioned for A LOT LONGER when you
idle.
> >2. do you think that reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm, under 45 mph)
hurts
> >A LOT? Do you think that going 40 mph at 2.5 k rpm is a "load" per se at
> >all? (Flat terrain, please)
> >3. do you really think that oil system for 1.5-2.5 l engine needs a whole
> >lot time to boost the pressure back after sitting overnight or starting
> >"dry" after oil change?
>
> Bottom line, idling to warm up is a bad idea and a waste of time.
>

On 6 Nov 2003 05:24:33 -0800, dreid@synthetic-solutions.com (David
Reid) wrote:

>With regard to synthetic oils being better. I think the recent class
>action suit against Mercedes suggests that they can deffinitlely be
>used for much longer periods with out the need to be changed.
>_________________________________________________ ____________________________
>
>Conventional Oil Costs Carmaker $32 Million
>

Interesting. I use Mobil 1 and change the oil twice a year (5-7K
miles.) Haven't had any engine problems with my GS-R (115K) or my
Volvo (146K.)

I do know that Mobil paid for some very expensive engines in the
early '90s due to shortcomings with their synthetic aircraft oil.
Synthetic certainly isn't a panacea but it may make a difference in
those Benz's doing 12K intervals. Not clear that it is doing anything
for my Hondas on my maintenance schedule.

"Gordon McGrew" <gRmEcMgOrVeEw@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:qcbmqvk8fd7fps15q8kki722vp16b6tlgh@4ax.com...
> On 6 Nov 2003 05:24:33 -0800, dreid@synthetic-solutions.com (David
> Reid) wrote:
>
> >With regard to synthetic oils being better. I think the recent class
> >action suit against Mercedes suggests that they can deffinitlely be
> >used for much longer periods with out the need to be changed.
>
>_________________________________________________ __________________________
__
> >
> >Conventional Oil Costs Carmaker $32 Million
> >
>
> Interesting. I use Mobil 1 and change the oil twice a year (5-7K
> miles.) Haven't had any engine problems with my GS-R (115K) or my
> Volvo (146K.)
>
> I do know that Mobil paid for some very expensive engines in the
> early '90s due to shortcomings with their synthetic aircraft oil.
> Synthetic certainly isn't a panacea but it may make a difference in
> those Benz's doing 12K intervals. Not clear that it is doing anything
> for my Hondas on my maintenance schedule.
>
> I started using Mobil 1 5w30 on my `92 accord at 120,000 kilometers.For
continued high speed driving (cross country ) I switch to Mobil 1, 15w 50
and leave it in until December sometime when I go back to 5w30.

The beauty of using Mobil 1 is that the gel point is something like -45*F? ,
so it never gets any thicjker than 15 weight oil even here in Southern
ontario in the early winter .The reason I change back to 5w30 near the end
of December is that we DO get some -35 *F weather in January and February
from time to time ..and I`m not sure if the specs on the container are THAT
exact ?

I also find that it can wirthstand higher temps at sustained highway speeds
,all day without degrading or using too much,some speeds in excess of 80-90
miles an hour , and ambient in the 80`s and 90`s,conditions and smokeys
permitting.
ed/ontario

"eraser" <whoever@wherever.ever> wrote in message
news:wpEqb.941$Vu6.753@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> agree
>
> "dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:as1mqvcf5irrcner6pcolqboo23ho7pvoj@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:29:28 -0600, "eraser" <whoever@wherever.ever>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Don't really want to add any more flame into the discussion, however:
> > >
> > >1. do you know that warm-up time while idling is at least 2-4 times
> longer
> > >than under reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm under 45 mph), therefore
> engine
> > >is exposed to the clearances you mentioned for A LOT LONGER when you
> idle.
> > >2. do you think that reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm, under 45 mph)
> hurts
> > >A LOT? Do you think that going 40 mph at 2.5 k rpm is a "load" per se
at
> > >all? (Flat terrain, please)
> > >3. do you really think that oil system for 1.5-2.5 l engine needs a
whole
> > >lot time to boost the pressure back after sitting overnight or starting
> > >"dry" after oil change?
> >
> > Bottom line, idling to warm up is a bad idea and a waste of time.
> >
>
> I have to disagree. The fact is: when an engine is cold and started up the
block stays cold much longer than the pistons and this creates wear. I`m
talking anything below freezing? the engine should be given a few minutes to
warm up and circulate the oil. and then driven off gentlywithout pushing
the car to its limits until it is totally warmed up.I have practised this
for years in Ontario and never had an engine problem
ed/ontario

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:56:16 -0500, "xxxxxxxx" <carpediem@netrover.com>
wrote:

>
>"eraser" <whoever@wherever.ever> wrote in message
>news:wpEqb.941$Vu6.753@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>> agree
>>
>> "dizzy" <dizzy@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:as1mqvcf5irrcner6pcolqboo23ho7pvoj@4ax.com...
>> > On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 15:29:28 -0600, "eraser" <whoever@wherever.ever>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >Don't really want to add any more flame into the discussion, however:
>> > >
>> > >1. do you know that warm-up time while idling is at least 2-4 times
>> longer
>> > >than under reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm under 45 mph), therefore
>> engine
>> > >is exposed to the clearances you mentioned for A LOT LONGER when you
>> idle.
>> > >2. do you think that reasonable load (under 2.5-3k rpm, under 45 mph)
>> hurts
>> > >A LOT? Do you think that going 40 mph at 2.5 k rpm is a "load" per se
>at
>> > >all? (Flat terrain, please)
>> > >3. do you really think that oil system for 1.5-2.5 l engine needs a
>whole
>> > >lot time to boost the pressure back after sitting overnight or starting
>> > >"dry" after oil change?
>> >
>> > Bottom line, idling to warm up is a bad idea and a waste of time.
>> >
>>
>> I have to disagree. The fact is: when an engine is cold and started up the
>block stays cold much longer than the pistons and this creates wear. I`m
>talking anything below freezing? the engine should be given a few minutes to
>warm up and circulate the oil. and then driven off gentlywithout pushing
>the car to its limits until it is totally warmed up.I have practised this
>for years in Ontario and never had an engine problem
>ed/ontario
>

That proves it for me:-) Actually studies have shown that waiting for
the oil pressure to reach noraml, a matter of seconds, is beter than a
prolonged warm up.