I hear what you're saying but I still don't follow how this relates to your engine failure? If there was no sign of poor lubrication in the engine then why do you seem to blame yourself for not changing the oil more frequently than the recommended interval.
[/qoute]
Well, becouse it might have contributed to the damage.
It's only conjecture I know, but there must be many reasons why the bearing shell failed. A tiny fragment of metal or other body could have lodged into the oil feed to the bearing and failure would still then occur no matter how recently the oil had been changed. In fact, you'd do better to point your finger at the oil filter rather than the oil if something like that had happened. Then you have considerations of metal fatigue etc.
Yes, but also it might have been temporarly blocked by black sludge that builds up in the engine when the oil gets older.
You will prabobly say that i could have had the engine flushed on every service, BUT i think that it's much better to change the oil/filter more frequently and prevent the excess sludge build up rather than going for engine flush every 12k miles after it's been running for the last say 4kmiles with the risk of channels blocked.
You could even turn turn this whole discussion on it's head and argue that your engine was destined to fail and might well have failed a lot sooner had you not maintained regular servicing with a top oil brand etc :chin:
Right, just to make things clear - i never said a thing against using the highest quality oils, and never said that high quality oil contributed to my engine failure.
So people, always use the best oil you can afford basically and change it as often as you think is reasonable!
And Argo, ok lets end this discussion, becouse it seems to me that the only thing you're arguing is my insisting on more frequent services.
I totally agree with BeaveR above.
