This may be stupid but...
09-23-2009, 03:13 PM
#26
i don't think too many people would carry around a bottle of engine oil like us 8-owners do. I agree that you SHOULD check engine oil once in a while, but honestly, the fact is that I seldom (in fact, never as I recall) see anyone checking engine oil level at gas station...let's face it: it is probably not a big deal, but it is still a hassle that is uncommon to owners of other cars.
During re-fueling, the engine usually hasn't been off long enough for all the oil in the lines to drain back into the reservoir pan, unless you sit there for at least ten minutes. I never check my oil while re-fueling. The only oil I usually carry is a small, measured squirt bottle of Idemitsu.
I check my oil at home, in my garage, where I know the floor is level, and at my own convenience. Anywhere from 2 to 4 times a month. Usually, nothing has changed, but I still go through the motions just in case.
It also gives me an opportunity to do a quick visual inspection of everything else under the hood. All the other fluids, hoses, etc. That in itself is a good idea.
09-23-2009, 03:22 PM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only reason Mazda suggests checking it when filling-up is to associate it with another activity so people remember. It's not a good time to check it.
During re-fueling, the engine usually hasn't been off long enough for all the oil in the lines to drain back into the reservoir pan, unless you sit there for at least ten minutes. I never check my oil while re-fueling. The only oil I usually carry is a small, measured squirt bottle of Idemitsu.
During re-fueling, the engine usually hasn't been off long enough for all the oil in the lines to drain back into the reservoir pan, unless you sit there for at least ten minutes. I never check my oil while re-fueling. The only oil I usually carry is a small, measured squirt bottle of Idemitsu.
09-23-2009, 03:23 PM
#28
The only reason Mazda suggests checking it when filling-up is to associate it with another activity so people remember. It's not a good time to check it.
During re-fueling, the engine usually hasn't been off long enough for all the oil in the lines to drain back into the reservoir pan, unless you sit there for at least ten minutes. I never check my oil while re-fueling. The only oil I usually carry is a small, measured squirt bottle of Idemitsu.
I check my oil at home, in my garage, where I know the floor is level, and at my own convenience. Anywhere from 2 to 4 times a month. Usually, nothing has changed, but I still go through the motions just in case.
It also gives me an opportunity to do a quick visual inspection of everything else under the hood. All the other fluids, hoses, etc. That in itself is a good idea.
During re-fueling, the engine usually hasn't been off long enough for all the oil in the lines to drain back into the reservoir pan, unless you sit there for at least ten minutes. I never check my oil while re-fueling. The only oil I usually carry is a small, measured squirt bottle of Idemitsu.
I check my oil at home, in my garage, where I know the floor is level, and at my own convenience. Anywhere from 2 to 4 times a month. Usually, nothing has changed, but I still go through the motions just in case.
It also gives me an opportunity to do a quick visual inspection of everything else under the hood. All the other fluids, hoses, etc. That in itself is a good idea.
09-23-2009, 03:52 PM
#29
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Portland
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This idea is along the lines of a dry sump lubrication system, where the oil reservoir is separate from the oil pan or crankcase. Porsche has used this for years (I don't know about the current water-cooled cars, but the old air-cooled 911 flat 6's were all dry sump). In the 911 Porsche (including one I used to own), the oil capacity was around 12-14 quarts, held in a separate dry sump reservoir (literally a tank).
Since the wankel doesn't have a "crankcase" in the sense a conventional reciprocating piston engine does, it seems a dry sump system would be an ideal, and very elegant, solution. The only drawback to such a setup is cost. Big surprise, they cost more than just a plain old 'oil pan'. I suspect this is why Mazda didn't use it for the RX8.
I personally would have been very happy to pay a few hundred dollars more for a dry sump system for exactly the reason everyone has mentioned (and probably most of us would as well). But, I suspect "most" buyers of "regular" cars would not know a dry sump from a hole in the ground, and would not pay more for it. I also suspect that Mazda may have underestimated the sophistication of most RX8 buyers. I would bet that most RX8's are bought by relatively more sophisticated people (gear heads), many of whom probably would have been willing to pay the extra.
Hopefully someone at Mazda is listening, and might consider this for the next RX8.
Since the wankel doesn't have a "crankcase" in the sense a conventional reciprocating piston engine does, it seems a dry sump system would be an ideal, and very elegant, solution. The only drawback to such a setup is cost. Big surprise, they cost more than just a plain old 'oil pan'. I suspect this is why Mazda didn't use it for the RX8.
I personally would have been very happy to pay a few hundred dollars more for a dry sump system for exactly the reason everyone has mentioned (and probably most of us would as well). But, I suspect "most" buyers of "regular" cars would not know a dry sump from a hole in the ground, and would not pay more for it. I also suspect that Mazda may have underestimated the sophistication of most RX8 buyers. I would bet that most RX8's are bought by relatively more sophisticated people (gear heads), many of whom probably would have been willing to pay the extra.
Hopefully someone at Mazda is listening, and might consider this for the next RX8.
09-23-2009, 04:39 PM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This idea is along the lines of a dry sump lubrication system, where the oil reservoir is separate from the oil pan or crankcase. Porsche has used this for years (I don't know about the current water-cooled cars, but the old air-cooled 911 flat 6's were all dry sump). In the 911 Porsche (including one I used to own), the oil capacity was around 12-14 quarts, held in a separate dry sump reservoir (literally a tank).
Since the wankel doesn't have a "crankcase" in the sense a conventional reciprocating piston engine does, it seems a dry sump system would be an ideal, and very elegant, solution. The only drawback to such a setup is cost. Big surprise, they cost more than just a plain old 'oil pan'. I suspect this is why Mazda didn't use it for the RX8.
I personally would have been very happy to pay a few hundred dollars more for a dry sump system for exactly the reason everyone has mentioned (and probably most of us would as well). But, I suspect "most" buyers of "regular" cars would not know a dry sump from a hole in the ground, and would not pay more for it. I also suspect that Mazda may have underestimated the sophistication of most RX8 buyers. I would bet that most RX8's are bought by relatively more sophisticated people (gear heads), many of whom probably would have been willing to pay the extra.
Hopefully someone at Mazda is listening, and might consider this for the next RX8.
Since the wankel doesn't have a "crankcase" in the sense a conventional reciprocating piston engine does, it seems a dry sump system would be an ideal, and very elegant, solution. The only drawback to such a setup is cost. Big surprise, they cost more than just a plain old 'oil pan'. I suspect this is why Mazda didn't use it for the RX8.
I personally would have been very happy to pay a few hundred dollars more for a dry sump system for exactly the reason everyone has mentioned (and probably most of us would as well). But, I suspect "most" buyers of "regular" cars would not know a dry sump from a hole in the ground, and would not pay more for it. I also suspect that Mazda may have underestimated the sophistication of most RX8 buyers. I would bet that most RX8's are bought by relatively more sophisticated people (gear heads), many of whom probably would have been willing to pay the extra.
Hopefully someone at Mazda is listening, and might consider this for the next RX8.
Either way, re-locating the oil pan could colve the problem a bit, but being able to change the shape of the oil container it could make better use of the amount of oil in the pan. But then again, it presents the problem of moving the weight...
09-23-2009, 05:03 PM
#32
I typically put only about 1,500 miles on my car between oil changes, so realistically I would never have to check my oil, barring any problems. But I do anyway; getting under the hood isn't a chore for me.
09-23-2009, 05:22 PM
#33
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True, to a point, though I would maintain that there's a difference between a legitimate safety margin and needless over-filling. If you don't burn it off before the next change, it's waste.
I typically put only about 1,500 miles on my car between oil changes, so realistically I would never have to check my oil, barring any problems. But I do anyway; getting under the hood isn't a chore for me.
I typically put only about 1,500 miles on my car between oil changes, so realistically I would never have to check my oil, barring any problems. But I do anyway; getting under the hood isn't a chore for me.
I check my oil every time I fill up just because I can, and I can pretty much predict when my car is going to need oil... It is usually not until I get to about 2000 miles on the oil that I need to top off. And even if it doesnt need a full quart, it is maybe $5 per each 3k miles, I am already dropping gobs of money in gas for that stretch of distance, what is A few extra dollars for another petroleum product.
09-23-2009, 11:09 PM
#35
NO A/C :(
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Silver Spring, MD
Posts: 656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.... It does not really matter and I don't check every other fill up (BS) maybe around 2000-2500 mi for me but its how I drive that determines when I feel I need to change it, the light IMO is a safety net for me if it ever got that late but I would change before it came on. anyways.......
Last edited by bhop; 09-23-2009 at 11:11 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Learners_Permit
Series I Interior, Audio, and Electronics
8
09-27-2015 07:38 PM
