Prius 2010 Oil Change Interval Revised? Not yet... (closed)

What are you basing this on? Dealerships "might" but Don't? Twice as many visits - for an oil change service charge PLUS any other service they may be able to talk an owner into. This is a cash cow for them - and no doubt the reason Toyota has (undoubtedly) backed down from the 5K OCI. Pure politics and profit. U.S. regions and dealerships have a lot of clout.

The interval should be raised - to maintain consistency with regions outside U.S. and other manufacturers. The advantage would be current customer satisfaction - and perhaps save some (few, but still..) Prius sales losses due to buyer concern - maintenance $$ over the life of the vehicle.

Doug's Team knows this and mums the word....
You must work for a dealership or have some interest as your point is completely wrong.

 

Exactaly.

Oh but there is an advantage to keep them low... they reduce the chances of sludging and potential law suits.

 

The Toyota dealerships are not Toyota. The dealerships making money on oil changes does not mean that Toyota is making money on oil changes. It just means that the local dealership is making money.

 

It only increases the chance of sludging if they set the OCI higher than the oil and filter can reasonably cope with.

 

Right again, but they have to consider the lowest common denominator. Say a person who drives few miles in a cold, damp climate.

On another note, Roy misinterpreted your post above (like that doesn't happen around here much)... he read the the dealership rather than Toyota doesn't make a profit of of oil changes. And I believe you meant the dealership do make a profit and Toyota does not.

 

I think the strongest motivating factor is liability, otherwise we wouldn't have such fits about not being able to navigate on the go even though older more acceptable technologies have free reign.. like playing with your radio, AC controls, Cd player, Cell phones, vents, visors, cup holders, etc.... many things take our attention away, but because navigation is new, they still won't take the block off that allows up to have full control while moving.

Even so, just because we "can" go much more than 5k on an oil change, doesn't mean they want to encourage it because of all the people that will stretch it beyond that and abuse it without regard for whether the product they are using will actually last that long.

When they get in court, all the jury hears is that Toyota said they could go 10K or 15K between changes and that's all they can process in their little brains.... common sense is not so common.

 

duhhhh.... Is that what I said???? nope. Read your previous post. My point was your wording of "might".......

 

Sorry you misunderstood me then. What I wrote was "Their dealerships might, but they don't." Which is to say "Their dealerships (i.e. Toyota dealerships) might, but they (i.e. Toyota themselves) don't".

 

Well, I would assume that the jury in your hypothetical, if presented with "Toyota said that they could go 10k between oil changes, but they went 15k between oil changes and had problems" would be no less likely to decide in Toyota's favor than if they were presented with "Toyota said that they could go 5k between oil changes, but they went 15k between oil changes and had problems".

And if the issue is that under some circumstances it would be alright to go 10K, but not under all circumstances, I could understand the problem. Though as to OCI changing based on circumstances, I recall being told when I purchased my RAV4 that I should change the oil every 5,000 miles unless I drove it in adverse conditions, at which point I should change it every 3,500 miles.

 

When Amsoil says their synthetic is good to 25K and 15K under rough conditions... does that mean Toyota's engines are inferior if they truly need more frequent changes?... certainly not!, if anything, they are superior.

My Case is many things we read and stipulations we are held under are written by lawyers rather than engineers and mechanics.

Besides, you can do any mod you want to your car and Toyota can do nothing about it when you have a warranty issue unless they can "prove" that what you did caused the problem.

I"ve never been asked for my records when I brought my car in for anything... .has anyone else?

Is all this fear really unfounded rampant and reckless wording putting each other at each others throats for nothing?

Where is the proof this is even an issue?

 

Nowhere that I'm aware of. I think it stems from people wanting to give Toyota as little latitude in denying a potential warranty claim as possible.

 

And wishful expressions.

 

I guess having your ducks in a row does give you extra ammunition, but I just think allot of this stress is unfounded... but I could be wrong, but Ive just never seen an instance yet where the makes or doesnt make the case based on your records.

Toyota recommends allot of things from nitrogen in the tires to a certain types of antifreeze, gasoline, and even how much weight to put in your car, but the bottom line is they have to prove what you did caused the problem regardless of what they recommended.

At any rate.. I give up... I'm gonna do what I want and others can do what they want and we'll all get along!

 

Pretty much my thought too. If they go into the engine and it is full of gunk they'll likely ask for your maintenance records, but probably not if it isn't. And it probably depends on the dealership you bring it to.

 

No we won't. Anyway back to your post about having records... this example is is Kia not Toyota but I will mention it anyway. Our 06 Sedona developed a serious oil leak from the valve/timing covers. Got all over the engine and engine compartment. There was no recall or TSB for the issue (yet apparently has been happening a lot). I brought it in and service said that repairs would be covered IF I had proof of maintenance. Just so happens I keep a spreadsheet of all the maintenance and receipts. They were impressed and said most people don't keep that level of detail. In the end they didn't ask for the receipts. Anyway, the repairs were done under warranty.
If they denied it what recourse other than court would I have? What a PITA. I would rather keep good records and follow manual.

 

I'm wondering if the 'time' interval would be extended as well... I my case I will bang up against the six month criteria somewhat before the 5K limit. I assume it might be 10K/one year, correct?

 

Thats what I would think..... theres always concern for making the time too long as some folks don't drive far enough at one time to really burn off all the condensation that collects inside.
Like a glass of ice tea, condensation happens on the side thats warmer, which would be inside an engine.

 

Condensation collects on cold surfaces.

 

yep... but which side of the cold surface, the hot or cold side?
The right answer is "the hot side"... again, think of a glass of iced tea.
You never see water condensing on the outside of a cup of hot coffee.

The "cold surface" you speak of means its colder than the warmer air thats touching it "hence its cold in comparison" and that the side that collects moisture.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condensation"]here[/ame] is an explanation.

The same thing happens inside your muffler and tail pipe... water collects inside the pipes and when you first turn your car on, it either blows it our as the pipe heats vaporizes the condensed water that had collected inside making white smoke or steam for a minute or two.

But inside the engine, it takes a bit more time to boil off and if the car is only ran a few minutes time after time, the water can start corrosion.

Here is some discussion on it.

 

Yes I know all that, but thanks for the clarification. The statement you made about the "side thats warmer" was ambiguous.

Carry on.