Consensus on the first oil change

Interesting!

1. First change at 5,000 miles. This fits the Toyota recommendation.
2. Switch to synthetic. OK -- but it won't be a switch. The car comes with synthetic oil from the factory.
3. Use synthetic. OK -- but Toyota already requires this. The recommended oil is 0W-20. I have heard this oil comes only in synthetic. Perhaps there is a synthetic blend at that weight, but is it really much different?
4. One-Year Intervals. Very glad for you it has worked so well in other Toyota vehicles (to go with a one-year interval between oil changes), but Toyota's recommendation of 5,000-mile intervals will mean you should provide proof of oil quality/condition after each longer interval should you make a warranty claim.

I might not like it, and I might think it is unnecessary and wasteful, but I'm going to spend the extra money until my Toyota warranty period has passed.

Note: I don't want this to come across as judgmental -- I'm just saying that I'll spend the "extra" money to keep my warranty free from attack.

 

I have used Mobile 1 filter and Amsoil filter. Mobile 1 Extended oil has a warranty of 1 year or 15K miles. Amsoil warranty is 1year or 25K miles. I have used both. You can check to see if there is one for Prius or not. I have not looked one yet.

 

You know the answer. It's just like my paint will last several years even if I don't wash and wax it, but will last considerably longer with regular washes and waxing.
For 75% of the people out there changing oil early is a waste, just like using a synthetic oil is. The reason is that they will only keep the car for a few years and ANY oil if a regular oil change interval is adhered to will make the engine make it to the end of the warranty period.
But, a few of us keep a car for several hundred thousands of miles and more than ten years or so. The car I traded for My Prius was seventeen years old, and I bought it new. My truck is only nine years old, but I expect to keep it at least another ten, maybe more.
I have a couple of airplanes, one is sixty four years old, the other one is twenty seven. The AVERAGE age for a general aviation aircraft is twenty seven years old. Modern automobiles can last a very long time if properly maintained, just like the airplanes, both machines.
The idea of getting a new car every few years is outdated and foolish and not only economically unsound but not ecologically responsible either (in my opinion)

 

I like your style!

I'll argue only one point with you, and this is the ecological responsibility issue. Actually, I don't know that "argue" is the appopriate term.

It doesn't take much for me to recall the choking fumes and visible emissions from the cars of the 50s and 60s in my childhood. Aside from the fact they wasted steel, caused huge problems by chrome plating so much, wasted petroleum and created horrible air pollution scenes in cities across the country, they were not the safest vehicles to drive. The 70s saw limited improvements, while the cars of the 80s really started to show more restraint and lower pollution. The air pollution trend continues to improve, though the wasting seems to be going the wrong way at times.

My point: If you traded out cars for significant upgrades in the ability to lower pollution, very good. If you hung on to oil-burning, gas-guzzling, over-weight chromed monsters to save the environment, I don't know that it has helped much.

In terms of overall health and safety, I'd like to see the older cars relegated to "Antique" status and well-maintained or pulled off of the roads -- all in favor of lighter, safer, cleaner cars made today or in the recent past.

 

I knew somebody would bring up that vehicles should be replaced to keep the fleet modern because that's logical, but maybe we have gone just about as far as an internal combustion engine can go? Unless of course there is some form of breakthrough. I think simple economy will drive the replacement of the fleet, poorly maintained vehicles will pretty quickly be faced with a repair more expensive than they are worth, and or as a vehicle ages, due to the increased efficiency of newer vehicles continued operation of the older vehicle won't make sense.
The vehicle I traded for the Prius was a 93 Z28 Camaro, bought to run on the Autobahn because I was being stationed there. When I first got it, $20 would fill it up with premium and leave enough money for snacks etc. Towards the end of it's life it was as much as $80. Last couple of years of it's "life" it spent sitting in an aircraft hangar mostly unused as it no longer made sense to drive an old car that got poor mileage. C4C came along and a with that a Prius made sense financially, so finances drove the retirement of the old Camaro, not relialibility.
Now the truck sits in the hangar, still needed to pull a fifth wheel and various other things, but it isn't used for day to day transportation. The price of the new ULSD Diesel fuel has seen to that. I can afford to drive most any vehicle, but it irritates me to "waste" money on an inefficient vehicle. Before ULSD when Diesel was cheaper than gas the 18MPG that my truck gets equated to around 20+, now maybe 16 when compared to a gas vehicle. So economics have been the determining factor in what I drive, and I think the same for most.

 

there is no reason to change it out prior to the recommended 5000 mile mark.

 

Now is there any detriment to changing it prior the recommended 5000 mile mark? How about 2,500 for instance?

 

You can change your oil every day, or even twice a day. Might not get a lot of bang for your buck, but the only detriment would be to your pocketbook. Kind of like using high test gas or nitrogen in your tires.