According to Honda Techline the oil should NOT be changed until the oil life shows a 15% or LESS. Correct break-in does not occur if the oil is changed too soon. All documented cases I've seen at out dealer of low fuel economy or high oil consumption have had first oil changes at 3000 miles or less. I recommend following your owner's manual and Maintenance Minder system unless there is compelling evidence to the contrary.

 

Well I had my oil changed earlier this week, mileage was at 3270. Nobody at the dealer said anything about changing the oil too soon. Oil was at 70-80% life according to the gauge. The dealer also reset my oil life after the change its at 100% again now. They also put the sticker in my windows saying my next oil change is when the meter says 15%.

Either way i'm not following the book,the gauge, or the sticker in the window, I have a 10 year / 300,000 mile warranty from Quaker State that to keep valid I need to change the oil every 4 months or 4k miles with their oil. I have no problem with doing that for the warranty. I also fall into the extreme driving category, since 80-90% of my driving is in-city, and I live in Houston. I also get several mpg over the epa estimates even under these conditions, and with the a/c running constantly.

For all my future oil changes I will be having blackstone oil analysis done, which in my opinion is the only true way to know how long you can or should use an oil.

 

Interesting spin on this topic, especially considering that the reason Honda has stated for this is because the car is sold with Honda's special "break-in" oil in the engine, and (according to them) "if you don't run the engine in with this particular oil until there's only 15% oil life remaining, your engine will not break in properly."

Sounds like bull**** to me. First, the "special break-in oil" is only special because a molybdenum additive assists the break-in process, ie: it helps the engine break in "better" and quicker. (a 10,000-mile break-in period is quick??). Kinda like the way using a particular brand of shampoo "helps" prevent hair loss." (yup, "it won't stop your hair from falling out, but gee, it can't hurt. And it will be awfully clean when it hits the floor...")

Gosh, must be that special Honda alloy they use--- the one that only Honda knows about---- that can only be broken in with this additive in the oil. If this were true my engine would have run dry of oil before achieving "proper break-in", because it was down a quart at 3500 kms and down another quart at 7000 kms. I changed it out at 9500 kms (about 5800 miles) when the mileage minder was telling me I still had 60% oil life remaining.

If the above break-in trajectory were accurate my engine would have not been broken in until around 18,000 kms (just over 11,000 miles), and would not have quit using excessive amounts of oil until then. In this hypothetical scenario, had I went to 15% oil life remaining before changing my oil and not topped up the oil as its level dropped (for fear of diluting the "special break-in oil" with inferior regular oil) I'd have been fighting Honda for a new engine to replace the siezed one under warranty--- and Honda would have weaseled out of the argument by saying I "shouldn't have let my oil run dry."

But since it's not really necessary to run the engine that many miles to achieve proper break-in my engine quit using excessive amounts of oil after about 7000 kms, or 4000 miles. And my fuel economy has not suffered at all. When driving at highway speeds of no more than 60 mph I've achieved just under 40 miles per U.S. gallon, which is 46 miles per imperial gallon. Driving at typical highway speeds of 70 to 75 mph still yields around 32-33 miles per U.S. gallon. Still not too shabby.

Oh, and Honda also sez that if you've owned your Honda for one year and still haven't changed your oil, and still haven't reached 15% oil life remaining, you should change your oil. Hmmmm..... kinda flies in the face of their admonishment to keep their break-in oil inside the engine until it's (by their definition) "properly broken in."

 

shrug. I'll go according to the manual.



And of course I check the oil level every time I fill it with gas. So far it hasn't used any measurable oil (5,000 miles). If it needed it, I'd add the recommended oil.

Two quarts in 7k kilometers? That sounds excessive all right. (scribble scribble that's 2.4US quarts in 4,300 miles. I'd be visiting the dealer for more than an oil change. It sounds borderline.)

 

On most Honda products complete break-in can take upwards of 20k miles, most owners report increasing fuel economy up to that mileage, give or take. The other's comments are right, if you're using half your engine's oil between changes you have another issue. I don't want to argue, I can only go by what I see on several hundred Hondas a month.

 

I would change it once the MM shows 15% changing it early at around 50% (about 3500-5000 miles depending on how you drive) on the MM does not hurt.

 

Actually our "quarts" here in Canada are liters, which = 1000milli-liters. But our oil is typically sold in 946 ml plastic containers, so that's what I added each of those two occasions. Of course I do realize I'm splitting hairs here.

Either way, the car DID require me to add a liter twice during the first 7000 clicks--- and then none thereafter. I'm now at over 56,000 kms. Five oil changes later (typically performed at 60% oil life remaining), and no more oil issues to report--- and fuel economy is not suffering.

 

ahhh, and your miles are kilometers. I get it.

946 ml containers? You guys have officially gone metric by adopting the US quart?!!!!

(I guess you're getting US dipsticks now too. And by dipstick I don't mean tourists )

 

Here's a question for the maintenance minder skeptics: What does Honda gain by telling you not to change your oil that often? They're effectively reducing the amount of oil changes their dealers do by 2 to 3 times what they would normally do if every owner followed a 3k mile or 5k mile rule, reducing their income.
What I'm saying is, why would they lie?
And if you don't think they're lying, maybe you just think their engineers are wrong. Um ok, this is Honda we're talking about. Number 1 or number 2 car manufacturer in terms of reliability?

So either they're lying or they're wrong. Please provide a logical argument as to why they might be either. Not because you learned as a kid that oil should be changed every 3k no matter what!

 

The idea that a company like Honda would purposefully sabotage the life expectancy of their engines in an effort to create a larger-than-normal market for factory-supplied replacement engines after the warranties have long since expired is a stretch, even for a skeptic like me. That kind of sleaze is more GM's territory and even those clowns seem to focus more on lesser-cost components for this purpose rather than engines.

The only way Honda could realize a net profit via such a scheme would be if they somehow figured out a way to make their extremely durable engines last not quite as long as they do, yet not shorten engine life enough to be noticed by the public and eventually hurt sales. This is the only reason I can think of that any manufacturer would have for advising a maintenance practice that would actually shorten engine life. Again, not impossible, but not a very likely scenario with a company like Honda.

And of course, dealers would be more likely to insist on more frequent oil changes--- and that you MUST have their service department perform this ultra-high-tech task. I vaguely recall reading at least one instance of this happening to an owner on this forum.

But having said all this, I can only go by personal experience. And being a veteran vehicle owner and Aircraft Maintenance Engineer I know a few things about engine oils and metallurgy. Some basic facts:

1. Engine oils today are much more advanced and protect engines better than the best engine oils available 30 years ago. Especially synthetics.

2. Engines wear characteristics have also improved over the years due to advances in metallurgy.

3. In spite of the above, contaminants in oils from engine wear and condensation still do no good for any engine. In other words, while frequency of oil changes is no longer as dire as it used to be, it's still a good idea to change your oil at least every 5000 miles--- especially if your driving habits consist mainly of short trips starting off on a cold engine.

4. An engine (yes, even a Honda engine) will still break in just fine with regular engine oil--- just like all those other engines do. The same cautions regarding driving habits during break-in of course still apply.

5. I changed my oil at 9500 kms with 50% indicated oil life remaining, and that oil was VERY contaminated. Yet my car broke in just fine, uses no oil and gets decent fuel economy.

I've switched to Castrol Syntec 5W20 synthetic and use only very good quality Napa (actually Wix) oil filters, which also get changed when I change the oil. It's probably (ok, definitely) overkill. But the peace of mind is priceless.

 

I'm not a snob on the brand of oil, I use Amsoil 5w-30 and a Honda filter but if I didn't work at the dealer pretty much any synthetic oil would work and I would either use the (excellent) WIX/Napa filter or the Walmart Supertech. The supertech filters spec VERY well, filtrate area, spring and valve material, hole size and pressure tests.

I'm glad your engine does well, it is, after all, a Honda and they are very difficult to hurt.

You state that your engine oil was very contaminated at 9600 clicks, did you have it tested or are you basing it on a visual inspection?

 

They get to market a car that is more maintenance free. It's not always the engineers making every decision, but often the bean counters and marketers get their say as well.

Why did VW recommend 105k miles for timing belt replacements for the 1.8T only to have some start breaking at 80-90k miles? Oops. Or why did Toyota not require synthetic oil or shorter change intervals in some Camry engines that ended up sludging? In these cases if you followed the maintenance bible, you put your vehicle at risk. Those that were more anal and choose for whatever reason to do more frequent maintenance saved themselves a lot of hassle.

 

Agreed. Castrol Syntec certainly isn't the only decent oil brand, it just happens to be the one I use. Any warranty-approved oil will work, and in colder climates (like mine) any warranty-approved synthetic will get the job done even on the coldest days.

Which manufacturer makes Honda's and Walmart's filters in the states? I ask this because often it's not the same ones as here in Canada. For example, mostly all filters sold at Walmart in Canada are Frams. And Mazda in the states sells a decent filter, but here in Canada they sell cheap Fram filters painted blue and doubled in price.

As for my first oil change, I did not have it tested (although I should have just for proper reference). But having performed a lifetime of oil changes, engine rebuilds and other maintenance on both cars and aircraft I can assure you that what I saw in my oil was far beyond the normal garden-variety contamination, even for an engine that's just broken in.

I knew what Honda recommends regarding break-in period before changing the oil. And I knew that, even if the engine wasn't "completely broken in" at that point, the engine would continue to break in just fine with new oil. But I just didn't feel comfortable leaving such dirty oil as this was inside my engine. Even though Honda's opinion on recommended procedures made me 80% confident that leaving the break-in oil inside the engine until 15% oil-life remaining was ok, I was 100% confident (based on experience and knowledge in the field) that changing the oil at that point was the correct course of action and had no ill side-effects.

 

This is a very good point, and one that I should have picked up on. The industry is rife with cases such as these. Case in point:

When Mazda designed the rotary engine (one that, once the earlier designs had all the bugs worked out, was a damn good engine) their engineers knew that the most efficient method for lubricating the apex seals was to pre-mix a 100:1 ratio of 2-cycle oil in the fuel rather than pump a small small quantity of dirty 4-cycle oil out of the oil pan for this purpose. They also knew that a more fool-proof method of delivering this 2-cycle oil would be to gravity-feed it from a reservoir (equipped with a low-oil-level warning light) rather than relying on the owners simply dumping a half-quart of 2-cycle oil into the fuel tank during fill-ups. (The racing community knew this too, and simply discarded the metering pump in favor of pre-mixing).

Instead, Mazda designed an oil metering pump to pull oil from the pan. They knew this oil didn't lube as well or burn as cleanly for this purpose as 2-cycle oil would. They also knew that this metering pump could wear out in time (some lasted over 200,000 miles, others wore out at as little as 150,000, depending on how often the owners changed the oil) and that when this happened an engine rebuild would soon follow because they had no quick and easy method of detecting pump wear.

So why would Mazda choose this inferior system in the first place?

Because:

1. They knew a percentage of customers could not be counted on to add oil to the gas during fill-up, at least not in the proper quantity if at all.

2. They also knew that even if they used a reservoir which gravity-fed an approved 2-cycle oil into the intake system many customers would shun the design as a "cheap 2-cycle" engine.

3. They knew that even though the engine would last longer with a 2-cycle oil feed, the 4-cycle stuff from the pan would still work "okay" and that this would provide a seemingly less-maintenance-involved system--- at least from the public's point of view. All they'd have to do is add a little engine oil from time to time--- not a daunting task since "most owners have the required common sense to check their engine oil level once in a while."

Ultimately, this decision by Mazda was the best one, even if it wasn't the most technically efficient. The marketing department's concerns were legitimate and had to be addressed. The result was a decent and durable engine (I've owned six 1st-gen RX7s over the years, the last two of which I'd installed block-off plates and ran pre-mix instead), but one which had a compromise in the form of a designed-in Achilles heel in the form of a metering pump that could wear out if the oil wasn't changed often enough.

 

Ah but one of the smart things most Japanese car companies do is hire CEOs with backgrounds in engineering. The current CEO of Honda, Takeo Fukui, joined Honda as an engineer in 1969.

And Aviator, we're not talking about Mazda or rotary engines here. I owned 2 rotary cars for a total period of about 3 years, constantly reading the message boards for information. Honda reliability is far beyond Mazda, let alone Mazda's rotary. That was the main reason I got rid of my last RX-8. With a mortgage on the way in the near future and kids on the way in a few years I couldn't be worrying about my rotary flooding or a seal breaking off because of carbon buildup... or my clutch pedal breaking, or the transmission going out because it can't take the high rpm, etc. The rotary (and Mazda) faithful are definitely a different breed.

edit:
I decided to research the backgrounds of some of the most popular car company CEOs. Mind you, these are just the current CEOs and I didn't spend the time to search for past CEOs. Maybe most of the Japanese car makers do not in fact hold engineering degrees.

Rick Wagoner, General Motors, B.A. in Economics, MBA (just stepped down)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Wagoner

Fritz Henderson, GM, MBA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_Henderson

Takashi Yamanouchi, Mazda, degree in Commerce
http://www.mazdausamedia.com/bios/re...sident-and-ceo

Akio Toyoda, Toyota, MBA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akio_Toyoda

Carlos Ghosn, Nissan, engineering degrees
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Ghosn

Robert Nardelli, Chrysler, B.S. in Business, MBA. CNBC named him one of the "Worst American CEOs of All Time"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Nardelli#Chrysler

Takeo Fukui, Honda, B.S. in Applied Chemistry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takeo_Fukui

So Fukui doesn't have an engineering degree, but chemistry helps!

 

Some of these guys are living proof that there really is something to the Peter Principle. Others, not so much...

 

I see you are a rotary enthusiast, so I shall provide some context to my argument that Honda engineers can be trusted. "In the realm of daily driven vehicles," not airplanes, drag racers, or any other kind of racer whereby the duty for which the engine is used requires more frequent oil changes.

 

Do what you want, but if you crack open your oil filer at the first change, you will probably find scary amounts of metal in the filter elements. I would rather pay $25 for a oil and filter change early than to let that junk stay in. $19 for Pennzoil full synthetic and $6 for a filter at Wal Mart. Cheap protection by my reckoning. My Solstice has an element that pulls out, so it is easy to check what's in the filter. Opening the spin-on of a Fit is not hard. Makes a believer of you.

 

Just have a question about oil changing.
I bought my car as a demo with 3900 km on it, and when I bought it, Honda changed the oil for me. They also reset the maintenance reminder (at that point, it was around 70%). That was less than 3 months ago.

Today, I'm at 9000 km, and my oil life is still at 80%. In the last two fill-ups, I noticed that my fuel economy has gone down. It goes from around 7.0L/100km to about 8.3L/100 km (that's about 33 mpg to 28 mpg). I usually drive 60hwy/40 city (i have a 09 A/T sport)

I've been thinking about switching to synthetic oil and nanofibre filter from amsoil, in my attempt to improve the fuel economy and the acceleration and also with winter coming up here in Toronto.

The fact that I had my first oil change early, does it really affect the fuel economy and maybe the acceleration? Sometimes my Fit struggles to pick up the speed going into highway.

Should I change to synthetic or should I stick with conventional for a while?

 

Follow what Honda says, I trust the biggest engine manufacturer in the world far more than any kid on some internet forum.