i've wondered why people think or are instructed to have more frequent oil changes after a tune. Why? is it because they are more likely to be heavy footed? will it cause more oil blow by? If so, wouldnt a catch can be a wiser alternative?
Printable View
i've wondered why people think or are instructed to have more frequent oil changes after a tune. Why? is it because they are more likely to be heavy footed? will it cause more oil blow by? If so, wouldnt a catch can be a wiser alternative?
Nothing to do with oil blow by or a heavier foot, from my perspective.
A tune has far more implications than oil blow by, which is minor on an R (in fact, on many)
---------- Post added at 04:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:39 PM ----------
They are a nice bunch, I agree.
Always been very helpful.
---------- Post added at 04:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:40 PM ----------
LOL, only just saw that post :)
ok, i'm unenlightened.
why should one have more frequent oil/lubrication changes if the car is "tuned"
Well so the theory goes that more stress is being placed on the engine ergo more bits'n'pieces in your oil, sort of like the recommendation to change your oil after heavy track days.
If you just have a tune and drive it in the same manner you would without then it probably isn't necessary.
Sounds anecdotal to me TBH.
Can't see how sitting on redline in a stock car can be any different to the same in a tuned car. so the theory goes that a tuned car "should" be maintaining a more ideal and stoichiometrically ideal environment than a standard one.
Anyway, Moot point. same as the argument of servicing on time (with modern fully synthetic oils) c.f. servicing on distance.
Thanks SF. Informative, but still somewhat anecdotal. if driven in the same conditions as a standard vehicle, then can't see the point. Track use means higher oil degradation, it's the oil that's failing to perform its task.
Anyway, thanks for teh link, informative!
Golf R observation for the day
Children are too young to own a Golf R