[PurpleCooper]

Does anyone know if it is worthwhile having an oil change after the run-in period?

Would a dealer be prepared to do it under TLC or would I have to pay for it?

Does anyone have any experiences as I think it is probably best to have it done to remove all the c**p that accumulates during the run-in.

Look forward to your responses.

Thanks,

Simon

[Tigger, Eeyore & Roo]

This has been covered before and, unfortunately, you are likely to get diametrically opposed answers

Unfortunately, ever extended service and oil change intervals are not specified solely by the engineering divisions of car manufacturers, but are more normally the result of what the marketing division says is necessary to sell a car; it is much easier to sell a new car if an unsceptical car buying public can be persauded that it can be run on a shoe string!

So, if you value your engine then get the oil changed at the end of the running in period and ignore the extended oil change intervals and double up the frequency of oil changes. These will have to be paid for on top of the usual TLC cover.

Someone will, no doubt, say that engines are run in on benches at the factory; I've been to engine manufacturing plants and the engines are run for a very short time, just long enough to test it for power, emissions and water/oil tightness. Running in would take very many hours and there just isn't the time, the space or the profit margin to do this in an engine plant.

In addition, although modern synthetic oils do last longer, they work really badly when they are carrying a heavy load of metal particles!

It's your engine, you choose....

Tigger.

[Brynster]

Being a bit of an old-timer, I can remember when cars always had an oil and filter change after the running-in period (for the reasons that you mention) but, nowadays, manufacturing processes, design, oil and filtration are far more advanced so that - if BMW/MINI don't specify it (and they don't) - you can be confident that it's not necessary. After all, manufacturers don't expose themselves to avoidable warranty claims. If they thought that having an oil and filter change at your expense would help protect them, I'm sure that they'd recommend it - but they don't. I'm almost reaching the end of the break-in phase, myself, at the moment and have decided to simply follow the published TLC and voucher procedures.

[Tigger, Eeyore & Roo]

Quote: Originally Posted by Brynster

Being a bit of an old-timer, I can remember when cars always had an oil and filter change after the running-in period (for the reasons that you mention) but, nowadays, manufacturing processes, design, oil and filtration are far more advanced so that - if BMW/MINI don't specify it (and they don't) - you can be confident that it's not necessary. After all, manufacturers don't expose themselves to avoidable warranty claims. If they thought that having an oil and filter change at your expense would help protect them, I'm sure that they'd recommend it - but they don't. I'm almost reaching the end of the break-in phase, myself, at the moment and have decided to simply follow the published TLC and voucher procedures.

Do bear in mind that part of the sales technique on the MINI is to include most servicing costs for the first 5 years / 50,000 miles for £150. This would be extremely costly for BMW to provide if they had to include service intervals at a much more reasonable 1,000 miles and 6 - 10,000 mile intervals thereafter.

My company Volvo is run to the recommended 12,000 intervals and it requires about 2-3 litres of oil between services and the oil is completely black when it goes in for service. Since taking delivery of that car they have extended the neglect intervals to 18,000 miles My previous car completely destroyed its engine before it reached its first service at 20,000 miles.

I run my MINI to approximately 6,000 oil change intervals and it doesn't use a drop of oil and the oil is always clean.

Tigger.

[PurpleCooper]

Thanks for the responses.

Definately going to go for an oil and filter change after the run-in period. I don't think my mileage is going to be very high (mind you that may well change once I pick up my Cooper S Checkmate! )

If that is going to be the case I shall be changing my oil every 6k - just to keep the car happy

Simon

[THE ITCH]

Quote: Originally Posted by Tigger, Eeyore & Roo

This has been covered before and, unfortunately, you are likely to get diametrically opposed answers

Unfortunately, ever extended service and oil change intervals are not specified solely by the engineering divisions of car manufacturers, but are more normally the result of what the marketing division says is necessary to sell a car; it is much easier to sell a new car if an unsceptical car buying public can be persauded that it can be run on a shoe string!

So, if you value your engine then get the oil changed at the end of the running in period and ignore the extended oil change intervals and double up the frequency of oil changes. These will have to be paid for on top of the usual TLC cover.

Someone will, no doubt, say that engines are run in on benches at the factory; I've been to engine manufacturing plants and the engines are run for a very short time, just long enough to test it for power, emissions and water/oil tightness. Running in would take very many hours and there just isn't the time, the space or the profit margin to do this in an engine plant.

In addition, although modern synthetic oils do last longer, they work really badly when they are carrying a heavy load of metal particles!

It's your engine, you choose....

Tigger.

I'll definitely second this explanation. I'm still a believer in 3000 mi oil changes synthetic or not. For certain more frequent oil changes will not harm your car and is a great way of inspecting for unknown problems.

[RWA]

Quote: Originally Posted by Brynster

if BMW/MINI don't specify it (and they don't) - you can be confident that it's not necessary. After all, manufacturers don't expose themselves to avoidable warranty claims. If they thought that having an oil and filter change at your expense would help protect them, I'm sure that they'd recommend it - but they don't. I'm almost reaching the end of the break-in phase, myself, at the moment and have decided to simply follow the published TLC and voucher procedures.

I think that's all true, but I also think you need to look at what they are trying to protect themselves from, namely warranty claims and a reputation for failing engines. My personal opinion is that the advances you point to are probably sufficient to allow longer intervals and have the engine last 70-100k miles without significant impact. That clears the warranty and is long enough that if they start failing it isn't likely to cause people change their overall opinion about MINI quality.

It doesn't mean that there's no impact, though, and it's certainly possible that BMW/MINI would choose benefit from the marketing lift that extended intervals gives you while knowing that more engines would fail at 100k miles than is necessary. At that point what do they care?

For us, I think the purely rational thing to do is to shorten the intervals if you think you'll keep the car that long or will hand it off to someone you feel responsible for. If you know you'll just sell it on the open market after 30-50k then I think it's tough to say you'll experience any difference.

Personally I change it after break in then at 5k intervals. I haven't kept anything past 100k since my two tii's which I still have, but it still makes it easier to call a friend or acquaintance and vouch for the maintenance history when selling it. Plus, I just can't bring myself to drive the car hard that long on a single oil change, but I admit it might not be rational.

--Ware

[mitchgixer6]

I'm not much of a mechanically minded sort of chap, so what I say is obviously my own opinion that isn't based on very much at all!

When we get our new car (2 weeks now!!) we will be following exactly what is tells us to do in the service book. If BMW feel that the car doesn't need an oil change after the run in period then who am I to disagree? Surely if there was a large enough amount of swarf in the engine after run in to warrant an oil change then they would insist on one? Also wouldn't this amount of metal filings seriously damage the engine well before 70-100K? And wouldn't the oil filter catch the majority of these particles as well? As far as I know this is what the filter is for.

Just as comparison, I also run a 3 year old Suzuki motor bike. Motorbike engines require much more regular sevicing than cars do, one every 4000 miles in fact. I bought this bike new, and the run in period was 600 miles. I was told by both the dealer and the service manual that an oil/filter change would be required after these 600 miles. Of course I followed their advice and got this carried out, but this didn't stop the bike needing a new cylinder head after 10000 miles! And that was sticking exaclty to the service intervals laid out in the book! I guess what I'm trying to say is that you can be unlucky no matter what you do to the engine. That valve that wrecked the C/H would still have been out of position even if I had changed the oil every week.

I disagree that it is a marketing strategy to try and make the running costs of the car look cheaper. The consequencies of trying to save £50 per car for one extra oil change far out weigh this initial cost. You coud be talking ££££££ to fix hundreds of damaged engines through warranty claims. And I'm sure if BMW were to turn round and tell new owners that they would have to pay £50 for the initial oil change, then the rest woud be covered under TLC, 99.8% of owners would pay for this oil change.

At the end of the day BMW could make a fortune doing so, but they choose not too. And why? Becuase modern engines are alot different to ones of 10 years ago, and you just don't need this initial change. As I said at the beginning of my post, I'm no mechanic, so I trust BMW to tell me when I need to service my car.

[Tigger, Eeyore & Roo]

I'm really not going to try and change your mind, it's your engine after all and if you trust the oil change intervals then that's up to you.

Tigger.

["Megan"]

Thought this might be of interest to this discussion

http://www.alldata.com/tsb/BMW/10517...00000_M010203/

[Themikanic]

Ok, my 2 cents worth..... this is what my service guy implied, because he has to follow the official BMW / Mini line. When I said to him that I intend to keep my Mini for at least 10 years, he basically implied that I had rocks in my head to stick to the Mini oil change regime. However if I knew I was going to be trading in my Mini after say........3 to 5 years, then I may as well save the $$ and stick to the routine service interval.
Mike in Australia.

[fred3]

Quote: Originally Posted by Tigger, Eeyore & Roo

This has been covered before and, unfortunately, you are likely to get diametrically opposed answers

Unfortunately, ever extended service and oil change intervals are not specified solely by the engineering divisions of car manufacturers, but are more normally the result of what the marketing division says is necessary to sell a car; it is much easier to sell a new car if an unsceptical car buying public can be persauded that it can be run on a shoe string!

So, if you value your engine then get the oil changed at the end of the running in period and ignore the extended oil change intervals and double up the frequency of oil changes. These will have to be paid for on top of the usual TLC cover.

Someone will, no doubt, say that engines are run in on benches at the factory; I've been to engine manufacturing plants and the engines are run for a very short time, just long enough to test it for power, emissions and water/oil tightness. Running in would take very many hours and there just isn't the time, the space or the profit margin to do this in an engine plant.

In addition, although modern synthetic oils do last longer, they work really badly when they are carrying a heavy load of metal particles!

It's your engine, you choose....

Tigger.

conspiracy theorist. I wonder what engineering school you graduated from. Of course you could just be someone who owns lots of stock in a motor oil company. I've yet to hear of any car engine being damaged from metal particles if it was driven properly and had the car serviced when appropriate. Now if you pay any attention to *ahem* professionals like the two brothers known as Click & Clack who have a website, newspaper column and radio show and own a garage and dispense fair advice with mucho years experience you'd know that there's a good reason cars don't need their oil changed as often. Cars don't require undercoating to prevent rust through either, but I'll bet you get that done right? No? Well why not. Certainly you don't trust those sneaky suckers who tell you when to get your oil changed that you can trust them about the rust.

Me thinks you aren't speaking from experience, but are promoting falsehoods to enhance your online persona. Ahhh I see you are in sales. That explains a lot.

While changing your oil often certainly won't hurt the car if you drive it properly you won't need to change your oil any more often than is required, but you are welcome to join the "car will die a most horrible death" group and do it every 3k. Now I'm not in sales(repair subs actually-no not the sandwich), but don't you think it would have gotten out by now if the mfrs reasoning wasn't based on valid engineering and not *ahem* a ploy by the "sales" department?

Do you sell motor oil by chance, Tigger?

[Tigger, Eeyore & Roo]

Quote: Originally Posted by fred3

conspiracy theorist. I wonder what engineering school you graduated from. Of course you could just be someone who owns lots of stock in a motor oil company. I've yet to hear of any car engine being damaged from metal particles if it was driven properly and had the car serviced when appropriate. Now if you pay any attention to *ahem* professionals like the two brothers known as Click & Clack who have a website, newspaper column and radio show and own a garage and dispense fair advice with mucho years experience you'd know that there's a good reason cars don't need their oil changed as often. Cars don't require undercoating to prevent rust through either, but I'll bet you get that done right? No? Well why not. Certainly you don't trust those sneaky suckers who tell you when to get your oil changed that you can trust them about the rust.

Me thinks you aren't speaking from experience, but are promoting falsehoods to enhance your online persona. Ahhh I see you are in sales. That explains a lot.

While changing your oil often certainly won't hurt the car if you drive it properly you won't need to change your oil any more often than is required, but you are welcome to join the "car will die a most horrible death" group and do it every 3k. Now I'm not in sales(repair subs actually-no not the sandwich), but don't you think it would have gotten out by now if the mfrs reasoning wasn't based on valid engineering and not *ahem* a ploy by the "sales" department?

Do you sell motor oil by chance, Tigger?

My, you have made a lot of assumptions about me there, haven't you?

I have driven around 35,000 miles a year for the last 20 years in a selection of cars. The last car I ran with 6,000 mile oil changes ran to about 145,000 miles and, even at that mileage, din't use any oil at all between services. Most of my previous cars ran to about 100,000 miles and I don't remember any of them needing any oil between services either.

The first new car (from the same manufacturer that built the car that did 145,000 miles) I had that required oil changes at 20,000 intervals arrived in 2002. It started to drink oil at around 12,000 miles and eventually ate it's way through 2 pairs of cam shafts and an entire engine before it even got to its first service. It was believed to be due to oil starvation to the cams as a result of blockage of an oil feed. Despite having lost reasonable quantities of cam lobe into the sump the manufacturer still insisted that an oil change was not necessary before 20,000 miles

This particular manufacturer does a fair amount of business with contract hire and leasing companies. The problem was that each time they launched a car it got a reputation for unreliability, expensive service and heavy depreciation, the result of which was that their cars were ultimately blacklisted by each of the contract hire companies or the contract hire rates became uneconomic. By the introduction of ever longer service intervals they are able to make a case to the contract hire companies that their cheap service will help offset their heavy depreciation.

So I feel confident in taking what the manufacturer says with a heavy pinch of salt knowing that service intervals are not set purely on the recommendation of the service side of the manufacturer, but a heavily influenced by the marketing department.

Ultimately, it's the individual driver's choice and I wouldn't want to see this become personal.

Tigger.

PS I don't sell oil, but I do sell machines.