<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The Motor Oil Evaluator</title>
	<atom:link href="http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog</link>
	<description>What&#039;s the Best Motor Oil?  No Bull.  We&#039;ll Tell You!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:41:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Free Download by andy750</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/free-download/#comment-430</link>
		<dc:creator>andy750</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:41:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/free-download/#comment-430</guid>
		<description>Ive been reading the book a few pages at a time, Thanks for the download.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ive been reading the book a few pages at a time, Thanks for the download.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Partial oil change by MotorOilEvaluator</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/partial-oil-change/#comment-429</link>
		<dc:creator>MotorOilEvaluator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:42:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/partial-oil-change/#comment-429</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t believe there is anything wrong with that plan.  This, of course, accomplishes a few things:

1) SOME contaminant is removed from the system - whatever was mixed with the liter of oil you removed,

2) You give the additive package a boost with the new oil.

3) You move the viscosity of the oil back in the direction of &quot;new&quot;, whether it has thinned due to shearing or thickened due to oxidation and burn-off.

So, I see nothing wrong with this approach.  Obviously, at each filter change you&#039;re also losing some oil that must be replaced, so you&#039;re performing this same function at each filter change, just with a lesser amount of oil.

Theoretically, this could extend your oil change interval even beyond Castrol&#039;s recommendation, but, I am not personally recommending you do that - at least not without solid evidence that the oil is still in good shape.

The &quot;poor man&#039;s oil analysis&quot; that you used from &quot;The Motor Oil Bible&quot; is very useful, but it&#039;s not a perfect replacement for an oil analysis, so just be careful you do not rely TOO heavily on the information gleaned.  It&#039;s useful, but not perfect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t believe there is anything wrong with that plan.  This, of course, accomplishes a few things:</p>
<p>1) SOME contaminant is removed from the system &#8211; whatever was mixed with the liter of oil you removed,</p>
<p>2) You give the additive package a boost with the new oil.</p>
<p>3) You move the viscosity of the oil back in the direction of &#8220;new&#8221;, whether it has thinned due to shearing or thickened due to oxidation and burn-off.</p>
<p>So, I see nothing wrong with this approach.  Obviously, at each filter change you&#8217;re also losing some oil that must be replaced, so you&#8217;re performing this same function at each filter change, just with a lesser amount of oil.</p>
<p>Theoretically, this could extend your oil change interval even beyond Castrol&#8217;s recommendation, but, I am not personally recommending you do that &#8211; at least not without solid evidence that the oil is still in good shape.</p>
<p>The &#8220;poor man&#8217;s oil analysis&#8221; that you used from &#8220;The Motor Oil Bible&#8221; is very useful, but it&#8217;s not a perfect replacement for an oil analysis, so just be careful you do not rely TOO heavily on the information gleaned.  It&#8217;s useful, but not perfect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Free Download by MotorOilEvaluator</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/free-download/#comment-428</link>
		<dc:creator>MotorOilEvaluator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:36:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/free-download/#comment-428</guid>
		<description>Andy,

I&#039;ve sent you the download link by email.  Enjoy the book.  Sorry for any trouble.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Andy,</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve sent you the download link by email.  Enjoy the book.  Sorry for any trouble.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on I Can not log in to the data by MotorOilEvaluator</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/i-can-not-log-in-to-the-data/#comment-407</link>
		<dc:creator>MotorOilEvaluator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-407</guid>
		<description>Sorry for not replying sooner.  Was gone for the weekend for my son&#039;s gymnastics meet.  Had another user who was having same trouble.  Seems I&#039;ve figured out what the problem is, just don&#039;t have a permanent solution for it.

However, the temporary fix I&#039;ve implemented seems to have given access back to this other user.  Try logging in again and see what you get.

Again, sorry for the late reply.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry for not replying sooner.  Was gone for the weekend for my son&#8217;s gymnastics meet.  Had another user who was having same trouble.  Seems I&#8217;ve figured out what the problem is, just don&#8217;t have a permanent solution for it.</p>
<p>However, the temporary fix I&#8217;ve implemented seems to have given access back to this other user.  Try logging in again and see what you get.</p>
<p>Again, sorry for the late reply.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on NO ACCESS by MotorOilEvaluator</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/no-access/#comment-400</link>
		<dc:creator>MotorOilEvaluator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Feb 2012 03:04:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/no-access/#comment-400</guid>
		<description>Bob,

I am incredibly sorry that you&#039;re having trouble getting access to the specs.  I had just taken care of your login when I read this post - however, it&#039;s looking like you must have gotten in with your old login info, which means the new login info I created was unnecessary - sorry.  I was just responding to your email.

As for this new problem, as best I can tell it has something to do with the latest Wordpress update which has caused some issues with my database integration.  I&#039;m working on it right now, but I haven&#039;t been able to solve the issue.

I HAVE implemented what I believe will be s short-term fix which should allow you to access the data.  Try logging in now and give it another shot.  See if it works for you.  If it doesn&#039;t, clearing your browser cookies/cache, restarting your browser and/or restarting the computer to &quot;clear things out&quot; and start fresh.

I&#039;m away for the weekend for my son&#039;s gymnastics meet, so I may have trouble getting back to this before tomorrow night.  Hopefully, this temporary fix will do the trick for you. 

Very sorry for any inconvenience.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob,</p>
<p>I am incredibly sorry that you&#8217;re having trouble getting access to the specs.  I had just taken care of your login when I read this post &#8211; however, it&#8217;s looking like you must have gotten in with your old login info, which means the new login info I created was unnecessary &#8211; sorry.  I was just responding to your email.</p>
<p>As for this new problem, as best I can tell it has something to do with the latest WordPress update which has caused some issues with my database integration.  I&#8217;m working on it right now, but I haven&#8217;t been able to solve the issue.</p>
<p>I HAVE implemented what I believe will be s short-term fix which should allow you to access the data.  Try logging in now and give it another shot.  See if it works for you.  If it doesn&#8217;t, clearing your browser cookies/cache, restarting your browser and/or restarting the computer to &#8220;clear things out&#8221; and start fresh.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m away for the weekend for my son&#8217;s gymnastics meet, so I may have trouble getting back to this before tomorrow night.  Hopefully, this temporary fix will do the trick for you. </p>
<p>Very sorry for any inconvenience.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on oil by MotorOilEvaluator</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/oil/#comment-398</link>
		<dc:creator>MotorOilEvaluator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 19:27:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-398</guid>
		<description>To be honest, I&#039;m not completely sure I understand the question.  As regards motor oil, SAE primarily deals with viscosity.  The test requirements for determining whether an oil meets the criteria for a specific viscosity are few, one of them related to the minimum and maximum kinematic viscosity at 100 degrees C (approximately engine operating temperature).

Low temperature testing parameters are different for each viscosity grade with testing done at anywhere from -35 degrees C to -10 degrees C in terms of &quot;cranking&quot; and -40 C to -15 C for &quot;pumping&quot;.

Don&#039;t know if that helps or not, since I&#039;m not entirely sure your question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To be honest, I&#8217;m not completely sure I understand the question.  As regards motor oil, SAE primarily deals with viscosity.  The test requirements for determining whether an oil meets the criteria for a specific viscosity are few, one of them related to the minimum and maximum kinematic viscosity at 100 degrees C (approximately engine operating temperature).</p>
<p>Low temperature testing parameters are different for each viscosity grade with testing done at anywhere from -35 degrees C to -10 degrees C in terms of &#8220;cranking&#8221; and -40 C to -15 C for &#8220;pumping&#8221;.</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t know if that helps or not, since I&#8217;m not entirely sure your question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Good Grease? by MotorOilEvaluator</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/good-grease/#comment-397</link>
		<dc:creator>MotorOilEvaluator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:49:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-397</guid>
		<description>Goodgrease,

Sorry for not replying sooner. I do not agree with their assessment.  Although it certainly is possible that the 5w30 oil they put into your engine will protect adequately, and Schaeffer is a pretty good quality oil, the explanation that &quot;all the cars are going to 5w30 now&quot; is bunk.

MANY vehicles are moving to 5w30 and even 5w20 or 0w20 oils, but ALL of them are not, and there ARE situations where this might not be the best option, especially for any high performance engines that you want to last for a long time.

Unless you are specifically concerned about getting enhanced fuel economy or are looking to get that last little drop of extra performance out of your engine (which a lower friction 5w30 oil will likely provide), I do not believe that 5w30 was the best option for your engine.  If it were me, I&#039;d stick with 5w40 or possibly synthetic 0w40.  

Again, that doesn&#039;t mean that the 5w30 is inadequate.  It may do a fine job.  I&#039;m just of the opinion that, unless you have solid, logical reasons for doing so (and there ARE, sometimes, good reasons), I wouldn&#039;t disregard the manufacturer&#039;s viscosity recommendations so quickly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Goodgrease,</p>
<p>Sorry for not replying sooner. I do not agree with their assessment.  Although it certainly is possible that the 5w30 oil they put into your engine will protect adequately, and Schaeffer is a pretty good quality oil, the explanation that &#8220;all the cars are going to 5w30 now&#8221; is bunk.</p>
<p>MANY vehicles are moving to 5w30 and even 5w20 or 0w20 oils, but ALL of them are not, and there ARE situations where this might not be the best option, especially for any high performance engines that you want to last for a long time.</p>
<p>Unless you are specifically concerned about getting enhanced fuel economy or are looking to get that last little drop of extra performance out of your engine (which a lower friction 5w30 oil will likely provide), I do not believe that 5w30 was the best option for your engine.  If it were me, I&#8217;d stick with 5w40 or possibly synthetic 0w40.  </p>
<p>Again, that doesn&#8217;t mean that the 5w30 is inadequate.  It may do a fine job.  I&#8217;m just of the opinion that, unless you have solid, logical reasons for doing so (and there ARE, sometimes, good reasons), I wouldn&#8217;t disregard the manufacturer&#8217;s viscosity recommendations so quickly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on jerk by MotorOilEvaluator</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/jerk/#comment-396</link>
		<dc:creator>MotorOilEvaluator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:40:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-396</guid>
		<description>Well, that was very well said.  I&#039;m impressed with your attention to detail and your thoughtful critique of my site.  I&#039;m sure others will be equally impressed with your educational post, which I&#039;m sure will cause many subscribers to my site to immediately begin looking for other, better alternatives for finding easy access to the technical specifications of well over 1,000 different oils ...

Oh, wait, there are none.  I guess they&#039;ll just have to make due with my &quot;crappy&quot; implementation. Cheers.  :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, that was very well said.  I&#8217;m impressed with your attention to detail and your thoughtful critique of my site.  I&#8217;m sure others will be equally impressed with your educational post, which I&#8217;m sure will cause many subscribers to my site to immediately begin looking for other, better alternatives for finding easy access to the technical specifications of well over 1,000 different oils &#8230;</p>
<p>Oh, wait, there are none.  I guess they&#8217;ll just have to make due with my &#8220;crappy&#8221; implementation. Cheers.  <img src='http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on SUSUKI SWIFT DDiS by MotorOilEvaluator</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/susuki-swift-ddis/#comment-390</link>
		<dc:creator>MotorOilEvaluator</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:48:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-390</guid>
		<description>Unfortunately, I do not know.  I&#039;ve tried looking this up online to get an idea of what the owner&#039;s manual suggests to that I might have a bit of a foundation to build off of, but found little to go on.

As a general rule, I try to stick within one viscosity grade of the manufacturer&#039;s recommendation.  So, for instance, if a 5w30 is recommended, I&#039;d stick between 5w20 and 5w40 - 5w40 for better high heat protection, 5w20 for better fuel economy - you decide which is most important to you.

If you&#039;re driving in severe cold, you should stick to he 5w or even drop to a 0w rated oil.  Otherwise, if the vehicle never sees cold temps, you could easily use a 10w or even possibly a 15w, like 10w30, 10w40 or 15w40.

It all depends on what you&#039;re looking for.  But, unless you really know what you&#039;re doing, I wouldn&#039;t stray too far from the original manufacturer recommendations.

Sorry I can&#039;t really be of more help.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately, I do not know.  I&#8217;ve tried looking this up online to get an idea of what the owner&#8217;s manual suggests to that I might have a bit of a foundation to build off of, but found little to go on.</p>
<p>As a general rule, I try to stick within one viscosity grade of the manufacturer&#8217;s recommendation.  So, for instance, if a 5w30 is recommended, I&#8217;d stick between 5w20 and 5w40 &#8211; 5w40 for better high heat protection, 5w20 for better fuel economy &#8211; you decide which is most important to you.</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re driving in severe cold, you should stick to he 5w or even drop to a 0w rated oil.  Otherwise, if the vehicle never sees cold temps, you could easily use a 10w or even possibly a 15w, like 10w30, 10w40 or 15w40.</p>
<p>It all depends on what you&#8217;re looking for.  But, unless you really know what you&#8217;re doing, I wouldn&#8217;t stray too far from the original manufacturer recommendations.</p>
<p>Sorry I can&#8217;t really be of more help.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Total 5W-30 by boxstermac</title>
		<link>http://themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/total-5w-30/#comment-380</link>
		<dc:creator>boxstermac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-380</guid>
		<description>Quartz Ineo MC3 5w-30 is the approved VW oil that meets 502.00</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Quartz Ineo MC3 5w-30 is the approved VW oil that meets 502.00</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/comments/feed/ ) in 0.49217 seconds, on Feb 23rd, 2012 at 1:42 am UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on Feb 23rd, 2012 at 11:42 am UTC -->
<!-- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -->
<!-- Quick Cache Is Fully Functional :-) ... A Quick Cache file was just served for (  themotoroilevaluator.com/members-blog/comments/feed/ ) in 0.10061 seconds, on Feb 23rd, 2012 at 8:50 am UTC. -->
