Won't hurt to follow the 'traditional' break in. 5000 miles between oil
changes is a bit too much for my liking, synthetic or not, but as has
been stated personal preference is just that . . . personal. That
being said, many 'aftermarket extended service warranties' will require
documentation of no more than 4000 mile oil change intervals. I like
the synthetic blends for price/performance value. I drive Fords so I
use Motorcraft oil and filters. The quality of the filter you use is
the most important variable you control. Factory filters are always a
good choice. For the most part avoid the 'Quickie Lube' brands of
filters along with Fram. NAPA Gold filters are manufactured by WIX and
are also a good choice. When I was involved with building professional
racing engines the norm for start up was to use a series of aircraft
screen filters in the oil return lines in addition to the normal
filtering arrangement. These engines were assembled in a 'clean'
environment with great care. The amount of 'trash' generated on initial
run in is astounding. First one I saw I thought the engine had a
serious malfunction. Doesn't take long for the trash to be filtered out
and the oil stream clears up. When you buy a car from the dealer and
run it out to the 7500 mile oil change you're gambling your filter has
enough capacity to hold all the trash without bypassing and running the
crap through your engine.


Forrest wrote:
> A friend and neighbor, who is a retired engineer and has knowledge and
> experience with things mechanical, including cars, told me just now
> that he broke in his 1999 Ford 150 Lightning truck by changing the
> original factory oil at 1000 miles and then again at 2500 and then at
> 5000 and has kept to 5K, with synthetic, for changes since.
>
> I know that engines are machined to greater tolerances than those of
> 20 years ago, which then included a free dealer oil change at 500
> miles to flush out the metal filings etc, but would you agree that it
> makes sense to use a break in sequence, such as this, at this time,
> with our new Toyota 4Runner - rather than the published approach,
> which is to just do nothing until 5k miles and then change to
> Synthetic, if I wished to ?
>
> I don't mind the extra expense, even the cost of synthetic, and filter
> changes, in exchange for any benefits that breaking in in a preferable
> way would provide, if they so exist. It is possible that such a break
> in sequence would be a bit too daunting or complex for non machine
> minded consumers and Toyota, although it might so prefer it this way,
> just leaves the change at 5K miles to simplify things.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Forrest