AZGuy wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:27:15 GMT, "Nosey"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>>> ...and a non-tired engine will use no more oil at 3500 than at
>>>> 1800.
>>>
>>>
>>> Speaking from experience, you are wrong. I had a 350 that in normal
>>> around town and commuting use would go 1000 miles on a quart. But
>>> if I ran it on a high speed trip, even for only 200 miles (and
>>> assuming it was probably already half a quart low to start) it
>>> would use nearly another quart in that 200 miles. It was like that
>>> since I bought it at 24,000 miles and it stayed exactly like that
>>> up till the time I sold it at 124,000 miles.
>>
>> Read the comment again. He said a NON-TIRED engine.
>
> It wasn't tired.
>
> Using over a quart of
>> oil every 200 highway miles is not an acceptable consumption rate,
>> even by 1967 standards. Your 350 engine had significant problems at
>> 24,000 miles. This thing must have smoked like a freight train on
>> the highway.
>
> It neither smoked nor leaked. It just used quite a bit of oil, about
> a quart every 400 (if you read my comments again you'll see that's
> what it adds up to) when running long distances at 75 mph..

I must have comprehended what I read other than what you intended.
Even if it "only" used a quart per 400 miles, you would never have to change
the oil. It would burn 5 quarts every 2,000 miles. This is still not
acceptable oil consumption, and shouldn't be offered as an example of
normal.

> It sounds
>> like you had the exact same problem outlined in the original
>> question. Using one quart of oil in 200 highway miles adds up to
>> using 4 quarts in 800 miles. I suck at math and even I could figure
>> that one out.
>>
>
> Yup, but as my post said, it was about a half quart used on the trip,
> not the entire quart.
>
> In any case, I think you are missing the point I was putting forth,
> which is that it's possible for an engine with nothing wrong (other
> then using more oil then is typical) with it to burn that much oil and
> not smoke. I put 100,000 additional miles on mine and it never
> changed in how it performed and always ran like a top, it just used
> more oil then it should. Oil is a heck of a lot cheaper then an
> engine rebuild that will do nothing but save you the cost of a quart
> of oil a month. Would you spend $2000-3000 to rebuild an engine that
> didn't foul it's plugs or fail emissions or do anything bad but use a
> little too much oil???? Maybe you would. I certainly wouldn't.

You must have missed MY point. Burning that much oil means there IS a
problem. Just because you decided not to fix it doesn't change that fact.