Seat Belts saved our lives.

[booster]

Most vehicles that tout "lifetime" stuff like differential oil do so only for normal driving service schedules.


It would surprise me that any one ton van would have that for the severe service schedule.

[ChicagoTom]

Originally Posted by bpiasecki@sbcglobal.net

After visiting family in Ohio recently, we were heading home to California on I-40 through New Mexico. I was driving under the posted speed limit of 75 mph when suddenly without warning the right rear wheel of our 2008 Pleasureway Excell sheared off the axle. We rolled over three full times and came to rest upright in the median. The van was completely destroyed but somehow we were not seriously hurt. My wife sustained a small cut on her forehead and I was completely unscathed. The air bags did not deploy, but the seat belts undoubtedly saved our lives. Everything inside the RV came loose and flew about the cabin. All the cabinets came off the walls, the refrigerator and microwave bounced off of each other emptying the contents which then became potentially deadly missiles. We have kept the van well maintained and had it serviced and checked out by reliable mechanics prior to our departure. The RV was fully insured and we will replace it soon.

You say under the speed limit of 75, for an Excel 65 sounds like the max IMO. Curious how old the tire was?

[jrobe]

As the price of new Class B RV’s goes up and up, you see more and more 15 to 30 year old vans on the road. There are countless posts on this forum for buying advice from shoppers with a, for example $20k budget, that will often then end up with a worn out van. They should all at least read and consider this OP’s experience before buying a van that wasn’t built or designed to last forever at often overloaded weight capacities. This won’t be the last post like this here.

[MagicBox]

Crack open an average owner’s manual on a modern vehicle and you’ll be surprised at what they consider severe conditions are often describing every day driving:
Idling in traffic, up-and-down steep grades, carrying heavy loads, long distance driving, stop and go.
If you’re leasing a vehicle or otherwise keeping it short term, doing bare minimum might make sense.
But long term vehicle owners will own it after the warranty expires and relying on the manufactures’ low maintenance claim is not a good bet.

[avanti]

Originally Posted by MagicBox

Crack open an average owner’s manual on a modern vehicle and you’ll be surprised at what they consider severe conditions are often describing every day driving:
Idling in traffic, up-and-down steep grades, carrying heavy loads, long distance driving, stop and go.

You see this claim repeated frequently on the Internet as a justification for needlessly-frequent service intervals. It is misleading at best. You rarely see the actual texts. Here is what Ford says about my 2022 Transit:

SPECIAL OPERATING CONDITIONS SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE

If you operate your vehicle primarily in any of the following conditions, you need to perform extra maintenance as indicated. If you operate your vehicle occasionally under any of these conditions, it is not necessary to perform the extra maintenance. For specific recommendations, see your dealership service advisor or technician.

• Towing a trailer or using a car-top carrier
• Extensive idling or low-speed driving for long distances, as in heavy commercial use (such as delivery, taxi, patrol car or livery)
• Operating in dusty or sandy conditions (such as unpaved or dusty roads)
• Off-road operation
• Exclusive use of E85 (Flex fuel vehicles only)

I have added the underlines for emphasis.

They are quite specific on what conditions require extra maintenance (and they are also clear about what is needed under each condition). They are also clear that these conditions must be your primary operating mode--occasional instances don't count.

Note that there is no mention of "up-and-down", "steep grades", "carrying heavy loads", and certainly not "long distance driving" (which is actually a LIGHT-DUTY condition.) What they are describing is most certainly not "every day driving", unless you are a NYC Uber driver or some such.

There is a lot of science behind modern engines and lubricants and most OEMs are reasonably careful about their recommendations. I'm sure that the information we get from them is not perfect, but IMO it is the best available advice. They have a lot more information at their disposal than Us Guys on the Internet.

[MagicBox]

avanti

I’m saying be wary of “lifetime fluids” and be realistic about your driving conditions.
Manufactures and vehicle owners have been bitten by extended or no service interval maintenance in the past.

There also can be a vast difference between manufacturer recommended service on German vehicles versus domestic and Japanese.
German and high end Japanese manufacturers used to be the only ones suggesting brake fluid service for instance. Domestics? Crickets.

I just retired from 25 years as an automotive service advisor and shop manager. Believe it or not the reality on the ground can be different from what the manufacturer says or what us guys read on the Internet. Im frankly tired of talking about this stuff so I usually stick to less heady topics…..

Hey I just finished waxing my roof and my arms are about to fall off!

I’ll get off here. Y’all have fun.

[bpiasecki@sbcglobal.net]

Originally Posted by ChicagoTom

You say under the speed limit of 75, for an Excel 65 sounds like the max IMO. Curious how old the tire was?

The tire was NOT the problem. The entire wheel sheared off at the axle. The tire was fine (one year old 6K miles.) I would like to post photos but cant figure out phone to this forum. Any help would be welcome.
Also, speed was 70 mph on cruise.

[bpiasecki@sbcglobal.net]

I would love to post photos but don't know how to transfer them from my phone to this forum. They have no URL. Any help would be welcome.

[booster]

I always find any discussion of service intervals "interesting".


I think, first and foremost, that the intervals in the manuals are guidance given by the manufacturers who are also trying to sell vehicles so cost of routine maintenance has to be a consideration in selling because customers (some anyway) look at that stuff.


Second, I think the intervals are influenced by how long the warranty period is. With the warranties running out, for the most part, by 100K why design the service intervals to be shorter than anything that will give reliable life to that point?


Third, the same people that are giving you the service intervals are also the same people that said the Sprinter emissions systems worked well, that Volkswagons passed emission without cheating, your failure is the first time they have ever seen it, etc, etc, etc.


My background is in industrial manufacturing equipment so I have seen lots and lots of mean time between failure data in my past working life, and it never is an OK to this point, bad after that type of thing. It is always a curve of some sort that may start increasing faster at some point, but not radically. Mean time between failures often will be longer with different preventive maintenance schedules most of the time, but not 100% of the time. We used MTBF data to determine prefailure replacement points which are very expensive to do it not needed, if you expect the company to make money. We balanced replacement costs vs preventive maintenance costs all the time.



Personally, I don't think anyone can really accurately judge how good the service intervals are without access to the manufacturer's MTBF data. And, yes, they do have very detailed information on it.


I laughed at the post about brake fluid preventive maintenance being a new thing, which is mostly correct. I have been doing 3 year changes for about 30 years or more and in that time I have never had to rebuild or replace any wetted parts in a brake system, and this includes a car that went 210K miles in 18.5 years and another at 175K and 15 years in Minnesota weather as commuters. Changing fluid regularly works, I am convinced.


I do more preventative maintenance than the recommended intervals or oil monitor tell me too, but I really do believe that the minor expense of extra is less risk than use manufacture data, as they have an interest to have those intervals as long as possible, and that interest isn't making it to double the warranty period.

[avanti]

I have little interest in trying to change anybody's convictions concerning maintenance intervals. I do, however, believe in evidence-based behaviors. My problem with the frequent-service crowd is that as far as I can see, the recommendations are almost always simply pulled out of the air. The Sprinter guys say "20K is crazy, I do 10K". Why 10K? Why not 3K, or 1K... "Oil is cheap", right? As Booster says, only the OEMs have the data. Maybe their recommendations are nefariously motivated, but they are at least data-based. The other source of data is oil analysis. That is what REALLY makes me laugh. The Sprinter-Source gang often post such results, usually after 8K or so. In literally every case that I have seen, the oil tests just fine. Does that mean that the owners smile and keep driving? Nope. They virtually always change the oil anyway, 'cause "Oil is cheap".

Anyway, the only reason I joined this discussion was to correct factually-incorrect information concerning the OEM recommendations. The only thing worse that fact-free opinions are those based on facts that aren't.

Just as another example, let's look at the claim that

German and high end Japanese manufacturers used to be the only ones suggesting brake fluid service for instance. Domestics? Crickets.

So, I just checked the Owners' Manual for the 1985 Ford Sierra (chosen totally at random) to check this claim. Here's what I found:

brakeFluid1985.jpg

It is a minor point, but the effects of water absorption on brake fluid has been known for a long, long time, and although there are probably exceptions, generally speaking the industry has treated the issue rationally and responsibly, as far as I can see.

If one wants to make a case for accelerated maintenance intervals, I am all ears. But made-up claims or "I've been doing it for 30 years" tell us little more than "That's how Dad did it."

Sorry for the rant.

[booster]

Has anyone ever seen anything about how the oil analysis people determine the specifications they use for saying and oil is good or bad after use? I have never looked super hard, but quick looking over the years came up with what they use, but not where those limits came from.


Not saying they are wrong or right, but things like dilution, contamination load, additive depletion are all things that appear to accelerate wear at higher rates as the numbers get worse. A single point cutoff seems out of place to me. Some sort of sliding scale of loss of protection would be in order.



If you run your oil to X ppm of certain contaminates what does the expected life of an engine look like if you use that limit as a trigger for oil changes. It would certainly be curve, and as I and Avanti have both stated, you can bet all the OEMs have that data and chart.

[avanti]

Originally Posted by booster

Has anyone ever seen anything about how the oil analysis people determine the specifications they use for saying and oil is good or bad after use? I have never looked super hard, but quick looking over the years came up with what they use, but not where those limits came from.


Not saying they are wrong or right, but things like dilution, contamination load, additive depletion are all things that appear to accelerate wear at higher rates as the numbers get worse. A single point cutoff seems out of place to me. Some sort of sliding scale of loss of protection would be in order.



If you run your oil to X ppm of certain contaminates what does the expected life of an engine look like if you use that limit as a trigger for oil changes. It would certainly be curve, and as I and Avanti have both stated, you can bet all the OEMs have that data and chart.

This will give you a feel for what Blackstone does:

https://www.blackstone-labs.com/wp-c...e-combined.pdf

[booster]

Originally Posted by avanti

This will give you a feel for what Blackstone does:

https://www.blackstone-labs.com/wp-c...e-combined.pdf

Yep, I have seen that information before. They say that in the sample case it could be run longer....but based on what for actual life data? Having a history and an average of all samples, but are all sample averages unnormally high because only geeks get their oil analyzed? Without some controlled wear/life data I see only limited use for the analysis except to show when and issue comes up, like more fuel dilution or contaminates from a failed air cleaner.


I would like to see report that explained that if the reading are the norm you could expect some stated amount of life or even just a baseline zero reference. Then give what 25% over and under on each contaminate would do to that life. Other than that, you are counting on them to determine if you are good or bad, but not telling you what that is based on.


When you go to the doctor and they find high cholesterol, They will tell you that you have X amount of added chance of a heart attack or stroke, for instance.

[peteco]

Originally Posted by bpiasecki@sbcglobal.net

I would love to post photos but don't know how to transfer them from my phone to this forum. They have no URL. Any help would be welcome.

If using your phone, After you hit the "Reply" button then at the bottom there is an "Attach Files" box. Select "Manage Attachments". In the "Upload File from Your Computer" select the top "Choose File" button. A box will pop up giving you the option to: "Photo Library", Take Photo or Video" or "Choose File" (that's how it is on an iphone. Android should be similar). Hit "Photo Library" and then select the picture from there. Repeat for each picture you want to include. Then hit Upload and the picture will be listed in the "Current Attachments" box. Then hit "Close this Window" at the bottom. Finish your message and hit "Preview Post" to make sure it looks like you want. Then hit "Submit Reply"

[bpiasecki@sbcglobal.net]

Thank You, but the photos are on my phone, not on my computer. This seems way to complicated to merely post photos and so I will not post again.

[peteco]

Originally Posted by bpiasecki@sbcglobal.net

Thank You, but the photos are on my phone, not on my computer. This seems way to complicated to merely post photos and so I will not post again.

Do you have internet access on your phone? The directions I gave are to use on your phone.

[booster]

If you want to use the URL way to post pics, you have to load them from the phone to photo hosting site. Peteco's phone method is very similar to how you would do it from a PC and not bad at all, IMO, as hosting here is very convenient compared to going to a hosting site and storing them there just to get a URL..


We all have had to learn how to handle this kind of stuff to be able to use available features like the on site hosting offered here. It is just the way it is and not all that difficult once you do it a couple of times.

[GeorgeRa]

Originally Posted by avanti

I have little interest in trying to change anybody's convictions concerning maintenance intervals. I do, however, believe in evidence-based behaviors. My problem with the frequent-service crowd is that as far as I can see, the recommendations are almost always simply pulled out of the air. The Sprinter guys say "20K is crazy, I do 10K". Why 10K? Why not 3K, or 1K... "Oil is cheap", right? As Booster says, only the OEMs have the data. Maybe their recommendations are nefariously motivated, but they are at least data-based. The other source of data is oil analysis. That is what REALLY makes me laugh. The Sprinter-Source gang often post such results, usually after 8K or so. In literally every case that I have seen, the oil tests just fine. Does that mean that the owners smile and keep driving? Nope. They virtually always change the oil anyway, 'cause "Oil is cheap".

Anyway, the only reason I joined this discussion was to correct factually-incorrect information concerning the OEM recommendations. The only thing worse that fact-free opinions are those based on facts that aren't.

Just as another example, let's look at the claim that


So, I just checked the Owners' Manual for the 1985 Ford Sierra (chosen totally at random) to check this claim. Here's what I found:

Attachment 12976

It is a minor point, but the effects of water absorption on brake fluid has been known for a long, long time, and although there are probably exceptions, generally speaking the industry has treated the issue rationally and responsibly, as far as I can see.

If one wants to make a case for accelerated maintenance intervals, I am all ears. But made-up claims or "I've been doing it for 30 years" tell us little more than "That's how Dad did it."

Sorry for the rant.

Isn't Ford Sierra from Europe?

[avanti]

Originally Posted by GeorgeRa

Isn't Ford Sierra from Europe?

You are right (I really did choose at random).

I withdraw the example, with apologies.

[Roadtreker357]

Originally Posted by booster

Using only the best oils like Motul,Redline, high end Amsoil should also help.

Our 2007 C210 Roadtrek calls for 75W-90 gear oil. Looking for some guidance.

Looking at Red Line, I see there is also 75W-140 gear oil.
Which would be better lubrication to prevent this type of axle failure?

I also see several different Red Line offerings.
Synthetic Heavy Shockproof gear oil, 75W-90, #58204
GL-5 transmission and gear oil, 75W-90, limited slip, #57904
GL-5 transmission and gear oil, 75W-140, #57914
And other offerings

Which gear oil is considered the best to use for my application?
How much is needed to completely drain and refill the differential?