Lack of control group, the plural of anecdote is not data, etc.
What you are is a bit obsessive (as you admitted earlier) and, arguably, wasteful. There is no valid reason to believe the excessive servicing of your vehicle has done it any good whatsoever. For all you know, it would have done just as well without it.
Riggggght, but the way to refute what I just said isn’t to point to the cars you babied that ran for a good long while, but to point to cars that DIDN’T because they only got the minimum manufacturer’s recommended maintenance.
There are oil analysis companies out there where you can send a sample of used oil and they will send you back a report telling you more than you would ever want to know about the condition of the oil and any contamination in it. The results pretty much always indicate that the recommended change intervals are extremely conservative, usually by margins of over 100% or more.
According to my dealer, the standard Optima can go for 5k miles, but the SX or EX Turbos require 3k mile oil changes.
Thanks for telling me what I already admitted up front, captain obvious. :rolleyes:
Ah-ha… but on the bright side, no vehicles were harmed in the process. Right?
Go with the manual’s recommendation, not the dealer’s. The dealer wants to gouge you. The people who made the car know what’s best for it.
It’s really that simple.
In the rare instance that it’s the same, joy. But I doubt it is. Check the manual; I can almost guarantee the dealer’s recommendation is twice as often as the manual’s.
Why on earth people trust the dealer over the manufacturer is always baffling to me.
The truth is, even the manufacturer’s recommendations are on the conservative side, for obvious reasons.
Since I’m not aware of any problems resulting from changing oil too frequently I prefer not to let it go too long. But it is a waste of money to do it too frequently, and luckily by the time I actually get around to doing it, it’s about every 5000 miles anyway.
But a natural resource was wasted, which I cannot support.
It’s also a waste of a natural resource which, if you haven’t noticed, is at the center of a lot of instability in the world.
I think it’s a rip-off on several levels. It’s selling stuff that’s not needed at that mileage, it’s failing to provide stuff that Kia calls for at that mileage, and it’s overpriced for what is provided.
The factory schedule for 15K miles includes: inspection of various items; cabin (not engine) air filter replacement; oil, filter, and lube service (the lube includes checking basic fluid levels); and tire rotation.
Barring special cases like driving a LOT on dusty roads, modern engine air filters have 30K (or more) replacement intervals and will do okay for quite a bit longer. Replacement at 15K can’t really be justified.
The great (probably overwhelming) majority of tires go through their lifetime without needing to be rebalanced. Doing it every 15K is a good way for the shop to pay for the balancing machine, but is of little if any benefit to the customer.
BG is a company that sells automove fluid servicing equipment and additives. They make good products, but their inclusion on the dealer’s schedule is gilding the lily, and functions mainly as a profit generator. Vehicle manufacturers generally warn not to use oil additives.
The 30K service at this place lists “evaluate spark plugs for replacement” which is ludicrous – the plugs on this vehicle have a replacement interval of 105K. It also lists transmission fluid service (factory interval 60K for severe service, not mentioned for normal service), coolant flush (factory interval 120K), and power steering fluid flush (not listed by the factory, commonly called a “wallet flush” by many of my colleagues). These schedules are designed to sell service whether it’s needed or not, and mostly it’s not. It’s overkill and oversell, and it leads me to not trust this facility.
I agree that you’d be best served by an independent shop (or maybe a different dealer) that will do what’s on Kia’s schedule and not pad the list with questionable extras.
You’re under the mistaken impression that I’m making the argument that manufacturer suggested recommendations are insufficient for the average user/driver. I am not. I’m suggesting there is no harm in err-ing on the side of caution with more frequent oil changes. The link provided in the OP suggested 3,000 mile intervals. I don’t drive a Kia. I don’t know what the 2012 Kia require as far as manufacturer recommended changes. If the linked interval is incorrect then I suppose I stand corrected in advising the OP to change the oil per linked schedule. :dubious:
Having said that, you are not telling me anything new about used oil sample testing or what data those test results often yield under normal use. So I don’t know what argument it is you’re having with me but I assure you it’s an argument of your own making.
Kia’s oil change interval is 7000 miles for normal service, 3750 for severe service. For most cars that get a mix of city and highway driving a 5-6K interval would be reasonable.
Hell, it’s at the center of a lot of instability right in this thread. 
Just building the car wastes more resources than a few extra oil changes. You’re really stretching that concept here.
Fair enough. But if you’ve made the wasteful choice to purchase a car, why make it even worse by changing the oil 2x or 3x more often than the manufacturer suggests? In any case, a yet more serious concern is disposal of oil–environmental contamination by used oil is actually a pretty big problem.
My used oil gets recycled.
I’ll check that - it hadn’t occurred to me to look at the manual, actually as my previous dealer was so great, I guess I’m used to thinking they all are. 