Switching from conventional to synthetic oil?

Ray III said:
Whoever that guy is he must not have much of a life for the last 35 years if he could put a car through that many miles. A dump truck built in 1980 that sees daily use would only have 600,000 miles on it by now.
it could be the other way around - he could have had quite a life while driving all those miles. :)
 
Ray III said:
heh you guys think using ATF takes balls? My dad once had to deal with a motor that was all full of gunk, SO he drained the oil and filled it up with diesel fuel and idled it for a few... drain crap fill up with diesel again idle some more...


You win.... I'm gonna pass on that one. :flag:
 
Hissin' said "it could be the other way around - he could have had quite a life while driving all those miles. "

That's kind of how I saw it. If you love to drive, have the time to do it, and have a car you like - well, it doesn't get much better than that.

More on Irv's amazing car and feat.... http://savvytraveler.publicradio.org/show/features/2002/20020322/interview2.shtml
http://www.cabinnaise.com/vpage/irv.htm

Probably the most amazing thing is that he's never wrecked it in those (now) 2.1 million miles. I met him at Clayton Volvo here in K'ville a little over 2 years ago - he'd stopped in for a visit while on an LA to Long Island drive.
 
Michael Yount said:
he'd stopped in for a visit while on an LA to Long Island drive.
LOL - it is all relative. i consider a drive to be something i do on a nice day for an hour. his idea of a "drive" is 3K miles. actually, that sounds about right. :)
(Michael, thanks for the linkies).

BTW, it was indeed my take that this would be quite fun. ive always admired the guys who get a BMW, Kawi, etc (motorcycle), reinforce everything, add storage up the kazoo, aux fuel cells, etc and ride around the world (esp alone).
 
Michael Yount said:
Probably the most amazing thing is that he's never wrecked it in those (now) 2.1 million miles. I met him at Clayton Volvo here in K'ville a little over 2 years ago - he'd stopped in for a visit while on an LA to Long Island drive.

Way off-topic, but brings up an interesing insurance argument. With alot of companies rating you higher for the number of miles you drive each year - his would be absolutely astronomic, way off the chart -- but then, he hasn't had an accident. Hmmm...
 
Uh, I doubt the rates would be astronomic regardless of miles driven each year - it's a 66 Volvo with 2 million miles on it. According to the insurance company's stats, anything more than a couple thousand dollars worth of damage would likely result in a financial total loss. Trivia - he's averaged about 55,000 miles a year, or 150 miles a day -- for 38 years.
 
Michael Yount said:
Uh, I doubt the rates would be astronomic regardless of miles driven each year - it's a 66 Volvo with 2 million miles on it. According to the insurance company's stats, anything more than a couple thousand dollars worth of damage would likely result in a financial total loss. Trivia - he's averaged about 55,000 miles a year, or 150 miles a day -- for 38 years.

You completely missed my point.

My point is that some insurance companies do rate based on mileage, some with pretty hefty increases once you get around 20,000 miles per year, with most people being around 12,000-15,000 per year; decreases for less mileage than that. Their reasoning is because of the greater risk of accidents driving more mileage -- with some of the increases in the different mileage tiers you'd think having an accident would be imminent as you get over 20,000 miles.

My point was about this guy who's well over twice that for 35+ years without any accidents. It was just something to think about, not something to over-analyze.
 
I think I understood your point, didn't intend to debate it with you -- it was this line by you I was responding to... "With alot of companies rating you higher for the number of miles you drive each year - his would be absolutely astronomic..." The value of the car is a much bigger driver of insurance rates than the mileage driven - that's all I was pointing to.
 
Michael Yount said:
I think I understood your point, didn't intend to debate it with you -- it was this line by you I was responding to... "With alot of companies rating you higher for the number of miles you drive each year - his would be absolutely astronomic..." The value of the car is a much bigger driver of insurance rates than the mileage driven - that's all I was pointing to.

I see what you were saying, but even that, I have to say, is not completely true. That's why I was trying not to generalize all companies or point to anything other than just mileage.

The major factors can vary from company to company, policy to policy, and all sorts of things come into play. For example, at a previous company I worked for I changed a policy of an older man from a late 60's Corvette to a brand new (03 at the time) Corvette with no change in premium (same coverages). At the same company, I also changed the policy of a younger man with just your average car, a mid-80's Buick Century or similar. He called up and said he would be driving further to work at a new job than he had in the past (must have been the most honest guy in the world), and I rerated his mileage, not much, but enough to get him into the next higher mileage tier, and his policy increased by nearly 25%. I can also give you examples of where the opposite was true and things you wouldn't think, lowered premiums and such.

My point here, is that there are a tremendous amount of factors in insurance rates. Nothing more, nothing less.

That was completely off-topic, but figured I should offer some additional input since I started it.