[donv]

A first change at an earlier point than subsequent ones is being super cautious... but it may be with good reason. A significant portion of the wear of the engine happens in the first few thousand miles ("break-in"), which loads the oil with metal particles at a higher rate than later - synthetic oil or not. The filter deals with a lot of that, but they're not 100% efficient. However, if they are highly efficient, the oil flow can be impeded - which is not good either.

A 2K mile change on a Boxster w/synthetic sounds too conservative, but somewhere in the 5-7K range for a first change sounds right to me. Again, this is along the lines of cheap insurance - $250(?) for just the oil change, compared with possible longer life for a $50K investment.

The first two new cars I owned were maintained right at the manufacturer's recommended intervals and both became smokers to some degree as they went past 70-80K miles - maybe just bad luck, but certainly not what I wanted to have happen. After that I moved to changes at 3-5K intervals (somewhere in 60-70% of 5-7.5K mfgr rec.) and these cars lived to a good old age with no oil consumption under the same driving habits (not on synthetics). I'd heard that the EPA leans on the car mfgrs to show longer change intervals in order to minimize oil use... interestingly, the intervals are getting longer but, for most cars, nothing has changed about the oils (unless on synthetics)...?

BTW, my 5K interval Boxster change is really just an annual event based on my driving, done just before storage to minimize water in the engine as it sleeps - doing my own changes, it costs me <$70 for this "insurance". If I were driving year round, then I'd likely be stretching the changes to 10K intervals. I roll over my used synthetic oil to use in the yard equipment, etc. before final recycling so I don't feel guilty about the oil going to waste. And the good news is that the snowblower never started easier!