Subaru Impreza WRX

paisan

There is no written proof from mobil stating that it will increase your WRX 3hp. No more questions your honor.

-mike

paisan

Then why aren't we all running 0w oil in all our cars? The performance gain will be minimal at best. Like I said it's for longevity and thermal breakdown that is where synthetics are focused. Higher performance engines produce more heat and are under harder conditions, leading to pre-mature non-synthetic breakdown.

-mike

rex_ruthor

I cant disagree with you on the performance merits of a Grand National. For its time, it was a great car. Kinda like the WRX in its day..a fast affordable sleeper. But its not all you crack it up to be, investment wise.

Im a bit skeptical of whether its truly an automotive investment. Check out these links:

http://www.cars-on-line.com/84grandn4851.html a GN for 9K

http://hometown.aol.com/garyatz/index.html

This guy is selling a mint fully restored GN for 18K, thats gotta be close to what it sold for new. But think of the thousands he spent to get it back to showroom condition. Cars of this vintage just dont appreciate, unless they are actual bona fide exotics, with names like Shelby and Pantera.

rex_ruthor

There are published independent tests that show HP and fuel economy gains from lower viscosity oils. I understand where you are going, but I know you are only joking about 0-W oils to make a point. Obviously there is a practical limit at which viscosity is useful in offering protection. You can only go so low.

paisan

Grand National and Impala SS both good cars, but again not the most reliable creatures. Most of them are kept on life-support systems. The Impala SS is basically a police package car, where there are highly trained mechanics who can keep them running all the time. Just like ferraris who need to be tuned often or race cars with dedicated mechanics.

I'd be curious to see the reliability ratings of the Grand National.

-mike

ateixeira

The difference between a 10w30 and a 10w40 oil are pretty miniscule. I've even worked with 75w80 gear oil, and besides the smell it's hard to tell them apart (it's thicker when it's cold, but in warm weather it's hard to even notice). I don't think that going from one viscosity to another would produce a measurable gain in fuel economy.

-juice

rex_ruthor

Basically, the synthetic oil reduces internal heat and friction, as compared to conventional oils. This results in (marginal) HP and FE gains.

There is a genuine consensus on this very topic. We could all quibble over the exacts gains, but seriously, we all know thats fruitless unless someone puts their car on the dyno to measure it.
1% does not seem to be an unreasonable claim.

ateixeira

You shouldn't have used parenthesis, the word "marginal" is the key to your statement. I'm sure it's true, but the difference is meaningless, and probably rounds off to 0%, not 1%.

-juice

paisan

IMHO marginal is another word for not big enough to matter/won't effect things one way or another, etc. etc. Like Juice said probably rounds to 0%

I'll put $20 up if someone can show me dynos of their car before mobil1 drop the oil, put in mobil1 and re-run the dyno and gainst 3hp or more.

Although I'm not sure how accurite the dynos are...

-mike

rex_ruthor

You guys have no basis or consensus for your claim of "round off to zero". Its just an arbitrary position. By marginal, I was trying to reflect that its a small, somewhat inconsequential difference, not that its zero, or meaningless.

I too wonder if most commercially accessible dynos are accurate to within 1%, plus, the cost of getting it dynoed is probably high. I might just do it someday though.

ateixeira

Ours is a skeptical position, not arbitrary. The burden of proof should lie on the person making the performance gain claims, not us. In fact, you can summarize our entire position with the statement, "prove it".

-juice

rex_ruthor

Im just saying, its a well known fact (well known amongst engine shops, professional motorsports, extreme enthusiasts, et cetera) that there are HP and FE gains to be had by use of synthetics. The gains might be small, but they exist, and are measurable.

Look up on Google using query strings like "increased horsepower" together with "synthetic oil" and/or "windage", "friction", et cetera. There are plenty of references from oil company un-affiliated sources.

paisan

Is that they are so marginal that they don't amount to a hill of beans exept in extreme cases such as high powered motorsports situations and certainly not 3hp on a WRX. I put it in the same classification as the difference between the track on the Wagon v. Sedan. Not measureable to anyone on here, maybe to the subaru rally team, but certainly not to us laymen!

-mike

ramiller1

but you seem to be making argument for argument's sake rather than an attempt to get at the truth of the matter. Fact is, if you would go to the Mobil 1 website www.mobil1.com and spend a little time enlightening yourselves about the facts on synthetic oil, you would see right away on an intuitive basis what we are talking about here.
If you guys are so sure of your position that it doesn't make these increases, let's hear your argument and your proof. Just saying I'm talking a bunch of BS doesn't cut it. Exactly why wouldn't a synthetic give you better efficiency?

dop50

All this quibbiling about what oil to use.... Who really cares??? Oils have come so far in recent years that basically you can't go wrong, there is no "bad" oil. Just be sure you use some!

Back in the "old days" (Never thought I'd ever get to use that term. Hehe!) there was no such thing as 5w30 or 10w40 and such. I don't remember any oil thinner than 30w before the late 60's or early 70's. (Except for 3-in-1 machine oil) We've come a long way, baby!

Viscosity does make a difference, just because of the tighter tollerances they use to build the newer engines. It has to be able to get where it needs to go. It's pretty hard to push axle grease through a hypodermic needle.

There are a lot of cars worth a lot more than they cost new. The problem there is, they are the "exceptions". Think about how many more of each has met with the recycle man. Any time you have just a few left of anything "old" they become more valuable. I wonder how many of us will have our "Rex's" in 20 or 30 years. If we park them in an isolation container they will be worth a lot more than we paid for them also, but they wouldn't be near as much fun! Come to think of it, I probably won't be able to drive in 20-30 years, so, to heck with that idea!!!! I'll either be dead or about ready to move into a home, it won't do me much good in either case. Hehe!

Just drive, and be happy!!

bluesubie

and couldn't find anything on Mobil1.com.

-Dennis

ateixeira

I disagree. You're not going to educate yourself about the subject by reading brochures from the manufacturer that profits from the sales of the product. BMW's motorcycle brochure says its motorcycles are inherently the best-balanced because of the boxer engine, but I doubt the car brochures mention that (since they use in-line and vee configurations).

I would trust a source like Miata.net much more, a neutral, enthusiast-run site full of autocrossers. I've checked the FAQ and Garage sections and found nothing directly relating to power increases from synthetics.

Synthetic or dino, you still have the same thickness, as measured by the viscosity. I can imagine a loss of power if you have sludge in the oil that is heavier or thicker than the original engine oil, but that only means your oil change interval is too long, regardless of the oil you are using.

-juice

dop50

bluesubie

of Mobil conventional 5W30 is 10.5 cSt at 100 deg. C. Mobil 1 is 9.5 cSt at 100 C.
Even though they are the same weight, the M1 is thinner at operating temps. ;-)

This is from Mobil1's Product Data sheet.

-Dennis

ramiller1

I can understand being skeptical of a claim until you see the hard data. But companies like Mobil aren't going to provide hard data if it's going to end up costing them a ton of litigation money from frivolous lawsuits. Catch-22.

I called a respected speed shop in Boulder and the guy told me the dyno test costs $175 an hour but the margin of error on the test is about 3 hp, so taking my car there for the test isn't going to prove anything. He did say they do a lot of performance work for different local racing groups and that on one of their longer straightaways, the cars they work with will typically get 150-200 more rpm
out of synthetic oil than conventional, so that's an indication of the efficiency gains.
I vote we just end the argument and say my WRX is putting out 228.5 hp instead of 227 and move on to something else.
--RA

novcenthusiast

Where did you see information about a Millen version of the Lancer (clone of the EVO)?

I just checked on the rod millen motorsports site and I didn't find anything similar to what you mentioned.

ateixeira

I think this has been an informative and civil discussion of the possible benefits of synthetic. We've kept it civil, I think, so no harm done.

I've been looking around and most tend to talk about the reduced wear, at least that's what they focus on.

-juice

ateixeira

I saw that Lancer in Autoweek, IIRC. They have a web site if you want to do a search.

-juice

dop50

Sorry, I hit the wrong key. What do you expect from an "old guy"? Hehe!

Lets look at this from the basics of how an engine works....

Where does "power" come from? It's basically what you get when you ignite a fuel/air mixture under compression, right? So, how do you improve on the power output? Change one of the basic components that cause it in the first place! (Ignition, Fuel/Air mixture, or Compression) Granted, lubrication will enhance it's ability to produce power, but it will not create more power! The only thing you can expect to gain from any oil is less friction, any amount of friction requires more power to operate efficiently. You don't create more power by reducing friction! However, an engines ability to produce more power can be enhanced by reducing the friction. But if you don't do something besides provide better lubrication, you are only allowing the engine to produce what power it is designed to provide in the first place! Whether intended or not.

So, the point being, if you want to make noticable improvements, you need to worry about your fuel, air, or ignition, more than what kind of oil you use. If you want your engine to last longer than dirt, then provide it with a good quality oil.

Note: None of the above will help if you drive it like a maniac anyway.

1subydown1togo

It's Rhys Millen...it was mentioned in some i-club thread w/websites I saw today re: the official release of the EVO VII in the spring of 2003

paisan

Doesn' Colin work for an oil company? I believe he could shed some light on this subject.

-mike

rex_ruthor

hey guys,

Yah, hope it doesnt come across as argumentative, but I know i have seen lots of different references to synthetic HP and FE gains, much of it anecdotal, but you know, thats how real world experience for most enthusiasts comes across...we share the story on places like this. I did run across a Toyota Celica club (yah, I know) talking about it, as well as an Audi Club.

http://clubs.hemmings.com/vintagecelica/specs.html

http://www.audiworld.com/tech/eng14.shtml

normanr2

Here is Part 2 of the Autospeed upgrade article

http://www.autospeed.com/A_1064/P_6/article.html

Norman

rex_ruthor

ask and ye shall receive....not a WRX, but who cares, should be similar percentage increase for our cars

http://www.c5-corvette.com/redline.htm

note that the Corvettes used Mobil1 stock. So the increase over conventional oils should be even greater.

paisan

Except you realize that that is changing all fluids to Redline, not just the engine. 2.7hp on 325hp would be less than 1hp on just the engine and on one with only 227hp. Good data though. I'd still like to see what colin has to say on the subject.

-mike

ramiller1

the "stock" engine oil was Mobil 1--that's what the comparison was made against--it's what they put in Corvettes at the factory. We still don't have any data against conventional oil. Also, in my book, all our previous discussion was assuming you also put synthetic in the 5-spd. crankcase for the 3 hp gain.
--RA

rex_ruthor

Yah, but like i pointed out, the 2.7HP increase is over MobilOne oil, not conventional oil like the WRX comes with. If they had run the test with conventional oil as a baseline there should have been a more significant gain. But it would be good to see it on an actual WRX. Maybe someone like Cobb or M2 will do just that someday. Maybe SCC will do it...I think i will suggest it to some of these people.

paisan

I didn't see the mention of synthetic in the tranny and diffys in your previous discussions. I could have missed it though. Also I'm not sure those were the only changes, haven't had time to pour over the data but it looked like they also used water wetter, and some other redline products.

-mike

ramiller1

You're right, I didn't mention it, but if you're going to use synthetic in the engine, I think it's a good idea to put it in the gearbox and differential as well--only has to be changed every 30k or so and helps lessen driveline friction caused by the AWD. Just MHO--sorry, no guarantee from Mobil on that either
--RA

paisan

Just trying to put things into perspective. A lot of people read these boards like gospel and will rush out and spend money they don't have in the hopes of gaining hp through any means. Yes the mobil 1 will be better for the vehicle than a Type R sticker, but noticeable difference in hp you have to admit it's not going to amount to a hill of beans. Heck each engine probably has at least a 1%-2% difference in HP among them from the factory so that alone could effect you! With that I am actually on the verge of putting redline synthetics into my trooper (Diffys, T-case, Automatic Tranny, PS) and have been using mobil 1 since 10K miles.

-mike

rex_ruthor

Even given modern machining and assembly's tight tolerances, each car could vary, sure. Someone might have a 235 hp WRX, others might have 220...its hard to say what the slack is, without testing all the cars. Im sure SOA does random sampling of their production, like all manufacturers do, for quality, but we'd never find out if they found a variance...no one in their right mind would publish that data.

For instance, the car I test drove at the dealer seemed much faster than the one I got. My imagination? Possibly. Or, maybe its because I dont drive my own car like I stole it.

paisan

That's your problem Rex! You should drive your own car like you stole it, it's good for the subies. My XT6 takes a beating every day from me, and is stronger from it! Heck I'm convinced my XT6 is wound tighter than other XT6s but until i get my '91 XT6 on the road I won't know for sure.

-mike

dop50

If one believed everything one reads that is said by every manufacturer, one would go out and buy everything on the market. Maybe I'm a little skeptical but I know how marketing works. Maybe one should read the ingredient labels on various products before buying. Maybe something else is creating more HP. Like Maybe higher octain fuel??? Or maybe the resistance in the dyno was tweeked. Anything is possible. Unless you were there when the testing was done, who do you believe. I'm not saying it isn't so, just that I'm skeptical. You can't even believe pictures any more. I personally wouldn't waste my time or money on changing all the fluids in my vehicle just to gain a couple of HP when one or two octain points will do the same thing for just a couple of pennies. BAH-HUMBUG!

paisan

Actually lower octane will provide more HP, but can create pre-ignition. Higher Octane gives you less pre-ignition.

-mike

dop50

It's been a while since I was in automotive mechanics class, and It's getting harder to remember some things. I believe you are right about the octane. I think I was confused because I was remembering the days when we were just getting into unleaded fuel, something about the "old" leaded gas had a slower rate of ignition than the new unleaded fuels which resulted in better fuel efficiency. (or something like that). Of course there were drawbacks to the leaded fuel also, which included higher carbon emissions and such. As I recall, there were a lot of problems with the switch. Especially in the older cars, like the lack of lead caused a lot of valve problems. Thank goodness all we have to worry about now is what kind of oil to use. Hehe!

ramiller1

markets their WRX turbo with two horsepower ratings--a higher rating with I believe 96 octane gas. I've often wondered if using a 94 or 96 octane will improve hp in our WRXs, but so far only found the 91 octane in the Denver area. Makes sense but again, no hard data.
--RA

dop50

I may be a little backwards on some of the things I remember, but I do know that the higher octane will give you better fuel mileage. Whether or not it's more economical depends on the price when you buy it, I suppose. My dealer put in something like 87 octane when I picked up the car, and I ran it pretty low, the second tank I put in 93, it was noticeably peppier, and the mileage was about 2mpg better, even with the second tank being more town driving. I think the book recommends a min. of 90. I've been using 92-93 ever since.

paisan

That is England Spec Octane, I don't believe they use the same system as we do.

Dop50: You are right, it probably will be peppier with premium because what happens is that the ECU detects lower grade fuels and retards the timing to compensate so you don't ping, thus hindring your performance. On a car that doesn't get the timing retarted from lower grade fuels it should perform better but if you get pinging shouldn't use it.

leaded fuels: the valve problems were because they were partically lubricated by the lead. I need to add lead-lubricant to my boat gas on my outboards that were pre- lead-free days to help lube the valves as well.

-mike

dop50

dop50

Now I gotta do some research, I'll get back to you on this. But if higher octane gives better fuel economy and better performance, it stands to reason then that the higher octane would provide higher hp. It has something to do with the burn rate of the fuel. Slower is better, as I recall. I'm not sure but I'm thinking the higher the octane the slower it actually burns. If someone actually knows about this, refresh my memory. Thanks!

dop50

Go to:

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/autos/gasoline-faq/part1/

This will help, once there go to 6.13, There is a lot of info here, very interesting!

Have a good one!

krzyss

Hi !

When I switched to Mobil1 (my wife's Passat free maintenance has expired) I think I saw milage improvement from 23.5 mpg to 24 mpg. Not much.

The point that engine makes constant (or almost constant) power is valid but point is that some of the power is lost due to internal friction. If Mobil1 reduces internal friction it makes more power available to spin wheels. The problem is that gain is within the error of the measurement and it also depends on the engine (old engine with lots of residue might get unclogged with synthetic and lose pressure and make less power).

Synthetic oil gives you:
1) higher price ;-) nobody will challange me
2) better lubrication when cold
3) slower breakedown and now is point. As long as car manufacturers are sticking to 3000 miles oil change nothing moves but BMW uses oil change indicator and it could indicate oil change after 10000 miles. My Neon schedule B uses 5000 miles oil changes (non severe use) - I think it is 5000 and I am stretching it to 7500 with Mobil1.
In Europe car manufacturers are suggesting 15000/20000 km (10000 12000 miles) oil changes.

So, theoreticaly, one can save money using synthetic oil but it would cost one oil test fee to verify its suitability by pushing oil changes 5 times (15000 miles instead of 3000).

Krzys

bedabi

Prodrive does indeed advertise two different HP rating for different octane grades. This is because their Prodrive Performance Package, "PPP", involves an ECU with a different program and higher turbo boost levels (16.5 psi, IIRC). With the increased levels of boost, lower octane gas increases the risk of detonation, so the ECU compensates by retarding the timing and enriching the fuel ratio in relation to air, and I wouldn't doubt less turbo boost pressure, which equals less power.

corkfish

Announced base price is $27,000. If you want all the garbage options, it can go to 35K. My friends said "it would never be less than $30,000". Clueless.

paisan

Try to find one for $27K

-mike