Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
I always was under the assumpion it was thicker, to keep the engine lubricated and protected during all the shipment process. That way when the engine started, it would have oil in all the right places still.
Also, my father just bought a 2000 Mercury Grand Marquis and got similar advice from the dealership ... don't change your oil until you've reached 5,000 miles and then they changed it for free.
I doubt that synthetic can 'cool' an engine better. It's just that the oil can continue to do its job (lubricate, prevent metal-to-metal contact) at higher temps than petroleum ... which boils off or oxidizes and thickens so it won't flow.
--- Bror Jace
One of the many claims made by proponents of synthetic oils is their superior "slipperiness". So, the theory would be that the supposed reduction in friction would result in reduced engine wear. Apparently, that was not true.
Just because you don't like the message doesn't mean the messenger should be condemned. Prove them wrong! Run your own objective test and prove that two engines used identically will end up with different wear based on the oil they use.
Until then, everything is anecdotal at best...
But, if you doubt me about the stuff, their number is 1-800-33Honda, ext: 901
--- Bror Jace
PS: agt_cooper, anectdotal is fine with me. >:^)
I'm still waiting for some tangible verfication that some specially formulated "break-in oil" exists other than the products we get over the counter.
So far, in this discussion, "break-in oil" is simply the first batch of oil that is used in a new car and drained off at the first oil change. Sounds more like Marketing semantics...
I know that some manufacturers are rumored to put synthetic oil in their crank cases at the factory...but since when is synthetic oil "break-in oil"?
It's a shame that no Assembly Plant production workers post here. Then we might be able to find the Truth.
Cold starts wear down the engine. And as everybody knows, 90% of the engine wear occur during the first 5 secs it takes for the oil pump to build up oil pressure.
I hope you won't argue that the synthetics flow extremely well at the cold temps.
On the other hand extensive idling "wears down" oil, not the engine.
1) "And as everybody knows, 90% of the engine wear occur during the first 5 secs it takes for the oil pump to build up oil pressure."
I just love statements like this....where does this figure come from? Oil company advertising? Exactly how is this quantified, and what authoritative body has established these figures. I'm going to take a page from the bblaha playbook and ask you to show me the proof of this figure. (Once I see that, I'll adopt the practice of leaving my car idling overnight so as to avoid 90% of the wear on my engine. That way, I figure I'll never need a new car again!!!)
2) "On the other hand extensive idling "wears down" oil, not the engine"
Again, where do you come up with this stuff? And darn it, now I can't leave my car idling because the oil will wear out....
Can't wait to see the evidence....
Most cabbies don't own their ride, and want to maximize the number of fare-miles per shift. They do this by driving as fast as they can get away with (I've been in cabs that topped 50 on 2nd Ave, for instance), and making sure they're the first guy across the intersection - which means they're frequently treating the gas pedal like an on-off switch.
Call me crazy, but that's just the way I am.
I put "as everybody knows" in intentionally just to steer up dudes like you.
Cool down, reread your last message and try to concentrate on the bigger picture.
And as everybody knows leaving your car idling overnight can provoke some unstable entities to interpret the situation as an invitation to test drive your perfectly maintained vehicle.
Although I personally don't dispute that significant wear occurs on cold start-up, this sure isn't the site to quote to prove that.
I think we were hoping for something more objective. Something along these lines...
http://www.tanair.com/sae2.html
Admittedly this is for aircraft engines, so I don't say that this is definitive for cars.
I find its product testing findings interesting and useful.
But I still believe that their infamous oil test interpretations are flawed and VERY misleading(in my humble opinion).
I'm not a lube engineer and don't have too much of knowledge in that field. I think CR had enough of resources to hire a consultant familiar with the industry, which would have to be able to make their test at least look like a "scientific" one.
Lots of folks on this board are demanding links to the independent test results etc.
If you really wanna get the info - be prepared to pay for that. Oil analysis and testing requires some costly equipment and knowledgeable operators. It just seems that a lot of you wanna obtain some valuable " independent test lab results" free of charge and wonder why they are nowhere to be found.
Enough of CR.
Here is some intresting article on the GM "oil-life" monitoring system.
http://www.practicingoilanalysis.com/results.asp?search=engine+oil
------> GM's Oil-Life System
The first line on the back of the bottle read "100% synthetic*" with that little asterisk after the
word synthetic.
Further down it said " * except for the carrier oil ".
What's with this anyway, I mean there could be 99% carrier oil in that bottle and only 1% syn
and it still wouldn't be misleading advertising.
Are there any Mobil 1 lurkers here that could answer this.
Does amsoil or Redline have any conditions on the back of their tranny oil bottles?
Also saw some Valvoline 5w-30 100% synthetic engine oil going for 19.95 CD. or 12.50 US
for a 5 litre jug or roughly 2.50 US\ 1.1 usa quart.
One question, I see on the Mobil site that they recommend changing oil per manual instructions... obviously a cope-out answer to cover their butts. At the Redline site I believe, they claim up to 15 or 25k per changes.....and I think I read somewhere that synthetics should not be used on a new car until about 8k miles.....how can cars like Porsche ship with synthetic in them? As for changing the oil filters between oil changes, do you guys just change it while engine is cold to reduce oil lost, and add a bit of oil back into the engine?
For those who use those special add-on filters that you add to the oil line and you can change it out/clean it....where can you buy one and is it hard to install? I've read on this board that using one of those filters, you can essentially eliminate changing the regular oil filters (I'm sure no one does this since the filters have components that still break down)?
Thanks.
You can hold your breath and wait for 100% proof if you want but most people, making most decisions in their lives, anectdotal evidence is what they use.
I also think that Consumer Reports gets a little goofy when it comes to cars ... at least they used to. I remember when they put the Acura Integra in the "compact cars" category while some real lame-machines, that the 'Teg would humiliate in a race, in the "sporty car" category. I also remember their general recommendations about which options to get and they did not recommend getting the larger engine ... unless you got AC. This is not wrong, per se, but it's sorta goofy.
I also agree that the taxicab study isn't good as a real-world example for most people. The car's are not what most people drive, infrequent start-ups, etc ...
lov, 'carrier oil' is a trace of conventional oil used in the manufacture of some of the synthetic oil's additives. It's nothing to be concerned about.
luphy, most (including myself) think that you should be sure an engine is thoroughly broken in before switching to the very-slippery, synthetic oils.
The synthetic oil they use in some new cars may be 'enhanced' with a friction modifier at the factory and Mobil has 2 formulas of Mobil 1 5W30 and they don't comment publicly on the 2nd, "GM," formula.
I have never gone more than 8,000 miles on ANY change but if I were to do so, I'd change the filetr with the motor relatively cold and yes, I'd add a 1/3 - 1/2 quart into the motor to make sure it was to the upper mark on the dipstick.
--- Bror Jace
I know it's off-topic, but I just wanted to say that CR's automobile evaluations are definitely not in the mainstream of automotive publications. The things they consider important, and the recommendations they make, are often different from what the reader's priorities are in a vehicle. You just need to understand where they're coming from and not take red "overall score" bars as gospel (i.e. buy whatever vehicle has the "best" "overall score"). The problem is that people will read only surface deep and not take the time to understand the information being presented.
First, if the engine idle starts out lower and drops faster, that would suggest that the oil is creating more resistance in the engine, forcing it to run slower. Further, if the actual temperature is coming up to the normal operating range faster, that would suggest that the engine is producing more heat sooner, possibly as the result of greater friction inside the engine. This theory would be further supported by the fact that it seems your engine is warming faster at lower rpm's, and that only seems possible if engine were producing more heat.
Now, my personal opinion is that all this is nonsense. A little bit of the "placebo effect" in action perhaps....
CR TESTS---yes, right, You DO have to read carefully what the test does and doesn't say. What it says (claims) is that in a 60,000 mile test, synthetic didn't do squat to protect (or damage) engine parts, based on actually measuring engine clearance. Compelling evidence, to say the least, for the 60,000 mile mark. LOTS of tear downs, side by side comparisons.
But it says nothing about 200,000 miles, or extremes of temperature or extremes of rpm, because the test didn't go that far into those parameters.
Running one engine on synthetic alone and then tearing it down unfortunately proves nothing at all except that that engine has such and such wear factors.
Changing filters hot or cold: If filter is vertical-doesn't matter much probably. If not vertical it is probably best to change before drainback valve leaks unfiltered oil back to sump. Probably not a big deal.
Changing before break in: I changed oil in new Sentra at 30 miles to Mobil 1. After 2000 miles oil looks like it was changed yesterday. To the naked eye it has used zero oil. Case closed to me. (also for Porsh,AMG, Viper, Corvette probably others)
Ignore agt_cooper he has a vendetta against syn. IMHO. Other knowledgeable posters here to pay attention to.
Even though I am a regular user of the product, because I don't swoon and swear that synthetic oil is the best thing since sliced bread....
I do not dispute the superiority of the properties of synthetic oil over regular oil, I simply question whether the average driver of the average vehicle reaps any benefit for the added cost. If a rational question like that causes you to recommend that I be ignored, I think it is time to question your motives.
Most of the cars that come from the factory with synthetic already in them are the more expensive cars and their engines are blueprinted to some degree with each getting a lot more individual attention from the builder than say the powerplant in the average Toyota, GM sedan, Ford truck or Hyundai econobox.
agt_cooper, I don't blame people for being skeptical (I think it's healthy) but there comes a point where a preponderance of evidence (yes, it's anectdotal or biased) makes the doubter appear foolish. The placebo effect doesn't account for unintended results. An example would be me changing the oil in a lawn mower to synthetic and then finding that it was much easier to pull-start than before. That was serendipidous.
--- Bror Jace
My gut feeling is that the afore-mentioned Honda just fell into one of the catagories I have experienced in the past. I have a Toyota 2.2 RE engine-theoretically one of the best made. Mine is not one of the best-has always used oil (non-syn break in) Anyway, I didn't really want to recommend to anyone to do what I did. I agree with you it's better to be on the safe side.
Al
However, I do not believe that for the average driver there is any advantage - unless the driver take advantage of changing the oil less often.
If you don't lengthen the change interval beyond what you use for dino oil, and you don't have high heat operating conditions, then using synthetic oil is like a magic charm against alien attacks. It'll work perfectly.
The fact that it is not, disappoints you and causes you to say that there is not "any advantage".
Any A/B side by side comparison indicates performance advantages. If anything, the real disadvantage, while NOBODY wants to say or admit it directly, is the cost.
Without regard to cost, in the best case, say 1 buck a quart each for conventional and synthetic. Which would you pick?
There is no doubt in my mind which one I would take.
Even at 4x the cost there still is no doubt in my mind.
While I do use predominately Mobil One synthetic oil(5-30, 10-30W) with 15k oil change intervals, I have to thank those conventional oil users that use the 3k oil change, for sending my kids to college.
I wonder if they would be able to tell a difference if they changed from brand new conventional oil to brand new synthetic...
And brorjace, anecdotal examples or biased opinions are not evidence. Evidence is the product of hard work. In the case of synthetic oil being superior to conventional for the average driver, the most reasonable way to provide evidence would be a side by side comparison of identical engines in identical cars, driven under identical conditions. NOBODY HAS DONE THAT!!!
So, whether synthetic oil has better properties at the extreme limits of various tests does not necessarily mean that it will outperform conventional oils in the normal operating ranges of today's passenger cars. Moreover, it would have to provide 4 times the protection to justify the price assuming the same change interval.
Now, I know many people state that you can go 15-25,000 between changes with synthetic, but until product manufacturers are willing to put that in writing, I'm not buying it! My experience with my Mazda V-6 was that I went 4,000 miles on the original oil, changed once with conventional oil, then, changed to Mobil 1 @ 8,000 miles. Now, just prior to first changes, I the engine seemed to run a bit noisier, and once the new oil was in, the "new-car" smoothness returned. I expected that with the Mobil 1, the smoothness would last longer, but that has not been the case. As a result, I continue to change the oil every 4,000 miles.
I realize that the sound of the engine (and for that matter, the color of the oil) are not true indicators of the oil's ability to properly do its job. So, it may be that the oil I'm draining out has another 10,000 miles of useful service left. But, lacking any evidence to back that up, I change the oil to be on the safe side. I've also experienced no increase in fuel economy.
So, since you all love anecdotal experiences so much, there are mine! Enjoy!
LOL
Amsoil does place its oil change interval warranty in writing, whether this is good/bad and has ever been tested is a good question. Like most warranties it is probably not worth the paper it is printed on (like Toyota and the sludge issues elsewhere on this board) I think that they at least deserve some credit for having the nerve to place it in writing whereas Mobil says go with the manufacturer and RedLine suggests extended but places nothing in writing.
Alot of you people who wait for a year or two to slip by before you look under your vehicle are asking for trouble.
** Anecdotal examples ARE evidence ... just not the best kind of evidence. Biased opinions are not evidence ... but some test results, even though they are one sided, is another form of less-than-ideal evidence. GOOD tests would be expensive and who would pay for them/conduct them so they wouldn't be tainted in any way?
" ... (synthetic) would have to provide 4 times the protection to justify the price assuming the same change interval."
** Dino oil goes for around $1.50 and synthetic about $4.50 per quart. So, actually about 3 times as much. I increase my change interval about 50% (from 3-4,000 miles to about 5-6,000 miles) with the better oil so the cost difference isn't as great as you say. That additional $10-20 I spend per year on synthetic is cheap insurance for my car's engine. Also, if you figure VERY MODEST gains in mileage, say 1,2 or 3% that cost gap is nonexistent.
** Bror Jace
They all have high quality dino oil available for $1.00 or even less when purchased in 5 quart containers.
We, as a country, are famous (infamous) worldwide for our excess. We buy monstrous SUV's that never see the forest - owners justify this as a form of "insurance" in case the capability is ever needed. We buy insanely fast sports cars that sit in commuter traffic - "insurance" for merging into traffic. We buy a van when we have one child - "insurance" in case we have to take the childs whole room along on a trip. We buy pickups (or Vans) because they can haul a sheet of plywood - and then never buy a sheet of plywood. Many of these vehicles are bought for a situation that could, but may never, arise. They are bought for "insurance"
So in light of people paying thousands of dollars extra in purchase price, and hundreds of dollars per year in fuel costs for many of the vehicles that are on the road - why get up in arms over what - $20 a year more in oil expenses, for a little "insurance" for starting in cold weather. Maybe a little "insurance" on engine wear, or a little protection in extreme heat situations.
People pay $1,000 up front for an auto tranny and they also pay more for fuel - for the convenience (personally I find auto trannys inconvenient) of not having to shift. If this is OK then what is wrong with paying a couple of dollars more and only having to crawl under your car 3-times a year instead of 4.
I use synthetic oil even though I got 180,000 miles out of a Scirocco with conventional oil. I change oil and filter at 5,000 miles instead of 3,000, and in South Dakota when it is -20 or -30 or even a moderate 0 degrees, the engine starts much more easily. I started a car at -35 once that had conventional oil - you don't ever want to hear that painfull sound. In the summer when it is over 100 degrees out (we get both extremes of temp here) and I am driving 80-85 mph (75 mph speed limit here) on the highway, the A/C is on full, and the car is loaded with my wife, 3 kids and luggage, I am happy to have the extra "insurance" of synthetic.
A couple of dollars a year is not much of a price to pay for a little "insurance", especially in light of what some of us have already paid with our choice of vehicle.
So the idea that somehow your engine is "more protected" against overheating, or that you can extend your oil changes to VERY LONG intervals----maybe that's not such a good assumption to make, just based on what you read from prejudiced (by that I mean "financially interested") parties.
At least it is worth questioning and investigating, since with a modern car, when you lose the engine, you basically have lost the car.
I would take a wild guess and say that maybe 1% percent of folks actually run synthetic oil. In any case, it is a MINORITY position, and as such, can have tough uphill sledding.
The number/percentages are growing slowly however, of note, by manufacturers using it as factory fill and recommending a standard that the synthetic meets.
(anti trust law prohibits a brand REQUIREMENT unless it is being provided.)
To name a few: MB, BMW, Corvette, Porsche, and I apologize if I forgot any. (too many cars to drive, sooooo little time).
Even our august host, Shifty, whose esteemed car knowledge is beyond question, would not go past say 5-6k MAX on a high quality conventional oil. And to tell you the truth, I do not blame him, nor would I.
Currently, of note, I am running I 6 engines (a fav in some circles) with 245k, 115k, 84k, with 15k synthetic oil intervals.
I know my engine rebuilder hates me, but what I am saying is not only do I have faith in it, I also do it.
Perhaps the skeptics should use the consumer available "oil trend test" product, which is a bit like a engine urine test. Tinkle in a cup and send away for the results.
The truth of the matter is that the conventional oil users would ALSO benefit from the same analysis, BUT dare I say it is not considered cost effective. So to wit it is a matter of PERCEIVED higher synthetic cost. However in the longer term analysis, it is far cheaper amoung other performance advantages.
I readily concede that synthetic oil has superior properties in many areas. I simply question whether today's cars driven under normal circumstances ever benefit from those capabilities. I have no quibble with anyone who wants to use synthetics (as I do). However, when those people make recommendations that could negate warranty protections or damage engines, I think its time to call foul!!
And Dudleyr, I agree wholeheartedly that American's are kings of excess! Wouldn't it be nice if someone could prove conclusively and objectively that synthetic oils could safely extend oil change intervals to 25,000 miles. Think of the oil we could conserve!!
The last time I looked in Walmart, dino oil was between $1.18 and $1.45 per quart except for sales, gallon jugs and Mobil which may be priced closer to an even $1.00.
Synthetic is usually $4.24-4.49 per quart, sometimes $3.99 per quart or even cheaper in the large jugs.
Dudleyr, you bring up some really good points and comparisons. How typical of Americans to be penny wise and pound foolish.
Saturday night, a good friend of mine told me what happened to a car (my old '90 Integra) I sold his wife several years ago. The summer before last, she drove from Long Island, NY to Albany, NY (4 hours or so) with the oil filler cap off. Upon arriving home, she complained to him of the strong smell of burning oil. When my friend checked the car, he saw what had happened and found that the oil wasn't even showing on the dipstick. He figured the crankcase was completely dry. The oil he used? Mobil 1 10W30. He filled it back up and the car still runs great today ... with a total of 163,000 miles on it. >:^)
--- Bror Jace
But here it's anyway:
http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/cgi-bin/n.cgi?net8&html&box&noframes
Enjoy.
If you do not see longer drain intervals resulting in CONSERVATION of oil as an advantage or BENEFIT as YOU say; and are not willing to do it, what can I say! TALK is very cheap.
Synthetic oil to me, gives me performance advantages and oh bye the way, conserving oil IS a performance advantage.
My assumption is you're using this example to show the superiority of synthetics over dino oil. Now, to the best of my knowledge, not even the sleaziest of oil peddlers would claim that synthetics will prevent an engine from seizing when all the oil drains out.
But here you go, implying that in this instance, synthetics saved the day! First, just because no oil shows on the dipstick does not mean the crankcase is empty! Second, there is absolutely nothing here to suggest that the exact same scenario couldn't have occurred with dino oil!
It's like saying "Well, the day I got hit by that semi, I had just finished eating a Snicker's bar, so Snicker's bars can prevent serious injuries in a crash." Totally ludicrous!!!
If we're to have any hope of continuing a maningful debate, throwing in meaningless nonsense like that story should cease.