Did you recently rush to buy a new vehicle before tariff-related price hikes? A reporter is looking to speak with shoppers who felt pressure to act quickly due to expected cost increases; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com for more details by 4/24.
that fleetwood posed in #3199. I am very curious to hear responses to this one. I suppose I could just go with Sheaffer's oil and not worry about needing extra additives, but I'm a creature of habit and I've never seen Sheaffer's on the shelf at any of the local discount stores or auto parts stores that I visit regularly.
I am NOT an engineer, just a guy who will be buying 2 new vehicles soon, both 4cyl(Honda CR-V & ALTIMA). In simple terms, should I start using synth oils right away? Will it make ANY difference? I have never had engine problems before with regular oil so why switch now? Just looking for non technical info. Thanks.
More is not necessarily better. Moly has been linked to excessive corrosion. And you have to be careful with the zddp with the phosphorus/cat/con. although it appears those present values are conservative..Besides there may be negative reactions to the rest of the additive package.
Armtdm though makes a good point. Perhaps the best way to go, instead of willy/nilly adding extra stuff, is to find an oil that could care less about API. Perhaps they are more interested in the durability of the engine. Amsoil/Redline offer the most hope- but I still lean toward the PAO vs the Ester. The SuperSyn of Mobil could be a slam dunk-we'll see. I'm certain that they will publish their "breakthrough" in the SAE.
Just added the Lubeguard to the Mobil 1. It is a Liquid Wax Ester derived from "various seed sources" It is supposed to reduce oxidation by 30%, sludge by 60%, and metal wear by 50% compared to GM Factory fill (Dextron III). Since I am already using Mobil 1 ATF I'm really not sure of the benefits. I guess P. T. Barnum would love me.
phillyguy3 I went with the Mobil 1 at 30 miles (2L Sentra). Now at over 16K it uses zero oil. I changed 4K ago and the oil level may have dropped 1/16 inch- still very clean. That 2.5L -Altima may have some issues. I've heard problems here-mainly oil burning. If you go with it I would immediately switch.
On the engine make sure you use an SL fluid during the guarantee period. After that you can go to a higher ZDDP formulation if you wish. The converters shouldn't have changed to the cheap 2004 standard yet. I would put in an SL synthetic after the first recommended oil change on the severe schedule.
Honda transmissions are a weak point in an otherwise almost perfect car. If you're using automatic, find out what it uses. Lubegard has a new additive that turns ordinary Dexron III into Dexron V.
Honda uses its own transmission fluid, and it is highly friction modified. It may already be synthetic. Lubegard has an additive to turn ordinary Dexron into a highly modified one.
Regardless, on a Honda, I would do a drain and fill every 15K to be safe. Done that on my Dad's Taurus, a model famous for really bad transmissions, and it's been OK to 90,000 miles. Nissan Auto trannies are known to be fussy too.
I credit Lubegard transmission fluid with saving at least 4 transmissions that started having trouble on my, or relatives vehicles. Personally I'll always use it in any car I drive, even new.
I received about 8 TSB's from manufacturers that used various Lubegard products, including Volvo Subaru, Saab, Hundai, KIA and Ford to quiet transmission noises and improve shifting. When they say they are manufacturer recommended, it's the truth. At least in the transmission area. I checked Saab's and Ford's and they are valid, so I have no reason not to trust the others.
ADC100 -- while I love it for transmissions, what is your experience with Lubegard in engines. I put some in recently in my Subaru. Within a couple of weeks the oil was a lot darker. Still feels smooth however, so I'm keeping it in for the usual duration. I'm a little worried about it because I'm used to synthetics being pretty clear for most of the 6K interval I keep it in. I'll be changing it in a couple of weeks after a Sedona AZ trip.
one of the mobil diesel oils has moly (don't remember which)... now, with the lowering of the zddp levels, they may start using an alternative way which may not be evident on an oil analysis sheet. This is why I use the timken machine, it can't hide if it is to reduce wear metals.
as for lubegaurd, i may have to go get one of those additives and play with it to see if it does reduce friction/wear. as for the reduction on oxidation, oil analysis should report the numbers to you and be able to see that.
Interesting thing, there is some additives called lucas and of course slick 50, both of which i expected some reduction on friction as claimed in the ad's. niether one did anything when applied on this machine. slick50, sheared right out. lucas is a heavy bright stock oil that really clings and i really expected some results on that and it too sheared right out.
Stp on the other hand, whew, it's loaded with zddp and plated right up.
schaeffers has a moly additive which i don't normally tell people about since i don't believe in making chicken shxx into chicken salad. goto my web page, on the tech data sheets, look up # 132 moly ep additive. I will say this stuff does work.
Schaeffers has reps all over the country but there is some small stores that do carry the schaeffers but not major parts houses due to they(schaeffers) won't do any kind of infomercial. I myself have about 5 little guys retailing alot of the schaeffers oils, but most of my clients are end users at coporate accounts much like most reps do and is the reason you don't see it just anywhere.
adc, actually, too much of any kind of barrier lubricant can cause high oxidation levels due to the fact it overtakes the antioxidents and detergents thus not allowing them to do thier job. This is very common in race oils and in some of the reports i have seen on redline, it too seems to experience this. basicly, it shortens your oil drain cylce and is not good for extended drains but if done that way can cause damage as you suggested.
I haven't used it in my engine. I really don't intend to bc. I think the Mobil is adequate. As far as the Lubeguard. ..Philyguy3 should be aware of the fact that the additive to upgrade to the Honda fluid is a separate additive. Just wanted to emphasize that fact.
Ok i have a 2.0 litre chevy tracker "1999" i have been using mobil1 5w30 for a while now, but since all this talk about amsoil. I decided to try them out. So i bought amsoils' (0w30) oil. they claim it is their best. it isnt api cert. but here is my question/ statement. ok after putting in the amsoil 0w30 weight and using their filter. i noticed my tracker starts easlier and I mostly noticed how fast it drops in idle when i start it from a cold start. can a oil really do that much.? i mean i was already using Synthetic oil.. ok one last thing. when i poured the amsoil into my engine it flowed like water, it that a good thing or a bad thing. i mean it drained right out of the container, and i didnt have to sit there forever to wait until it all dripped out. ALL btw i ALMOST forgot to mention. i did do the AMSOIL engine flush b4 i installed their oil. my engine has 40k on it.
I have a new 01 Altima w/4-cyl that used some oil by first 10K miles. Switched from 5W30 oil to 10W30 and the oil consumption slowed way down. That was 6K miles ago on reg oil. Plan to switch to a 10W30 syn blend at the next oil change. Switched my used Maxima to full syn at 30K after I bought it. 1st time I've ever used syn oil. May be my imagination, but I'd swear the engine runs smoother, quieter, and starts easier. Both Nissans are great cars too!
There are a lot of old "wives tales" about synthetic oils hanging around the motorcycle industry. I'll try to give you a little history of how they got started and why they are simply not true today. When synthetic base oils first came out over 20 years ago, the detergency additives that were in the new synthetic oils were so much better than the detergency additives that were being used in the straight petroleum oils at that time. This caused all sorts of weird problems to show up when people would change to the new synthetic base oil when there was a lot of preexisting sludge and carbon left in their engine from the weaker detergency additives in the old petroleum base oils. The new synthetic oils would breakup and loosen all this old preexisting sludge and carbon buildup, and it would start floating around in the engine causing all kinds of problems. The first synthetic oils also caused engine seals to swell and leak and the new synthetic oils would sometimes attack and react negatively with the gaskets in the engine. There was a lot to learn about blending and using synthetic oils, and the oil manufacturers soon realized what the problems were and re-blended the synthetic base oils to be compatible with the engine seals and gaskets. The oil producers also started using better detergency additives in the petroleum oils, so there wouldn't be this problem of breaking up the old preexisting sludge and carbon when customers changed over to synthetic oils. The problems were all cured after just a few years, BUT the rumors and old wives tales persist about the "evils" of using synthetic base oils in automobiles and motorcycles.
The reason you want to "break-in" a new motor with a petroleum base oil, is because the synthetic oils are so much better as a metal wetting agent, they sometimes retard the process of rings seating properly. The material that was used to make rings over 20 years ago, would require several thousand miles to allow the rings to seat properly. Today, the material used to make rings, allows the rings to seat properly after only about 200 to 500 miles at the most. After that, using 100% synthetic oil in motorcycle, (or automobile), engines is a great idea. The engine will run cooler with synthetic oil, the synthetic oil will resist breakdown at higher operating temperatures for a much longer period of time, allowing the oil to stay in viscosity grade longer. Synthetic oil will hold contaminates in suspension longer and reduce any oxidation, and offer increased high-load capacity, offering increased engine protection to critical engine parts. The better cold flow characteristics of 100% synthetic oil will protect the engine at startups better, and the oil change interval can be extended 3, 4 or in some cases 5 times as long. Why would anyone not want those benefits for their motorcycle, (or automobile), engine?
While we are on the subject of oil changes with 100% synthetic base oils, everyone should remember that even though the "oil" can stay in the engine many times as long, the oil "filter" still needs to be changed at the same regular manufacturer recommended intervals. The oil filter is what cleans the contaminates out of the oil. Important point to remember when changing the oil filter while leaving the synthetic oil in the engine; DON'T forget to top off the oil level, (replace what oil is lost when changing the oil filter).
The problem with the motorcycle wet clutches, when using automobile synthetic oils, is caused by slippery agents that are added to "automobile" synthetic oils. The new reformulated gasoline that the US Government has been mandating, caused a loss in gas mileage for automobiles. Great, we have "better" gasoline, but now we have to burn a lot more of it. The automobile manufacturers started leaning on the oil companies to add more and more slippery agents to the oils, to try and recover some of this lost gas mileage. These slippery agents that have been added to "Automobile" Synthetic oils, are very bad for motorcycle wet clutches. These agents will cause the wet clutches to "plate-out", and start slipping and have a greatly reduced life span.
Most all motorcycle oil manufacturers now use "Motorcycle Specific" oil additive packages to cure this potential problem. The motorcycle OEM manufacturers have their own oil specifications now, The JASO Motorcycle 4T Specifications. There is JASO-MA spec, (the Best), and JASO-MB spec, (the Good). All good motorcycle oils should now say: "motorcycle specific", and refer to one of these new OEM JASO specifications, MA or MB.
Another part of the automobile manufacturers "request" of the oil manufacturers, was to greatly reduce the zinc, phosphorus, and other extreme pressure additives from the oil. These items were contaminating their catalytic converters over a long period of time and the Government was after them to warrantee the converters for 100,000 miles at the very least. These extreme pressure additives are the safety net in the motorcycle engines. The higher rpm's of the motorcycle engines, the higher operating temperatures, and the scant amount of oil in the motorcycle engine as compared to the virtual ocean of oil in the standard automobile engine, will cause premature failure to motorcycle cam lifters and followers. The latest automobile oil specification, API-SJ, should not be used in motorcycle engines at all, and the next API specification coming out next year, (GF-3, API-SL), will be even worse for premature motorcycle engine wear, and for motorcycle wet clutches.
It turns out that our Maxima "Motorcycle Specific" 100% synthetic oil is great for automobile engines as well. We have been sponsoring a NASCAR team this last year and their engine builder has told us that not only did our Maxima Motorcycle Specific 100% Synthetic Oil perform great, they saw an "increase" in horsepower using our oil on their dyno, and after a few races when they took the engine apart for routine maintenance, they told us that they had never seen a race engine that clean inside. I guess it just goes to prove again, "You get what you pay for!"
Bob is the oil guy! So Bob, you've been holding out on us! Down there in your oily lab, hunched over your own personal Falex Pin machine busily shear testing out all the oils mentioned under the full moon. Busily grinding up test pins, using all the Syn-Lubes, and Lord knows what else you have been torturing in your '4-Ball machine. Do I read this correctly, you are a distributor for Schaeffers Oil Products? Most of the main 'posters' on this site are secret Amsoil Guys, glad you have come out of the Lab, Bob, now please tell me what I need to know to cure my sleepless nights. How do the all major Syn's hold up under your torture tests. I have read and re-read your 'shear test' report, and I think the bottom line was...Schaeffers out performed them all? How about the Falex Pin test for friction? It is obvious that the Oilcan Companies are not going to tell us..so Bob, the Can is in your Court.
I don't see why there would be any diference between the Amsoil and Mobil 1. I have used both and saw no difference. There is no reason for the Idle to increase with an oil as it is controlled by the ECU.
I have the 0W30 Amsoil in one car and quite honestly, I didn't notice the difference in the flow out of the bottle compared to the 10W30 I use in other cars. In fact, compared to the Wal Mart full synthetic 10W30 I use in my lawn mower, now that stuff really flows like water.
Anyway, I have used the 0W30 in one car for about two years now, change in once a year (only 8-10,000 miles/year) and filter at 6 months. Analysis fine.
At 40,000 miles, unless your engine was really dirty I guess I would not have used the Amsoil flush. I have switched cars at 30,000, 49,000 and 57,000 and never used the flush. that stuff kind of scares me but it seemed to work for you.
didnt you see how fast the 0w30 pours out of the container.? omg it was very noticable to me and my buddy. Now with my engine maybe it is more senitive to thinner oilers or something, it is foreign. cause with the 0w30 it is very noticable it almost seems more responsive. but as i said i also did that engine flush too.
Longo, I see no one is going to get anything by you, you sly dog, anyway, yes, I am a manufactures rep for Schaeffers down here in florida. Yes, I have a big aquisition of all the different types of oils, and yes, I put them all through the shear tests since that IS my most important concern (wear). If an oil won't impress me there, then I go no farther to see how well it's going to last because it got to protect before i would use it and i could care less as to how well the oil will maintain it's life if no wear protection.
I have tried my best not to "push" any product nor hammer any ones choice of what they like, thats why I have always tried to do nothing more than educated on the basic priciples. As some of you just read from someone trying to educate people on why oils can be used or cannot be used in certain applications, i can understand why so much confusion exists in this subject, as what they were talking about was off base in alot of points.
In respect to edmunds board, I try not to use this as a forum to "promote" schaeffers. Now to answer your questions on how it holds up on the tests I have performed.
I have put every major brand of oil on the falex, everyone of the oils including schaeffers will shear through the actual base oil or should I say the hydrodynamic film that everyone keeps comparing and worrying on how good it is.
My first step is to establish wear protection. If a base oil film can keep the falex from stopping the two surfaces from touching, I'm all for it because that would be the best lubrication possible, unfortunatly, the real world applications dictate that for every action there is an = reaction, so when the force is applied, the base oil will part allowing the two surfaces to connect. Again, all oils that I have done this with will do this including Schaeffers.
Now, giving the oil a chance to "plate" up or "bond" to the surfaces, I then apply a simple force to see the amount of pressure required to shear through the boundary additives that are there to protect as the last line of defense. As pointed out before, this is where I expect a difference since the film strength is of no use in an open system it cant withstand the pressure thus squeezing out.
Now, understand that even barrier lubricant additives can and do shear out also. Some quicker than others.
The main ones I have experimented with is zddp found in all oils but heavier in some than others, mos2 or moly, Ptfe or tephlon.
When I plate up the machine and it is spinning and cannot be sheared while the bearing is still in the oil bath. I will shut it down, pull the little pan, dry off all parts, bearing and pin, then without any lubrication at all, I will restart and apply pressure without any lubricants at all. Now in this instance, this simulates a dry start. Figure that any oil will after a period of time drain off any vertical surface like around the piston and such. The boundary lubricant doesn't drain as for it is attached by either plating or bonding to the surface. kinda like what some of you want to belive the synth's base oil does(but can't).
alright, no oil, dry and now I reapply pressure. In my findings, Ptfe takes an extreme amount of time and heat to first plate up.. in further investigation, I have found it will also attack yellow metals due to its cloric nature simular to clorox bleach. This is why you won't see ptfe in any api certified motor oil. quaker state ownes penzoil and slick50 and if it was able to be certified don't you think they'd had it in there by now if they could?.. anyway,next
zddp's- such as the amounts in amsoil... plates up in a reasonable time, and does a decent job of protecting, but... with just a little more force than normal, it will shear right out quick. I also tried this while the oil is even still on the bearing and able to replace what is being sheared but still cannot maintain enough on there to protect and will shear out.
moly.. common in redline,schaeffers,petromoly, and a few others, once plated up, oil removed and parts dried, you can apply a tremendous amount of force and will find that it will maintain. Depending on the amount of time you were to allow the oil to bond up, will effect the amount of time to shear through this. In minamal amount of times, it will take at least 45-60 secs to break through and lock up the wheel. ( more than enough time for oil to get back to the parts and replenish what has been sheared off, especially in dry start situations.)
I will say also that I have plated up the machine with these barrier lubes and walked away, comming back another day, and try to shear the dry wheel, and with little effort succeded on all but the moly. In fact, I had found that it bonds into the metal surfaces. Ok, I know you say that can't happen, well first, I have some interesting info for you techy types on moly on my site (STATES of LUBRICATION) that will explain.
Let me explain one other thing that takes this further to support why moly holds up better. Moly becomes active when heated. Where friction exists on two metal surfaces, the metal will expand. moly will plate into and on to the surface with approx 39plates. like magnets in a box, pick one up only so many will attach and not the whole box of magnets. since heat is what moly will plate to, when it gets to 39 plates, the heat is reduced to such a level that it no longer activates the suspended moly but when sheared down new plated replenish it. This keeps moly from building up in any one area. Anyway, when I come back to the dried bearing 2 days later, The machine is cold like in a dry start situation, I find it near impossible to shear it down with out haveing to use sandpaper. Since both surfaces pin and bearing, are plated, and the moly is impregnated in the cold contracted metal surface it requires a ruff surface to tear it up.
Plating on the other hand, is nothing more than coating the surface and actually has some but very little bond effect so it has never proven to me to hold up as well.
As a barrier lubricant, I agree that amsoil is better than most about providing protection due to the higher levels of zddp(along with diesel oils). But in my book, any soluble moly oil has a much greater affinity to the metal and maintains a much better level of protection.
Stp, does real well on this test. Lucas, It showed NO levels at all of resisting shearing, fact is, I suspect it has no barrier lube properties at all and is nothing more than a bright stock oil that will make an oil climb.
anyway that is the short of basic barrier lube additive application.
After having tested the barrier lube properties then I move to oil analysis and determine how the base oil holds up. This is where I decieded that Schaeffers had an edge over alot of them.
Redline uses a higher level of both zddp and moly. when experimenting with it, I had found that it ran a higher level of oxidation reading. I h
I had found that it ran a higher level of oxidation reading. I suspect it is caused by the fact that when balancing additives out, to much of one thing can effect another additives capablility to perform since it was higher in barrier additives the detergents and antioxidants had a much harder time in fighting the acids causing higher levels.
In schaeffers case,Blends of 25 to 28%pao, I have seen extended drains with no filter changes as high as 20,000 miles in a gas engine and 40-50,000 miles on diesel engines. In one case 80,000 miles. Of course every oil analysis is going to be different depending on the situations. I'm conservative so I never go over 12,000 miles on my own car.
anyway, you now know some of the stuff I have done to find my way to where i'm at. BTW, I started using Schaeffers over 7yrs ago. This is longgggg before I actually got involved with them on a distribution level.
Two posts ago, you said "...in my book, any soluble moly oil has a much greater affinity to the metal and maintains a much better level of protection. Stp, does real well on this test."
When you say "Stp" are you talking about some sort of STP engine oil additive, or actually STP brand engine oil?
they are giving a $12 rebate if u use Castrol Syntec.....hmmmm....
for my car i need 5 quarts of oil. 4x$4.5 = $18 less refund = $12
So I get 5 quarts of Syntec oil for $6. Not bad. Especially if Mobil1 is also going the Castrol way and using hydrocracked "synthetic" and still charge $4.5 for it.
SuperSyn, a proprietary patented technology of ExxonMobil, is a high-viscosity PAO typically used at low treat rates to balance the viscometrics, shear stability and low temperature properties of a lubricant. Its viscosity ranges between 150 to 3,000 cSt at 100° C, and it mixes completely with conventional PAOs, esters and mineral oils. Used in engine oils, automatic transmission fluids, gear oil greases, hydraulic oils and other specialized applications, SuperSyn has the following features: A viscosity index that is 35-40 units higher compared to conventional PAOs of the same viscosity grade. A pour point that is 10-20° C lower than conventional PAOs of the same viscosity grade. An increase of Synergistic VI when blended with mineral and synthetic base stocks. A high viscosity with good ambient fluidity.
I was reffering to the STP engine oil additive. It appears to be loaded with zddp for antiwear protection.
yes I tested mobil as well.
no, it didn't stand up to the boundary test any better than other "synths" that were not mentioned previously.
Let me state that obviously it is not a true scientific test in what i have done but a way for me to see for myself how it would hold up under the extreme conditions i set forth for the oil.
OMG! I didn't write a book this time! must be losing my touch. thank goodness for that.
Where did you get the info on the new SuperSyn? It sounds like Mobil may be onto something here....they may be actually getting better instead of worse like all of the other oils....
Well, after all the agonizing over the various chemical and molecular properties of everyones favorite $ynthetic Oil on this site, seems ol' Bob down in his Oil Torture Chamber has answered the question we should be more concerned about. " What happens to your engines moving surface parts, on start up, and under extreme heat and load?" Seems that the various mechanical tests that the Oil Companies don't want you to see, would show that the current crop of high priced premadonnas of the Synthetic Lube Industry, might not be worth the extra $$$$. I for one think that a high priced synthetic lube, loaded with additives, should be nearly indestructible in the Falex Pin and V Block test, and ol' Bobs' other nasty testing apparatus. Well, BAD NEWS, seems it isn't ,so who the hell wants to leave it in the engine for extended drains? We might all be better advised to spend extra bucks for the best oil filter we can put on the motor, Mobile 1, Pure one, or Hastings, for example, and stick to factory recomended changes with the new and improved crop of cheaper dino Oil. Bob, thanks again for letting us peek over your shoulder.
The API sequence tests are really a measure of the severe conditions an oil is likely to see in the harsh environment of an engine. While I applaud and admire Bob for taking the initiative and posessing the intelectual curiosity to make judgements on a product, these tests don't tell the whole story. I think Bob would even agree with that.
The question is: does the product hold up with a measure of reserve as it fulfills its desired function? If the oil can win the Indy 500 and then have the engine torn down and say that this engine can go another race without rebuilding- Isn't that a reasonable validation that the oil will more than hold up for the consumer? Or If the oil can be changed every 15K and after 200K the engine has almost no wear- isnt that a reasonable standard?
Asking it another way: Would you choose an oil based on the above two examples or the Pin and V Block Test?? Also I should point out that the oil which passes the tests that Bob does may very well have the ability to do the things I mentiones.
Hey its early-might as well start stirring the pot, Later-Al
Well, I am not sure a great filter makes any difference any more, seems if you cut one open 99.9% of the time it is basically clean, at least to the eye. Did the Toyota sludged engines have filters that were plugged up or using bypass mode only, I don't think so. Oil was filtered but the sludge was there anyway.
So, change every 3000 using the cheapest SL crap on the market and Fram fitler and you will get 100,000 + miles, no problem. All depends on comfort level, level of hassle one is willing to assume for frequent changes and what "YOU" feel works best for you. Like most things in life, there is no right answer.
Yes, with all the seq tests done by the lubrication industry they are presenting a "reasonable" wear protection. no argument there.
Yes, there is more to the oil than that of just my little timken test that I do, as I pointed out in my prev post, That was my first test I wanted to see hold up to MY "reasonable" wear protection test (if you consider that 30k mile piston bearing wear reasonable). Then I moved on to oil and additive durabliltiy by running in the engines and doing oil analysis to make those determinations.
Why did I do all that? Cause the internet and advertising campains are so full of misguided information now aday's such as someone posted on my board made this claim
and I quote "no other additive can surpass the performance of Greased Lightning. ANd meets the manufacturers specifications for most all vehicles as listed on the bottle. Independent test prove GL instant engine treatment Dramatically reduces engine wear, and Improves fuel mileage."
PLEASEEEEE, give me a break!
It's amazing all the "hype" involved. Look at amsoil, all thier marketing hype. even quakerstate says we'll give u 250,000 mile engine warr.
So who the heck am I going to believe? Since I personally don't know nor can relate to how much is reasonable wear with thier tests, I do my own in addition to thier tests and try to come up with a rounded conclusion for myself. All factors wiegh in for my decision including but not limited to how long a company has been in business and what kind of BS ad's they run to get consumers to think that the oil they are actually using in a $250,000 race car engine, is actually going to be the same oil on the auto parts shelf. I think not. They are different, in fact.. There is a lot of racers that use a different oil but sold ad space on thier cars. That is how they pay for thier sport. Even Schaeffers has a car they sponsor and has to pay for the ad placement on the car, difference is, they actually are using our race oil which I would NEVER use in my car since it is totally different blend and will not provide enough protection for my engine. Oh, that's right, race oil's have a much lesser degree of detergents and antioxidant additives thus the tbn's are much less than conventional oils therefore must not be run as long as standard motor oils.
So, as you can see, I put a lot of effort into understanding lubrication. Fact is, there is very few lubrication salesmen out here that have a clue as to why they are better or not. Most sell on brand name or price alone and nothing more. I have been there when a penzoil salesman came in and stated to the owner," what are you paying for your oil and I'll beat his price". If all a person is interested in price and not protecting his equipment then I move on since I only want customers that want less work and longer productivity with less downtime which saves them more money in the overall than just the short term savings on a qt of oil.
Needless to say, I do have the mobil salesman mad at me on one account because once my customer became educated on how all thier greases were holding water and washing out, his line was dropped. His(mobil guy) name for me is SCARE TACTIC bob. I LOVE IT!.
However, I use Schaeffers motor oil and I don't need to add anything to it. A relative of mine wants to continue using Mobile 1. Could he use Schaeffers moly ep additive (No. 132) added to the Mobile 1 and benefit from it without harming anything? After all, I figure the company sees some marketing benefit for it somewhere. At long last, we have the several postings of yours giving us more actual useful information than I have seen in reading most of the postings. Thank you for responding to the inquirer, which led to the several lengthy and informative writings of yours. TerryharrisII
armtdm'..I think that original quote was from a guy who couldn't decide between between a blond and a brunette. It would make an interesting new topic, but, as for what is the best MOTOR OIL to dump into my vehicles private parts, with 'Bobstheoilguy' recently sharing the results of some his oil torture experiments, I can now sleep at nights. (with my brunette)
That additive is a soluble moly additive which is already in the schaeffers oil but also it is a viscosity improver. This will enhance the viscosity and barrier lube properties of any oil. By increaseing the VI's, it will affect the actual viscosity of the original base oil. It looks like a green version of STP's oil treatment. I have never seen it seperate and completely blends into what ever it is put in.
I normally don't recommend it to people that use anything other than schaeffers,.. not that it won't work, on the contrary it does, but I hate to see people trying to make chicken salad out of chicken shxx oil.
This additive is designed for smoking engines but will also provide the extra protection for wear if someone is looking to increase that. I have used it to see how it affects the oil and I will say it makes a difference. I have put this in engines that tick, smoke,low oil pressure, and normal running and it has in made a difference in every case.
Purchased another Technical Paper online from the SAE. This one deals with the development and testing of the latest generation of Delvac 1 5W-40 which is intended for diesel engines. It gives a real good perspective of what tests are run and the results of the product compared to the standard. If you know nothing about the subject you will walk away with a good sense of the testing and certification process.
This oil has been tested with drain intervals of 100K and even though the oil reserviors are huge that is counterbalanced by the amount of soot the oil must deal with. This oil would be the ultimate to run in a passanger car except for the .15% zinc which may be too high for the cat conv.
The article is $10 for 16 pages, including title page and bibliography. and can be downloaded immediately. I think these papers are a way for the consumer to get the most reliable technical information available about a specific product and at the same time take your knowledge about lubrication to a higher level.
Do a search by using "synthetic" and the article in question is "2000-01-1993 Performance of an Advanced Synthetic Diesel Engine Oil" BTW if you scroll down the list of articles - "981444-Advanced Synthetic Passenger Vehicle Engine Oils for Extended Oil Drain Performance" is short (12 pages) but good.
I use Delvac 1 in my VW TDI diesel. I have contemplated, however using it in other vehicles. I have long suspected that it had a much better additive package than the standard synthetics. It may not cause problems with the cat converters because Mobil states that it can be used in gas engines as well. I'll have to check out that publication from SAE....
I bought a jug of synthetic blend Quaker State 4X4 Mercon V rated tranny fluid. It comes in a deluxe looking clear plastic bottle. It is expensive. Any opinions on this product out there?
I use Amsoil ATF and have for many many years. It is about $6-$7/quart. Of course I swear by it but curious as to what you call expensive. Compared to the dino ATF out there for $1-$1.99 yea, very expensive.
Okay guys! Here is a challenge. I'm not going to reveal the name of this oil, or where I got the data...just yet. It's not hard to figure out anyway. What I'm interested in knowing is your "unbiased" opinion of this synthetic blend oil before you know it's brand name. So what do you make of this 5W-20 oil based on the following?
SAE Grade 5W-20
API Service SJ / EC Gravity, ºAPI 35.0 Specific Gravity, @ 60ºF (15.5ºC) 0.852 Density, lb/gal 7.10 Flash Point, COC, ºF(ºC) 365(185) Viscosity: cSt @ 40ºC 49 cSt @ 100ºC 8.8 Viscosity Index 161 HT/HS Viscosity, cP @ 150ºC 2.65 Pour Point, ºF(ºC) -49 (-45) Sulfated Ash, Wt. % 0.94 Total Base Number (TBN) 7.5 ASTM Color 4.0
I'll guess its Mootcraft since you were looking for those specs.
Can't make any opinions based on this blend other that it does have pretty good low temp properties. Where all blends and petroleum base stocks fall short is the high temperature department (note the low flash point). Only synthetic oils can give the reserve protection in the ugly world of "oh darn my engine is overheating as I'm sitting here in traffic and its 95 degrees outside"
Gee, I've been away too long. Actually, I've been "lurking" but haven't had time to log-in and post.
I'll stick up for RobistheLubeDude once again. I don't think he is here to sell. For the amount of oil most of us would buy, it would not be worth his trouble to get it to us, I'd guess. In one discussion about grease, he even suggested one of us buy a comparable competitor's product which could be sourced locally.
From what Bob's been saying, motor oil has principally two components: the base oil and the additive package. No matter how "good" the base oil is, it can only do so much to provide a hydrodynamic cushion between metal parts. Once stressed (perhaps high-RPM operation and/or severe loads such as towing), that liquid will be squeezed out and the only thing left to prevent wear are the anti-wear agents in the oil usually ZDDP and (in rare cases) molybdenum. When you are paying extra for synthetic, all you are getting is an oil that will flow under extreme conditions. It flows better in bitter cold, it resists thinning at high temps and won't oxidize and thicken over long periods of time giving you a tenny bit better mileage. BUT, it won't necessarily protect against wear any better than a dino oil if the additive package is weak (which is my theory about the SJ Mobil 1 Tri-Synthetic). And this protection is what most of us look for in a motor oil.
Of course, the additive package has more in it than anti-wear agents but I think most of us assume the anti-oxidant and detergent/dispersant package of all SJ and newer oils is at least competent. This is why I find Bob's adventures with his little snake oil tester very interesting. While all lab tests fail to duplicate real-world experiences, I think a lot can be learned from them and in this case, they seem to be testing the most important aspect of the lubricants.
I try to realize the limitations to looking at spec sheets and judging an oil solely on that but it isn't very impressive. As adc100 points out, that flash point isn't terribly impressive, it's TBN is less than 10 and nowhere is there listed the amount of zinc phosphate. <:^(
One last comment, I saw someone say a couple dozen posts ago that we were "all a bunch of Amsoil guys" and that's just silly. There is only one regular here that is a loyal Amsoil user and he will criticize them over a few things. I use Red Line but realize it is prohibitively expensive for most folks so I rarely recommend it. The rest of the people are split among a handful of mass-market brands if they use synthetic at all. If these maintenance threads were just a bunch of guys blindly loyal to one brand or another who bicker back and forth, I would have left long ago. >;^)
I actually don't like to try and sell to individuals since I don't make much of anything here unless they do a min order and I really don't see many people doing that.Even on my web board do you see me pushing schaeffers? I try not to, although it comes up as a subject i don't say go and get schaeffers, i have always tried to suggest things off the shelf if possible or included other specialized oils such as rp, redline and such when mentioning schaeffers.
A while back I indicated I had something to put a twist into this subject about synth oils. That is where I was going.to bring out the importaint issues and the main one is wear. Listening to most of this topic has been on the base oil and it's ability to last longer than any other. As stated before, I'd change mine more often (if I had to) if i got less wear from a cheap base oil than a good oil that lasted forever but didn't reduce wear.
Oh, before I forget, TBN's, great subject.... Here is a prime example of how the numbers look good BUT can mislead you very quickly. if you look at the TBN numbers of lets pick on amsoil, they have a tbn of 12 and schaeffers has a tbn of 8.3 on the 10w30 oils. figure amsoils tbn is better right? Well, here you run both oils under the same conditoins and milage and the tbn of amsoils will drop to say 9 but at the same interval schaeffers has only dropped to 7.1 . Amsoils is dropping much faster why?, here's what happens, the tbn is a basic measurement of the detergents that fight acids from creating oxidation of the oil.. but what about the antioxidants? antioxidants actually nuetralizes acids so therefore the detergents are not spent right away on fighting acids since there is no acids yet. So an oil with higher levels of antioxidants with a lower tbn will experience a slower drop in tbn levels, and as some know that when a tbn is about 50% of it's original # it should be replaced. This is just another point of how do you know how good your oil is just by looking at the tech data sheet. Interesting note, in tests I have seen done by dyson analysis, schaeffers has held up as long and in some cases longer due to this reason alone which most people don't see it comming till it appears. Myself included.
Hows that for another point to ponder about quality of oils.
That blend is a poor quality base stock and very little synth. due to it's level of flash point as one indicator i wouldn't use it.
adc,... you state "Where all blends and petroleum base stocks fall short is the high temperature department (note the low flash point). Only synthetic oils can give the reserve protection in the ugly world of "oh darn my engine is overheating as I'm sitting here in traffic and its 95 degrees outside"
here is schaeffers blend, please tell me how far does the flash point fall short on this.. SAE Grade 5W-30
API Gravity 60°F (ASTM D-1298) 30.92
Specific Gravity 60°F .8712
Viscosity @ 40°C, cSt. (ASTM D-445) 47-52
Viscosity @ 100°C, cSt. (ASTM D-445) 11.19-12.00
High Temperature/High Shear Viscosity 302°F/150°C, cP (ASTM D-4683) 3.5
I thought the rule of thumb was when an oil reached 50% of it orginal base value (as Bob noted) or 2 which ever is "lower" is the time to replace it. At least my literature on interpreting analysis says that.
Now, as Bob mentioned, how is one to know how quickly that TBN drops for a specific oil in a specific engine under your driving conditions. Well, I guess analysis is the only way.
Bob, Thanks for the clarification on TBN. It makes sense that you could start off with a high-TBN but the additives could be less stable and the rating could drop rather quickly.
There was something else you threw into your post that caught my eye. People who read a lot of what I write know, I think very little of Royal Purple lubricants. The technical info on their site is a joke and seems very "snake-oilish" and misleading. As far as I know, this is a PAO synthetic (hydrocracked?) blend although you now have to dig to find out the oil is not 100% synthetic (whatever that means these days) with a special ingredient called "Synerlec". I don't know why, but I always figured this was PTFE (Teflon). I think we've all read the article that suggests this stuff can reduce friction AND increase wear all at the same time and I would never use any form of PTFE in an engine again.
I also heard that RP's 'special' purple color goes away quickly once it's put in a crankcase. This does nothing to raise my opinion of the oil but merely sets off my "stupid gimmick" alarm. Gimmicks are most often associated with low quality products.
So, do you know anything about Royal Purple that I don't?
Comments
Armtdm though makes a good point. Perhaps the best way to go, instead of willy/nilly adding extra stuff, is to find an oil that could care less about API. Perhaps they are more interested in the durability of the engine. Amsoil/Redline offer the most hope- but I still lean toward the PAO vs the Ester. The SuperSyn of Mobil could be a slam dunk-we'll see. I'm certain that they will publish their "breakthrough" in the SAE.
Just added the Lubeguard to the Mobil 1. It is a Liquid Wax Ester derived from "various seed sources" It is supposed to reduce oxidation by 30%, sludge by 60%, and metal wear by 50% compared to GM Factory fill (Dextron III). Since I am already using Mobil 1 ATF I'm really not sure of the benefits. I guess P. T. Barnum would love me.
phillyguy3 I went with the Mobil 1 at 30 miles (2L Sentra). Now at over 16K it uses zero oil. I changed 4K ago and the oil level may have dropped 1/16 inch- still very clean. That 2.5L -Altima may have some issues. I've heard problems here-mainly oil burning. If you go with it I would immediately switch.
Honda transmissions are a weak point in an otherwise almost perfect car. If you're using automatic, find out what it uses. Lubegard has a new additive that turns ordinary Dexron III into Dexron V.
Honda uses its own transmission fluid, and it is highly friction modified. It may already be synthetic. Lubegard has an additive to turn ordinary Dexron into a highly modified one.
Regardless, on a Honda, I would do a drain and fill every 15K to be safe. Done that on my Dad's Taurus, a model famous for really bad transmissions, and it's been OK to 90,000 miles. Nissan Auto trannies are known to be fussy too.
I credit Lubegard transmission fluid with saving at least 4 transmissions that started having trouble on my, or relatives vehicles. Personally I'll always use it in any car I drive, even new.
I received about 8 TSB's from manufacturers that used various Lubegard products, including Volvo Subaru, Saab, Hundai, KIA and Ford to quiet transmission noises and improve shifting. When they say they are manufacturer recommended, it's the truth. At least in the transmission area. I checked Saab's and Ford's and they are valid, so I have no reason not to trust the others.
ADC100 -- while I love it for transmissions, what is your experience with Lubegard in engines. I put some in recently in my Subaru. Within a couple of weeks the oil was a lot darker. Still feels smooth however, so I'm keeping it in for the usual duration. I'm a little worried about it because I'm used to synthetics being pretty clear for most of the 6K interval I keep it in. I'll be changing it in a couple of weeks after a Sedona AZ trip.
as for lubegaurd, i may have to go get one of those additives and play with it to see if it does reduce friction/wear. as for the reduction on oxidation, oil analysis should report the numbers to you and be able to see that.
Interesting thing, there is some additives called lucas and of course slick 50, both of which i expected some reduction on friction as claimed in the ad's. niether one did anything when applied on this machine. slick50, sheared right out. lucas is a heavy bright stock oil that really clings and i really expected some results on that and it too sheared right out.
Stp on the other hand, whew, it's loaded with zddp and plated right up.
schaeffers has a moly additive which i don't normally tell people about since i don't believe in making chicken shxx into chicken salad. goto my web page, on the tech data sheets, look up # 132 moly ep additive. I will say this stuff does work.
Schaeffers has reps all over the country but there is some small stores that do carry the schaeffers but not major parts houses due to they(schaeffers) won't do any kind of infomercial. I myself have about 5 little guys retailing alot of the schaeffers oils, but most of my clients are end users at coporate accounts much like most reps do and is the reason you don't see it just anywhere.
they are suppose to have a new online store on thier web site. http://www.schaefferoil.com
adc, actually, too much of any kind of barrier lubricant can cause high oxidation levels due to the fact it overtakes the antioxidents and detergents thus not allowing them to do thier job. This is very common in race oils and in some of the reports i have seen on redline, it too seems to experience this. basicly, it shortens your oil drain cylce and is not good for extended drains but if done that way can cause damage as you suggested.
Thanks Bob.
They are making a big marketing ploy out of the new oil. It will be interesting to see how it is. Supposedly it will be out on April 15.
the motorcycle industry. I'll try to give you a little history of how
they got started and why they are simply not true today. When synthetic base oils first came out over 20 years ago, the detergency additives that were in the new synthetic oils were so much better than the detergency additives that were being used in the straight petroleum oils at that time. This caused all sorts of weird problems to show up when people would change to the new synthetic base oil when there was a lot of preexisting sludge and carbon left in their engine from the weaker detergency additives in the old petroleum base oils. The new synthetic oils would breakup and loosen all this old preexisting sludge and carbon buildup, and it would start floating around in the engine causing all kinds of problems. The first synthetic oils also caused engine seals to swell and leak and the new synthetic oils would sometimes attack and react negatively with the gaskets in the engine. There was a lot to learn about blending and using synthetic oils, and the oil manufacturers soon realized what the problems were and re-blended the synthetic base oils to be compatible with the engine seals and gaskets. The oil producers also started using better detergency additives in the petroleum oils, so there wouldn't be this problem of breaking up the old preexisting sludge and carbon when customers changed over to synthetic oils. The problems were all cured after just a few years, BUT the rumors and old wives tales persist about the "evils" of using synthetic base oils in automobiles and motorcycles.
The reason you want to "break-in" a new motor with a petroleum base oil, is because the synthetic oils are so much better as a metal wetting
agent, they sometimes retard the process of rings seating properly. The material that was used to make rings over 20 years ago, would require several thousand miles to allow the rings to seat properly. Today, the material used to make rings, allows the rings to seat properly after only about 200 to 500 miles at the most. After that, using 100% synthetic oil in motorcycle, (or automobile), engines is a great idea. The engine will run cooler with synthetic oil, the synthetic oil will resist breakdown at higher operating temperatures for a much longer period of time, allowing the oil to stay in viscosity grade longer. Synthetic oil will hold contaminates in suspension longer and reduce any oxidation, and offer increased high-load capacity, offering increased engine protection to critical engine parts. The better cold flow characteristics of 100% synthetic oil will protect the engine at startups better, and the oil change interval can be extended 3, 4 or in some cases 5 times as long. Why would anyone not want those benefits for their motorcycle, (or automobile), engine?
While we are on the subject of oil changes with 100% synthetic base oils, everyone should remember that even though the "oil" can stay in the engine many times as long, the oil "filter" still needs to be changed at the same regular manufacturer recommended intervals. The oil filter is what cleans the contaminates out of the oil. Important point to remember when changing the oil filter while leaving the synthetic oil in the engine; DON'T forget to top off the oil level, (replace what oil is lost when changing the oil filter).
The problem with the motorcycle wet clutches, when using automobile synthetic oils, is caused by slippery agents that are added to "automobile" synthetic oils. The new reformulated gasoline that the US Government has been mandating, caused a loss in gas mileage for
automobiles. Great, we have "better" gasoline, but now we have to burn a lot more of it. The automobile manufacturers started leaning on the oil companies to add more and more slippery agents to the oils, to try and recover some of this lost gas mileage. These slippery agents that have been added to "Automobile" Synthetic oils, are very bad for motorcycle wet clutches. These agents will cause the wet clutches to "plate-out", and start slipping and have a greatly reduced life span.
Most all motorcycle oil manufacturers now use "Motorcycle Specific" oil additive packages to cure this potential problem. The motorcycle OEM manufacturers have their own oil specifications now, The JASO Motorcycle 4T Specifications. There is JASO-MA spec, (the Best), and JASO-MB spec, (the Good). All good motorcycle oils should now say: "motorcycle specific", and refer to one of these new OEM JASO specifications, MA or MB.
Another part of the automobile manufacturers "request" of the oil manufacturers, was to greatly reduce the zinc, phosphorus, and other
extreme pressure additives from the oil. These items were contaminating their catalytic converters over a long period of time and the Government was after them to warrantee the converters for 100,000 miles at the very least. These extreme pressure additives are the safety net in the motorcycle engines. The higher rpm's of the motorcycle engines, the higher operating temperatures, and the scant amount of oil in the motorcycle engine as compared to the virtual ocean of oil in the standard automobile engine, will cause premature failure to motorcycle cam lifters and followers. The latest automobile oil specification, API-SJ, should not be used in motorcycle engines at all, and the next API specification coming out next year, (GF-3, API-SL), will be even worse for premature motorcycle engine wear, and for motorcycle wet clutches.
It turns out that our Maxima "Motorcycle Specific" 100% synthetic oil is
great for automobile engines as well. We have been sponsoring a NASCAR team this last year and their engine builder has told us that not only did our Maxima Motorcycle Specific 100% Synthetic Oil perform great, they saw an "increase" in horsepower using our oil on their dyno, and after a few races when they took the engine apart for routine maintenance, they told us that they had never seen a race engine that clean inside. I guess it just goes to prove again, "You get what you pay for!"
Anyway, I have used the 0W30 in one car for about two years now, change in once a year (only 8-10,000 miles/year) and filter at 6 months. Analysis fine.
At 40,000 miles, unless your engine was really dirty I guess I would not have used the Amsoil flush. I have switched cars at 30,000, 49,000 and 57,000 and never used the flush. that stuff kind of scares me but it seemed to work for you.
I have tried my best not to "push" any product nor hammer any ones choice of what they like, thats why I have always tried to do nothing more than educated on the basic priciples. As some of you just read from someone trying to educate people on why oils can be used or cannot be used in certain applications, i can understand why so much confusion exists in this subject, as what they were talking about was off base in alot of points.
In respect to edmunds board, I try not to use this as a forum to "promote" schaeffers. Now to answer your questions on how it holds up on the tests I have performed.
I have put every major brand of oil on the falex, everyone of the oils including schaeffers will shear through the actual base oil or should I say the hydrodynamic film that everyone keeps comparing and worrying on how good it is.
My first step is to establish wear protection. If a base oil film can keep the falex from stopping the two surfaces from touching, I'm all for it because that would be the best lubrication possible, unfortunatly, the real world applications dictate that for every action there is an = reaction, so when the force is applied, the base oil will part allowing the two surfaces to connect. Again, all oils that I have done this with will do this including Schaeffers.
Now, giving the oil a chance to "plate" up or "bond" to the surfaces, I then apply a simple force to see the amount of pressure required to shear through the boundary additives that are there to protect as the last line of defense. As pointed out before, this is where I expect a difference since the film strength is of no use in an open system it cant withstand the pressure thus squeezing out.
Now, understand that even barrier lubricant additives can and do shear out also. Some quicker than others.
The main ones I have experimented with is zddp found in all oils but heavier in some than others, mos2 or moly, Ptfe or tephlon.
When I plate up the machine and it is spinning and cannot be sheared while the bearing is still in the oil bath. I will shut it down, pull the little pan, dry off all parts, bearing and pin, then without any lubrication at all, I will restart and apply pressure without any lubricants at all. Now in this instance, this simulates a dry start. Figure that any oil will after a period of time drain off any vertical surface like around the piston and such. The boundary lubricant doesn't drain as for it is attached by either plating or bonding to the surface. kinda like what some of you want to belive the synth's base oil does(but can't).
alright, no oil, dry and now I reapply pressure. In my findings, Ptfe takes an extreme amount of time and heat to first plate up.. in further investigation, I have found it will also attack yellow metals due to its cloric nature simular to clorox bleach. This is why you won't see ptfe in any api certified motor oil. quaker state ownes penzoil and slick50 and if it was able to be certified don't you think they'd had it in there by now if they could?.. anyway,next
zddp's- such as the amounts in amsoil... plates up in a reasonable time, and does a decent job of protecting, but... with just a little more force than normal, it will shear right out quick. I also tried this while the oil is even still on the bearing and able to replace what is being sheared but still cannot maintain enough on there to protect and will shear out.
moly.. common in redline,schaeffers,petromoly, and a few others,
once plated up, oil removed and parts dried, you can apply a tremendous amount of force and will find that it will maintain. Depending on the amount of time you were to allow the oil to bond up, will effect the amount of time to shear through this. In minamal amount of times, it will take at least 45-60 secs to break through and lock up the wheel. ( more than enough time for oil to get back to the parts and replenish what has been sheared off, especially in dry start situations.)
I will say also that I have plated up the machine with these barrier lubes and walked away, comming back another day, and try to shear the dry wheel, and with little effort succeded on all but the moly. In fact, I had found that it bonds into the metal surfaces. Ok, I know you say that can't happen, well first, I have some interesting info for you techy types on moly on my site (STATES of LUBRICATION) that will explain.
Let me explain one other thing that takes this further to support why moly holds up better. Moly becomes active when heated. Where friction exists on two metal surfaces, the metal will expand. moly will plate into and on to the surface with approx 39plates. like magnets in a box, pick one up only so many will attach and not the whole box of magnets. since heat is what moly will plate to, when it gets to 39 plates, the heat is reduced to such a level that it no longer activates the suspended moly but when sheared down new plated replenish it. This keeps moly from building up in any one area. Anyway, when I come back to the dried bearing 2 days later, The machine is cold like in a dry start situation, I find it near impossible to shear it down with out haveing to use sandpaper. Since both surfaces pin and bearing, are plated, and the moly is impregnated in the cold contracted metal surface it requires a ruff surface to tear it up.
Plating on the other hand, is nothing more than coating the surface and actually has some but very little bond effect so it has never proven to me to hold up as well.
As a barrier lubricant, I agree that amsoil is better than most about providing protection due to the higher levels of zddp(along with diesel oils). But in my book, any soluble moly oil has a much greater affinity to the metal and maintains a much better level of protection.
Stp, does real well on this test.
Lucas, It showed NO levels at all of resisting shearing, fact is, I suspect it has no barrier lube properties at all and is nothing more than a bright stock oil that will make an oil climb.
anyway that is the short of basic barrier lube additive application.
After having tested the barrier lube properties then I move to oil analysis and determine how the base oil holds up. This is where I decieded that Schaeffers had an edge over alot of them.
Redline uses a higher level of both zddp and moly. when experimenting with it, I had found that it ran a higher level of oxidation reading. I h
In schaeffers case,Blends of 25 to 28%pao, I have seen extended drains with no filter changes as high as 20,000 miles in a gas engine and 40-50,000 miles on diesel engines. In one case 80,000 miles. Of course every oil analysis is going to be different depending on the situations. I'm conservative so I never go over 12,000 miles on my own car.
anyway, you now know some of the stuff I have done to find my way to where i'm at. BTW, I started using Schaeffers over 7yrs ago. This is longgggg before I actually got involved with them on a distribution level.
When you say "Stp" are you talking about some sort of STP engine oil additive, or actually STP brand engine oil?
Say a scale of 1-10.
for my car i need 5 quarts of oil.
4x$4.5 = $18
less refund = $12
So I get 5 quarts of Syntec oil for $6.
Not bad.
Especially if Mobil1 is also going the Castrol way and using hydrocracked "synthetic" and still charge $4.5 for it.
SuperSyn, a proprietary patented technology of ExxonMobil, is a high-viscosity PAO typically used at low treat rates to balance the viscometrics, shear stability and low temperature properties of a lubricant. Its viscosity ranges between 150 to 3,000 cSt at 100° C, and it mixes completely with conventional PAOs, esters and mineral oils. Used in engine oils, automatic transmission fluids, gear oil greases, hydraulic oils and other specialized applications, SuperSyn has the following features:
A viscosity index that is 35-40 units higher compared to conventional PAOs of the same viscosity grade.
A pour point that is 10-20° C lower than conventional PAOs of the same viscosity grade.
An increase of Synergistic VI when blended with mineral and synthetic base stocks.
A high viscosity with good ambient fluidity.
It appears to be loaded with zddp for antiwear protection.
yes I tested mobil as well.
no, it didn't stand up to the boundary test any better than other "synths" that were not mentioned previously.
Let me state that obviously it is not a true scientific test in what i have done but a way for me to see for myself how it would hold up under the extreme conditions i set forth for the oil.
OMG! I didn't write a book this time! must be losing my touch. thank goodness for that.
everyones favorite $ynthetic Oil on this site, seems ol' Bob down in his Oil Torture Chamber has
answered the question we should be more concerned about. " What happens to your
engines moving surface parts, on start up, and under extreme heat and load?" Seems that the various mechanical tests that the Oil Companies don't want you to see, would show that the current crop of high priced premadonnas of the Synthetic Lube Industry, might not be worth the extra $$$$. I for one think that a high priced synthetic lube, loaded with additives, should be nearly indestructible in the Falex Pin and V Block test, and ol' Bobs' other nasty testing apparatus. Well, BAD NEWS, seems it isn't ,so who the hell wants to leave it in the engine for extended drains? We might all be better advised to spend extra bucks for the best oil filter we can put on the motor, Mobile 1, Pure one, or Hastings, for example, and stick to factory recomended changes with the new and improved crop of cheaper dino Oil. Bob, thanks again for letting us peek over your shoulder.
Just say that I have a good eye and can read fast moving things.....
check out the movie clip at
http://www.mobil1.com
The question is: does the product hold up with a measure of reserve as it fulfills its desired function? If the oil can win the Indy 500 and then have the engine torn down and say that this engine can go another race without rebuilding- Isn't that a reasonable validation that the oil will more than hold up for the consumer? Or If the oil can be changed every 15K and after 200K the engine has almost no wear- isnt that a reasonable standard?
Asking it another way: Would you choose an oil based on the above two examples or the Pin and V Block Test?? Also I should point out that the oil which passes the tests that Bob does may very well have the ability to do the things I mentiones.
Hey its early-might as well start stirring the pot,
Later-Al
So, change every 3000 using the cheapest SL crap on the market and Fram fitler and you will get 100,000 + miles, no problem. All depends on comfort level, level of hassle one is willing to assume for frequent changes and what "YOU" feel works best for you. Like most things in life, there is no right answer.
Yes, there is more to the oil than that of just my little timken test that I do, as I pointed out in my prev post, That was my first test I wanted to see hold up to MY "reasonable" wear protection test (if you consider that 30k mile piston bearing wear reasonable). Then I moved on to oil and additive durabliltiy by running in the engines and doing oil analysis to make those determinations.
Why did I do all that? Cause the internet and advertising campains are so full of misguided information now aday's such as someone posted on my board made this claim
and I quote "no other additive can surpass the performance of Greased Lightning. ANd meets the manufacturers specifications for most all vehicles as listed on the bottle. Independent test prove GL instant engine treatment Dramatically reduces engine wear, and Improves fuel mileage."
PLEASEEEEE, give me a break!
It's amazing all the "hype" involved. Look at amsoil, all thier marketing hype. even quakerstate says we'll give u 250,000 mile engine warr.
So who the heck am I going to believe? Since I personally don't know nor can relate to how much is reasonable wear with thier tests, I do my own in addition to thier tests and try to come up with a rounded conclusion for myself. All factors wiegh in for my decision including but not limited to how long a company has been in business and what kind of BS ad's they run to get consumers to think that the oil they are actually using in a $250,000 race car engine, is actually going to be the same oil on the auto parts shelf. I think not. They are different, in fact.. There is a lot of racers that use a different oil but sold ad space on thier cars. That is how they pay for thier sport. Even Schaeffers has a car they sponsor and has to pay for the ad placement on the car, difference is, they actually are using our race oil which I would NEVER use in my car since it is totally different blend and will not provide enough protection for my engine. Oh, that's right, race oil's have a much lesser degree of detergents and antioxidant additives thus the tbn's are much less than conventional oils therefore must not be run as long as standard motor oils.
So, as you can see, I put a lot of effort into understanding lubrication. Fact is, there is very few lubrication salesmen out here that have a clue as to why they are better or not. Most sell on brand name or price alone and nothing more. I have been there when a penzoil salesman came in and stated to the owner," what are you paying for your oil and I'll beat his price". If all a person is interested in price and not protecting his equipment then I move on since I only want customers that want less work and longer productivity with less downtime which saves them more money in the overall than just the short term savings on a qt of oil.
Needless to say, I do have the mobil salesman mad at me on one account because once my customer became educated on how all thier greases were holding water and washing out, his line was dropped. His(mobil guy) name for me is SCARE TACTIC bob. I LOVE IT!.
At long last, we have the several postings of yours giving us more actual useful information than I have seen in reading most of the postings. Thank you for responding to the inquirer, which led to the several lengthy and informative writings of yours. TerryharrisII
(with my brunette)
I have never seen it seperate and completely blends into what ever it is put in.
I normally don't recommend it to people that use anything other than schaeffers,.. not that it won't work, on the contrary it does, but I hate to see people trying to make chicken salad out of chicken shxx oil.
This additive is designed for smoking engines but will also provide the extra protection for wear if someone is looking to increase that. I have used it to see how it affects the oil and I will say it makes a difference. I have put this in engines that tick, smoke,low oil pressure, and normal running and it has in made a difference in every case.
This oil has been tested with drain intervals of 100K and even though the oil reserviors are huge that is counterbalanced by the amount of soot the oil must deal with. This oil would be the ultimate to run in a passanger car except for the .15% zinc which may be too high for the cat conv.
The article is $10 for 16 pages, including title page and bibliography. and can be downloaded immediately. I think these papers are a way for the consumer to get the most reliable technical information available about a specific product and at the same time take your knowledge about lubrication to a higher level.
http://www.sae.org/servlets/search
Do a search by using "synthetic" and the article in question is "2000-01-1993 Performance of an Advanced Synthetic Diesel Engine Oil" BTW if you scroll down the list of articles - "981444-Advanced Synthetic Passenger Vehicle Engine Oils for Extended Oil Drain Performance" is short (12 pages) but good.
Later guys.
Mark
SAE Grade 5W-20
API Service SJ / EC
Gravity, ºAPI 35.0
Specific Gravity, @ 60ºF (15.5ºC) 0.852
Density, lb/gal 7.10
Flash Point, COC, ºF(ºC) 365(185)
Viscosity:
cSt @ 40ºC 49
cSt @ 100ºC 8.8
Viscosity Index 161
HT/HS Viscosity, cP @ 150ºC 2.65
Pour Point, ºF(ºC) -49 (-45)
Sulfated Ash, Wt. % 0.94
Total Base Number (TBN) 7.5
ASTM Color 4.0
Thanks,
Chuck
Can't make any opinions based on this blend other that it does have pretty good low temp properties. Where all blends and petroleum base stocks fall short is the high temperature department (note the low flash point). Only synthetic oils can give the reserve protection in the ugly world of "oh darn my engine is overheating as I'm sitting here in traffic and its 95 degrees outside"
I'll stick up for RobistheLubeDude once again. I don't think he is here to sell. For the amount of oil most of us would buy, it would not be worth his trouble to get it to us, I'd guess. In one discussion about grease, he even suggested one of us buy a comparable competitor's product which could be sourced locally.
From what Bob's been saying, motor oil has principally two components: the base oil and the additive package. No matter how "good" the base oil is, it can only do so much to provide a hydrodynamic cushion between metal parts. Once stressed (perhaps high-RPM operation and/or severe loads such as towing), that liquid will be squeezed out and the only thing left to prevent wear are the anti-wear agents in the oil usually ZDDP and (in rare cases) molybdenum. When you are paying extra for synthetic, all you are getting is an oil that will flow under extreme conditions. It flows better in bitter cold, it resists thinning at high temps and won't oxidize and thicken over long periods of time giving you a tenny bit better mileage. BUT, it won't necessarily protect against wear any better than a dino oil if the additive package is weak (which is my theory about the SJ Mobil 1 Tri-Synthetic). And this protection is what most of us look for in a motor oil.
Of course, the additive package has more in it than anti-wear agents but I think most of us assume the anti-oxidant and detergent/dispersant package of all SJ and newer oils is at least competent. This is why I find Bob's adventures with his little snake oil tester very interesting. While all lab tests fail to duplicate real-world experiences, I think a lot can be learned from them and in this case, they seem to be testing the most important aspect of the lubricants.
I try to realize the limitations to looking at spec sheets and judging an oil solely on that but it isn't very impressive. As adc100 points out, that flash point isn't terribly impressive, it's TBN is less than 10 and nowhere is there listed the amount of zinc phosphate. <:^(
One last comment, I saw someone say a couple dozen posts ago that we were "all a bunch of Amsoil guys" and that's just silly. There is only one regular here that is a loyal Amsoil user and he will criticize them over a few things. I use Red Line but realize it is prohibitively expensive for most folks so I rarely recommend it. The rest of the people are split among a handful of mass-market brands if they use synthetic at all. If these maintenance threads were just a bunch of guys blindly loyal to one brand or another who bicker back and forth, I would have left long ago. >;^)
--- Bror Jace
A while back I indicated I had something to put a twist into this subject about synth oils. That is where I was going.to bring out the importaint issues and the main one is wear. Listening to most of this topic has been on the base oil and it's ability to last longer than any other. As stated before, I'd change mine more often (if I had to) if i got less wear from a cheap base oil than a good oil that lasted forever but didn't reduce wear.
Oh, before I forget, TBN's, great subject.... Here is a prime example of how the numbers look good BUT can mislead you very quickly.
if you look at the TBN numbers of lets pick on amsoil, they have a tbn of 12 and schaeffers has a tbn of 8.3 on the 10w30 oils. figure amsoils tbn is better right? Well, here you run both oils under the same conditoins and milage and the tbn of amsoils will drop to say 9 but at the same interval schaeffers has only dropped to 7.1 . Amsoils is dropping much faster why?, here's what happens, the tbn is a basic measurement of the detergents that fight acids from creating oxidation of the oil.. but what about the antioxidants? antioxidants actually nuetralizes acids so therefore the detergents are not spent right away on fighting acids since there is no acids yet. So an oil with higher levels of antioxidants with a lower tbn will experience a slower drop in tbn levels, and as some know that when a tbn is about 50% of it's original # it should be replaced. This is just another point of how do you know how good your oil is just by looking at the tech data sheet. Interesting note, in tests I have seen done by dyson analysis, schaeffers has held up as long and in some cases longer due to this reason alone which most people don't see it comming till it appears. Myself included.
Hows that for another point to ponder about quality of oils.
adc,... you state "Where all blends and petroleum base stocks fall short is the high temperature department (note the low flash point). Only synthetic oils can give the reserve protection in the ugly world of "oh darn my engine is overheating as I'm sitting here in traffic and its 95 degrees outside"
here is schaeffers blend, please tell me how far does the flash point fall short on this..
SAE Grade
5W-30
API Gravity 60°F (ASTM D-1298)
30.92
Specific Gravity 60°F
.8712
Viscosity @ 40°C, cSt. (ASTM D-445)
47-52
Viscosity @ 100°C, cSt. (ASTM D-445)
11.19-12.00
High Temperature/High Shear Viscosity 302°F/150°C, cP (ASTM D-4683)
3.5
@-25°C, cP (ASTM D-5293)
1,562
@-35°C ASTM D-4684
27,845
MRV Borderline Pumping Temperature °F/°C (ASTM D-3829)
-35°/-37.22°
Scanning Brookfield Gelation Index @ -35°F/-37°C
6.7
Viscosity Index (ASTM D-2270)
180
Flash Point °F/°C (ASTM D-92)
441°/227°
Fire Point °F/°C (ASTM D-92)
485°/251.67°
Stable Pour Point °F/°C (FTM 7916 Method 203)
<-41°/<-42°
Volatility 700°F % Evaporation Loss (ASTM D-2887)
8.5
NOACK Volatility % Evaporation Loss (ASTM D-5800)
11.5
Shear Stability (ASTM D-3945 Procedure A)
% Viscosity Loss
5
Foam Test (ASTM D-892)
Sequence I
0/0
Sequence II
0/0
Sequence III
0/0
Sequence IV
0/0
Sulfated Ash Content % wt (ASTM D-874)
1.1
Total Base Number (ASTM D-2896)
8.3
Copper Strip Corrosion Test (ASTM D-130)
__________________-
and of course in BJ's comment about tbn, I had just covered that issue last post.
Now, as Bob mentioned, how is one to know how quickly that TBN drops for a specific oil in a specific engine under your driving conditions. Well, I guess analysis is the only way.
There was something else you threw into your post that caught my eye. People who read a lot of what I write know, I think very little of Royal Purple lubricants. The technical info on their site is a joke and seems very "snake-oilish" and misleading. As far as I know, this is a PAO synthetic (hydrocracked?) blend although you now have to dig to find out the oil is not 100% synthetic (whatever that means these days) with a special ingredient called "Synerlec". I don't know why, but I always figured this was PTFE (Teflon). I think we've all read the article that suggests this stuff can reduce friction AND increase wear all at the same time and I would never use any form of PTFE in an engine again.
I also heard that RP's 'special' purple color goes away quickly once it's put in a crankcase. This does nothing to raise my opinion of the oil but merely sets off my "stupid gimmick" alarm. Gimmicks are most often associated with low quality products.
So, do you know anything about Royal Purple that I don't?
--- Bror Jace