Alcan, There's a lot to your "warm and fuzzy" explanation. Yes, I know I might be spending a little more than I HAVE TO but it's not as much as people think and there's something about this cost issue that really bugs me. Earlier, someone pointed out the savings from extending your drain interval from 3,000 to 5-6,000+ but there are other considerations as well.
I feel that an increase of 1-2% in fuel mileage is fairly realistic. So, if you spend something like $500 per year on gasoline, that 1-2% savings is a savings of $5-10. Already, that extra $20 more per year someone figured out synthetic users are spending is cut in half because of very modest gains in fuel economy.
Another consideration is oil consumption. Every engine I've ever run on synthetic has experienced less oil consumption than when the same motor was running dino juice. This includes cars, trucks and power equipment I have around the house. My '95 Civic with just under 100,000 miles on the odomoeter has seen synthetic since it had 10,000 miles on it. I have NEVER ONCE had to add a drop of oil to that car between changes. As a matter of fact, the oil level on the dipstick usually doesn't even BUDGE during that time.
My father's '94 Mercury, on the other hand, which used exclusively conventional oil began to use a quart of oil every 1,000-1,500 miles once it hit 80,000 miles. The amount of money expended on this "top-off" oil adds a significantly to the operating costs once you start disputing $5, $10 or $20 dollars.
Oh, and the time I lost my radiator on the Mass Pike between Albany, NY and Boston, I was sure glad I had synthetic motor oil in my crankcase. >;^}
Oil consumption is based on engine wear...it gets burned in the combustion chamber or drips down the valve stem seals or guides.....I really don't see how synthetic oil is not going to burn in a combustion chamber....got any ideas about that, because it's pretty darn hot inside an engine...so I'm still a bit skeptical about how that is possible, and equally skeptical about how an overheating engine is going to be saved by synthetic oil. As was pointed out, oil is a poor coolant, so if your engine is "over the top" in meltdown mode, no oil is going to save it, seems to me....didn't save my friend's race engine at Daytona, for one example.
I think we need to be careful about the "miracle" properties of synthetic oil. It's just oil, doing what oil can do and doing it well...but there are limits as to its capabilities is catastrophic circumstances or under thermal stress.
I suspect the real answer is somewhere far back from the extreme...if fuel mileage increase is 1-2% (reasonable), then I might accept an equally reasonable claim of "somewhat less oil consumption (rather than from oil burning to no oil burning) and might also nod my head at a claim of synthetic withstanding a higher temperature (to a POINT!) than regular oil and so perhaps affording more protection PRIOR TO severe engine overheating.
I can swallow all that if that's what you mean to say.
Mr. Shiftright: "I really don't see how synthetic oil is not going to burn in a combustion chamber....got any ideas about that, because it's pretty darn hot inside an engine..."
Actually, the level of oil in your engine going down can be also attributed to a lot of other things (in addition to physical wear and deteriorating flexible seals) including, but not limited to:
1) The additive package (VI-viscosity improvers) in the oil breaking down and boiling off.
2) Petroleum oil boiling off under high temps.
3) Sticking rings allowing more oil to bypass them since they are not sealing ideally.
So,
1) Synthetic oil has less VI and some formulations with only a minor spread between the winter and summer numbers have no VI at all. This keeps the engine cleaner as when VI breaks down, some of it boils off but some also forms sludge and hard deposits. And the fact that many synth oils have little or no VI accounts for some of the consumption difference.
2) Synthetic compounds such as PAO (Mobil 1) or Polyol Esthers (Redline) boil off only at high temperatures the inside of an engine never sees. There's no consumption here either.
3) Some ring and cylinder wall temps cook petroleum oils and/or reduce their ability to lubricate the rings and allow thr ings to do their job (seal the combustion chambers against the crankcase) while synthetics better survive these higher temps and keep the rings working better. The rings are essentially seals and when they are working better, the engine allows less oil into the combustion chambers, thus more of it stays in the crankcase.
More Shiftright: "I'm ... equally skeptical about how an overheating engine is going to be saved by synthetic oil. As was pointed out, oil is a poor coolant, so if your engine is "over the top" in meltdown mode, no oil is going to save it, seems to me....didn't save my friend's race engine at Daytona, for one example."
Oil does a LOT of the engine cooling (and preventing of friction which causes heat) and the better the oil (lower coefficient of fricton and resistant to thermal breakdown) the cooler the engine will run ...assuming it is air cooled or the existing liquid cooling system is not functioning. No, synthetic oil won't save a completely lost cause and I don't know how long the motor would have lasted if I had to drive more than the 10+ miles at 60mph that I did once I noticed the temp guage pinned on 'hot,' but I believe the oil kept my car from damaging itself under those severe conditions.
The basic point is, that synthetics will put up with these very harsh conditions better than petroleum oils. The high heat you speak of works against petroleum oils more than synthetics which is why it's better to use synthetics in those cases.
Sorry, I don't buy that at all--oil doesn't do much cooling--what happens is that the *absence* of oil does much heating!-- also, the original claim was not that synthetic oil holds up better under heat (we know this to be true) , but that in fact synthetic oil *decreases* or *stops* an existing oil burning condition in an old car. I find that extremely hard to believe in all but perhaps a very few rare cases and against extremely high odds. I will gladly bet you large sums of whatever precious commodity you may value that you can pour all the synthetic oil you want into my Alfa Romeo and you are not going to stop it from burning oil, or even substantially decrease the consumption to any significant degree. Maybe a tiny bit just from viscosity improvements, hard to say. You got worn rings, then you got worn rings...nothing in a can is going to fix that. Synthetic oil does not replace metal or decrease extreme engine clearances.
But thank you for taking the time to present your views so well...I will re-read them again at leisure and mull them over.
I didn't mean to sound flippant, just that different people have different comfort zones. In fact I re-read my post and decided to delete it. One thing for sure, there's NO way one group is going to convince the other that they're right but choices are what make life interesting. :-)
Mr. Shiftright, About oil cooling motors, I read that in an engine manual somewhere years ago. I doubt I can find it but anyway ...
I think you have to expand your mind and consider that engine oil can leave the crankcase in more ways than merely rings and worn valve guides ... and I'm not talking about leaks either. Oils and their additive packages break down and boil off ... and this happens less (if at all) with most synthetics. I've gotten this from chemists that work in the petro-chemical industry and I've seen evidence of it myself.
The rings-sealing-better-when-lubed-with-synthetic-oil theory is mine alone. I'm not sure of it but it makes sense to me nd I consider it a good possibility along with what I've written in the additives thread. I'll have a short post for that one too.
I wouldn't switch an old Alpha Romeo over to synthetics to see if it will burn less oil. I doubt it. I don't mean to suggest that synthetic oil won't burn in an older, heavily worn engine but for reasonably current engines that are experiencing 'normal' oil consumption, this will diminish significantly upon switching to synthetics for ... I believe ... a combination of different of factors ... many I explained before.
I've talked to at least a half a dozen people on the 'net that experienced the same phenomenon I do when using synthetic and a number of mfrs may even claim that on their product. So, assuming we're not suffering from independent mass delusions, can you explain what's going on?
How much of a decrease in consumption are we talking about here? From what to what? then I could tell you what I think. I believe (please correct me if I'm mistaken here) that someone earlier on mentioned going from a quart every 1,000-1,500 miles to no consumption. That was hard for me to believe.
So if it's from one shotglass of oil consumption in 3,000 miles to one shotglassl in 5,000 miles, sure I'll believe that the sturdier properties of synthetic would account for that.
But if the contention is that synthetic turns a smoking, sniveling wreck of an engine into a smooth, clean-burning swiss watch of a powerplant, no, I can't go there.
There are a number of tests given in an SAE publication that I have. (SAE 951026) that head to head comparisons between conv and syn gives conventional oil consumption 5 to 10 times that of syn. A sound engine should consume between 1 to 2 ounces per 1000 miles with syn. My 94 Corsica consumes about 1 ounce per 1000 miles. As brorjace surmised but can not prove, syn does seal better around rings. Also since conventional oil is made up of small chain hydro carbons up to large chain ones, the small ones tend to boil off. There is no question that syn oil is much less. Anyone who uses it knows that.
Also , Mr Shiftright- pray tell-what fluid carries off the heat generated in main, and rod bearings?? Just curious.
Anyway, anyone who has to justify the extra cost of syn should not use it IMHO.
Thanks for the back-up adc100. Like most people, I cannot prove everything I observe. Even things that are easily observed by me.
heng, there are no guarantees in life that your cars will be around for ridiculous amounts of miles but as I've stated before, when you look at the big picture, the extra costs associated with synthetic are negligible. Think of it as cheap insurance.
Alright I won't answer. And yes, I will readily dismiss information that's not verifiable, It's not arrogant it's how engineers are trained and how we make a living. Goes with the territory. Later Al
Okay, we are all friends here.....maybe we can look over our words and try to make our points clearer.
On cooling, what I was trying to express is that oil is not a good cooling agent in a water cooled car...if we took all the water out of the block, the oil itself could only absorb so much heat without being able to dissipate it to the outside air through the block...the oil, ANY oil, would soon overheat and burn up. In an air cooled car, of course, you often have a thinner alloy block and cylinder heads with finned cooling. This allows the heat to leave the oil. In a water cooled engine, with a thicker block and no fins and often not great air flow around the block, the oil would soon be overwhelmed by the job of dissipating large quantities of heat energy. There simply isn't the volume of oil or the conductive means to do it. Heat energy from combustion would come into the oil faster than the oil could get rid of it. Think of how much water circulates to the cool outside air every minute, carrying off that heat. How could almost "stationary" oil do that through a thick block? Just look at a late model Porsche air-cooled engine, and see all the engineering, with alloys, fins and huge oil coolers....no water cooled car is equipped like that.
FUEL MILEAGE--what troubles me about claims for 10% fuel mileage increases is that there is no way to account for the extra energy that has suddenly appeared to do that. There is only so much energy in a gallon of gas...through efficient design, turbocharging, better intake and exhausts, we can somewhat increase the work that that gallon of fuel can do....but to suddenly increase an engine's fuel efficiency by some 10%---that presumes a release of a lot more energy (car goes further on same amount of fuel, in other words)....more than I could account for by the diminishment of friction by using a superior oil.
OIL CONSUMPTION--if an engine is consuming oil, something has worn out, or some clearance is quite large (like race engines, which are built "loose", for a good reason). How can oil resist the force of combustion in rings? I just can't fathom it. If you've got blow-by, say in a diesel, how can synthetic prevent a 21:1 compression ratio from doing what it wants in there?
Some good thinking here. And yes we can be friends and disagree,and maybe even taunt sometimes. Can't take it that seriously. I agree that oil does not have the heat capacity of water which is second best in the world except for liquid sodium. However whar the oil does is removes the hear from the bearings and helps disperse it into the block where of course the water carries it away via the jacket. Obviously (maybe not ) the heat of combustion is carried away by the water jacket and here I agree that the oil does not contribute to heat removal much here, it limits friction and thus additional heat transfer. I guess the main point for me is heat of bearing friction. This is probably small compared to heat of combustion considering the engine is only 20% efficient. I really didn't mean to imply the engine would seriously function for a long period of time without water. Without water things are cooking. There have been numerous carse where the loss of cooling (water) has allowed the engine to function well beyond "normal" temperatures. Indy race in 1989 a driver finished the last 25 miles of the race with the loss of all his coolant. Syn has been nownh to function 265 degrees beyond what was considered normal.
With regards to the milage increases: syn will give anywhere from 2% to 30% increases in industrial applications (Exxon's numbers). I agree with you that 10% is probably too high. Personally I can see 3% to 5%. My 94 Corsica has given as High as 39 mpg with a 3.1L using syn. It never gave that high with dino oil but I have no direct correlation.
Oil consumption: like I said syn in a sound engine uses almost no oil. Its a fact of life. The syn has a better attraction to metal than conventional oil and therefore seals at rings better. That from a lub engineer. I can't prove it to you.
adc, you said KMart sells Mobil1 for $3.59/quart on sale. In the past couple years, the cheapest I've seen at KMart (Detroit area) is $3.99 on sale. The only place I've seen cheaper than $3.89 (one of my local Target stores, though the others are $4.39) is Sam's Club. They had cases for $21.49 a quart but recently ran out and I doubt they'll restock it since it was a very slow seller.
I really enjoy reading your posts. Your ability to focus on the subject matter and not get worked up about other people's statements is admirable. In particular, your post #455 was one of the most educational and logical I've read in the past couple days of catching up on this and the synth forum. In the past 2 days I've read all 466+ posts on this forum and about 200 posts on the synth forum.
adc100, you said recently that anyone who has to justify the cost of synthetic shouldn't be using it. I guess I have to disagree with this. Don't most people consider whether an item is "worth the money" - to them - before they decide to buy/use it?
My wife and I have a 95 Ford Contour and 98 Isuzu Trooper. I change the oil on both vehicles myself. We bought the Contour used and previous owner used Mobil1. I have continued that practice with 5W30. Got 2 Mobil1 filters via a free promo but will probably go with the Motorcraft filter; I've heard it's a Purolator Pure One on the inside, and it's 3 bucks at Wal-Mart.
I switched from dino to synthetic blend (always 5W30) on the Trooper at 15k miles (we bought it used at 7k miles). These forums have taught me that synthetic blend is a waste due to the low ratio of synthetic vs. dino oil. I'm considering whether to switch to full synthetic in our Trooper, which has 42,000 miles. I use the Isuzu brand filter, $4 each. Part of my dilemma is that the 3.5L V6 engine and the earlier 3.2L V6 in Troopers are well known to consume quite a bit of oil. A quart every 1000 miles is not rare at all. My consumption seems to be in the range of 1 quart every 2000-2500 miles. I don't relish the thought of adding 1 or 2 quarts of $4/qt. synthetic between oil changes. Also, my impression from reading much about the Trooper's engine is that oil and filter should be replaced every 3000 miles. If running synthetic, I will probably extend this to 5000 or 6000 miles, but I may change the filter every 3000. Does anyone consider 42,000 miles too many to safely switch to a full synthetic? Do you think my oil consumption will increase or decrease if I switch? Is it a bad idea to switch to synthetic in an engine that has a history of higher oil consumption than other engines in other vehicles?
What's my point? Hmm, I had to think about that for a second. I guess I have one statement and one question:
1) Justifying the cost of synthetic oil seems like a valid thing to do.
2) Are you interested in educating and converting average motorists about the benefits of using synthetic oil, or are you hoping to maintain some sort of elitist club of people "in the know?" The average Joe won't change to an oil that is 4x more money per quart just because a few people on Edmund's tell him to. He needs to feel that there is some benefit to using the product, and he needs to know that he may be able to save time, and recoup some of the cost difference, by changing his oil and/or filter less frequently. Some of your posts come off as pretty snooty, and that doesn't really lend any credibility to your claims. I do appreciate the information and opinions you contribute, though perhaps you should strive for brorjace's tact.
I know someone mentioned a while back that 5W-20 is available at Wal-Mart, but I thought I'd mention also that the price at my local Wal-Mart was $1.26 a quart. So for people whose owner's manual calls for 5W-20, it seems that there is a reasonably priced choice out there.
I have a Honda civic with 52k miles on it. According to the responses I got in regard to my question of whether to switch to Synthetic from Dino, I concluded that I'll have to do it gradually over next few oil changes. I'll be starting by mixing one quart of synthetic and rest Dino and then add another quart in my next oil change and so on. Now Can I mix different brands, meaning is this ok to mix 10w 30 Mobil 1 Synthetic with 10w 30 Valvoline non synthetic. If not, please recommend me a combination. Thanks in advance folks.
probably good choice. Mobil says you can mix all conventional oils. A long time ago when I was converting, I mixed with Havolin, Castrol, and Ford's brand.
Bluedevils: Probably valid observations on your part.
"Don't most people consider whether an item is "worth the money" - to them - before they decide to buy/use it?" Yea- I guess I look at that $15,000 to $40,000 vehicle and knowing what I know about syn and knowing the cost benefits, I find it hard to worry about that small cost differences considering the huge benefits. That's just me.
As far as the Trooper. I believe thats another matter worthy of more soul searching. I had a 88 Ranger that used the same amount you are talking about. This was during the time I didn't use syn. As I considered converting- the oil pan was replaced and Ford advised not to use syn because of it being incompatable with Syn- typical Ford. When I switched to the syn the consumption dropped maybe 1/3 less. After 2000 miles on the oil change the consumption went up. I used 2 quarts of syn mixed with conventional. One of the 2 quarts was the 15W50 Mobil 1.
I think if I were you I would try a witches brew of the conventional oil you think is good, 1qt. 15W50 syn, and 1 qt 10W/30. Then play it by ear. Using a potentially better filter than the Isuzu and making up the oil usage with alternating 1 qt syn and 1 qt conventional could give you a happy medium of changing say 5 or 6 k. This should be OK given the fact that you are adding a couple of quarts of clean oil during that time.
As far as converting the average Joe to syn. I've sort of given up outside of this board. They find it totally nuts to spend $4.50 vs $1.50 for Dino oil. Its a different story on this board though, as a lot of people are here to learn. There are those who want to only bash syn and no matter what -syn sucks. I then pointlessly respond in kind. (bad idea). I do hope people read and make their own decision- whatever. Personally I hope the Joe Sixpacks on the outside keep using Jiffy Lube with Dino oil. They'll be happy, oil companies/Jiffy Lube will be happy and it's good for the economy. I also believe if syn became the standard, engines would be built cheaper.
The question on Havoline synthetics. I just bought a quart at Advanced Auto (lawmower usage) at $2.99/quart yesterday.
I, well my son, just purchased a 97 Rodeo 3.2L V6 with 58,000 miles. Engine not sludged up but a greasy dark film inside the oil filler/valve cover. All my others are clean having used synthetic for years. Anyway, I switched it to Amsoil 10W30 full synthetic. Based upon my experience, this is now the third engine I have switched later on in life (one at 49,000, another at 30,000) I have had no problems, did the rear end and tranny with synthetic too. Only been a month so we shall see. I have not heard that the 3.2L is an oil burner, will see.
I also have a 96 Mystique Zetec engine.. Converted that to synthetic at 30,000 and I change it once a year, filter at 6 months but only 8,000-12,000 miles/year. Oil analysis great, no problems as yet Oh, the Motorcraft filter is a Pure One element with a Purolator Premium Plus shell. .
adc100, well, I too have tried converting friends and relatives to synthetics to no avail. I have even given them free oil and showed them reams of oil analysis results. They don't care for two reasons. First, the price and second, the owner's manual. If it says 3000 miles they will not alter that!!! And many dealer service reps know so little about lubrication that they say synthetics are a waste of money.. Of course they benefit. They are so afraid of warranty issues etc. I have just given up.
adc100, I am reluctant to use any grade/viscosity other than 5W30 in my Trooper. I don't know squat about engines, but several people who do have advised on www.itog.com for several years that the lifters or other parts in the 3.2L and 3.5L Isuzu engines develop significant problems if 5W30 (a "thin" oil?) is not used.
I've always been advised that the Isuzu filter is well-suited to the engine, but I forget why. If I tried to guess without digging back through the Isuzu archives I'd look stupid, so I won't.
Regarding cost, a $10 monthly difference in the cost of changing oil and filter, times 2 vehicles, may be an important amount to some people. With a baby on the way soon, I need to reexamine what we are spending our dollars on. Excessive insurance against engine wear, in the form of synthetic oil and frequent change intervals, may be too expensive to justify.
armtdm, I wish your son luck with his Rodeo. The 3.2L is definitely an oil-burner! It's easily the #1 complaint from owners who frequent www.itog.com and, to a lesser extent, the Trooper and Isuzu Owner's Club boards here at Edmund's. The oil consumption does not concern me regarding long-term durability of the engine, but the additional cost of adding a quart of oil every 1k - 3k miles (depending on how lucky you are with your particular vehicle) is a bit annoying, especially if you're using oil that's 4 bucks a quart or more.
Bluedevils, thanks. For what it's worth, I feel switching directly to synthetic is OK at any amount of miles under 100,000 as long as the vehicle has seen regular maintenance. As for vehicles that have been neglected, who knows?
Mr. Shiftright, my point about synthetic oil and cooling was not to suggest that ANY oil is a replacement for a proper water-cooling system but that in the event your primary cooling system should shut down, it would be best to have a lubricant that withstands thermal degradation well ... the way PAO and especially polyol esthers do. Your engine will survive a lot longer before the inevitable occurs ... and that might make the difference between you getting safely to a garage and seizing up right there along side the road.
As far as fuel mileage claims, I think you should be troubled/skeptical about claims of 10% more mileage. Personally, I feel comfortable telling people to expect 1-2% and if that ends up being a percent or two more, that's just gravy. Cars have come along way in the past 10-20 years. Fuel injection, leaner burning engines, low rolling resistance tires, aerodynamic bodywork, etc ... have gotten quite a lot out of a gallon of gasoline. I only figure a couple percent increase when switching from dino oil to synthetics. The synthetics have a lower coefficient of friction and this reduction of internal engine friction is where the gains are coming from. It's kind of like the new trend toward thinner and thinner oils in order to reduce pumping losses. I'm surprised that more manufacturers don't recommend synthetic oil. I'm guessing they don't want it to get around that their cars require a "special" sort of "expensive" maintenance.
I remember an interview with an engineer from one of the big three in either Car & Driver or Road & Track and he was asked (years ago) why the "American" car companies hadn't come out with DOHC, 4-valve engines and he used as an excuse the reciprocating mass and additional friction that came with all those moving parts. Despite the fact that I think he was stalling for those companies' lack of innovation at the time, there IS something to his argument. Synthetic oils minimize that loss of energy inherent with a reciprocating engine. So, you aren't actually 'creating' energy with a synthetic oil, you are minimizing waste caused by friction.
"If an engine is consuming oil, something has worn out, or some clearance is quite large ..."
Not necessarily. It is expected that most engines in good running order may require as much as a quart of oil between changes. If you switch to synthetic, this amount will drop off precipitously. As for why? I gave you my THEORIES. They may be flawed/wrong but as most people (myself and adc100 included) will tell that have tried synthetic in a properly running engine (gasoline, I have very little experience with diesels), your consumption goes down ... WAY down.
Owner's Manual on my son's 97 Rodeo V6 3.2 L recommends 10W30 not 5W30. I checked that out before switching it over. Actually, on the 96 Mystique it calls for the 5W30 and I have run 10W30 until the last change. As daughter is in a colder climate at school I went to the Amsoil 0W30 to give it a try. Never had a problem with the 10W30 though. It is a pain to have multiple weights around though for topping off purposes.
Someone pointed out that they did not like the fact that Amsoil did nto produce its own base stock like Mobil. Well, does a small company like RedLine produce its own also. I doubt it. They buy and add their own concoction of additives etc. Does Mobil even make all of their own additives? I doubt that also. Cannot be an expert or the most efficient producer in everything.
armtdm, My point in comparing Mobil and Amsoil is not to insinuate that one is better than another. I just doubt, that a small company like Amsoil which started out with a radically different formula, can do things with PAO beyond the capabilities of one of the world's largest producers of PAO ... Mobil. It's possible, but unlikely.
I actually don't have it out for Amsoil. I think it's *probably* a comparable product to Mobil 1, Valvoline Synpower and other full synthetic, PAO formulas. I just don't like the way it is marketed and all the questionable hype. I used to take Shaklee when I was younger and I had friends who tried selling Amway. I'm turned off to anything sold via MLM. This is a large part, but not quite all, of my aversion.
So, I assume that Redline, which appears to be an even smaller company then Amsoil falls into the same category based upon your commetns above? That is in terms of the quality of the product?
No, Redline seems to be a small company that took an established, aerospace technology, jet turbine lubricants, and adapted that technology for use in automotive engines, specifically racing applications. No one else I know uses the same sort of base stocks and NO ONE has their reputation on the track.
The two companies are very different. Their product are two different formulations and the route they've chosen to get their product to market is not at all the same either.
earlier on the implication you stated was that smaller companies did not have the technology, know how to compete with a giant like Mobil and that Amsoil purchased its base stock implying that it could not compete with the giant. My comment is, so does RedLine. They are extremely small, purchase the base stocks and additives so does that make them a poorer quality, no, probably not. It is what you do with the products that count. That was my only comment and you keep avoiding the fact that RedLine also purchases base stock.
armtdm stated: "you stated was that smaller companies did not have the technology, know how to compete with a giant like Mobil and that Amsoil purchased its base stock implying that it could not compete with the giant."
No, that's not what I said. Let me try to re-word it for you: Between two companies using the SAME base stocks (PAO) I would trust the manufacturer (and early automotive pioneer) of the base stock that also sells a finished product rather than merely a reseller/blender of that same base stock ... like Amsoil. A clear distinction.
Sure, Amsoil pioneered the use of synthetics in this country, but their earlier base-stocks proved unsuitable and when they switched to PAO, they had to start from square one.
Redline, who I ASSUME is buying their base stocks from some other company, is using a different base stock altogether. Perhaps, if the the #1 manufacturer of polyol esthers came out with their own engine oil formulation, I'd have to reconsider who I'd buy from.
Even then, Redline has years of experience working with the stuff in automotive applications all the while getting feedback from race teams and motorists so it STILL wouldn't be a comparable situation.
The manufacturer of these jet engine lubricants probably won't get into the market because it's such a narrowly defined segment and Redline's reputation among many car guys is already too strong to compete with.
The idea that an engine that requires a quart every few hundred miles will suddenly stop or decrease for no other reason than a switch to synthetic oil is ludicrous. That properties of synthetics might decrease the loss of oil by a few percentile points under certain circumstances might be believable, particularly if the problem is leakage caused by seals. I would suspect that current synthetics have additives to reduce the chance of seal leakage because of past concerns.
Also the idea of huge mileage increases with synthetics is not reasonable. Sionce switching to synthetic my mileage has decreased, but this a fucntion of the weather and winter blend gasoline. Mileage is a factor of many variables. One of the main factors is the engine. If you look at the gas mileage as a function of the engine life, it is like a sine wave. The initial mileage is not great, but gets better until it reaches a certain point (usually between 3-10,000 miles)it then will stay near this peak until it slowly tapers off as the engine wears. I personally think that the mileage improvements attributed to synthetics is actually the natural progression of the engine. I am not saying that synthetics are not worth the effort, just that it depends on the situation. If you are determined to stick with a 3-5,000 oil change interval, I would stay with dino. If you use oil on a frequent basis, you would probably not find it cost effective to switch, but it also would not hurt to try it for a year if you are willing to spend the money. As for blending, why waste money and effort?
"an engine that requires a quart every few hundred miles will suddenly stop or decrease for no other reason than a switch to synthetic oil is ludicrous."
and:
"the idea of huge mileage increases with synthetics is not reasonable."
Who here is saying these things? I'm certainly not. I said the use of one quart between oil changes (3,000-5,000 miles) is often considered 'normal' and I've explained why I feel MODEST gains of mileage while using synthetics are realistic.
i can understand having differant weights of dino oil as in 5-30,10-40 etc. but why is there differant weights in sny. oils . I use 5-30 mobil 1 in all my autos and truck. thank you for your help on this
ScottyGMC4x4, while it's true that synthetic oil performs better over a wider temperature range than dead-dino juice, it is still best to tailor your weight of oil to your application ... even with synthetics.
Yes, 5W30 synthetic is good for about 80-90% of modern automotive applications but if I lived in the southern 1/3 of the country I'd use 10W30 as it has a more stable base oil and in really high heat and/or over longer periods of time, your engine will be protected better.
If I had an older car that tended to consume some oil AND I was operating continually in 90+ degree heat, I'd use a 15W50 or 20W50 synthetic motor oil. I also tend to use this ultra-tough stuff in air-cooled engines that will see heavy use ... like gas-powered generators that may be run for 6-8+ hours at a time in an emergency.
I currently use synthetic in both of my vehicles but don't see the need for everyone to use. MrShiftRight is correct, most of us will never see the high mileage so why waste the money. My wife have a '96 Chrysler Town & Country with the 3.3l V-6. I use the van frequently to pull a 10' utility trailer loaded with three dirt bikes. I figure the synthetic can't hurt when towing during the hot summer months in Missouri. By the way, this van will go through a quart of oil every 1500 to 2500 miles. I use Mobil 1 at oil changes but then I add conventional 10W40 in between when the oil is low. I could add 2 or 3 quarts in between my 7500 mile interval oil changes. My other car is a VW Passat with the 1.8 turbo engine. Again, I use Mobil 1 here but only because of the turbo. Does it make a difference, I don't know! Again, is synthetic necessary for everyone, I doubt it. The only cars I used it in the past was in my diesels. But like MrShiftRight, that was because changing the oil in my Mercedes diesel was not that much fun and finding CG rated oil is difficult outside of synthetic.
Yep, that's about my sentiment....I use synthetic as a "target" oil for certain situations...if my car isn't in those situations in which synthetic excels, I don't use it. So I vary my use, not only from car to car, but from driving situation to driving situation. Right now, the Benz diesel has synthetic, but the two Alfas do not. Last year, for the summer trip across the desert, I used synthetic in the little Alfa, and it ran just great in 100+ degree heat. But the little guy holds 7 quarts plus a $10 filter, and really, the synthetic oil looked pretty grungy after 5,000 miles so I dropped it.
Also, and possibly not related, the synthetic did not prevent a camshaft failure two years ago.
Did I see you mention the other day that you own a Trooper? If that's true, I'm glad. Choosing a Trooper says a lot about the owner. Why don't we ever see you in the Isuzu Owner's Club?
I was not refering to anything in particular that you said, but a while back, a statement was made about engines that stop using oil with the switch to synthetics. There have also been claims about switching to synthetic to get more than 1-2 mpg better performance. On a 20 mpg vehicle that is over a 5-10% improvement. Synthetics are a good product, but extreme claims will do more harm than good. I personally would like to see the manufacturers recommend synthetics more and to make the recommended oil change interval with synthetics above 6000 miles.
I have a new 2001 Suburban LT with the new 8.1 engine - only 750 miles. I want to do an oil change right now, or at least before 1000 miles and my overall intent is to use synthetic oil - probably Amsoil or Mobil 1.
My question is should I change to synthetic now? I know I should probably change the oil again at about 3000 miles after it is most or all of the way broke in. Should I just not worry about synthetic now and start it at the 3000 mile change or should I go ahead and put synthetic now in and only do a filter change at 3000 miles?
I realize that it is OK to do the breakin with synthetic oil, but don't want to throw money away if at 3000 miles I should do a full chnage rather than just the filter.
Steve, I agree. Some of the zealots that advocate synthetic oil for everything from gouged cylinder walls and broken crankshafts to protecting the ozone layer and healing arthritis are doing more harm to an extremely useful product than the 'old timers' who are set in their way and still believe in running 'straight 30' in everything they own.
hi, I'm an Amsoil dealer. In response to your question, I would change the oil and filter at 1,000 miles. When you reach 2,000 miles change the oil and filter again. When you reach 3,000 miles then change to synthetic oil with a new oil filter. I've been doing this for over 30 years and this seems to work for me and all my customers who buy new cars. The reason I do it this way is because when an engine is new, it has what is called break in particles, parts that are wearing in to seat. this causes a sludge if you would call it but is very fine and you need to keep the oil clean and free from this stuff which is normal. So a couple of oil changes is all it takes to keep that engine trouble free for many miles. This is just my suggestion. But I haven't had a bad engine in all my life. I hope this helps you. Good luck.
I agree with "brorjace" on all but one topic. I have seen it written on the internet that the use of synthetic will save the ozone layer. I read it on the internet, it has to be true! Doesn't it?
Mr. Shiftright, mine is a '98 and actually I don't need a front bumper. You could probably post it on www.itog.com and get some response. Was yours an older Troop?
By the way, I've pretty much decided to go with full synthetic in the Trooper, at least the engine anyway. I hope my vehicle's consumption rate of 1 quart every 2,000 miles or so decreases a bit. I'd hate to be adding $4/qt Mobil1 every 2k miles. I'm planning to go 6,000 miles on the oil and filter, with an extra filter change halfway in-between. Hard to believe Isuzu's recommended change interval is 6 months / 7,500 miles (except "severe duty which is 3 / 3,000).
Unless your Trooper's oil filter is tiny, 6,000 miles is not too long to leave it in place. I do this all the time with my Hondas.
Let us know about the oil consumption. It should decrease about 50% or so. All vehicles are different so it's hard to say for sure. Hondas burn very little oil while Mitsubishis seem to consume a lot, even when relatively new. I have little or no experience with other Japanese makes. Keep us posted.
"Hard to believe Isuzu's recommended change interval is 6 months / 7,500 miles (except 'severe' duty which is 3 / 3,000)."
That seems standard for most makes. Did you read the descriptions of 'normal' and 'severe'? Most people fall into the severe category.
Manufacturers would avoid a lot of consumer misinterpretation if they changed their description of operating conditions. What they classify as "Normal" should be renamed "Ideal", and "Severe" should be renamed "Normal" since as you mention this is the condition that best describes most people's situation.
alcan, that is a very good point. "Ideal" and "normal" are much more indicative of the set of conditions provided in the typical owner's manual.
In the case of my Trooper's manual, the comments used to describe the normal and severe schedules are very generic and not too helpful. I will say that about 75% of the times my Trooper is started, it's driven 30-60 minutes before the engine is turned off. Yes, there are the occasional short errand trips on weekends, but much of the driving is fairly long commutes to work, with a mix of highway and city driving. Like many people, I have bought into the "better safe than sorry" approach of oil and filter changes every 3,000 miles.
The oil filter on the Trooper actually is fairly small, considering it's a big SUV with a fairly big (3.5L V6) motor. The filter seems no bigger than the one on a 98 Mitsu Galant or 99 Nissan Altima. The filter on my 95 Contour 2.5L V6 is much larger.
If you have the room to work with a larger filter (you can get a filter wrench on it) then I suggest asking the parts person to get you a filter that is larger yer will be the same gasket and thread fit as your OEM. I do it all the time. No room on the Contour but that laready has a good sized canister.
Comments
There's a lot to your "warm and fuzzy" explanation. Yes, I know I might be spending a little more than I HAVE TO but it's not as much as people think and there's something about this cost issue that really bugs me. Earlier, someone pointed out the savings from extending your drain interval from 3,000 to 5-6,000+ but there are other considerations as well.
I feel that an increase of 1-2% in fuel mileage is fairly realistic. So, if you spend something like $500 per year on gasoline, that 1-2% savings is a savings of $5-10. Already, that extra $20 more per year someone figured out synthetic users are spending is cut in half because of very modest gains in fuel economy.
Another consideration is oil consumption. Every engine I've ever run on synthetic has experienced less oil consumption than when the same motor was running dino juice. This includes cars, trucks and power equipment I have around the house. My '95 Civic with just under 100,000 miles on the odomoeter has seen synthetic since it had 10,000 miles on it. I have NEVER ONCE had to add a drop of oil to that car between changes. As a matter of fact, the oil level on the dipstick usually doesn't even BUDGE during that time.
My father's '94 Mercury, on the other hand, which used exclusively conventional oil began to use a quart of oil every 1,000-1,500 miles once it hit 80,000 miles. The amount of money expended on this "top-off" oil adds a significantly to the operating costs once you start disputing $5, $10 or $20 dollars.
Oh, and the time I lost my radiator on the Mass Pike between Albany, NY and Boston, I was sure glad I had synthetic motor oil in my crankcase. >;^}
--- Bror Jace
I think we need to be careful about the "miracle" properties of synthetic oil. It's just oil, doing what oil can do and doing it well...but there are limits as to its capabilities is catastrophic circumstances or under thermal stress.
I suspect the real answer is somewhere far back from the extreme...if fuel mileage increase is 1-2% (reasonable), then I might accept an equally reasonable claim of "somewhat less oil consumption (rather than from oil burning to no oil burning) and might also nod my head at a claim of synthetic withstanding a higher temperature (to a POINT!) than regular oil and so perhaps affording more protection PRIOR TO severe engine overheating.
I can swallow all that if that's what you mean to say.
Actually, the level of oil in your engine going down can be also attributed to a lot of other things (in addition to physical wear and deteriorating flexible seals) including, but not limited to:
1) The additive package (VI-viscosity improvers) in the oil breaking down and boiling off.
2) Petroleum oil boiling off under high temps.
3) Sticking rings allowing more oil to bypass them since they are not sealing ideally.
So,
1) Synthetic oil has less VI and some formulations with only a minor spread between the winter and summer numbers have no VI at all. This keeps the engine cleaner as when VI breaks down, some of it boils off but some also forms sludge and hard deposits. And the fact that many synth oils have little or no VI accounts for some of the consumption difference.
2) Synthetic compounds such as PAO (Mobil 1) or Polyol Esthers (Redline) boil off only at high temperatures the inside of an engine never sees. There's no consumption here either.
3) Some ring and cylinder wall temps cook petroleum oils and/or reduce their ability to lubricate the rings and allow thr ings to do their job (seal the combustion chambers against the crankcase) while synthetics better survive these higher temps and keep the rings working better. The rings are essentially seals and when they are working better, the engine allows less oil into the combustion chambers, thus more of it stays in the crankcase.
More Shiftright: "I'm ... equally skeptical about how an overheating engine is going to be saved by synthetic oil. As was pointed out, oil is a poor coolant, so if your engine is "over the top" in meltdown mode, no oil is going to save it, seems to me....didn't save my friend's race engine at Daytona, for one example."
Oil does a LOT of the engine cooling (and preventing of friction which causes heat) and the better the oil (lower coefficient of fricton and resistant to thermal breakdown) the cooler the engine will run ...assuming it is air cooled or the existing liquid cooling system is not functioning. No, synthetic oil won't save a completely lost cause and I don't know how long the motor would have lasted if I had to drive more than the 10+ miles at 60mph that I did once I noticed the temp guage pinned on 'hot,' but I believe the oil kept my car from damaging itself under those severe conditions.
The basic point is, that synthetics will put up with these very harsh conditions better than petroleum oils. The high heat you speak of works against petroleum oils more than synthetics which is why it's better to use synthetics in those cases.
--- Bror Jace
But thank you for taking the time to present your views so well...I will re-read them again at leisure and mull them over.
I think you have to expand your mind and consider that engine oil can leave the crankcase in more ways than merely rings and worn valve guides ... and I'm not talking about leaks either. Oils and their additive packages break down and boil off ... and this happens less (if at all) with most synthetics. I've gotten this from chemists that work in the petro-chemical industry and I've seen evidence of it myself.
The rings-sealing-better-when-lubed-with-synthetic-oil theory is mine alone. I'm not sure of it but it makes sense to me nd I consider it a good possibility along with what I've written in the additives thread. I'll have a short post for that one too.
I wouldn't switch an old Alpha Romeo over to synthetics to see if it will burn less oil. I doubt it. I don't mean to suggest that synthetic oil won't burn in an older, heavily worn engine but for reasonably current engines that are experiencing 'normal' oil consumption, this will diminish significantly upon switching to synthetics for ... I believe ... a combination of different of factors ... many I explained before.
I've talked to at least a half a dozen people on the 'net that experienced the same phenomenon I do when using synthetic and a number of mfrs may even claim that on their product. So, assuming we're not suffering from independent mass delusions, can you explain what's going on?
--- Bror Jace
How much of a decrease in consumption are we talking about here? From what to what? then I could tell you what I think. I believe (please correct me if I'm mistaken here) that someone earlier on mentioned going from a quart every 1,000-1,500 miles to no consumption. That was hard for me to believe.
So if it's from one shotglass of oil consumption in 3,000 miles to one shotglassl in 5,000 miles, sure I'll believe that the sturdier properties of synthetic would account for that.
But if the contention is that synthetic turns a smoking, sniveling wreck of an engine into a smooth, clean-burning swiss watch of a powerplant, no, I can't go there.
Also , Mr Shiftright- pray tell-what fluid carries off the heat generated in main, and rod bearings?? Just curious.
Anyway, anyone who has to justify the extra cost of syn should not use it IMHO.
Now was Mobil 1 suppose to extend the life of these vehicles? Don't bother answering.
You didn't read what was posted in 5 lines right after apologizing for not reading someones else's post fully.
You are also very choosy by dismissing info that is not verifiable by you. That's pretty arrogant.
heng, there are no guarantees in life that your cars will be around for ridiculous amounts of miles but as I've stated before, when you look at the big picture, the extra costs associated with synthetic are negligible. Think of it as cheap insurance.
--- Bror Jace
Later
Al
On cooling, what I was trying to express is that oil is not a good cooling agent in a water cooled car...if we took all the water out of the block, the oil itself could only absorb so much heat without being able to dissipate it to the outside air through the block...the oil, ANY oil, would soon overheat and burn up. In an air cooled car, of course, you often have a thinner alloy block and cylinder heads with finned cooling. This allows the heat to leave the oil. In a water cooled engine, with a thicker block and no fins and often not great air flow around the block, the oil would soon be overwhelmed by the job of dissipating large quantities of heat energy. There simply isn't the volume of oil or the conductive means to do it. Heat energy from combustion would come into the oil faster than the oil could get rid of it. Think of how much water circulates to the cool outside air every minute, carrying off that heat. How could almost "stationary" oil do that through a thick block? Just look at a late model Porsche air-cooled engine, and see all the engineering, with alloys, fins and huge oil coolers....no water cooled car is equipped like that.
FUEL MILEAGE--what troubles me about claims for 10% fuel mileage increases is that there is no way to account for the extra energy that has suddenly appeared to do that. There is only so much energy in a gallon of gas...through efficient design, turbocharging, better intake and exhausts, we can somewhat increase the work that that gallon of fuel can do....but to suddenly increase an engine's fuel efficiency by some 10%---that presumes a release of a lot more energy (car goes further on same amount of fuel, in other words)....more than I could account for by the diminishment of friction by using a superior oil.
OIL CONSUMPTION--if an engine is consuming oil, something has worn out, or some clearance is quite large (like race engines, which are built "loose", for a good reason). How can oil resist the force of combustion in rings? I just can't fathom it. If you've got blow-by, say in a diesel, how can synthetic prevent a 21:1 compression ratio from doing what it wants in there?
With regards to the milage increases: syn will give anywhere from 2% to 30% increases in industrial applications (Exxon's numbers). I agree with you that 10% is probably too high. Personally I can see 3% to 5%. My 94 Corsica has given as High as 39 mpg with a 3.1L using syn. It never gave that high with dino oil but I have no direct correlation.
Oil consumption: like I said syn in a sound engine uses almost no oil. Its a fact of life. The syn has a better attraction to metal than conventional oil and therefore seals at rings better. That from a lub engineer. I can't prove it to you.
Later
Have a good weekend.
Al
My wife and I have a 95 Ford Contour and 98 Isuzu Trooper. I change the oil on both vehicles myself. We bought the Contour used and previous owner used Mobil1. I have continued that practice with 5W30. Got 2 Mobil1 filters via a free promo but will probably go with the Motorcraft filter; I've heard it's a Purolator Pure One on the inside, and it's 3 bucks at Wal-Mart.
I switched from dino to synthetic blend (always 5W30) on the Trooper at 15k miles (we bought it used at 7k miles). These forums have taught me that synthetic blend is a waste due to the low ratio of synthetic vs. dino oil. I'm considering whether to switch to full synthetic in our Trooper, which has 42,000 miles. I use the Isuzu brand filter, $4 each. Part of my dilemma is that the 3.5L V6 engine and the earlier 3.2L V6 in Troopers are well known to consume quite a bit of oil. A quart every 1000 miles is not rare at all. My consumption seems to be in the range of 1 quart every 2000-2500 miles. I don't relish the thought of adding 1 or 2 quarts of $4/qt. synthetic between oil changes. Also, my impression from reading much about the Trooper's engine is that oil and filter should be replaced every 3000 miles. If running synthetic, I will probably extend this to 5000 or 6000 miles, but I may change the filter every 3000. Does anyone consider 42,000 miles too many to safely switch to a full synthetic? Do you think my oil consumption will increase or decrease if I switch? Is it a bad idea to switch to synthetic in an engine that has a history of higher oil consumption than other engines in other vehicles?
What's my point? Hmm, I had to think about that for a second. I guess I have one statement and one question:
1) Justifying the cost of synthetic oil seems like a valid thing to do.
2) Are you interested in educating and converting average motorists about the benefits of using synthetic oil, or are you hoping to maintain some sort of elitist club of people "in the know?" The average Joe won't change to an oil that is 4x more money per quart just because a few people on Edmund's tell him to. He needs to feel that there is some benefit to using the product, and he needs to know that he may be able to save time, and recoup some of the cost difference, by changing his oil and/or filter less frequently. Some of your posts come off as pretty snooty, and that doesn't really lend any credibility to your claims. I do appreciate the information and opinions you contribute, though perhaps you should strive for brorjace's tact.
Thanks in advance folks.
Bluedevils: Probably valid observations on your part.
"Don't most people consider whether an item is "worth the money" - to them - before they decide to buy/use it?" Yea- I guess I look at that $15,000 to $40,000 vehicle and knowing what I know about syn and knowing the cost benefits, I find it hard to worry about that small cost differences considering the huge benefits. That's just me.
As far as the Trooper. I believe thats another matter worthy of more soul searching. I had a 88 Ranger that used the same amount you are talking about. This was during the time I didn't use syn. As I considered converting- the oil pan was replaced and Ford advised not to use syn because of it being incompatable with Syn- typical Ford. When I switched to the syn the consumption dropped maybe 1/3 less. After 2000 miles on the oil change the consumption went up. I used 2 quarts of syn mixed with conventional. One of the 2 quarts was the 15W50 Mobil 1.
I think if I were you I would try a witches brew of the conventional oil you think is good, 1qt. 15W50 syn, and 1 qt 10W/30. Then play it by ear. Using a potentially better filter than the Isuzu and making up the oil usage with alternating 1 qt syn and 1 qt conventional could give you a happy medium of changing say 5 or 6 k. This should be OK given the fact that you are adding a couple of quarts of clean oil during that time.
As far as converting the average Joe to syn. I've sort of given up outside of this board. They find it totally nuts to spend $4.50 vs $1.50 for Dino oil. Its a different story on this board though, as a lot of people are here to learn. There are those who want to only bash syn and no matter what -syn sucks. I then pointlessly respond in kind. (bad idea). I do hope people read and make their own decision- whatever. Personally I hope the Joe Sixpacks on the outside keep using Jiffy Lube with Dino oil. They'll be happy, oil companies/Jiffy Lube will be happy and it's good for the economy. I also believe if syn became the standard, engines would be built cheaper.
See ya
Al
I, well my son, just purchased a 97 Rodeo 3.2L V6 with 58,000 miles. Engine not sludged up but a greasy dark film inside the oil filler/valve cover. All my others are clean having used synthetic for years. Anyway, I switched it to Amsoil 10W30 full synthetic. Based upon my experience, this is now the third engine I have switched later on in life (one at 49,000, another at 30,000) I have had no problems, did the rear end and tranny with synthetic too. Only been a month so we shall see. I have not heard that the 3.2L is an oil burner, will see.
adc100, well, I too have tried converting friends and relatives to synthetics to no avail. I have even given them free oil and showed them reams of oil analysis results. They don't care for two reasons. First, the price and second, the owner's manual. If it says 3000 miles they will not alter that!!! And many dealer service reps know so little about lubrication that they say synthetics are a waste of money.. Of course they benefit. They are so afraid of warranty issues etc. I have just given up.
I've always been advised that the Isuzu filter is well-suited to the engine, but I forget why. If I tried to guess without digging back through the Isuzu archives I'd look stupid, so I won't.
Regarding cost, a $10 monthly difference in the cost of changing oil and filter, times 2 vehicles, may be an important amount to some people. With a baby on the way soon, I need to reexamine what we are spending our dollars on. Excessive insurance against engine wear, in the form of synthetic oil and frequent change intervals, may be too expensive to justify.
armtdm, I wish your son luck with his Rodeo. The 3.2L is definitely an oil-burner! It's easily the #1 complaint from owners who frequent www.itog.com and, to a lesser extent, the Trooper and Isuzu Owner's Club boards here at Edmund's. The oil consumption does not concern me regarding long-term durability of the engine, but the additional cost of adding a quart of oil every 1k - 3k miles (depending on how lucky you are with your particular vehicle) is a bit annoying, especially if you're using oil that's 4 bucks a quart or more.
Mr. Shiftright, my point about synthetic oil and cooling was not to suggest that ANY oil is a replacement for a proper water-cooling system but that in the event your primary cooling system should shut down, it would be best to have a lubricant that withstands thermal degradation well ... the way PAO and especially polyol esthers do. Your engine will survive a lot longer before the inevitable occurs ... and that might make the difference between you getting safely to a garage and seizing up right there along side the road.
As far as fuel mileage claims, I think you should be troubled/skeptical about claims of 10% more mileage. Personally, I feel comfortable telling people to expect 1-2% and if that ends up being a percent or two more, that's just gravy. Cars have come along way in the past 10-20 years. Fuel injection, leaner burning engines, low rolling resistance tires, aerodynamic bodywork, etc ... have gotten quite a lot out of a gallon of gasoline. I only figure a couple percent increase when switching from dino oil to synthetics. The synthetics have a lower coefficient of friction and this reduction of internal engine friction is where the gains are coming from. It's kind of like the new trend toward thinner and thinner oils in order to reduce pumping losses. I'm surprised that more manufacturers don't recommend synthetic oil. I'm guessing they don't want it to get around that their cars require a "special" sort of "expensive" maintenance.
I remember an interview with an engineer from one of the big three in either Car & Driver or Road & Track and he was asked (years ago) why the "American" car companies hadn't come out with DOHC, 4-valve engines and he used as an excuse the reciprocating mass and additional friction that came with all those moving parts. Despite the fact that I think he was stalling for those companies' lack of innovation at the time, there IS something to his argument. Synthetic oils minimize that loss of energy inherent with a reciprocating engine. So, you aren't actually 'creating' energy with a synthetic oil, you are minimizing waste caused by friction.
"If an engine is consuming oil, something has worn out, or some clearance is quite large ..."
Not necessarily. It is expected that most engines in good running order may require as much as a quart of oil between changes. If you switch to synthetic, this amount will drop off precipitously. As for why? I gave you my THEORIES. They may be flawed/wrong but as most people (myself and adc100 included) will tell that have tried synthetic in a properly running engine (gasoline, I have very little experience with diesels), your consumption goes down ... WAY down.
--- Bror Jace
Someone pointed out that they did not like the fact that Amsoil did nto produce its own base stock like Mobil. Well, does a small company like RedLine produce its own also. I doubt it. They buy and add their own concoction of additives etc. Does Mobil even make all of their own additives? I doubt that also. Cannot be an expert or the most efficient producer in everything.
I actually don't have it out for Amsoil. I think it's *probably* a comparable product to Mobil 1, Valvoline Synpower and other full synthetic, PAO formulas. I just don't like the way it is marketed and all the questionable hype. I used to take Shaklee when I was younger and I had friends who tried selling Amway. I'm turned off to anything sold via MLM. This is a large part, but not quite all, of my aversion.
--- Bror Jace
The two companies are very different. Their product are two different formulations and the route they've chosen to get their product to market is not at all the same either.
--- Bror Jace
No, that's not what I said. Let me try to re-word it for you: Between two companies using the SAME base stocks (PAO) I would trust the manufacturer (and early automotive pioneer) of the base stock that also sells a finished product rather than merely a reseller/blender of that same base stock ... like Amsoil. A clear distinction.
Sure, Amsoil pioneered the use of synthetics in this country, but their earlier base-stocks proved unsuitable and when they switched to PAO, they had to start from square one.
Redline, who I ASSUME is buying their base stocks from some other company, is using a different base stock altogether. Perhaps, if the the #1 manufacturer of polyol esthers came out with their own engine oil formulation, I'd have to reconsider who I'd buy from.
Even then, Redline has years of experience working with the stuff in automotive applications all the while getting feedback from race teams and motorists so it STILL wouldn't be a comparable situation.
The manufacturer of these jet engine lubricants probably won't get into the market because it's such a narrowly defined segment and Redline's reputation among many car guys is already too strong to compete with.
--- Bror Jace
Also the idea of huge mileage increases with synthetics is not reasonable. Sionce switching to synthetic my mileage has decreased, but this a fucntion of the weather and winter blend gasoline. Mileage is a factor of many variables. One of the main factors is the engine. If you look at the gas mileage as a function of the engine life, it is like a sine wave. The initial mileage is not great, but gets better until it reaches a certain point (usually between 3-10,000 miles)it then will stay near this peak until it slowly tapers off as the engine wears. I personally think that the mileage improvements attributed to synthetics is actually the natural progression of the engine. I am not saying that synthetics are not worth the effort, just that it depends on the situation. If you are determined to stick with a 3-5,000 oil change interval, I would stay with dino. If you use oil on a frequent basis, you would probably not find it cost effective to switch, but it also would not hurt to try it for a year if you are willing to spend the money. As for blending, why waste money and effort?
"an engine that requires a quart every few hundred miles will suddenly stop or decrease for no other reason than a switch to synthetic oil is ludicrous."
and:
"the idea of huge mileage increases with synthetics is not reasonable."
Who here is saying these things? I'm certainly not. I said the use of one quart between oil changes (3,000-5,000 miles) is often considered 'normal' and I've explained why I feel MODEST gains of mileage while using synthetics are realistic.
--- Bror Jace
differant weights in sny. oils . I use 5-30 mobil 1 in all my autos and truck. thank you for your
help on this
Yes, 5W30 synthetic is good for about 80-90% of modern automotive applications but if I lived in the southern 1/3 of the country I'd use 10W30 as it has a more stable base oil and in really high heat and/or over longer periods of time, your engine will be protected better.
If I had an older car that tended to consume some oil AND I was operating continually in 90+ degree heat, I'd use a 15W50 or 20W50 synthetic motor oil. I also tend to use this ultra-tough stuff in air-cooled engines that will see heavy use ... like gas-powered generators that may be run for 6-8+ hours at a time in an emergency.
--- Bror Jace
MrShiftRight is correct, most of us will never see the high mileage so why waste the money.
My wife have a '96 Chrysler Town & Country with the 3.3l V-6. I use the van frequently to pull a 10' utility trailer loaded with three dirt bikes. I figure the synthetic can't hurt when towing during the hot summer months in Missouri. By the way, this van will go through a quart of oil every 1500 to 2500 miles. I use Mobil 1 at oil changes but then I add conventional 10W40 in between when the oil is low. I could add 2 or 3 quarts in between my 7500 mile interval oil changes.
My other car is a VW Passat with the 1.8 turbo engine. Again, I use Mobil 1 here but only because of the turbo. Does it make a difference, I don't know!
Again, is synthetic necessary for everyone, I doubt it. The only cars I used it in the past was in my diesels. But like MrShiftRight, that was because changing the oil in my Mercedes diesel was not that much fun and finding CG rated oil is difficult outside of synthetic.
Also, and possibly not related, the synthetic did not prevent a camshaft failure two years ago.
My question is should I change to synthetic now? I know I should probably change the oil again at about 3000 miles after it is most or all of the way broke in. Should I just not worry about synthetic now and start it at the 3000 mile change or should I go ahead and put synthetic now in and only do a filter change at 3000 miles?
I realize that it is OK to do the breakin with synthetic oil, but don't want to throw money away if at 3000 miles I should do a full chnage rather than just the filter.
Any Ideas?
Thanks
Dan
--- Bror Jace
I read it on the internet, it has to be true! Doesn't it?
By the way, I've pretty much decided to go with full synthetic in the Trooper, at least the engine anyway. I hope my vehicle's consumption rate of 1 quart every 2,000 miles or so decreases a bit. I'd hate to be adding $4/qt Mobil1 every 2k miles. I'm planning to go 6,000 miles on the oil and filter, with an extra filter change halfway in-between. Hard to believe Isuzu's recommended change interval is 6 months / 7,500 miles (except "severe duty which is 3 / 3,000).
Let us know about the oil consumption. It should decrease about 50% or so. All vehicles are different so it's hard to say for sure. Hondas burn very little oil while Mitsubishis seem to consume a lot, even when relatively new. I have little or no experience with other Japanese makes. Keep us posted.
"Hard to believe Isuzu's recommended change interval is 6 months / 7,500 miles (except 'severe' duty which is 3 / 3,000)."
That seems standard for most makes. Did you read the descriptions of 'normal' and 'severe'? Most people fall into the severe category.
--- Bror Jace
Most of it is dumbed down and the auto manufacturer's motives have to be taken into account when reading it.
--- Bror Jace
In the case of my Trooper's manual, the comments used to describe the normal and severe schedules are very generic and not too helpful. I will say that about 75% of the times my Trooper is started, it's driven 30-60 minutes before the engine is turned off. Yes, there are the occasional short errand trips on weekends, but much of the driving is fairly long commutes to work, with a mix of highway and city driving. Like many people, I have bought into the "better safe than sorry" approach of oil and filter changes every 3,000 miles.
The oil filter on the Trooper actually is fairly small, considering it's a big SUV with a fairly big (3.5L V6) motor. The filter seems no bigger than the one on a 98 Mitsu Galant or 99 Nissan Altima. The filter on my 95 Contour 2.5L V6 is much larger.
No room on the Contour but that laready has a good sized canister.