Engine Oil - A slippery subject Part 2

ywilson

I took my Explorer Sport for service and asked the rep about this since I am not getting any more free oil change services. He told me that Ford is going to use a 5w-20 but the 5w-30 is good enough. "Don't sweat it at all" were his exact words. One works as good as the other. So you Ford motorheads out there, 5w-30 is good for your vehicles.

brorjace

CarJim, Ford Explorers and underinflated Firestone tires. What a PERFECT example of the vehicle manufacturer giving advice that's NOT in you and your vehicle's best interest!

That even goes to show that following the manufacturer's advice, contrary to what you know in your heart to be right, (I tend to inflate my tires closer to the max) can even be downright dangerous!

Bravo!! >:^D

5W20 is best for Ford's (and Honda's) corporate goals, NOT your engine!

--- Bror Jace

mrdetailer

5W-20 for Fords and Hondas.

My Lube manager saw a video where a 10W-30 gummed up the valves on a new Ford. It seized the engine. So I wouldn't recommend that.

This test was not on 5W-30.

For those with overhead cams and hydraulic lifters the 5W-30s extra ability to flow better really makes a difference if temperatures are in the 40s and below. Those cars have a tendency to tap until the oil warms up. I know the manufacturers say it's not a problem, but I'd still rather have it minimized.

I've also been surprized about how much easier it is to start as well using a 5W instead of a 10W.

8u6hfd

I heard about the issue in Goss' Garage radio show also. And because that owner used 5w30, they voided the powertrain warranty. For liability reasons, Pat Goss recommends using 5w20 oil whether its synthetic or not.

titanium10k

I have been using castrol 20w-50 in my dodge with 3k miles changes and haven't had any problems yet... with over 155000 miles

opera_house_wk

What a joke. Maybe in a Toyota.

zr2rando

I had a 1976 280z in Florida, 20w50 was all I used even after I moved here to North Carolina, sold it at 189k with no engine issues, no knocking, no burning...That was actually a VERY good car, be carefull on here, folks may start slamming you for using the thick stuff
see ya
Rando

al_saadallah

Well,

With that said, do you recommend that i put 10W40 in my engine? Mine has 96K on the clock.

zr2rando

8u6hfd

And what engine is it?

zr2rando

titanium10k

Rando,
I live in Florida and its warm enough to use the 20w-50 all year long. If I lived up north I would use something else. The 20w-50 seems to be working fine.....

zr2rando

I lived in NW Florida, near Pensacola. The engine almost never actually cooled off,,even overnight..
I used 20w50 Kendall mostly. Long live the truck!
see ya
Rando

vidtech

used an "SL" rated oil for the first time (valvoline 10/30).i have 1500 miles on the duke so far,i have noticed slightly less oil consumption.there must be more detergents because the oil is very dark looking already.the engine has 158k miles on it.anyone else have similiar experiences?

john339

From the LA Times, 3/13/02. Check out the quotes from the oil expert on how long oil will last between chnges:

http://cgi.latimes.com/class/highway1/yourwheels/20020313/t000018575.html

bluedevils

brorjace was mentioning the other day that he thinks Chevron's Supreme conventional oil is a high-quality product. Their product labels and web site make mention of Iso-Syn base stocks, but I didn't see much explanation of the term except this blurb from the web site's Data Sheets section:

"Chevron Supreme Motor Oils SAE 5W-20, 5W-30, 10W-30, 10W-40, and 20W-50 are formulated with ISOSYN (TM) base stocks, a shear-stable viscosity index improver, and contain detergent, dispersant, wear control, antioxidant, corrosion inhibitor, and foam suppressant additives."

I'm trying to decipher that sentence; does it mean that the ISOSYN base stocks are a viscosity index improver? What does that mean?
Does anybody know anything about Chevron Supreme?

I'm wondering if Chevron Supreme has any similarities, either in composition or expected performance, to the hydrocracked 'full synthetics,' Valvoline Max-Life, etc. If so, that would make it a *huge* bargain-- I picked up a case of 10W30 at Wal-Mart for $1.09/quart.

I did notice that the 5W30 at Wal-Mart did not have the ISOSYN on the bottle (they must still have some old stock of 5W30).

fleetwoodsimca

The LA Times article gives one pause to reconsider the Toyota phenomenon. I have a Geo Prizm (T. Corolla) that I change oil and filter on every 3K. It runs perfectly, and is a remarkable little car at 56+K.
That Chevron mumble jumble surely is intended to fill space and not tell the consumer anything! (:oÞ You might consider buying up some "old stock" to avoid the SL category a little longer.

bluedevils

Maybe I'm a little confused on why this is advisable-- it's because there is less ZDDP in many of these oils, and ZDDP has some beneficial properties (reduces wear?), and less ZDDP is a bad thing?

I'm sure the Chevron web site explains ISOSYN somewhere, but I didn't bother to search around for it.

The "Data Sheet" page does have some useful information about the oils, such as flash point, % zinc, % phosphorous, base number, sulfated ash %, pour point, viscosity index, etc. Unfortunately, I'm not well-versed on what are good and bad numbers. Any web sites that give good explanations or baselines for these types of characteristics?

pjksr

Iso-syn means hydrocracked. Proprietary name (they invented the process).

Chevron Supreme & Citgo Supergard have the highest flash points (in 5W & 10W-30) that I've found in an oil with no PAO. This means they have the highest % of hydrocracked base oil.

http://www.docs.citgo.com/msds_pi/241488.pdf

http://www.chevron.com/prodserv/nafl/auto/content/motoroils.shtm (click on MSDS)

csandste

and SJ was worse than the previous standard. Why would you avoid SL oils?

bluedevils

I thought a couple of the regulars here (brorjace, adc100, etc.?) had been cautioning that SL oils might not protect as well. I don't remember exactly *who* was suggesting this, or why SL should be avoided, but I was pretty sure that it was being mentioned here or on the Synthetic Oil forum.

pjksr

I've found, correct me if I'm wrong!

SJ: had lower flash pts, higher % anti-wear additives

SL: higher flash pts(better against sludge/breakdown), but lower anti-wear %

bluedevils

Thanks for the info in your last couple posts.

Folks, does pjksr's theory in post #1220 hold water?

bluedevils

I just read (for a second time) the past 20 or so posts for clarity of mind. Am I understanding this correctly? ZDDP is a good thing because it has anti-wear properties. But ZDDP is also a bad thing because it has some negative side effects? Therefore, a very few of the most exotic/least common oils are including moly to ensure that the oil still has enough “anti-wear” in it, in spite of the reduced ZDDP levels. The thing I do not remember is why some manufacturers have reduced the amount of ZDDP in their oils.

bluedevils

I *am* interested in the theories, concepts, terms, and industry developments. However, my main reason for following these topics is so I can do what's best for my family's vehicles, for the lowest price possible. I think some of you folks are more interested in the former discussion and less so in the latter.

Recently, my quest has been to determine how good Chevron Supreme's oil is, and whether it qualifies as an ultra-cheap way to get a high-quality hydrocracked oil. A couple folks have posted bits and pieces that lend support to this idea, but I'm hoping for more...

fleetwoodsimca

The trend here is toward the conclusion that longevity of the reciprocating mass is being jeopardized for the sake of CAFE.

bluedevils

fleetwood, I think I basically understand, though "longevity of the reciprocating mass" is way too technical for me. The SL standard basically leans more toward increased fuel economy and away from long-term protection of the engine (from wear)?

adc100

I think that this will help. One point: the standard was going to lower phosphorus ("bad" for catalytic converters) which would have cut down the amount of anti-wear additive (Phosphorus/zinc compound) This was not done. In reading some of Mobil's test materials-the they (Mobil) came to the conclusion that phosphorus was not as detremental to the catalytic converters as once thought. So I really think that Mobil helped the cause for not reducing anti-wear agents.

http://www.tosco.com/internet_pub/repository/lubes/44_tn3_4.pdf

brorjace

As I understand it, the decrease in ZDDP levels came only with the adoption of the SJ standard a few years ago.

I'm not sure what effect (if any) moving to the SL standard had on ZDDP levels.

--- Bror Jace

csandste

regarding SJ and ZDDP (not SL). I thought SL oils were like semi-synthetics as a lower price.

fleetwoodsimca

Too technical? You nailed it! (:oÞ

brorjace

I just read through this again. To clarify, I did NOT say to avoid the SL oils. It was the SJ oils that seemingly made a step backwards in terms of protection.

The SL oils seem to be a genuine improvement over SJ.

--- Bror Jace

fleetwoodsimca

Please explain the "SL... genuine improvement over SJ." I had the idea bad was going to worse! But then, I always have motorcycle engines in mind as well as cars/trucks. SG/SH was about the end of the line for automotive oils working well for motorcycles.

brorjace

Well, for motorcycles, I still think you're still S.O.L. if you want to use any old automotive oil in the crankcase. <:^(

But, according to the excellent article <b>adc100 provided a link to (it was in PDF format) above, they merely increased the protection against wear and decreased the volatility and boil-off when going to SL.

I didn't see anything that suggested they were decreasing the ZDDP in SL any further. Maybe I need to read it again?

--- Bror Jace

coonhound

Thank you for providing that link. The site is very specific and detailed.

Now what are we going to discuss here that this should end the ZDDP anti wear properties discussion?

If we want some more ZDDP we can just add a bottle of STP. But according to the article. Why would we want to add anything.

frule

So,does this mean there are still inadequate amounts of ZDDP in SL oils due to the change back when SJs appeared?

Are the SL oils comparable to the hydrocracked synths in the amount of hydrocracked in the blend?

Does this change your thinking on the Mobil-1 SL possibly having inadequate amounts of zinc?I'm still considering Amsoil,which seems to have about as good an additive package as is available,but the SLs could affect that decision.Thoughts?..TIA!

zr2rando

It is possible I read some article that stated that "fact" prematurely, the excellent article posted a couple days ago by ADC100 mentioned that they decided against lowering the phosphorous from .1% down to .08%, but they had previously planned on it,,,I could have seen some article printed (and now considered inaccurate)
before they made that decision ...
It does look clear though that decreasing the phosphorous (taking the zinc along with it) was strictly for the health of the emissions system/catalytic converter..just looks like they started that effort back with the SJ oil.
Looks like I may need to apologize to the SL folks, and start complaining to the SJ folks!!!
and COONHOUND, we can still complain about the reduction of the ZDDP, we just have to keep in mind that we started losing it further back than we realized

joffficer

I've been using snythetic oils for about 6 years now (in different vehicles). I noticed a difference in my toyota truck's 2.4L (performance/mileage) as well as my 5.0 Mustang. Both engines started and ran better. I also use syn in my '95 Dodge Ram, but didn't seem to see/feel much difference.
The question I have is this... Will it make much difference if I use one brand then another (not at the same time). I mainly use pennzoil, but have picked up clearenced Valvoline and Mobil 1 (5qts under $10!) I was told years ago to stick with one brand, but that was for the dino stuff.

lukjack

I have to admit, its a Sat. night, and am on my third beer. This site is pretty technical for the average person just trying to get some good advice on oil...

Seems like you all are over analyzing the situation. I think most cars are getting well over 100,000 miles and most people are not very anal about their maintenance. Jiffy lube every 3000-5000 miles...Am I missing something??

adc100

Switching conventional oils is no problem because the seals see only conventional oil. Put personally I think that switching back and forth from syn to petroleum or switching syn brands constantly will adversely affect seal life. I have no real proof of this but syns are made to control seal swell and different amounts of PAOs, Esters, and whatnot could disrupt the different swelling rates and leave you with a leaking seal. Just a thought.

rayfbaird

Engine oil is a hotly contested subject for various reasons. Among them:

Constantly changing standards
Denial that Synthetic can be used for extended drains;
Addition of synthetics and hydrocracked (Highly refined) oils to standard motor oil;
Damage to the catalytic converter;
Seal leakage and swelling issues requiring expensive repairs;
Frequency of oil changes;
Engine Sludging if not drained at proper interval;
Anti-wear additives;
EPA Mileage requirements forcing move to thinner oils;
and the list goes on.

brorjace

Gee, I guess my "clarification" needs some clarification. I do not have adobe Acrobat on my machine here at home, only at work. I'll take another look at adc100's article and post again on Monday.

Assuming that the ZDDP levels in SL oils are the same as SJ, they still would be better because the base oil has to be made more stable.

One thing that I think, ZDDP levels aside, is that The SL standard is narrowing the gap between "conventional" oils and mass-market (PAO and hydrocracked) "synthetics". I don't see how the price difference (double to triple) can be justified much longer.

More on Monday ...

--- Bror Jace

zr2rando

I think Castrol messed it up for everyone by getting the hydro-cracked oil to be defined as synthetic. I agree with Bror that the diff between most conventional and some "synthetics" is getting pretty slim. I bet in a couple years there will be a "premium" synthetic and a "semi"-synthetic put out by the companies to identify what we all consider "true" synthetics and the other heavily processed petroleum oils.
They will probably have to bite the bullet on pricing conventional oils with only minor price increases....I don't think the big majority of folks will start buying synthetic until they have no other choice,,
see ya
Rando

bobistheoilguy

They changed the base oil levels and even stated to have enhanced the frictional reduction properties as well as reducing th noack vol from 22% to 10% (less burnoff) .

The new SL GF-3 levels are a better improvement over the GF-2. Fact is, GF-2 was not as good as the old GF-1. This is no longer the case, GF-3 SL base oils are definatly a better base stock oil than its previous counter parts.

here some of the test info requirements for both sl and sj oils

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/currentapitest.htm#SL

bob

fleetwoodsimca

Chevron seems quite able to produce "IsoSyn" based product and sell it for no more than the typical price for SJ. I recall some speculation that IsoSyn must mean a synthesizing of some molecules in the brew, but I can't attest to any facts. Meanwhile, I have a couple cases of Chevron SL on my shelves, waiting for me to run out of all prior API designation lubes.

eharri3

I checked the oil lever on my Mom's 1.6 liter Corolla this weekend and the dipstick came out bone dry! Turns out she'd been driving around for a week like that with the engine running fine, the only clue something was wrong was that the light came on. It took over 3 quarts to get it to the full level again! My mom asked if driving with little or no oil could have caused permanent damage. My best guess was that whatever residual oil had been left coating the engine had been enough to keep it sufficiently lubricated for a few days, but there still could be damage. But if there was, she might as well just drive the car until the problems showed and then figure out what to do from there than pay for an expensive engine tear down when there might not even be a problem. after all, if there was damage to the bearings, rods, cylinders, etc, then it's basically a question of spending a fortune now to fix it or a fortune later when the car stops working. Anybody else got any suggestions? Should I have told her different?

csandste

(depending on year). Ran her 90 Prizm almost dry. I then instructed her to keep oil in it and she proceeded to put in a quart with every fill up until she had about six quarts in it. That was about thirty thousand miles ago. Car runs fine with about 175K on the odometer although the oil light comes on at idle-- something correctable with a bit of STP. Anyway at that age the car is a beater which owes her nothing, although it keeps on ticking after taking quite a licking. What kind of "gel" would a new Toyota have after that kind of abuse.

If the car does crap out at that kind of mileage and she wants to keep it, a wreck yard engine with 100,000 miles can be had for $300-$400.

yurakm

I would change oil immediately, and again a couple weeks or 500 miles later - to wash out the small steel shavings, if any, from the engine. The oil currently is in engine, probably, is in pure condition too.

I would also look, why the engine was so low on oil? Does it have a leak, or what?

After this I would just hope that the engine was not damaged substantially.

Disclaimer: this is just a common sense suggestion. I do not know much about cars.

vetteryan

My Corolla 1993 1.6 only holds 3 quarts total(including a new filter) when I change the oil. I would be very surprised if she didn't cause substantial damage to her engine. Their is nothing you can do though-- I would just keep drivng it. Change the oil completely real soon!

fleetwoodsimca

My daughters have both used our 1600cc 1997 Geo Prizm (read: Toyota Corolla) as training wheels (:oÞ . The little rascal truly takes a licking and keeps on ticking. If my experience was the same, I would drive it, change out the filter and oil a couple times with very short mileage, and hope for the best. I'll bet if you can put 1K on it without bad signs, you can go what? --another 50K?