Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
No matter what is acceptable to Honda, any new car buyer can change his oil and filter every 3-4K if he desires to do so. I certainly would.
I hope that you were not serious,it's a no brainer.
Oil ,air and oil filter, engine, fuel, combustion, are ten times if not 100 times better than 20 years ago.
100000 miles on a car 20 years ago was a lot, big and lazy 8 cyl, carburator, point, condenser, changing the oil at 1500 to 2000 miles was the normality.
But today is a whole different story, 3000 miles is overkill, we are just waisting natural ressource, hey, most of the time the engine survive the car, maintained by fanatic or not ;-)
Viscosity is also an implication to shearing from internal mechanical stresses of a internal combustion engine or any other mechanical device. Oil shearing can occur if the oil is too thin (low viscosity) or too thick (high viscosity) for a particular engine/environmental application.
The grade number associated with a motor or gear oil does not necessarily equate to the actual static viscosity rating (weight). This is especially true in multiviscosity motor oils.
For example, in a 5W-30 grade motor oil, the viscosity rating indicates the OPERATING TEMPERATURE RANGE, not static viscosity numbers. In other words, this oil meets the requirement of a engine that operates within a broad temperature range. The "W" in a multi-vis oil indicates the viscosity rating at 0 degrees F.
Multiviscosity oils start with a base stock of a specified static viscosity to which two primary chemicals are added. Viscosity Index Improvers (VIIs) are added to impede molecular stretching as the temperature of the oil increases. Pour-Point Depressants (PPDs) are added to decrease the molecular contraction rate as the temperature is lowered. The end effect is to narrow the band of viscosity change of the base stock oil in order to meet the operating temperature range requirements of the engine. This essentially gives the particular oil blend its Viscosity Index or VI.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Dusty
nW-nn
Where the first numeric value = viscosity index @ 0 deg. F.
The second numeric value = viscosity index @ 212 deg. F.
Regards,
Dusty
In most cases you get what you pay for but in the case of oil filters, the most expensive may not be the best for the situation.
I recently bought a tool (like a screwdriver, but with a sharp point) at the hardware store that I use to punch a hole in the oil filter, allowing it to drain before I unscrew it. It has spared me trying to remove the old filter without spilling oil. The tool is sharp enough to punch through the filter with firm pushing; it's pretty convenient.
I also agree today's oils are far better than those of 20 years ago, or even just 10 years ago, but you still can't assume that you can go a lot longer between oil changes. Someone mentioned that changing oil every 3K is just a waste. Not always true. I've seen analysis results on some dinos that were literally crap by 3K miles. I've also seen them for some of the better dinos that were showing good numbers at 5K-6K miles. There are a lot of factors that determine how long oil is good for. Oil and filter quality, engine type, type of driving, climate, how the vehicle is maintained, etc., all these factors effect how long oil will last. To make a blanket statement like '10K oil change intervals are fine" is just ridiculous because it simply doesn't apply to every application.
I just turned 1K in my new Accord and plan to change my oil this weekend. I am going to do an analysis just to see what this "break-in oil" contains. I will be changing to Schaeffers Supreme 7000 5W-30 because of the superior additive package it contains. I plan to go between 4-5K on the first change and run an analysis each oil change until I determine the proper interval for my specific car based upon oil analysis trends.
Would it be cheaper to do it another way? Probably, but IMHO there is not a better way. Besides, the cost is less than the difference of having someone else change my oil instead of me and it makes me sleep better. LOL!!
Since the car was new I've had the oil & filter changed at 3,000 mile intervals at my Honda dealer.
I've noticed since the last two oil changes the dealer is now using 5w-20 instead of the 5w-30 as called for in the owners manual.
I've questioned the dealer on this...they showed me a chart from Honda that shows since 1999 model year Honda now recommends 5w-20 instead of 5w-30.
comments please??
Your manual says 5W30 so I say stay with it. As yet there is no proof that 5W20 equals the same longevity as the 5W30 and your manual is your bible IMO not an after the manufacturing date change of spec to reduce the number of items in inventory or charge a higher price.
I think it is a sticky problem that oil spilled all over the under car structure when old filter was removed. Oil on exhaust line is smelly as well. How could it be prevented?
-kent
Not worth agrueing about as there are no studies, tests, used oil analsyis over a 200,000 mile period to prove anything either way.
They have to allow you to use something that is reasonably easy to find, though.
-juice
With some of the modern motors that have low total oil capacities a synthetic really proves itself . The seals will last longer as well because of the conditioning and the FACT that synthetics run cooler oil tempuratures .
Mobil 1 is $ 4.00 per quart generally across the USA . No-one can beat that when it comes to protection vs the price per mile it can go .
ARE YOU SURE that's a FACT in a normal operating engine????
In most reciprocating internal combustion engines a majority of the heat is generated by the effects of combustion, not the friction points such as ring to cylinder or main and rod bearing. Most of heat picked up by the oil is through conductivity from the bigest heat source, the combustion chamber.
The belief that synthetic motor oils reduce oil temperature solely as a result of it being synthetic, is not established by any data I've ever seen or are aware of. In an otherwise correctly operating and normal engine, motor oil temperature is the direct result of mechanical conditions, not the reverse.
Regards,
Dusty
you did an excellent job of explaining the basics of heat transfer and oil.
It is amazing how many that hear the word synth assume that the base oil is (since that's the only thing they are referring to) has better film thickness, and protects better than a high quality non synth. This has always been interesting how over the years, it was all about being a couple of degrees better noack vol, so it was a better base oil therefore it could protect better(if you had the engine on fire at 400+degs maybe). Now it appears many are basing the quality of an oil based on what group base stock it has. I see more questions, what group is this or that oil. No questions as to what kind of refinement has this oil been through and with what additives are in addition.
I'd hate to hear how some would pic music, Well the singer is great, but what about the rest of the band? one part of that band, can break it and really stink up the sound, so can choosing an oil.. Just because a certain base stock is used, that's nothing more than the singer, what about the backup, the drummer/additives, and so on. Think about it, most people will take some basic inferior naph oil switch to some kind of synth, and have a decent experience but do they really know why?, You can get a good high quality paraffinic oil that will provide as good when it comes to engine wear. What it boils down to is that you have to look at the whole oil, not just the base stock only.
Anyway, gota go.
It's funny you mentioned NOACK percentage. Nowadays almost all packaged motor oils are specified as being less than 15%, regardless of base stock.
Of course, finding the manufacturers specifications is a problem in it's self. The majority of refiners do not publish their material specifications or ASTM data for each and every grade or version.
Americans, being Americans, are often observed severely missing a skeptical element. More is not necessarily better and in some cases actually worse. Synthetic motor oils, while generally exhibiting some positive characteristics, is not necessarily a better oil than something else (ie: compare pour-point or viscosity indexes). A lot depends on environmental and operating conditions.
I realize that what I've just said is heresy to some. Then again, it also means that they hold certain opinions with religious-like conviction that can never be countered by established fact.
Best regards,
Dusty
You have wrote 310 words in the above post and none make any sense .
NOAK is measured in percentage of loss , NOT degrees.
Napthentic base oil/formulation usually are chosen specifically by the end user for the desired qualities they offer . It is NOT inferior unless not used in the appropriate applications .
You have said people speak of synthetics in a general way , you have now done this yourself speaking of Napthenics .
Mr Oil wrote :
"It is amazing how many that hear the word synth assume that the base oil is (since that's the only thing they are referring to) has better film thickness, and protects better than a high quality non synth "
How many have you spoke to that makes this " amazing " ?
I surmise that most all people are speaking of the FULLY formulated synthetics .
Now, a liquid cooled motor that you say holds a constant tempurature of 210F has no correlation with oil tempuratures and fluxuation . Some will run coolant temps from 200-210 F but the oil temp will vary from 240 to over 300F when driven hard for example .
Much proof is offered in some notable SAE Papers about the superior flow characteristics of a PAO or PAO/Ester formulated motor oil .This flow pulls heat away from ALL internal part to INCLUDE the motor seals in dynamic operation .
Have you ever seen a hard , brittle one piece front/rear or camshaft seal ? If so , just how to you think this condition came about ?
Just so you do not miss the I'll write again :
Have you ever seen a hard , brittle one piece front/rear or camshaft seal ? If so , just how to you think this condition came about ?
I will not go into detail about my experiences with my turbocharged Kawasaki and how much longer the silicone material the seals are made of have remained pliable thus eliminating the need to change them every few years after switching to true a synthetic < Motul > but the fact of the matter is that because of better flow , reduced oil temperatures by using a true synthetic means that if you were to take two modern cars with their Nitrile or Buena-N seals , use a synlube in one and a group I/ group II formulated dead dinosaur oil in the other from the time the vehicles were new at 250k the synthetic lubed motor will not have the weepage or leaks of the dino lubed motor , reason being superior flow to ALL parts of the engine resulting in overall reduced oil tempurature and combined cleaner seals over it's dino counterpart because of less or no "as in none" build up on them allowing them to remain pliable with that fact alone - then factor in the esters in the formulated synthetic.
Esters in formulation work ! Thats why the various oil companies developed high milaege oils with seal conditioners " esters " to help stop leaks stop what would have never happened if a synlube had been used in these newer motors.
So the other post " took the fun out of it " huh ?
I have looked through this site and see you sell motor oil .
Would you please list some other credentials that would leave me to believe your remarks here are based on some type actual education in the fields of Automotive , Aeronautical or other specialty fields of lubrication and or other degrees associated with ?
If not I will simply choose to ignore your comments from here on out on this board and hopefully you will return the same .
Thanks .
Brendella,
You may be correct about certain seal materials being positively impacted by synthetic motor oils, but will that include all because they are merely synthetic based? Even full synthetic oils vary in composition.
The point of my post was that I don't believe synthetic oil -- just because it's a synthetic -- will lower the temperature of the oil. Your reference to flow may be a valid point, but that only means that any oil that flows better would do the same thing.
For example, comparing the 10W-30 Mobil 1 full synthetic at 10.0 centistokes (ASTM D445) to the Quaker State straight 10W at 6.3, obviously indicates that the Quaker State will have better flow characteristics at 212 degrees F.
The even better question is how much of an effect on oil temperature does increased oil flow have? In the vast majority of automotive engines flow can only be regulated by a change in oil viscosity since the pumping systems are not flow regulated, they're pressure regulated.
I think you'll find that in liquid-cooled engines as cylinder head temperatures rise the effect of oil flow has a negligible effect on oil temperature. In fact depending on engine design, increased oil flow may have just the reverse effect that could lead to increase oil temperatures.
The system designed to carry away heat in liquid-cooled engines is the cooling system. Running lots of oil past the top of the combustion chamber will likely have much more of an effect on heating the oil than the oil contributing to dissipating the heat.
As to the subject of film strength, this can be muddy water.
In your opinion, what is the best way to measure the film strength of motor oil for comparative purposes?
Regards,
Dusty
"if not I will simply choose to ignore your comments from here on out on this board and hopefully you will return the same ."
Whew. Sorry, been participating on Bob's board too long I guess but he has certainly expressed unbiased opinions on many oil and filter related issues even though he is a rep for Shcaeffers. Plus, too many people on that board with credentials to ignore. Don't understand the animosity though.
He is opinionated at times, but is a big source of information about motor oil. Some might find some of his tests (his Timkin test for one) a bit unscientific but I find them fascinating. Where else can you get this kind of entertaining information about oil???
It's not just about additives or you could put the Mobil1 additives into a dino oil and get 10K mile intervals out of it. However, the additives play a big part.
We are having a discussion here though that involves a lot of opinions and some facts. Sometimes people confuse opinions with facts. Theories become facts when there is sound data to support them. I haven't seen evidence that demonstrates that synthetics run cooler although I do believe its true. I would love to see evidence of it. Right now, its just a theory as far as I know. However, lubrication is all about reducing friction. If we can all agree that synthetics reduce friction better than dinos then it follows that they do run cooler. Friction creates heat and more friction creates more heat.
I have been trying to engage you in a civil and polite way and I asked a question to initiate a technical discussion. I was hoping you would provide some sort of response.
(As to the subject of film strength, this can be muddy water. In your opinion, what is the best way to measure the film strength of motor oil for comparative purposes?)
You are proclaiming that synthetic motor oils are "superior." The word 'superior' envokes a general understanding of something "situated higher up," or better by some great advance in measurement. I would agree that they -- in general -- have some distinct advantages, but I would not be so bold as to use the term "superior" to discribe them in a broad way.
Here is where I must challenge you. Please provide some evidence that this is so by some standard measurement instead of just stating it is. If synthetic motor oils are "superior," it should be relatively easy to explain, patiently, how. Since I have access to SAE technical publications, I'd be willing to retrieve any reference article that you provide so that this subject could benefit from a clear baseline.
Best regards,
Dusty
Ok Brendella you want to pick me apart, that's fine, hopefully you'll take this as less of an attack against you and more of an opinion based on my experience and knowledge.(just for the sake of argument with you which I wont have with anyone).
Mr Oil,
[You have wrote 310 words in the above post and none make any sense . NOAK is measured in percentage of loss , NOT degrees.]
Hmm, you have way too much time on your hands if you count # or words in posts. As for noack, Can't agree more. But I believe you got my drift and knew what I meant as I a lot of times will type ahead of myself and leave out some small but critical word(s) as I can see you're no dummy. So guess I'm busted.
In this case it was intended to read...
it was all about being a couple of degrees (BASED on) better noack vol%. To add to that statement, one company use(d) noack as a selling point about how their base oil wont burn off. particularly when it comes to zddp levels.
[Naphthenic base oil/formulation usually are chosen specifically by the end user for the desired qualities they offer . It is NOT inferior unless not used in the appropriate applications .
You have said people speak of synthetics in a general way , you have now done this yourself speaking of Naphthenics .]
Ok, you say so, not sure what you mean as you didn't explain so I believe you.
[Mr Oil wrote :
"It is amazing how many that hear the word synth assume that the base oil is (since that's the only thing they are referring to) has better film thickness, and protects better than a high quality non synth "
How many have you spoke to that makes this " amazing " ?]
Hmm, This question seems to have no bearing except you do not like my writing style, just a figment of speech. Ok, I agree, I'm not a good typist and tend to type slower than what I think. Again, my articulation has got me in trouble. Again, you're right.
[I surmise that most all people are speaking of the FULLY formulated synthetics .]
Well, lets put it this way, what most all believe are FULLY formulated synth's.
[Now, a liquid cooled motor that you say holds a constant tempurature of 210F has no correlation with oil tempuratures and fluxuation. Some will run coolant temps from 200-210 F but the oil temp will vary from 240 to over 300F when driven hard for example .]
Nope, can't take credit for that comment as I don't believe that's what I said. The comment was...
What is it that you've seen that has made it such a fact for you that you can reduce oil temp in an engine that has a mechanical thermostat of say 220*degs which keeps the water/engine temp consistent but yet the oil can actually keep cooler?
The point I was making is that if you have a control device designed to WARM UP the engine to a SET TEMP, how is an oil able to cool down an engine lower than that set temp. The oil normally will hang with in a few degrees of the water temp so say a 220* water temp, oil temp between 230-to no more than 250 extreme.
[Much proof is offered in some notable SAE Papers about the superior flow characteristics of a PAO or PAO/Ester formulated motor oil .This flow pulls heat away from ALL internal part to INCLUDE the motor seals in dynamic operation .]
AHHH, now we have the sae paper and superior flow issue. Like most, this is many times taken out of context. Let me explain this, if you have a normal operating engine with either synth or mineral oil(talking about a good quality mineral not the napth oil) both new out of the bottle, say both 10w30 with exact Cst measurement. most will say the synth is going to flow better..
Well, if you think about this, how did the 10w30 synth and mineral become qualified as such? Take a viscosometer, put both oils in the standard 100*C bath, fill both tubes up, one with mineral other synth, and time them both out and both measure the same under the same conditions. What is viscosity? The measurement of flow? well if both have the same measurement how is it that the synth can flow faster than a mineral?(again, qualifying the mineral as a Paraffinic not napth.)
both flowed exactly the same in the test, so what makes that synth flow different at this point? What those papers are referring to is where the oil is put beyond in severe conditions which is lower temps, extreme higher temps and extended drains. This is because of the vi index holding better but not under normal conditions does this hold true.
One step farther, you have a hydrodynamic film in the rod bearing area, this is where a wedge of oil is between two surfaces(not to insult you, thats for those that don't know) when pressure is applied, oil is squeezed and since there is a reaction for every action, oil is going to flow BASED on the viscosity of the oil. So IF synth's were to flow faster, then it would mean it would leave the bearing area faster leaving less wedge and exposing the surface faster than a mineral oil. This of course isn't the case but by your definition of flow, would you consider that a bad thing? I want oil in my bearings as long as possible. Again, synth's do not flow better than a good mineral when both are in standard operating conditions of an engine. Of course again, my opinion.
[Have you ever seen a hard , brittle one piece front/rear or camshaft seal ? If so , just how to you think this condition came about ?]
One possibility, a poor quality oil was used and over extended on their drain.
[Just so you do not miss the I'll write again :
Have you ever seen a hard , brittle one piece front/rear or camshaft seal ? If so , just how to you think this condition came about ?]
Asked and Answered.
[I will not go into detail about my experiences with my turbocharged Kawasaki and how much longer the silicone material the sea
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/sealconditioning/sealcondtioning.ht- - m
Now, There is some numbers to look at that might actually show where it's not really so much the esters in my test that did the cleaning but the detergent additives. Looking at the amsoil additives they appear to have one of the highest detergent additives around and showed exceptional cleaning compared to others.
amsoil
Calcium, 3200 ppm
Magnesium, 300 ppm
Mobil ss.
sodium 8
calcium 2666
magnesium 18
schaeffers
mag 20
Calc 3308
valvoline chevron
Calcium 2249 1874 Magnesium 5 5
Maxlife
mag 11
cal 2732
(notice the magnesium #'s?)
Again, this isn't to say that esters don't clean, just I suspect you put more into the base stock doing more than it really does, as it doesn't swell seals, ok, maybe a very slight bit but not measurable enough to stop leakage or even slow it down. The cleaning, as pointed out, not so much the base oil but the additives.
I don't agree that having a vehicle with full synth from day one will ensure no seal leaks at 200k miles by any means. It's not only the lack of lubrication that causes seals to dry out but also heat. Over a period of time, No matter what oil used, you'll find that seals will give out as only ONE SIDE of that seal is lubricated. The part mounted against the motor and shaft will have direct contact with block and shaft and this will transfer the block temp(water temp,not oil temp) to that seal. Over time, it will start to leak due to the heat drying out the outer sides. Notice though that most seal leaks(discussing front and back seal) are normally in the center part of the seal where the shaft protrudes out? This is a common thing as there is no lubrication at that point and friction exists where the shaft is rotating and in some cases vibrating. No oil can lubricate that part but only the natural lubrication properties of that seal will keep it lasting as long as it does. Obviously if one keeps an oil in there that maintains good cleanliness, then it will help keep the seal slightly but not by much, cooler helping to extend the seal. This is true with any oil not over extended by drain intervals. Of course also, consider that most HM oils won't want to have a good cleaning package as they don't want to create leaks but the opposite. So, reason why HM oils reduce oil consumption?, they are slightly higher in Cst viscosity for that grade of oil which helps slow down the flow.
On here,I took a poll and many commented on how this issue about seals and synth's worked. Since credibility is a BIG issue for you, you might like to look at some of these guys profiles, one of which is a Physicist; Systems Engineer in Aerospace Propulsion and Systems and also teaches at a well known college on some of these areas.. Tribology, Lubricants and Additives, Thermodynamics, Organic Chemistry, Physics. It's really a great discussion and who knows maybe you might see something on there that's believable for you.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;- f=1;t=000156;p=1
[Esters in formulation work ! Thats why the various oil companies developed high mileage oils with seal conditioners " esters " to help stop leaks stop what would have never happened if a synlube had been used in these newer motors.]
Well, I answered this point on esters and seals above so nothing to add except I believe that you believe it does, which is good but all the hype can be carried a bit farther than the truth is. We all need to question more so we can learn more.
[So the other post " took the fun out of it " huh ?
I have looked through this site and see you sell motor oil .]
Interesting, did I try selling anyone? what does that have to do with the topic? To look at my site, you'd be hard pressed to know I sell what oil. My site and I are not so much to sell, but help understand some of the myths and untruths. I don't need to push oil on anyone and for the most part, don't as some can attest to this.
Would you please list some other credentials that would leave me to believe your remarks here are based on some type actual education in the fields of Automotive , Aeronautical or other specialty fields of lubrication and or other degrees associated with ?
Sorry, I don't play games of trying to show off and explain if I know something or not to anyone. You'll have to base that on what you see and hear. Your choice and personally, Your loss as I am a nice guy and do nothing more than try to help others. If you think my paper credentials will help convince you, sorry to hear that. I don't need or will prove over the inet what I have. No need to. Just browse around and make your own mind up. You think that makes me bad or not qualified in your eyes, so be it.
[If not I will simply choose to ignore your comments from here on out on this board and hopefully you will return the same .]
Sorry, but when I hear someone spewing what they think and cannot handle a contradictory response,I'm not going to ignore it.
I can see you acting like the little kid that covers his ears and starts yelling so not to hear anyone else. What a shame, as I really thought that you process some real intelligent information which I hope to hear more of but as said before, your loss.
BTW, sorry for offending you, I suspect you have something to do with synth's and seem to have a personal attachment to it. Never wanted to hurt your feelings.
If you believe that synth's reduce friction better than dinos could you explain how?
thanks.
http://www.plantservices.com/Web_First/PS.nsf/ArticleID/MMHH-4M5E- - WN/
that seem to say it delivers a lower COF. This is also a good one.
http://www.mt.luth.se/~boa/posterNordtrib2000.pdf
I especially like this exceprt:
"Long straight molecules like esters, PAO, and polyglycols have relatively low coefficients. The reason for this is that long weak molecule chains find it easier to orient themselves favourably with respect to shear. Due to the small number of branches on the ester molecules, the degree of entanglement is also very low, which also helps reduce the coefficient of friction. The molecules in a refined mineral oil such as naphthenic or paraffinic oils are less able to adopt different kinds of configurations and these oils are therefore expected to have a stiffer behaviour and higher coefficients of friction. Molecules having a higher coefficient than the longer ones. The reason for this is that long weak molecule chains find it easier to orient them selves favourably with respect to shear."
We are taught this in Chemical Engineering classes too.