equilon will be the oil that is distributed by Shell, in Shell bottles. I think you can be sure that it is no longer associated with newly refined Havoline. But the stuff is out there. BTW it is a good oil just not Chevron.
Dropped by two local auto stores and saw the new SL Chevron 5W-30, synthetic. It also meets the GM 4718 specification. It is also about a dollar cheaper than the "premium" mass marketed synthetics per qt.
While a google search will probably reveal more technical information,
"Most synthetics mention GM 4718M in their list of claims; that's the unique spec created by General Motors for Corvette oil. It's a high-temperature requirement that tolerates less oxidation (thickening) and volatility (boil-off) on a standard engine test called Sequence 111E according to engineer Bob Olree of GM Powertrain. "
For me, this is one portion where synthetic earns its money, in that synthetic has an ability to form sludge very close to zero%, while conventional oil, while still low % wise is many times greater than synthetic oil. (estimates up to 8x more for conventional oil)
Buried away in technical data is the concept of sludge %. So for example ALL oils oxidize and burn off (boil off, again ,estimates up to 8x more for conventional oil).
So if you do the math: if you use less product (synthetic) and close to zero % sludge formation and get little to no sludge formation, vs using more product (conventional) and farther from zero % sludge formation will you get more sludge? The answer is yes!!
The upshots are three. 1. Use less product and get less sludge formation and burnoff. (synthetic)
2. If you use conventional oil and it structurally gets more sludge formation, don't be surprised that over time it forms MORE sludge!!!
2b. The good news is that at intervals of your choosing, you can do like a 150 dollar Borsch procedure, that pumps under high pressure, solvents thru your engine block to remove the sludge build up.
3. Unless you are a gear head(no disrespect meant or inadvertently intended) , most folks (98%) are not going to care one wit that their internal engine specifications show almost like new engine specifications at the 50k,100k 150k and beyond mark!!!
One of the major cards played was the low-to-no sludge potential. Sludge most likely develops from contaminants that make up a very small percentage of the fraction (as, from the cracking tower) used to manufacture motor oil. Now, with the advent of hydrocracking, the level of contaminants may be so dramatically reduced that there may not be a meaningful advantage remaining for synthesized oil.
I have yet to come across an Amsoil rep. I have a number of contacts in auto parts, auto repair, etc. I have been solicited by AMWAY, MARY KAY, NSA and a number of other MLM outfits, but I know of no one who has been contacted by an AMSOIL representative. What is the story? Did they leave the greater NYC area years ago?
The proof is really in the sludge % numbers! Speculating that the new hydrocracked version will cut down sludge % without the numbers might be true flim flam if it was indeed marketing.!! Hydrocracked "synthetic" oils have still have higher sludge %'s than stuff like Mobil One, Redline, Amsoil. Keep in mind also that most synthetic oils also meet or exceed the SL standard. In fact the SL conventional does not meet the GM 4718M spec, where that is indeed a major concern.
I guess "we will see." I am not concerned about the so-called sludge percentage on modern engine lubricants, but I suspect that people who put too many miles on their oil should be. My point in 4260 was that the new SL oils derived from Chevron base stocks may not have much real world potential for sludging up engines to the point of mechanical failure. Oh, by the way: Do you suppose many people really care anything at all about that GM standard you noted? >;^]
Also you need a HUGE degree of sludge for "mechanical" failure! So in that sense most folks should buy the CHEAPEST oil in the current SL grade.
Most folks dont keep their cars past 50,000 miles. So in effect, whatever care or lack of it is like "old maid" in that it is passed to thenext new "used" car owners. So in that sense this is oxymoronic in that if you just follow the manufacturers guideline: i.e., say 7500 miles per oil change you are FULFILLING the warranty terms and in the course of 50,000 miles will change the oil a grand total of 6.67 or 7x! SOOOOO no need to overamp with 16.67-17 oil changes with a 3000 mile interval? Me I am happy changing it at 15k intervals or for 50k miles 3.33 times or even less !!!
Me, I keep my cars to target mileages of 300k. The closest I have come to that is app 250,000 miles, but sold it because I had too many cars and was getting bored with it. So it behooves someone like me to be as quality conscious as possible. Most folks as you and I have both alluded, could give one little wit about it.
As I have said in a prior post probably less than 2%.
You're out of the "boredom" closet! I'll join you and confess that most vehicles I sell off or trade are just boring me to death! I do the 3K oil and filter changes to increase the chances of no problems arising on my watch, and I like clean oil. Yep, I simply LIKE IT!
a "full" synthetic or does it have a hydrocracked base oil that meets this GM standard the 'Vette must maintain. Although I'm sure the percentage of sludge that forms in an oil is an important aspect, it cannot be talked about ad nauseum in a vacuum. For one, the time in which the sludge is formed would be critical to the discussion, the driving conditions under which it was formed would be critical as well. Additionally, looking at the percentage of sludge formed without looking at the other ways the oil is depleted or spent makes absolutely no sense.
...is the company that developed the current top-of-the-line process for hydrocracking (using hydrogen to break big molecules into smaller ones). I understand that the process is patented. It produces precise results, and the end products are equivalent to synthesized products.
Tonight I found Shell Rotella T Synthetic 5W-40 on sale at Wal-Mart for $3.37/qt or $12.83/gal. I'm going to give it a try in my wife's 528i(@9000 mile change interval) to see if I realize any fuel economy gains as compared to the 15W-50 Mobil 1 I usually run. The Rotella Syn data sheet looks pretty good as well. Has anyone else tried it?
I am looking at one of my OLD Chemical Engineering textbooks ( Chemical Processing Principles by Shreve and Brink). It is discussing the use of hydrocracking for petroleum processing, that book is copyrighted 1977. It also discusses how the use of additives has increased the performance of most lubricating oils...cool huh? This was a book I was reading when I was in college back in about 1983, And now I'm looking back at it in 2002!....I reckon I'm getting old!!!
You might want to check out www.Chevron.com for their own write ups and data sheets on their own brand of Chevron Supreme Synthetic Motor oil. Using their own words, which you can check out, they say that their synthetic motor oil exceeds SL conventional motor oils, including their own! They somehow talk around the Group lll base stock issue, but numerous times say their synthetic is 100%.
When checking out the data sheets for 5w-30 and 10w-30 Chevron Supreme Synthetic, I found that the sulfated ash % was WAY too high (1.12%) which many times higher than Mobil One.(0%) (: It is a lot cheaper than Mobil One retail also! So I personally will have to pass.
The weight stays the same,but most likely there are at least two weights recommended in the owners manual! Keep in mind that say between a 5w-30 and a 10w-30 there is a app 2% mileage penalty for the thicker viscosity. So for example in an Toyota Echo that gets 35 mpg with say 5w-30. you will get 34.3 mpg with the 10w-30. The other trade off being better protection due to less viscosity improvers.
most folks don't keep cars past 50k miles, yet there are so many cars in service with more than 50k miles. How do you account for this. Did you mean to sat that most new car owners lease and don't buy and therefore don't keep their cars past 50k miles? If this is so, is it also your contention that "leasers", as opposed to buyers, are less concerned about maintenance? If so, I agree!
I doubt there is that much penalty(2%) especially on a trip where the 5W-30 could actually be a little thicker at above 200 F. Although I'm sure you got those numbers from somewhere??
I don't know, but it would not be hard to believe that most new car buyers/leasers move on to another vehicle within 50K-- eh? And the used market picks up the trade-ins and outright sales... What's not to understand? I'm sure I missed the point.
ruking assertion that most people don't keep their cars past 50k miles. Why then, are there so many vehicles with more than 50k miles on the road? As you say there are many used cars. Is there any place one can find out what might be the average mileage on a vehicle currently registered in the U.S.? Because if ruking is correct that "most people sure do not keep their cars past 50k miles" then where are all these high miles cars coming from? And why the current emphasis on "HIGH MILEAGE MOTOR OILS" ?
"...Although I'm sure the percentage of sludge that forms in an oil is an important aspect, it cannot be talked about ad nauseum in a vacuum. For one, the time in which the sludge is formed would be critical to the discussion, the driving conditions under which it was formed would be critical as well. Additionally, looking at the percentage of sludge formed without looking at the other ways the oil is depleted or spent makes absolutely no sense. "...
Realistically the only vehicles that affect/effect me are my own. Surely there are other ways sludge builds up in engines and the most build up are in engines that use conventional oil ! If that is not a concern to you, then truly, it is not a concern to me!!
Again this is not rocket science, if Chevron supreme synthetic 5w-30 SL version has a sulfate ash % weight of 1.12% (quote of their data sheets) and Mobil One 5w-30 SL version has a sulfate ash % weight of (0% ) then the real component of sulfate ash build up needs one more number and that is how long does it take to burn off 1 qt of oil in the subject engine 3,000 miles per qt? 5,000, ? So for example, if it is 3000 miles then the sulfate ash % of 1.12% will yield .3584 of an oz. So at app 67k miles you can expect app a half pound of sludge due to this factor alone.
So for me, the oil consumption in 3 of my vehicles using synthetic oil Mobil One 5W-30 is 1/4-1/2 qt per 14,000 miles. Sludge due to this factor alone is negligible. Another vehicle has a consumption rate of 1 qt per 5000 miles. Again given near (0) sulfate ash % weight, sludge build up is still negligible.
Again as you and others have alluded, not many folks really care. For me I keep my vehicles way past 100000 miles so the less sludge build up the better in addition to hopefully less wear and tear to the engine.
Also the reference was made to folks really not caring about "proper " maintenance due to normal leases that penalize severely, mileage over certain annual amounts.
I have also read that the average age of the American car fleet is 8 yrs. So with annual average miles of between 12-15k it is reasonable to say 96,000-120,000 miles. So as an example, I have one 94 TLC that has 98,000 miles. (No sludge per Toyota mechanics, and I actually saw inside when they removed valve cover when it was due for the valve check and possible 250 dollar value adjust, which it did not need)
"Again this is not rocket science, if Chevron supreme synthetic 5w-30 SL version has a sulfate ash % weight of 1.12% (quote of their data sheets) and Mobil One 5w-30 SL version has a sulfate ash % weight of (0% ) then the real component of sulfate ash build up needs one more number and that is how long does it take to burn off 1 qt of oil in the subject engine 3,000 miles per qt? 5,000, ? So for example, if it is 3000 miles then the sulfate ash % of 1.12% will yield .3584 of an oz. So at app 67k miles you can expect app a half pound of sludge due to this factor alone."
Now this is using linear mathematics. Are there engineers out there that subscribe to this equation. And in the absence of that can anyone provide a trend analysis to support this. Or has anyone actually run 67k miles on any dino oil?
I wouldn't want to use magical mathematics! What you are having second thoughts about conventional oil? Whats a half a pound of engine oil sludge between friends?
I take it you have never seen a disassembled engine in real time? If you have a shop that you frequent and trust their judgment, ask them or just watch when they do a procedure that you can see the inner workings of an engine.
I suspect that half a pound of sludge is nothing more than ugly. (:oÞ What I mean is, does it really matter if you have built up a half pound of sludge? I remember many years ago when I ventured inside motors (car and cycle) frequently. Those of us gathered 'round would note the sludge present, but we just scooped away with putty knives, and life went on. All this stuff about Toyota engines being "ruined" by sludge is quite puzzling to me. I don't really know what to make of it.
So in keeping with this discussion, if a certain amount of sludge is fine and dandy in your engine, then why should I tell you it is not ok?
In regards to the sludge in the Toyota Sienna engines, obviously there are areas in the engine that exceed the burn point of the most commonly used engine oils, in plainer terms the areas pan fry the oil! If that is also ok with you, you could make a good deal for a used Sienna for the residual value, I am sure has been dropping like a rock due to this known problem.
about mine, or anyone else's knowledge or experience with regards to internal combustion engines. I asked what data you had with regard to an engine running 67k miles on dino oil w/o changing, the oil and the oil filter. I asked where I might find a text to support your mathematics regarding sludge build up. Please read my questions, if you don't have the documentation, say it. If you make assumptions in your logic state them! But don't assume the extent of anyone's knowledge or experience.
I am making no assumptions at all! You really dont need to get defensive! Is there any data that at precisely 67k there a half a pound of sludge? No! (it is usually more!) :)So in your vast experience are you saying at @ 67k miles there is NO sludge in engines with a consistent diet of conventional oil? Again if you dont mind sludge in your engine using conventional oil, trust me I have absolutely no problem with that at all. If you don't believe the figures that the manufacturer itself presents, again, I have no problem if you don't believe what they attest. They have met their legal "nut" in not making a claim of being "sludge" free. So whatever lawsuits one might bring against the manufacturers because of engine sludge will most likely be lost! Most people wouldn't care if you had a half a # or more of sludge in your engine! More to the point, if I were buying your car I would merely make a much lower offer to pay for at least a Borsch system cleaning.
"Please read my questions, if you don't have the documentation, say it. " The documentation is at www.chevron.com, Chevron Supreme Synthetic 5w-30, Sulfate ash weight % of 1.12% I have stated this in prior posts and repeat it due to you either missing or ignoring the reference.
the contaminants in the oil. That's what the additives and detergents help it do. Now, an oil analysis of a synthetic vs. a conventional using the same engine under similar miles and driving conditions, that's proof. you make a giant leap with your % of sulfated ash to an enormous amount of sludge in an engine, ignoring (on purpose?) all other variables. And yes, most if not all of the contaminants would leave with the oil drain following prudent maintenance intervals. Or does RUKING have an equation for this as well?
"Sulphated ash does not indicate the ash content in the oil. It indicates the ash content when treated with Sulphuric acid in Lab conditions.
All Engine oils contain Detergents - Phenates, Sulphonates or Salicylates of Barium, Calcium or Magnesium. Hence, on treatment with Sulphuric acid in certain Lab conditions, they leave ash. In fact, presence of Sulphated ash clearly indicates the presence of Detergents. Pure base oils do not leave Sulphated ash. But Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) recommend control on the same. For example, Cummins recommended ash content of 1.85% by weight maximum.
In these days, sulphated ash may or may not indicate anything, because ashless additives are coming up in a big way. I feel that ash content of the same oil in successive batches may be used for continuous quality monitoring. Sulphated ash per se may not mean much."
#4297 "More food for thought. This guy's opinion."
Or was that more elements for sludge formation?
So again I repeat: "So in your vast experience are you saying at @ 67k miles there is NO sludge in engines with a consistent diet of conventional oil?"
I now wonder, what is your point? I'll respond and say that most any engine at 67K that has been lubricated with petroleum based oil very likely will have some amount of sludge inside it. This begs the question, "So what?" Your recent postings seem very consternated, and I wonder why. Perhaps I misunderstand the point you are trying to make. For example you said to me: [So in keeping with this discussion, if a certain amount of sludge is fine and dandy in your engine, then why should I tell you it is not ok?] My honest response to this question is, I have no idea why you should or shouldn't. Then you went on to say: [In regards to the sludge in the Toyota Sienna engines, obviously there are areas in the engine that exceed the burn point of the most commonly used engine oils, in plainer terms the areas pan fry the oil! If that is also ok with you, you could make a good deal for a used Sienna for the residual value, I am sure has been dropping like a rock due to this known problem.] To that I can only say that am not interested in acquiring a Toyota Sienna. Now-- Let me clarify, first that I am not arguing with you. My point in 4289 was not hostile at all. I am one who contends that a little sludge left undisturbed is relatively innocuous. And I am puzzled how one of the premier automobile companies of this planet finds itself host to many, many complaints concerning engine failure due to sludge! What is going down?
For me the Toyota quality is not uniform thoughout the models. I for one had massive sludge buildup in a 4 cylinder 1985 Toyota Camry with 3000 mile oil & filter change intervals. The brand I used almost exclusively was Castrol. How did I find this out? I had a intake manifold stress crack or stress hole crack that let the oil spew out like a fire hose (just safely out of warranty) When they finally fixed the problem, 2500 dollars later they told me I needed massive rotor brake axle and suspension work, but luckily they covered it under "secret" warranty.
On the other hand ALL of my TLC's have been virtually "bullet proof ".
#4300
With the manufacturers figures, it is half that or half a pound. So if you disagree with me by a few ozs, then i think you have been "splitting hairs"
Comments
GM 4718?
While a google search will probably reveal more technical information,
"Most synthetics mention GM 4718M in their list of claims; that's the unique spec created by General Motors for Corvette oil. It's a high-temperature requirement that tolerates less oxidation (thickening) and volatility (boil-off) on a standard engine test called Sequence 111E according to engineer Bob Olree of GM Powertrain. "
Buried away in technical data is the concept of sludge %. So for example ALL oils oxidize and burn off (boil off, again ,estimates up to 8x more for conventional oil).
So if you do the math: if you use less product (synthetic) and close to zero % sludge formation and get little to no sludge formation, vs using more product (conventional) and farther from zero % sludge formation will you get more sludge? The answer is yes!!
The upshots are three. 1. Use less product and get less sludge formation and burnoff. (synthetic)
2. If you use conventional oil and it structurally gets more sludge formation, don't be surprised that over time it forms MORE sludge!!!
2b. The good news is that at intervals of your choosing, you can do like a 150 dollar Borsch procedure, that pumps under high pressure, solvents thru your engine block to remove the sludge build up.
3. Unless you are a gear head(no disrespect meant or inadvertently intended) , most folks (98%) are not going to care one wit that their internal engine specifications show almost like new engine specifications at the 50k,100k 150k and beyond mark!!!
The proof is really in the sludge % numbers! Speculating that the new hydrocracked version will cut down sludge % without the numbers might be true flim flam if it was indeed marketing.!! Hydrocracked "synthetic" oils have still have higher sludge %'s than stuff like Mobil One, Redline, Amsoil. Keep in mind also that most synthetic oils also meet or exceed the SL standard. In fact the SL conventional does not meet the GM 4718M spec, where that is indeed a major concern.
Oh, by the way: Do you suppose many people really care anything at all about that GM standard you noted? >;^]
Also you need a HUGE degree of sludge for "mechanical" failure! So in that sense most folks should buy the CHEAPEST oil in the current SL grade.
Most folks dont keep their cars past 50,000 miles. So in effect, whatever care or lack of it is like "old maid" in that it is passed to thenext new "used" car owners. So in that sense this is oxymoronic in that if you just follow the manufacturers guideline: i.e., say 7500 miles per oil change you are FULFILLING the warranty terms and in the course of 50,000 miles will change the oil a grand total of 6.67 or 7x! SOOOOO no need to overamp with 16.67-17 oil changes with a 3000 mile interval? Me I am happy changing it at 15k intervals or for 50k miles 3.33 times or even less !!!
Me, I keep my cars to target mileages of 300k. The closest I have come to that is app 250,000 miles, but sold it because I had too many cars and was getting bored with it. So it behooves someone like me to be as quality conscious as possible. Most folks as you and I have both alluded, could give one little wit about it.
As I have said in a prior post probably less than 2%.
Now I just need to go out and buy a 'vette!
Chevron has the hydrocracked process down!
This was a book I was reading when I was in college back in about 1983, And now I'm looking back at it in 2002!....I reckon I'm getting old!!!
Rotella looks good. I might consider it for my MC. Thanks for the tip!! That beats the $7 + mobil 1 MC oil.
The weight stays the same,but most likely there are at least two weights recommended in the owners manual! Keep in mind that say between a 5w-30 and a 10w-30 there is a app 2% mileage penalty for the thicker viscosity. So for example in an Toyota Echo that gets 35 mpg with say 5w-30. you will get 34.3 mpg with the 10w-30. The other trade off being better protection due to less viscosity improvers.
Good mornin everybody!
Rando
What's not to understand? I'm sure I missed the point.
"...Although I'm sure the percentage of sludge that forms in an oil is an important aspect, it cannot be talked about ad nauseum in a vacuum. For one, the time in which the sludge is formed would be critical to the discussion, the driving conditions under which it was formed would be critical as well. Additionally, looking at the percentage of sludge formed without looking at the other ways the oil is depleted or spent makes absolutely no sense. "...
Realistically the only vehicles that affect/effect me are my own. Surely there are other ways sludge builds up in engines and the most build up are in engines that use conventional oil ! If that is not a concern to you, then truly, it is not a concern to me!!
Again this is not rocket science, if Chevron supreme synthetic 5w-30 SL version has a sulfate ash % weight of 1.12% (quote of their data sheets) and Mobil One 5w-30 SL version has a sulfate ash % weight of (0% ) then the real component of sulfate ash build up needs one more number and that is how long does it take to burn off 1 qt of oil in the subject engine 3,000 miles per qt? 5,000, ? So for example, if it is 3000 miles then the sulfate ash % of 1.12% will yield .3584 of an oz. So at app 67k miles you can expect app a half pound of sludge due to this factor alone.
So for me, the oil consumption in 3 of my vehicles using synthetic oil Mobil One 5W-30 is 1/4-1/2 qt per 14,000 miles. Sludge due to this factor alone is negligible. Another vehicle has a consumption rate of 1 qt per 5000 miles. Again given near (0) sulfate ash % weight, sludge build up is still negligible.
Again as you and others have alluded, not many folks really care. For me I keep my vehicles way past 100000 miles so the less sludge build up the better in addition to hopefully less wear and tear to the engine.
Also the reference was made to folks really not caring about "proper " maintenance due to normal leases that penalize severely, mileage over certain annual amounts.
I have also read that the average age of the American car fleet is 8 yrs. So with annual average miles of between 12-15k it is reasonable to say 96,000-120,000 miles. So as an example, I have one 94 TLC that has 98,000 miles. (No sludge per Toyota mechanics, and I actually saw inside when they removed valve cover when it was due for the valve check and possible 250 dollar value adjust, which it did not need)
"Again this is not rocket science, if Chevron supreme synthetic 5w-30 SL version has a sulfate ash % weight of 1.12% (quote of their data sheets) and Mobil One 5w-30 SL version has a sulfate ash % weight of (0% ) then the real component of sulfate ash build up needs one more number and that is how long does it take to burn off 1 qt of oil in the subject engine 3,000 miles per qt? 5,000, ? So for example, if it is 3000 miles then the sulfate ash % of 1.12% will yield .3584 of an oz. So at app 67k miles you can expect app a half pound of sludge due to this factor alone."
Now this is using linear mathematics. Are there engineers out there that subscribe to this equation. And in the absence of that can anyone provide a trend analysis to support this. Or has anyone actually run 67k miles on any dino oil?
What you are having second thoughts about conventional oil? Whats a half a pound of engine oil sludge between friends?
I take it you have never seen a disassembled engine in real time? If you have a shop that you frequent and trust their judgment, ask them or just watch when they do a procedure that you can see the inner workings of an engine.
What I mean is, does it really matter if you have built up a half pound of sludge? I remember many years ago when I ventured inside motors (car and cycle) frequently. Those of us gathered 'round would note the sludge present, but we just scooped away with putty knives, and life went on. All this stuff about Toyota engines being "ruined" by sludge is quite puzzling to me. I don't really know what to make of it.
So in keeping with this discussion, if a certain amount of sludge is fine and dandy in your engine, then why should I tell you it is not ok?
In regards to the sludge in the Toyota Sienna engines, obviously there are areas in the engine that exceed the burn point of the most commonly used engine oils, in plainer terms the areas pan fry the oil! If that is also ok with you, you could make a good deal for a used Sienna for the residual value, I am sure has been dropping like a rock due to this known problem.
No just what is in the engine.
I am making no assumptions at all! You really dont need to get defensive! Is there any data that at precisely 67k there a half a pound of sludge? No! (it is usually more!) :)So in your vast experience are you saying at @ 67k miles there is NO sludge in engines with a consistent diet of conventional oil? Again if you dont mind sludge in your engine using conventional oil, trust me I have absolutely no problem with that at all. If you don't believe the figures that the manufacturer itself presents, again, I have no problem if you don't believe what they attest. They have met their legal "nut" in not making a claim of being "sludge" free. So whatever lawsuits one might bring against the manufacturers because of engine sludge will most likely be lost! Most people wouldn't care if you had a half a # or more of sludge in your engine! More to the point, if I were buying your car I would merely make a much lower offer to pay for at least a Borsch system cleaning.
All Engine oils contain Detergents - Phenates, Sulphonates or Salicylates of Barium, Calcium or Magnesium. Hence, on treatment with Sulphuric acid in certain Lab conditions, they leave ash. In fact, presence of Sulphated ash clearly indicates the presence of Detergents. Pure base oils do not leave Sulphated ash. But Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) recommend control on the same. For example, Cummins recommended ash content of 1.85% by weight maximum.
In these days, sulphated ash may or may not indicate anything, because ashless additives are coming up in a big way. I feel that ash content of the same oil in successive batches may be used for continuous quality monitoring. Sulphated ash per se may not mean much."
More food for thought. This guy's opinion.
"More food for thought. This guy's opinion."
Or was that more elements for sludge formation?
So again I repeat: "So in your vast experience are you saying at @ 67k miles there is NO sludge in engines with a consistent diet of conventional oil?"
Simple, yes or no and why if you wish.
Your recent postings seem very consternated, and I wonder why. Perhaps I misunderstand the point you are trying to make. For example you said to me: [So in keeping with this discussion, if a certain amount of sludge is fine and dandy in your engine, then why should I tell you it is not ok?] My honest response to this question is, I have no idea why you should or shouldn't. Then you went on to say: [In regards to the sludge in the Toyota Sienna engines, obviously there are areas in the engine that exceed the burn point of the most commonly used engine oils, in plainer terms the areas pan fry the oil! If that is also ok with you, you could make a good deal for a used Sienna for the residual value, I am sure has been dropping like a rock due to this known problem.] To that I can only say that am not interested in acquiring a Toyota Sienna.
Now-- Let me clarify, first that I am not arguing with you. My point in 4289 was not hostile at all. I am one who contends that a little sludge left undisturbed is relatively innocuous. And I am puzzled how one of the premier automobile companies of this planet finds itself host to many, many complaints concerning engine failure due to sludge! What is going down?
For me the Toyota quality is not uniform thoughout the models. I for one had massive sludge buildup in a 4 cylinder 1985 Toyota Camry with 3000 mile oil & filter change intervals. The brand I used almost exclusively was Castrol. How did I find this out? I had a intake manifold stress crack or stress hole crack that let the oil spew out like a fire hose (just safely out of warranty)
On the other hand ALL of my TLC's have been virtually "bullet proof ".
#4300
With the manufacturers figures, it is half that or half a pound. So if you disagree with me by a few ozs, then i think you have been "splitting hairs"