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 7/25 for details.
Options

Engine Oil - A slippery subject Part 2

1303133353671

Comments

  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    This may have been discussed here before, but I've read posts at other places hat it's not a good idea to mix oils of different viscosities. Now this may be true, but my question is: doesn't the viscosity and the additive profile of any oil change somewhat after just a short time (1k miles) of running at high temperatures? And if so, any additional oil or additive changes the oil's profile again. Just asking.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    API Audit: One in Five Motor Oils Off-spec

    More than one out of five API-licensed engine oils was off-spec last year, according to the American Petroleum Institute’s 2001 worldwide engine oil quality audit. API collected and tested more than 600 samples of licensed engine oils, including both bulk and bottle samples. Sixteen percent were found to have “marginal” deviations, and 5 percent (30 oils) had “significant” deviations.

    According to API, “significant” deviations “are so far outside compliance limits that they could potentially raise short-term or long-term engine operability concerns.”

    It does say that there was a much higher incidence with SJ rated oils than with SLs.
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    That may be all the more reason to add STP or Super Tech oil treatment to each oil change. It certainly will boost your anti-wear and barrier protection levels. I'd like to know which brands were the major offenders, and which were in near compliance.
  • adc100adc100 Member Posts: 1,521
    I understand that todays polymers hold viscosity stable for at least the recommendations of automakers oil change intervals. If its a concern though for you-yet another reason to switch to a syn 10W-30 which has little if any polymers to shear down. My oil analysis indicated that after over 6K (Mobil 1 10W-30)my viscosity was 10.8 compared to the specs of 9.3 to 12.5 for a 30 wt. Thats smack dab in the middle if their analysis correct. I will be getting another report back shortly which will help verify.
  • pdalpsherpdalpsher Member Posts: 136
    I put it in my Toyota Highlander a few days ago and will be doing an oil analysis at my next change. I found it at a local WalMart for $1.08/qt. The Highlander tore up the Penzoil 10/30 the dealer used (based on an analysis) and after the change the engine was much quieter. That I hadn't expected.
  • mrdetailermrdetailer Member Posts: 1,118
    I had the same issue on a Dodge with Standard Quaker State changed over to Valvoline. Don't think I'll go back to QS on that car. This does not apply to the QS full synthetic however. I've run that for a couple of years on my small engine Subaru. It is both tough and quiet. That was using SJ. Hopefully SL will be even better.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    to switch to a syn in the foreseeable future. The report did not eliminate "synthetic" oils from shortcomings in their quality nor did they single one out. I'm just going to be sure to drain the oil and change out the filter at 3k religiously until the 10-12 qts on hand are gone. That's for my 2 Hondas which have 225k and 110k on them respectively. I just changed the oil on my Wife's 01 Explorer Sport Trac. I probably have enough Mobil 5-30 SL dino to get her another one. By that time who knows what will be in the bottles of that elixir for cars we have come to call motor oil! And I do have a couple of Super tech or STPs around from previous cars which consumed oil and use them as needed on the 4 bangers. After first 1k though, no oil consumption on either.
  • gregb882gregb882 Member Posts: 75
    Fleetwoodsimca, charlesb_la, and anyone else interested. I promised to give you an update on my use of Schaffer's Moly #132 (see posts 1406 & 1482). I just changed the oil/filter on my 2002 Explorer XLT (6 cyl) after 3,000 miles. Although I did see about .8 MPG increase to 18.34 average (which could be from all kinds of reasons - some completely unrelated to oil), I've concluded that the only real benefit of using the product is for it's purported anti-wear properties, which is very important in its own right. I have nothing bad to say about it, the engine ran very smooth and quite, but it's new - it should! I also added it to my 97 JGC that has 93,000 miles on it. I do think it quieted it down some but my wife drives that vehicle so it only has about 400 miles on it since adding the #132. I'll let you know if anything develops with it.

    I am sure I will periodically use the #132 as a preventative measure, but I guess it will be for what it prevents from happening (excessive wear) rather than what it overtly does. Again, while that is very important, it's nice to be able to "see" the results of it's use.
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    Thanks for the information. I have added some STP to my 98 Pathfinder at 39K. I want to boost the anti-wear content, and STP Oil Treatment adds zinc dialkyldithiophosphate. I am fairly certain that molybdenum is a better means, which increases barrier protection, and thus is anti-wear, but ZDDP ain't half bad and a whole lot less expensive as well as far more available.
  • adc100adc100 Member Posts: 1,521
    You do have to be careful with moly as it can lead to corrosion. I understand from bobistheoilguy and others that the cheaper form of moly which is sometimes used will do this.
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    Thanks for the heads up. I just got happier about my ZDDP dose! (:oÞ
  • gregb882gregb882 Member Posts: 75
    Do you think Schaffer's #132 is considered a better form of Moly? I would think so but I'd like to hear what others think. At least I think I'd like to hear what others think! :)
  • adc100adc100 Member Posts: 1,521
    I really can't prove it and it might be hype. But I know from past experience in my working life that you needed to be careful. I am not a Shaeffers fan yet. I'm still looking into it. I have some healthy respect for Bob (the oil guy). Even though he sells Shaeffer's he is quite unbiased in his information. On his new message board he has many times even avoided pushing his products in respones to a messege even though one of his products seemed to be the answer. on his own message board!
  • gregb882gregb882 Member Posts: 75
    Thanks!
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    So where is Mobil Exxon in this equation? Do they (and others) buy hydrocracked base stock from Chevron? Does Chevron license their technology for creating post-synthetic motor oil?
  • sailorbeavissailorbeavis Member Posts: 14
    Our V6 Corsica is up for an oil change and coolant flush. I'm sticking with Chevrolet's recommendations, so Dex-Cool is going in the radiator and 5W-30 Mobil (my choice) in the engine.

    The engine is clean as a whistle inside, as it only has 53k miles on it. I was thinking the synthetic would help keep the engine wear down. It's the around-town errands car, so it only gets oil changes every 5000 miles or so. Is synthetic worth the extra money?

    BTW, I have read about the intake manifold problems that have popped up on the 3100 series engine... the coolant's being replaced because it's getting a little too brown for my liking and I'd rather not end up with milky oil. But, at least it's not a 3.8L Taurus... :-)
  • adc100adc100 Member Posts: 1,521
    Both needed the intake manifold job. I used Mobil 1 on both Corsicas one symptom of a manifold leak can be an oil leak. I have always wondered if the syn oil had anytinng to do with it. Don't really think so but... Anyway the 3.1 is a very good strong engine, but the intake manifold is its achillias heel. Sooner or later that Corsica wil rise up and try to financially ruin you. I worked my way through the problems (altinators, intake manifolds, ignition module, bad wires, auto trans solenoids, water leaks, broken engine mounts-all these things are known problems.) Good luck. Oh..the '94 manifold went at 75K and the '92 at 125K.
  • sailorbeavissailorbeavis Member Posts: 14
    Hence the preventative maintenance. :-)

    The Corsica is my grandmother's car, it's mint right now, so I figure by the time that problem rears its ugly head, she'll have retired from driving and we can just sell the car to someone who is willing to deal with it. I'm pretty careful about maintaining vehicles (I owned a Tempo/Topaz, you have to be). I've seen the Alldata TSB list for the Corsica, it's massive. I'll cry if another vehicle's tranny solenoid goes out.

    How long did you use synthetic in your Corsicas before the leak developed?
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    I have a great idea. What I'll do is put synthetic in my wife's 01 Explorer run it for about 6k, drain the oil and the filter , replacing it with new syn of course. Then use the pre owned synthetic in one of my Hondas that already have 100k plus miles. Has to be the best resolution because synthetic oil with 6k on it is better than any virgin dino oil I could purchase. Can anyone find a better way to reduce my lubrication costs?
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    Buy petroleum oil for all of 'em.
  • adc100adc100 Member Posts: 1,521
    There's really no maintenance which can help you with the head gasket problem. The DexCool antifreeze was supposedly a solution to the gasket corrosion problem, but its a matter of gasket compression and design as I understand it. My 92 had syn in it for about 80K and the 94 had about 50K of syn. The solenoid was a relatively cheap fix (100 bucks). I would consider using a product called "Lubeguard" for the auto trans. It is one of the rare products which is not snake oil. It can prevent solenoid sticking problems ($10/bottle- Napa) BTW the auto trans on these vehicles are rock solid. I would change the fluid every 40K though. What year is your Corsica?? Don't forget those spark wires and don't replace with the Delco ones. Autolites are good.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    that pre owned synthetic oil isn't better than new dino? Can't be!
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    I meant to be answering your "rhetorical" question by suggesting that you buy petroleum oil for your vehicles in order to get more bang for your buck. Change it every 3-4K miles and change the filter with a Kmart or Walmart house brand every time. You'll win win win!
  • bill731bill731 Member Posts: 16
    In posts over on Bobs site two members who work for oil companys are in agreement that there are two formulas of Texaco Havoline oil being sold .

    If it says on the label (Distributed by Equlion Enterprises)THIS IS THE OLD FORMULA.Good oil but not Chevron.

    If the label says Chevron/Texaco then THIS IS THE NEW FORMULA. And is blended by Chevron.

    While in Checker Auto Parts store I found Havoline 5W-30 oil by Equilion and Havoline 10W-30 oil by Chevron/Texaco.

    Equlion has the right to use the Havoline name for only another 18 months or so,then there will be less confusion.

    Bill
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    I heard a rumor that Valvoline has discontinued "All Fleet" 15W-40 heavy duty motor oil. Does anyone know more about it? I picked up a couple cases on sale from CSK (Checker) recently.
  • bluedevilsbluedevils Member Posts: 2,554
    Something tells me your garage walls are stacked to the rafters with motor oil and filters. I've got about 6 filters on hand and about 40 quarts of oil, but from the sound of it you probably have 10 times more inventory.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    Auto Makers Will Postpone GF-4

    American and Japanese automakers have decided to delay adoption of GF-4, the next passenger car motor oil upgrade, according to the Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association.

    The association told members Monday that the International Lubricant Standardization and Approval Committee decided last week that it cannot develop the standard fast enough to have GF-4 oils commercially available by the fall of 2003. The standard, prescribed to protect emissions control systems required on model year 2004 cars, figured to be the biggest engine oil upgrade since the auto and oil industries wrote the Engine Oil Licensing and Certification System in 1993.

    It was widely recognized, however, that the 30-month timeline for developing GF-4 was very aggressive, with some observers expressing skepticism that ILSAC could meet it. Lesser upgrades have taken up to seven years to complete.

    A spokeswoman for ILSAC’s administrative umbrella, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, refused to confirm or deny the report, which was e-mailed to members of the Independent Lubricant Manufacturers Association. ILSAC member representatives could not be reached for comment yesterday.

    Jeff Leiter, legal counsel for the lubricant manufacturers association, said the delay was agreed to after a General Motors representative told an ILSAC meeting early last week that the committee’s timeline for GF-4 was not practical.

    “He went into the meeting and told people that they needed a reality check,” Leiter said. “He said it was just not going to be possible to do GF-4 for the 2004 model year.” ILSAC members then held a conference call at the end of the week during which they agreed to delay the specification, he said.

    ILMA officials said they did not know the specific reason for the delay and that ILSAC members plan to meet July 9 to set a new schedule and to draft a statement explaining their decision.

    More than one significant obstacle for GF-4 has been identified . Perhaps the biggest challenge is the question of whether formulators can develop a motor oil that protects new emissions control devices (and meets other stated goals of improving gas mileage, offering better cold-temperature performance and lasting longer under high temperatures and high loads) while protecting engines in existing cars . Automakers have insisted that GF-4 be backward compatible. Oil and additive companies have said that may not be possible or practical .

    Another challenge – development of a new test to measure oil oxidation and engine wear – was discussed at last week’s ILSAC meeting, according to Leiter. ILSAC had said it wanted to begin matrix testing of the GM-sponsored IIIG engine sequence test in August, but members are still working to identify funds and will not be able to start testing until fall or winter.

    Leiter said it is difficult to say if a delay in implementation of GF-4 will benefit the lubricant industry. On the one hand, manufacturers might be relieved to have more time to prepare for such a large change. On the other, automakers have previously warned that they might abandon EOLCS and develop their own motor oil specifications if they believed the cooperative system could not meet their schedule.

    By Tim Sullivan
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    Nothing so grandiose! I only have you by a factor of three. Yeah, the wife is beginning to wonder about my stash. I have declared a moratorium. I maintain five cars and a motorcycle, a garden tractor, a mower, a chipper shredder, a pressure washer, etc., etc.,...
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    are not the same oils when sold by the same store (Wally World, for example). The Havoline on the shelf next to the Chevron is distributed by Equilon, when the Havoline is not sold along side Chevron, it is distributed by Chevron, and should have the same formulation.
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    that sounds about right, but I have recently purchased Chevron and Havoline from Checker Auto albeit during different weeks' rebate sales, and did not end up with any Equilon. I have SL by Chevron in both brands-- and I am glad for it!
  • csandstecsandste Member Posts: 1,866
    are you sure that Chevron and the non-Equilon havoline are the same? Pennzoil (with excellent data sheets, about as good as Chevron), Quaker State and Super Tech (with pretty good data sheets), and Wolf's Head (sub-mediocre data sheets) are all made by the same company and have vastly different specs.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    The Chevron site refers to the hydrocracked base oils used with Chevron/Texaco products.
    BTW, I have been hunting down that STP oil extender and hit pay dirt today. I figured to look in discount stores where discontinued items are carried and found it. Bought all nine they had @ 99 cents each.
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    You robbed that place! The STP Oil Extender sold for 6 bucks, just last year. I got one for free, as a coupon redemption, but I like your deal even more (assuming it is good stuff).
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    remember seeing your posts from about 2 months ago and how this product contained moly. I suspected when it was discontinued that I might find it in one of these stores. I found 3 up front on the shelf and then dug behind the regular STP and found more. Took 'em all.

    CSANDSTE: I went back through the posts and found posts indicating that spec sheets for Havoline (Chevron distributed) SL was same as Chevron SL
  • bottgersbottgers Member Posts: 2,030
    I recently switched from SuperTech full syn, to Chevron's SL for a couple of reasons. One, because the Chevron is considered to be a syn at dino prices, and two, Chevron claims their oil reduces consumption. My car was using about 1/2 to 3/4 of a quart for every 1500-2000 miles. So far, it appears to be doing about the same using the Chevron. I know this isn't an alarming amount of consumption, but I would like to stop it, or at least slow it down if possible. Do any of you know if Valvoline's Maxlife will reduce consumption? I know Valvoline claims it reconditions seals to help stop leaks, but is this all it does?
  • bottgersbottgers Member Posts: 2,030
    Valvoline's web site says that their Maxlife oil only meets the older "GF-2" or "SJ" specs. Is this just outdated info, or does this oil actually not meet the newer "SL" spec?
  • sthughes99sthughes99 Member Posts: 4
    ...for what it's worth, I've seen Valvoline MaxLife on the shelf at WallyWorld with the bottles marked SL.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    I've put Max-Life in my friends car, he likes it. Most feedback I've read has been positive, but have read none regarding oil consumption issues, but you are not using a lot anyway.
  • fleetwoodsimcafleetwoodsimca Member Posts: 1,518
    The evidence that suggests the idea that Chevron and Havoline SL oils are one and the same favors the idea of people wanting one of those brands using them interchangably. Where I live, they are both available.
  • mrdetailermrdetailer Member Posts: 1,118
    Their datasheet indicates that it is designed to reduce oil consumption as well. Varied from 5% to 25% reduction.

    All of the popular weights at my auto parts stores list the classification as SL.
  • gregb882gregb882 Member Posts: 75
    I must be spoiled! I've NEVER had any car I've owned (17 cars/SUVs to date) use ANY noticeable amount of oil that required me to add between changes. I don't use long change intervals so the most would have been about 7000 miles when I got lazy on a lease car (with 3000 to 5000 being typical), but I am a stickler about regularly checking. I know that manufacturers say some oil loss is normal, but I'd be cheezed off if I had a newer vehicle use 3/4 qt in 2000 miles! I don't care what the mfg says, that is unacceptable! MHO
  • bottgersbottgers Member Posts: 2,030
    I agree. Like I said, my engine using 1/2 to 3/4 of quart for every 2K miles isn't anything to get alarmed about, and it certainly doesn't mean the engine needs to be replaced, it's just annoying to me. Though this may be considered normal consumption, it just doesn't SEEM normal to me for an engine to consume ANY oil. I'll give the Maxlife a try (which is, by the way an "SL" now). Maybe this will slow it down, or stop it altogether.
  • bottgersbottgers Member Posts: 2,030
    There are testimonials on Valvoline's web site by customers who use Maxlife, stating that it has reduced, and in some cases, even stopped consumption altogether. For whatever that's worth. And according to Valvoline, Maxlife has an anitwear additive.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    about a little history? Things like when did you start using synthetic oil and so forth.
  • gregb882gregb882 Member Posts: 75
    Not at all being very knowledgeable about such things, it would seem to me that as long as the leaks are from gaskets or O-rings, it could help. If it's from blow-by at a mechanical part, it probably can't help much. Maybe a viscosity improver like STP or Schaffer's Moly #132 could help that (by thickening the oil). They would also have the added benefits of improved anti-wear additives. Good luck!
  • bottgersbottgers Member Posts: 2,030
    It's a '93 Tercel. It had about 91K on it when I bought it. The day I bought it, I changed the oil and filter, and filled it with SuperTech full syn. I changed out the SuperTech at about 93K and replaced it with Chevron SL. During that 2K miles, it used between 1/2 to 3/4 of quart. I was hoping the Chevron would slow down the consumption, but it doesn't appear to be doing so. When it's time to dump the Chevron, I'll give the Maxlife a try. I know this isn't a huge amount of consumption, but I've heard good things about the Maxlife, and I'm the kind of guy who can't stand ANY consumption. The Maxlife is only about $.60 more per quart than the Chevron is, and considering the Tercel only requires 3 quarts per change (including changing the filter), I think I can afford it. We'll see what happens.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    should be surprised by the oil consumption. Most of what I've read says that changing to a synthetic on a high miles car is going to result in the oil finding the spaces in the valve seals. Maxlife probably would help but for the hell of it, why don't you try putting some of the Super Tech oil treatment in before changing out your oil, or regular STP as you can find it just as cheap. You may find this helps. Then when you change the oil, go to Max-Life, as I've said, it's seems to do what it claims.
  • bottgersbottgers Member Posts: 2,030
    Actually I was surprised. Not too long ago, I bought an '84 Honda with 170K miles on it. The person I bought it from said it never had syn in it. I changed to syn, and it didn't burn a drop. So I was surprised when this Toyota with about half as many miles, started using oil. I don't consider a Toyota with 90K to be a high mileage car. 200K is starting to get up there for a Toyota. But I suppose everything is reletive to how well the car has been taken care of.

    I think I will take your advice and try some of the treatment the next time my oil level drops enough. Then it's on to the Maxlife.
  • mrdetailermrdetailer Member Posts: 1,118
    That is well within normal specifications. Each engine is different. Frankly when my son's Mazda never used oil between changes I was surprised. Every vehicle I have ever owned burned oil at the rate you specify here. This is true whether synthetic, blend or conventional. I wouldn't be jumping to STP or oil thickener just yet. You might want to try a 10W-40 Maxlife to see if that's better. I run that in my high reving Subaru. It's quieter, and doesn't eat too much into the gas mileage. Remember the 40 weight oils like Maxlife have to pass the tough European test for durability. No lighter weight oils can pass that standard.
  • malachy72malachy72 Member Posts: 325
    put MAX-LIFE in both of my 4 banger Hondas, I just have a few quarts of old inventory that my "cheapocratic' oath compels me to use first! BTW I use STP after I've put 1k on the oil, I figure that the viscosity is broken down at that point and I am thickening thinned oil, I probably would never do it in winter. And my wife's 01 Explorer Sport Trac never uses oil between changes, only has 23k on odometer.
Sign In or Register to comment.