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.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
Has anyone here ever compared the gas mileage after changing to thicker oil? I have used the STP oil treat in the Nissan for the last 15k miles and have not noticed any worse gas mileage at all..Motor sounds much better though..I understand that manufacturers recommend the thinner oil but I think they are trying to keep the mileage figures up, My main concern is making the engine run better longer, slightly less gas mileage is not quite as important, anybody got anything to add?
STP is, like all these additives, "SNAKE OIL" however, after 100,000 miles I guess who cares and you seem to have okay luck with it. At 32 degrees F, STP is a solid, will not pour out of the can. All it is doing is raising your overall oil viscosity. If engine was running fine why risk tinkering with STP?????????????????/
I am just thinking that after 40k miles there has been enough wear to use that thicker oil, MY Blazer with the same 4.3 had a problem after 107k and I only used 10w30 in that one , had some bearing damage-Cam bearing spun..
It may be just bad luck that the Blazer spun that bearing at 107k but I just keep thinking that is the ONLY vehicle that I have ever used 10w30 in and the ONLY one that had any major problem..I have noticed that the Nissan with STP starts up smoother/quieter than it did before (even after sitting for several days) and runs much quieter than before ..
I chg oil every 3k and use AC filters, used Frams once upon a time but they seem to bypass a lot..lots of valve tap noise until the engine warmed up..AC filters immediately stopped that..
Lets hear from you, thanks for the responces so far
Maintenance practices, operating conditions, filtration are often culprits in failures.
As to viscosity, we think most engines are relatively forgiving on vis changes, IF oil used flows at low temps (i.e. no 30W below 0 deg.F etc...), but we *always* recommend going with OEM vis reccomendation --- they built it, and have no clear motivation to make something failure prone or not last. No motivation even considering desire to lower vis ranges for gas milage.
That said, I do not personally feel great about 5W-20 stuff coming on the market. But I would still use it, in new cars as directed.
More vis=more protection ONLY if stresses break the oil films, to the extent they test for this in new engines (and they have a lot of motivation to test properly) --- engines will be OK...
Interestingly we sell a lot of 10W40 and 20W50 due to "viscosity religion"...technically almost no one should be using those grades in most modern engines...
So help me out here, How would the 10w40 help, and how would it hurt,,,
some background...
I always crank the motor and let it run a full minute before I even put it in gear, even after warm in the summer.
I always change oil at 3k and use ac filters.
I always keep rpm below 2k until engine is at normal temp(gauge is at 190F)
Most of my driving is to work which is about 35 miles away on interstate, and when hunting or offroad, engine is at normal temp before I am more than 5 miles from home...in other words I go to great lengths to make sure the engine is ready before I ever really work it...I really want to make these things last...
Have you got any other helpfull hints or anything?
I really don't want this zr2 motor to have any problems because of me..(trying hard to keep faith in Chev....)
I really am looking forward to answers on this subject...see yall
mwikle...."More vis=more protection ONLY if stresses break the oil films, to the extent they test for this in new engines (and they have a lot of motivation to test properly) --- engines will be OK..." good point. You are probably right. Extensive testing was done. I remain skeptical though (ford). I would first not purchase a car requiring the 20 wt. nor would I use the 20 wt. if specified. I'll take my chances with the 30 wt.
Again, I'd use the vis GM recommends. In an ideal world a 40W film is slightly tougher than a 30W during certain type of lubrication conditions in some types of bearing and surfaces. So the short answer is it is more forgiving under some circumstances of high loads. My guess is you never get close to those conditions anyway.
OEMs went away from 40W not just for mileage gains, but they had some data that the VI (visosity improver that makes it a multi grade -- basically a special plastic we grind up and dissolve in the oil) was a problem in some in some cases breaking down. It takes a lot more of the this VI to make a 10-40, versus a 10-30 so the OEM thinking was "less VI is good". I am not aware of any real world issues on 10-40 from the VI however --- but I do not work for an OEM.
Modern engine oils --- all of them --- are very highly engineered stuff. Blended correctly to spec (buy only major consumer or oil company brands for the Quality Control) a GF-3 oil is very tough as long as you keep out sand and dirt, use a decent filter (PureOne is my personal fav on the cost/value scale), and warm up the engine on most drives to keep the water out. Very few of them appear to me to be "overformulated" to go beyond spec. It is all MBA marketing for the most part in Passenger Car Oils, keeping in mind that blended right, a **basic** oil is pretty darn good, and getting better (newer group II/II+ stocks (isosyn, purebase, etc.) are are very robust in high temp, and low temp properties).
I'd say relax and change the oil every 5K or so (3K if you feel better --- oil is cheap) and drive happy! For what it is worth this is generally what "Click & Clack" reccommend as well on PBS radio.
Merritt
I heard the Arabs and OPEC also recommend 3K oil changes and long, spirited drives to keep your engine in top condition!
My favorite is when CR raved about the Dodge Dakota, and then said in another article that the Durango was poor quality, and "rode like a truck". Someone forgot to tell them that they are the same vehicle.
They also tend not to compare high-end electronics in their tests. I don't really care who makes the best "cheap" stuff.
It is amazing though how many people I speak with take CR's word as gospel.
We Americans must look like wasteful gluttons to the Europeans who change at 10K minimums.
Way to go rcarboni
Ford explorers were tested by a car magazine (forgot which one)and found NOT to be more prone to rollovers than other SUVs --- though data does seem to say underinflated Firestones are poor tire choice relative to other tires. My Dad had some Firestone 500's in the 70's -- remember those?
Remember in the automotive aftermarket reproducible product performance is often secondary. Marketing, brand reputation, and anecdotal endorsements are best way to sell products for many companies.
My Thoughts on Oil Service Intervals
There are some rather "interesting" opinions on oils / lubrication / testing / extended drains...Cars can be a passion for enthusiasts.
Waaay too many posters in these technical forums sound too "authoritative" in their tone. Most are probably well-meaning I know. Claiming a solid "I know" cause/effect relationship (or implying it) without data is kinda silly. Like race car *Drivers*??? endorsing "miracle" aftermarket oil additives...come on, that is "testimonial" not proof/solid evidence. Drivers are not Engineers. Nor do they have reproducible DATA. Netizens beware...
FWIW, I am a Chemical Engineer, and STLE (Society of Tribologists and Lubrication Engineers) CLS(tm)(Certified Lubrication Specialist).
The color of the oil is not really relevant as to its condition in most cases (big exception might be busted coolant gaskets in the block---you CAN see that kind of contamination). There are so many chemicals in modern spec. oils to keep it healthy during use, that used oil testing is only way to go for definitive answers. If you change it when it first becomes dark, that is only good for oil suppliers, your engine will not benefit.
I NEVER recommend *consumers* vary from OEM (original equipment manufacturer --- i.e. carmakers in this case) oil drain and viscosity recommendations no matter what testing processes they do...risk/reward is just too small IMHO. It is technically fine (if perhaps economically imprudent) to be more conservative and/or test used oil, but set your maximum service intervals at OEM time/mileage for your service conditions.
Severe service; is not quite as common, in my opinion, as some Quicklubes would have you believe because *occasional* severe conditions (e.g. desert type heat & dust / stop & go) are not the same as truly severe service like, say for example, daily long idling police cars & frequent trailer towing.
BTW, it is very surprising the amount of 10W40 & 20W50 PCMO we sell...***BUT no OEM recommends those grades any longer*** (and has not for a while). Old habits/beliefs die-hard. Within proper ranges (OEM spec) higher viscosities are not usually better or more protective.
For the record, I personally use syn & premium (or OEM) filter in my personal cars, and change at about 5K miles...this is really overkill (vs. 7500 miles) that I cannot intellectually justify, but heck oil is cheap and engines are not. The syn does not really lube "better" in a material way, but does provide some additional safety margins in some areas (temperature extremes, and a slightly over-spec. premium formulation maybe close to GF-3/SL next generation oils). Syn might have less "flowing friction"(my words) for better mileage/HP, or a maybe a better film strength, but this is probably way too small to observe/measure, and is still technically controversial among some tribolgists as to relevance.
I have used oil analysis from time to time on my older car to check conditions. Titan Labs (sold at K-mart) has a consumer-friendly report. Most folks should avoid purely numeric reports like fleets use.
At work, we use Cleveland Tech (CTC) for used oil analysis, they may do some other OEM-branded tests too, I do not know. But our work is for fleets, and mostly HDMO (i.e. Heavy-Duty Motor Oil for sooty diesel engines, not PCMO --Passenger Car Motor Oil).
Note that visual oil filter inspection in sometimes helpful, but not conclusive. Filters can pull out to 10-25 microns; only people with good vision can see (in ideal conditions) down to maybe 20 microns. Also particles are buried in the media. Memory says particles in typical engines need to be over about 40 microns to possibly damage anything in the tightest bearing clearances in most engines. Most importantly most filters are not designed for long life service.
My PCMO oil advice to consumers is mostly like "Click & Clack"(NPR car show) give:
(1) GF2/API SJ oils are very good even at base spec. blend
(2) buy a major brand (big oil co or retail brand --- the issue is day to day quality control, NOT who is "best" oil. Around 5%, if I remember correctly, per API tests and State of NC tests (only state that checks) of off-the-shelf oil are misblended/off-spec. I think big suppliers do better QC.
(3) change oil and use a good filter (OEM, Purolator, Wix, are my favorites, others may be OK) each time and do it at *5000 miles* not 3000 oil change places say...when the color get darker the oil is still fine for service. If you are TRULY severe service (per OEM), then do that recommendation for miles
(4) Add **nothing** to the oil. PCMO is a VERY competitive market---if there was a miracle additive in would be in oil in the first place...major Oil/Chemical company developers/chemical suppliers are doggone pretty smart formulators.
Smaller specialty oil supplers can vary on oil change intervals and testing advice, and often push extended drains & expensive oil. They need a way to merchandise oils, and it is quite true that ***done right*** extended drains are possible in most cases; just kinda silly and risky for most consumers in terms of risk/hassle & reward. The risk/reward ratio looks much better for extended drain if you run a fleet and have economic impact when vehicles are serviced. Furthermore, current major-branded oils will give you plenty of miles without oil-related issues/failure. Just sold a 150K mi. 88 Accord run on regular oil, with plenty of engine life left, even if the rest of the car showed a bit more wear!
Also "Memory says particles in typical engines need to be over about 40 microns to possibly damage anything in the tightest bearing clearances in most engines. Most importantly most filters are not designed for long life service." A study by GM states: "Compared to a 40 micron filter engine wear was reduced by 50% with 30 micron filtation. Likewise, wear was reduced by 70% with 15 micron filtration"
While I would have to agree with you that syn provides the extra margin of protection under extreme conditions I would question that it doesn't lubricate better than conventional oil under normal conditions. Conventional wilsom in industry says that you can go approximately one ISO or SAE grade lower with syn. Also the Mobil 1 tests did indicate that there was less wear with syn than conventional oil in their 200K tests. Since I was working with Mobil in an unrelated project I got to know one of the test engineers. I couldn't get the wear/measurement numbers from him, however. I believe (in spite of my distrusting self) that the information was valid.
Later, Hope there is enough data here.
Al
I like the advice you gave AGAINST heavy weight oils. I know plenty of boy-racers who think the minute you add anything high-performance to a car (even decals!) you need to switch to a 20W50 oil. I reserve this stuff ONLY for cars that are showing signs of wear like visible smoke and/or excessive consumption. For the most part, the extra effort used to pump this stuff through a motor robs some mileage and horsepower ... especially at the higher RPMs.
I especially like you warning against using an oil with an extreme spread between the winter and summer numbers. I've been warning against the polymeric goo that these oils rely on. This is why I think that 10W30 is one of the best weights going for warm weather use. With some types and brands, this weight has no VI whatsoever. Often, the viscosity improver is the first component in an oil to break down and form varnish, sludge, etc ...
I used the additive "Prolong" once in my current car ... but I'll never use a miracle additive like this again. I'll stick with a good synthetic oil and high-quality filters.
--- Bror Jace
Something else I was thinking is that when manufactures specify something, like recommended oil weights, they are making those recommendations for new/relatively new engines. I wouldn't consider that same motor after 50k miles to be the same as it was when it was new. Wouldn't that be something to consider after a few years/miles?
Certainly agree one can go to extended drains with good oils syn or not. Should do some used oil testing to ensure everything is OK for a few changes(or have OEM that has done that for you "in effect" -- Mercedes, etc..). I'd think 10K is no sweat with almost any good oil, and a mix of pretty normal driving,. 15K doable for many.
It is not really the "syn" itself (PAO or Group II+/III base oil) that might make a syn last longer in normal service ... it's the fact that some synthetics might be "overadditized" in a way to make them last a bit longer (with good filtration and a tuned and tight engine). Syns sure as heck last longer in extreme conditions (that the vast majority of folks do not see) and are most excellent in a blizzard!
Agree on filtration...CLEAN IS GOOD & does cut verryyyyyy slooooooowww WEAR (provided decent flow in the finer filter, etc.). DAMAGE is when a bit-o-crud scars a surface because it is too big, and >40 micron might cause that. In circulating oil systems in plants, premium filtartion often pays big dividends. In cars, excellent filtation is good, but the increase in life may not be material to the service expectancy of the car/engine as a whole. YMMV, and I guess that is why the most of the most enthsiastic car folks use bypass filter and boutique oil.
FTC spanked Prolong pretty bad, also Slick50, and many others.
Higher vis can be nifty for old/loose cars.
Maxlife is an MBA Marketing product. I personally bet it is a bit "better" in formulation for older cars, BUT does that matter, or is it needed, or will you see a material/measurable difference --- I very seriously doubt it. I'd use separate treatments if needed to "chemically" fix that old car before it is sold...STP, Motor Honey, Seal Swell, Compression Booster, etc... Keep in mind I'm talking very well worn cars here, where adding a bit of chemical magic to a long-in-the tooth engine might be a temporary "roll aid" vs. a mechanical fix is not big issue.
Anyway, I have also seen the Prolong commercial where these two chicks (er, rather attractive young women) drove up and down the Cal. coastling with "no oil" in the engine. I know they (Prolong-not the girls) were spanked. Do you have any other information on this scam??
Al
MWikle, You might be just the dude to answer the following: Can you tell us the difference between paraffinic and napthalenic (pardon my spelling) base mineral oils? Any ideas as to who (major manufacturers) uses which? I know Pennzoil and Quaker State used to be criticized for using paraffin oils and clogging up motors with waxy goop but Chevron almost BRAGS about being from paraffinic stocks in their advertising. Any thoughts?
About Max-Life, I had heard from another oil-conscious netizen that it uses Grade III base stocks so it might considered in the same league as "Pure-Base" and "iso-syn" base oils ... and these lubricants generally run between $1.50 to $2.00 per quart. I always thought the marketing of this stuff was odd. Why would people buy a "special" oil for an older (read: "Beater") car? Why not merely stick with their same brand ... but switch from 5W30 & 10W30 to the heavier 10W40 and 20W50. They have some interesting technical data on their site which suggests that the stuff helps a little with older seals ... but just a little. I still find the concept a bit odd.
--- Bror Jace
And was not the CR Fram test way back in the 80's???
Then you have the mechanics who say "3000 miles works graet for an oil change - but that does not tell you if 3500 or 4000 might not be OK.
Using that logic, 1000 mile oil changes would work graet too.
My instinct that except for very short trips in cold weather there is a lot of oil being wasted on 3000 mile oil changes.
Chemically, a napathenic oil is more reactive and less stable in some ways, also solubility is different. Commonly napathenics are used for "low stress" duty: shingle oil, 3-in-one, nominal temp apps, process oils, maybe a way oil, can't remeber some apps at the moment, etc...Naps are (used to?) be cheaper too --- but a lot of plants closed so I'm not current on realtive prices.
"Wax" is what happens as base oils get cool --- wax crystals form and fall out. It is a characteritic of a given base oil, but is a non-issue for any normal engine oil. Not gonna see ANY "wax" issues in a proper oil from almost any manufacturer short of a heck of an off-test blend with a marginal base oil, maybe...
Any ideas as to who (major manufacturers) uses which? -- All modern motor oils are paraffinic in nature, though it is no longer necessary to use a "parrafinic" crude to make them. In the OLD days, "Pennsylvania"-type high paraffinic crude was good 'cause oils had few/no additives, and refiners could not chemically modify base oils, so the motor oil "inherited" a lot of the crude's properties. That is not the case at all today in modern base oil plants.
Here some information from Chevron on base oil:
http:// www.chevron.com/prodserv/BaseOils/articles.htm
http://www.chevron.com/prodserv/BaseOils/faq.htm
also the site has some good papers on this "behind the scenes" stuff. The materials look to me to written from a viewpoint to be sure, but are pretty non-marketing and hype-free based on verifiable facts/data. [Disclosure: I work for Chevron, but this forum is on my own time & my own views & my employer really does not "play seriously" in the PCMO Passenger Car Motor Oils) space anyway as most of us are Engineers and not hard-core "Marketers" (though we try!) --- though I think Chevron sells excellent PCMO at bargain prices.]
Public data is scarce because test are expensive, and most consumers do not care, and enthusiasts do what they want anyway. Decent motor oil is SO forgiving that it just does not matter. If valid data sold oil, or any aftermarket product, then it would be there belive me!
Most lube oil is so good and so standardized for cars now, that people do not make much money in it at all realtive to equity --- that why all of the restructuring (Penn/Quaker etc...many others). Gotta be big to make a go of it.
The ZMAX case filed last February scares me. The FTC said that they were promoting colored baby oil. Scary stuff. Any know it's current status?
Since I have no hobbies to speak of (other than trying to keep my head above water while raising a family!), I’ve adopted this topic as a little hobby, if you will. Since I can find no hard test data, periodically I’ll invest in an oil analysis test kit to see just how well, or poor, my oil is doing, and from that make a judgment as to the appropriate oil change interval that suits my driving, and disposition. The oil analyses kits that are available at K Mart, Auto Zone, etc. offer very little data, other than broad reaching and general stmts that the oil tested was within vis spec, had no water or antifreeze in it, etc. and there were “normal” amounts of wear metals present, etc. To get good spectrographic data you have to cough up ~$20 for a good kit.
I suggest to anyone that gives a rip about this kind of stuff to give the oil analysis idea some thought, especially if you’re interested in thumbing your nose at the quick lube industry’s 3,000 mile oil change or die hype.
That’s my $.02 worth.
Which non-consumer (i.e. gives numbers) used oil test kit do you like for home use?
Merritt
In response to mwikle in post 642, I've used the test kit supplied by Oil Analyzers, Inc. That co. is obviously a subsidiary of Amsoil. Their oil analysis reports are quite detailed (more information than I can digest)and when you call up there for follow-up the folks give good customer service. I don't know if this thought crossed your mind, but their connection to Amsoil notwithstanding, they'll analyze any brand / type of oil, ATF, etc.
Here's the bad part, if you might consider this as such; with S&H their kit, through the Amsoil web site, is ~$23. Again, for a boring old coot like me with no real hobbies, I can swallow ~$23 periodically.
No doubt there are other companies that offer the same services.
For the record, I don't think that working or Chevron taints your opinion too much as long as you disclose it fully ... which you did. I worked for Pepsi once and have always preferred Coke and I'm pretty much a right-winger even though I work for state government.
Thanks for info. It confirms some things I already knew and had some new information as well.
I was pretty impressed with Chevron's site and have been using it as a point of reference for almost a year now.
So, you are saying that virtually all motor oils are parraffinics these days?
--- Bror Jace
Yep, all are parrafinic in nature --- even if not from a "parrafinic" crude source, or if "synethesized" to a degree --- note that I'm NOT even gonna debate what is a "synthetic": Group II/II+/III VHVI etc... or PAO PAO/Esther three-syn etc... Besides, given my employer, no one is gonna think I am bias-free .
Some of the older base oil plants still do solvent extraction ("washing") of the VGO (vaccum gas oil) distillate to make base oil & pull-out wax (for logs, candles, etc...itself a valuable product becasue so few folks make it domestically as a lubes by-product anymore -- most catalytically dewax and hydroprocess...think I heard China's old refineries are now exporting wax to U.S.!) These plants do make a true "parrfinic" base oil in the tradional sense of it.
Thanks on the site feedback. I know the folks that create much of the info, and will pass along the attaboy. I can say, we are EXTREMELY sensitive to product claims at work being precisely accurate, so I personally think it is a pretty good "reference" site too.
tc93 TY for the info on the oil test kits ... yeah $23 is bit high, but I suspect Retail kits require a lot of "hand holding" and price reflects those phone calls...Amsoil is an excellent niche Marketer of oils.
But yes I WOULD like to hear your take on the subject of synthetics despite you being a foot soldier for one of the 'evil oil companies.' >;^)
I'll just consider the source and weight it accordingly with all the other info I've received. After all, what are the chances I'm gonna stumble upon a 100% impartial source on this subject in the next year or tow, eh?
--- Bror Jace
I had an olds like that.
1 quart at each 80 miles worse at high speeds. Much less at lower speeds.
#1732 of 1756 Support tech data on synthetic oil by gsleve Jul 07, 2001 (08:29 am)
MORE GREAT TIPS
"Durability of an optimized PAO-based synthetic formulation compared with a commercial high quality mineral oil was also measured. Chassis rolls testing was done at 55 and at 85 mph with 15,000 mile (24,123 km) oil drains intervals. Wear for the engine having the PAO-based formulation was essentially nil.
The engine run on the commercial mineral oil formulation showed several wear parameters that exceeded factory limits. Final proof of performance was evaluated using over-the-road extended drain vehicles tests. In recent extended drain fleet testing studies, PAO-based fully formulated full synthetic oil outperformed mineral oil by having better viscosity control, less oil consumption and better end-of-test vehicle engine ratings.
"An added benefit from using synthetic oils over mineral oils (including hydrocracked oils) is the improved performance in regard to filter plugging. Goyal has shown that overall filter life was improved using synthetic oils. The synthetic oils tested showed no filter plugging in extended drain over-the-road tests running up to 25,000 miles (40,000 km)."
What is your take on the Test? Was it Fair?
MORE GREAT TIPS
Today's passage is from the book "Synthetic Lubricants and
High-Performance Functional Fluids."
"In diesel engine testing a PAO-based formulation outperformed a commercial oil based on severely hydroprocessed mineral oil. Superior deposit and wear results were found for the PAO-based engine oil. Double-length VW 1431 turbo diesel tests demonstrated the superior thermal-oxidative stability of the PAO-based formulation.
"Durability of an optimized PAO-based synthetic formulation compared with a commercial high quality mineral oil was also measured. Chassis rolls testing was done at 55 and at 85 mph with 15,000 mile (24,123 km) oil drains intervals. Wear for the engine having the PAO-based formulation was essentially nil.
The engine run on the commercial mineral oil formulation showed several wear parameters that exceeded factory limits. Final proof of performance was evaluated using over-the-road extended drain vehicles tests. In recent extended drain fleet testing studies, PAO-based fully formulated full synthetic oil outperformed mineral oil by having better viscosity control, less oil consumption and better end-of-test vehicle engine ratings.
"An added benefit from using synthetic oils over mineral oils (including hydrocracked oils) is the improved performance in regard to filter plugging. Goyal has shown that overall filter life was improved using synthetic oils. The synthetic oils tested showed no filter plugging in extended drain over-the-road tests running up to 25,000 miles (40,000 km).
"Synthetic fluids, such as poly(a-olefin)/ester blends, offer a number of inherent performance advantages over conventional petroleum-based oils for the formulation of modern automotive engine oils. Another important feature that must be considered in automotive crankcase applications is low-temperature performance. The most widely recognized property benefit of PAO-based fluids is excellent low temperature performance.
Tables 12 and 13 compare the low temperature characteristics of base fluid PAOs with HVI and VHVI mineral oils of comparable viscosity. Highly refined mineral oil stocks are improved over conventional mineral oils’ however, they suffer in low temperature performance even with the addition of pour point depressants. The cold crank simulation test is of vital interest to any car owner who has ever lived in a cold climate.
The advantage of a PAO-based formulation in the crankcase is immediate and obvious on a cold winter morning – it is the difference between being able to start the car and not. The superior low temperature operation of synthetic automotive lubricants in automotive engine oils, gear oils and automatic transmission fluid formulations has been demonstrated."
For more information about "Synthetic Lubricants and High-Performance Functional Fluids"