Originally Posted By: abycat
So wouldnt flashpoint and NOACK and being syn be something to look at?
Also without googling the fix for the problem isnt just putting in new rings and giving it a hone for them the fix?
If it was a ring job in that car would be around 600$. If i had the book for it I think I could do it in my driveway in a weekend. So he might be wasting money trying to prolong the inevitable. If the car is pretty much mint he most likely wants to keep it for as long as possible.
Personally, I'd agree that flashpoint and NOACK would be the among the most important things to consider with this issue. While re-ringing the engine isn't overly expensive or a huge hassle, I definitely understand tpitcher's desire to avoid that, or at least push it back as long as is possible.
This is where I can understand the desire by tpitcher to use a Group IV synthetic. This isn't about simple economics, where one chooses a competitively priced conventional lube and filter combination and follows an appropriate OCI or takes the synthetic out to some extended OCI. This is, for want of a better expression, a labour of love. As Bill already pointed out, after the mention of Saturn engine cleanliness with M1, it's quite likely that such owners not only used synthetic, they changed it at severe service intervals or even more often.
Reasoned, extended OCIs on synthetic are pretty much relegated to BITOGers, some general public Amsoil enthusiasts, and fleet managers. Most of the general public falls into the camps of never/seldom changing oil out of negligence, following the manual/OLM, or changing it way too often.
As I said, I won't torment tpitcher about conventional any further, and I'm not going to even get into the cold start issue; I'm dealing with that in a couple threads already. The car isn't a rare classic or a Rolls Royce. But, he wants to treat it in a way that might, at least might, delay or prevent the Saturn oil consumption issue. It's not a true scientific experiment, but it's not intended as such. I've already made my recommendations on possible Group IV choices.
With respect to the mention of turbos (which the Saturn lacks), as others have pointed out, turbos do not require synthetic. My old 1991 Audi 200 Turbo got conventional, with the rare OCI on synthetic, without any problems. Then again, it has an oil cooler that's bigger than the rad; I should see if I can get a picture for the oil cooler thread. There was a bit of varnish, and some evidence of minor coking. However, I wouldn't place the blame solely on conventional. It did have 250,000 km on it and the manual's OCI was 12,500 km on conventional, which might have been a little optimistic for the oils of the day and with mechanical fuel injection. This was before the Germans started pushing ACEA and proprietary specifications, and we do know that they had some poor results with extended OCIs before moving beyond API specifications.
Originally Posted By: tpitcher
Thank you. I think this thread is now..... Done.
No way! We're having way too much fun here!
So wouldnt flashpoint and NOACK and being syn be something to look at?
Also without googling the fix for the problem isnt just putting in new rings and giving it a hone for them the fix?
If it was a ring job in that car would be around 600$. If i had the book for it I think I could do it in my driveway in a weekend. So he might be wasting money trying to prolong the inevitable. If the car is pretty much mint he most likely wants to keep it for as long as possible.
Personally, I'd agree that flashpoint and NOACK would be the among the most important things to consider with this issue. While re-ringing the engine isn't overly expensive or a huge hassle, I definitely understand tpitcher's desire to avoid that, or at least push it back as long as is possible.
This is where I can understand the desire by tpitcher to use a Group IV synthetic. This isn't about simple economics, where one chooses a competitively priced conventional lube and filter combination and follows an appropriate OCI or takes the synthetic out to some extended OCI. This is, for want of a better expression, a labour of love. As Bill already pointed out, after the mention of Saturn engine cleanliness with M1, it's quite likely that such owners not only used synthetic, they changed it at severe service intervals or even more often.
Reasoned, extended OCIs on synthetic are pretty much relegated to BITOGers, some general public Amsoil enthusiasts, and fleet managers. Most of the general public falls into the camps of never/seldom changing oil out of negligence, following the manual/OLM, or changing it way too often.
As I said, I won't torment tpitcher about conventional any further, and I'm not going to even get into the cold start issue; I'm dealing with that in a couple threads already. The car isn't a rare classic or a Rolls Royce. But, he wants to treat it in a way that might, at least might, delay or prevent the Saturn oil consumption issue. It's not a true scientific experiment, but it's not intended as such. I've already made my recommendations on possible Group IV choices.
With respect to the mention of turbos (which the Saturn lacks), as others have pointed out, turbos do not require synthetic. My old 1991 Audi 200 Turbo got conventional, with the rare OCI on synthetic, without any problems. Then again, it has an oil cooler that's bigger than the rad; I should see if I can get a picture for the oil cooler thread. There was a bit of varnish, and some evidence of minor coking. However, I wouldn't place the blame solely on conventional. It did have 250,000 km on it and the manual's OCI was 12,500 km on conventional, which might have been a little optimistic for the oils of the day and with mechanical fuel injection. This was before the Germans started pushing ACEA and proprietary specifications, and we do know that they had some poor results with extended OCIs before moving beyond API specifications.
Originally Posted By: tpitcher
Thank you. I think this thread is now..... Done.
No way! We're having way too much fun here!
