20,000 mile MPG Test - Synthetic Vs Dino

[Mr_Incredible]

Just figured it up from 1999-2002 records.

All types of driving, all weather. Some trailering with both types. Mineral for first 8k and some in the middle. Synthetic after 8k and some in the final part.

Quaker State 5w-30. Mobil 1 5w-30.

1999 F250SD V10 4x4 Regular cab, 3:73 Auto

9,709 miles of mineral oil......10.83 MPG average
10,002 miles of synthetic oil...10.96 MPG average

Thought you might find it interesting. I did. Synthetic didn't do much for my mileage.

 

[TeeDub]

Try this comparison with the Amsoil Series 2000, 0w-30 and see what you think.

Mobil 1 is hardly state of the art when it comes to synthetic lubes....

TD

 

[TimVipond]

Interesting. A 1.20% increase in fuel economy. You saved 120 miles of gasoline, 11.08 gallons, or about $25.

You also put about 50 pounds of less pollution into the atmosphere.

Way to go! Keep it up. Just think if everyone made the switch.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

Sorry, I don't do Amsoil. Plus, if it were a test of pure mpg I would have tested 15/50 vs 0/20. 5w-30 vs 5w-30 was the test.

If the difference between regular oil and synthetic over one tank shy of 20,000 miles was a mere 0.13 mpg, I don't think 5w-30 Amsoil is going to better that by very much, anyway.

This was simply a posting of prior results. Somebody had asked for something like this on some thread somewhere. I thought somebody might find it useful.

 

[TeeDub]

Mr. C,

You are missing the point entirely....

One of the main advantages of synthetic lubes is that you can subsititute a low viscosity, PAO/Ester synthetic for a significantly higher viscosity petroleum oil - without compromising on protection from wear and engine deposits.

For example, you can run a 0w-30 in place of an SAE 10w-30 or 10w-40 in many gas engine applications, and you can run an SAE 5w-30 or 10w-30, HD diesel oil in place of a much more viscous SAE 15w-40.

If you merely substitute the same viscosity of synthetic lube for a petroleum oil, you aren't taking full advantage of the superior physical/chemical properties of the best synthetic lubricants.

TD

 

[jdean]

TeeDub I agree with you. I switched from a 5w-30 to a synthetic 0w-30 and noticed a gain of at least a .50 mpg gain in fuel economy. I further changed my drive line oils to synthetic in my suv and gained additional mpg. When you change from a petroleum to a synthetic ,take advantage of the synthetic technology . I feel that the highest impact on mpg is gained through the use of synthetic oil in the drive train rather than the engine.

 

[Zaedock]

Quote:

---

Mr. C,

You are missing the point entirely....

One of the main advantages of synthetic lubes is that you can subsititute a low viscosity, PAO/Ester synthetic for a significantly higher viscosity petroleum oil - without compromising on protection from wear and engine deposits.

For example, you can run a 0w-30 in place of an SAE 10w-30 or 10w-40 in many gas engine applications, and you can run an SAE 5w-30 or 10w-30, HD diesel oil in place of a much more viscous SAE 15w-40.

If you merely substitute the same viscosity of synthetic lube for a petroleum oil, you aren't taking full advantage of the superior physical/chemical properties of the best synthetic lubricants.

TD

---

That's not true.

Look at some of the Jeep UOA's running 10W30 M1 compared to Delo or some 10W40's.

GC 0W30 is thicker than regular 10W30.

I'd never run 5W30 in my diesel instead of 15W40. It would probably throw a rod under load.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

Your point wasn't missed. Perhaps mine was, or more precisely, my lack of a point other than the one I gave.

I am in no way arguing your statement. Nor was I making any conclusion other than, of those two same-weight oils, neither was enough better than the other to write home about. I then went on to add that I didn't believe an Amsoil oil of the same weight would be much better than the M1 strictly for mpg's.

All the rest can be argued by other people.

No

, I...(when I can help it)

My apologies if I somehow got anybody stirred up.

 

[Eddie]

Similar to my 4,000 + mile test with my 2000 Subaru Forester. I changed the engine & both differentals over to Mobil 1 with the same viscosity as OEM. I found an increash of 0.38 mpg with a SD of o.16. My conclusion was that I will never recoup the extra cost of Sythetic oil unless I run out to rediculas oil change intervals like 28,000 miles. I still use Mobil 1 for the safety margin and I do my own oil changes.

 

[FowVay]

I'm not certain that I agree with all that's been said here. If a 5W-30 PAO oil is 10cst and has a ht/hs of 3cP and a 5W-30 mineral oil is 10cst and has a ht/hs of 3cp's then I don't believe that you are getting any superior lubrication characteristics.

With a oil such as Redline, they have 5w-30 oils that are 10 cst but much higher ht/hs ratings. These oils will likely allow you to go to a lower viscosity to achieve the same dynamic viscosity found in a thicker mineral oil.

However, I simply don't see the numbers being superior with synthetic oils. They will provide better MRV numbers and possibly lower NOACK numbers due to a better base oil with less modifiers but I just don't think that you can arbitrarily say that using a PAO oil will allow you to go to a less viscous fluid and achieve the same or better wear rates.

I think that it's for this reason that not all engine mfgr's will accept 5W-20 use and not all require 20W-50. If we can get the fuel economy provided by a 2.6cP 5W-20 with the dynamic lubrication qualities of a 4.6cP 15W-40 then we've found the fountain of youth motor oil.

Fortunately we're able to settle into a happy medium and have a near 'one size fits all' product to choose from.

 

[oilyriser]

Is it possible your tires wore down, making the odometer run faster and faster, over the 20,000 miles? That might account for some of the difference.

 

[Gary Allan]

Now when you say "all kinds of driving" ..just what's the trip length on average??

The reason I ask is that my observations tend to support that the biggest gains from one 'apparent' visc over another is based on the length of heating cycle ..or rather heating cycles per mile (or invert it to read miles per heating cycle). Given the substantial difference in VI between like synths and dinos ..you had to do a substantial amount of this mileage composite in a fully warmed ..or near fully warmed up state.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

Gary,

As stated, these were all types...250 miles each way, 600 miles in a weekend, every other weekend for the period, along with daily back and forth to work 10 miles each way, plus normal driving around, over a 20k mile interval.

Four wheelin', highway, city, idling, hot, cold, in-between, all four seasons, no gas additives, 4k OCI's.

Each type of oil, 10,000 miles each. Same everything.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

I might add, this was not designed as an oil test. I had oil change notations with dates and mileage, and I had gas fill-up dates and amounts.

I took fill-ups from the records and cross referenced them to the oil information for those periods and received the noted figures.

My life at the time was built around trips to KC to see my son. Everything else just happened. SS, DD.

I suppose the only thing I might do different is to throw out the first 8k miles as break-in miles and disregard them. That might make the dino even with the synthetic.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

More like the fat one these days...

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:

---

Gary,

As stated, these were all types...250 miles each way, 600 miles in a weekend, every other weekend for the period, along with daily back and forth to work 10 miles each way, plus normal driving around, over a 20k mile interval.

Four wheelin', highway, city, idling, hot, cold, in-between, all four seasons, no gas additives, 4k OCI's.

Each type of oil, 10,000 miles each. Same everything.

---

I just figured out the application (not really ..it was a while ago). There are two modes of fuel usage for you. Bad and worse. The inherent weight of the vehicle so outstrips parasitic losses that there's nothing to be gained ..even in the fractional %%%'iles.

It's like AC on or off when you're towing a 28' travel trailer. It just doesn't see it. Wind will alter the fuel economy more

 

[Mr_Incredible]

The test was performed for approx 10k miles each and through all seasons, etc. This would have included wind in the variables. It shouldn't be a factor either way.

I'm no statistician, but I suspect the difference in the two oils was so small that it's still within background noise levels.

Whether my V10 is wrapped in a brick and getting 10.83 mpgs or a streamliner and getting 30 mpgs, the difference here was oil. The V10 isn'g going to care about anything other than it's going 2000 rpm at XX load.

The only lesson I take from this is that M1 5w-30 isn't going to get enough of a mpg difference to make it cost effective as an mpg tool.

Any other considerations for M1 or synthetics in general is another argument. Whether other 5w-30 synthetic oils would have made a difference is another argument.

Again, these are just my opinions and observations after those 20,000 miles and another 64,000 miles of driving a V10 Ford Brick.

 

[TeeDub]

Comparing a cheap, Group III based synthetic, to a Group II based petroleum oil really doesn't tell you much. Those two basestocks are very close in terms of traction coefficients, ie "intrafluid" friction.

By comparison, PAO based synthetics have significantly lower intrafluid friction, even when compared to a petroleum oil of the same viscosity. In laymens terms they are simply more "slippery" than conventional oils. This is one of the main reasons why you typically see a noticably temp drop when PAO based, synthetic lubes are used in transmission and differential applications.

The Amsoil 5w-30 is a PAO/Ester based oil with a VI of 185 - it will most certainly work better than some cheap Group III based oil when it comes to fuel efficiency and overall performance.

 

[Mr_Incredible]

I have no idea what basestocks Mobil1 had in late '99 to late '02.

Don't know. Don't care. Just reporting what I saw.