AMPCO Oiler and Running Lean?

[moving2]

Disclaimer: I am not asking for your opinion on the use of an Ampco oiler in a modern vehicle, and any such posts will be ignored.

I've been using an Ampco (Marvel Mystery Oil) Oiler for it's claimed benefits: "provides critical valve to seat lubrication, which is now absent from gasoline, and prevents sticking valves and detonation caused by carbon and combustion deposits". When doing the head gasket as preventive maintenance on my '97 Landcruiser with only 135k mi (the old design is known to be a problem spot) the machine shop found I needed all new exhaust valves and valve guides. They said it looked like I had extra air getting in from somewhere and like it was running lean. Never a CEL, oil usage/burning, or a noticeable problem, and all maintenance done on time. I am wondering if it is possible the Ampco oiler might be to blame? I know there were a few times I let the Ampco run dry before filling it up again. I am wondering if this is a possible culprit for running lean, and if this may have still occurred even if I hadn't let it run dry those few times. Any helpful comments would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Shannow]

Pretty useless posting anything in this, as if it doesn't fit your strict specification on what answers (and indeed discussion) are acceptable to you, you will ignore it.

Not an answer, nor a discussion.

Did the inverse oiler and MMO lead to longer life of your exhaust valves ?

 

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Pretty useless posting anything in this, as if it doesn't fit your strict specification on what answers (and indeed discussion) are acceptable to you, you will ignore it.


Useless posting anything? Huh? I'm not sure I understand. I made a pretty simple request, really: I'm not looking for opinions on the use of an MMO oiler in a modern FI vehicle because I know that is a controversial discussion and I'm posting for a different reason: I have a very specific problem I'm seeing in my vehicle, and I'm wondering if the Ampco could be the culprit. And, if so, then some theories as to how this could've been a contributor. Hope this clears it up.


Originally Posted By: Shannow
Did the inverse oiler and MMO lead to longer life of your exhaust valves ?


1. I'm not using an inverse oiler

2. I am asking a very similar question to the one you have posed above in my OP, so I'm not sure why you're simply restating my question (in a slightly different way) back at me. Care to enlighten me? Not a rhetorical question.

3. I'm guessing you're one of those people who just couldn't wait to jump on the very oiler/MMO controversy discussion I'd hoped to avoid (you were obviously miffed at my disclaimer). So you just found a different way to do it. Maybe try not to be so obvious next time? Thanks for the "help", but I think your instincts were right- it was useless for you to post.

 

[dishdude]

Maybe you can convert it to Nitrous.

 

[Lapham3]

Now don't bite my head off, but I use these oilers in some 50 year old cars and would doubt that they would give you this problem in old or modern engines.

 

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: Lapham3
Now don't bite my head off, but I use these oilers in some 50 year old cars and would doubt that they would give you this problem in old or modern engines.


Lapham3- on the contrary, thank you for the helpful response! What if the vehicle was run for some time after the oiler was empty? Couldn't this produce a lean condition? Note this isn't the older inverse oiler, it's a newer Ampco type with the plastic container.

 

[Lapham3]

I just have the older glass versions, but the jar empty 'induced leak' would be small and I'd think any problem show up with at idle along with it's largest vacuum 'pull'. You might just close the valve to see if any change. I have a good running 1985 Chev V8 original and high miles where the Q-jet carb throttle plate shaft bushings are worn that will flash a code after a bit of idling as the mix has leaned out-I'd think your's would code too if a significant leak.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: moving2

3. I'm guessing you're one of those people who just couldn't wait to jump on the very oiler/MMO controversy discussion I'd hoped to avoid (you were obviously miffed at my disclaimer). So you just found a different way to do it. Maybe try not to be so obvious next time? Thanks for the "help", but I think your instincts were right- it was useless for you to post.



I've used them on old soft iron headed cars that I ran with LPG...no not the brand name and part number that you have but I also used a lubricant that was specifically for valve seat recession, not one that almost advertises that driving past a billboard with a picture of it will give you MPG, and reverse the flow of fuel from your engine to tank.

So do you think your investment saved your valves ?

Personally, and when I used them, it was obvious that to run them out of oil was a vacuum leak.

Was that the answer that you wanted ?

 

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: Lapham3
I just have the older glass versions, but the jar empty 'induced leak' would be small and I'd think any problem show up with at idle along with it's largest vacuum 'pull'. You might just close the valve to see if any change. I have a good running 1985 Chev V8 original and high miles where the Q-jet carb throttle plate shaft bushings are worn that will flash a code after a bit of idling as the mix has leaned out-I'd think your's would code too if a significant leak.


Lapham3- that's a good point. With OBD-II I would expect to see a CEL (probably misfire) if there were a detectable vacuum leak. Hmm...

 

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

I've used them on old soft iron headed cars that I ran with LPG...no not the brand name and part number that you have but I also used a lubricant that was specifically for valve seat recession, not one that almost advertises that driving past a billboard with a picture of it will give you MPG, and reverse the flow of fuel from your engine to tank.


Thanks for the somewhat relevant information amongst your opinion piece.


Originally Posted By: Shannow
So do you think your investment saved your valves ?


...and once again you are simply restating a version of the question I asked in my original post. You never did respond as to why you're simply posing my own question back at me. Care to actually answer this time?

BTW, my answer to your question is this: I don't know, and that would be why I posted. And this could have absolutely nothing to do with Ampco/MMO, as my mechanic's guess at the moment is fuel injector seals / leaking injector. I'm quite sure you're happy to hear this may have nothing to do with that singular topic you're so ready to pounce on. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Personally, and when I used them, it was obvious that to run them out of oil was a vacuum leak. Was that the answer that you wanted ?


Since I guess it still isn't clear to you, I didn't "want" any particular answer; I just asked for people to stick to the topic without going off the rails about their opinion re: MMO/oilers/modern cars, as you seemed so eager to do above.

Thank you, Lapham3, for pointing out a CEL would be likely if the vacuum leak were detectable; which, in my experience, means even a small vacuum leak would trigger the CEL.

 

[Shannow]

OK
* I doubt that a small vacuum leak form the oiler would give you a CEL.
* The leak would be at part throttle (which is where these things inject all the lubricant, none at full throttle).
* At part throttle, the engine is in closed loop, and I'm quite positive would be compensated for via oxygen sensors and injectors that are big enough for full throttle.

Only other question that I had was did you REALLY have burned valves, or were you getting duped ?

What would the extra air (if it was there) do to the valve guides ?

 

[Trav]

I don't have an answer to the question but FWIW i would install an add on A/F monitor with a gauge so i could monitor the A/F ration right from the dash under all conditions.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: moving2
I've been using an Ampco (Marvel Mystery Oil) Oiler for it's claimed benefits: "provides critical valve to seat lubrication, which is now absent from gasoline, and prevents sticking valves and detonation caused by carbon and combustion deposits".


Did this installation meet your expectation of the claimed benefits ???

 

[The_Eric]

I seriously doubt your oiler contributed to the worn valves. As was stated- if the running it out of oil caused a vacuum leak, it would be noticed by the O2 sensor and the computer would first try to compensate by increasing the fuel trims. If the trims were beyond the (computer's predefined) threshold for too long, it would set a code. You might not necessarily notice it in the driveability either. If it were so bad as to cause damage in the short/few times you ran it out, you would most certainly notice it in the way it ran.

 

[OVERKILL]

IMHO, not discussing the proclaimed merits of the device precludes us from being able to discuss that the device may have caused the issue.

Essentially, you've ended up with an engine in the shop with valve problems, something the product claimed to prevent. It obviously failed to deliver on at least one of the advertised benefits of the system.

So other than confirming that yes, it would cause a (small) vacuum leak that should generally be compensated for by the adaptive strategy in the ECM, we don't have much to discuss unfortunately

 

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
OK
* I doubt that a small vacuum leak form the oiler would give you a CEL.
* The leak would be at part throttle (which is where these things inject all the lubricant, none at full throttle).
* At part throttle, the engine is in closed loop, and I'm quite positive would be compensated for via oxygen sensors and injectors that are big enough for full throttle.


I think you forgot about cold start idle, where they inject a decent portion of the lubricant.



Originally Posted By: Shannow
Only other question that I had was did you REALLY have burned valves, or were you getting duped ?


This is a good question I'm also asking. The mechanic and machine shop are both reputable and trusted by me, but as they say, trust but verify.


Originally Posted By: Shannow
What would the extra air (if it was there) do to the valve guides ?


Another good question. I know I did not adjust valve clearance at 60k or 120k mi, as recommended, but this is just another variable to potentially explain what I'm being told.

 

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

Did this installation meet your expectation of the claimed benefits ???


I see you keep asking the same question after I don't give the answer you're looking for. The answer is: I don't know, that's why I posted here. There are many potential causes of what I'm seeing, including:

- Ampco oiler left empty for too long, too many times
- leaky injectors
- fuel injector seals
- valve clearance

The Ampco oiler certainly doesn't claim to provide its benefits in the conditions above, does it now?

 

[moving2]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
IMHO, not discussing the proclaimed merits of the device precludes us from being able to discuss that the device may have caused the issue.


What I was hoping to avoid can be illustrated pretty clearly with some examples.

- I wanted to avoid this (opinion pieces on MMO/oilers/suitability in modern vehicles):
Originally Posted By: Shannow
(MMO) almost advertises that driving past a billboard with a picture of it will give you MPG, and reverse the flow of fuel from your engine to tank.


- I wanted this instead (technical discussion relevant to the particular issues I'm seeing with exhaust valves and valve guides):
Originally Posted By: The_Eric
I seriously doubt your oiler contributed to the worn valves. As was stated- if the running it out of oil caused a vacuum leak, it would be noticed by the O2 sensor and the computer would first try to compensate by increasing the fuel trims. If the trims were beyond the (computer's predefined) threshold for too long, it would set a code. You might not necessarily notice it in the driveability either. If it were so bad as to cause damage in the short/few times you ran it out, you would most certainly notice it in the way it ran.


Hope that clears it up.

 

[mk378]

Running the valves too tight (not enough clearance) can burn them. Valves are cooled in large part by conductive heat transfer from the edge of the valve to the head while the valve is closed (which is 3/4 of the time). If the rocker arm doesn't come off of the valve to let the spring close it tightly, the heat transfer is impeded.

If your EGR system is clogged up that causes the fuel to burn hotter. Generally there is a self check that will throw a code but not always. If you've never cleaned the system at all, it is very likely clogged.

Your question about the oiler seems to have already been answered.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: moving2
Originally Posted By: Shannow
OK
* I doubt that a small vacuum leak form the oiler would give you a CEL.
* The leak would be at part throttle (which is where these things inject all the lubricant, none at full throttle).
* At part throttle, the engine is in closed loop, and I'm quite positive would be compensated for via oxygen sensors and injectors that are big enough for full throttle.


I think you forgot about cold start idle, where they inject a decent portion of the lubricant.


That depends on the source you used for vacuum, ported or manifold vacuum. You would not want to use manifold vacuum with one of these as manifold vacuum drops off as RPM increases but ported vacuum where the flow at idle would be almost zero but increase with RPM.

The exhaust valve are not in much danger of overheating at idle so any oil drawn in is just going out the pipe and providing little benefit.
To give an opinion as to what happened we would need to know which valves burned and their location in relation to vacuum tapping point.

Getting into ported vacuum would allow relatively even flow to all cylinders.