Beginning to have my doubts

[Thatwouldbegreat]

I'm not sold on wear metal levels as being an indicator of oil performance...only as a way of spotting problems and trends.

What if some oils and filters will leave the wear metals in sludge or in the filter media, or other oils will dissolve and carry out the previous wear metals?

I think the glycol and fuel tests are more important, or a real spike in wear metals with constant testing.

Bottom line, well designed and maintained engines, operated properly, will normally not wear out before the vehicle with any correct oil and the correct OCI.

UOA's are fun, and can tell us useful info about a given oil in an engine for that OCI... but not really meaningful if not performed over the life of the vehicle. And, I find them too expensive and time consuming to do every oil change on every engine.

I stick with oils we all agree are good for a given engine based on many factors...and I choose middle of the road OCI's.

3K to 5K for a good 'conventional'

7K to 10K for a true synthetic.

And I use good oil filters and sometimes change at OCI midpoint on 10K OCI's.

Really what has to be determined here is the maintenance goal:

I want the best chance of a perfect engine for 300K under severe conditions, driven hard, with multiple drivers...yet long OCI's. I think I need synthetic oil like RL, M1, GC, S2k S3K.

If I wanted lowest cost and I'm trading at low or mid level mileage I'd pick the best dino for the money and follow the OLM, and maybe add some LC20 and/ or VSOT. *

*Except for the fact that I'd want the next owner to get a good car, which is why I use synthetic or short OCI and dino.

If I'm under warranty and want to ensure the warranty is good... I'd follow the owner's manual to teh letter.

[ October 05, 2005, 02:09 PM: Message edited by: Thatwouldbegreat ]

 

[Dagwood]

Thanks for the support and opinions! Who would have thought there could be this much fun talking about oil?

 

[vad]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thatwouldbegreat:
I'm not sold on wear metal levels as being an indicator of oil performance...only as a way of spotting problems and trends.

---

That's exactly right!
This whole topic kinda pointless.
Some of you here claiming that the UOA's showed that the dino was better for your engine, don't realize that for the most part you don't really see the whole picture.

 

[fuel tanker man]

I think we do see the whole picture. I just think that many of you are too trusting of folks who urinate on your legs and tell you it's raining.

 

[thunderchild]

I used to use M1 in my Durango. I switched to Walmarts Supertech. Only $12.00 for 5 quarts. I just could not justify the cost on the truck. I do however, continue to use M1 T&S in my Audi. The engine requires nothing less than full Synth.

 

[kingrob]

quote:

---

I think we do see the whole picture. I just think that many of you are too trusting of folks who urinate on your legs and tell you it's raining.

---

Well said, Dan.

The synthetic emperor's nekkid as a jaybird!

 

[Gary Allan]

As Doug Hillary pointed out in another thread (in a sorta round about way) ..there is no magic oil for making an engine last longer. There may be conditions that make the use of a synth make sense ..but it's not wear. It's severe duty (-30 starts)..or extended drains ..or whatever ..but it's not to out perform a dino oil for engine longevity (assuming that the dino is used properly for the application).

 

[bulwnkl]

You know, it's funny. Lots of folks say conventional oils show better results than synthetics. Looking at hard data shows a fundamental, massive superiority of synthetics under very cold start-up conditions. It also shows that the "W" rating on a dino goes right out the window after only a hundred miles or so. Nevertheless, dino oils in those super-cold conditions still seem to show pretty good UOA results.

So, F_T_M, does that mean that UOA doesn't show as much as some people think, or does that mean that people don't need nearly as thin an oil as so many seem to think? Or does it mean something else?

 

[MarkC]

It means we spend way too much time worrying about stuff like this.

 

[buster]

MarkC is right.

Seriously, engine cleanliness over long drains in severe cold or hot conditions clearly favor synthetics. They don't leave behind as many deposits under extreme heat.

Drivers following the owner's manuals and driving under normal conditions will do just fine with conventional oils which are as good as synthetics of awhile back.

Many oils today that we are seeing are using better basestocks and additives so it's no wonder they are better. Full synthetics though under the most extreme conditions are better then conventional oils however.

 

[vad]

quote:

---

Originally posted by fuel tanker man:
I think we do see the whole picture. I just think that many of you are too trusting of folks who urinate on your legs and tell you it's raining.

---

Do you trust Dave at RedLine?
I do.
He said that RedLine will keep my engine in the pristine condition regardless of mileage.
He was right.
After 70K mi on the odo and 60K on RedLine the engine looks cleaner than when it was new.
I bet you've seen my pictures.
The UOA after 7K of short 9 mile trips and 14 months in the crankcase looks great too.
Now, please tell me again why should I trust YOU?

 

[fuel tanker man]

I would agree that under extremely hot conditions (hot oil, that is) that the full syn PAO or ester would resist breakdown better.

For extreme cold weather starts, the 0WXX syns would flow better initially, and protect earlier.

But those are very rare conditions.

And...

I think that from the UOA evidence here and elsewhere, the better dinos seem to show the lowest metal counts. Is this because some syn bases "crowd out" the AW adds? Is there a scenario where the "clingy" esters are playing musical chairs with the zinc/phos molecules? And could it be that the zinc/phos or moly elements are going to be better at EP protection than some "clingy" ester material? This might explain why syns generally show higher wear metal counts than dinos in like engines.

Perhaps it is a good thing that the PAO and ester based syns flow better at extreme cold start ups. Because it may be that they'll need to. Because they've left thinner or even non-existent ZDDP layers in the upper regions of your engine.

So. Unless you're oiling an engine where the oil temperature will exceed 305 degrees F (that's the number given by the GM engineer who was with us here briefly

)... then you're going to be fine with a dino.

Dan

 

[kingrob]

The bottom line on synthetics to me is price. Longer OCI's don't appeal to me and factual data concerning cold start /wear ratios is lacking. But ~5.00/qt compared to 1.50/qt; that's all the evidence I need.

 

[spf182]

I agree... my experience here has been the same. I originally thought I would learn about great syn oils here but mostly discovered that for what I do dino is the way to go - performs the same and costs less. It is a testament to unbiased fact finding members. I have considered switching to syn for one OCI over the coldest winter months here but I'm not sure the lows in Maryland even warrant that.

 

[Thatwouldbegreat]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kingrob:
The bottom line on synthetics to me is price. Longer OCI's don't appeal to me and factual data concerning cold start /wear ratios is lacking. But ~5.00/qt compared to 1.50/qt; that's all the evidence I need.

---

I can't see this focus on pennies for oil when we spend wheelbarrows of cash on our cars.

At 3K OCI over 200,000 miles we have 66 dino oil changes at, lets say, $10 in materials or $660.

At 5K OCI over 200,000 miles we have 40 dino oil changes at, lets say, $10 in materials or $400.

At 7K OCI over 200,000 miles we have 29 oil changes at, lets say, $35 in materials or $1015.

At 10K OCI over 200,000 miles we have 20 oil changes at, lets say, $35 in materials or $700.

Now suppose we got the dino oil and the filters for free...over 200,000 miles we could save $700 to $1015 in synthetic oil costs.

Yet in 10 years at 20K per year :

-insurance costs are probably $5000 to $10000,

-tire costs are probably $2000 or more,

-fuel costs even at 30 mpg and $2.00 / gallon would be $13333!

-maintenance costs are probably $2000 or more over 200K

-plus we lost $22000 in value of hypothetical $25000 car

So we have costs of $44000 to $49000 to drive 200K.

What is $400 to even $1000 in extra oil expenses.. an additional .5% to 1% in operating costs?

Compared to the labor costs of 30 or 40 oil changes [ $300 to $800 ], or the personal free time wasted [ 15 to 20 hours ] I think the cost of synthetic oil is close to zero.

I think for my driving and maintenance needs synthetic oil is best.

I could use conventional oil if I wanted to check the oil level more often and change the oil more often, and drive a little easier.

[ October 05, 2005, 11:04 PM: Message edited by: Thatwouldbegreat ]

 

[Audi Junkie]

What I have gathered, is that you could tweak the numbers of syn vs dino change costs to make either seem preferable. Depending on OCI, DIY, flter changes...blah blah blah. Let's see someone beat $.79c Havoline at 5000 mi on a wear/mi/dollar basis.(other than an AMSoil salesman)

IMO, use synth IF you NEED it. Turbos, artics, spec requirements all are a good reason for synth. Another consideration is the value of your car. Helix in a Chevette? Nah. Accel or Road Tech in a Bentley or Aston Martin? Nah. That leaves a lot of middle ground. Best bet is shoot for a desired oci, Mobil Clean oils make that pretty strait forward. Myself, I want to go from Thanksgiving to St.Patrick's Day w/o an OC in the cold. 4 months equals almost 8000 miles for me, out of range of dino. I DIY, so I figure I save from what the dealer labor charges and can splurge on the oil. Some guys count change and do rebates and stuff. For an extra $5-$10 a change, I think that is not a big deal even though I endure the cost of maintaining a few cars. Blends up to 7500 miles looks like a hit, maybe 6000 miles and dump it. What does a blend over standard grade cost per OC, a few $?

[ October 06, 2005, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: Audi Junkie ]

 

[tweeker43]

with uoa, i can get 2/3 of the mileage (compared to synthetic) on an oci, and pay about 1/4 of the price to do so.

so yeah, i was once a mobil1 guy. no more.

 

[Thatwouldbegreat]

I agree with you Audi Junkie.

I wasn't trying to tweak numbers to show an advantage one way or the other...as much as trying to show that oil isn't a big area to save money.

Pick an oil, an oil filter, and an OCI you like and stick with it. Then decide if you want to run UOA's and/or additives.

Bottom line is that there are lots of good oils out there, and we have to look at them objectively.

 

[Audi Junkie]

"I wasn't trying to tweak numbers to show an advantage one way or the other...as much as trying to show that oil isn't a big area to save money"

Not implying you did but it frequently happens here. Agreed, it's best to think of it as a break-even situation. Some cars are difficult to DIY service and longer ocis with premium synth tips the scale with costs of dealer service. Synth does not make sense in an easily serviced, lightly driven car.

 

[Jim 5]

I was beginning to suspect the same about the dino being equal to synth for oci's under 7k miles.

I was starting to feel pretty bad about my stockpile of GC since it never goes on sale here.

The good news for me, is that -30 deg C starts are common for me, and for this service, there is value in synthetics. I can sure tell the difference between a 5w30 dino and a 0w-30 synth at -20C and colder. It's hard to turn that key at those low temperatures knowing how hard it is on the engine. It feels good knowing I've got a full synth in there.

I use it in the summer because I've got such a large supply.

I'm really impressed with all the havoline UOA's. Not to mention the pennzoil 5w-20 UOA's on hondas.