When you are using nonsense methodology to compare numbers, it doesn't matter what scale you use.
The result is still nonsense
Beginning to have my doubts
- Thread starter Dagwood
- Start date
- Status
The result is still nonsense
FWIW, my oil hits 170C and coolant stays neutral.
BTW- it's a non-weighted gauge.
To me this board allows a person (myself) to differentiate between marketing/Internet experts and fact. A discussion such as this does not fit into those categories and serves little to no purpose. Degrades the board and significantly lowers the entire forum to nothing more than Internet trash. My humble take for what it is worth...I always looked at BITOG as a refuge from the flame wars found in car forums....
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Help me out ther sgtgeek ..I don't see too many here getting too excited. Some are redundantly obsessive in their evangel on their soapbox ..and a little humor has been thrown in ..here and there ..as well as some opposing PsOV and some challenges to assertions.
..other than that (and I've reread this thread twice just to assure that I didn't miss anything) ..what's the beef?
Or am I too numb to figure it out
..other than that (and I've reread this thread twice just to assure that I didn't miss anything) ..what's the beef?
Or am I too numb to figure it out
The cyls. are shut down so every other powerstroke turns to a cooling stroke. The system works pretty good. Syn won't buy anything in reguards to overheating protection.I have posted this tidbit before ,I worked for a forklift dealership one of the accounts was a big box type home improvment store.The drivers on a regular would back into boards sticking out of a unit of lumber which holed the radiator .They would run the engine " a mitsubishi astro engine" untill it got so hot the valve seats would drop out. Pull the head have it straightened and the seats repaired a new radiator the engine was good to go no harm to the block. You have to kinda understand how an engine works not to be fooled by not really knowing.quote:
Originally posted by ekpolk:
Not to lurch off in another direction, but I was just wondering what effect, if any, oil choice might have in the small number of cars built with what I think GM called the "limp home" mode. IIRC, either the Northstar V-8 or the "Shortstar" V-6s had this feature for a while. The idea was that if coolant was lost, the engine would shut off fuel to half the cylinders, and that then, those cylinders would air cool the engine for a limited time. This feature does not seem to be advertised any more, though. I wonder if a syn might buy you a few additional minutes or miles in "limp home" before reaching the point where the oil turned to goo, effectively trashing the engine (but before metal parts started deforming).quote:
Originally posted by Bill in Utah:
{snip}
No coolant = damaged engine... No matter what oil you use.{snip}
I wasn't aware of any class action suit. I just remember some discussion about the MB claims. Given the problems a friend has had with her new S Class sedan, I wouldn't expect an MB OLM to work any better than a lot of the other items on that car...
Letting the engine idle in the driveway while in park or neutral is nothing compared to lugging that same engine around at 1000rpm or less while dragging a 4000+lb Jeep around a trail. Just think of the guys that do this out on the trails for hours on end. Now tell me those oil temps aren't getting up there. I'd be willing to bet they are higher than one would think. What about the guys that play out in the rocks out west? Not arguing here, just trying to say that you don't need to have the hammer down on a high horsepower engine to get the oil hot.
I think the issue is having an intelligent choice about which oil is suitable for any given application. My Isuzu 3.5L V6 is known for developing coked up rings and then burning oil. I use Red Line in it and avoid the problem. Also this truck has seen some hard use. Does my 01 Infiniti I30 really need Red Line? I doubt it, but there is a choice.
From the UOA's here, it really does seem that dinos turn in the lowest wear metal counts.
We hear that syns give higher metal counts because they're "cleaning," but this "cleaning trend" seems never to end.
I asked HERE... for some credible data on the famed "downtrending metal counts for Redline oils." As you can see, no one was able to provide such data. Likely because such data doesn't exist.
I think when the truth all comes in, we will learn that petroleum bases allow for better adhesion of the ZDDP layer to critical wear surfaces.
When attempting to understand an issue, the theoretical model must fit reality. The reality is that syns tend to give slightly higher (or sometimes significantly higher) wear metal counts. Whether this is because of an impeded ZDDP layer action, or due to the effects of corrosion (which might be promoted by some syn bases) is debatable. But the idea that your wear metal counts are as good with syn as with dino isn't the case.
For applications where the oil will be "cooked" to very high temps, a syn is the forced compromise. On average, however, I do not believe that non-petroleum based syns actually lube and inhibit rust and corrosion as well as petroleum oils do.
Horrids.
Dan
We hear that syns give higher metal counts because they're "cleaning," but this "cleaning trend" seems never to end.
I asked HERE... for some credible data on the famed "downtrending metal counts for Redline oils." As you can see, no one was able to provide such data. Likely because such data doesn't exist.
I think when the truth all comes in, we will learn that petroleum bases allow for better adhesion of the ZDDP layer to critical wear surfaces.
When attempting to understand an issue, the theoretical model must fit reality. The reality is that syns tend to give slightly higher (or sometimes significantly higher) wear metal counts. Whether this is because of an impeded ZDDP layer action, or due to the effects of corrosion (which might be promoted by some syn bases) is debatable. But the idea that your wear metal counts are as good with syn as with dino isn't the case.
For applications where the oil will be "cooked" to very high temps, a syn is the forced compromise. On average, however, I do not believe that non-petroleum based syns actually lube and inhibit rust and corrosion as well as petroleum oils do.
Horrids.
Dan
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
FTM ..you've kinda created your own tempest here ..it boiled out of the tea cup.
As Doug more or less stated, there is no magic oil ..and under most normal conditions, the difference between the two is not enough (in the "big picture") to fit a razor blade between in terms of protection. In terms of longevity ..synths win, hand down. Now that doesn't mean that all syths in all applications are going to retain all their marbles over any given OCI ..extended or not. I think that you incorrectly have assigned a defect in the oil ..when the service may not be conducive to extended drains at all.
I think that Doug, in his "service neutral" observation point, clearly demonstrates that service length is the primary advantage ..when all other things are equal ..and that is only one "isolation" test of tremendous magnetude. If you moved to severe cold starting ....synth too shows better ..by a significant magetude ..and this can be clearly seen in the spec's between a dino and a synth for everyone to see. We can then move to the various spec's that dinos cannot meet ..under many circumstances ..or are just now managing to be formulated to meet (very recent) and we can see that there is a clear superiority for the VAST majority of history. So I wouldn't hang your assertions as being canon as though synths were a rippoff from the get go ..as though this is "old news" to you. The users of synths were not being hood winked for the past 30 years.
As Doug more or less stated, there is no magic oil ..and under most normal conditions, the difference between the two is not enough (in the "big picture") to fit a razor blade between in terms of protection. In terms of longevity ..synths win, hand down. Now that doesn't mean that all syths in all applications are going to retain all their marbles over any given OCI ..extended or not. I think that you incorrectly have assigned a defect in the oil ..when the service may not be conducive to extended drains at all.
I think that Doug, in his "service neutral" observation point, clearly demonstrates that service length is the primary advantage ..when all other things are equal ..and that is only one "isolation" test of tremendous magnetude. If you moved to severe cold starting ....synth too shows better ..by a significant magetude ..and this can be clearly seen in the spec's between a dino and a synth for everyone to see. We can then move to the various spec's that dinos cannot meet ..under many circumstances ..or are just now managing to be formulated to meet (very recent) and we can see that there is a clear superiority for the VAST majority of history. So I wouldn't hang your assertions as being canon as though synths were a rippoff from the get go ..as though this is "old news" to you. The users of synths were not being hood winked for the past 30 years.
also have to keep in mind many of the people using synthetic run extended drain intervals, from what ive seen 5-10k. so of course the wear metals in a synthetic uoa will be higher simply because the oil was in longer.quote:
Originally posted by fuel tanker man:
From the UOA's here, it really does seem that dinos turn in the lowest wear metal counts.
We hear that syns give higher metal counts because they're "cleaning," but this "cleaning trend" seems never to end.
Sheesh, I guess I haven't learned anything working on my cars for 30 years. That three years I spent serving as a Motor Transport officer (my first three years in the reserves) must not have helped either.
Let's try a pure hypothetical to illustrate what I was saying. Keep in mind that I'm "making up" these numbers, with the idea that they partially approximate reality.
Suppose you have two identical test engines (or groups of engines), one using a dino that begins to burn at 350 degrees, the other using a syn that does not start to burn until 450 degrees. Actual damage to the metal parts of the engine should not begin to occur until some point beyond 450 degrees.
Now suppose that you subject all of these engines to overheats that run up to 400 degrees and stay at that level, but do not go above it before the engine is shut down and begins to cool.
In this instance, at least in theory, the engines with the dino oil will suffer from the effects of burned oil while the synthetic oiled engines should not. In that sense, wouldn't the syn actually provide protection during certain overheat situations that dino would not? On the other hand, obviously in a catastrophic runaway overheat, the engine will suffer structural damage rendering oil effects essentially irrelevant.
I've wondered about this scenario after having several of our 5-ton trucks experience overheats that resulted in destruction of a couple and no damage to others. Any thoughts?
With the latest review from Terry of this analysis it appears this oil did not perform as well as we think it did, this oil sheared back then thickened, and allowed much more wear of the bearings, also, the combustion chambers have fuel soot (deposits) in them
This is just an assumption based on a false premise...quote:
Originally posted by fuel tanker man:
From the UOA's here, it really does seem that dinos turn in the lowest wear metal counts.
We hear that syns give higher metal counts because they're "cleaning," but this "cleaning trend" seems never to end.
The most of your run a synthetic for just one or max two OCI, then do an UOA that shows higher metal count and then make a conclusion that the synthetics equal to higher wear.
How much more rediculous can it get?
In order to get a realistic picture you must AutoRX the engine first, then run a syntetic for a couple of OCI and only then perform an UOA.
Have you seen my engine after 60K miles on RedLine?
Have you seen my UOA after 14 months and 7K of stop and go traffic?
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Vad voices my continued objection to "switch hitters" gleaning much from a UOA. Some, dinos usually, don't appear to suffer as much as synths in "switching chemistries". That is, dino to dino doesn't seem to react as dino to PAO to POE and so on.
FTM- My only concession is that most can be served equally as well with a dino in most service duties that most encounter. Synths, in my opinion (and speaking of synths as a group) are probably overkill. Most never push the edge of the envelope ...no where near it anyway. That doesn't mean that they aren't superior.
FTM- My only concession is that most can be served equally as well with a dino in most service duties that most encounter. Synths, in my opinion (and speaking of synths as a group) are probably overkill. Most never push the edge of the envelope ...no where near it anyway. That doesn't mean that they aren't superior.
Hey...
One of you guys need to show me the consecutive Redline UOAs where the wear trends down. So far, not a soul has come up with such evidence. It's likely a myth--but I'll reverse my opinion if someone shows the UOAs.
We do have some consecutive Redline UOA's here--but not one of them shows a downward trend in wear metals.
The Havoline UOA I mentioned earlier shows wear metals at half or less the Universal Averages with the exception of the Lead. But with Lead UA's at 9 ppm at around 6000 miles, the 22 ppm lead at 13K isn't out of line with the averages.
As for the oil thinning then re-thickening--being a layman I don't know how that can be determined. Perhaps one of you can tell us how we can know that...
Nonetheless, the oil did a fantastic job of protecting the engine.
Dan
We do have some consecutive Redline UOA's here--but not one of them shows a downward trend in wear metals.
The Havoline UOA I mentioned earlier shows wear metals at half or less the Universal Averages with the exception of the Lead. But with Lead UA's at 9 ppm at around 6000 miles, the 22 ppm lead at 13K isn't out of line with the averages.
As for the oil thinning then re-thickening--being a layman I don't know how that can be determined. Perhaps one of you can tell us how we can know that...
Nonetheless, the oil did a fantastic job of protecting the engine.
Dan
One other thing...
That Havoline went in that GM engine at a little over 5000 miles on the vehicle. Break-in wear was almost certainly still occuring at this time. It would seem too soon in this engine's life to conclude that bearing metals are too high.
The next 13K Havoline UOA would probably show less wear metal than this first one, owing to the fact that the engine will be well beyond break-in at this time.
Dan
That Havoline went in that GM engine at a little over 5000 miles on the vehicle. Break-in wear was almost certainly still occuring at this time. It would seem too soon in this engine's life to conclude that bearing metals are too high.
The next 13K Havoline UOA would probably show less wear metal than this first one, owing to the fact that the engine will be well beyond break-in at this time.
Dan
- Status
Similar threads
