changing from synthetic to conventional in dodge c
- Thread starter ChadW
- Start date
- Status
Won't hurt a thing.
Nothing at all wrong with changing between syn/conv. Just curious, why the switch?
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
Originally Posted By: ChadW
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
None.
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
None.
Originally Posted By: Doog
Originally Posted By: ChadW
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
None.
There's a mass of misinformation out there.
Originally Posted By: ChadW
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
None.
There's a mass of misinformation out there.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: ChadW
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
No, that's like saying the earth is flat, LOL
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
No, that's like saying the earth is flat, LOL
Originally Posted By: ChadW
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
Oh my.... where to even start with that one. :-/
Lets just say its not true. If it were my engine, I'd stick with the synthetic year round. No downside except the cost.
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
Oh my.... where to even start with that one. :-/
Lets just say its not true. If it were my engine, I'd stick with the synthetic year round. No downside except the cost.
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: ChadW
I have an 04 dodge cummins which i put mobil 1 5-40 turbo diesel in for the winter. I am wondering if i will hurt anything if i go back to conventional during warmer months or if its better to stick with 1 or the other.
No it will not hurt the engine to change back and forth.
The only way to know which is "better" is to do a long series of UOAs in micro-analysis.
But I can assure you that unless you do greatly extended OCIs, the wear differences are negligible to non-existent. And therefore cost cost/availability should be your deciding factor. You might be every bit as successful using conventional lubes year round for a lot less cost.
I have an 04 dodge cummins which i put mobil 1 5-40 turbo diesel in for the winter. I am wondering if i will hurt anything if i go back to conventional during warmer months or if its better to stick with 1 or the other.
No it will not hurt the engine to change back and forth.
The only way to know which is "better" is to do a long series of UOAs in micro-analysis.
But I can assure you that unless you do greatly extended OCIs, the wear differences are negligible to non-existent. And therefore cost cost/availability should be your deciding factor. You might be every bit as successful using conventional lubes year round for a lot less cost.
Hi,
ChadW - You may be under-using an excellent lubricant. It is an excellent lubricant for extended OCIs and should easily cope with year round use in your case - just go to the top end of the Manufacturer's recommended OCIs. A UOA or two may enable you take it out much further!
ChadW - You may be under-using an excellent lubricant. It is an excellent lubricant for extended OCIs and should easily cope with year round use in your case - just go to the top end of the Manufacturer's recommended OCIs. A UOA or two may enable you take it out much further!
There may be some truth to conventional protecting better due to polarity however I think that it would be measured in ppm which over the life of a vehicle isn't relevant. I prefer conventionals due to cost however in our frigid winters here I use synthetics for the winter season.
With your engine I doubt very much that there would be any wear difference using either a syn or conventional so personally I would use the most cost effective of the 2. If you are going to run a synthetic I suggest getting as much return on investment as possible.
I have a friend who runs a double can by-pass using toilet paper as filters and the full flow filter. He has be driving a cummins since they were first put in a dodge,so his experience is vast with these motors.
Anyways he never changes the oil. He changes the filters every 10 or 20 thousand kms then tops up the oil which ends up being near a gallon. His last cummins had 500000kms on it with the same filtration system and it ran stellar when totalled. If I had a diesel this is the route I would go. The cost of the filtration system would pay for itself in only a few oil changes.
I know the thought of never changing the oil sounds insane but when you really think about it the oil is filtered so well his insols are at 0,yes the oil is black but its not dirty,and the add pack is replenished when the top up oil is added at filter change.
I think he does have condemnation limits when he does change the oil but he has 100000 miles on his new truck and he hasn't hit that level yet. So even if you changed out the oil every 100000 miles the bypass system still pays for itself.
Just some food for thought
With your engine I doubt very much that there would be any wear difference using either a syn or conventional so personally I would use the most cost effective of the 2. If you are going to run a synthetic I suggest getting as much return on investment as possible.
I have a friend who runs a double can by-pass using toilet paper as filters and the full flow filter. He has be driving a cummins since they were first put in a dodge,so his experience is vast with these motors.
Anyways he never changes the oil. He changes the filters every 10 or 20 thousand kms then tops up the oil which ends up being near a gallon. His last cummins had 500000kms on it with the same filtration system and it ran stellar when totalled. If I had a diesel this is the route I would go. The cost of the filtration system would pay for itself in only a few oil changes.
I know the thought of never changing the oil sounds insane but when you really think about it the oil is filtered so well his insols are at 0,yes the oil is black but its not dirty,and the add pack is replenished when the top up oil is added at filter change.
I think he does have condemnation limits when he does change the oil but he has 100000 miles on his new truck and he hasn't hit that level yet. So even if you changed out the oil every 100000 miles the bypass system still pays for itself.
Just some food for thought
A 5W40 is 40 viscosity when hot.
I used 5W40 Delvac 1 SHC for 21500 mi of Australia heat 2010-12.
Charlie
I used 5W40 Delvac 1 SHC for 21500 mi of Australia heat 2010-12.
Charlie
Originally Posted By: ChadW
What about in arizona type heat? Is 5-40 syn ok?
It would be adequate however I prefer conventionals for summer use.
What about in arizona type heat? Is 5-40 syn ok?
It would be adequate however I prefer conventionals for summer use.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: ChadW
What about in arizona type heat? Is 5-40 syn ok?
It would be adequate however I prefer conventionals for summer use.
Why? Because you're crazy like that?
I mean come on, if Doug can run D1 through the Australian outback in freakin' semi trains, I think it is going to do alright by the OP and his Cummins
Originally Posted By: ChadW
What about in arizona type heat? Is 5-40 syn ok?
It would be adequate however I prefer conventionals for summer use.
Why? Because you're crazy like that?
I mean come on, if Doug can run D1 through the Australian outback in freakin' semi trains, I think it is going to do alright by the OP and his Cummins
Hi,
a quick summary of the viscosity retention of Delvac's D1 5W-40 in my operations and during extensive testing (several years/millions of kms/thousands of hours/many engines) showed:
Detroit Diesel Series 60 requirement: 72-119
New D1: 85
During testing:
Lowest: 82
Highest: 92
Average at OCI (90kkms-56k miles): 88
a quick summary of the viscosity retention of Delvac's D1 5W-40 in my operations and during extensive testing (several years/millions of kms/thousands of hours/many engines) showed:
Detroit Diesel Series 60 requirement: 72-119
New D1: 85
During testing:
Lowest: 82
Highest: 92
Average at OCI (90kkms-56k miles): 88
Originally Posted By: ChadW
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
Were they in the bar when they told you that tale? Bearing protection relates a lot more to viscosity and anti wear additives than to actual base stock type.
I'm under the impression (from other mechanics) that conventional protects better because of larger molecules as compared to synthetic which has smaller molecules. The bigger molecules "cushion" the bearings better or something? Anybody know if there is any truth to that?
Were they in the bar when they told you that tale? Bearing protection relates a lot more to viscosity and anti wear additives than to actual base stock type.
Originally Posted By: ChadW
Sounded like it made sense to me. Everyone knows synthetic is thinner at the same weight as conventional. Thats the great thing about this site, i can ask questions and hopefully get educated answers. Thx guys
Don't quite understand that, but perhaps a quote from EHOW might help:
Synthetic Oil Viscosity:
Synthetic oil is rated for viscosity in the same manner as natural oil. This means that a quart of 10W-40 oil is the same viscosity, or thickness, regardless of whether it is natural oil or synthetic oil and will perform the same in the engine.
Sounded like it made sense to me. Everyone knows synthetic is thinner at the same weight as conventional. Thats the great thing about this site, i can ask questions and hopefully get educated answers. Thx guys
Don't quite understand that, but perhaps a quote from EHOW might help:
Synthetic Oil Viscosity:
Synthetic oil is rated for viscosity in the same manner as natural oil. This means that a quart of 10W-40 oil is the same viscosity, or thickness, regardless of whether it is natural oil or synthetic oil and will perform the same in the engine.
Originally Posted By: ChadW
Sounded like it made sense to me. Everyone knows synthetic is thinner at the same weight as conventional. Thats the great thing about this site, i can ask questions and hopefully get educated answers. Thx guys
The entire 40 part of 5W-40 10W-40 15w40 or 0W-40 means at operating temperature, they're all the exact same measured viscosity.
When someone tries to tell you synthetics are thinner then the same weight as conventional, you're basically being told that a 60 watt light bulb gives off less light in a bathroom fixture then a 60 watt bulb does in your kitchen fixtures.
Sounded like it made sense to me. Everyone knows synthetic is thinner at the same weight as conventional. Thats the great thing about this site, i can ask questions and hopefully get educated answers. Thx guys
The entire 40 part of 5W-40 10W-40 15w40 or 0W-40 means at operating temperature, they're all the exact same measured viscosity.
When someone tries to tell you synthetics are thinner then the same weight as conventional, you're basically being told that a 60 watt light bulb gives off less light in a bathroom fixture then a 60 watt bulb does in your kitchen fixtures.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
