Dino or Syn???

[FastSUV]

Is it better to change dino every 3k-4k or syn every 6k-8k? Or would say the benefit is about the same?

I have done M-1 10w30 for the last 8yrs in my '98 Jeep GC, but I am thinking dino on sale every 3k might be just as good ... SO MANY MORE people like dino on this forum than I ever imagined.

When I joined, I figured it would be all Amsoil & Redline people with a few M-1 & RP people battling it out...

But I am please with the divirsity of opinion but honesty here about certain topics. The more I read, the more I think dino every 3-4k is the BEST oprion for a guy who doesn't mind an oil change every now & then. I am pleased to see how many peopl can agree on this.

MY issue is that EVERY CAR I have ever owned used oil past 4k or so...I HATE to have to top-off and I hear of so many people using M-1 or other syns for crazy OCIs with no oil useage.

I have yet to own a car that can do that, so I just like to go until it drops from "MAX" to the lower 3/4 of the dipstick but still above "ADD". Once it has used enough to add oil I just change it. And this has been somewhere between 3-5k on all my past & present vehicles.

Since this is the case, isn't dino or belnd my best option with all things considered?

 

[HTSS_TR]

If you accumulate 1k, mostly highway, miles per month, you may use dino with 3-5k OCI and with good filter you may not need to change it every oil change.

 

[Quest]

On my dad's work car (1st one was a 88 Mazda 323 EFI 1.6L), he's been using dino for every 6000kms OCI since bought used (@ 110,000kms) and when it was totalled, it had in excess of 286,000kms to clock, still pass provincial emissions control w/ original cat, original O2 sensor (both lazy but still works) and engine uses about 1/4qt per oil change mainly due to crankshaft seal leaks. It was on a strict diet of either Q-state green 10W30 or whatever we can lay our hands on.

He's currently on 8000kms oci on either formula shell 5W20/5W20 or whatever onsale on is 1st owner 7th gen civic 1.7L. It's already got in excess of 130,000kms to clock and been AutoRx'ed once in approx. 86,000kms, absolutely no oil consumed during the course of OCI.

My mazda B6 block clocked in excess of 186,000kms to clock before I sold it due to paint peeling problems, and the engine does not consume any oil at all. Diet comprised of *ahem* early YB 10W30, then Q-state full-syn 10W30 exclusively. All seals are pliant and no leaks whatsoever. Also passes air-care like new (cat is a bit lazy).

My 07 fit is now on a MC 5W20 semi-syn diet per OLM or 1 year OCI, and I intend to keep it that way for at least 18 yrs, pending on whether it's paint gonna peel on me again.

who sez conventional oil or blend cannot serve you well (and will detonate an engine at the very instant you pour it in?).

I'm looking forward to ILSAC GF-5 specifications and oil with that spec...

Q.

 

[mitchcoyote]

Full synthetic is always better.......

 

[crinkles]

while I am on synthetic now, it was my first and probably only time. it is very expensive down here and frankly at 5,000 mile OCI's, dino juice is a very good proposition to me and my wallet. my driving habits (short trips) don't warrant 10,000 OCI's with a synthetic costing 3x more.

 

[crinkles]

Originally Posted By: mitchcoyote
Full synthetic is always better.......


"always" is a naughty word...

 

[dnewton3]

The correct answer is .... it depends!

Only you can answer a question that you control the inputs to. To be "better", you have to define what's important to you, and then priortize those characteristics into a hierarchy. Consider the following:
cost of initial purchase
length of OCI
desire for, and cost of, UOAs
willingness/ability to get under the car
desire for brand loyality, or willingness to accept "on sale" items
availability of product
engine famility traits (some slugdge, some don't ... etc)

If I could find some more Citgo 5w30 for $.99/qt again like I did earlier last year (at Rural King), I'd say that up to 5k miles of OCI is attainable, and to stock up. Change it and forget it until the next go round.

But sometimes you can find group III's on sale; last year there were excellent PP and Synpower sales. I got Synpower 5w30 BOGOF; making it about $2.75/qt! Can't beat that, and I can extend the OCI well past 5k miles. for me, I try to maximize my OCI based upon the fluid availability and cost.

Personally, I buy what I percieve to be the best value; I sometimes adjust my OCI to the fluid, and let the sales dictate my purchase. Other people, though, are brand/grade loyal, and only pursue one path, regardless of cost. I have a 1995 Villager that my wife drives with 174k miles on it, and it has bounced back and forth between dino and group IIIs and even PAOs upon occasion. There was a time when she overheated the van (failed water pump) and I was thankful that I had group III in it at the time; it just may have saved the engine from mechanical damage or demise. But typically, dinos fill the bill with little fanfare for the excellent job they do.

All these things play into what's "best" for your situation. You shouldn't be asking us what could best for you; you should be sharing with us what has worked best for you!

So, you see, as I said, it depends ...

 

[ChiTDI]

If you have had 8 years of success with a top shelf oil, why would you want to change that?

 

[FastSUV]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
The correct answer is .... it depends!

Only you can answer a question that you control the inputs to. To be "better", you have to define what's important to you, and then priortize those characteristics into a hierarchy. Consider the following:
cost of initial purchase
length of OCI
desire for, and cost of, UOAs
willingness/ability to get under the car
desire for brand loyality, or willingness to accept "on sale" items
availability of product
engine famility traits (some slugdge, some don't ... etc)

If I could find some more Citgo 5w30 for $.99/qt again like I did earlier last year (at Rural King), I'd say that up to 5k miles of OCI is attainable, and to stock up. Change it and forget it until the next go round.

But sometimes you can find group III's on sale; last year there were excellent PP and Synpower sales. I got Synpower 5w30 BOGOF; making it about $2.75/qt! Can't beat that, and I can extend the OCI well past 5k miles. for me, I try to maximize my OCI based upon the fluid availability and cost.

Personally, I buy what I percieve to be the best value; I sometimes adjust my OCI to the fluid, and let the sales dictate my purchase. Other people, though, are brand/grade loyal, and only pursue one path, regardless of cost. I have a 1995 Villager that my wife drives with 174k miles on it, and it has bounced back and forth between dino and group IIIs and even PAOs upon occasion. There was a time when she overheated the van (failed water pump) and I was thankful that I had group III in it at the time; it just may have saved the engine from mechanical damage or demise. But typically, dinos fill the bill with little fanfare for the excellent job they do.

All these things play into what's "best" for your situation. You shouldn't be asking us what could best for you; you should be sharing with us what has worked best for you!

So, you see, as I said, it depends ...


Originally Posted By: ChiTDI
If you have had 8 years of success with a top shelf oil, why would you want to change that?



Well guys...the Jeep sits and will not see many miles. It will be used to tow a small trailer to the lake (JetSki), and for camping trips, or when there are icey roads. Mobil-1 burns off faster than I'd like. And the fact that I will not even put 3k per year on the Jeep, I hate to waste full-syn oil if HM dino will curb oil burning, and also be cheaper to drain & fill even though it has not yet seem a full OCI....

It comes down to me now, what is better for sitting & moisture...syn or dino.

If dino can handle sitting in a cold garage and my main bearings are still ahppy, then why not try a HM dino?

 

[jorton]

With only one oc expense per year you should stay with synthetic. Try to reduce consumption by switching to M1 HM, or M1 HM 10w-40.

 

[caveatipse]

I am a n00b I admit and probably am very wrong, but based on the extensive reading I have done this week, and the university library research, it appears at least to me that all of the scientific studies have pretty much proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that synthetic engine oil is superior to natural in every way.

 

[peterdaniel]

oh please... for every person that says this is best, I will show you another that says that is best. Dino, Synthetic... all depends on your driving condition.

For 99.9% of people here and their driving habits, plain old dino oil in whatever flavor or color bottle you like will be perfect. You will never know the difference if you lived to be 100.

Find the cheapest oil that still meets the Sl or SM standards and go with that and a quality oil filter.

Then go and enjoy your life.

 

[caveatipse]

Actually I have to humbly disagree. It is not a matter of personal opinion, but of scientific studies. According to the science, synthetic oil is superior in every way.

 

[dnewton3]

FastSUV - sitting for long periods isn't as near a big concern as the type of trips you might make. You're towing for camping, jet skis, snow 4x4 excursions? I do the same with my Dmax HD3500. But that doesn't automatically make that type of use "bad". If you come up to temp, and operate with reasonable sense, then the "sitting" in the garage until such use probably isn't near as troublesome as you might suspect. If moisture is a concern, then a higher TBN might be what you seek, and not automatically a "synthetic". There are good high-mileage PCMOs, or even 10w30 HDEOs that might fill the bill for you.

caveatipse - there is no such thing as "superior in every way". Superior is akin to saying "best", and "best" can only be defined by a given situation. While I admit that most synthetics flow a bit better at extreme cold, and can typically (but not always) extend OCIs, they also cost more. If you don't need those capabilities, then synthetics can be a waste of money, and therefore are NOT superior. To many people, "value" is as important as any other characteristic. Value is perhaps well defined calling it by it's other name; efficiency. What outputs do you get for the inputs you provide? Do you get the "value" from a synthetic if you only drive 3k miles a year, but all those miles are good, heat-soaked 100 mile trips? Any dino in the proper grade would likely provide as good protection, and do it for less money. In this way, synthetics are not "superior". Those scientific studies you mention, if truly "scientific", should have statements as to conditional parameters, base assumptions, and boundries. I doubt if they included "value" as a characteristic, because it is very subjective. Regardless, though, it is a very tangible and important topic when considering the selection of a lubricant.

I have a 1966 convertible Mustang with a 289 V-8. I run Rotella 10w30 in it; good TBN for corrsion protection, correct grade, good add-pack. I might drive 500 miles a year in it, for Sunday family cruising with the top down, listening to the Beach Boys. All those trips are 50-100 miles in length, and well more than an hour in time. Just how "superior" do you think some Amsoil or RL or RP product would be? Is an $8/qt oil THAT superior to a $2/qt oil, if dumped at 500 miles at the end of the season? I doubt there would be ANY dicernable difference in a UOA, with an OCI that short. So, where's the superiority in "synthetics"?

Now, I do use synthetics upon occasion. I have set parameters that I believe make sense, given operating conditions, OCI length, risk of environments concerns, etc. I don't think that synthetics are evil, any more than they are salvation. They are a tool that has it's proper use and place. That's all.

My point is this; "best", "superior", "exceeds" and any other superlative only has meaning when the WHOLE view is considered for each individual application, not just a small glimpse out one window of your world ...

 

[FrankN4]

Originally Posted By: mitchcoyote
Full synthetic is always better.......

I got to have a lengthy discussion with the chemistry professor from a near-by college. It was very enlightening, and he has access to some very nice equipment.

Consider that synthetic base oil is "designed" to be a lubricant base and conventional is "adapted" to be a lubricant base.

Synthetics do have the molecular, equal size, structure that lets it flow better. It flows better not just at low temperatures, it flows better at all temperatures. That is something of special importance to me.

Synthetics withstand high temperatures better than conventional. Not just the high temperatures from the race track or towing a heavy load, but also the high temperatures, many localized, just from coming off the stop light in a spirited manner, hitting the passing gear and getting around that fool. That may not really effect the sump temperature but localized temperatures can go rather high.

Synthetics have much less potential to form sludge, varnish, or other engine deposits.

Synthetics require fewer, and in some cases no, Viscosity Index Improver's. It stays in grade better/ longer, shears less.

Since 1990, myself, my wife, our 2 daughters and their husbands, have over 2,000,000 miles on just one brand and one grade of synthetic, so I do have experience with synthetic. The vehicles include GM, Chrysler, Ford, VW, Mitsubishi, Kia, Toyota, and DaeWoo. They include everything from I4, 2 valve, push rod all the way to twin dual OHC SPFI, multi-valve. Engines that never exceed 2,000 RPM to engines that regularly see 6,000 RPM. NONE of these engines ever used a drop of oil, none leaked or seeped, no engine noises, never an engine problem, always better than EPA mileage estimates. I tried to figure an average mileage, including vehicles in use today, and I came up with 164,888. Of course that number changes daily with use.

I have been told that I could have done the same thing with a top shelf conventional. I don't know. I do know that I did do that with a synthetic. I use the synthetic because I think it is the best option. If you consider that we now have three 2008 vehicles than bring the average down, we have an average 164,888 miles before sell/trade. I am satisfied and very comfortable.

I absolutely believe that "conventional" oils are getting better. I believe that improvements in refining will turn what we call conventional today into very near gp III synthetic. I think we are going to see more and more engines that require "synthetic" oil. I think we are also going to see a lot of base oils that are not related to petroleum in any way.

Just my experience, opinion, and preference.

 

[farrarfan1]

Originally Posted By: caveatipse
I am a n00b I admit and probably am very wrong, but based on the extensive reading I have done this week, and the university library research, it appears at least to me that all of the scientific studies have pretty much proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that synthetic engine oil is superior to natural in every way.

If you are probably "very wrong" why would you give an opinion? Why do people post opinions but admit they're wrong? Strange.

 

[bepperb]

"all of the scientific studies have pretty much proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that synthetic engine oil is superior"

Consumer Reports did a "scientific" study of taxicabs in NYC, no difference between conventional and syn.

So not all, and not beyond a shadow of a doubt. You're using theory to assume real world results, and studies don't always backup your hypothosis.

But to the OP... once a year I'd probably just spend the extra few bucks. But, I see your point, and I'm sure either would be fine. It's certainly not a harsh environment you're putting the oil into.

 

[caveatipse]

Originally Posted By: farrarfan1
Originally Posted By: caveatipse
I am a n00b I admit and probably am very wrong, but based on the extensive reading I have done this week, and the university library research, it appears at least to me that all of the scientific studies have pretty much proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that synthetic engine oil is superior to natural in every way.

If you are probably "very wrong" why would you give an opinion? Why do people post opinions but admit they're wrong? Strange.


Geez. lol I wrote that to try to be nice and to allow for the possibility that opinions can be wrong, instead of saying, "This is my opinion, and I am 100% right about everything and you are all wrong." Which would you prefer in my future posts?

 

[lovcom]

Originally Posted By: farrarfan1
Originally Posted By: caveatipse
I am a n00b I admit and probably am very wrong, but based on the extensive reading I have done this week, and the university library research, it appears at least to me that all of the scientific studies have pretty much proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that synthetic engine oil is superior to natural in every way.

If you are probably "very wrong" why would you give an opinion? Why do people post opinions but admit they're wrong? Strange.


You, like me, and every single person living on the earth give some opinions even as we think we could be wrong; and we do it every single day.

It's because we're human. There is nothing wrong with qualifying one's opinion, and in fact it should be done a heck of a lot more here on this site, because there are just too many "experts" that spew "facts" lacking cites.

Strange you don't acknowledge this.

 

[farrarfan1]

Originally Posted By: lovcom
Originally Posted By: farrarfan1
Originally Posted By: caveatipse
I am a n00b I admit and probably am very wrong, but based on the extensive reading I have done this week, and the university library research, it appears at least to me that all of the scientific studies have pretty much proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that synthetic engine oil is superior to natural in every way.

If you are probably "very wrong" why would you give an opinion? Why do people post opinions but admit they're wrong? Strange.


You, like me, and every single person living on the earth give some opinions even as we think we could be wrong; and we do it every single day.

It's because we're human. There is nothing wrong with qualifying one's opinion, and in fact it should be done a heck of a lot more here on this site, because there are just too many "experts" that spew "facts" lacking cites.

Strange you don't acknowledge this.

I've stated before that that is exactly what's wrong with this place. Way too many people join knowing very little to nothing about motor oil, then in a matter of days they're experts making recomendations and analysing UOA's.All the while telling you they're probably wrong.

"I may be very wrong, but I'm going to replace your transmission".

"I may be very wrong, but you need a whole new furnace".

"I may be very wrong, but I think we need to amputate your leg".

Sounds wrong doesn't it?