I can no longer advocate for Synthetic.

[Zaedock]

You really can't compare an atmospheric V8 to a turbo 4, but for the sake of argument let’s meet in the middle, look at the Ecoboost in the F150. It’s life expectancy is supposedly tested to several hundred thousand miles. It’s the premier towing engine! I believe it does not require synthetic (please correct if I'm wrong).
Many here tout “new engines…better materials…tolerances…clearances…”. Why wouldn’t a new turbo 4 be expected to last on its specified oil – whether that be conventional or syn (whatever that application specifies)? Most vehicles die from rot, broken driveline, or accidents before the engine blows up (unless it's a doo dee engine design from the start).

 

[lexus114]

Originally Posted By: Zaedock
You really can't compare an atmospheric V8 to a turbo 4, but for the sake of argument let’s meet in the middle, look at the Ecoboost in the F150. It’s life expectancy is supposedly tested to several hundred thousand miles. It’s the premier towing engine! I believe it does not require synthetic (please correct if I'm wrong).
Many here tout “new engines…better materials…tolerances…clearances…”. Why wouldn’t a new turbo 4 be expected to last on its specified oil – whether that be conventional or syn (whatever that application specifies)? Most vehicles die from rot, broken driveline, or accidents before the engine blows up (unless it's a doo dee engine design from the start).




A doo dee engine design?

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: Zaedock
You really can't compare an atmospheric V8 to a turbo 4, but for the sake of argument let’s meet in the middle, look at the Ecoboost in the F150. It’s life expectancy is supposedly tested to several hundred thousand miles. It’s the premier towing engine! I believe it does not require synthetic (please correct if I'm wrong).
Many here tout “new engines…better materials…tolerances…clearances…”. Why wouldn’t a new turbo 4 be expected to last on its specified oil – whether that be conventional or syn (whatever that application specifies)? Most vehicles die from rot, broken driveline, or accidents before the engine blows up (unless it's a doo dee engine design from the start).


My parents' 2013 Escape ecoboost specifies a ford spec that some conventional meet. Time will tell.

On the testing for the F150 Ecoboost, didn't they run the engine wide open? That's not exactly real world. The real world engines are going to be short tripped, run hard then shut right off (though, I guess that's not a problem with coolant cooled turbos).

Very good point - here in NY, the vehicle is going to rust out before it wears out (unless it suffers an AT failure or something odd). There aren't any "great" engines that stick out, because they are all pretty much excellent now. A few sludgers here and there, however.

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted By: Miller88
On the testing for the F150 Ecoboost, didn't they run the engine wide open? That's not exactly real world. The real world engines are going to be short tripped, run hard then shut right off (though, I guess that's not a problem with coolant cooled turbos).



They swapped the same motor into several trucks, one that towed flat out for 24hrs straight, then they ran it in a baja modded truck, placed in a decent position, then swapped it into something else, etc.


All that said, I bought the 5.0L as I wanted the working man to test it first. If it passes carpenter, plumber, etc duties, it's good enough for me.

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
A doo dee engine design?

In this neck of the woods:

Doo dee is bad.

Pisah is good.

 

[V8man]

Conventional Oil has come a long way.

 

[HerrStig]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: Zaedock
You really can't compare an atmospheric V8 to a turbo 4, but for the sake of argument let’s meet in the middle, look at the Ecoboost in the F150. It’s life expectancy is supposedly tested to several hundred thousand miles. It’s the premier towing engine! I believe it does not require synthetic (please correct if I'm wrong).
Many here tout “new engines…better materials…tolerances…clearances…”. Why wouldn’t a new turbo 4 be expected to last on its specified oil – whether that be conventional or syn (whatever that application specifies)? Most vehicles die from rot, broken driveline, or accidents before the engine blows up (unless it's a doo dee engine design from the start).




A doo dee engine design?

Advertising hype is just that, the Ford "ecowhatever" ain't a Cat diesel. Predictions of a long life may be well, optimistic. Folks in Europe tend to care for their vehicles a lot better than the typical US "lease it and dump it" set, thus favoring small high specific output engines. It'll be the second owners of a lot of these weeine wagons who get the bad news.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: Zaedock
You really can't compare an atmospheric V8 to a turbo 4, but for the sake of argument let’s meet in the middle, look at the Ecoboost in the F150. It’s life expectancy is supposedly tested to several hundred thousand miles. It’s the premier towing engine! I believe it does not require synthetic (please correct if I'm wrong).
Many here tout “new engines…better materials…tolerances…clearances…”. Why wouldn’t a new turbo 4 be expected to last on its specified oil – whether that be conventional or syn (whatever that application specifies)? Most vehicles die from rot, broken driveline, or accidents before the engine blows up (unless it's a doo dee engine design from the start).




A doo dee engine design?

Advertising hype is just that, the Ford "ecowhatever" ain't a Cat diesel. Predictions of a long life may be well, optimistic. Folks in Europe tend to care for their vehicles a lot better than the typical US "lease it and dump it" set, thus favoring small high specific output engines. It'll be the second owners of a lot of these weeine wagons who get the bad news.


It is an advertising hype for sure and, I think it's more just getting power out of a small engine than anything. My parent's aren't getting great mileage out of the 2.0 Eco-Boast Escape (around 22.5 advertised is 29) ... but it pulls good for being a 2 liter 4 cyl ... it pulls a lot better than their 3.8 V6, 4.10 geared, lighter jeep ever did. It's heaver, has an automatic transmission and a 3.07 "rear end".

But back to oils ... I'd like to see how syn blend holds up in this engine.

Factory default was a 7500 Mile OCI. On a turbo, DI engine, I'm sure some people here would freak out about going that far on a synthetic blend oil.

 

[tommygunn]

This month, Napa synthetic is on sale for $3.49/qt, and the Napa-branded Wix oil filters are heavily discounted as well. Napa usually has this sale about twice a year, making synthetic a no-brainer since it costs the same as conventional.

Napa Synthetic is rebranded Synpower

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: Zaedock
You really can't compare an atmospheric V8 to a turbo 4, but for the sake of argument let’s meet in the middle, look at the Ecoboost in the F150. It’s life expectancy is supposedly tested to several hundred thousand miles. It’s the premier towing engine! I believe it does not require synthetic (please correct if I'm wrong).
Many here tout “new engines…better materials…tolerances…clearances…”. Why wouldn’t a new turbo 4 be expected to last on its specified oil – whether that be conventional or syn (whatever that application specifies)? Most vehicles die from rot, broken driveline, or accidents before the engine blows up (unless it's a doo dee engine design from the start).




A doo dee engine design?

Advertising hype is just that, the Ford "ecowhatever" ain't a Cat diesel. Predictions of a long life may be well, optimistic. Folks in Europe tend to care for their vehicles a lot better than the typical US "lease it and dump it" set, thus favoring small high specific output engines. It'll be the second owners of a lot of these weeine wagons who get the bad news.


Show us evidence that Euro V8 and V6 engines last longer than the 4 cyl models. Here in the US how many 4 bangers go 200-300K with ease.

 

[lexus114]

Originally Posted By: tommygunn
This month, Napa synthetic is on sale for $3.49/qt, and the Napa-branded Wix oil filters are heavily discounted as well. Napa usually has this sale about twice a year, making synthetic a no-brainer since it costs the same as conventional.

Napa Synthetic is rebranded Synpower



With out the *Power*

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: HerrStig
Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: Zaedock
You really can't compare an atmospheric V8 to a turbo 4, but for the sake of argument let’s meet in the middle, look at the Ecoboost in the F150. It’s life expectancy is supposedly tested to several hundred thousand miles. It’s the premier towing engine! I believe it does not require synthetic (please correct if I'm wrong).
Many here tout “new engines…better materials…tolerances…clearances…”. Why wouldn’t a new turbo 4 be expected to last on its specified oil – whether that be conventional or syn (whatever that application specifies)? Most vehicles die from rot, broken driveline, or accidents before the engine blows up (unless it's a doo dee engine design from the start).




A doo dee engine design?

Advertising hype is just that, the Ford "ecowhatever" ain't a Cat diesel. Predictions of a long life may be well, optimistic. Folks in Europe tend to care for their vehicles a lot better than the typical US "lease it and dump it" set, thus favoring small high specific output engines. It'll be the second owners of a lot of these weeine wagons who get the bad news.


Show us evidence that Euro V8 and V6 engines last longer than the 4 cyl models. Here in the US how many 4 bangers go 200-300K with ease.


I'd like to see how long my 2.0 Duratec will go, but the car will probably be consumed by rust around 100K so I won't get to find out.

 

[FZ1]

You made the right call to get the 5.0. Just say no to 2 Turbos spinning at 20,000 rpms.

 

[Zaedock]

Originally Posted By: FZ1
You made the right call to get the 5.0. Just say no to 2 Turbos spinning at 20,000 rpms.


Yeah, I think so. IMO, the 5.0L's power is underrated. She'll rip 'em loose with ease and I just pulled home my brother's 1940 COE and spare parts on my trailer without a hitch.

Getting back to the syn/conv thing, I'm currently running Valvoline NextGen conventional 5W20 in my 5.0L. A buck a quart!

 

[FZ1]

Different strokes. I prefer to have Synthetic down here in the Sunny South. Cars can last,forever,down here.

 

[fdcg27]

Since you can always get synthetics at a deal, I find them cheaper to use, so I typically use them.
What conventional oil with filter is cheaper than a jug of PP with K&N, at $10.00 after AAP and SOPUS MIRS, for example?

 

[ChrisD46]

For me , I feel better with the higher flashpoint temp of synthetics as opposed to dino . July traffic jams in ATL can be brutal and if your cooling system is below 100% effeciency and your engine temps rise ... well , I just feel an additional level of margin with synthetics due again to the higher flashpoint before the oil cooks .

 

[147_Grain]

Synthetics take the HEAT and COLD a lot better. When its 0*F., a top-tier synthetic oil can reach all internal moving parts twice as fast as dino-based oils. Improved MPG is a plus too.

 

[artificialist]

I have always found heavy varnish in turbo gasoline engines that ran conventional on syn blend even if changed every 3,000 miles.

That is why I use synthetic.

 

[nitehawk55]

I think dino is fine for most vehicles but with the cold starts up here in the winter and both cars being DOHC I like to think a 0W# synthetic gets the oil flowing faster to those those cams during the cold months . That to me is worth a little extra cost .