i have been using PU 5-20 for a few years and did notice that specially after OC my FE always dropped noticeably. 2-3mpg on average . I do drive the same 18 miles route the same time of the day morning and afternoon every day for last 13 years and I always zero out my average MPG trip cpu. With time , let's say after 2-3K miles FE comes back up .... One great thing about PU 5-20 even after 10K miles on one fill it still feels smooth and revs without any harshness. I could probably do 12K miles on it. Not sure if PP would last this long and still perform this good ? I can also notice that first 5-7 miles at 45-60mph my mpg is always significantly worse and later once temp goes up FE is around 30% better... Wonder why Ferrari would use PU as oil of choice , I think its formula is super durable and can stand to high compression high performace motor of Ferrari .... it is just my guess.
Mazda 0-20 vs PU 5-20 ???
- Thread starter M6ser
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: nitehawk55
Originally Posted By: M6ser
Mazda sells the same car world wide and specs 0-20 and 5-30 in the same 2.5l sky DI engine for different markets...
I like to dump stock fill after 100 miles and do engine break in with conventional oil for 1-2K , than OC to a blend of the same conventional oil + quart of Synthetic of choice to be used later and than after 3K miles on the blend switch to all synthetic for 5K miles and 10K miles for all future OC's...
Walmart online recently allows to buy 5 quart jugs of PU 5-20 for 26usd... and ship to home address.
Why the heck would you dump the factory fill after 100 miles and then use conventional working up to semi syn and then Full Synthetic ?....that's beyond logic .
+1
Originally Posted By: M6ser
Mazda sells the same car world wide and specs 0-20 and 5-30 in the same 2.5l sky DI engine for different markets...
I like to dump stock fill after 100 miles and do engine break in with conventional oil for 1-2K , than OC to a blend of the same conventional oil + quart of Synthetic of choice to be used later and than after 3K miles on the blend switch to all synthetic for 5K miles and 10K miles for all future OC's...
Walmart online recently allows to buy 5 quart jugs of PU 5-20 for 26usd... and ship to home address.
Why the heck would you dump the factory fill after 100 miles and then use conventional working up to semi syn and then Full Synthetic ?....that's beyond logic .
+1
I do not believe that Synthetic High Moly 0-20 like Mazda's FF is a good formula for quicker engine break in. So why not dump it and run conventional oil for a break-in , after 3K miles run blend for 3K miles and than switch to Full Synthetic once engine is mostly past break in period. I read that synthetic fluid prolongs break in of the engine . My approach does not cost me much more and should not hurt anything but allow for quicker break in process.... some do not believe in engine break in or think that mass made 22K car had engine broken in at the factory .... i don't see that happening on a mass made car like this one.
Originally Posted By: M6ser
I do not believe that Synthetic High Moly 0-20 like Mazda's FF is a good formula
What your statement is saying is you disagree with mazda and the engineers who built the car and already picked the right oil for breakin for you. Similarly for Honda, they state in owner's manual explicitly do not change factory fill early. It also has a high moly factory fill for a better breakin.
If you don't agree with the engineers who built the car, why are you looking for advice from people who have even less credentials?
It looks like you already have your mind made up. If you're just looking for people to validate your thoughts and idea, then you're not really looking for advice.
If that is the case, get some guts and just do what you planned to do; and don't bother sheepishly looking for validation if you're not listening to the responses anyway.
I'll give you the interwebs validation: Your idea sounds wonderful, one thousand thumbsup go for it.
Reminds me of this post which should be in the internet car forum hall of fame.
http://www.audiforums.com/forum/off-topic-5/hey-guys-please-help-my-mods-gone-wrong-80267/
But at least that guy had the balls to just do his plan first and not sheepishly look around for validation
I do not believe that Synthetic High Moly 0-20 like Mazda's FF is a good formula
What your statement is saying is you disagree with mazda and the engineers who built the car and already picked the right oil for breakin for you. Similarly for Honda, they state in owner's manual explicitly do not change factory fill early. It also has a high moly factory fill for a better breakin.
If you don't agree with the engineers who built the car, why are you looking for advice from people who have even less credentials?
It looks like you already have your mind made up. If you're just looking for people to validate your thoughts and idea, then you're not really looking for advice.
If that is the case, get some guts and just do what you planned to do; and don't bother sheepishly looking for validation if you're not listening to the responses anyway.
I'll give you the interwebs validation: Your idea sounds wonderful, one thousand thumbsup go for it.
Reminds me of this post which should be in the internet car forum hall of fame.
http://www.audiforums.com/forum/off-topic-5/hey-guys-please-help-my-mods-gone-wrong-80267/
But at least that guy had the balls to just do his plan first and not sheepishly look around for validation
Last edited:
i think you should relax , find validation that any engine should be in breakin on synthetic ?
i never heard that? You have too much faith in Manufacturers will to do what is really in your best interest. I have the balls to defend my theory and no one yet was able to proof that synthetic is fine for initial engine breakin. Instead of getting personal with me find a proof that it is otherwise and I will take my hat off....
i never heard that? You have too much faith in Manufacturers will to do what is really in your best interest. I have the balls to defend my theory and no one yet was able to proof that synthetic is fine for initial engine breakin. Instead of getting personal with me find a proof that it is otherwise and I will take my hat off....
Originally Posted By: M6ser
i think you should relax , find validation that any engine should be in breakin on synthetic ?
i never heard that? You have too much faith in Manufacturers will to do what is really in your best interest. I have the balls to defend my theory and no one yet was able to proof that synthetic is fine for initial engine breakin. Instead of getting personal with me find a proof that it is otherwise and I will take my hat off....
The proof is what's in the owner's manual and the factory warranty. Do you think Mazda intentionally wants their product to fail by giving bad advice? What benefit is it to them if the car just lasts long enough to survive the warranty period and then the engine falls apart? Is that good for their reputation? Don't you think their reputation is better served by giving good advice from the get go and building the image of a durable, long lasting product? Do what you want, but if you think you know better than Mazda engineers, be prepared to suffer the consequences. It's a scary and expensive roulette wheel.
i think you should relax , find validation that any engine should be in breakin on synthetic ?
i never heard that? You have too much faith in Manufacturers will to do what is really in your best interest. I have the balls to defend my theory and no one yet was able to proof that synthetic is fine for initial engine breakin. Instead of getting personal with me find a proof that it is otherwise and I will take my hat off....
The proof is what's in the owner's manual and the factory warranty. Do you think Mazda intentionally wants their product to fail by giving bad advice? What benefit is it to them if the car just lasts long enough to survive the warranty period and then the engine falls apart? Is that good for their reputation? Don't you think their reputation is better served by giving good advice from the get go and building the image of a durable, long lasting product? Do what you want, but if you think you know better than Mazda engineers, be prepared to suffer the consequences. It's a scary and expensive roulette wheel.
You see, this is the problem. I'm kind of old school and prefer a conventional for break in, particularly if I do an early change or two. But thinking I'm going to get proof of that is a fool's errand. The chances of me getting a couple hundred engines and running them all identically, except half with synthetic and the other half with conventional, and then seeing which has better break in and long term durability, is a bit of a logistical nightmare, even for an automaker or an oil company. You trying one way and me trying another is simply not "proof."
Then, there's always the argument as to what's a "synthetic" and what's a "conventional" under this urban legend. In a vehicle calling for 5w-20 (or most SN/GF-5 type oils), good luck finding a pure conventional, and good luck finding a Group IV or V synthetic.
I have a belief, and it's nothing more than that. I'm well aware that plenty of vehicles come with synthetic from the factory and last long lives. To get statistically valid evidence on either side of the argument would be exceedingly difficult.
Then, there's always the argument as to what's a "synthetic" and what's a "conventional" under this urban legend. In a vehicle calling for 5w-20 (or most SN/GF-5 type oils), good luck finding a pure conventional, and good luck finding a Group IV or V synthetic.
I have a belief, and it's nothing more than that. I'm well aware that plenty of vehicles come with synthetic from the factory and last long lives. To get statistically valid evidence on either side of the argument would be exceedingly difficult.
Thks Garak, i agree.
Manufacturers do not always do what best possible for their cars.
Those how blindly believe it are just naive.
How about running lifetime transmission fluid, it is a proof i got.
Bunch of [censored] , such fluid does not exist , my 2008 and now 2013 MAZDA cx9 with same Asin 6 speed atx is a proof , both are runned on same specs fluid one is called lifetime and other calls for 30-50K service. Go ahead and trust the mfg for doing what's best for your car.... Sorry i do not.
Manufacturers do not always do what best possible for their cars.
Those how blindly believe it are just naive.
How about running lifetime transmission fluid, it is a proof i got.
Bunch of [censored] , such fluid does not exist , my 2008 and now 2013 MAZDA cx9 with same Asin 6 speed atx is a proof , both are runned on same specs fluid one is called lifetime and other calls for 30-50K service. Go ahead and trust the mfg for doing what's best for your car.... Sorry i do not.
Still, though, we do have to give the manufacturers some credit. They do make some valid points. There are engines out there that have been broken in just fine on synthetic or haven't had early oil changes and have gone huge miles.
Other people don't touch their transmissions or differentials and never have problems, either. The taxi fleet got some transmission maintenance, but I never touched a differential, and never had one pile up, and they went hundreds of thousands of miles.
Some people prefer doing some added maintenance and some do not. I fall into the first category, but there are enough people who buy vehicles that don't want to do additional maintenance. And I may just be OCD and not doing any good.
Some manufacturer recommended maintenance is silly. First, air filter intervals are almost always too short. Secondly, my tire manufacturer warranty wants very regular rotations, but only done by an "approved shop." By the time I'm halfway through the tires' life, I would have spent enough on rotations to buy a new set of tires.
Other people don't touch their transmissions or differentials and never have problems, either. The taxi fleet got some transmission maintenance, but I never touched a differential, and never had one pile up, and they went hundreds of thousands of miles.
Some people prefer doing some added maintenance and some do not. I fall into the first category, but there are enough people who buy vehicles that don't want to do additional maintenance. And I may just be OCD and not doing any good.
Some manufacturer recommended maintenance is silly. First, air filter intervals are almost always too short. Secondly, my tire manufacturer warranty wants very regular rotations, but only done by an "approved shop." By the time I'm halfway through the tires' life, I would have spent enough on rotations to buy a new set of tires.
I followed the "get it out at 1,000 miles" mantra for my 89 Accord when it was on its FF. That was my dad's practice. Most still hanging onto this notion probably did learn it from their dads. I would imagine it came from Honda with conventional 5w30 at the time. I was hung up on 10w30 and that is pretty much what I used for its life with me. The first OC was with Mobil 1 10w30. It was my first experience with synthetic oil so I was running 7K OCI's for the first three years, or so. Finally got "brave" and went to 10K OCI's. Never did a used oil analysis. Used whatever brand of "full synthetic" was on sale.
The engine had 355,000 miles when I lost to car to an accident. Upper and lower ends were plenty clean and fuel economy numbers never varied significantly for the entire 23 years.
The Mazda3 came with 0W-20 as FF. I think we have established that it is synthetic. I left that in for the full 7,500 mile OCI. I guess I am just trying to reduce waste by letting go of outdated dogma. And it IS dogma. People believe in it like they believe in their religions.
The engine had 355,000 miles when I lost to car to an accident. Upper and lower ends were plenty clean and fuel economy numbers never varied significantly for the entire 23 years.
The Mazda3 came with 0W-20 as FF. I think we have established that it is synthetic. I left that in for the full 7,500 mile OCI. I guess I am just trying to reduce waste by letting go of outdated dogma. And it IS dogma. People believe in it like they believe in their religions.
Originally Posted By: Garak
You see, this is the problem. I'm kind of old school and prefer a conventional for break in, particularly if I do an early change or two. But thinking I'm going to get proof of that is a fool's errand. The chances of me getting a couple hundred engines and running them all identically, except half with synthetic and the other half with conventional, and then seeing which has better break in and long term durability, is a bit of a logistical nightmare, even for an automaker or an oil company. You trying one way and me trying another is simply not "proof."
Then, there's always the argument as to what's a "synthetic" and what's a "conventional" under this urban legend. In a vehicle calling for 5w-20 (or most SN/GF-5 type oils), good luck finding a pure conventional, and good luck finding a Group IV or V synthetic.
I have a belief, and it's nothing more than that. I'm well aware that plenty of vehicles come with synthetic from the factory and last long lives. To get statistically valid evidence on either side of the argument would be exceedingly difficult.
Agree. Modern conventional oils are really just semi-syns.
We know for a fact that BMW uses a conventional 5w30 as break-in oil on the M cars for the first 1200 miles (though they electronically rev-limit them), so you're not totally crazy to think that way. It's my understanding that Honda's FF/break-in oil is also a conventional.
Here's an old thread on the BMW break-in oil:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/1889945/
You see, this is the problem. I'm kind of old school and prefer a conventional for break in, particularly if I do an early change or two. But thinking I'm going to get proof of that is a fool's errand. The chances of me getting a couple hundred engines and running them all identically, except half with synthetic and the other half with conventional, and then seeing which has better break in and long term durability, is a bit of a logistical nightmare, even for an automaker or an oil company. You trying one way and me trying another is simply not "proof."
Then, there's always the argument as to what's a "synthetic" and what's a "conventional" under this urban legend. In a vehicle calling for 5w-20 (or most SN/GF-5 type oils), good luck finding a pure conventional, and good luck finding a Group IV or V synthetic.
I have a belief, and it's nothing more than that. I'm well aware that plenty of vehicles come with synthetic from the factory and last long lives. To get statistically valid evidence on either side of the argument would be exceedingly difficult.
Agree. Modern conventional oils are really just semi-syns.
We know for a fact that BMW uses a conventional 5w30 as break-in oil on the M cars for the first 1200 miles (though they electronically rev-limit them), so you're not totally crazy to think that way. It's my understanding that Honda's FF/break-in oil is also a conventional.
Here's an old thread on the BMW break-in oil:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/1889945/
I have noticed that my engines in our past 5 new cars we had over last 12 years did feel like broken in (opened up , revving smoother, having better power , better FE = all benefits of broken in engine) after around 20K miles .
But at 5K miles when switched to Synthetic always felt better, less strained and more free reving than during initial breakin. I feel if I runned on synthetic as FF this process would be lot longer as synthetic and it's more slippery and better lubricant quality would stall breaking in process and I just want to enjoy my new car and nicely broken in engine sooner so i run this conventional to blend to Full Synthetic routine.
But at 5K miles when switched to Synthetic always felt better, less strained and more free reving than during initial breakin. I feel if I runned on synthetic as FF this process would be lot longer as synthetic and it's more slippery and better lubricant quality would stall breaking in process and I just want to enjoy my new car and nicely broken in engine sooner so i run this conventional to blend to Full Synthetic routine.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked