Mini-update bypass test

[Gary Allan]

Yep, the guinea pig gets a little nervous now and then. It's survived the heavy weight/cool test. Now's the time to what happens on the other end of it. So far it has proved to be a rather stout test subject.

Now I did find a source for even heavier oil. BradPenn pdf warning! ..but we'll go totally contrarian and go light for the 85-90+ PA summers.

 

[Winston]

Yes, it is a little embarrasing that that my Montero shares an engine with a Minivan, but they have never been known for power, they are very reliable. Plus, the reviewers hate them so I got a great discount at the dealer.

The Mitsubishi 3L and 3.5L V6 engine are known for being very reliable and able to go 2-300k miles with normal maintenance. (Even without LC and Arx)

Does your minivan have an oil cooler? Does it use oil? The valve stem seals on the older V6's tend to wear out at about 100k.

 

[Gary Allan]

My van doesn't have a factory oil cooler. I repeatedly tried to get the factory sandwich that was available on the 92 Stealth (3000-GT) ..but the parts man just couldn't make it work in his terminal. I will be adding oil/coolant heat exchangers as I get motivated.

My 3.0 isn't short on power. Naturally it gets asthmatic above 80-85, given the frontal area of the minivan ..but will bury the speedo and then some. I can break the tires loose if I want to take a few $$$ out of the life of the axles and transmission.

It suffered horribly from the leaking valve seals. Auto-Rx fixed 95% of it. Now instead of leaving a vapor trail ..I may leave a brief "puff" if I idle too long.

The consumption from almost new was ZERO until about 3000 miles into an oci. Then it didn't matter what was in there ...synth..dino..light ..heavy. It would use about a quart a 1000+/-. Typically after it used the second quart it was time for an oil change.

It has the original catalytic converter ..and passes our enhanced emissions program with plenty of room to spare as long as the timing is retarded enough to reduce NOX.

It also has the original timing belt and is just turning 169k on the odometer.

We're driving up to Lock Haven tomorrow. This will add another 400 miles to the clock. I'll get to see the effects of a 20w-50 on fuel economy. The last run with 15w40 yielded 22.5 mpg with almost 95% of the driving being @ 70-75 mph. I want to see if this is reduced.

 

[Winston]

I realize we are off topic, but 169k miles on the original timing belt?!?!? I thought I was crazy because I went 90k miles on mine. You know that this is an interference engine and a broken timing belt will ruin the engine. Right?

 

[Gary Allan]

Yes, I'm running on the edge here. The thing is, it's original water pump, original timing belt and every thing else (I believe that the lower rad hose is OEM

). If anything really goes wrong with it ..it's so close to a deluxe long block ..it's rediculous. I mean, I'm not going to tear into it myself. If I'm going to have the timing belt done ..I might as well have the valve seals done...and while he's there ..get the water pump done ..and if one of the guides has slipped (they made it so they couldn't in the 93 models..then it's a wasted trip unless I pull the head ..if I have the head pulled ..it's a waste to JUST have guides put in without doing the valves ..it's a waste do just one head ..and so on

Seeing as my friend won't touch rice internally (he's a bow-tie man and may tolerate a Ford or Mopar if he's in the mood)..I have to use my "reasonable" wrench (they're friends) ..he's going to be over $700-$800 for all that (maybe more if theres a "cascading" repair evolution that I mentioned above). The deluxe long block (includes cams, oil pump, water pump, lifters, etc.) is around $1300 and my bow-tie pal will throw it in ...probably for next to nothing (yes, he's a good friend that I barter much of my free time with in "good will").

See what I mean??

It's sorta like buying popcorn at the movies. You get a small for $4.50, med for $5.50, and a large for $6 ..but the difference between them in value is nearly 5X.

 

[rg144]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Winston:
I realize we are off topic, but 169k miles on the original timing belt?!?!?

---

I have 143K mi with the original belt too ('96 3L). It is easy to check the condition of the belt - a few bolts and the cover tilts away - repeated turns of the ignition - no dry rot, cracking, lost teeth, so why change it? (It seems to me that, originally, belts were supposed to last for 60k and now are good for over 100k). With these minivans what happens is the water pump leaks and it is driven off the timing belt and you do the belt when your dripping antifreeze.

Anyway, I have the same experience as Gary; good-enough power even with family and camping gear (we just did a trip to the Catskills), puff of blue at start-up (after ARX cleaned up the bad smoke), factory exhaust, very smooth idle with a fresh Delo 400 oil change.

 

[Winston]

Well you have convinced me never to change the belt in my '95. By the time it breaks I wont want the car anyway. When I changed it at 90k miles I put in a new water pump. (while I was in there, etc). But changing the valve seals is a whole other process. I am lucky and do not loose any oil yet. The belts do fail. My friend had a '94 3.5 L DOHC Montero SR. Due to the dual cams that engine has much longer belts and is more prone to breakage. His broke at 70k miles. Strangely, it broke upon startup and did not damage the engine.

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:
..but we'll go totally contrarian and go light for the 85-90+ PA summers.

---

How about some 0w5 ? That would be the dogs bollucks.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

But changing the valve seals is a whole other process.

---

Well, I was kinda approaching from that being the starting point. I had wanted it done ..the "reasonable" wrench pointed out that he had to disturb the cams and therefore a timing belt was a no brainer ...that leads to the water pump being another no brainer ..etc ..etc.. If he found just one slipped guide ...

quote:

---

How about some 0w5 ? That would be the dogs bollucks.

---

Well...it is quiet @ 8 psi with 30 weight at a hot, post highway run, idle ...so I suppose ZERO with flow wouldn't be too bad .. Heck, it might develop into a home grown retro fit VVT system.

 

[Ugly3]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:

quote:

---

But changing the valve seals is a whole other process.

---

Well, I was kinda approaching from that being the starting point. I had wanted it done ..the "reasonable" wrench pointed out that he had to disturb the cams and therefore a timing belt was a no brainer ...that leads to the water pump being another no brainer ..etc ..etc.. If he found just one slipped guide ...

quote:

---

How about some 0w5 ? That would be the dogs bollucks.

---

Well...it is quiet @ 8 psi with 30 weight at a hot, post highway run, idle ...so I suppose ZERO with flow wouldn't be too bad .. Heck, it might develop into a home grown retro fit VVT system.

---

You sound like the old farmer that was teaching his mule not to eat. Just about the time the mule got good at not eating he up and died.

 

[Gary Allan]

Oh

You heard about my mule too, huh??

It was all in the name of science, I assure you.

 

[Gary Allan]

Side notes: Mileage with 15w40 was approx 22.5. Mileage w/20w-50 was 23.365 ..which is very close to the vehicles peak mpg ever recorded which was 24+. I can't find my exact fuel/miles figures for the 15w40 at the moment and the difference isn't enough to be called significant, but the last trip I controlled enough of the variables to feel that it was very accurate. I'll swap out the 20w-50 today and put in the 5w-20 and do the exact same run and see what it yields. Temps are comparable and they're very close back to back tests ..so vehicle condition shouldn't have degraded in any other area (tune, etc.).

Now this will only show the difference the viscosity makes in a vehicle doing 70-75 mph for a very decent run. One could easily argue that under that speed, parasitic losses due to viscosity could be trumped by shear air resistance ..especially for a mini-van of this vintage ..but I will present the data FWIW.

(brief pause for me to get motivated)

Well, the 5w-20 is in. Valve train is somewhat noisier (this was normal) with a few random ticks for no dam% good reason. The stuff went in thinnner than the 20w-50 came out at (warm). The 5w-20 would have won a time trial between the two.

Another side note: Since my Auto-Rx treatments ..I've seen nothing collecting on my magnetic drain plug. Which I'm not truly certain about since I never really developed a good technique for getting the stuff off the plug (you don't dwell on this stuff too long when you're changing oil -especially on a 100k+ vehicle). After the Auto-Rx treatments ..the plug cleaned itself ..perhaps some function of polarity of certain bonding agents in the various oils (mostly HDEOs) ..who knows.

Whenever I went to clean it with a paper towel ..the stuff would just jump back on it as I slid the towel off of it ..sorta like magnetic graphite.

Now if after this run of 5w-20, which I will keep in indefinitely in the absense of any "warnings", it would be interesting to see if any additional (new) stuff is on the magnet (cue Twilight Zone music - what could it mean

)

Now most of this is

..but I figure if we're going to all this trouble and are swapping oils like underware ..we might as well piggyback as many tests as possible just to see what happens "while we're there" type thiing.

I'll probably switch back to a heavy weight (the 20w-50 worked well) when we reach some saturation level in the filter ..so far we haven't figured out any definitive mileage limit on the filter (5000 miles has been suggested). I also have a 9k used filter that Ugly3 has sent me (a PureOne as well) that can be swapped in for a short time just to see what condition of saturation it's at and if the bypass valve has any frequency of use.

 

[427Z06]

IMHO, short of some problem developing, run at least one load of oil up to at least 5K miles on that filter. I'll spare you all the various half-witted conjectures I have on why to do so.

 

[Gary Allan]

Sure! ..but why spare us the conjectures

I think you're correct in that one batch will contribute more realistic accumulation than 5 batches over the same duration. So far the filter and engine have only seen pristine oils packed chuck full of vitamins and minerals. These haven't had any time to decay.

We need free radicals and the byproducts that they produce.

This thing has beat up oil after 3k miles traditionally. It didn't matter what weight ..synth or dino.

I wish I could have done oil samples along the way here. It would be way too many ..but it would have been interesting to see just what shook out here. I don't think that it would have proved anything ..but it might have given us more things to ponder..

 

[Winston]

Can't wait to see what the pressures look like with that old filter from Ugly3. I assume it is a Mobil 1 filter?

You mentioned that the engine beats up oils in 3k miles. What is the mfg recommended OCI?

 

[Gary Allan]

I don't recall the factory recommended OCI off hand (it was 13 years ago). I think 5000 miles. There was a separate paper (not factory print stock) that highly recommended 3m/3k OCI's. It appears that they actually knew something that the factory never let on about.

I just did 385 miles with the MC 5w-20. The oil temp rarely strayed above 160F and the pressure at 65-70 mph was 52/48. Idle pressure after coming off the highway was about 17-18/15. We appear to be approaching a solid 4 psid (other than idle). Fuel economy on the way there was 23.7 mpg. I will fill up at the same pump I did before leaving to record the return mileage (you climb a few mountains on the way there ..you roll down a few on the way back). Other than the lifters ticking a little more ..no noted differences between the 20w-50 and the 5w-20. I did notice a distinct difference when I put the 20w-50 in though. I still think that there's something to "new" oil that disappears in a few miles. I'll be going to Bloomsburg tomorrow to watch my daughter's playoff game (they're #2 in their conference (and I think 6th in the nation in Div II NCAA

) ..so I'll rack up a few more miles.

I'm sure when the ambient temp climbs a bit, the oil temp will start climbing too. I've already seen where a 75F day brings the oil temp up a good bit. When that occurs, I'll expect the idle pressure to drop even more...perhaps into the single digits (it's done this before on 10w30). This doesn't concern me too much since we have such fine AW additives in our contemporary oils should the need arrise

quote:

---

I assume it is a Mobil 1 filter?

---

Pure One ..same as is on there.

[ April 25, 2005, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]

 

[Gary Allan]

The return trip actually yielded less mpg

(22.09) I did 186 miles and had to add 8.42 gallons. It's that "new" thing to oil I tell ya!! I didn't even have another warmup cycle on the return trip

Well, we'll see what Bloomsburg yields.

 

[Ugly3]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:

The return trip actually yielded less mpg

(22.09) I did 186 miles and had to add 8.42 gallons. It's that "new" thing to oil I tell ya!! I didn't even have another warmup cycle on the return trip

Well, we'll see what Bloomsburg yields.

---

Best performance and some luck to your daughter!

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:
It's that "new" thing to oil I tell ya!!

---

While I believe new oil does goes through some kind of conditioning period, I have a firm belief that trying to determine gas milage differences over a tank or two isn't very accurate. Will you be making the same trip again any time soon?

 

[Gary Allan]

I'm not sure how soon I'll get to do the same trip. You're right, though. Just too few miles over too short a time. Just the fillup angle/pitch could have thrown it off a good bit.

I think that the biggest difference will be when a series of short runs are done over multiple tankfuls. You just gotta let time make the variables run out of space to hide. If I can maintain anywhere near 20 under those conditions it will surely (to me anyway) mean that the visc is responsible. Hopefully I'll be able to offer statistics to back up my impressions.