mixing oils can eat your engine?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

If there is a take away from this thread, it should be that there is no inherent harm in mixing oils despite what the naysayers would have you believe and the idea that you're somehow better off picking a brand and sticking with it even if there is something else you believe may be more suitable is ridiculous.


Thanks Caterham for using a common-sense summary of what oil manufactures' have openly stated. I personally appreciate the advice rendered based upon your experience and research!
 
Thanks to one of our members, vinu_neuro, you can see that CATERHAM is incorrect and suggesting bad practice by mixing different chemistries.


Quote:
Courtesy of my university I have unlimited access to the SAE library. Having read more papers than I can count over the last few years by OEM's and additive suppliers, this practice of mixing different oils is a joke if you know how difficult it is to balance the formulations. Here's an excerpt one from last night below. Another one by Chevron Oronite discussed ash limits, just reducing the detergent level had implications on wear with same phosphorous in place, or the zero-phosphorous formulation that produced some of the best ring/liner and cam wear they'd seen, but was compromised in another way. There are numerous such examples of how difficult additive balancing is.

Caterham is borderline trolling, not just because of advocating mixing oils.

We're getting to a point in this forum that people who don't know any better would be better off having not joined.

Engine Oil Effects on Fuel Economy in GM
Vehicles -- Separation of Viscosity and
Friction Modifier Effects

A group at Ford [6-8] used bench tests to investigate the
interactions between friction modifiers and other
additives, especially ZDDP, in engine oils. They focused
on how these interactions influence the FE properties of
the lubricant as it ages during use. A used engine oil lost
its friction reduction capabilities before the depletion of
the MoDTC (Molybdenum DiThioCarbamate) friction
modifier; this indicated the importance of additive interactions
[6]. Mo-containing friction modifiers will react
with the ZDDP, and the reaction products greatly influence
the friction-reducing properties of the engine oil [7].
The degree of interaction was highly dependent on the
type of the basestock, the temperature, and the other
additives in the oil [7, 8]. The importance of these interactions
in maintaining the friction-reducing properties of
the oil during usage was emphasized.
 
Quote:
We're getting to a point in this forum that people who don't know any better would be better off having not joined.



I do agree and it's a shame. CATERHAM is ignoring science, and pushing his opinion as fact and encouraging others to do things that are absurd when it comes to motor oil.
 
If mixing oils were a fatal, or even contributory, habit I think we would have know about it by now. Anybody that was knowledgeable from the industry would have spoken up long ago

As it stands, it has not been proven and nobody has come forward to "expose" this practise.

I'm not worried, but my oil habits prevent it.

(Yawn.)
 
100% right on: this so reminds me of a discussion in a diner. Nobody can produce evidence that mixing does damage as nobody can produce anything in all these discussions to prove a point. Just opinion. Do women do this kind of stuff ?? Need to be right even though I have no real clue!!I make a mistake sometimes quoting stuff that I read here and people like engine builders just look at me as if I was nuts which I am.
smile.gif

Originally Posted By: Mr_Incredible
If mixing oils were a fatal, or even contributory, habit I think we would have know about it by now. Anybody that was knowledgeable from the industry would have spoken up long ago

As it stands, it has not been proven and nobody has come forward to "expose" this practise.

I'm not worried, but my oil habits prevent it.

(Yawn.)
 
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
100% right on: this so reminds me of a discussion in a diner. Nobody can produce evidence that mixing does damage as nobody can produce anything in all these discussions to prove a point. Just opinion. Do women do this kind of stuff ?? Need to be right even though I have no real clue!!I make a mistake sometimes quoting stuff that I read here and people like engine builders just look at me as if I was nuts which I am.
smile.gif

Originally Posted By: Mr_Incredible
If mixing oils were a fatal, or even contributory, habit I think we would have know about it by now. Anybody that was knowledgeable from the industry would have spoken up long ago

As it stands, it has not been proven and nobody has come forward to "expose" this practise.

I'm not worried, but my oil habits prevent it.

(Yawn.)



Some do have a need to be right. Personally, I couldn't care less if someone else does what I do or likes the brands I like. Run beach sand in your engine for all I care, it's not mine. It's like the brand thing, some have their favorites and think everyone else should use that too when in reality everyone here knows that for most people the difference between major manufacturers isn't going to amount to a hill of beans difference.

I think there are likely other reasons than CATERHAM that people would have been off not joining for.
 
Originally Posted By: buster

I do agree and it's a shame. CATERHAM is ignoring science, and pushing his opinion as fact and encouraging others to do things that are absurd when it comes to motor oil.


I'd agree. For instance he makes statements as if he had insider knowledged of what a producer is or was doing in the past but is incorrect.

From another thread:
Originally Posted By: CATERTHAM


Remember a 5W-20 is basically a 5W-30 with less VIIs with most formulators so it wasn't anymore expensive to make.

Mobil 1 was the first to market a 0W-20 as a synthetic up-grade where a 5W-20 was specified for Ford, Honda, Toyota etc circa 2002 and it didn't sell probably because everybody thought 0W meant zero viscosity; heck even motorhead Jay Leno used to think so. Mobil had to slap a red sticker on existing bottles of M1 0W-20 (they also had a 0W-30 that didn't sell any better) stating it was suitable for 5W-20 applications like Ford, Honda etc but it didn't help and they eventually withdrew both their 0W-20 and 0W-30 from the market place. They then offered a M1 5W-20 which did sell.

Fast forward to 2009 and Toyota and Honda started specifying the 0W-20 grade and Mobil reintroduced the withdrawn 0W-20 and 0W-30 oils with new marketing as Advanced Fuel Economy oil grades and it worked.

But the 0W-20 oils that Toyota and Honda offered were different because they had this new 200+ viscosity index making them very light oils, much lighter than the 5W-20 grade even on start-up at room temperature and to certain extent at normal operating temp's as well. They were also lighter than M1 AFE 0W-20 at none extreme cold temp's but not at -40 degrees M1 had no peers.

So that's the history and also why you cannot automatically run a Japanese OEM 0W-20 in a 5W-20 application because those 0W-20s are lighter at normal operating temp's than the 5W-20 that Ford specifies.



The bolded portion would suggest he had insider knowledge and that Mobil 1 had 0w-20 AND 0w-30 in production and then pulled them from the shelves to later sell them again in 2009. Perhaps my memory is a bit poor but I remember Mobil 1 0w-30 on the shelves continuously to the present day. Not in every store but available to the market.
 
Last edited:
I think that it is sad that this thread, along with several others in this vast forum, has been derailed by this witch hunt. Believe it or not, people were mixing oils in this forum way before Caterham joined, in fact people have been doing this for decades with no ill effects. The fact that I can run an oil with sodium and then two OCI's later some sodium shows up even though the previous two oils didn't contain any shows that everyone mixes oils, whether they are for it and against it.

The fact that even oil manufacturers state that it is ok to mix should be an eye opener to some. It wouldn't make any sense for an oil company to make an oil that it's not compatible with other oils. People keep on saying how oils are carefully balanced and yet we have all seen the variance within batches. What about those variances my fellow wannabe chemists?

If you have a major problem with mixing oils and then the onus is on you to provide evidence to the contrary. Those of us that have mixed oils have provided UOA's, VOA's, and the butt dyno as evidence and you have provided nothing but the theoretical possibility that it may not be feasible even though for decades people have been mixing. Moreover, calling people trolls adds nothing to the discussion.
 
^ What is sad is people like you who are not picking up on what others are saying. It's not that mixing will cause problems, it's just that it creates an unknown. Forget mixing different brands that use differet components to achieve a higher VI. It's a waste of your time and could impact the synergism between a full formulated product.

We know too much ZDP is bad, as is Ca and other additives. When additing oils with different detergents, VI's, ZDP's you're creating a mix bag that is no longer pure and no longer technically credible.

Just because something is compatible doesn't mean you should do it.
 
Just a few points:

Originally Posted By: Capa
I think that it is sad that this thread, along with several others in this vast forum, has been derailed by this witch hunt.


I wouldn't call it a witch hunt. It is simply a call for recognition that you create an unknown when you blend products together without testing the end result in the same way each of the contributing products are tested.

Quote:
Believe it or not, people were mixing oils in this forum way before Caterham joined, in fact people have been doing this for decades with no ill effects. The fact that I can run an oil with sodium and then two OCI's later some sodium shows up even though the previous two oils didn't contain any shows that everyone mixes oils, whether they are for it and against it.


Having trace amounts of a previous product showing up in a UOA is not the same as blending specific quantities of two or more formulated lubricants together in hopes of achieving a superior end-product. A product whose cited superiority rests fully on its VI and no other trait.

Quote:
The fact that even oil manufacturers state that it is ok to mix should be an eye opener to some.


And those same oil manufacturers state that in order to get the full benefits of a given product, it is best to use it by itself. Is that an opposing eye opener or are we going to continue to reach? Nobody is arguing that mixing oils is going to result in catastrophic engine failure. But simply because oils CAN be mixed without noted ill-effect in no way implies that oils SHOULD be mixed in hopes that you'll somehow end up with a product that is somehow greater than the products that were mixed to make it.

Quote:
It wouldn't make any sense for an oil company to make an oil that it's not compatible with other oils. People keep on saying how oils are carefully balanced and yet we have all seen the variance within batches. What about those variances my fellow wannabe chemists?


And we are basing these variances on what, VOA's and UOA's, which we know to be imprecise measuring tools for these sorts of things in the first place? Come on, this is as bad as thinking a UOA is going to tell you the exact rate at which your engine is wearing. They are a tool to measure contamination and oil life, nothing more. They are not a wear divining rod and they aren't meant to provide you with the exact composition of a lubricant either.

And even WITH batch variances, you are dealing with slight changes in the quantity of components that have already been tested to a given standard together. You aren't introducing foreign substances like sodium for example into an oil that didn't have sodium in it, or adding tri-nuclear moly to an oil that doesn't have it...etc.

Quote:
If you have a major problem with mixing oils and then the onus is on you to provide evidence to the contrary. Those of us that have mixed oils have provided UOA's, VOA's, and the butt dyno as evidence and you have provided nothing but the theoretical possibility that it may not be feasible even though for decades people have been mixing. Moreover, calling people trolls adds nothing to the discussion.


Quite the opposite dear sir. We have the manufacturer certifications and approvals as well as the data provided by the API and ACEA that shows that a formulated lubricant performs to a given standard. We have MOUNTAINS of this evidence. The fact that you'd cite UOA's, VOA's and the bloody "butt dyno" as proof that you haven't compromised some trait of a properly formulated product is beyond laughable.

Do you think your VOA, UOA and butt dyno replicates the test used by Porsche to obtain their approval? Grueling hours of simulated Nurburgring lapping? How about the Sequence IVA test? Honda's deposit control test? Name ONE OEM, API or ACEA testing protocol that your butt-dyno/VOA/UOA "testing" replicates. There isn't one.

You can mix to your hearts content, I've got nothing against your experimentation. Just don't tell me you've created a better end-product. Because until you actually test it in the manner in which a properly formulated lubricant is tested, you are just peddling unsubstantiated tripe.
 
I'm as far from being a tribologist as anyone can be, but I just can't see that mixing oils is dangerous:

1) Oil certifications require compatibility among oils
2) Since like forever, people have been topping up oil with brands different than used in the last oil change
3) Some manufacturers allow a filter change at every other oil change with no admonition to use the same oil
4) Look at any PQIA comparison: there are a pretty listed number of additives used and most brands have similar levels. Valvoline is an outlier with sodium and I suppose not all phosphorous is created equal, but...
5) There are a very finite number of additive makers: their package for oil A can't be that different from oil B

All that said, if I mix I generally stay in the same brand, but still can't see that doing otherwise is dangerous.
 
Here is a good paper describing additives. http://www.atc-europe.org/public/doc49word.doc

It is well worth a full read. One paragraph that is particularly relevant to this thread is posted below.

Quote:
A performance package is therefore a concentrate of several components (5 to 10 or even more) blended carefully together. Adjusting a performance package is not easy. The different components can have synergistic or antagonistic effects on a given performance parameter due to chemical interactions or competition at the metal surface. They can also exhibit physical or chemical incompatibility unless formulated correctly. The development of a performance package is technically challenging and expensive, requiring considerable expertise
 
Originally Posted By: JAG
Here is a good paper describing additives. http://www.atc-europe.org/public/doc49word.doc

It is well worth a full read. One paragraph that is particularly relevant to this thread is posted below.

Quote:
A performance package is therefore a concentrate of several components (5 to 10 or even more) blended carefully together. Adjusting a performance package is not easy. The different components can have synergistic or antagonistic effects on a given performance parameter due to chemical interactions or competition at the metal surface. They can also exhibit physical or chemical incompatibility unless formulated correctly. The development of a performance package is technically challenging and expensive, requiring considerable expertise


Great contribution JAG
thumbsup2.gif
 
Quote:
Believe it or not, people were mixing oils in this forum way before Caterham joined, in fact people have been doing this for decades with no ill effects. The fact that I can run an oil with sodium and then two OCI's later some sodium shows up even though the previous two oils didn't contain any shows that everyone mixes oils, whether they are for it and against it.


Having trace amounts of a previous product showing up in a UOA is not the same as blending specific quantities of two or more formulated lubricants together in hopes of achieving a superior end-product. A product whose cited superiority rests fully on its VI and no other trait.

Every time an oil change is done with a different brand of oil there is a mix of oils since generally there is at least 1/2 a quart left over if not more. I, like many here, do not necessarily mix oils for a better mix but out of necessity. I do stick with the same brand but if I have 3/4 quart of Mobil EP left over and my vehicle with AFE needs about a quart and then I am going to mix. I know that there is absolutely no adverse effect because people have been doing this for decades. Please, enough with the chemistry FUD!

Quote:
The fact that even oil manufacturers state that it is ok to mix should be an eye opener to some.


And those same oil manufacturers state that in order to get the full benefits of a given product, it is best to use it by itself. Is that an opposing eye opener or are we going to continue to reach? Nobody is arguing that mixing oils is going to result in catastrophic engine failure. But simply because oils CAN be mixed without noted ill-effect in no way implies that oils SHOULD be mixed in hopes that you'll somehow end up with a product that is somehow greater than the products that were mixed to make it.

If you will carefully inspect those quotes that you are referring to and then you will see that the manufacturer is not wanting THEIR product to be diluted. This is obviously done from a sales perspective since they do state that their products can be safely mixed, which is something every chemist should know.

Quote:
It wouldn't make any sense for an oil company to make an oil that it's not compatible with other oils. People keep on saying how oils are carefully balanced and yet we have all seen the variance within batches. What about those variances my fellow wannabe chemists?


And we are basing these variances on what, VOA's and UOA's, which we know to be imprecise measuring tools for these sorts of things in the first place? Come on, this is as bad as thinking a UOA is going to tell you the exact rate at which your engine is wearing. They are a tool to measure contamination and oil life, nothing more. They are not a wear divining rod and they aren't meant to provide you with the exact composition of a lubricant either.

And even WITH batch variances, you are dealing with slight changes in the quantity of components that have already been tested to a given standard together. You aren't introducing foreign substances like sodium for example into an oil that didn't have sodium in it, or adding tri-nuclear moly to an oil that doesn't have it...etc.

Nonetheless, there is definitely some variance within batches as with all things. Again, please stop with the chemistry FUD.

Quote:
If you have a major problem with mixing oils and then the onus is on you to provide evidence to the contrary. Those of us that have mixed oils have provided UOA's, VOA's, and the butt dyno as evidence and you have provided nothing but the theoretical possibility that it may not be feasible even though for decades people have been mixing. Moreover, calling people trolls adds nothing to the discussion.


Quite the opposite dear sir. We have the manufacturer certifications and approvals as well as the data provided by the API and ACEA that shows that a formulated lubricant performs to a given standard. We have MOUNTAINS of this evidence. The fact that you'd cite UOA's, VOA's and the bloody "butt dyno" as proof that you haven't compromised some trait of a properly formulated product is beyond laughable.

Do you think your VOA, UOA and butt dyno replicates the test used by Porsche to obtain their approval? Grueling hours of simulated Nurburgring lapping? How about the Sequence IVA test? Honda's deposit control test? Name ONE OEM, API or ACEA testing protocol that your butt-dyno/VOA/UOA "testing" replicates. There isn't one.

You can mix to your hearts content, I've got nothing against your experimentation. Just don't tell me you've created a better end-product. Because until you actually test it in the manner in which a properly formulated lubricant is tested, you are just peddling unsubstantiated tripe. [/quote]

Your problem is that you keep in dealing with absolutes. While I may create a mix that is slightly inferior there is no doubt that I can create a mix that is slightly superior. What if my 5W-20 has sheared and I add a quart of 5W-30 to bring it back to an acceptable 20 weight level. Then, yes, I have created a superior oil given my specific situation. Pleas note that I am not saying that one should always mix a 20 weight with a 30 weight but there are scenarios where it MAY be beneficial. You mention specific testing and so I am really wondering how you feel about boutique oils that lack said certifications?
 
On aftermarket additives:

Quote:
First of all, the chemistry of a particular motor oils is proprietary and there is no way an aftermarket additive company can engineer one additive to enhance the performance of any motor oil without knowing the exact chemical composition of that particular motor oil. Different base stock motor oils and manufacturer additive package formulations each respond differently to aftermarket oil additives.

Secondarily, a base oil formulation, which is inferior, cannot be converted into a top quality motor oil simply by pouring in an aftermarket oil additive, contrary to the additive manufacturers claims. What works in one motor oil may have totally different effects in another brand and/or type of motor oil. Yet, look on the bottle of any of these miracle additives and they are stated to work with any brand or type of motor oil.


Quote:
The bottom line is that there is absolutely no credible documented data or evidence by any major oil, automotive or equipment manufacturing company that substantiates the use of aftermarket oil additives. My advice is to stay away from any aftermarket oil additive.
 
Quote:
This manufacturer states it would be unlikely anything bad would happen, such as a gel forming from an interaction of the chemicals (a common fear), because the oils are compatible with each other. In fact, many oils are a blend of natural and synthetic oils. So, if you are low on oil, don't be afraid to add a quart or two of synthetic oil if you are using regular oil or even regular oil if you are using a synthetic. You don't need to rush right out and get an oil change so you'll have "pure" oil.

However, it is not recommended to routinely mix oils because the additives in different products may interact or the oils may become destabilized by the mixture. You may reduce or negate the properties of the additives. You'll lose the benefits of the more expensive synthetic oil. So, adding regular oil to your special synthetic oil will mean you'll need to get your oil changed sooner than you would have otherwise. If you have a high performance engine, it's possible it will be displeased if the (expensive) additives can't work the way they are supposed to. This may not damage your engine, but it won't help its performance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top