mixing oils can eat your engine?

[CATERHAM]

For what it's worth I do have a science degree and I have been trained in the scientific method.

Yes you have a confirmation bias which you prove time and time again. Or to put in layman's terms you have a closed mind on the subject and reject the mountain of evidence that doesn't support your position.

 

[buster]

I have a minor in Biology and BA in Economics.

I don't claim to be a chemist though and neither should you.

I believe you have the confirmation bias. So you have it a bit backwards.

 

[CATERHAM]

Now you're just being childish.

 

[CATERHAM]

I'd be the first to admit there are good blends and bad blends.

You're close minded to the subject since under no circumstances can you conceive of any blend that would be good despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM
I'd be the first to admit there are good blends and bad blends.

You're close minded to the subject since under no circumstances can you conceive of any blend that would be good despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary.


I've mixed oil several times with no ill effects. I also read what buster stated, which left me confused, and only mixing oil in beaters. What mountains of evidence say its not a problem? UOA reports [which I'm really not totally convinced are the Gospel some make them out to be], or actual engine tear downs and measurements [which I've seen working in a machine shop to be fool proof]?

I'm just trying to learn. Thanks

 

[ottotheclown]

First of all we need to contact Honda asap. I would not wait till Monday!! They switched to Conoco from Mobil. I saw where the Motorcraft and the Honda 5-20 was almost the same now. That means all those cars with 5-20 Mobil will if not already have trouble. Too, keep in mind for the most part we cannot see the people on the internet. So taking something for real leaves out the visual, say a person is telling you something with a propeller on his hat would you believe like you might with someone looking the part in a lab coat??/This affect plays a big role in politics, TV, reality shows even picking a mate. Just me...

 

[CATERHAM]

This discussion is not about any "harm" resulting from a blend, buster has already acknowledged that but rather a blend no longer being "ideal", although he has never defined what his concept of "ideal" is.

His basic argument is that it is arrogant or audacious to presume that somebody can actually blend two oils and produce something "better" than what's commercially available.
Well the answer is of course you can, which is why all boutique formulators encourage the blending of their oils; their is no need to be limited to their 40wt or 30wt if you want a viscosity somewhere between the two.
The same applies to HDEOs and PCMOs, all formulators will tell there is no problem blending the two if you want a higher ZDDP level or a higher TBN; whatever the different attribute of an oil is you're trying to achieve.
Is there a formulator on the planet that wouldn't agree that mixing their syn' oil with a dino of another brand with not result in a syn' blend better than the dino alone? I think not and Castrol is on record claiming as much.

This is really much about nothing.
Every member on BITOG has run plenty of blends; every time you change brands results in a blend.
That said overt blending is not for everybody, and any discussion of a blend is for those that have a basic understanding of motor oil plus a predilection to want to blend; there has to be a goal of some sort even if it is just using up some left over bottles of oil in one's stash.

That said there are poor blends and some great blends. I think it is a lot more interesting discussing why one blend would be good and another counter-productive than simply pooh-poohing the whole practice.
In fact it really is quite hypocritical to condemn blending; even buster has tried out all kinds of different oil brands; he's okay with that although it results in a blend nonetheless.

 

[buster]

Quote:
This discussion is not about any "harm" resulting from a blend, buster has already acknowledged that but rather a blend no longer being "ideal", although he has never defined what his concept of "ideal" is.


Correct. Otto is just another clown so I'll ignore his stupidity.

My position on this is simple. Try and stick with one brand. Switching brands won't hurt, nor will mixing, but to get the most of an oil, you should stick with 100% one brand because you don't know what will change by adding different ingredients. Pretty common sense and well acknowledged with people who do this for a living.

When trying to achieve a higher VI, which CATERHAM likes to do, you can't assume that viscosity modifier from one brand mixed with an oil with a different chemical make-up will give you great results. You could argue that it did via a UOA, but is a UOA conclusive? Not always.

Oils are designed with specific "additive packages" that give the oil it's protective properties. When mixing oils the additives won't necessarily give you better results than just using one oil or the other. If you aren't going to gain anything, why do it? If you run low on oil and change from brand to brand but are using just 100% of that brand (or 95% due to residual oil left behind), there is nothing wrong with that. You can mix, but what you get is an unknown.

 

[buster]

Mixing is fun among the internet engineer chemist types that like to make pretend they know what they are mixing. It's really that simple.

I just posted an article on the new viscosity modifiers from Infineum. CATERHAM just assumes he can mix whatever is out there and get a superior result. Talk about naive. If the makeup of these ingredients varies, what makes you think you can do better with your own blend?

 

[DragRace]

Originally Posted By: buster
Quote:
This discussion is not about any "harm" resulting from a blend, buster has already acknowledged that but rather a blend no longer being "ideal", although he has never defined what his concept of "ideal" is.


Correct. Otto is just another clown so I'll ignore his stupidity.

My position on this is simple. Try and stick with one brand. Switching brands won't hurt, nor will mixing, but to get the most of an oil, you should stick with 100% one brand because you don't know what will change by adding different ingredients. Pretty common sense and well acknowledged with people who do this for a living.

When trying to achieve a higher VI, which CATERHAM likes to do, you can't assume that viscosity modifier from one brand mixed with an oil with a different chemical make-up will give you great results. You could argue that it did via a UOA, but is a UOA conclusive? Not always.

Oils are designed with specific "additive packages" that give the oil it's protective properties. When mixing oils the additives won't necessarily give you better results than just using one oil or the other. If you aren't going to gain anything, why do it? If you run low on oil and change from brand to brand but are using just 100% of that brand (or 95% due to residual oil left behind), there is nothing wrong with that. You can mix, but what you get is an unknown.


EXACTLY

 

[DragRace]

Originally Posted By: buster
Mixing is fun among the internet engineer chemist types that like to make pretend they know what they are mixing. It's really that simple.

I just posted an article on the new viscosity modifiers from Infineum. CATERHAM just assumes he can mix whatever is out there and get a superior result. Talk about naive. If the makeup of these ingredients varies, what makes you think you can do better with your own blend?


Again,agree.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: buster
CATERHAM just assumes he can mix whatever is out there and get a superior result.

As you're well aware, I am decidedly not a fan of mixing. But, CATERHAM is mixing to a certain end, and an achievable end. He's looking for certain viscometric properties. He's generally not trying to toy with additive levels and tends to mix things with a bit more "known" compatibility due to conversations he's had or who formulated the oils in the first place.

I stick with what's in the bottle. Heck, I don't like mixing batch numbers.

But that's just me.

 

[ottotheclown]

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaYou ok?? What does Otto have to do with your thread here? I just said Honda mixed Conoco with Mobil and that might need to be addresses re. this thread.

Originally Posted By: buster
Quote:
This discussion is not about any "harm" resulting from a blend, buster has already acknowledged that but rather a blend no longer being "ideal", although he has never defined what his concept of "ideal" is.


Correct. Otto is just another clown so I'll ignore his stupidity.

My position on this is simple. Try and stick with one brand. Switching brands won't hurt, nor will mixing, but to get the most of an oil, you should stick with 100% one brand because you don't know what will change by adding different ingredients. Pretty common sense and well acknowledged with people who do this for a living.

When trying to achieve a higher VI, which CATERHAM likes to do, you can't assume that viscosity modifier from one brand mixed with an oil with a different chemical make-up will give you great results. You could argue that it did via a UOA, but is a UOA conclusive? Not always.

Oils are designed with specific "additive packages" that give the oil it's protective properties. When mixing oils the additives won't necessarily give you better results than just using one oil or the other. If you aren't going to gain anything, why do it? If you run low on oil and change from brand to brand but are using just 100% of that brand (or 95% due to residual oil left behind), there is nothing wrong with that. You can mix, but what you get is an unknown.

 

[Art_Vandelay]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

Is there a formulator on the planet that wouldn't agree that mixing their syn' oil with a dino of another brand with not result in a syn' blend better than the dino alone?


With respect to base stock improvement it would be better than dino alone.
So let's say you blend 3 quarts of synthetic with 3 quarts of dino. You now have 6 quarts of a synthetic blend that is superior to the 3 original quarts of dino alone. In terms of base stock.

However, is the additive package inferior to the original 3 quarts of dino?

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

Is there a formulator on the planet that wouldn't agree that mixing their syn' oil with a dino of another brand with not result in a syn' blend better than the dino alone?


I've said that before over the years and was attacked by resident know-it-alls when mentioning mixing PU with PYB or even a Mobil product. Many were quick to attack, and say the oil companies knew better, go figure! The truth is a simple UOA will tell us nothing, now a tear down in another story, no one has posted results or commented about that when it comes to mixing as far as I can remember. So the jury is still out as far as I'm concerned.

 

[crazyoildude]

well i own a very busy engine rebuilding shop and i have never heard of changing oil brands causing problems.
98% of all engines get all sorts of oil dumped into the sump with no problems at all and i never saw any car company warn of this..

 

[virginoil]

Is it time to shutdown this thread as its getting off topic and replies seem to be directed at the posters rather than the topic ?

 

[ottotheclown]

Originally Posted By: virginoil

Is it time to shutdown this thread as its getting off topic and replies seem to be directed at the posters rather than the topic ?

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: Art_Vandelay
Originally Posted By: CATERHAM

Is there a formulator on the planet that wouldn't agree that mixing their syn' oil with a dino of another brand with not result in a syn' blend better than the dino alone?


With respect to base stock improvement it would be better than dino alone.
So let's say you blend 3 quarts of synthetic with 3 quarts of dino. You now have 6 quarts of a synthetic blend that is superior to the 3 original quarts of dino alone. In terms of base stock.

However, is the additive package inferior to the original 3 quarts of dino?

This is what Castrol said on the matter years ago regarding the original ester/PAO based Syntec:

"Syntec is a fully formulated, super premium motor oil and is fully compatible with all conventional and synthetic motor oils.
Mixing Syntec with a premium oil will improve the performance and not harm your engine in any way. However, by diluting Syntec, you also dilute it's effectiveness. We recommend that you use 100% Syntec every time you change your oil to get the maximum benefit."

So it's not just the base oils that must be fully compatible but rather the fully formulated finished oil as per ASTM D6922.

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.

 

[jfking106]

My special blend is 2 pretty cheapest silver bottles, 1 dusty cheapest Dollar General cheapo bottle, 1 watermelon Jolly Rancher, 2 ounces of Tartar sauce, and 3 Milk Dud sized dog turds. Guaranteed 30k OCI.