Autozone's Valucraft oil. It's still SF rated! There's even a warning on the back not to use it in vehicles manufactured after 1988.
oils that suck
- Thread starter moontan
- Start date
- Status
Info: http://www.machinerylubrication.com/article_detail.asp?articleid=518&relatedbookgroup=Maintenancequote:
Originally posted by Thomas Pyrek:
thanks for the heads up on the starburst thing. I'll be sure to not buy PC oil either.
Given that, perhaps it's safe to answer this thread, "Oils that Suck?" with the response:
[ March 03, 2004, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: TallPaul ]
Most any oil could be called SF rated since an SL oil would almost certainly pass SF requirements.
And no one officially certifies oil as SF anyway.
THANK YOU for the great link to Machinery Lubrication. Sure explains things.quote:
Originally posted by TallPaul:
Info: http://www.machinerylubrication.com/article_detail.asp?articleid=518&relatedbookgroup=Maintenancequote:
Originally posted by Thomas Pyrek:
thanks for the heads up on the starburst thing. I'll be sure to not buy PC oil either.
Given that, perhaps it's safe to answer this thread, "Oils that Suck?" with the response:
Energy Conserving/ API Starburst oils SUCK!
For example, the API/SAE J300 specs for "energy conserving" have a hypothetical 1% "gain" over the Reference Oil. That's a hypothetical gain in a test motor, say 0.01 MPG on average.
Thanks to the EPA CAFE nonsense, you can apply that hypothetical "gain" fleet-wide across hundreds of thousands of units.
How long is an engine warranty? 3/36? Beyond that you're S.O.L. if it begins to burn oil or act up.
Want to save fuel? Get rid of your V10 gasoline Ford Excursion and get a tiny Toyota Echo Hatchback. LOL somebody will buy a gargantuan vehicle that averages 10 MPG and try to figure out how to suddenly increase fuel economy 1%.
Many makers (Ford, DC, GM, etc) also come up with some pathetic nonsense on what is "normal" oil consumption.
When Ford had the problem with bad valve seals in their modular V8's, they claimed around 1 quart every 900 miles was "normal."
GM is telling their truck Vortec owners that 1 quart every 100 gallons of fuel is "normal."
So unless your motor is putting out a heavy blue smokescreen, the company won't do anything about it anyway.
In every other vehicle I have ever owned, purchased new, I have had excellent results running a heavier HDEO in summer (15W-40, 5W-40, etc). There is NO difference in fuel economy.
Of course, in my severe winters, I run the lightest oil possible (Mobil 1 0W-30) which should be common sense.
My 2000 GMC Sierra with Vortec 5.3 litre V8 will be using either Mobil 1 15W-50 or Mobil Delvac 1 5W-40 this summer.
Some folks worry a heavier oil will destroy the oil pump. My 1984 Ford F-150 with 302 V8 has run Mobil Delvac 1 5W-40 from new and still puts out good oil pressure. The distributor shaft is tight. It currently has around 528,000km on the odometer, lowest compression is 130 (With oil squirted in, 160).
Want to destroy an oil pump? Put in a "Starburst" 5W-30 dino oil, then try to start the thing at -42. Good luck!
Jerry
In every other vehicle I have ever owned, purchased new, I have had excellent results running a heavier HDEO in summer (15W-40, 5W-40, etc). There is NO difference in fuel economy
I'm glad you have had such good fuel economy with those heavy mostly non friction modded oils because I did not in 90-105F ambient when I tried Delvac 1300S in my 1985 Ford 302 a couple years back ..... no errors , no tune-up troubles just a solid 19 mpg vs 23 hiway over the 10w-30 PCMO that took it to it's 165k miles at that time . I saved alot of fuel apparently in those 165k miles and 17 years running time since it was purchased new .
No flames , no problems just stating the results of my use of a HD 15w-40 oil . I used it in another engine briefly ,,, never again though .
In fact , take a look in the UOA section . Wear metals dropped when BITOG went from a 15w-40 back to a 10w-30 .I'm sure fuel mileage went up . It's an older post that BITOG himself brought to the top today with additional information . Take a peek at it .
Hey Bob is back !
I'm glad you have had such good fuel economy with those heavy mostly non friction modded oils because I did not in 90-105F ambient when I tried Delvac 1300S in my 1985 Ford 302 a couple years back ..... no errors , no tune-up troubles just a solid 19 mpg vs 23 hiway over the 10w-30 PCMO that took it to it's 165k miles at that time . I saved alot of fuel apparently in those 165k miles and 17 years running time since it was purchased new .
No flames , no problems just stating the results of my use of a HD 15w-40 oil . I used it in another engine briefly ,,, never again though .
In fact , take a look in the UOA section . Wear metals dropped when BITOG went from a 15w-40 back to a 10w-30 .I'm sure fuel mileage went up . It's an older post that BITOG himself brought to the top today with additional information . Take a peek at it .
Hey Bob is back !
"To the PCs fuel economy comes before engine life."
I thought I'd heard everything on these boards, but now I hear something to the effect of "Punish the treehuggers by NOT buying Energy Conserving oils." Let your politics dictate what you look for on an oil label??? Reject certain weights and friction modifiers because they're "PC"? Okey dokey...
As for the incorrect, obsolete opinion that "Energy Conserving" 5w-20 oils (and other lighter weights) will trash your newer engine, here's about a million 5w-20 UOAs (non-synthetic oils, no less) WITH EACH SHOWING INSIGNIFICANT IRON AND LEAD WEAR UNDER 10 PPM. Reject rhetoric and noise, and embrace fact.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000296
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=001080
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000668
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000588
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=001312
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000954
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000500
[ March 03, 2004, 06:38 PM: Message edited by: TC ]
I thought I'd heard everything on these boards, but now I hear something to the effect of "Punish the treehuggers by NOT buying Energy Conserving oils." Let your politics dictate what you look for on an oil label??? Reject certain weights and friction modifiers because they're "PC"? Okey dokey...
As for the incorrect, obsolete opinion that "Energy Conserving" 5w-20 oils (and other lighter weights) will trash your newer engine, here's about a million 5w-20 UOAs (non-synthetic oils, no less) WITH EACH SHOWING INSIGNIFICANT IRON AND LEAD WEAR UNDER 10 PPM. Reject rhetoric and noise, and embrace fact.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000296
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=001080
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000668
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000588
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=001312
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000954
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000500
[ March 03, 2004, 06:38 PM: Message edited by: TC ]
Most HDEO's are friction modified, as fuel economy is a big deal for those of us with fleets.
When you consider that the "official" API/SAE J300 has only a 1% difference between the "reference oil" and a heavily modified "energy conserving" oil, most folks shouldn't notice any difference.
About the only thing that would skew the results is using a HDEO in a motor with miles on it. The excessive detergents in all HDEO (To control soot in HD diesel motors) can start a cleaning process.
I bought new my 1984 Ford F-150 with 302 V8. I changed the factory oil at 1,000km to a PCEO 10W-30 (It claimed "energy conserving II" which was a current spec at the time) and noticed NO difference in fuel economy.
I changed the oil at 3,000km, again using the same PCEO 10W-30. At 5,000km, changed to Delvac 1 5W-40. No difference in fuel economy running these oils.
Consider my 1990 Toyota 4Runner with 3.0 V6. From 1993-1998 I lived in Salt Lake City, Utah, and ran Mobil 1 15W-50 instead of Delvac 1. I lived in a condo and was not allowed to work on my vehicle in the underground parking garage.
Rather than expect a mechanic to measure out the proper amount of oil from gallon jugs of Delvac 1, I simply bought 6 quarts of Mobil 1 15W-50 from Pep Boys and let a local Toyota dealer change my oil.
They even let me watch, so I knew they were using my oil.
No difference in fuel economy. However, a fellow college student warned me I was losing a HUGE amount of fuel economy, so I became worried and tried an OCI running Mobil 1 5W-30. This was from May to July of 1995, when the temps were already in the upper 90's.
There was NO DIFFERENCE in fuel economy. None whatsoever. You would think going from a 15W-50 to a 5W-30 would have made SOME difference, right?
None. Zip. Nadda. Except for one and only one tank when I appeared to get 0.25 MPG more. I think it was due to a tailwind or slower speeds driving I-80 back from Wendover, NV.
Though the motor DID sound like marbles inside an empty coffee can. So I went back to Pep Boys, got 6 quarts of Mobil 1 15W-50, and had Toyota change the oil and filter again.
Same as in summer of 2001 when I ran Mobil 1 15W-50 in my 2000 GMC Sierra with Vortec 5.3 litre V8: I did a lot of heavy towing in hot temps that summer, and there was NO difference in fuel economy running the much heavier 15W-50. Not even running empty.
I've kept careful track of fuel economy in my HD equipment, and back when I used Esso XD-3, I would run 15W-40 summer and 0W-30 "Arctic" winter.
Even running the 0W-30 into warmer temps, beyond the recommended cutoff, then changing to 15W-40, there was NO difference in fuel economy.
Maybe some folks might see a differnce. But 23 MPG vs 19 MPG?? A differnce of 21%? I don't get it.
Jerry
When you consider that the "official" API/SAE J300 has only a 1% difference between the "reference oil" and a heavily modified "energy conserving" oil, most folks shouldn't notice any difference.
About the only thing that would skew the results is using a HDEO in a motor with miles on it. The excessive detergents in all HDEO (To control soot in HD diesel motors) can start a cleaning process.
I bought new my 1984 Ford F-150 with 302 V8. I changed the factory oil at 1,000km to a PCEO 10W-30 (It claimed "energy conserving II" which was a current spec at the time) and noticed NO difference in fuel economy.
I changed the oil at 3,000km, again using the same PCEO 10W-30. At 5,000km, changed to Delvac 1 5W-40. No difference in fuel economy running these oils.
Consider my 1990 Toyota 4Runner with 3.0 V6. From 1993-1998 I lived in Salt Lake City, Utah, and ran Mobil 1 15W-50 instead of Delvac 1. I lived in a condo and was not allowed to work on my vehicle in the underground parking garage.
Rather than expect a mechanic to measure out the proper amount of oil from gallon jugs of Delvac 1, I simply bought 6 quarts of Mobil 1 15W-50 from Pep Boys and let a local Toyota dealer change my oil.
They even let me watch, so I knew they were using my oil.
No difference in fuel economy. However, a fellow college student warned me I was losing a HUGE amount of fuel economy, so I became worried and tried an OCI running Mobil 1 5W-30. This was from May to July of 1995, when the temps were already in the upper 90's.
There was NO DIFFERENCE in fuel economy. None whatsoever. You would think going from a 15W-50 to a 5W-30 would have made SOME difference, right?
None. Zip. Nadda. Except for one and only one tank when I appeared to get 0.25 MPG more. I think it was due to a tailwind or slower speeds driving I-80 back from Wendover, NV.
Though the motor DID sound like marbles inside an empty coffee can. So I went back to Pep Boys, got 6 quarts of Mobil 1 15W-50, and had Toyota change the oil and filter again.
Same as in summer of 2001 when I ran Mobil 1 15W-50 in my 2000 GMC Sierra with Vortec 5.3 litre V8: I did a lot of heavy towing in hot temps that summer, and there was NO difference in fuel economy running the much heavier 15W-50. Not even running empty.
I've kept careful track of fuel economy in my HD equipment, and back when I used Esso XD-3, I would run 15W-40 summer and 0W-30 "Arctic" winter.
Even running the 0W-30 into warmer temps, beyond the recommended cutoff, then changing to 15W-40, there was NO difference in fuel economy.
Maybe some folks might see a differnce. But 23 MPG vs 19 MPG?? A differnce of 21%? I don't get it.
Jerry
Oils that suck: Any oil in which you have no idea who makes it or the level of "name brand" quality control. Who makes Rite Aid motor oil? The same supplier as a few months back, or did another low bidder come along? Yes, it's said to meet the specs, but such a claim is only as good as the supplier making the claim to Rite Aid...but exactly who is the supplier? Oil recalls are not especially rare, but they typically involve small suppliers/refiners, so quality problems and spec-meeting discrepancies certainly occur.
Mobil Drive Clean and Drive Clean Blend. It is the onlyu oil that I have ever had a car consume. I had two trucks that ate a quart of this stuff every week. BOth vechiles had never burned any oil before. I drained them and refilled with other products and they both quite burning oil.
I've kept careful track of fuel economy in my HD equipment, and back when I used Esso XD-3, I would run 15W-40 summer and 0W-30 "Arctic" winter.
Your speaking diesel engines I suppose ? If not , twist that around and use the 0w-30 in the summer when all gas motors and I presume diesel too run more efficient . You'll see a marked increase in fuel mileage and it adds up over the course of time . The Industry is trending eventually to soley 30wts for the diesel's and 20wts for the gassers and there is a reason for it...to help save our Earths recources and the environment .
Also , you can't compare the 15w-50 synthetic on the low end of a 50wt to a hi cSt 15w40 tractor oil . Well I guess you can , in everday start,stop-n-go the Mobil synlube will get better mileage , way more CF than the dino typical diesel oil .Enter a highly friction modified PCMO 30wt and lower formulated by experts that get paid the big bucks and one can reap the benefits of even better fuel mileage without excessive engine wear .
There are countless stories of plain old PCMO 30wt taking engines beyond 250k . All the while saving fuel over a heavy wt oil used out of application .
I've taken three 302's to over 200k miles each using 10w-30 and helped save some fuel and the environment for my children's children and their children . My committment to a responsible take on lubing my engines will remain just that , and bet I'll not loose an engine either.
Again , no flames , no problems just how I see it based on some fact .
Your speaking diesel engines I suppose ? If not , twist that around and use the 0w-30 in the summer when all gas motors and I presume diesel too run more efficient . You'll see a marked increase in fuel mileage and it adds up over the course of time . The Industry is trending eventually to soley 30wts for the diesel's and 20wts for the gassers and there is a reason for it...to help save our Earths recources and the environment .
Also , you can't compare the 15w-50 synthetic on the low end of a 50wt to a hi cSt 15w40 tractor oil . Well I guess you can , in everday start,stop-n-go the Mobil synlube will get better mileage , way more CF than the dino typical diesel oil .Enter a highly friction modified PCMO 30wt and lower formulated by experts that get paid the big bucks and one can reap the benefits of even better fuel mileage without excessive engine wear .
There are countless stories of plain old PCMO 30wt taking engines beyond 250k . All the while saving fuel over a heavy wt oil used out of application .
I've taken three 302's to over 200k miles each using 10w-30 and helped save some fuel and the environment for my children's children and their children . My committment to a responsible take on lubing my engines will remain just that , and bet I'll not loose an engine either.
Again , no flames , no problems just how I see it based on some fact .
I never had any problem with Mobil Drive clean. My intervals were 2k miles with 3 autocrosses on it. Never burned any oil.
99 cents a quart.
thanks for the heads up on the starburst thing. I'll be sure to not buy PC oil either.
Motorbike:quote:
Originally posted by Motorbike:
I've kept careful track of fuel economy in my HD equipment, and back when I used Esso XD-3, I would run 15W-40 summer and 0W-30 "Arctic" winter.
Your speaking diesel engines I suppose ? If not , twist that around and use the 0w-30 in the summer when all gas motors and I presume diesel too run more efficient . You'll see a marked increase in fuel mileage and it adds up over the course of time . The Industry is trending eventually to soley 30wts for the diesel's and 20wts for the gassers and there is a reason for it...to help save our Earths recources and the environment .
Also , you can't compare the 15w-50 synthetic on the low end of a 50wt to a hi cSt 15w40 tractor oil . Well I guess you can , in everday start,stop-n-go the Mobil synlube will get better mileage , way more CF than the dino typical diesel oil .Enter a highly friction modified PCMO 30wt and lower formulated by experts that get paid the big bucks and one can reap the benefits of even better fuel mileage without excessive engine wear .
There are countless stories of plain old PCMO 30wt taking engines beyond 250k . All the while saving fuel over a heavy wt oil used out of application .
I've taken three 302's to over 200k miles each using 10w-30 and helped save some fuel and the environment for my children's children and their children . My committment to a responsible take on lubing my engines will remain just that , and bet I'll not loose an engine either.
Again , no flames , no problems just how I see it based on some fact .
Again, I refer to the 1990 Toyota 4Runner that I bought new. There was NO DIFFERNCE in fuel economy between Mobil 1 5W-30 and Mobil 1 15W-50.
Also no difference running Mobil Delvac 1 5W-40, or as you call it, "tractor oil." According to your logic, I should have seen huge gains in MPG under identical driving conditions running Mobil 1 5W-30 vs Mobil 1 15W-50.
Certainly running Mobil 1 5W-30 vs Delvac 1 "tractor oil."
None whatsoever. Some folks talk glibly of a magic 20% increase, how is this possible??
If you truly want to save fuel, do the following:
1. Buy a small efficient car, say the Toyota Echo Hatchback or the Toyota Prius.
2. Keep the suspension in perfect alignment
3. Use efficient all-season tires, properly inflated. Indeed, inflate over 40 psi if the tire supports this.
4. Drive sensibly, no hot rodding
5. Keep the car in good tune
6. Take mass transit where possible/practical
Just like those folks who buy gargantuan SUV's and pickup trucks, then use them for daily drivers. They cry about MPG and fuel cost. Tough.
I also refer you, again, to the published API/SAE J300 and ILSAC GF-3 test VIB specs for "fuel economy" approvals: compared to the "reference oil" an oil that "helps" CAFE will have theoretical improvement from 0.9% to 2%, with values dropping dramatically after the mandatory 96 hour aging test.
As a fleet operator I have, in the past, fallen for gadgets that claimed miraculous MPG improvements. The only miracle was that I was dumb enough to fall for it. Never again, I don't even listen when somebody claims more than 3% improvement. I've never had even 0.5% improvement, as far as I can tell, with running different oils alone.
So I apologise if I'm a bit testy over your implication that I don't give a s*** about fuel economy. I do. I just have hard-learned experience, and thousands of dollars, to PROVE that there is NO MAGIC POTION to deliver the claimed economy benefits.
I'm VERY VERY sensitive to even fractional improvements in fuel economy, not for the environment, but just to reduce my stratispheric operating costs.
To achieve the best fleet economy, I do the following: run the most efficient tires possible, keep the fuel system spotless, adjust the software on my ISX motors to forbid speeds over 60 MPH, forbid +75% torque applied, etc etc. So my drivers hate me, but I can prove around a 10% savings doing this.
So to "save the environment" I should switch my Peterbilt's with Cummins ISX motors to a 0W-20 or a 5W-20? Okey dokey, are you willing to cover my loss of engine warranty?
The Europeans are FAR more concerned about high fuel costs than we are. Why do the same exact motors that here in North America "require" a xW-30 or xW-20, in Europe require heavier viscosities.
I would think the Europeans would be FAR more interested in saving fuel, even that theoretical 1%. For some reason, they prefer the heavier viscosity.
Why?
I hope you're not suggesting that the engineers at ACEA are in some way less, how shall I put it, "enlightened" then us folks here in North America?
Why does Ford only recommend a 5W-20 in North America? In Europe, Ford had VERY bad results in testing xW-20 oils in fleets and recommends either a 5W-30, 10W-30, 10W-40, or 20W-50 based on driving style and ambient operating temperatures.
So if you truly buy into this garbage about "saving the environment" why not ditch the SUV or pickup for a small putt-putt?
Put tri-pane windows in your home. Make sure the heating system is rated +90% AFUE. Make sure the A/C is rated +17 SEER. Put in compact flourescent lamps. Get rid of the widescreen tv, etc.
I'm not flaming. I'm just basing my observations on 24 years of experience with my personal vehicles and with fleet use. The best way to save fuel is to keep your foot out of it and drive gently.
Jerry
Let's all sing, "Cumbaya"!
No intent to punish anyone. Just don't want the greens in my crankcase. "Energy Conserving" oils are only here because of CAFE and CAFE is only here because of the green lobby.
As for thin oils, maybe they are needed in some of the new vehicles, but likely not as thin as the CAFE-driven recommendations. If you are driving on a mountainside road, you don't drive right on the edge of the road close to the cliff, so why chance an oil that is on the edge of protection. The 5w20 oils are pusing the lower limit of HT/HS (around 2.6 -2.8).
Jerry, Motorbike's experience shadows my own. Read my post on "0-20/fuel economy post you started". You state that you had no difference in f. economy and Motorbike's was 21%.
Your observation mimmics those posters from Australia that say they don't notice a difference either except that the engine sounds like a box of marbles. The difference as I have too noted is as Motorbike describes and I have posted this observation well over a year ago is that on an engine that has had a steady diet of 30 weight for eg. for many thou's of miles and then a 50 weight is used, fuel economy will pummel.
Like when I had the ever-diminishing engine performance from 30 weight synthetic and first put in M-1 15-50...it was like I lost half the engine along with half the fuel economy to boot. My guess is that all the varnish/gummed up garbage from years/thou's of mi. of thin oil use resulted in constrictions which were then non-condusive to a thicker viscosity. This may be why some are confused and make statements like "thick oils suck". Well, yeah...they do when all your engine knows is 5-30.
So, I have concluded that to these nay-sayers to first clean out the garbage with auto-rx or similar before moving to such thicker viscosities. Otherwise, move up gradually or use diesel/ester-base oils (eg. Delvac or Redline) to clean things out first.
And IMO the cleanup "could take" just as many miles as it took to lay down the crap in the first play. ie. it's a beehatch to get things clean. That's why it's smarter to keep things clean in the first place. 3k OCI's or heavier weight synth. concurrent with extended OCI based on UOA's as a guide.
Your observation mimmics those posters from Australia that say they don't notice a difference either except that the engine sounds like a box of marbles. The difference as I have too noted is as Motorbike describes and I have posted this observation well over a year ago is that on an engine that has had a steady diet of 30 weight for eg. for many thou's of miles and then a 50 weight is used, fuel economy will pummel.
Like when I had the ever-diminishing engine performance from 30 weight synthetic and first put in M-1 15-50...it was like I lost half the engine along with half the fuel economy to boot. My guess is that all the varnish/gummed up garbage from years/thou's of mi. of thin oil use resulted in constrictions which were then non-condusive to a thicker viscosity. This may be why some are confused and make statements like "thick oils suck". Well, yeah...they do when all your engine knows is 5-30.
So, I have concluded that to these nay-sayers to first clean out the garbage with auto-rx or similar before moving to such thicker viscosities. Otherwise, move up gradually or use diesel/ester-base oils (eg. Delvac or Redline) to clean things out first.
And IMO the cleanup "could take" just as many miles as it took to lay down the crap in the first play. ie. it's a beehatch to get things clean. That's why it's smarter to keep things clean in the first place. 3k OCI's or heavier weight synth. concurrent with extended OCI based on UOA's as a guide.
- Status
Similar threads
