switching to synthetic at 140,000
- Thread starter mdwebneck
- Start date
- Status
Okay.
Anyway, I agree with the other guy, a double ARX treatment would be a good thing.
Anyway, I agree with the other guy, a double ARX treatment would be a good thing.
I wouldn't switch to synthetic at 140K. Makes no sense to do so this late in the engine's life. If you wanted to get the benefits of a synthetic oil, the switch should've been made 100K ago in my opinion. *Most* 4.0s are on borrowed time per se after 200K anyways. Just stay with whatever oil and filter you have been using and call it good.
The benefit of using synthetic is the cold weather. Also the cleaning effect, may not be as good as a ester (ARX) but it still cleans. I run synthetic in my vehicles in the winter for both reasons. If you do decide to use it though I think I would change the filter and add a quart after 2000 miles or so.
if your goal is indeed to get another car in only 60k then my suggestion is either stick to what your doing now, or use a High Mileage Oil... if you really want to get into blends or syns
Go blends, and expect it to be cleaning and burning off (potentially) the first several oci.... it will likely get much darker a lot faster and toast the oil sooner than expected... the burn is because of cleaning and reseating and can be expected...
60K is nothing for a normal name brand oil if the vehicle has been well maintained, you don't need to worry about it yet... start with your new ride.
In the mean time however...
I suggest you experiment with
gas suppliments and the like and see how they affect your existing ride...
If you were going to keep her, I'd say just do it and dont be shy, your call as a syn or a blend.
I believe the blends offer the most benefits for the buck.
Go blends, and expect it to be cleaning and burning off (potentially) the first several oci.... it will likely get much darker a lot faster and toast the oil sooner than expected... the burn is because of cleaning and reseating and can be expected...
60K is nothing for a normal name brand oil if the vehicle has been well maintained, you don't need to worry about it yet... start with your new ride.
In the mean time however...
I suggest you experiment with
gas suppliments and the like and see how they affect your existing ride...
If you were going to keep her, I'd say just do it and dont be shy, your call as a syn or a blend.
I believe the blends offer the most benefits for the buck.
Rotella T 5w40 is a Group III HDEO synthetic that works really well in the Jeep 4.0 engines. Do a couple of ARX cycles and then go with that. That's my recommendation.
As far as lubrication, unless you are bored I'd stick to what you have successfully used so far, except use a filter with a better reputation here.
If you are bored you can still save your money: Try Havoline conventional in the same viscosity you have been using.
If you are bored and feel like spending extra money on it then ignore me, there are better suggestions to that end already.
If you are bored you can still save your money: Try Havoline conventional in the same viscosity you have been using.
If you are bored and feel like spending extra money on it then ignore me, there are better suggestions to that end already.
*Most* 4.0s are on borrowed time per se after 200K anyways. Just stay with whatever oil and filter you have been using and "call it good."
I don't think so. I have several friends with 4.0's approaching 300K and going strong.
I don't think so. I have several friends with 4.0's approaching 300K and going strong.
I also disagree with this statement. I switched my '90 Saab 900 (2.0L 16v I4) over to syn at 120k mi. That was 6 yrs ago, & the engine's now up to 185k mi. I fully expect this engine to go at least 300k mi at this point. The way I look at it, it's never too late to start getting better protection into your engine.
At the time, I simply switched from 3k mi OCIs on conventional to 10k mi OCIs on syn. Today, I'd definitely run at least one (extended) A-Rx clean/rinse before switching over any vehicle at that mileage.
MarkC-What's all been replaced on those engines going on 300K? They most certainly are not unmolested, factory equipped engines anymore. How bad is the piston slap and how bad are those lifters and rockers rapping/tapping away? I'm sure they have approached diesel-like noise levels, especially when cold. I'm sure those heads could use a valve job/respring/reseal as well if not already done. I'd like to see what the cylinder bores spec out at considering the 4.0s puke iron. It's all relative to how you perceive a engine lasting I suppose, but at 200K plus, ANY engine is essentially on borrowed time. That's not to mean it will blow up tomorrow, just that mechanically it has lived a full life per se and that some type of failure shouldn't come as a surprise. With all that said, I hope I'm one of those guys that can get 200K plus out of my current 4.0.
99:
http://www.hondabeat.com/highmiles.php
I disagree. I might not have disagreed before I owned a Honda but I figure most Honda engines should be able to achieve 200,000 miles with regular proper maintenaince. I have just over 200K on mine and at the following link, that qty of miles is hardly a noticeable achievement:
http://www.hondabeat.com/highmiles.php
All things being equal,if anything your vehicle should run cooler rather than hotter.
So I would say the truth is inverse to whomever you heard that from.
Conventional oil and synthetic are ALMOST 100% perfectly compatible. There are of course exceptions. I have been a Mobil 1 user for a few miles. (743,000) As a longer term Mobil 1 user, I would ask, what are you really trying to accomplish on the switch?
Specifically 1. longer/ shorter OCI's? 2. Less/more wear? 3. better/worse mpg? 4. why now? especially after so many miles with conventional oil? 5. what does better worse really mean to you? 6. etc.
If I were to make the transition I would do auto RX cycle/s and or FP/LP cycle/s. Conventional oil is the mmost prone to sludging if you have an engine that has sludge.
99,
A co-worker's 89 is at about 280K and it doesn't sound any louder than a new one, he hasn't had to replace anything on the engine itself.
My own 96 has 112K on it, and it still runs as good as when it was new. It's not "puking Iron" the last UOA showed 14 ppm at 3001 miles, or about 4.6 ppm/1K. Not bad. No weird sounds, no piston slap, nothing. I ahve replaced nothing except the serpentine belt and the )2 sensors--aside from normal maintenence such as oil, plugs, coolant, brakes, etc. When these guys go, it's usually nothing to do with engine wear.
A co-worker's 89 is at about 280K and it doesn't sound any louder than a new one, he hasn't had to replace anything on the engine itself.
My own 96 has 112K on it, and it still runs as good as when it was new. It's not "puking Iron" the last UOA showed 14 ppm at 3001 miles, or about 4.6 ppm/1K. Not bad. No weird sounds, no piston slap, nothing. I ahve replaced nothing except the serpentine belt and the )2 sensors--aside from normal maintenence such as oil, plugs, coolant, brakes, etc. When these guys go, it's usually nothing to do with engine wear.
If you have leaks already its going to get worse when switching, if you dont give it a shot and see what happens.
Good engine design and good maintenence habits probably have more to do with long engine life than using a particular oil. Keep doing what you're doing.
thanks guys,
I do know that using a higher octane fuel helps my fuel economy and I generally dump at least one full tankful of 93 per OCI.
All said, I have decided to start with a synthetic blend for a few OCIs and see how it effects the performance and go from there.
Does anybody have any experience regarding premium oil filters? brands/partnums?
I do know that using a higher octane fuel helps my fuel economy and I generally dump at least one full tankful of 93 per OCI.
All said, I have decided to start with a synthetic blend for a few OCIs and see how it effects the performance and go from there.
Does anybody have any experience regarding premium oil filters? brands/partnums?
MarkC-Are those engines still on the original fuel injectors? The older 4.0s up to late 99/early 00 used junk injectors that perform horribly when they get some miles on them. The first 4.0s used notoriously bad/dangerous injectors. Anyways, if the injectors didn't leak externally, they would leak internally and just load up the oil with gas over time. That's not good for cylinder and ring wear. I've been around 4.0s since my I got my first new Jeep in 93 and I do agree that they seemingly "run forever" but they won't do it without attention and they will need a full or partial rebuild somewhere down the line. The 4.0 is a great engine, one of the best of all time, but it is not invincible. Good luck with yours.
- Status