Quote:
Wont a good GRP III, with appropriate OCIs, also keep your rings clean?
Any oil will, with appropriate OCI.
Wont a good GRP III, with appropriate OCIs, also keep your rings clean?
Any oil will, with appropriate OCI.
Switching to Synthetic, Yay or Nay?
- Thread starter Scott_AU
- Start date
- Status
Yes, I suppose you're right. I have always wondered about that though.
For a while, 4 years ago, i switched to mobil 1 5w 30 for my 95 neon.... everything was fine, until about 2 years and 12,000 miles later, 3 days after an oil change.. foud about half a quart of oil undeer the pan....mobil had cleaned everything up so my gaskets leaked. Replaced the rear main seal, oil pan and gasket(needed it) and still leaked a little, so went back to regular dino....
currently using valvoline 5w 30 synthetic, but this time, added a bottle of cd 2 oil stop leak...so far no leaks
so! i think you can, yes use synthetic, but!!! if leaks apper, gaskets need replace or use an engine stop leak additive. Then i think you should be set
currently using valvoline 5w 30 synthetic, but this time, added a bottle of cd 2 oil stop leak...so far no leaks
so! i think you can, yes use synthetic, but!!! if leaks apper, gaskets need replace or use an engine stop leak additive. Then i think you should be set
Originally Posted By: ARB1977
A clean engine is a happy engine. Either way it depends how often you want to be under the car changing oil.
My statements are just about what you posted there is no benefit using a syn oil as compared to dino oil if the SYN OIL IS CHANGED AT DINO OIL,OIL CHANGE INTERVALS. engines are plenty clean with dino when changed at proper intervals.
A clean engine is a happy engine. Either way it depends how often you want to be under the car changing oil.
My statements are just about what you posted there is no benefit using a syn oil as compared to dino oil if the SYN OIL IS CHANGED AT DINO OIL,OIL CHANGE INTERVALS. engines are plenty clean with dino when changed at proper intervals.
I have owned several vehicles past 100K using dino at 3-4K intervals and never had a major engine problem. I just have not seen enough evidence to convince me that the extra money is justified in everyday driving conditions. Extreme climates or extended drains are a different story.
Steve S, stick with your opinion. There are plenty here trying to sway theirs. I guess as long as it is done in a civil respectful manner for exchange of views.
Most OEM's for the vehicles I have owned have all recommended mineral oils with 5000km or 3months for severe duty or 10000km or 6months for normal use. Steve S is just reinforcing OEM's view in general.
Most OEM's for the vehicles I have owned have all recommended mineral oils with 5000km or 3months for severe duty or 10000km or 6months for normal use. Steve S is just reinforcing OEM's view in general.
Originally Posted By: mikemc
I have owned several vehicles past 100K using dino at 3-4K intervals and never had a major engine problem. I just have not seen enough evidence to convince me that the extra money is justified in everyday driving conditions. Extreme climates or extended drains are a different story.
Why are you wasting oil by changing oil at 3-4K intervals?
I have owned several vehicles past 100K using dino at 3-4K intervals and never had a major engine problem. I just have not seen enough evidence to convince me that the extra money is justified in everyday driving conditions. Extreme climates or extended drains are a different story.
Why are you wasting oil by changing oil at 3-4K intervals?
Can't see any reason to use a syn oil for my app.
Temps are not extreme, 10-90 F
Engine sees mostly normal service
Gonna stay with with Mobil Clean 5000 5w-30
every 5k with a new purolator filter.
This will more than keep my Hondas happy!
SS
Temps are not extreme, 10-90 F
Engine sees mostly normal service
Gonna stay with with Mobil Clean 5000 5w-30
every 5k with a new purolator filter.
This will more than keep my Hondas happy!
SS
Originally Posted By: tenderloin
I use it "just in case". Maybe a slight low/high temp advantage, plus less deposits.... For the relatively little difference in price, I buy myself a little more piece of mind....Which to me you can't put a price on...
I really hear that all the time as an arguement what is the just in case?
I use it "just in case". Maybe a slight low/high temp advantage, plus less deposits.... For the relatively little difference in price, I buy myself a little more piece of mind....Which to me you can't put a price on...
I really hear that all the time as an arguement what is the just in case?
Originally Posted By: Scott_AU
i have 87k on the car
i hope to gain better performance,effeciency, and lifetime out of my engine.
You will get that with regular oil.this isn't the 1960's GpII+ oils work well.
i have 87k on the car
i hope to gain better performance,effeciency, and lifetime out of my engine.
You will get that with regular oil.this isn't the 1960's GpII+ oils work well.
I hear you guys. I used to use synthetic just in case, too. Just in case the engine got too hot, or I didn't change it in time, and for the cold flow, and the better cleaning, and so that wear would be even less than with conventionals, and so on.
Then I joined BITOG and learned how to read UOAs and looked at them, eventually hundreds of them. And I was always rooting for the synthetics at first. I looked particularly closely at UOAs when the car was run in hot weather, or with lots of cold starts, or where there were problems with coolant or anything else, or where the poster said the engine was run hard or was modified, and so on.
In the end there was really no difference, at least not as far as I could tell. Conventionals run in hot summer weather with lots of stop-and-go driving posted great results, more often than not. Same with lots of cold starts, same with any kind of severe service you can think of. Eventually I had to admit that I could not see a single real advantage for synthetics in all the UOAs that I had looked at, and in fact very often guys would go from synthetics to conventionals and the results would actually improve.
In addition to that there was the real-world reality that the majority of truly high mileage engines I heard about were run on conventional oil, right up to the extreme examples such as the recent 1,000,000 mile Chevy. Sure there are more cars run on conventionals to begin with, so any automotive population should skew that way, but if there was an advantage to synthetics you would at least expect it to show up at those extremes, right? Apparently not. My ability to internally justify the extra expense of synthetics was evaporating.
I switched my own cars from synthetics to conventionals, and of course noticed no difference, and I would say that my current view tends to be that there is a) no provable real-world advantage to synthetics, and b) if there is some advantage that is not provable by UOA or other objective method, it is small enough that it makes no difference AT ALL to how long your engine will last, and to compound the unlikelihood that synthetics are worthwhile, it is rare that the lifespan of the engine will be a limiting factor in the lifespan of the car anyway.
I do believe that there are potential advantages to synthetics but they are not the ones being exploited by the majority of users. Long OCIs, for example, but to be truly cost-effective they have to be on the order of 15k+ miles. Improvements in efficiency due to greater film strengths could be another, but to take advantage of it you need to run a less viscous oil than you otherwise would, as AEHaas has done by running 0W-20 in a variety of cars. I have seen very few people doing that. And truly extreme conditions are another, although I don't really buy that such conditions are common: for example, most ordinary turbos seem to run perfectly well with conventionals.
Then I joined BITOG and learned how to read UOAs and looked at them, eventually hundreds of them. And I was always rooting for the synthetics at first. I looked particularly closely at UOAs when the car was run in hot weather, or with lots of cold starts, or where there were problems with coolant or anything else, or where the poster said the engine was run hard or was modified, and so on.
In the end there was really no difference, at least not as far as I could tell. Conventionals run in hot summer weather with lots of stop-and-go driving posted great results, more often than not. Same with lots of cold starts, same with any kind of severe service you can think of. Eventually I had to admit that I could not see a single real advantage for synthetics in all the UOAs that I had looked at, and in fact very often guys would go from synthetics to conventionals and the results would actually improve.
In addition to that there was the real-world reality that the majority of truly high mileage engines I heard about were run on conventional oil, right up to the extreme examples such as the recent 1,000,000 mile Chevy. Sure there are more cars run on conventionals to begin with, so any automotive population should skew that way, but if there was an advantage to synthetics you would at least expect it to show up at those extremes, right? Apparently not. My ability to internally justify the extra expense of synthetics was evaporating.
I switched my own cars from synthetics to conventionals, and of course noticed no difference, and I would say that my current view tends to be that there is a) no provable real-world advantage to synthetics, and b) if there is some advantage that is not provable by UOA or other objective method, it is small enough that it makes no difference AT ALL to how long your engine will last, and to compound the unlikelihood that synthetics are worthwhile, it is rare that the lifespan of the engine will be a limiting factor in the lifespan of the car anyway.
I do believe that there are potential advantages to synthetics but they are not the ones being exploited by the majority of users. Long OCIs, for example, but to be truly cost-effective they have to be on the order of 15k+ miles. Improvements in efficiency due to greater film strengths could be another, but to take advantage of it you need to run a less viscous oil than you otherwise would, as AEHaas has done by running 0W-20 in a variety of cars. I have seen very few people doing that. And truly extreme conditions are another, although I don't really buy that such conditions are common: for example, most ordinary turbos seem to run perfectly well with conventionals.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
You may pick up.5 to 1 mpg with the synthetic vs. dino. Do the math and you will find it may not be more costly to run the synthetic.
I don't think so with the last few oil designations. I have never been able to get the numbers to pay off using syn oil for automobiles light trucks .The convience of once a year 10,000 mile oil changes can make syn worth the cost.
You may pick up.5 to 1 mpg with the synthetic vs. dino. Do the math and you will find it may not be more costly to run the synthetic.
I don't think so with the last few oil designations. I have never been able to get the numbers to pay off using syn oil for automobiles light trucks .The convience of once a year 10,000 mile oil changes can make syn worth the cost.
Very interesting glennc. You offer a good argument.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
I noticed I got about 1 mpg better with syn. So with gas at $3 and driving 7k per year, I may save 16 gallons which is $48. Of course,"your mpg may vary."
It sounds like you get about 20mpg, which means a 1mpg improvement is about 5%. The internet is filled with claims of mileage increases like that and even more, but if I recall correctly instrumented testing more typically finds differences on the order of 0.5% - 2% from differences between motor oils. Differences in engine friction might be more than that but of course engine friction is only a part of overall drag. I could be wrong on those numbers but couldn't find any good data with a quick search.
Also it's got to be extremely imprecise trying to measure mileage differences between OCIs, because so many other variables change on a seasonal or similar basis. Tire type and wear, type of driving done and weather will all typically have more than a 1mpg effect through a given year, for example, so parsing the difference created by the oil itself is going to be tough.
If you're right then obviously your results would make a slam-dunk case for synthetic. I have never noticed an actual mpg difference from different oils in my cars even though I have looked for it. Nor from fuel system cleaners, air filters, tune-ups or any other such things, even when I've wanted to. Still, a big part of the reason I'm going to try Red Line in my E30 is to see if there is a gain in mileage, although I expect that for one to occur I would need to run a lower viscosity than before.
As you know there is an API "Energy Conserving" spec, which is met by conventional oils of certain grades just as universally as by synthetics of the same grades. If synthetics really gave better mileage I would expect an "Energy Conserving II" spec at a higher level that only synthetics could achieve, as well as more emphasis from the oil industry and vehicle manufacturers on synthetics, for example a near-universal adoption of synthetics as factory fills, given that small mpg gains are aggressively pursued as a result of CAFE standards.
I could be wrong and if I am then I will switch back to synthetics, but as far as I can tell the only way you can gain economy benefits from oil, compared to what the industry standards already give you in today's friction-modified oils, is to switch to an oil of a lower grade.
My humble opinion,
I noticed I got about 1 mpg better with syn. So with gas at $3 and driving 7k per year, I may save 16 gallons which is $48. Of course,"your mpg may vary."
It sounds like you get about 20mpg, which means a 1mpg improvement is about 5%. The internet is filled with claims of mileage increases like that and even more, but if I recall correctly instrumented testing more typically finds differences on the order of 0.5% - 2% from differences between motor oils. Differences in engine friction might be more than that but of course engine friction is only a part of overall drag. I could be wrong on those numbers but couldn't find any good data with a quick search.
Also it's got to be extremely imprecise trying to measure mileage differences between OCIs, because so many other variables change on a seasonal or similar basis. Tire type and wear, type of driving done and weather will all typically have more than a 1mpg effect through a given year, for example, so parsing the difference created by the oil itself is going to be tough.
If you're right then obviously your results would make a slam-dunk case for synthetic. I have never noticed an actual mpg difference from different oils in my cars even though I have looked for it. Nor from fuel system cleaners, air filters, tune-ups or any other such things, even when I've wanted to. Still, a big part of the reason I'm going to try Red Line in my E30 is to see if there is a gain in mileage, although I expect that for one to occur I would need to run a lower viscosity than before.
As you know there is an API "Energy Conserving" spec, which is met by conventional oils of certain grades just as universally as by synthetics of the same grades. If synthetics really gave better mileage I would expect an "Energy Conserving II" spec at a higher level that only synthetics could achieve, as well as more emphasis from the oil industry and vehicle manufacturers on synthetics, for example a near-universal adoption of synthetics as factory fills, given that small mpg gains are aggressively pursued as a result of CAFE standards.
I could be wrong and if I am then I will switch back to synthetics, but as far as I can tell the only way you can gain economy benefits from oil, compared to what the industry standards already give you in today's friction-modified oils, is to switch to an oil of a lower grade.
My humble opinion,
Thanks for you response. I was just letting the Honda dealer do the oil changes so, who knows, they could have been using 5w-30 so when I started using 5w-20 synthetic the vicsosity change could account for the difference. I just happened to get slightly better mileage with the synthetic immediately. Good math skills, 20-21 is correct.
and for the one hundreth time there is no such thing as RING PACKS
- Status