T6 rorella 5w40 in my 01 7.3 power stroke

Status
Not open for further replies.
"It's the internet dude" Really so I guess on that thin justification it gives someone the right to brow beat anyone who dares post a UOA on synthetic HDEO or posts that they get good performance from using a synthetic product? That's your internet "dude" it ain't mine and that's why I chose not to post results here anymore.

"spew the facts, point - counter point!" Hey your buddy does that very well and like he says it's right to brow beat people for making dumb decisions (at least in his opinion). I couldn't agree more he has a right, just like I have a right to tell him people are growing sick of that one-trick pony he trots out everytime and that I think he's an a__ for brow beating people to make his point. Is it just me or do other people respect dnewtons knowledge and contributions but are getting a little tired of the same old schtick?

"Only 17 posts?" Oh so that's how you judge the validity of what someone posts? So you've got what, 620 posts so you must be at least what 36 - 37 times smarter than me? The only problem with that logic is that when I review your recent posts an inordinate number of them follow a post from dnewton
and they say in effect "yeah, what he says man, so in your face"
That's very deep!

But then I wouldn't expect much more from someone who's signature line says they are a disciple of dnewtons teachings. Perhaps you should change it to attack chihuahua for dnewton when someone says the Emperor has no clothes?
Get a life Bambam and move on with it, or is it really true when people say if you can't have an impact in the real world at least try and look important on the internet?
 
Atta boy ! When all else fails belittle and berate.

I'm not sticking up for dnewton, nor am I his attack dog, I'm trying to stick up for you in a way and get you to defend yourself and your decision(s).

Yeah in a way the internet does allow someone to brow beat you for something you post,like it or not if it doesn't break the rules it could go on forever!

I never said that someone's smarts was dependent on the number of posts they have,did I?

Seems a lot of my posts recently are following one of yours, right ? So are we buddies, or am I your lap dog?

I shall change my signature just for you, so you have won an internet battle! One for you !

Now justify your oil useage , so we can challenge the rhetoric and same old shtick !

Check that I'm leaving my sig alone as I have student of dnewton, as I thought.
 
Last edited:
"Now justify your oil useage"

It's comments like this that make my case better than I could ever possibly do.

Who the H are you to sit in judgement of my oil useage and then demand I have to justify it to you???!!!

It's attitudes like yours that turn people off to this forum. Look at the trend in the number of postings under some of the categories here over the past couple of years. I'm guessing you'll see they are declining. Is it attitudes like yours or mine that contribute to that? Of course I'll let you be the judge of that since you've taken on that role and everything people do from the type of oil they use to the analysis results has to be justified to you and judged by your selected criteria. If that wasn't such a sad reflection of your character it would be laughable.

I belong to many different forums on wide range of issues and interests and no where else do I run into clowns like you.

I'm so done with this place
 
Originally Posted By: CdnMax
"Now justify your oil useage"

It's comments like this that make my case better than I could ever possibly do.

Who the H are you to sit in judgement of my oil useage and then demand I have to justify it to you???!!!

It's attitudes like yours that turn people off to this forum. Look at the trend in the number of postings under some of the categories here over the past couple of years. I'm guessing you'll see they are declining. Is it attitudes like yours or mine that contribute to that? Of course I'll let you be the judge of that since you've taken on that role and everything people do from the type of oil they use to the analysis results has to be justified to you and judged by your selected criteria. If that wasn't such a sad reflection of your character it would be laughable.

I belong to many different forums on wide range of issues and interests and no where else do I run into clowns like you.

I'm so done with this place


All I asked was for you to challenge the rhetoric you so adamantly hate, asking to prove someones ideology or line of thinking wrong. Now I'm a bad person with weak character and the ultimate demise of internet forums !

I'm not demanding and you certainly don't have to justify it, but in the spirit of friendly debate I thought it would be interesting to hear your thoughts and the data you've collected?
 
I'm here to tell you that you don't have to prove anything to me or anyone else here. There are plenty of knowledgable guys here who have backrounds in lubrication and are highly educated in this field( Dnewton not being one of those). Guys like Doug Hillary who dont just log on to spew stuff they read off of their iphone etc. He will only give you information based on his extensive fleet data which encompasses over a million miles of UOA's and tear downs of several different diesel platforms. And he definately wont bash you for your stance on synthetics or bypass filters as he has proven BOTH do in fact work when used in the right application. Dont be turned off to this site because of a few guys whom you dont care for. There are plenty of people here I dipise and yet I keep on comin back. Cheers!
 
Originally Posted By: CdnMax
Wow dnewton3 you continue to trot out that synthetic Vs dino oil tirade. Isn’t it about time you left that “one trick pony” in the barn?

I mean you bring it out time, after time, after time, after time ………. in fact if I wrote the word time for every instance you’ve taken the opportunity to regale the unwashed masses with your opinion on this issue my post alone would be multiple pages long.


The reason he does this, although I cannot speak for him, is because we always get new posters who "trot out" that synthetic is better than dino, without any definition as to what better is. They rely on the "cheap insurance" argument, or "better cold starts" (while living in Florida and sticking to a 10w-30 in synthetic), and so forth.

If one's vehicle requires synthetic according to the manufacturer, by all means, use it. If one wishes to extended OCIs and do so in a reasoned fashion, by all means, use synthetic. If one has a known sludger (or a vehicle with some other issue) and does not wish to shorten OCIs absurdly, again, use a synthetic. If one's vehicle requires something in the 40 grades, but it's going to be used in real winter conditions, again, by all means use synthetic since that's the only way you'll realistically find a 0w-40 or a 5w-40.

Some synthetic choices are less than optimal, though. In my G, is could use 5w-30 synthetic. For my warranty mandated 3750 mile OCIs, it's simply not worth it. I could get a 0w-30 for enhanced cold starts. Considering it's either in my heated garage or my heated business, it's really no more than a "nice to have" issue. So, I'd wait until I extend OCIs, or maybe stick with conventional. For my old F-150, switching to synthetic with fuel dilution would be a waste, in my view.

The old Audi preferred a 40 grade (less consumption, and factory recommended). I tried 5w-40 year round. It was great, but expensive. So, I settled on 15w-40 in the summer and 10w-30 or 5w-30 in the winter. That was much cheaper.

That's why the debate comes up. Sure, people are free to use whatever they want. Some people undoubtedly roll their eyes at my use of PYB in my G. I roll my eyes at people who use synthetics in vehicles that don't require them, all for 3,000 mile OCIs.

People have the right to buy and use what they want. People also have the right to scoff at others' choices, for better or for worse.
 
Originally Posted By: CdnMax
"Now justify your oil useage"


That comment doesn't bother me, like it does you. I consider it a challenge. One can either justify the rationale, or one cannot. Note that one doesn't have to justify it; one can merely say stuff it, and that one will use what one wants.

Originally Posted By: AzFireGuy79
Guys like Doug Hillary who dont just log on to spew stuff they read off of their iphone etc. He will only give you information based on his extensive fleet data which encompasses over a million miles of UOA's and tear downs of several different diesel platforms. And he definately wont bash you for your stance on synthetics or bypass filters as he has proven BOTH do in fact work when used in the right application.


But, Doug won't buy into the argument, for example, that 3,000 mile OCIs on synthetic are of any benefit for the "average, vanilla" engine out there, either. He follows specifications carefully and does use extended OCIs.

I've got millions of miles of fleet management experience, too, using solely conventional PCMOs on extended drains and with occasional teardowns. I would not have had "better" results with synthetics.
 
If you take the time to read my initial posting that created this issue you'd see I merely posted a UOA of the oil I was using at the time (still using). I made no claims of superiority, inferiority, better this, worse that, cheaper, more expensive, etc.
If I were to trot out any of the claims you talk about it can be argued that I was fair game. If you review my post all I did was post results and ask for comments on the parameters reported.
Instead I got sucked into someone's vortex and became a plank on their soapbox. I was told how much I paid for the products I was using although the poster was absolutely clueless on those details in my case. I was also told how long I was going to keep that oil in crankcase. How the poster would know that information when I don't even have that answer is beyond me. That oil is still in the crankcase by the way.
The poster has repeated on more than one occasion that he had every right to do what he did. I've never disputed that. I've also stated that I have every right to call him an [censored] for what he did. I also have the right to not participate in a forum where people conduct themselves in that manner.
I would like to caution you though to not to confuse new posters with uneducated posters. There doesn't have to be any correlation between the two.
 
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
How would you know without actually using it for millions of miles? Valvoline has shown that you could save money using synthetic and is willing to back it up with a guarantee.


Admittedly, these days, that might be possible. I was doing 6,000 mile OCIs on QS conventional at $1 or under per litre at the time. Back then, synthetics were over $5 per litre. These days, a price of double is a good rule of thumb, and double the OCI is definitely feasible. A 30,000 mile OCI would likely have been a bit of a stretch in those days.

Additionally, the link you provided is for a 40 weight HDEO. The fleet consisted of passenger cars, all running PCMO. While it could be argued that going from a 30 weight PCMO to a synthetic one (i.e. something like M1 AFE) could result in enhanced mileage, it would be difficult to claim that when going from a 30 weight conventional to a 40 weight synthetic.

Aside from that, if I were running a diesel these days, I'd certainly be tempted to use a synthetic HDEO if I was unable to plug in or use the heated garage. Switching viscosities for seasons isn't terribly attractive to me (unless I was on a terribly short OCI anyhow), and a 5w-40 or 0w-40 HDEO certainly could be advantageous. That being said, the cold start advantages of synthetic don't really apply to my situation. My primary vehicle is always in a heated environment. My old F-150, which rarely moves and is intended more for winter in the first place, gets the magnetic oil pan heater as needed.

Originally Posted By: CdnMax
I would like to caution you though to not to confuse new posters with uneducated posters. There doesn't have to be any correlation between the two.


I certainly wouldn't want to confuse the two. My comment about people coming in with their 3,000 mile OCIs on synthetics and claiming it's a superior maintenance regimen was not directed at you. It was more of a general statement, and I'm sure you've seen people make claims that synthetic is better for short OCIs, that synthetic is an absolute must have for turbos, for cold weather, or for car X that isn't actually speced for it.

But you did ask for comments. You certainly got them. You got some honest commentary, there. There are two sides to the coin when it comes to commentary. You can get it from both barrels from someone like dnewton3 with respect to your maintenance regimen. Or, other posters (including some of our posters with the most expertise) who could provide commentary get tired of doing so because they have to repeat the same thing over and over, debunk the various myths over and over, or, worse, get told they know nothing at all about the topic.

I'm glad that some posters keep us on our toes, even with withering commentary. There are many times someone comes up with something that's extreme overkill or OCD on this board, asking for commentary. There are many times I simply roll my eyes and say to myself, "Why bother?" That might save me some grief and repetition, but it certainly doesn't help someone who might benefit.

Even I get tempted by synthetics from time to time. There's no doubt that we see some pretty impressive properties in most of them. That being said, I've sent many cars to the junkyard that had clean, great running engines using only conventional with hundreds of thousands of miles on them, but have simply lost the battle when it comes to rust, interior wear and tear, electrical issues, suspension, transmissions, and so forth.
 
Doug Hillary would be the first to tell you that most people here have the ability to do what they want, when they want, with any product they want. I don't know that it's possible for me to disagree in any manner with that.

But, he'd also the one to tell you that most people here have no idea how to use a UOA. Not read one; most folks can read. I'm talking about using one fully in a 'PREVENTITIVE' maintnenacne program. You see, he (and I) understand how and why condemnation limits are set, and how to use a fluid up to its full potential to maximize your investment. He runs a very broad, large fleet program. He has commented many times that soot is typically the criteria that limits his OCIs. Certainly, it's not some short duration of the odometer; I can assure you of that. He's also stated that both conventional and synthetics can be a good choice, but only within the context of using any product to its full potential.

Garak, who also runs a large fleet program, has also told us that synthetics do not pay out in many circumstances. They ceraintly can be made to do so, but short-to-moderate OCIs are not the conditions that contribute to that being true.

I, with a decade of running industrial maintenance programs including lube and coolant analysis experiences, am telling you all that in the specific manner of the OPs quest (dino vs syn in a 5k mile OCI in a 7.3L PSD), will NOT see any specific "benefit". I also have many years of statistical process quality control; I'm a numbers geek now. I have more than 500 UOAs in my personal database; most of them diesel HDEO related. I don't claim to be an expert, but I'm confident I have a lot more experience in making relevant decisions in this manner than people that "hobby" this topic, or build up trucks with tuners and aftermarket turbos.

Further, we do have tribologist and chemists here. But many of them don't have the direct, real world experience that Doug, Garak and I have. In these entire 7 pages, I have yet to hear one of them pipe up and say "Yeah - synthetic in a PSD for 5k miles is a great idea; it'll result in a hugely significant wear reduction." If I missed it, then please edify me; show me where one of our reknowned chemists have chimed in to say how great an idea that would be, or otherwise discredit my position.

I've seen plenty of silly marketing hype touted. I've seen a member post how great a syn is, when the marketing hype example compared a modern syn to a six-level lower API dino oil, as if that were somehow a reasonable comparison. I've referenced two recent UOAs that are about as nearly identical as people would want to find, under conditions that are about as similar as anyone could imagine, only to be told they're not relevant.


OK - let's put all the bovine poo aside. I believe in putting my money where my mouth is ...
I'll offer to pay for one dino sump load and one dino UOA for the OP at 5k miles. AZsynthetic or CdnMax can offer to pay for a RL OCI and UOA at 5k miles. We will hold as many crieteria constant as possible (lab, duration, etc). Whichever UOA shows "better" results, relative to the cost structure ratio, wins and gets the money back. We could have the money held in escrow by a impartial third party member here.

What say you? Interested in "proving" your claims, gentlemen?
Silver1 - interested in finding out the "truth" to synthetics?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dnewton3

I'll offer to pay for one dino sump load and one dino UOA for the OP at 5k miles. AZsynthetic or CdnMax can offer to pay for a RL OCI and UOA at 5k miles. We will hold as many crieteria constant as possible (lab, duration, etc). Whichever UOA shows "better" results, relative to the cost structure ratio, wins and gets the money back. We could have the money held in escrow by a impartial third party member here.


You make me laugh, thanks.

In my line of work, your proposed experiment would be laughed right out of the meeting room and funding denied. Give me any truck and any oil and I can generate a terrible UOA in 5K miles. I prefer to stick with controlled industry standard tests already done by the oil and car manufacturers.

A better idea would be for you to write to Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota, etc. and ask them which oil is better for your vehicle. I got a hundred bucks it is synthetic.
 
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic


A better idea would be for you to write to Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota, etc. and ask them which oil is better for your vehicle. I got a hundred bucks it is synthetic.

How many decades is it going to take to see any potential benefit with a 7.3 being driven 5K a year?
 
I laugh at your fear of a swayed UOA ! How could we control anything if it's another persons vehicle???

Ask Ford,GM , Chrysler the best place to have your vehicle serviced, think they'll say at your local dealer? hmmmm Think they'll say use geniune factory parts??

I think the challenge is fair, no control and nothing to gain other than data.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: hatt

How many decades is it going to take to see any potential benefit with a 7.3 being driven 5K a year?


Who cares? We are talking about 5K oil change interval not 5K per year.
 
Originally Posted By: Bambam
How could we control anything if it's another persons vehicle???

Ask Ford,GM , Chrysler the best place to have your vehicle serviced, think they'll say at your local dealer? hmmmm Think they'll say use geniune factory parts??

I think the challenge is fair, no control and nothing to gain other than data.


How do you know the test is fair if you cannot control the test environment and parameters? You are obviously not an engineer.

Ford Motorcraft does have both mineral and full synthetic diesel oil. Don't you think they would know which is better?

http://www.fordparts.com/Products/Chemicals-MotorOils.aspx
 
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Doug Hillary would be the first to tell you that most people here have the ability to do what they want, when they want, with any product they want. I don't know that it's possible for me to disagree in any manner with that.

But, he'd also the one to tell you that most people here have no idea how to use a UOA. Not read one; most folks can read. I'm talking about using one fully in a 'PREVENTITIVE' maintnenacne program. You see, he (and I) understand how and why condemnation limits are set, and how to use a fluid up to its full potential to maximize your investment. He runs a very broad, large fleet program. He has commented many times that soot is typically the criteria that limits his OCIs. Certainly, it's not some short duration of the odometer; I can assure you of that. He's also stated that both conventional and synthetics can be a good choice, but only within the context of using any product to its full potential.

Garak, who also runs a large fleet program, has also told us that synthetics do not pay out in many circumstances. They ceraintly can be made to do so, but short-to-moderate OCIs are not the conditions that contribute to that being true.

I, with a decade of running industrial maintenance programs including lube and coolant analysis experiences, am telling you all that in the specific manner of the OPs quest (dino vs syn in a 5k mile OCI in a 7.3L PSD), will NOT see any specific "benefit". I also have many years of statistical process quality control; I'm a numbers geek now. I have more than 500 UOAs in my personal database; most of them diesel HDEO related. I don't claim to be an expert, but I'm confident I have a lot more experience in making relevant decisions in this manner than people that "hobby" this topic, or build up trucks with tuners and aftermarket turbos.

Further, we do have tribologist and chemists here. But many of them don't have the direct, real world experience that Doug, Garak and I have. In these entire 7 pages, I have yet to hear one of them pipe up and say "Yeah - synthetic in a PSD for 5k miles is a great idea; it'll result in a hugely significant wear reduction." If I missed it, then please edify me; show me where one of our reknowned chemists have chimed in to say how great an idea that would be, or otherwise discredit my position.

I've seen plenty of silly marketing hype touted. I've seen a member post how great a syn is, when the marketing hype example compared a modern syn to a six-level lower API dino oil, as if that were somehow a reasonable comparison. I've referenced two recent UOAs that are about as nearly identical as people would want to find, under conditions that are about as similar as anyone could imagine, only to be told they're not relevant.


OK - let's put all the bovine poo aside. I believe in putting my money where my mouth is ...
I'll offer to pay for one dino sump load and one dino UOA for the OP at 5k miles. AZsynthetic or CdnMax can offer to pay for a RL OCI and UOA at 5k miles. We will hold as many crieteria constant as possible (lab, duration, etc). Whichever UOA shows "better" results, relative to the cost structure ratio, wins and gets the money back. We could have the money held in escrow by a impartial third party member here.

What say you? Interested in "proving" your claims, gentlemen?
Silver1 - interested in finding out the "truth" to synthetics?



Iam all in, this is some good stuff! OP here.
 
Originally Posted By: azsynthetic
Originally Posted By: Bambam
How could we control anything if it's another persons vehicle???

Ask Ford,GM , Chrysler the best place to have your vehicle serviced, think they'll say at your local dealer? hmmmm Think they'll say use geniune factory parts??

I think the challenge is fair, no control and nothing to gain other than data.


How do you know the test is fair if you cannot control the test environment and parameters? You are obviously not an engineer.

Ford Motorcraft does have both mineral and full synthetic diesel oil. Don't you think they would know which is better?

http://www.fordparts.com/Products/Chemicals-MotorOils.aspx


OMG you have to be an engineer to conduct a test??? You sir are unreal !
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Shannonwilkerson
  • Locked
Oil and filter
Replies
5
Views
1K
MSCH
M
2024 6.7 Cummins - Looking for an oil recommended
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
OLEJOE
P
Rotella T6 high oil consumption in small tractors
Replies
7
Views
4K
Olympus
J
Oil recommendation - Winter/Summer L5P
2
Replies
25
Views
6K
CleanSump
F
F-350 gasser with 388K oil question
Replies
9
Views
884
JohnnyJohnson
Back
Top