Trying to consolidate oils

[JohnnyJohnson]

Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by MoPowa

Also the tracker has about 260k on the odometer, and the jeep is starting to rack up some high miles as well. Haven't noticed any major loss of compression or major oil loss, but these are getting up there in age/miles.

Have to say I'm impressed you have that Tracker still on the road! 👠Wasn't aware that they could rack up that many miles.


Old buddy had one and Jerry got over 300 K out of his it was still running when he got rid of it.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by MoPowa

Also the tracker has about 260k on the odometer, and the jeep is starting to rack up some high miles as well. Haven't noticed any major loss of compression or major oil loss, but these are getting up there in age/miles.

Have to say I'm impressed you have that Tracker still on the road! 👠Wasn't aware that they could rack up that many miles.


Old buddy had one and Jerry got over 300 K out of his it was still running when he got rid of it.

Great little engine I guess..was that a fully made GM (GM mfg the Geo right?) engine in there?? Some of those 2L i4's from that era were great little engines.

 

[MoPowa]

Thanks again everyone! This has been a great help! I would love to have a larger selection of oil on hand, but with a move across the country coming up soon, then another move again about 6 months after that, I have to keep things pretty lean

 

[MoPowa]

I'm not entirely sure about the original builder/engineer's of the motor. I believe it was Suzuki, all the emissions info, vacuum line diagrams... under the hood are labeled Suzuki. The ownership and who built what gets pretty murky pretty quick in the late 80's to 90's Suzuki/Geo/GM/Chevy vehicles.

I have been very impressed actually with these little motors. They don't put out much power at all (60 and 80 hp) and was concerned initially that they would be stressed to the point of failure. I can say that they definitely do get driven hard, it's pretty much pedal to the floor constant just to keep a 60mph pace (especially with the 1.3 liter), but they handle it astonishingly well. We just took off the valve cover on both of them and adjusted valve lash, and there was no, I'm talking 0 sludge at all, just some varnish. A lot of good engineering went into these
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
Originally Posted by Mad_Hatter
Originally Posted by MoPowa

Also the tracker has about 260k on the odometer, and the jeep is starting to rack up some high miles as well. Haven't noticed any major loss of compression or major oil loss, but these are getting up there in age/miles.

Have to say I'm impressed you have that Tracker still on the road! 👠Wasn't aware that they could rack up that many miles.


Old buddy had one and Jerry got over 300 K out of his it was still running when he got rid of it.

Great little engine I guess..was that a fully made GM (GM mfg the Geo right?) engine in there?? Some of those 2L i4's from that era were great little engines.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by MoPowa
I'm not entirely sure about the original builder/engineer's of the motor. I believe it was Suzuki, all the emissions info, vacuum line diagrams... under the hood are labeled Suzuki. The ownership and who built what gets pretty murky pretty quick in the late 80's to 90's Suzuki/Geo/GM/Chevy vehicles.

I have been very impressed actually with these little motors. They don't put out much power at all (60 and 80 hp) and was concerned initially that they would be stressed to the point of failure. I can say that they definitely do get driven hard, it's pretty much pedal to the floor constant just to keep a 60mph pace (especially with the 1.3 liter), but they handle it astonishingly well. We just took off the valve cover on both of them and adjusted valve lash, and there was no, I'm talking 0 sludge at all, just some varnish. A lot of good engineering went into these[quote=

Yeah I had a early 90's Camry with an i4 and that thing was virtually bomb proof. You could be right on the Suzuki engine thing.. wasn't the Samurai a very similar build to the Tracker?? And to this day I see the occasional Samurai on the road. Guys up my way actually like to 4 wheel them. They're a relatively cheap project...

 

[MoPowa]

Your spot on madhatter, the tracker replaced the samurai, at least in the North American market. Many, if not most parts are interchangeable between the samurai and the geo tracker(8 valve 1.6l at least).

And I actually do plan to use this in both on road and off. The great thing about these things is like you said they're cheap, especially compared to a jeep. Also, when you have a vehicle that's so light, you kind of just float on top off the mud, you don't need a crazy powerful engine to dig you out of it.

It is kind of odd actually, when you look at a lot of the smaller four and six cylinder engines being made in the mid eighties to early ninety's, how many were pretty fuel efficient, easy to work on, and so trouble free.

 

[Mad_Hatter]

Originally Posted by MoPowa
Your spot on madhatter, the tracker replaced the samurai, at least in the North American market. Many, if not most parts are interchangeable between the samurai and the geo tracker(8 valve 1.6l at least).

And I actually do plan to use this in both on road and off. The great thing about these things is like you said they're cheap, especially compared to a jeep. Also, when you have a vehicle that's so light, you kind of just float on top off the mud, you don't need a crazy powerful engine to dig you out of it.

It is kind of odd actually, when you look at a lot of the smaller four and six cylinder engines being made in the mid eighties to early ninety's, how many were pretty fuel efficient, easy to work on, and so trouble free.

You mean like the Ford Escort? A friend of mine has GT that's still going. I think it's an 89/90 or something like that. Crazy easy to work on and parts are equally cheap but he says it is getting a little harder to find them due to it's age. I had a Tempo/Topaz in the 80's that had no balls (i4 1.8L IIRC) but got good mileage and I use to beat that car up. I was young and commuting long distance at that time and didn't really care about the maintenance much, like changing the oil, and that car just took everything I could throw at it and didn't quit till it got totaled in an accident. I was actually glad to get rid of it at the time but looking back now I think, man that was a tough little car.

 

[Puckrobber]

After the Samurai got blasted by Consumer Reports for the rollover issue, Suzuki made the Sidekick to better handle sudden turns. GM worked with Suzuki to sell them as Geo Trackers in the U.S. with the 1.6L 4-banger. Used to have a '92 Tracker 4x4. Not much room in them, save for a few passengers. But, they drove well in the snow and got great MPG, usually around 30.

As to the OP, 5W-30 should do just fine in all of your vehicles. However, after spending some time here at BITOG, you'll find reasons to have other flavors on hand.

 

[MoPowa]

Thanks again everyone, I really appreciate the help! This site is great!

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted by Duffyjr
10w30 in Texas.

ISLAC 10W30's are thinner than 5W30's so why would you make this recommendation? It must be because of the mild Texican climate.

 

[dave1251]

5W30 is the catch all. But if you can get an API certified oil at closeout as long as it isn't a 25W70 in January your engines will be fine.