Turbo proliferation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Clevy
Originally Posted By: Corvette Owner
The 1997 Chevy Corvette was the first engine that GM designed to last 200,000 miles. Most cars engines are designed to last 100,000 miles, although many will last much longer. Note that this was also the first GM car to require synthetic oil.

GM use to require newly designed engines to run for 10 hours at wide open throttle and full load, The Corvette was run for more than 25 days at wide open throttle and full load.



If you're going to post this type of comment you've gotta back it up with some kind of evidence.
I think it's an absurd idea to be honest so please post some evidence.

K guys. Diesel trucks have turbos so big they'll suck small birds in and those turbos last a million miles using plain jane conventional hdeo oils so to just assume syn is required is laughable.
Honda had a spec for their specific turbos but they wanted a thinner version to improve fuel economy over a 15w-40 for example.
And as a rule it's a good idea to let a turbo run at idle to wash out the heat from driving as a preventative measure to insure the turbo didn't coke up however today's oem turbos are also water cooled which makes cooling far more efficient and more user friendly.


This info was in the book "All Corvettes are red", the author was given access to the development of the fifth Generation of the Corvette.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy
K guys. Diesel trucks have turbos so big they'll suck small birds in and those turbos last a million miles using plain jane conventional hdeo oils so to just assume syn is required is laughable.


Don't try to compare diesel turbos to gasoline turbos. The operating environment is much cooler in a diesel turbo. EGT's on diesels max out at ~1250F. EGT's on gasoline engines go up to ~1750 F. A hot shutdown heat soak in a diesel turbo is not as bad. But I still wait for my EGT gauge to drop below 350 F before shutting down my Cummins Dodge.
 
I was a little off, here is the correct info:

When they developed the C5 Corvette (1997-2004) they kept an engine at redline for 520 hours (over 21 days) nonstop!

GM's requirement was only that engines run for 50 hours straight at redline without any problems.

They also pick a random Production Corvette out of the production line and run it on a track at top speed until the gas runs out (about 30 minutes for 18 gallons).
 
Last edited:
The downsized turbo passenger engines of today are a careful balance of "as cheap as possible" and "as reliable as necessary", the big compensator? Design aspects.

The number one issue with the downsized high power density approach is heat management. Large cooling system capacities, more than 4quart sumps and high flow/cooled oil systems are the design aspects used to ensure a reasonable life. Yes, old performance engine tricks are making their way into the regular consumer market. Forged factory internals are also a staple. h temps kept in check, synthetic blends are no problem IMO
 
Corvette Owner said:
The 1997 Chevy Corvette was the first engine that GM designed to last 200,000 miles. Most cars engines are designed to last 100,000 miles, although many will last much longer. Note that this was also the first GM car to require synthetic oil.

I remember reading that GM required synthetic in that Corvette because they did away with the oil cooler for space saving reasons.
I've seen many GM 3.8 V6's with well over 200K.
 
Originally Posted By: pbm
Corvette Owner said:
The 1997 Chevy Corvette was the first engine that GM designed to last 200,000 miles. Most cars engines are designed to last 100,000 miles, although many will last much longer. Note that this was also the first GM car to require synthetic oil.

I remember reading that GM required synthetic in that Corvette because they did away with the oil cooler for space saving reasons.
I've seen many GM 3.8 V6's with well over 200K.


It was actually for COST savings reasons. But they were amazed how little wear there was when using synthetic oil.
 
Originally Posted By: VNTS
What kills the turbos is running dino, the oil entering the bearings brakes down, carbons up the small oil feed holes, slowly restricts the supply to the bearings until failure.

I always run synthetic, to eliminate that issue.


Generally agreed but not always the case. My '86 Daytona Turbo Z CS had 175k on the original turbo when it was rear ended and totalled. It was run almost exclusively on dino (and usually 20w-50) as I didn't know any better at the time.
 
On the note of oil being coked inside the hot turbo bearings...would running a good quality synthetic with good cleaning qualities (eg. Pennzoil Platinum) gradually clean out the coking?
 
Originally Posted By: bvl


3-5K mile conventional changes are fine. Many of us turbo owners prefer longer OCIs and are synthetic (and BITOG) geeks, but we still represent a very small amount of the population
smile.gif


- b


01.gif
 
The Mazda 2.3L DI turbo as found in the Mazdaspeed3 is very hard on oil compared to any NA engine I've ever worked on. This nearly 10 year old design is a marvel of specific output at 116hp/L. Compare that to the new Camaro LS3 I'm buying which, even though it puts out a healthy 426hp, only produces 68.7hp/L. That's 40% less folks.

DI may be more of a culprit here than the turbo. This motor is a proven fuel diluter showing 2.5% after only 3-4,000 miles. By then the oil is jet black, reeks of gas and is losing viscosity. Mazda has had some reliability issues because they extended the warranty on the turbo and timing chain from 3/36000 to 7/70000.

Knowing this, would you dare run a conventional oil in this engine? Not me. Would you dare try for extended OCI? Not me. This is a case where UOA confirms everything one suspects from a physical inspection of the oil. Does this experience prevent me from running TGMO 0W-20 for 10000 miles in the wife's Sienna? Of course not. Completely different engine used in a different way.

The other lesson here for those of you who require data before you believe anything is that human observation and logic is useful for observing oil performance.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Indydriver
The Mazda 2.3L DI turbo as found in the Mazdaspeed3 is very hard on oil compared to any NA engine I've ever worked on. This nearly 10 year old design is a marvel of specific output at 116hp/L. Compare that to the new Camaro LS3 I'm buying which, even though it puts out a healthy 426hp, only produces 68.7hp/L. That's 40% less folks.

DI may be more of a culprit here than the turbo. This motor is a proven fuel diluter showing 2.5% after only 3-4,000 miles. By then the oil is jet black, reeks of gas and is losing viscosity. Mazda has had some reliability issues because they extended the warranty on the turbo and timing chain from 3/36000 to 7/70000.

Knowing this, would you dare run a conventional oil in this engine? Not me. Would you dare try for extended OCI? Not me. This is a case where UOA confirms everything one suspects from a physical inspection of the oil. Does this experience prevent me from running TGMO 0W-20 for 10000 miles in the wife's Sienna? Of course not. Completely different engine used in a different way.

The other lesson here for those of you who require data before you believe anything is that human observation and logic is useful for observing oil performance.


Fare statement...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top