Urban Legend from decades ago ... synthetic oil was "too slick" for engines

Joined
Apr 27, 2023
Messages
577
Location
Franklin, TN
I was thinking back to the first car I bought myself around 1998 - a 1989 Accord LX 5spd (last year of the carbureted engine) - and taking it to the local Honda dealership for a tune up. They had 2 oil change services "standard" and "synthetic". I had no idea what the differences were so I asked and the SA told me that synthetic was "too slick" for cars like mine that had used regular dino oil for its 140K mile life. I recall him also saying that you had to use regular dino oil for the first 30K miles before you switched to synthetic and synthetic was really only to be used for "some sports cars". My memory is a little fuzzy as this was almost 30 years ago but I seem to recall that thought being widely circulated on the car forums that I visited in the very late 90s/early 2000s.

Was there any truth to any part of that? Any ideas on why that was conventional wisdom during that time period?
 
I will never listen to anyone saying synthetic oils will cause any kind of trouble in a older engine. Its literally just oil. If a engine cant handle better oil than it was designed for it was a terrible design.

I will pour synthetic in everything i own and if it cant take it, its a bad design.
 
Last edited:
Big-time rumor in the Harley world. Would supposedly cause the crank roller bearings to "skate". They apparently "solved" that problem when they introduced Syn3 oil.
I remember that fallacy, it even made one of the old British car magazines back in the day. I always struggled to understand how an oil that is too 'slick' as to prevent a roller bearing from rolling but not slick enough to protect said element??
 
Don't forget, the other thing that mechanics wre saying at the time was that synthetic oil would cause your car to leak/use oil.
Of course, at the time I think Mobil1 was a 5W-20 or something, nothing thicker in the beginning.
All of it urban legend of course. I switched to synthetic as soon as it became commonplace.
I remember “the molecules are so small they go past the seals”
 
I was thinking back to the first car I bought myself around 1998 - a 1989 Accord LX 5spd (last year of the carbureted engine) - and taking it to the local Honda dealership for a tune up. They had 2 oil change services "standard" and "synthetic". I had no idea what the differences were so I asked and the SA told me that synthetic was "too slick" for cars like mine that had used regular dino oil for its 140K mile life. I recall him also saying that you had to use regular dino oil for the first 30K miles before you switched to synthetic and synthetic was really only to be used for "some sports cars". My memory is a little fuzzy as this was almost 30 years ago but I seem to recall that thought being widely circulated on the car forums that I visited in the very late 90s/early 2000s.

Was there any truth to any part of that? Any ideas on why that was conventional wisdom during that time period?
IF synthetic was “too slick” - why, in those years, did high end sports cars get delivered from the factory with synthetic? The Corvette came with Mobil 1 for example, so…was Honda behind GM in engineering and manufacturing back then?

A service adviser that didn’t know what he was talking about and made up words like “too slick”?

And you believed him?

Really?
 
OMG, World War Eleven! (jk)

What I recall hearing was that you didn't want to break in your new engine using synthetic oil.

Also, the more 'sane' folk used to say, "It's good if you live in Alaska or Death Valley. Most people don't need it".

Back in my Saab days, there was a contingent of owners who boasted about their 300K turbos on conventional oils.
 
Back
Top Bottom