"you can use anything for that short of a OCI . ."

[Crusader]

I constantly hear "you can use most anything for that short of a OCI . . ."

I'm skeptical of this premise. Experts and fellow skeptics please chime in.

For example Joe Six-Pack uses Super Tech dino 5w-30 known to be a tad thin on additive pack. And he changes his oil every 2,000 miles, highway driving, because he knows this to be true and he figures it will perform just fine. He's obsessive compulsive about this OCI and loses sleep if he goes over 1/10th over 2000 miles.

Fred uses a top of the line Amsoil synthetic 5w-30 on even months and on odd months uses Schafer's best syn 5w-30. HE also changes his oil every 2,000 miles. Money is no object to Fred. He pre washes his dishes even though he owns the best dishwasher money can buy. There is NO talking Fred out of wasting money on 2000 mile OCI with these oils.

Considering it's the same car, same conditions etc. who will experience less wear?

Am I skipping any other considerations.

My premise is Fred will have less wear metals in his UOA. Am I correct?

 

[jazztrumpet216]

Well, the first thing you should do is tell Joe and Fred to get a UOA. Joe saved enough to afford one and Fred apparently wipes his butt with money, so it shouldn't be a problem on either account.

I would also guess that Fred will have less wear, but in 2k highway miles I bet it would be pretty negligible.

 

[Drivebelt]

Quote:

---

My premise is Fred will have less wear metals in his UOA. Am I correct?

---

I would say no.

Modern 5W-30 conventional's will put up as good wear numbers as synthetics -- and generally much longer than 2K miles.

This is one area (wear performance) where modern conventional Group II's can match synthetics. There may be some extreme situations where they can't, like where a car is being tracked in very hot weather, but generally they deliver synthetic like performance. The Group II base oils used in conventional these days are generally ~ 99% or greater pure high performance base oils (like synthetics) -- one could even make a good argument for calling them synthetic base oils.

 

[Spector]

Unless it is Januray in Canada the wear should be the same!

 

[BradC]

Wasn't there a lot of chatter on here at one point that synthetics don't do as well (wear wise) on short OCIs?

 

[Cutehumor]

I would say Fred needs to hook me up with some oil if he's going to go through with synthetic in 2k miles. why change oil at 2k miles? why not 1k miles? why not 1500 mile oci?

 

[Pablo]

Quote:

---

Wasn't there a lot of chatter on here at one point that synthetics don't do as well (wear wise) on short OCIs?

---

Some guy tried to say that, but a) there is no data b) skewed memories.

Wearwise, synthetic oil is better, UOA wise about a tie.

 

[sxg6]

I'm getting rusty since i don't visit bitog much these days.. But if what i remember is correct, preventing wear is all in the additive package, not the base oil, so synthetic vs conventional really is a moot argument. There are always exceptions of course, such as extreme cold or heat, turbocharged/supercharged, engine design.. But as drivebelt said, conventional oils have come a long way..So they will do just fine.

 

[tripleM]

To the original OP: prove any of what you've stated.
That will answer your questions.

Otherwise, I find it difficult to see how 1 oil is > than any other oil esp with thousands of UOA to support this.

 

[nascarnation]

Fred has BITOG OCD.

It can be alleviated with therapy and medication.

 

[Drew99GT]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Wasn't there a lot of chatter on here at one point that synthetics don't do as well (wear wise) on short OCIs?

---

Some guy tried to say that, but a) there is no data b) skewed memories.

Wearwise, synthetic oil is better, UOA wise about a tie.

---

How about the many cases here where people have done UOA back to back mutiple times with synthetic, then dino, and the dino has much lower wear?

Oh, but that's not statistically accurate for a nuclear power plant bla bla excuses...

There's plenty of data here in the UOA section.

 

[Pablo]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Wasn't there a lot of chatter on here at one point that synthetics don't do as well (wear wise) on short OCIs?

---

Some guy tried to say that, but a) there is no data b) skewed memories.

Wearwise, synthetic oil is better, UOA wise about a tie.

---

How about the many cases here where people have done UOA back to back mutiple times with synthetic, then dino, and the dino has much lower wear?

Oh, but that's not statistically accurate for a nuclear power plant bla bla excuses...

There's plenty of data here in the UOA section.

---

Sure there is....

where???? Please post it!

I think people get these strange memories on both side of the discussion. I have looked and there is nothing conclusive – certainly NOTHING that says “All synthetics are WORSE for wear than all conventional oils at 3000 miles……..”

And I’m not looking for manned space flight accuracy. Just a demonstrable difference.

 

[Drew99GT]

They're there if you look. And there's been many posts about this fact here over the years, but, like you said Pablo, "people get these strange memories on both sides of the discussion".

Bill in Utah is the best example of where back to back UOA show lower wear with dino. I'm not gonna sit here and find every example, but they are there. I guess it's my selective memory!

There is also someone here with Maxima with a huge spreadsheet worth of UOA, and Pennzoil dino always showed the lowest wear compared to Mobil 1 and Amsoil.

You say one can't demonstratively show synthetic is always worse wear wise compared to dino. I'll grant you that, but on the same token, you can't prove above in your post that synthetic is BETTER wear wise!!!

Bottom line is it's a dumb argument. There is one 100% fact about synthetic oil and that is it lasts much longer and protects at the extremes of cold and heat. But for a regular old tan sedan rollin down the street, I doubt running synthetic will make your engine fail at 400K as opposed to 300K with dino.

 

[Crusader]

Maybe in my original post I should of compared Super Tech Synthetic 5w-30 instead. I really didn't want the dino vs. synthetic to be a major issue, however I have also read posts here where dino user have relatively low wear numbers compared to synthetics.

So now it seems that the additive pack is what help oils last longer? Just seems that a better additive pack would be better for low wear right out of the starting gate?

 

[glenncof]

Assuming your using the proper weight and you don't have "problem" engine or challenging application...then I'd accept anything SAE rated for 3K OCI and under. I would guess the differences would not be statistically significant under 100K miles. Probably not at 200K either or 300K or....

 

[06VtecV6]

Quote:

---

I'm getting rusty since i don't visit bitog much these days.. But if what i remember is correct, preventing wear is all in the additive package, not the base oil, so synthetic vs conventional really is a moot argument. There are always exceptions of course, such as extreme cold or heat, turbocharged/supercharged, engine design.. But as drivebelt said, conventional oils have come a long way..So they will do just fine.

---

Hence why they say Synthetic Blends are 'the best of both worlds'. You have the additives for anti-wear and a good GRP II and some III base oil for slightly longer OCIs then dinos. Perfect for up to 5k OCIs. You need synthetic for the extreme stuff but how extreme are most driving conditions? Exactly. Use synthetics for >5k OCIs if not 6 to 7k OCIs as full syns and boutique oils are for extended drains(>5k), period. I mean I'm sure you can go slightly above 5k for non full synthetics but then you're giving yourself less protections in case you did some marginal extreme driving or some super extreme driving environment.