An engine's PCMO history (valve pics)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: mehullica
Valve clearance is way out, the exhaust on #3 looks like it's way more than .014".


I didn't know one could make an assessment of any of the valve clearance when you can't even begin to see the interface of the cam lobe and the top of the lifter. How is that done?
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: volk06
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: lukejo
1995 Camry 4 cyl 5sfe. 205,000 miles.
First 100,000 miles were nearly all short trip with PYB 10w-30.
100,000-160,000 mainly short trip with M1HM 10w-30.
Then-I'm second owner. For 160k-205k, nearly all highway miles, M1HM 5w-30, then Valvoline Full Syn with Maxlife for the last 25k of it.


While it isn't terrible it does show that good synthetic oils by themselves didn't clean it up much in your case.
27.gif
I'd run a short OCI or two with a dose of Kreen if it were mine.


How can you make this claim without knowing that it looked like before the started use of the synthetics? It has 200K on it, just let it go running the HM oils going forward. What good would kreen or a flush actually do in this case if it is not burning any oil and runs smooth? The answer, not much besides emotional warm fuzzy feelings.


Easy, if the oil was doing a bang up job cleaning then the engine should look cleaner than that after the amount of time the OP was using synthetic oil. We also know that heavy varnish may lead to problems later on, [it has been discussed time and time again here] so why not try and clean it up after actually seeing what it looks like?


Once again just assumptions. Still a moot point if you have no reference point to what it looked like when it began. The oils could be doing a bang up job, you have no way of knowing without a starting data point. 40K on synthetic oils, after being run for almost 20 years on dino, you have no idea how much it could have actually reduced. Why not clean it up with an aggressive additive? Because it really doesn't need it. With the oils he is using, the varnish will most likely not get any worse and/or improve.
 
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Why are some of the lobes covered in varnish? Here's my 5SFE if you want to look for reference:
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3830022/Under_Valve_Cover_Pics_-_2000_

I know, at first I thought the varnish on the lobes was a GREAT anti-wear tribofilm, but, no.

I'd just change oil with any High Mileage Full Synthetic oil at 5k mile intervals and the varnish will slowly go away or not get worse at least. Doesn't affect anything.

Originally Posted By: Cressida
Originally Posted By: mehullica
Valve clearance is way out, the exhaust on #3 looks like it's way more than .014".

I didn't know one could make an assessment of any of the valve clearance when you can't even begin to see the interface of the cam lobe and the top of the lifter. How is that done?
I think he is just observing varnish, knowing that too much clearance won't rub off the varnish on the lobes. Spec clearance should clean the lobes.

Originally Posted By: jhellwig
Yuck. I am not familiar with overhead cam engines but it looks like some of the cam followers are not returning as they should.
You're right. Lash clearance adjustment is needed. No automatic hydraulic valve lash adjusters on these (and Honda engines, etc.)... http://www.toyotacelicas.com/forums/94-fifth-generation/71858-valve-lash-adjustment-tips-tricks.html
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: volk06

Once again just assumptions. Still a moot point if you have no reference point to what it looked like when it began. The oils could be doing a bang up job, you have no way of knowing without a starting data point. 40K on synthetic oils, after being run for almost 20 years on dino, you have no idea how much it could have actually reduced. Why not clean it up with an aggressive additive? Because it really doesn't need it. With the oils he is using, the varnish will most likely not get any worse and/or improve.


Ok you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would have expected to see a cleaner engine after being run on synthetic oils with a good reputation for cleaning for 25K miles. You're correct in saying we don't know what it looked like before. I don't think it looks good now, and to me that's all that matters. What it looked like in the past doesn't matter, since we'll never know. I deal in the present, I'd want to clean it up. If synthetic oil has it looking like that after 25K miles I doubt it is able to do much more cleaning.
 
Come on! M1 and the Valvoline are NOT SYNTHETIC OIL. This is not Group V or a IV/V majority blend.

Most group III have poor solubility.

This "synthetic will clean it up" chatter has got to stop. Silly and misinformed.

ILSAC high % VM utilized in don't help either.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: volk06

Once again just assumptions. Still a moot point if you have no reference point to what it looked like when it began. The oils could be doing a bang up job, you have no way of knowing without a starting data point. 40K on synthetic oils, after being run for almost 20 years on dino, you have no idea how much it could have actually reduced. Why not clean it up with an aggressive additive? Because it really doesn't need it. With the oils he is using, the varnish will most likely not get any worse and/or improve.


Ok you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would have expected to see a cleaner engine after being run on synthetic oils with a good reputation for cleaning for 25K miles. You're correct in saying we don't know what it looked like before. I don't think it looks good now, and to me that's all that matters. What it looked like in the past doesn't matter, since we'll never know. I deal in the present, I'd want to clean it up. If synthetic oil has it looking like that after 25K miles I doubt it is able to do much more cleaning.


I'm in agreement with agreeing to disagree with our opinions.
smile.gif
An engine like this would be fun to do some testing on though. Run random synthetics and then different additives with before and after pictures of each OCI, but that is a lot of work!
 
Originally Posted By: volk06
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: volk06

Once again just assumptions. Still a moot point if you have no reference point to what it looked like when it began. The oils could be doing a bang up job, you have no way of knowing without a starting data point. 40K on synthetic oils, after being run for almost 20 years on dino, you have no idea how much it could have actually reduced. Why not clean it up with an aggressive additive? Because it really doesn't need it. With the oils he is using, the varnish will most likely not get any worse and/or improve.


Ok you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would have expected to see a cleaner engine after being run on synthetic oils with a good reputation for cleaning for 25K miles. You're correct in saying we don't know what it looked like before. I don't think it looks good now, and to me that's all that matters. What it looked like in the past doesn't matter, since we'll never know. I deal in the present, I'd want to clean it up. If synthetic oil has it looking like that after 25K miles I doubt it is able to do much more cleaning.


I'm in agreement with agreeing to disagree with our opinions.
smile.gif
An engine like this would be fun to do some testing on though. Run random synthetics and then different additives with before and after pictures of each OCI, but that is a lot of work!


thumbsup2.gif
It would be the perfect test mule. But lets not get our hopes up, like you said it would be a lot of work.
 
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: volk06

Once again just assumptions. Still a moot point if you have no reference point to what it looked like when it began. The oils could be doing a bang up job, you have no way of knowing without a starting data point. 40K on synthetic oils, after being run for almost 20 years on dino, you have no idea how much it could have actually reduced. Why not clean it up with an aggressive additive? Because it really doesn't need it. With the oils he is using, the varnish will most likely not get any worse and/or improve.


Ok you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would have expected to see a cleaner engine after being run on synthetic oils with a good reputation for cleaning for 25K miles. You're correct in saying we don't know what it looked like before. I don't think it looks good now, and to me that's all that matters. What it looked like in the past doesn't matter, since we'll never know. I deal in the present, I'd want to clean it up. If synthetic oil has it looking like that after 25K miles I doubt it is able to do much more cleaning.


I'm not sure how you can say it doesn't matter what it looked like 40k miles ago.

if it looked like this:


then what the oil he is using is doing a fantastic job...

you are right that we will never know, but to say it doesn't matter is not looking at it with the right frame of mind. It makes a HUGE difference what the starting point was ... we will just never know...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: meborder
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: volk06

Once again just assumptions. Still a moot point if you have no reference point to what it looked like when it began. The oils could be doing a bang up job, you have no way of knowing without a starting data point. 40K on synthetic oils, after being run for almost 20 years on dino, you have no idea how much it could have actually reduced. Why not clean it up with an aggressive additive? Because it really doesn't need it. With the oils he is using, the varnish will most likely not get any worse and/or improve.


Ok you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I would have expected to see a cleaner engine after being run on synthetic oils with a good reputation for cleaning for 25K miles. You're correct in saying we don't know what it looked like before. I don't think it looks good now, and to me that's all that matters. What it looked like in the past doesn't matter, since we'll never know. I deal in the present, I'd want to clean it up. If synthetic oil has it looking like that after 25K miles I doubt it is able to do much more cleaning.


I'm not sure how you can say it doesn't matter what it looked like 40k miles ago.

if it looked like this:


then what the oil he is using is doing a fantastic job...

you are right that we will never know, but to say it doesn't matter is not looking at it with the right frame of mind. It makes a HUGE difference what the starting point was ... we will just never know...


You missed my point, we have no idea what it looked like, all we know is what it looks like now. It looks like it needs more cleaning, especially if the synthetic oil has been cleaning for 25K miles. I'm reasonably certain it did not look like the picture you posted, and I'm pretty sure you being a Bitog member would agree.
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
205,000 miles. That's alot of heat and alot of oil. I wouldn't be alarmed by varnish.
What were the oil change intervals? 4K for the PYB but what about the synthetics?

Synthetic OCI's have been 4.5k to 6k.
 
Here you go with synthetics again. They arent synthetic!

Gotta hit this forum over the head with a pine board!

You get lied too enough you believe anything.
 
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Here you go with synthetics again. They arent synthetic!

Gotta hit this forum over the head with a pine board!

You get lied too enough you believe anything.


I think someone else has been hit over the head "with a pine board" one time too many.

Show us proof of the composition of Mobil 1, any grade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top