Synthetic Blends

"John" > wrote in message
...

> I have a friend that never changes his oil. Every 3,000 miles he puts
> on a new filter and tops it off with Mobil 1. He's done this for
> years now. This is probably equivalent to changing the oil every 15
> to 30 K miles, depending on how much oil the filter holds.

He probably never changes his underdrawers either. Only a fool
treats an engine this way.

"WindsorFox" > wrote in message
news2ccf.1018$4n5.927@dukeread01...

> Actually it quite is. There is mounds of scientific proof from
> numerous places. Even Mobil has begun to lenthen drain intervals with
> their synthetic. Why did Calloway put it in his Vette? Take a look at
> some oil sample results sometime. This is not an opinion, it is proven
> fact that even the worst synthetics are more stable than the best
> conventional oils.

It is not a proven fact. This has been discussed a lot over in
rec.autos.tech,
and there are pro synths and pro dinos.

Apparently the facts are that the recent dino oil formulations are just as
protective as, if not moreso than, the synths.

Many of us have searched for definitive tests for both oils and filters, and
the
data is difficult to come by. Lots of claims, but very little hard data.

One advantage of synthetics is the rather low viscosity necessary for
equivalent
lubrication, and this is advantageous in low temperature applications and
arguably gives a small increase in fuel economy. The same low viscosity can
also lead to seeping at gaskets, seals, etc...but not destruction of the
elastomers.

The dino formulations reportedly give 'good as or better than' lubrication
results
when compared with the synthetics. With 5W30 or so, the viscosity effects
are
not even such a bad deal.

Anyone who would run his oil and filters for EXTENDED periods (over 5000
miles,
or so) is looking for trouble, no matter what lubricant he uses. The recent
spate of
engine failures documented by a number of different manufacturers seems to
be
supporting evidence for this.

I know you have your mind made up, so we will both continue to view the
facts as
we each desire. My engines last...that is proof enough for me.

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 13:03:01 GMT, > wrote:

>
>"John" > wrote in message
.. .
>
>> I have a friend that never changes his oil. Every 3,000 miles he puts
>> on a new filter and tops it off with Mobil 1. He's done this for
>> years now. This is probably equivalent to changing the oil every 15
>> to 30 K miles, depending on how much oil the filter holds.
>
>He probably never changes his underdrawers either. Only a fool
>treats an engine this way.
>
He seems to be pretty auto savy. Got about 10 cars from a Jeep to two
Porsches and two motorcycles. Maybe, he'll learn better if he runs
into a problem.

--
John
'69 Mach 1 390 Toploader Acapulco Blue
ThunderSnake #59

"John" > wrote in message
> He seems to be pretty auto savy. Got about 10 cars from a Jeep to two
> Porsches and two motorcycles. Maybe, he'll learn better if he runs
> into a problem.

Well, I am pretty much oldfartish about maintaining my autos. I have only
ever had one engine go bad on me, and that was a 66 428 CJ. The piston
broke at only 17,000 miles, and Ford replaced the entire engine. That
was no oil failure, however.

I have been researching the issue a lot of late, since I intend to sell my
van and get something more fuel efficient, and more comfortable on the
road. The deeper I get into the situation, I find that a lot of cars of late
are having problems.

Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen, as well as some American cars are having
engine sludging (gellation) problems which have lead to engine failures.
Toyota finally backed down, and took some responsibility for their
problems, saying that the problem has been fixed, but also saying that
the failures are essentially all related to poor maintainance of the vehicle
(change the freaking oil). Toyota is recommending oil changes at
less than 5000 miles.

One of the manufacturers appears to recommend dino oils instead of
synthetics. Picked this up in the research, but dont remember exactly
which it is.

I owned a VW Passat in Europe, and it came with synthetics. The car
ran fine and held up well, BUT it seeped synthetic at various locations
from day one. Seeping is not a big problem, especially here in Amerika,
but in Europe if it turns into a leak (drip), you may fail your EU
inspection,
and that costs big money.

Finally, I bought a new lawnmower here with a Briggs motor, and after
break-in, decided to change to synthetic. Should make the engine last
forever, huh? NOT! In just a few hours, the engine began burning
oil like crazy. The representative whom I asked about it said that Briggs
had run into that problem, and synthetics had been linked with the demise
of these engines.

So, despite all the hoopla and claims, I have gone back to what I know
works.
Use good oil and filter, and change often, if you care about your iron..
Doesnt cost much, and it works.

Use synthetics if you wish, but not in your lawnmower maybe. Or dont use
them...the new dino formulations are excellent, and a lot cheaper.

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 13:15:26 GMT, > wrote:


>I know you have your mind made up, so we will both continue to view the
>facts as
>we each desire. My engines last...that is proof enough for me.
>
Much as there are diehard bowtie supporters and blue oval supporters,
there will be synth and dino supporters. I sort of wonder, for the
average driver, whether it really makes that big a difference (driving
conditions such as severe weather or dust/sand not withstanding).

I've used both, and have yet to lose an engine aside from having an
oil pump seize after a rebuild was installed... because the installed
didn't get all the bits of seal out.

--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
w/Black Std Interior, A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok;
Vintage 40 16" rims w/225/50ZR16 KDWS BF Goodrich
gForce Radial T/As, Cobra drop; surround sound
audio-video...
See my ride at....
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/003_May_21_3004.jpg
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/005_May_21_2004.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/d..._11_05_002.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/E...ebuild_006.jpg

"Spike" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 13:15:26 GMT, > wrote:
>
>
> >I know you have your mind made up, so we will both continue to view the
> >facts as
> >we each desire. My engines last...that is proof enough for me.
> >
> Much as there are diehard bowtie supporters and blue oval supporters,
> there will be synth and dino supporters. I sort of wonder, for the
> average driver, whether it really makes that big a difference (driving
> conditions such as severe weather or dust/sand not withstanding).
>
> I've used both, and have yet to lose an engine aside from having an
> oil pump seize after a rebuild was installed... because the installed
> didn't get all the bits of seal out.
>

IMO, the only people that might benefit from using synthetic oil are people
that live where temperature extremes are common. Syn. reportedly holds it's
stated viscosity better than dino when it is extremely cold or hot. No
benefit for anyone else, as far as I can see.
I don't go for the extended service interval argument, either. Dirt,
moisture and other impurities get into the engine regardless of which oil
you use and the longer they are left in, the more damage they do. Some
people claim better fuel mileage with syn. Maybe, maybe not, but it would
have to be a LOT better to offset the higher cost. Then there's the *feel
good* factor. I guess it's worth whatever you're willing to pay. ;-)

Dave

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 12:46:45 -0600, "Hairy" > wrote:

>
>"Spike" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 13:15:26 GMT, > wrote:
>>
>>
>> >I know you have your mind made up, so we will both continue to view the
>> >facts as
>> >we each desire. My engines last...that is proof enough for me.
>> >
>> Much as there are diehard bowtie supporters and blue oval supporters,
>> there will be synth and dino supporters. I sort of wonder, for the
>> average driver, whether it really makes that big a difference (driving
>> conditions such as severe weather or dust/sand not withstanding).
>>
>> I've used both, and have yet to lose an engine aside from having an
>> oil pump seize after a rebuild was installed... because the installed
>> didn't get all the bits of seal out.
>>
>
>IMO, the only people that might benefit from using synthetic oil are people
>that live where temperature extremes are common. Syn. reportedly holds it's
>stated viscosity better than dino when it is extremely cold or hot. No
>benefit for anyone else, as far as I can see.
>I don't go for the extended service interval argument, either. Dirt,
>moisture and other impurities get into the engine regardless of which oil
>you use and the longer they are left in, the more damage they do. Some
>people claim better fuel mileage with syn. Maybe, maybe not, but it would
>have to be a LOT better to offset the higher cost. Then there's the *feel
>good* factor. I guess it's worth whatever you're willing to pay. ;-)
>
>Dave
>
I don't go for the extended service... but, having lived in the desert
with it's blowing sand and dust so fine it gets into everything, I can
see the merit of cheaper oil changed more often.

I've also lived in Minnesota, and so far north in Maine we went south
to cross into Canada, and know when the temp drops, the less you have
to work the engine to start, the better. Batteries can drain in
minutes if you forget the lights, let alone be grinding a starter. In
Maine, I removed the battery when I got home and took it into the
house. So slick might be expensive, but invaluable. Some of those
places did have provisions for block heaters. Even apartments with
sockets on a post for each assigned parking space. Every little bit
helps in such places.
--
Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
w/Black Std Interior, A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok;
Vintage 40 16" rims w/225/50ZR16 KDWS BF Goodrich
gForce Radial T/As, Cobra drop; surround sound
audio-video...
See my ride at....
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/003_May_21_3004.jpg
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/005_May_21_2004.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/d..._11_05_002.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/E...ebuild_006.jpg

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 14:11:18 GMT, > wrote:

>
>"John" > wrote in message
>> He seems to be pretty auto savy. Got about 10 cars from a Jeep to two
>> Porsches and two motorcycles. Maybe, he'll learn better if he runs
>> into a problem.
>
>Well, I am pretty much oldfartish about maintaining my autos. I have only
>ever had one engine go bad on me, and that was a 66 428 CJ. The piston
>broke at only 17,000 miles, and Ford replaced the entire engine. That
>was no oil failure, however.

The initial 428 that came out in '66 was not a CJ. It had heads and
intake similar to a 390. In '67 there was a 428 PI. The 428 CJ
debutted in the '68 model year replacing the 427 as Ford's performance
engine. The 428 SCJ came out in the '69 model year.

>I have been researching the issue a lot of late, since I intend to sell my
>van and get something more fuel efficient, and more comfortable on the
>road. The deeper I get into the situation, I find that a lot of cars of late
>are having problems.
>
>Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen, as well as some American cars are having
>engine sludging (gellation) problems which have lead to engine failures.
>Toyota finally backed down, and took some responsibility for their
>problems, saying that the problem has been fixed, but also saying that
>the failures are essentially all related to poor maintainance of the vehicle
>(change the freaking oil). Toyota is recommending oil changes at
>less than 5000 miles.
>
>One of the manufacturers appears to recommend dino oils instead of
>synthetics. Picked this up in the research, but dont remember exactly
>which it is.
>
>I owned a VW Passat in Europe, and it came with synthetics. The car
>ran fine and held up well, BUT it seeped synthetic at various locations
>from day one. Seeping is not a big problem, especially here in Amerika,
>but in Europe if it turns into a leak (drip), you may fail your EU
>inspection,
>and that costs big money.
>
>Finally, I bought a new lawnmower here with a Briggs motor, and after
>break-in, decided to change to synthetic. Should make the engine last
>forever, huh? NOT! In just a few hours, the engine began burning
>oil like crazy. The representative whom I asked about it said that Briggs
>had run into that problem, and synthetics had been linked with the demise
>of these engines.
>
>So, despite all the hoopla and claims, I have gone back to what I know
>works.
>Use good oil and filter, and change often, if you care about your iron..
>Doesnt cost much, and it works.
>
>Use synthetics if you wish, but not in your lawnmower maybe. Or dont use
>them...the new dino formulations are excellent, and a lot cheaper.

I don't use synthetics. I change oil and filter every 3,000 miles and
use dinolube. I've never had a problem, so why spend more $ to fix
(?) it. I think it's just good marketing.

My friend's the synthetic believer.

--
John
'69 Mach 1 390 Toploader Acapulco Blue
ThunderSnake #59

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 13:15:26 GMT, > wrote:

>
>"WindsorFox" > wrote in message
>news2ccf.1018$4n5.927@dukeread01...
>
>> Actually it quite is. There is mounds of scientific proof from
>> numerous places. Even Mobil has begun to lenthen drain intervals with
>> their synthetic. Why did Calloway put it in his Vette? Take a look at
>> some oil sample results sometime. This is not an opinion, it is proven
>> fact that even the worst synthetics are more stable than the best
>> conventional oils.
>
>It is not a proven fact. This has been discussed a lot over in
>rec.autos.tech,
>and there are pro synths and pro dinos.
>
>Apparently the facts are that the recent dino oil formulations are just as
>protective as, if not moreso than, the synths.
>
>Many of us have searched for definitive tests for both oils and filters, and
>the
>data is difficult to come by. Lots of claims, but very little hard data.
>
>One advantage of synthetics is the rather low viscosity necessary for
>equivalent
>lubrication, and this is advantageous in low temperature applications and
>arguably gives a small increase in fuel economy. The same low viscosity can
>also lead to seeping at gaskets, seals, etc...but not destruction of the
>elastomers.
>
>The dino formulations reportedly give 'good as or better than' lubrication
>results
>when compared with the synthetics. With 5W30 or so, the viscosity effects
>are
>not even such a bad deal.
>
>Anyone who would run his oil and filters for EXTENDED periods (over 5000
>miles,
>or so) is looking for trouble, no matter what lubricant he uses. The recent
>spate of
>engine failures documented by a number of different manufacturers seems to
>be
>supporting evidence for this.
>
>I know you have your mind made up, so we will both continue to view the
>facts as
>we each desire. My engines last...that is proof enough for me.

Here's a debate I had with my pro synthetic buddy. Todays engine is
the product of *decades* of research, development, and modifications
to make the most efficient yet low cost source of power (and torque)
for the automobile. During almost that entire time, dinolube was not
just the standard, hell, it was the only reasonable option, so it's
fair to say that today's engine has been optimized when running
dinolube. Why pay a lot more to change to synthetic to tweak some
perceived benefits and possibly suboptimize other critical areas that
jeopardizes all that *experience* based on so little data?

--
John
'69 Mach 1 390 Toploader Acapulco Blue
ThunderSnake #59

wrote:
> "WindsorFox" > wrote in message
> news2ccf.1018$4n5.927@dukeread01...
>
>
>> Actually it quite is. There is mounds of scientific proof from
>>numerous places. Even Mobil has begun to lenthen drain intervals with
>>their synthetic. Why did Calloway put it in his Vette? Take a look at
>>some oil sample results sometime. This is not an opinion, it is proven
>>fact that even the worst synthetics are more stable than the best
>>conventional oils.
>
>
> It is not a proven fact. This has been discussed a lot over in
> rec.autos.tech,
> and there are pro synths and pro dinos.
>
> Apparently the facts are that the recent dino oil formulations are just as
> protective as, if not moreso than, the synths.
>
> Many of us have searched for definitive tests for both oils and filters, and
> the
> data is difficult to come by. Lots of claims, but very little hard data.
>
> One advantage of synthetics is the rather low viscosity necessary for
> equivalent
> lubrication, and this is advantageous in low temperature applications and
> arguably gives a small increase in fuel economy. The same low viscosity can
> also lead to seeping at gaskets, seals, etc...but not destruction of the
> elastomers.
>
> The dino formulations reportedly give 'good as or better than' lubrication
> results
> when compared with the synthetics. With 5W30 or so, the viscosity effects
> are
> not even such a bad deal.
>
> Anyone who would run his oil and filters for EXTENDED periods (over 5000
> miles,
> or so) is looking for trouble, no matter what lubricant he uses. The recent
> spate of
> engine failures documented by a number of different manufacturers seems to
> be
> supporting evidence for this.
>
> I know you have your mind made up, so we will both continue to view the
> facts as
> we each desire. My engines last...that is proof enough for me.
>
>

I just changed the 141K Taurus 3.0 at 18,000 mi. w/ Mobil 1 & a 400S
Motorcraft filter. It was down 1 qt. in that entire mileage(never
added). At 10K the oil was barely dirty, so I didn't change it, then
got too busy until last weekend. Love that Mobil 1... but 10K is much
more reasonable & responsible.

I also use Mobil 1 in all the lawn & garden equipment. 2 1994 lawn
tractors, wood splitter, Troy Bilt tiller, - all Briggs powered - & a
Tecumseh powered snow blower, & several other smaller motors, all
older... no problems ever. The cost of small engine replacement can be
daunting compared to automotive replacements - I don't like to take chances.

From a chemical & physical perspective, synthetics are far superior,
but please don't let science get in the way of anecdotal evidence...
which is all you will get in usenet discussions.

Rob