for the guys that are into recreational oil changing...

wrote:

> Actually, even if blowby was at the root of the problem (which it
> wasn't on the Toyotas and 3.7 Mopars)...

I think you meant 2.7 Mopars there.

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

> wrote in message
> Actually, even if blowby was at the root of the problem (which it
> wasn't on the Toyotas and 3.7 Mopars) synthetic oils do not oxidize as
> easily - meaning the acids etc deposited by the blowby would not break
> down the synthetic as fast.
>
> Would it eliminate the problem? Doubtful - but it would definitely
> REDUCE the problem -or delay it.

Would they oxidize as easily, or not? Prove your point.

"jim beam" > wrote in message
t...
> On 04/04/2010 06:05 AM, hls wrote:
>>
>> "jim beam" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 04/02/2010 07:47 AM, ACAR wrote:
>>> <snip for clarity>
>>>> Toyota's oil related sludge/gelling issues were pretty well
>>>> publicized. However, I think it is true that not one problem was cited
>>>> by anyone who changed their own oil.
>>>
>>> that statement is worth significant examination: "sludge", any engine,
>>> is an oil problem, not mechanical. if toyota had been sold a job lot
>>> of defective oil or if iffy-lube were being more ruthlessly
>>> inattentive than normal, that would indeed cause the problem.
>>>
>>
>> So you are trying to say that the problematic Toyotas would not have
>> sludged if they had been using synthetic oils?
>
> can't you read? [rhetorical]
>
>
>> I doubt you have any
>> proof at all for that statement.
>
> why don't you bother to do some research for yourself? it's easy to sit
> there and complain. if you think i'm wrong, go away, do your homework,
> then come back and present it. don't just **** and moan because i dare to
> offend the delicate sensibilities of the know-nothings and ignorants that
> pollute usenet with their uninformed personal fears and superstitions.
>
> --
> nomina rutrum rutrum

I have done my homework, and likely know the field better than you.
I am not complaining.

I am simply saying you have not proved your points with evidence.

> wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 08:05:22 -0500, "hls" > wrote:
>
>>
>>"jim beam" > wrote in message
...
>>> On 04/02/2010 07:47 AM, ACAR wrote:
>>> <snip for clarity>
>>>> Toyota's oil related sludge/gelling issues were pretty well
>>>> publicized. However, I think it is true that not one problem was cited
>>>> by anyone who changed their own oil.
>>>
>>> that statement is worth significant examination: "sludge", any engine,
>>> is
>>> an oil problem, not mechanical. if toyota had been sold a job lot of
>>> defective oil or if iffy-lube were being more ruthlessly inattentive
>>> than
>>> normal, that would indeed cause the problem.
>>>
>>
>>So you are trying to say that the problematic Toyotas would not have
>>sludged if they had been using synthetic oils? I doubt you have any
>>proof at all for that statement.
>>
> He is correct though - synthetic oils at the recommended interval did
> not sludge - nor dird regular oils at the severe duty schedule.
> That has been proven time and again.

Toyota, which does not have a recommendation for synthetics in my book,
claims that the problems were that the owners did not maintain their
vehicles
properly. There is evidence that there was more to it than that (PCV
system modifications).

I have seen no data with regard to synthetics in the problematic runs
of Toyotas. Have you actually SEEN the data, and can you cite your
source?

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" > wrote in message news:elmop-
> You're doing nothing but proving that most people are idiots.

What I doing is showing that a lot of people talk crap, thinking that their
having read it, or heard it, makes it more true when they repeat it.

On 04/04/2010 09:57 AM, hls wrote:
>
> > wrote in message
>> Actually, even if blowby was at the root of the problem (which it
>> wasn't on the Toyotas and 3.7 Mopars) synthetic oils do not oxidize as
>> easily - meaning the acids etc deposited by the blowby would not break
>> down the synthetic as fast.
>>
>> Would it eliminate the problem? Doubtful - but it would definitely
>> REDUCE the problem -or delay it.
>
> Would they oxidize as easily, or not? Prove your point.

hey, mr. **** and moan, if you want to contradict what is otherwise a
known fact, the onus is on YOU to present the contrary evidence. not
simply bitch about your apparent inability to do your own homework.

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

On 04/04/2010 09:58 AM, hls wrote:
>
> "jim beam" > wrote in message
> t...
>> On 04/04/2010 06:05 AM, hls wrote:
>>>
>>> "jim beam" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 04/02/2010 07:47 AM, ACAR wrote:
>>>> <snip for clarity>
>>>>> Toyota's oil related sludge/gelling issues were pretty well
>>>>> publicized. However, I think it is true that not one problem was cited
>>>>> by anyone who changed their own oil.
>>>>
>>>> that statement is worth significant examination: "sludge", any engine,
>>>> is an oil problem, not mechanical. if toyota had been sold a job lot
>>>> of defective oil or if iffy-lube were being more ruthlessly
>>>> inattentive than normal, that would indeed cause the problem.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So you are trying to say that the problematic Toyotas would not have
>>> sludged if they had been using synthetic oils?
>>
>> can't you read? [rhetorical]
>>
>>
>>> I doubt you have any
>>> proof at all for that statement.
>>
>> why don't you bother to do some research for yourself? it's easy to
>> sit there and complain. if you think i'm wrong, go away, do your
>> homework, then come back and present it. don't just **** and moan
>> because i dare to offend the delicate sensibilities of the
>> know-nothings and ignorants that pollute usenet with their uninformed
>> personal fears and superstitions.
>>
>> --
>> nomina rutrum rutrum
>
> I have done my homework, and likely know the field better than you.

so post it then!


> I am not complaining.
>
> I am simply saying you have not proved your points with evidence.

so post your evidence! maybe you can teach us something!


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

On 04/04/2010 10:01 AM, hls wrote:
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 4 Apr 2010 08:05:22 -0500, "hls" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "jim beam" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 04/02/2010 07:47 AM, ACAR wrote:
>>>> <snip for clarity>
>>>>> Toyota's oil related sludge/gelling issues were pretty well
>>>>> publicized. However, I think it is true that not one problem was cited
>>>>> by anyone who changed their own oil.
>>>>
>>>> that statement is worth significant examination: "sludge", any
>>>> engine, is
>>>> an oil problem, not mechanical. if toyota had been sold a job lot of
>>>> defective oil or if iffy-lube were being more ruthlessly inattentive
>>>> than
>>>> normal, that would indeed cause the problem.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So you are trying to say that the problematic Toyotas would not have
>>> sludged if they had been using synthetic oils? I doubt you have any
>>> proof at all for that statement.
>>>
>> He is correct though - synthetic oils at the recommended interval did
>> not sludge - nor dird regular oils at the severe duty schedule.
>> That has been proven time and again.
>
> Toyota, which does not have a recommendation for synthetics in my book,
> claims that the problems were that the owners did not maintain their
> vehicles
> properly. There is evidence that there was more to it than that (PCV
> system modifications).
>
> I have seen no data with regard to synthetics in the problematic runs
> of Toyotas. Have you actually SEEN the data, and can you cite your
> source?

where's yours?


--
nomina rutrum rutrum

On 04/04/2010 10:02 AM, hls wrote:
>
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" > wrote in message news:elmop-
>> You're doing nothing but proving that most people are idiots.
>
> What I doing is showing that a lot of people talk crap, thinking that their
> having read it, or heard it, makes it more true when they repeat it.

enlighten us dude! cite!

--
nomina rutrum rutrum

"Scott Dorsey" > wrote
>
> I had a Chrysler Laser which was notorious for turbocharger problems. The
> oil would bake in the turbocharger after the engine was turned off, and
> clog it up with varnish. I used mostly synthetic oil in the thing for
> years and never had a turbocharger problem.

One of the problems in ****ing contests is that each participant looks at
things from their own perspective. You bring up a good point there of an
exception to most rules. Turbo engines need the best oils for the high
temperatures. Exceptions also apply to the guy that travels a mile to work
in -40 temperatures and the guy that commutes 90 miles across Death Valley.