A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Technology
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

which is worse, wrong viscosity or dino oil?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 28th 05, 07:37 PM
Timothy J. Lee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article <1119749038.d640a4359a0d93828439333cd4bfdf4b@teran ews>,
Nate Nagel > wrote:
>Question: given the choice, for a car that requires a 40 or 50 weight
>oil, if you can't find a good synthetic in that weight, which would be
>preferable:
>
>1) synthetic 0W30, 5W30 or 10W30
>2) Dino-squoze 15W40
>
>And yes, I live in automotive hell; those are pretty much my choices.


Your local Wal Mart doesn't have 5W-40 synthetic (Shell Rotella T Synthetic
or Mobil 1 Truck and SUV), 10W-40 synthetic (Castrol Syntec), or a thick
5W-30 or 10W-30 synthetic (Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic)?

The other question is, does the car in question have a reputation of
sludging, excessive engine wear, or other problems on conventional oil?

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
Ads
  #22  
Old June 28th 05, 07:58 PM
John S.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Steve wrote:
> John S. wrote:
>
> >
> > Steve wrote:
> >
> >>John S. wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Instead of guessing about which oil might be too thick or thin or
> >>>otherwise have the properties for a given engine and why not just use
> >>>the grade and weight that Porsche recommends.
> >>
> >>
> >>Well, in some cases, the recommended grades are no longer available in
> >>first-rate oils (some engines from the 50s "require" single-grade oil if
> >>you go by the manual!)

> >
> > Well, true, but the 944 Porsche isn't exactly a 1950's era car either
> > <vbg>. And you can still find single grade 30w oil for that 1951 Buick
> > Roadmaster straight 8.

>
>
> But when 10w30 will work better in that engine, WHY use a single-grade oil?
> >
> >
> > And in virtually ALL cases for cars more than 15
> >
> >>years old, oil technology has changed so much that many of the
> >>assumptions that drove the ratings published in the manual are no longer
> >>valid.

> >
> > If in the unusual case that that 10-40 or graphite oil isn't available
> > I would contact the car maker for their recommendation. I wouldn't
> > follow advice like "switching from 15-40 to 0-50 sounded like a good
> > idea so I did it" and yet that is the basis for a lot of the oil advice
> > given here.
> >

>
> I think the pertinent advice is 1) go with a good quality oil before
> using a crappy oil just because its available in an outdated viscosity
> grade, 2) get a viscosity grade NEAR what was recommended (if possible),
> and 3) mainly, watch the pressures and make sure they're within limits,
> which ensures that the oil is being distributed properly.
>
> Also, when oiling older vehicles, you need to have some awareness of
> what the additive packages are. The API is really cutting back on the
> allowable amounts of some additives that are REALLY important to older
> engines, but aren't needed with most modern engines. For example, ZDP.
> Very important for flat-tappet cams, gear drives, and other high-shear
> contact points in an engine. The higher dose of ZDP and other additives
> in Mobil 1's extended life oil means that it doesn't get the latest API
> rating, but its a better oil for a high-performance '60s v8 with really
> stiff valve springs and an aggressive cam than the latest-rated regular
> Mobil-1 which is aimed at roller cam engines.


The point, or mine anyway was that some thought be given to matching
the requirements of the engine with the specifications of the oil and
not just guessing.

  #23  
Old June 30th 05, 06:58 PM
Steve
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John S. wrote:
>


>
> The point, or mine anyway was that some thought be given to matching
> the requirements of the engine with the specifications of the oil and
> not just guessing.
>


That's my point as well. Just because an engine built 20 years ago, and
the manual written 20 years ago call for a particular grade oil, that
doesn't mean that its still the best oil to use. Its a very good
guideline on what the designers were looking for in an oil, but those
characteristics might be much better met by a slighly different grade
with modern oils. Oil technology has changed even more radically than
engine technology over the past 50 years.
  #24  
Old July 1st 05, 02:36 PM
Don Stauffer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Steve wrote:
> John S. wrote:
>
>>

>
>>
>> The point, or mine anyway was that some thought be given to matching
>> the requirements of the engine with the specifications of the oil and
>> not just guessing.
>>

>
> That's my point as well. Just because an engine built 20 years ago, and
> the manual written 20 years ago call for a particular grade oil, that
> doesn't mean that its still the best oil to use. Its a very good
> guideline on what the designers were looking for in an oil, but those
> characteristics might be much better met by a slighly different grade
> with modern oils. Oil technology has changed even more radically than
> engine technology over the past 50 years.


Don't newer specifications require that the oil still meet older
grade/specifications?
  #25  
Old July 1st 05, 07:31 PM
Steve
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Don Stauffer wrote:

> Steve wrote:
>
>> John S. wrote:
>>
>>>

>>
>>>
>>> The point, or mine anyway was that some thought be given to matching
>>> the requirements of the engine with the specifications of the oil and
>>> not just guessing.
>>>

>>
>> That's my point as well. Just because an engine built 20 years ago,
>> and the manual written 20 years ago call for a particular grade oil,
>> that doesn't mean that its still the best oil to use. Its a very good
>> guideline on what the designers were looking for in an oil, but those
>> characteristics might be much better met by a slighly different grade
>> with modern oils. Oil technology has changed even more radically than
>> engine technology over the past 50 years.

>
>
> Don't newer specifications require that the oil still meet older
> grade/specifications?


VISCOSITY specifications do, API ratings don't necessarily, since the
ratings place limits on the allowed amounts of some additives that can
harm catalytic convertors.



  #26  
Old July 1st 05, 09:03 PM
N8N
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wishful thinking on both of our parts I guess

nate

Steve wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> > 944 is water cooled,

>
> Duh.. Why did my eyes convert it to "911?"
>
>
> > but I agree with you otherwise. It's an
> > all-aluminum engine and can run hot if everything isn't working together
> > properly.
> >
> > nate
> >
> > Steve wrote:
> >
> >> Given that this is an air-cooled machine, I'd lean toward sticking
> >> with the synthetic oil for its better thermal stability. Try the
> >> thinner oil and keep a close eye on the oil pressure. If your hot oil
> >> pressures stay good, there's really no need to go to a thicker oil.
> >> Viscosity and film strength are NOT necessarily related- a thicker oil
> >> won't necessarily protect bearings and cylinder walls better than a
> >> thin oil- but the pressure has to stay good enough to properly
> >> distribute the oil.
> >>
> >> All the above is just my opinion, mind you. :-) I've been running
> >> 10w30 or 5w30 Mobil-1 year round in Central Texas for years-
> >> admittedly in water-cooled v8s though.
> >>
> >>
> >> Nate Nagel wrote:
> >>
> >>> Went to change my oil today; car has been running a steady diet of
> >>> Mobil 1 15W50 which IMO is probably a little too thick for the
> >>> engine. However, a xW30 is definitely on the thin side. I wanted to
> >>> try this new Mobil 1 5W40 "Truck and SUV formula" which is supposed
> >>> to have a great additive package but ended up having to settle for
> >>> regular 0W40 instead. almost didn't even find that.
> >>>
> >>> Question: given the choice, for a car that requires a 40 or 50
> >>> weight oil, if you can't find a good synthetic in that weight, which
> >>> would be preferable:
> >>>
> >>> 1) synthetic 0W30, 5W30 or 10W30
> >>> 2) Dino-squoze 15W40
> >>>
> >>> Car is an old Porsche 944 FWIW.
> >>>
> >>> And yes, I live in automotive hell; those are pretty much my choices.
> >>> As much as I bust on yuppie northern VA, that is where I actually saw
> >>> the oil I wanted to use offered for sale. I might just have to start
> >>> shopping there...
> >>>
> >>> nate
> >>>

> >
> >


  #27  
Old July 1st 05, 09:08 PM
N8N
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



John S. wrote:
> Instead of guessing about which oil might be too thick or thin or
> otherwise have the properties for a given engine and why not just use
> the grade and weight that Porsche recommends. If the engine design
> team from Porsche and the chemists from Mobil participated in this
> discussion, you might have a good basis for doing something other than
> what the owners manual says. Otherwise the opinions you get will be
> uninformed guesses.


That's what I'm trying to do, but I can't always find a xW40 synthetic,
hence my original question. The FSM recommends a xW40 or xW50 for most
temperatures that we see in this area, and current thinking seems to be
to use the thinnest acceptable oil to keep the flow rate up.

nate

  #28  
Old July 1st 05, 09:13 PM
N8N
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Timothy J. Lee wrote:
> In article <1119749038.d640a4359a0d93828439333cd4bfdf4b@teran ews>,
> Nate Nagel > wrote:
> >Question: given the choice, for a car that requires a 40 or 50 weight
> >oil, if you can't find a good synthetic in that weight, which would be
> >preferable:
> >
> >1) synthetic 0W30, 5W30 or 10W30
> >2) Dino-squoze 15W40
> >
> >And yes, I live in automotive hell; those are pretty much my choices.

>
> Your local Wal Mart doesn't have 5W-40 synthetic (Shell Rotella T Synthetic
> or Mobil 1 Truck and SUV), 10W-40 synthetic (Castrol Syntec), or a thick
> 5W-30 or 10W-30 synthetic (Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic)?


Nope. Actually there is no local Wal-Mart (amazing!) but Sam's Club
(yes, I checked there) does not carry any of those, nor do the local
parts stores. Many of them carry Mobil 1 but only the xW30 and
occasionally 15W50 grades - except for the one where I found the 0W40.

I guess that means I will have to do my oil shopping after work in
Virginia, where I have seen all the above in the Wal-Mart there.
Sucks, because I hate Wal-Mart but they seem to be the only retailer
that carries the products I want.

>
> The other question is, does the car in question have a reputation of
> sludging, excessive engine wear, or other problems on conventional oil?
>


Not really, but IMHO the synth is cheap insurance as an engine rebuild,
or even a good used engine, could easily cost more than the value of
the car. (Porsche 944)

nate

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
(newbie question) oil viscosity and fuel consumption William Park VW water cooled 4 March 17th 05 05:12 AM
whats wrong? gabriel Honda 7 February 11th 05 04:39 PM
2004 JGC Oil Viscosity Neil Jeep 1 January 10th 05 03:50 PM
Nobody knows what is wrong with my 99 Dodge Avenger v6 LadyGelzer04 Dodge 14 May 22nd 04 04:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.