Will switching from Synthetic to Dyno oil harm my engine?

SNIP
>
> I have also been displeased with Amway (are they related?),
SNIP

NO!

Huw wrote:
> "Philip" > wrote in message
> link.net...
>> Oh come on Huw! LOL
>
> I need to wind down after a hectic and rewarding period of work. I
> really do feel a bit burnt out and a week or so off my main job will
> do me good. However, my wife is also off work so will ensure I stay
> away from the 'puter as much as possible.

Understood. :-)

>> BTW, I ran across this blurb on the Mobil website:
>>
>> -> Features & Benefits
>> Modern high output, *low* emission diesel engines generate *higher*
>> levels of soot and run at higher temperatures than older, naturally
>> aspirated engines, which significantly increases the demands on
>> engine lubricants.
>
> Higher temperatures, yes. You and I both know that they actually
> produce less soot by far, especially compared with indirect injection
> engines, although they may deposit slightly more in the oil than
> stage 11 standard engines due to timing issues primarily.

My gut reaction is to agree that indirect injection results in more soot,
also much less diesel cackle. This soot gets into the oil, obviously.
Please explain why direct injection design would promote "slightly more"
soot fouling of the oil. What am I missing?

>> Current engine designs reduce oil consumption, resulting in less
>> fresh oil makeup to replenish depleted additives.
>
> Most of my many engines require very little, if any, oil between
> service intervals. This has been true back to the 1970's although I
> have had the occassional engine which needs a quart every thousand
> miles or so.

Are limiting oil consumption to the context of diesels here?

>> Top piston rings are located higher
>> on the piston bringing the oil film closer to the combustion chamber
>> where higher temperatures increase thermal stress on the lubricant.
>
> True
>
>
>> Higher fuel
>> injector pressure and retarded timing improve exhaust emission
>> control, but also increase engine temperatures and increase soot
>> loads, including those engines operating with Exhaust Gas
>> Recirculation (EGR).
>
> Also true and combined with significantly improved output per litre
> displacement as a result.


>> Well, the ol Nissan SD22 has an EGR (that I disconnected), is
>> naturally aspirated, and has the injection timing back up at 18
>> degrees (instead of the 7 degrees BTDC when I got the truck). It's
>> also running current formulation Delo 400 ... not the stuff that was
>> available back in 1982. So with these soot contributors corrected, should
>> not the oil take
>> more miles to get fouled than without these "corrections?" HA! Could
>> have fooled me!
>
> This engine is a somewhat cleaner example than my Land Rover 67hp 2.5
> litre. In fact I know your engine family very well having a 2.5 litre
> version [TD25] naturally aspirated fitted to a skid steer loader, a
> Nissan Dodich, and still having one of three 2.7 litre turbo versions
> of the family working daily [TD27T] in a Nissan Terrano.
> In fact these have 6000 mile service intervals here using high
> detergent oil. As you know, I use API CH4 oil which is an SHPD
> specification heavy duty long drain specification. With this oil I
> can be confident that even if I drive a few weeks over the
> recommended interval, the oil can stand it and no harm will be done.
> In the Land Rover however, 5000 miles is religiously followed due to
> the soot deposits which tended to overwhelm lesser oils at 5000 miles
> and threatened to turn it into a thick sludge. It is fairly
> spectacular to observe the difference between SHPD oil and API CE in
> this application at 5000 miles. The lesser oils actually start to
> clump with a thick lumpiness.

YIKES! The SD22 by the 3,000 mile post (on Delo 400)(estimated time: 100
hrs/30 mph average) is soot fouled enough that when you rub a little between
your fingers, that getting the black crap off your skin requires serious
pumice soap. Solvent doesn't touch it. I use hospital latex gloves on
oil/filter changes! Wised up quick. Can't speak difinitively about the
viscosity at this mileage. Never sent a sample for laboratory.

> I have another heavy duty engine which can break down the viscosity
> of CE oil well within 200 hours to the consistency of water but which
> has no problem with SHPD oil. This engine runs so hot that when a
> piston oil spray nozzle failed last Summer the piston melted into
> small alloy beads and the cylinder burst and also broke the head.
> There were no deposits and no noticeable wear of any other components
> in this engine and all cylinders were stripped just in case. Luckily
> it has individually replaceable pots and heads.
>
> Huw

All that from simply losing an oil cooling jet? Sounds fishy ... sorry.
When you say "this engine runs so hot..." ... which "hot" are you referring
to? Coolant? Oil temperature? Exhaust temperature? Combustion chamber
temperatures? Is the injection timing known to be correct for the fuel
quality?? Perhaps a little less timing advance?
--

- Philip

Timothy J. Lee wrote:
> In article . net>,
> Philip > wrote:
>> Yes, I know VW suggests
>> synthetic IF ... are you are going to perform oil services by the
>> oil life monitoring system.
>
> Actually, VW has specifically recommended "synthetic" for its diesel
> engines since 1999 in the US, using fixed oil change intervals. Also,
> the 5W-40 grade recommendation for all recent VW engines in the US
> is a roundabout way of saying "use synthetic", but lots of owners and
> dealers use conventional oil (of some other grade).

Once again ... just because the manufacturer makes such a specific
requirment does not make that oil a mainstream oil. What you find on the
shelves of Autozone, PepBoys, Napa, TA, Petro, 76 truck stops, and (any
name) gas station is mainstream.
--

- Philip

JP wrote:
> SNIP
>>
>> If the car manufacture states you need to change it that often, 3k,
>> and you don't, and something fails under warranty, they can refuse
>> coverage. Now you really wasted money.
>
> Wouldn't an oil analysis by an independant lab settle any dispute?
>
> JP

Hahahhahha Recall the great Toyota V6 debate.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 02:19:02 GMT, "JP" > wrote:

>SNIP
>>
>> If the car manufacture states you need to change it that often, 3k,
>> and you don't, and something fails under warranty, they can refuse
>> coverage. Now you really wasted money.
>
>Wouldn't an oil analysis by an independant lab settle any dispute?
>
>JP
>

If you are given a maintenance schedule to change your oil every 3k
miles, and you don't(even with an oil analysis), do you think you met
your end of the warrenty agreement?

Just asking....

Tom @ www.BookmarkAdmin.com

Neil Nelson > wrote in
:

> In article >,
> "Michael Pardee" > wrote:
>
>> "aarcuda69062" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >,
>> > Don't know about the Chevron but the Havoline, yeesh, what tar!
>> > And when I say tar, I mean experience from being inside engines
>> > that has had it's oil changed religiously every 3K miles and the
>> > owners have used Havoline exclusively since the vehicle was new.
>> >
>> FWIW, that is the message I get from my gear-head younger brother. He
>> tells me it leaves crusty carbon that just won't dissolve with
>> anything throughout engines.
>
> Exactly what I've seen.
>

If Pennzoil was free I wouldn`t use it. I have only seen one eng in 30
years run on that stuff that wasn`t a mess inside when tore down. Hardly
any detergent there. KB (ps the **** killed many ford 2300 cams as per
ford TSBs. in the 1970s)

--
ThunderSnake #9 Warn once, shoot twice
460 in the pkup, 460 on the stand for another pkup
and one in the shed for a fun project to yet be decided on

Kevin Bottorff wrote:
> Neil Nelson > wrote in
> :
>
>> In article >,
>> "Michael Pardee" > wrote:
>>
>>> "aarcuda69062" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Don't know about the Chevron but the Havoline, yeesh, what tar!
>>>> And when I say tar, I mean experience from being inside engines
>>>> that has had it's oil changed religiously every 3K miles and the
>>>> owners have used Havoline exclusively since the vehicle was new.
>>>>
>>> FWIW, that is the message I get from my gear-head younger brother.
>>> He tells me it leaves crusty carbon that just won't dissolve with
>>> anything throughout engines.
>>
>> Exactly what I've seen.
>>
>
> If Pennzoil was free I wouldn`t use it. I have only seen one eng in
> 30 years run on that stuff that wasn`t a mess inside when tore down.
> Hardly any detergent there. KB (ps the **** killed many ford 2300
> cams as per ford TSBs. in the 1970s)

Are you rootin' for the Hatfields or the McCoys? Good grief. Your
prejudice is appalling. Still using water soluble oil in your cooling
system instead of ethylene glycol too?
--

- Philip

"Kevin Bottorff" > wrote in message
...

> If Pennzoil was free I wouldn`t use it. I have only seen one eng in 30
> years run on that stuff that wasn`t a mess inside when tore down. Hardly
> any detergent there. KB (ps the **** killed many ford 2300 cams as per
> ford TSBs. in the 1970s)

They don't sell that oil anymore.

> wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 02:19:02 GMT, "JP" > wrote:
>
>>SNIP
>>>
>>> If the car manufacture states you need to change it that often, 3k,
>>> and you don't, and something fails under warranty, they can refuse
>>> coverage. Now you really wasted money.
>>
>>Wouldn't an oil analysis by an independant lab settle any dispute?
>>
>>JP
>>
>
> If you are given a maintenance schedule to change your oil every 3k
> miles, and you don't(even with an oil analysis), do you think you met
> your end of the warrenty agreement?
>
> Just asking....
>

It would be a 'get out' for the manufacturer here. For industrial machines
and prime movers then an oil analysis and proof of reasonable maintenance,
such as an in-house service record, would suffice.

Huw

"Philip" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> Huw wrote:
>> "Philip" > wrote in message
>> link.net...
>>
>> Higher temperatures, yes. You and I both know that they actually
>> produce less soot by far, especially compared with indirect injection
>> engines, although they may deposit slightly more in the oil than
>> stage 11 standard engines due to timing issues primarily.
>
> My gut reaction is to agree that indirect injection results in more soot,
> also much less diesel cackle. This soot gets into the oil, obviously.
> Please explain why direct injection design would promote "slightly more"
> soot fouling of the oil. What am I missing?

Only the latest direct injection diesels foul their oil slightly more than
versions of about pre 2000 due to previously mentioned reasons. Compared to
indirect injection diesels they pollute their oil far less with soot.

>
>>> Current engine designs reduce oil consumption, resulting in less
>>> fresh oil makeup to replenish depleted additives.
>>
>> Most of my many engines require very little, if any, oil between
>> service intervals. This has been true back to the 1970's although I
>> have had the occassional engine which needs a quart every thousand
>> miles or so.
>
> Are limiting oil consumption to the context of diesels here?

Most of my diesel engines use virtually no oil between services. My Toyota
diesel running at twice the recommended oil change interval on synthetic oil
uses no oil at all AFAICS up to 10,000 miles. The Mercedes did use half a
quart to reach 15000 miles initially but was using less when I sold it.


>
>>> Top piston rings are located higher
>>> on the piston bringing the oil film closer to the combustion chamber
>>> where higher temperatures increase thermal stress on the lubricant.
>>
>> True
>>
>>
>>> Higher fuel
>>> injector pressure and retarded timing improve exhaust emission
>>> control, but also increase engine temperatures and increase soot
>>> loads, including those engines operating with Exhaust Gas
>>> Recirculation (EGR).
>>
>> Also true and combined with significantly improved output per litre
>> displacement as a result.
>
>
>>> Well, the ol Nissan SD22 has an EGR (that I disconnected), is
>>> naturally aspirated, and has the injection timing back up at 18
>>> degrees (instead of the 7 degrees BTDC when I got the truck). It's
>>> also running current formulation Delo 400 ... not the stuff that was
>>> available back in 1982. So with these soot contributors corrected,
>>> should not the oil take
>>> more miles to get fouled than without these "corrections?" HA! Could
>>> have fooled me!
>>
>> This engine is a somewhat cleaner example than my Land Rover 67hp 2.5
>> litre. In fact I know your engine family very well having a 2.5 litre
>> version [TD25] naturally aspirated fitted to a skid steer loader, a
>> Nissan Dodich, and still having one of three 2.7 litre turbo versions
>> of the family working daily [TD27T] in a Nissan Terrano.
>> In fact these have 6000 mile service intervals here using high
>> detergent oil. As you know, I use API CH4 oil which is an SHPD
>> specification heavy duty long drain specification. With this oil I
>> can be confident that even if I drive a few weeks over the
>> recommended interval, the oil can stand it and no harm will be done.
>> In the Land Rover however, 5000 miles is religiously followed due to
>> the soot deposits which tended to overwhelm lesser oils at 5000 miles
>> and threatened to turn it into a thick sludge. It is fairly
>> spectacular to observe the difference between SHPD oil and API CE in
>> this application at 5000 miles. The lesser oils actually start to
>> clump with a thick lumpiness.
>
> YIKES! The SD22 by the 3,000 mile post (on Delo 400)(estimated time: 100
> hrs/30 mph average) is soot fouled enough that when you rub a little
> between your fingers, that getting the black crap off your skin requires
> serious pumice soap.

The Land Rover achieves this in the first mile, believe me.


Solvent doesn't touch it. I use hospital latex gloves on
> oil/filter changes! Wised up quick. Can't speak difinitively about the
> viscosity at this mileage. Never sent a sample for laboratory.
>
>> I have another heavy duty engine which can break down the viscosity
>> of CE oil well within 200 hours to the consistency of water but which
>> has no problem with SHPD oil. This engine runs so hot that when a
>> piston oil spray nozzle failed last Summer the piston melted into
>> small alloy beads and the cylinder burst and also broke the head.
>> There were no deposits and no noticeable wear of any other components
>> in this engine and all cylinders were stripped just in case. Luckily
>> it has individually replaceable pots and heads.
>>
>> Huw
>
> All that from simply losing an oil cooling jet? Sounds fishy ... sorry.

Oh yes. The little cranked pipe which sprays oil under the piston crown
broke off at the banjo bolt.


> When you say "this engine runs so hot..." ... which "hot" are you
> referring to? Coolant? Oil temperature? Exhaust temperature?
> Combustion chamber temperatures?

All of the above. Coolant being, in this case, the sump oil which bathes the
lower part of the cylinders and under the piston crown. The upper cylinder
and head are air cooled. When it failed catastrophically, it was not even
working that hard, just hauling a ten ton load [17 ton gross] up a two mile
hill. It is a 160 hp electronically controlled 6litre turbo intercooled
engine with around 580Nm torque at 1400rpm. It does not have much constant
power, let alone rising power charachteristic and a rather modest torque
rise of some 25% by todays standards.

It has been known to work at maximum power output for hours on end, and it
is here that it runs exceedingly hot. All parameters appear to be
significantly hotter than any other engine I run. Such engines, very
economical though they are, have been phased out recently because their
combustion temperature does not lend itself to passing emission regulations,
in particular oxides of Nitrogen.


Is the injection timing known to be correct for the fuel
> quality?? Perhaps a little less timing advance?

Everything is spot on and no adjustments were made when it was repaired and
it has been going as well as ever since the cylinder was repaired.


Huw