Grumpy Bear

Finding glitter or even pieces isn't normal but it is common. Correct me if I'm wrong @newdude but when a cam/lifter kit fails the motor is not fully torn down, cleaned like a new build would be and reassembled. Those chunks have to go through the pump to get to the filter and they have to get in the pan before the pump can pick them up. Warranty work. There are many reasons a kit can fail. To low a viscosity is one. To low a AW/EP package is another. But so is poor heat treat of parts. Wrong materials substituted by the vendor. Poor QC methods. Not using an assembly lube. Not allowing time for the cam and roller to 'work harden' but for hamming it on a long tow. Corrosion attack from fuel ingress. Everyone's hand is in that pie. The best you can ever do is be the best as YOUR part of the puzzle. Your part is how you drive, maintain and the fluids/filters you choose to use. Given todays OEM shared everything business plan I don't think this is a one make and model experience. As @diyer2 often says, "Luck of the draw" Confidence is built by time and experience with that unit. We can't do that for you. I've been where you are and it sucks. But if everyone did their part time will give you what you are looking for. Dizzy crapped on me at 80 K and we have 285K on her now.

It all matters, right? Can't cure a crap build with the best oil or oil regiment or easiest service. But I'd be preaching to the choir.

I'm plenty chill, thanks for caring. What do you believe "Built Specifically" means? Think about it before you continue. Go to the video and start about 45 seconds in and listen through 2 minutes 15 seconds. Lean in real hard at 1 minute 50 seconds and you will get your answer and it isn't what you believe it is. Lake and I are in Total agreement on this point. These marketing types use the words "Built for" and "Tunned for" as interchangeable and as they do "Clearances" and Tolerances". They are steering people to a goal not the truth. You have to listen to everything with more than your ears, you have to listen with discernment. Marketing is the craft of disarming discernment and the telling of artful lies. Now about this below Like an old MAN sport, MAN. Bingo. Same reasoning GM uses a heavier grade for 'Track Day" oil call out than they do for "Daily Driver" mode in the same vehicle. It dumbfounds me that Joe Average can't cross that bridge during towing.

$4.17 - $4.45 here.

IF you mean Red Line as a brand he, Lake, and Terry Dyson both give it a big thumbs down. What's my data say? Are you telling me I should surrender what anyone can see in the data to someone's notoriety? I don't do hero worship. Those two put their pants on one leg at a time just like you and I. I listen and I listen intently. I buy what has value and does not violate the physics of the larger scientific community. I have no trouble rejecting the garbage no matter who it comes from. LISTEN to Lake carefully. He admits C.A.F.E., EPA and the API are in charge. What you do not seem to understand is that promoting that agenda is THIER BUISNESS. ALL his testing leans toward that light, just like a Sunflower. Terry was more bold about it. VM's that had huge temporary shear values he saw as a "Feature" of the chemistry that allowed a 5W30 to be as fuel efficient as a 5W20. What it is, is additive companies 'marketing' CHEAP VII's as a tool for CAFE compliance. It's not a feature. It's a flaw and it's cheap to use and to promote. It will also not meet the specifications for the EURO C3 license which requires the oils minimum 150 C HTHS to be 3.5 cP and stay there. It requires the minimum 100 C HTHS to not fall below 9.3 cSt. This display below is an example of an SAE 5W30 made by Warren Oil for COSTCO. Look at the second yellow highlighted test result? ASTM D6616. This 5W30 has a HTHS of 6.9 cP at .800 gr/cm density. That's a 8.62 cSt 100 C viscosity or the equivalent of a modest *W20. (Thank you Anton Paar and an on line Cp to cSt calculator) A 0W20 may not have any VII in it if the natural VI is high enough so when Lake is comparing one to the other he is actually testing the same OPERATIONAL viscosity. Do you understand that? Good. Now, he is not 'wear' testing an oil like HPL No-VII Euro 5W300 which has a 100 C viscosity of 11.2 cSt both by ASTM D445 and ASTM 6616. It doesn't shear because there is nothing to shear. Both solidly in the upper half of the SAE spec and miles above the ability of the oil to meet the ILSAC GF-6 or 7 spec for 'fuel efficiency. I doubt you will ever see him test a ILSAC GF-7 5W30 verses a ACEA C3 5W30. Bad for the business of herding the sheepeople toward those products the OEM's, EPA are demanding. If I might be so blunt...you are not looking for what's true. You are looking to be right and in that mindset you will hear none of this. I didn't write anything in this post you can't look up for yourself. But you would have to buy a few SAE papers. Those three highlighted values show you the entire viscosity profile of Kirkland's Signature Series 5W30. Top line is the SAE requirement ASTM D445 at 10.91 cSt Second line is the 100 C HTHS, rarely publishied and shows the viscosity under dynamic high shear. 8.62 cSt (after conversion) [What the motor sees in the bearings] and it's OUT OF SPEC Thrid line is the recovery viscosity or HTLS at 100 C at 9.4 cSt. In spec but after shear is reduced and that is the 'stay in grade' value. So...Stay in grade doesn't mean what you are lead to believe. Hey! It's in spec!! Woohoo. Yea, not really. This physical behavior is why I choose 5W40 oils 90% of the time even for 0W20 applications. Lake did admit that these alternate viscosities are appropriate for the machine, just not approved by the law. Listen to everything.

Blanket statements are dangerous. Listen to the qualifiers. Blanket statement. 0W20 protects just as well as 5W30. THEN he notes, "As long as the 0W20 stays in grade". The qualifier. He is admitting 0W20 has ZERO 'cushion' so if you run it, run one with a hearty VII and assure yourself that there is little fuel dilution. Blanket statement: He is assuming all oil fit this paradigm. They don't. Red Line HP 0W20 has the HTHS of a 5W30 and HPL's No-VII 0W20 doesn't shear at all. It will dilute but it will not shear but it is also at the very bottom of the HTHS for a SAE20. Ditto 5W30's. In his study of thousands of samples by its very nature includes them all but it will be bias toward shelf oils with non-stable VII's. Darn few people run a ACEA C3 spec oil so his sample pool is bias toward 2.9 cSt HTHS which is fractionally better than an SAE 20's 2.6 cSt. The C3 *W30 oils are 3.5 min and 'stay in grade". You can get stat's to say whatever you like if you dilute the pool of samples. Blanket Statement. "The larger the difference between the number before and after the W' the most it shears and he has his pretty little graph to show that. He is also considering ONE of the four types of VII and the least stable of the lot. He is not considering in that sampling NO-VII blends or those of exceeding high natural VI that use a FRACTION of the polymer to do the same thing. Blanket statement stink, even with statistical quotation marks around them. Number don't lie but liars use numbers. Even some people that don't lie get caught in the 'wrong conclusion for the data" trap. Here's why that matters... Strictly on viscosity Stribeck HOLDS. Physics isn't optional. Thicker is more protection every single time and there is no exceptions to Stribeck. Now that said; wear is also dependent on AW and EP additives and IF you were testing the exact same add pack (concentration and all) and vary ONLY the viscosity, Stribeck HOLDS every time. However IF the 0W20 has a superior package and a superior VII then it could look as if Stribeck is violated. When you toss 6K samples into the Stats blender you get garbage. The LS Mean is supposed to filter that out but no one LOOKED at the variation bars in that graph. They just focus in on the MEAN. His chart doesn't show 'Just as good" he even admits that in the statement that the statistical difference is so small as to be meaningless. On that we agree. So...what you are getting is CUSHION when you are driving the viscosity buss with both eyes shut. If you not going to take the time to learn the WHY then listening to blanket statements from experts is your way to go. You WILL do what you've always done and get what you've always got. Guaranteed. He want's receipts? Here's mine... Total wear metals between two identical Mitsubishi 3A92 motors. The first (an acquaintance) was run on Mobil 1 5W30 Advanced and the second (mine) run on Red Line Euro 5W40. Those two yellow dots are the MEAN of the entire Blackstone library of 0W20 oils in the 3A92 platform. You want to run without a cushion? Have at it but lord man, use one that stays in grade and has a robust package then don't outdrive it's headlights with silly long OCI's.

Well she's off the walker and on a cane and she's off the narcotics. Tylenol only now and few of those. She's sleeping good and eating well. Pretty quick. PT at home twice a week. Back to work this week modified hours. She's happy. No marathon running but not bad for less that two weeks.

285,000 Mile Service 458,663 Km 4/25/2026 3,000 mile OCI 3,080 actual 90 oz make up. 5 Quarts Valvoline R&P 5W30 1 Purolator L15436 filter 4/28/2026 285,135 miles. Tire rotation.

Oil temperature is not as closely related to water temperature as you might think. Oil temp is indeed related to air temperature AND to load and rpm. Ya like measurement and science...here it is. Pepper in the winter runs about 175 F oil and has a 180 F water thermostat. In July she runs roughly 200-210 F on oil. Both temperatures are running 55 mph. Run 55 mph in fourth gear and it will run up past 250 F. Not uncommon pulling a trailer loaded at max GVW and this wasn't. Drop 7 K lbs on that trailer and you can cook road kill. I don't recall how many times I've posted this chart but a bunch. This is high gear with changes only in road speed for three different water thermostats and three different base oil packages for the center water thermostat. All within 5 degrees air temperature over the exact same roads in winds under 10 mph. Bottom line is water temperature does not regulate oil temperature to within a few degrees of water temperature. That nearly 18 degree F oil temp swing from cold to hot cuts oil life in half. The Arrhenius rate rule states that for every 10°C (18°F) increase in oil temperature above 60°C (140°F), the oxidation rate roughly doubles The bold in the quote above is the oxidation onset temperature of mineral oil. Synthetics, by type, are higher to start the process but the 'rate' is the rate. Double per 18 F (10C).

Open highway Pepper gets about 25 mpg so one fuel stop between De Kalb Illinois and Denver. A forty gallon tank gets me there on zero. LOL. I stop for the day in Lincoln and stop several times a day. Often at a station. So...... My butt gives out before the tank does.

Saw two stations at $3.96 today!

As of this morning we've had but three days this April without rain. We have twice our monthly average at 6.09 inches. This is keeping the sump pumps busy and the grass by the bubbler watered to death; cutting a ditch in the turf. Better than in the basement. More is forecast for later this week but we are getting a few dry days. Those few are recording sub freezing temperatures over night killing off early sprouts. I have to say the lawn has never looked better and I've mowed a summers worth already. Glad gas is cheap

Cabernet Sauvignon This one took me by surprise. This one is a 2021 but the one I tried and loved is a 2023 which dispensed with the screw top and uses a synthetic cork. There is a silver top version that is not bourbon barrel aged and the difference is pronounced. Not a fan of the silver. It's already getting hard to source but modestly priced at about $17 tax included in Illinois. Granted, I am not a wine snob. I like a wine or not, so don't expect me to expound on this vintage and it's notes. I'm more of a "Can I have a second glass" versus "Is it rude not not finish this?" sort of tester. I can say it is not overly dry and is a very full bodied selection. I don't eat and drink so can't comment on that but it is a very nice drink at room temperature and even better if you let it 'breath' about an hour. If you try it, let me know what you think of it. Taste is a personal experience...I get that.

$4.00 to $4.30 here. Add a quarter twenty five miles east.

We had basement time. Not fun as the wife just had a hip replacement and stairs were not on her bingo card. Rain, wind, hail and twisters. YUCK. Still our property has faired better than many. We spent heavy last year on water abatement and it has already paid for itself. Basement is as dry as can be. Roof looks good and we lost no glass. Big upgrade. We were out of the tornado warning by 10 pm last night but the rain kept up for a few hours more and the thunder was deafening at times.

Interesting question as this is an unusual product. It cleans, yes but it also has a decent HTHS viscosity. 3.3 cP last time I looked. Nearly meets the spec of an SAE 40 (3.5 min). Seems to have a decent add pack as well. So, especially in the case of quart million mile motor....keep using it. If the rings needed freeing at say 60-80 K then I'd use it until it stopped improving and see where I was. If the recovery was partial (uses a quart between 5K changes) then I'd stay with it. Some bore/ring damage has been done and a cleaner oil won't make it last any longer. If however it fully recovered (zero to less than a cup, by dipstick eyeball) over that same period of time AND I was inclined to run it until the cows come home then yea, AMSOIL SS or Red Line HP or one of the offerings from High Performance Lubricants like No-VII 5W30 would be on the short list. If I were just going to trade it then stay with the R&P. It will do just fine. Even for the next guy. You are also in a unique position as a Master Tech and better able to gauge the here and now condition as well as the likely future that I could from a distance. Trust your training. You're good at this. I'd add this as well. ANY oil is like a sponge. It will only hold what it will hold so even this super cleaner has a limit as to the miles that can be run on it and that varies with blowby and season.

This is going to effect 0W* and 5W* products the most in the general market but DEXOS has a bigger issue. No read across to PAO or POE/AN. It was a stupid rule when it was made and now it bites them in the ****. Group III has a viscosity rage as a base oil of 4 to 8 cSt. GTL is even lower. So a natural SAE 8 to SAE 20. Group II bright stocks range 4-30 cSt and POA 4-70 with mPOA reaching out much further. AN's run 5-20 cSt and Esters are dealers choice. DEXOS boxed itself out limiting base oil selection. Group II bright stocks won't meet their low temp or cleanliness or NOACK performance and Group's IV and V have very limited approval. Gen3 the most liberal. They know these last two groups outperform; just being stubborn on testing to their own harm. Admitting they are superior removes doubts of using boutiques that don't rely on that market. A genie that can't be put back int he bottle. What's going to hit everyone is the additives. And I don't have enough information to even venture a guess.

Wife had her hip replacement today. Went pretty good. This outpatient stuff is mind blowing. Like assembly line medicine.

We do this annually around the end of the first quarter. We have a meeting with the lawyer, our RFC and accountant all at once. Lawyer makes any needed changes to the Trust and has them ready at the meeting. DPO is part of the Trust. Personal preference but I'm more comfortable with a Trust than a Will. No probate and no arguments.

I've been using the App of several years. I use it as a general guide but have a short list of stations that do in fact keep current in updating the data base. As a member, and I am not one, have liberty to update pricing in real time as well. There's a note on the page about last update times. It is more inaccurate during times of extreme price volatility. Like any tool, it is as good as the data it is fed. Where I find it really handy is on long trips in areas I haven't explored much in finding stations of a particular brand. Or finding E-85 for Pepper outside my 'loop'. I agree, it isn't perfect but still useful to a degree that i keep it loaded on my phone. My 2 cents...

Weird one today. I'm at a Phillips 66 station today that has both alcohol free 91 and E-10 93 octane. Few stations carry E-0. So, anyway, Their 87 was $4.05 and the 93 was $4.38. only a 33 cent spread....as it should be. The 91 was priced like everyone elses 93 at $5.10. Most stations in my area have an 80 cent to a a $1.20 spread so 33 cents was like crazy. Their 89 was like $4.18 But only station like this in a three county area that I've found.

1.) I'm saying Valvoline made a product to cure a real problem that works. I'm saying there are niche oils that will absolutely prevent it. So yea, hot and cold struck rings are an issue now and always has been; and how do I know that for sure? API has a test sequence for it and allows it. (ASTM D8256) Been testing for decades . New oils have to pass at zero in the test sequence which has zero relevance to your "Real World" https://www.swri.org/sites/default/files/sequence-vh-test.pdf 2.) No, and yet two decades ago no one was using low tension DLH coated rings either. No 207F thermostats. We weren't sticking 2.7 liter motor making 310 SAE NET hp in full sized trucks. We didn't run them hot as the center of the sun. 207 F thermostats and minimal oil and water circulation. We didn't run 0W20 oil in 4 to 7 liter V8's. 2. b.) That valve train shot is cleaner than new. You missed that and those seals are like new as well. Show me yours at that milage. This motor uses the same ring type and cylinder prep as the Ecotec3 and has the same TSB for "STUCK RINGS THAT CAUSE OIL CONSUMPTION. This one uses none at this milage and that sir is RARE. Look, you do what you want. I don't buy or maintain your stuff.

Great point. There is a social element that brings joy to eating! Good reminder. Thanks Stan.

Five Senses Sour Milk. Stale Crackers. Slimy Mushrooms. Burnt toast. Boiled bland meat. We eat with our eyes, our mouth, both taste and texture, our ears and our sense of smell. Well, some of us do. When served a meal in a restaurant, some pay for the experience of a well prepared meal and some others pay to have someone else do the dishes. A few just to be seen. I don't think you have to have a Michelin Star to serve good food that pleases all five senses and I don't think it should require a second mortgage on the house to eat above the gutter. Seems I'm in the minority. I realized that today in a conversation with a waitress. We were discussing the art of the Omelet on which we disagreed. Once she understood what it actually is she shifted her focus to the prohibitive effort and time required to accomplish the task. My rebuff was, "To much time and effort to do their job?" I wasn't just talking about what was cooked in the kitchen but the waitress failing to properly screen what she served and expected a LARGE tip for doing so. We don't eat out much. I only eat about twice a day and one of those needs to be satisfactory to the whole experience. That often means I or the wife do the shopping, cooking and cleaning at home. Oddly or not, one can do this task for about three days of well prepared and pleasing meals for the cost of one awful eat out experience. But hey, that's just my take.

Did it use oil? If so when did it start and how much did it use? I have one at just under 200K so this is interesting to me. Thanks.