Jump to content

An Oil Thread

Spiney Norman
 Share

Recommended Posts

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

I ran 20-50 Amsoil in all my gas engines up to my trailblazer ss at 25K oil changes or one year. They ( the dealer) used mobile 1 at 12-15k oil changes in the trailblazer per oil minder. First experience of the dealership using full synthetic. Now with most dealerships using full synthetic I just let them do it. 0-20 seems wrong haven’t lost an engine so I just go with it. My Avalanche just gets Amsoil in everything. The rest at the dealership. I can get under the Avalanche without jacking it up, so I do it mostly.

  • Like 2
customboss Senior Enthusiast

customboss

Posted
Posted
On 4/29/2022 at 3:54 PM, Grumpy Bear said:

 

You did! Nothing wrong with your post.

Don't even think you were talking to me but the question was a good one so I responded.

😉 

 

Engineering at it's very best

 

We own a 2006 Civic which from the factory uses upper control members that are to short to provide an alignment that does not eat tires at a horrible rate. TSB attached.  Horrid negative camber. 

 

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2014/SB-10052495-1405.pdf

 

Note the date of this TSB 2/2014.

 

From 2008 to 2014 this was not a recall but a Factory Service Bulletin that was addressed with only customers that 'repeatedly' and loudly complained of rapid tire wear.

 

From 2006 until the FSB came out complains were first addressed by Honda providing NEW ALIGNMENT specs which did nothing but by stroke of a pen put the out of camber situation in mid spec. :crackup:

 

That was replaced in 2008 with an additional spec change to increase to the stupid rear toe in a effort to even the wear. And some tire relief IF when inspected it still had the OEM BRAND, TYPE AND SIZE it came with. None did naturally. 

 

About this time (2008) they also released a new upper control arm whose design length SPEC was longer but as the production tolerance for +/- was huge many replacement arms that were close to the minimum length were actually shorter than the original arms at their maximum length. :idiot:That the set they installed on ours. We bought the car from my sister-in-law who bought it new with 60K on the clock and already had eaten 3 sets of tires. We went through 2 more sets before Honda replaced the arms and then another set only 8K miles after the repair. Yea wore out faster fixed than not. 6 sets of tires in under 100K. 

 

MOOG Problem Solver line had an adjustable length arm that I bought an installed and then had my local private shop dial in the alignment to specs to MY CHOICE.

 

Did the next 100 K on one set and now 30K into a second set and look new yet. Added almost 5 mpg to the normal average. Handling improvement was off the hook. As was braking and the run in twitch was gone. 

 

I have a few more accounts like this including Dizzy's breather system and the issues that FUBAR design caused. And a totally messed up 76 Ford Granada I bought new. 

 

There is no Elfin Magic factory or 'special' engineers except those that get to work on the Corvette projects. 😱

 

 :rant:

 

 

There is no Elfin Magic factory or 'special' engineers except those that get to work on the Corvette projects. 😱

 

 

AGREED!  Have you seen Corvette engine quality for the past 20 years.....LOL  

 

 

 

customboss Senior Enthusiast

customboss

Posted
Posted
On 4/28/2022 at 1:22 PM, Spiney Norman said:

So I've read that 20psi at idle, normal operating temp, is fairly normal. My '03 with the V6 makes that at idle and over 50psi (almost 60) at highway speed.

I'm running 10w40, truck has almost 116k miles. Anyone ever at a quart or two of 20W50 to thicken things up for summer? Or should I just keep running 10W40?

 

In other news I took the truck on a little road trip recently. A/C off, used the cruise control, kept my foot out of it and averaged 23.7mpg. I'm pleased.

 

US spec passenger car/truck engine (PCMO)  oil specs : 

72-89% of a PCMO is base oil 

5-12%  is additive package

5-15% is viscosity modifier  ( most likely that 10w40 is 15% viscosity modifier making a VERY THIN base oil behave to 40 SAE grade @100C 

<1% is pour point depressant 

 

GM ran away from 10w40, 20w50 etc years ago because once the lower quality viscosity modifiers gave up the ghost they gummed the engine up AND when that cooked off and stuck to the internals the remaining engine oil usually measured less than SAE 20. 

 

European engine makes DEMAND better oils and drive engine oil production there. Here the American Petroleum Institute ( API ) drives oil making. 

 

So a Euro spec 10w40 might really do well in your GM engine but you are trusting the polymer quality to an engine that wanted less of those becoming deposit formers. 

 

The base oils are the key and marketing makes it really hard to see the real McCoy out here in the US market. 

 

 

 

 

dna9656 Enthusiast

dna9656

Posted
Posted

I'm old enough to barely remember straight weight oil. I remember Popular Science ran an article about "Non Newtonian" oils and how through the use of polymers chemists could make oil behave (flow) like a heavy oil when hot and a thinner oil when it was cold Most of you folks prolly know the "W" in "10W 30) means winter. So this particular oil acts like a 10 weight oil (gets thinner,. flows easier) in the cold (when most all fluids get thicker and harder to pump) and a 30 weight oil in the summer (gets thicker, so it's not too thin to do it's job) when most all fluids get thinner.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,914
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    AidenVorpagel
    Newest Member
    AidenVorpagel
    Joined

  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,260 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Sugar Bears 2015 GMC Terrain SLE-2 2.4 AWD

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      286,740 Mile Services   8/6/2026   New AC Compressor. Refrigerant oil and dye, evacuate and charge system.  New exhaust system from cat back.  New Iridium plugs plus replace #3 coil Repair/rewire headlamp wiring (passenger side) and replace all forward bulbs. Polish lenses of both assemblies.  Pull rear rotors, clean and adjust parking assembly. Inspect, clean and grease front calipers. Check pads and shoes.  4 wheel power bleed of brake system. Dot 4 Reset idle speed 50 rpm higher New Serpentine belt.    Will need new pads in the rear in about 5K more miles.    Tax Title and License out the door just short of a grand.    AC clutch had bitten the dust. 1 year warranty on the pick and save replacement. Thing will make a Polar Bear cry Uncle.  He spent quite some time on the wiring. It was in the harness and he does nothing half. I got off cheap. I have considerable more light down the road. Sylvania Silver Star replacements.  Gas seal between the porcelain and shell of plug #3 was blown, cooked the coil. That was the cold miss.  Love the new exhaust. I can sneak into the neighborhood again.  Nice to have a working parking brake again. Belle Tire never got it done. That was disappointing.    This was one of her bigger bills and still way cheaper than a payment even given the oil consumption. This thing cost me under a hundred a month in repairs and normal routine costs. What is my incentive to replace it? 🤔           
    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...