I don't want an oil burner/best oil to use

Another JR · October 9, 2025

I made this meme for a previous thread on oil consumption rate and GM’s position on a quart per 1000 miles being acceptable.

Chuck FB · October 9, 2025

I imagine not only the volume measuring you did but the visual on the dipstick that tracked the slight drop in oil level assuming you were parked in the same area gave you the picture. I've never had a vehicle or piece of equipment yet that didn't throw me various readings depending on how it happened to be parked but I never had the luxury of time until more recently so its pour in oil into a tractor/combine/highway tractor if I think it needs attention based on how I think its leaning and the next day I'll figure out if I put a bit too much in or not ...

I am just amazed you get that sort of mileage with the camper, its pushing a bit of wind ( not near as much as a traditional hard camper though ) and its having to carry that weight constantly. Your getting as good a mileage as some do driving empty pickups but I suspect its the driving style/speed that is partly if not mostly to blame for not using less than you do with the camper on. Mind you there could be fuel blends different there than what someone else is using but I would guess you get thrown lots of ethanol blended fuel in Washington state. Ironically and this is years ago as I've only driven through Seattle and south on interstate 5 once down to Oregon but a stretch in there is where I got the best fuel mileage ever on an older truck, not much for hill grades and the elevation is low and the weather was good with no wind.

I was at a neighbour farm last night visiting and we were talking about his one ton dually duramax 2023 model and he has a 10-2 northern lite, he has been over the scale and it still has me confused as he claimed to weigh around 14000 lb, must have thrown a lot of junk into the camper and the back seat of the truck. He figured his best fuel economy he has calculated so far and was with sticking to 62 mph figured out to 11.25 US miles per gallon. Its crazy up here if one is older and used to the imperial system, figuring in IMP, US, and the stupid Litres per 100 KM which will never sit right in my head. No question that your rig setup is more economical on fuel and gas being cheaper the last years vs diesel.

diyer2 · October 10, 2025

Can we just agree to change the oil more frequently than the OLM reads?

Chuck FB · October 10, 2025

You can put my name down in the agree column

Pryme · October 10, 2025

So I just changed my trucks oil the other day. I ran that oil almost 10mo so just decided to change it now before winter. Only 2700mi on it and there was zero oil loss. I drained the old oil into two empty five quart jugs and put 4qts in each one. It was spot on. That was with the super tech oil.

Chuck FB · October 11, 2025

This was one of the videos I was thinking about lately that talked about the graph I couldn't recall the name of, the Stribeck Curve and I included a graph and the explanations behind it. Also this video from Lake Speed where he gets into the topic of the GM recall on the 6.2 and that whole concept of a higher viscosity oil at operating temperature to protect the crank from touching the bearings if the situation calls for it. And yes the bs surrounding why North America is pushing for thin oil where some other country may have a different viscosity recommendation for an exact engine we have here. Changing the initial factory oil much sooner etc, a few good bits of information in this video.

A friends half ton with the 6.2 has an appointment later this month for the recall to be checked at the dealer with the instrument of pass or fail, that should be interesting ...

https://www.fuchs.com/us/en/what-is-the-stribeck-curve/

Grumpy Bear · October 12, 2025

Chuck FB · October 12, 2025

3 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

That was the graph all right and I believe what you had posted before, I just couldn't make out the wording on my screen and also couldn't recall what they referred to that curve as. The odd part is they don't point to the area under the curve and say anything as it should say "Danger Will Robinson Danger" !.

Something tells me not only GM with the 6.2 but other engine brands as well have been dipping their toes below the no go line and got more than their toes burned, and vehicle owners paying the price for it. Crank bearing wise, valve train and cam chain wear etc.

Z45 · October 13, 2025

Edited October 13, 2025 by Z45

Chuck FB · October 13, 2025

51 minutes ago, Z45 said:

That was where I saw the stribeck curve talked about. The sample testing the API did certainly doesn't give 100% confidence that all oils that claim to meet a certain spec actually do, would be curious if there was a theme of which brands did not or what countries fell short.

Grumpy Bear · October 13, 2025

I took note of his comments that you can find a study to support every position or belief. I agree. He also says to do it right you have to TEST and then admits he is to lazy to do that. Well....a least he's honest. I like that. I'm not that lazy. I test.

Oil Geek and this guy are in about 99 point agreement. And yet both walk around significant facts that only testing would reveal. Honestly, that is to be expected. Their coverage of generic and the advice would of necessity require it to be specific and that, again, would require testing. For example, his talk about the graphs showing viscosity v temperature walk around the fact that POA's response to cold is quite different from a mineral oil (Group II or III) with even PPD additives and as I've displayed before can be a grade or more different as the specification for qualification is a MAXIUM with no minimum. Here it is again.

They both use words like 'Significant" when speaking of the differences in wear. That world implies a standard to judge 'significance' against. Slight of hand but it doesn't mean none, it means compared to THE standard and they leave us in the dark about what the value of THE is.

In the Steinbeck Curves displayed the points plotted on that curve for oil grades were plotted to make the point he was making. They were not random. And it is the main reason that you can find a study to support any argument you wish to make. The actual placement of that point on that curve is unique to the example under discussion. Right down the driver as the driver controls the average and median LOAD applied of the test and over the life of the unit used in calculating the Hersey number.

To know your particulars you have to instrument and test. Acquire data and LOOK. You can not make blanket statements about lubrication.

I have two such studies underway right now for MY equipment.

Chuck FB · October 13, 2025

21 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

I took note of his comments that you can find a study to support every position or belief. I agree. He also says to do it right you have to TEST and then admits he is to lazy to do that. Well....a least he's honest. I like that. I'm not that lazy. I test.

Oil Geek and this guy are in about 99 point agreement. And yet both walk around significant facts that only testing would reveal. Honestly, that is to be expected. Their coverage of generic and the advice would of necessity require it to be specific and that, again, would require testing. For example, his talk about the graphs showing viscosity v temperature walk around the fact that POA's response to cold is quite different from a mineral oil (Group II or III) with even PPD additives and as I've displayed before can be a grade or more different as the specification for qualification is a MAXIUM with no minimum. Here it is again.

They both use words like 'Significant" when speaking of the differences in wear. That world implies a standard to judge 'significance' against. Slight of hand but it doesn't mean none, it means compared to THE standard and they leave us in the dark about what the value of THE is.

In the Steinbeck Curves displayed the points plotted on that curve for oil grades were plotted to make the point he was making. They were not random. And it is the main reason that you can find a study to support any argument you wish to make. The actual placement of that point on that curve is unique to the example under discussion. Right down the driver as the driver controls the average and median LOAD applied of the test and over the life of the unit used in calculating the Hersey number.

To know your particulars you have to instrument and test. Acquire data and LOOK. You can not make blanket statements about lubrication.

I have two such studies underway right now for MY equipment.

Even with my extremely limited knowledge of oil as after all I make use of oil but its not like I personally test oil, I agree that a video like this is giving general information on the concept of viscosity but does not go deeper than that to show physical proof in testing nor break down the fact that not all oils perform the same as what their viscosity given numbers on the side of the bottle would suggest. He is relying on engine engineers paid by a manufacturer as well as oil specialists ( Mobil employees in this case ) to provide him with information. The problem with that method, is ulterior vested interests that each company has and therefore how they present the "facts" they create and present them to this person doing the video. I know from the past with other videos he seems rather tied to Mobil, and that is a possible conflict right there but also he tests vehicles sometimes and can't go badmouthing too hard as otherwise every door would get slammed in his face. After all this engineer who made this video gets lots of views and right in front of him is what I would say is a product placement, don't tell me there are no little perks that come back to him from such a product placement !.

To a degree Lake Speed would be in the same position I suspect even though he claims not to have a bias with any one oil company, he can say some things and suggest some things that won't put him in the bad books but still help the person on the street in general terms and in his case does testing to show proof of engine wear. What he or anyone else in that space of knowledge and access to the lab testing of oil can't do ( without your oil samples ) is make claims of what various oils and viscosities can or can't do in YOUR piece of equipment under your type of use/load and cycle times and temperature conditions which in your case may mean towing, air quality as per dust in the air for example and oil change period intervals. Maybe its just my perception but I get the impression and certainly with an engineer presenting information like in this video, they are driving around in a car that is sleek and requires little power to drive at legal speeds that so many people do compared to the horrible aerodynamics of HD pickups and pulling a high wind resistance trailer where the engine is worked far harder and consumes many times the fuel ( read, engine contamination ) in the process and producing higher temperatures in the process.

KARNUT · October 13, 2025

14 minutes ago, Chuck FB said:

Even with my extremely limited knowledge of oil as after all I make use of oil but its not like I personally test oil, I agree that a video like this is giving general information on the concept of viscosity but does not go deeper than that to show physical proof in testing nor break down the fact that not all oils perform the same as what their viscosity given numbers on the side of the bottle would suggest. He is relying on engine engineers paid by a manufacturer as well as oil specialists ( Mobil employees in this case ) to provide him with information. The problem with that method, is ulterior vested interests that each company has and therefore how they present the "facts" they create and present them to this person doing the video. I know from the past with other videos he seems rather tied to Mobil, and that is a possible conflict right there but also he tests vehicles sometimes and can't go badmouthing too hard as otherwise every door would get slammed in his face. After all this engineer who made this video gets lots of views and right in front of him is what I would say is a product placement, don't tell me there are no little perks that come back to him from such a product placement !.

To a degree Lake Speed would be in the same position I suspect even though he claims not to have a bias with any one oil company, he can say some things and suggest some things that won't put him in the bad books but still help the person on the street in general terms and in his case does testing to show proof of engine wear. What he or anyone else in that space of knowledge and access to the lab testing of oil can't do ( without your oil samples ) is make claims of what various oils and viscosities can or can't do in YOUR piece of equipment under your type of use/load and cycle times and temperature conditions which in your case may mean towing, air quality as per dust in the air for example and oil change period intervals. Maybe its just my perception but I get the impression and certainly with an engineer presenting information like in this video, they are driving around in a car that is sleek and requires little power to drive at legal speeds that so many people do compared to the horrible aerodynamics of HD pickups and pulling a high wind resistance trailer where the engine is worked far harder and consumes many times the fuel ( read, engine contamination ) in the process and producing higher temperatures in the process.

You’re a little new at this website. Like I was back in 2014. I bought my first truck with cylinder deactivation I came for information. I retired shortly after joining so my driving habits changed somewhat. I was used to going extended with my oil changes. Things said here made sense regarding oil changes. My experience was in the equipment field. I’ve owned many different types of equipment and vehicles. Farm and industrial. Used all the brands of oil. Amsoil mostly for extended. Some vehicles GM used mobile one and recamended extended. During that time is switched from fleet buying for our business to buying used vehicles. I get tired of them and let the family have them for next to nothing. I got a few out there. Most high mileage. I from advice here tend to stay around 5K oil changes. The people who tend to get my vehicles go by manufacturers recommendations. Some as high as 10K. I don’t know anyone who’s using oil. I’ve asked at my old business. One brother has a fleet of 19 working ROWs. Some of the backup trucks have 250K miles. No oil burners. They aren’t exactly heavily maintained. Im not exactly recommending extreme extended. If I was more of a highway cruiser like in the past. I’d go more extended. So with all the anxiety over using oil or oil related failures do to the oil itself. It hasn’t been a problem for me. Has it been for you? Is it really the oil? Hasn’t been for me.

Chuck FB · October 13, 2025

8 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

You’re a little new at this website. Like I was back in 2014. I bought my first truck with cylinder deactivation I came for information. I retired shortly after joining so my driving habits changed somewhat. I was used to going extended with my oil changes. Things said here made sense regarding oil changes. My experience was in the equipment field. I’ve owned many different types of equipment and vehicles. Farm and industrial. Used all the brands of oil. Amsoil mostly for extended. Some vehicles GM used mobile one and recamended extended. During that time is switched from fleet buying for our business to buying used vehicles. I get tired of them and let the family have them for next to nothing. I got a few out there. Most high mileage. I from advice here tend to stay around 5K oil changes. The people who tend to get my vehicles go by manufacturers recommendations. Some as high as 10K. I don’t know anyone who’s using oil. I’ve asked at my old business. One brother has a fleet of 19 working ROWs. Some of the backup trucks have 250K miles. No oil burners. They aren’t exactly heavily maintained. Im not exactly recommending extreme extended. If I was more of a highway cruiser like in the past. I’d go more extended. So with all the anxiety over using oil or oil related failures do to the oil itself. It hasn’t been a problem for me. Has it been for you? Is it really the oil? Hasn’t been for me.

Thankfully ( or so I think ) I don't own a vehicle with cylinder deactivation as to just one more thing to potentially have issues with. As to date wise joining this site it was sometime earlier this year although I had been reading various threads in this forum as well as some other GM forums on the HD trucks and the L8T going back a year before that I believe. But since I had not made a choice and bought a truck yet I didn't ... I mean had I joined this site and then bought a cyber truck I don't think I could live with myself, you know ... LOL.

The truck I recently purchased, it has yet to be determined as to all what types of use it may see, if indeed it ends up doing some towing as buying it meant I was able to tow or haul a medium sized camper for example or if some farm equipment does get towed with it. As of yet its just being used for transportation and am at the juncture of phasing out of actively farming. Oil interest wise really dates back to years ago trying to maintain farm equipment and using the right viscosity of oil for the temperature applications and in some cases upgrading the oil quality with synthetic for some engines, drive lines and hydraulics to more suitable oils and oils that never used to exist back when the equipment was made. My issue here in this part of the world is the temperature swings from winter to summer and if an oil chosen can cover the whole range.

One if the issues on a grain farm is the seasonal use of equipment, some of it only gets used for as little as a couple of weeks out of the year and so if its equipment that is planned on having around for many years, to maintain it so it does last as per the engine for example. The typical scenario of using such equipment until its job is complete for the season and then changing the engine oil so its ready for the next season. Even some farm pickups, they get used in varying degrees from spring to fall and then they are parked and some may get few miles on them but hard miles due to so many short runs and mostly on gravel roads so changing oil on ones that reach 3000 miles is probably not even often enough. And yes, certain well aged vehicles that use oil and have to keep checking and adding to stay on top of things. Even the engines that are seen as sound, they are using some oil as per the combines etc and as the hours add up on an oil change cycle I typically note that they use more oil as the hours accumulate. Highway tractors are no different, start working them hauling grain to the elevators and do that day after day and they use some oil working hard and they do get a lot of idle hours on them. But as I have commented before, dusty gravel roads and then kicking up crazy amounts of dust in the field depending on the field operation, that doesn't tend to say ideal conditions for long drain intervals !. That reminds me, a farmer in the area who had come over from Holland after WW2 and passed away some years ago now, he said that engines over in Holland seemed to run and run for much longer before being worn out vs here as he said the air was damp and they were not creating the type of fine dust that we do here.

The oil in the equipment would have to have been sampled and tested to actually tell what is going on in the engines, if its dirt causing wear or just the engine design that is going to use some oil or perhaps a different oil brand would have responded differently, good question. I think I can safely say some pieces of equipment bought used such as the highway tractors just have a lot of hours on them and nothing lasts forever. I know with certain other engines things have taken place, like a gas engine pickup that had the fuel pump fail and the pump was designed to dump the fuel into the crank case upon pump failure ... yeah, that really helps an engine to have its oil diluted that much ( amazing the bearings didn't fail ) but it turned it into an oil using engine. During the winter before better oils came out we were always using a tiger torch under the oil pan ( with a long stove pipe with a 90 elbow ) set on low to warm the oil up. Need to haul grain, out with the torch to warm up the tractors oil to plow snow, then the trucks oil to haul grain ( aside from plugging the block heater in over night ). Had we not take care like that, I can only imagine the damage that could have been caused such as turned crank or con rod bearings and wiped out engines. Back then there was no such thing as those silicone pad electric oil warmers. Winter without the proper oil viscosity and not warming up the oil before its turned over is just bad news, there was a reason why when my dad retired he wanted to move OUT of the winter and never to return !.