Battle of the oils (or the chicken and the egg)

[TxDoc]

Discussing various automotive lubricants and their properties, I fear we

enter the realm of irrational human behavior!

 

Refuting claims of lubrication prowess becomes not unlike attempting to

refute tenets of religion, or of politics!

 

Reading various posts, some statements may seem questionable, without

further qualification and clarification.  "Additives," and "superior

ring-sealing," prevent synthetic oil from getting as dirty as

petroleum-based lubricants?

 

The additives part appears somewhat contradictory--will adding detergent to

a washing machine keep the water cleaner (a definition for the term,

"cleaner," would be useful here)?  Or maybe only dissolve more dirt?  An

imperfect analog, but could water be saved by continuing washing clothes in

the same water (let's keep this quiet; lest some laundry detergent company

actually convinces people this scheme works)?

 

The premise that synthetic oils somehow "disappear" the unavoidable and

measurable contaminants of combustion requires a consumer's "leap of

faith;" obviously, some successfully make that leap.

 

As to ring-sealing; the methodology for measuring this characteristic is

not specified; however:  if the operational performance is so superior,

wouldn't automobile manufacturers (and certainly all race drivers) team

with the synthetic manufacturers, producing an invincible engine/lubricant

combo?

 

But, they DON'T.  Manufacturers only provide their recommendations

regarding API (American Petroleum Institute) service codes to follow for

lube service.  If synthetics provided such extended service life as

claimed, it seems the manufacturers would be better served recommending

synthetic products.  Think of the millions of dollars in warraanty claims

that would be avoided!

 

I don't KNOCK synthetics or deny their desirable properties.  For example,

synthetics resist chemical breakdown, especially high-temperature chemical

breakdown, better than petroleum oils; whether Detroit agrees or not, some

justification for extended change intervals may exist.  However, no

lubricant works miracles great as sometimes claimed, and sometimes,

sincerely believed.

 

Regardless, do automobile manufacturers give a "pass" to users of synthetic

oils?  Would GM excuse an extended crankcase oil change interval by a

customer, because he's using synthetic?

 

We all choose our own myths, including myself.  Anecdotal reports from two

cam grinders and my own limited experience suggest to me, petroleum-based

lubricants protect OHC cam lobes better than synthetics, possibly because

synthetics drain more completely when the engine is at rest, causing

relatively "drier" start-ups and attendant higher friction and wear;

further, "natural" oils may flow into voids more readily than synthetics,

lubricating incidental metal-to-metal contact better . . . Nonsense?

Maybe.  Coming up with a definitive test confirming or denying the notion

appears difficult, providing me the opportunity to enter my own zone of

irrationality!

 

While I'm skeptical about some lubricant claims, let me tell you about the

hundred miles-per-gallon carburetor.  Yeah, right!  See, this guy invented

this carburetor, gets 100 miles per gallon or more on ANY engine, but

Detroit and the oil companies control the patent, see, and they won't let that happen.

[lahanko]

I like it, feel or think the same way.

[Lynx]

here is ssomething that might interest you,

 

h

ttp://www.unofficialbmw.com/all/misc/all_oilfaq.html

[Stepside Z]

Quote from Lynx, posted on Nov. 11 2001,10:02

here is ssomething that might interest you,

 

h

ttp://www.unofficialbmw.com/all/misc/all_oilfaq.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

Those are some very intereting numbers. Thanks for the information.

[CapnDean]

IMHO:

 

It's all about money guys!  "Motor Oil is Motor Oil".  Your engine does not notice the difference between brands, or additives.

 

It only notices the difference between viscosity and the other measureable differences like that.  Same deal for synthetics:

Basically, they are just the same as 'dinosaur juice' except that they do not break down as quickly.

 

Has anybody ever known ANYBODY that experienced an oil related failure of their engine? {I have to qualify this remark...running out of oil does not count}   Suppose your engine locked up tomorrow (10K miles) and the dealership said

"That wouldn't have happened if you'd been using pennzoil...but since you used Quaker State...etc."  You'd go bonkers wouldn't you?

 

Most important thing about your engine oil?  Check it, and change it regularly.  Where does the money come in to play?

ADVERTISING.  Yep - - Mark Martin's recommendation of Valvoline makes people recognize it and buy it.  That's the whole deal.  Aside from getting it free..do you think Mark uses Valvoline in his cars? {Maybe required by his contract...but otherwise doubt seriously that Mark even changes his own oil..probably has it done}.  BTW:  Have met Mark IRL a couple of times...super fellow.  Paid a bundle for a painting that he did with a kid at an auction, then gave the painting to the kid!

First Class fellow!

 Keep your oil changed and forget worrying about the brand.  So long as it meets SAE specs...you can use kmart brand.

 

As Dennis Miller Says:  "That's just my opinion, I could be wrong".