top end rebuild

[MAKG]

well synthetic oil is thinner in overall viscosity which might help punch through some dirty oil passages

NO!

10W-30 is 10W-30 whether it's synthetic, conventional, cow patties, mucus, whatever. As long as it's SAE rated crankcase oil (the scale is different for gear oils).

It also is not higher in detergents; those are largely imposed by the API rating. Excess detergents displace other additives (especially phosphate anti-scuff, which is dilute enough already in SL oils), as there is only so much surface in the oiling system.

It's certainly CLEANER than the dirty oil it's replacing, and clean crankcase oil (whether conventional or synthetic) is the most appropriate "engine cleaner."

 

[Big Jim M]

What?

well synthetic oil is thinner in overall viscosity which might help punch through some dirty oil passages

That's not what it says on the can!! It says what the weight is and that is supposed to be what it is...by LAW!
Big JIm

 

[treeguy]

Synthetic oil is proven to "stick" to the metal better than regular oil. It reduces "dry" start ups . . . it is more heat stable and doesn't break down as readily as conventional oil. which would translate to better friction reduction in an engine (2.9L) already prone to oil flow issues. Read up on it, its good stuff !!!!

 

[Big Jim M]

You know what?

Synthetic oil is proven to "stick" to the metal better than regular oil. It reduces "dry" start ups . . . it is more heat stable and doesn't break down as readily as conventional oil. which would translate to better friction reduction in an engine (2.9L) already prone to oil flow issues. Read up on it, its good stuff !!!!

If I had an oil that would do all you THINK synthetic oil will do..

I'D PRINT IT OUT RIGHT THERE ON THE CAN!

But you know what? I have never read that on any synthetic can!

All I have done is listen to what guys say they THINK is happening! Which is a result of advertising.. But the advertising is PHONY! All the advertising is guys with a huge smile on their face saying how they THINK the synthetic oil did this or that to their engine..

But no real facts on the can saying it WILL DO THEM THINGS!

Big JIm

 

[90B24wd]

On my 2 current running vehicles (90 Bronco II & 90 truck) that I purchase the previous owners used synthetic oil 10/30. On the Bronco II I had to replace both heads. While doing so I check out the cylinders to see if there was a ridge. To my surprise their were no ridge except for a little carbon at the top. (mileage on Bronco 144,000+) I also have no ticking problems. The synthetic oil must be doing something right. Synthetic oil does not sludge up causing improper oil flow. Oh and I still believe that it is NOT WORN CAM BEARINGS that is causing the ticking in these 2.9's. The problem is improper oil flow!

 

[treeguy]

BMW runs synthetic, VW runs synthetic, etc. etc. I know of a few local mechanics who swear by it. There has been independant lab testing of synthetics and the data tables prove it. I will try to locate the info I came across. I am a cheapo myself and rarely take anyone's word, I looked into it and was convinced . . . I now run only full synthetic in my 2000 4.0 4wd. No issues yet.

 

[treeguy]

Big Jim M read these before you make any claims . . .http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/synthetic_vs_conventional_oil/index.html and then let me know what you THINK you know about synthetics. And here is another . . . http://www.minitruckinweb.com/tech/engine/0901mt_conventional_petroleum_oil_vs_synthetic_oil/index.html. BTW they have spent millions trying to tell people about the benefits of synthetic oil, and most engine specialists already know this stuff.

 

[Big Jim M]

Ok I read them both.. And came away with this..

Both say there is a cost for 7 more horses at 6200 rpm. Both say that the oil will withstand temps that the coolant in your engine won't. Both question the price versus any possible gains..

I must mention here these guys depend on the manufactors for support in their endevors.

Until Mobil 1 prints on their cans just what gains there are for a common vehicle.. It ain't true! There are NO GAINS.

Treeguy.. If you had an oil that would be BETTER and do this and that, that other oils wouldn't do, wouldn't you print it on the can?

So far nobody has run two exact engines on a test stand for 200K and then opened them up and told us what the internal differences are..

I AM POSITIVE Mobile 1 has done this test and is reluctant to disclose the results!!!!

Big JIm

 

[treeguy]

Big Jim if you could enlighten me about Mobil 1 running such a test . . . where could I find it, and take a look.

 

[treeguy]

That is a rather simplistic take home on 2 well written articles. Your 7 hps gains weren't from the synthetic but conventional, I would also assume that "Ford's prototype 392 small-block stroker crate engine" wouldn't spoil the results since they tested several engines using different oils in each and tore them down. Article 1 states that the 7 hp gain was with the thinner conventional oil (10w30 used instead of factory recommended generic 20w-30) and this is expected. Compared to the synthetic used the hp increase was closer to 10 plus an additional increase in peak torque of up to 15lb-ft, no peak increase was observed for the thinner conventional oil used (10w-3- instead of 20w-30).
Your smoke screen comment about the synthetic oil handling temps that the engine coolant can't distracts from the fact that if the engine does overheat, the synthetic oil will still do its job (it's stable to about 400 F) & prevent metal-to-metal contact and avoid a costly rebuild due to friction induced engine seizure, I am sure a head gasket will still get blown . . .
Aside from performance gains it still prevents dry start ups which is where a majority of engine wear occurs. Also, Westech Performance probably doesn't get much from oil companies, they make their money just like every other high performance shop by offering excellent products and services, product endorsement will NOT float a crappy shop, excellent workmanship and service will. Synthetics were engineered because conventional oil wouldn't do the job that the engineers were building engines to perform.
Overall the synthetic oil outperforms conventional , the second article says the same except they tested one truck ('07 tacoma), dynoed it with the conventional oil in, drained as much as they could out, then replaced all oil in the truck with synthetic of some sort & still found hp gains of 3 or so and increase in torque +4 ft-lbs.
One reason to avoid synthetic oil is during an engine break-in period (some say avoid as long as 20,000 miles) because it lubes too well and prevents the rings from seating properly (Mercedes had this issue).

 

[cckc135r]

RE: 90B24wd

On my 2 current running vehicles (90 Bronco II & 90 truck) that I purchase the previous owners used synthetic oil 10/30. On the Bronco II I had to replace both heads. While doing so I check out the cylinders to see if there was a ridge. To my surprise their were no ridge except for a little carbon at the top. (mileage on Bronco 144,000+) I also have no ticking problems. The synthetic oil must be doing something right. Synthetic oil does not sludge up causing improper oil flow. Oh and I still believe that it is NOT WORN CAM BEARINGS that is causing the ticking in these 2.9's. The problem is improper oil flow!

From the 2.9 tech page:Valve train oil pressure was entirely dependent upon a supply fed through the two center cam bearings. Even slight bearing wear could cause complete loss of oil pressure to the hydraulic valve lifters, rocker shaft, and rockers.

If it's not worn cam bearings then why would the tech page say that 2.9's through out the years have suffered from this problem? The valve train is pressure fed by the #2 and 3 cam journals. If the bearing are worn then oil will bleed past the bearings and not flow up to any of the valve train parts.

Have a look there on the 2.9 link and have a look at the picture of the 2 cylinder heads set side by side. The rocker shafts have been removed and if you look at the center mount pad you'll see two holes, one for the bolt and one for the oil passage leading down to the cam bearing.

 

[Big Jim M]

Good post treeguy

Big Jim if you could enlighten me about Mobil 1 running such a test . . . where could I find it, and take a look.

THAT's the point of my posting. We KNOW for sure Mobil 1 has done many tests..but the question is..where are their tests?

All we get is tests done by third partys that have something to gain by giving Mobile 1 small advantages.

Here the general public is buying a high priced product and relying solely upon advertising from people that have NOTHING to do with selling the product.

We see vettes and others with MOBIL 1 written on the engines.. But we aren't told how much money was given to GM (and others) to place that advertisement on the engine!

In short it is a huge pile of bullshit! Anyone reading this, that had a better WIDJET, would place just why that widjet was better on the widjet box!

Until the makers of synthetic oil print WHY it is better on each can of oil...I won't believe second hand information.

Don't we all get that? What we are getting is second hand information.. From companys that stand to gain from tilting their tests, by way of added income from oil companys.

Three, five or ten horsepower at What rpm? 6500? C'mon guys! Most of us have a hard time believing our own government.. And then we think these supposed TESTS are the gospel?

Surely we do KNOW FOR SURE Mobil 1 and others have placed two engines on test stands, one with their product and one without, and run them until they quit.. months and months of running.. Then they have taken the engines apart to see which was worn and where..
Why haven't they made these tests available to the public?

Could it be that the common oil actually did as good or even BETTER than their high priced synthetic?

None here will know for sure until they do release these tests.. But after all these years they still haven't released them.. So what should we think the reason is?

If you had a better oil how would YOU advertise it? Particularly if your oil would cause an engine to have less wear and last longer.. But even if your oil did ANYTHING that other oils wouldn't do as well..

There again is my point.

Big Jim

 

[treeguy]

I found this 2 year study . . . it is insightful without too much figures. Third party studies are good for establishing facts or trends. When multiple studies are done & they all say the same . . . that definitely reinforces the benefits of a particular product. The part I found interesting is highlighted in blue.


In July 1996, Consumer Reports published the results of a two year motor oil test involving a fleet of 75 New York taxi cabs and found no noticeable advantage of synthetic oil over regular oil.[12] In their article, they noted that "Big-city cabs don't see many cold start-ups or long periods of high speed driving in extreme heat. But our test results relate to the most common type of severe service — stop-and-go city driving." According to their study, synthetic oil is "worth considering for extreme driving conditions: high ambient temperatures and high engine load, or very cold temperatures." [13] This research was criticized by some because most engine damage appears to be caused by cold starts, and their research method may not have included enough cold starts to be representative of personal vehicle use.

 

[Big Jim M]

So I looked and found this:
Advantages of Synthetic
Mobil tried to popularize synthetic oil for passenger vehicles back in the early 1970's. At the time, Mobil was promoting 20K or 25K oil changes with synthetic, but they soon backed down from this. Unfortunately for the synthetic oil industry there is virtually no advantage to using synthetic oil in a non-high performance engine that is operated in moderate climates. You probably could go a bit longer between oil changes with a synthetic, i.e. following the normal service schedule even if you fall into the severe service category, but I wouldn't advise this. In short, synthetic may give you the peace of mind of knowing that you are using an oil that is far better than necessary for your vehicle, but it won't reduce wear or extend the life of the engine. The mistake some people make is to wrongly extrapolate these benefits onto normal engines operated in mild climates, with the ultimate lack of any knowledge being manifested with statements such as "synthetics provide 'Peace of Mind,' or 'Cheap Insurance,'" or other such nonsense.

 

[90B24wd]

This is another thread that I wanted up front so we can read what Big Jim thinks about synthetic oils.