Skip to main content

Read our primer articles on High Mileage Oil, Synthetic Oil and Kinematic Viscosity

I just pulled the rocker covers on my 2002 Craftsman Riding Mower/tractor (made by American yard Products AYP). Engine is a B&S 21.5 HP vertical shaft. Engine has 1200 plus hours on it. Never saw Synthetic OCI, except for one Mobil 1 top off. This old girl has had B&S oil factory fill, AAP 20w-50, GTX, Warren convenience store oil, etc. All has met API SL minimum. Last change was Rotella 15W-40. Current fill is Delvac 1300. Filters were either B&S or MotorCraft 400S.
Here is a link of the engine.

Remember, this is an air cooled Briggs Intek V-twin full pressure lube. It sees 25+ hours a month in very dusty conditions.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...=1861000#Post1861000

Dave
Last edited {1}
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
I just pulled the rocker covers on my 2002 Craftsman Riding Mower/tractor (made by American yard Products AYP). Engine is a B&S 21.5 HP vertical shaft. Engine has 1200 plus hours on it. Never saw Synthetic OCI, except for one Mobil 1 top off. This old girl has had B&S oil factory fill, AAP 20w-50, GTX, Warren convenience store oil, etc. All has met API SL minimum. Last change was Rotella 15W-40. Current fill is Delvac 1300. Filters were either B&S or MotorCraft 400S.
Here is a link of the engine.

Remember, this is an air cooled Briggs Intek V-twin full pressure lube. It sees 25+ hours a month in very dusty conditions.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...=1861000#Post1861000

Dave


Capt. Kirk, Prove to me about Sludge again......

This thing has only had dino (mineral oil) on the average of every 100 hours.

Dave
Last edited by deltonadave
I started driving in 1960, well 1958 if you count the motor scooter. I used Pennzoil back then, you know the kind people used to say caused sludge. Any way I used either Pennzoil or castrol GTX for the next 40 years with absolutly no sludge what so ever. But I have always maintained my cars and trucks really well. I have used synthetic for the past 10 years.

Now I have always used synthetic in my 1995 Cub cadet. It has a Kohler engines and runs as good as it ever has.

Just my experience
Last edited by snakedoctor
Looks new, just because the engine is well designed and I changed the oil whenever, usually about 100 hours. Nothing special, just TLC.

Just goes to show, not so much the oil, but the engine design also keeps thing clean. B&S has always built a tough little motor, especially for the money. If I had big $$$, I would go with Kohler or Kawasaki.

Dave
quote:
Originally posted by snakedoctor:
I started driving in 1960, well 1958 if you count the motor scooter. I used Pennzoil back then, you know the kind people used to say caused sludge. Any way I used either Pennzoil or castrol GTX for the next 40 years with absolutly no sludge what so ever. But I have always maintained my cars and trucks really well. I have used synthetic for the past 10 years.

Now I have always used synthetic in my 1995 Cub cadet. It has a Kohler engines and runs as good as it ever has.

Just my experience


Snake,
This POS engine has gone over 200 hours (one season) w/o a change. I have even been cheap and changed the oil, but not the filter. The current fill of Delvac 1300 is holding up really good. I can prolly go 200+ hours on it. Trick is keeping the fins clean. The mower will fall apart, before the engine does. The floorboards are rusting pretty badly.

Dave
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
I just pulled the rocker covers on my 2002 Craftsman Riding Mower/tractor (made by American yard Products AYP). Engine is a B&S 21.5 HP vertical shaft. Engine has 1200 plus hours on it. Never saw Synthetic OCI, except for one Mobil 1 top off. This old girl has had B&S oil factory fill, AAP 20w-50, GTX, Warren convenience store oil, etc. All has met API SL minimum. Last change was Rotella 15W-40. Current fill is Delvac 1300. Filters were either B&S or MotorCraft 400S.
Here is a link of the engine.

Remember, this is an air cooled Briggs Intek V-twin full pressure lube. It sees 25+ hours a month in very dusty conditions.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...=1861000#Post1861000

Dave


Deltona Dave, great pics, and I am sure you follow the manufactures OCI on this mower.
quote:
Originally posted by Big Bear:
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
I just pulled the rocker covers on my 2002 Craftsman Riding Mower/tractor (made by American yard Products AYP). Engine is a B&S 21.5 HP vertical shaft. Engine has 1200 plus hours on it. Never saw Synthetic OCI, except for one Mobil 1 top off. This old girl has had B&S oil factory fill, AAP 20w-50, GTX, Warren convenience store oil, etc. All has met API SL minimum. Last change was Rotella 15W-40. Current fill is Delvac 1300. Filters were either B&S or MotorCraft 400S.
Here is a link of the engine.

Remember, this is an air cooled Briggs Intek V-twin full pressure lube. It sees 25+ hours a month in very dusty conditions.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...=1861000#Post1861000

Dave


Deltona Dave, great pics, and I am sure you follow the manufactures OCI on this mower.


Big Bear:
I have been changing every 75-100 hours. Briggs recommends 50 hours. The last 2 seasons I started using HDEO, Rotella or Delvac 1300. Seems to run just fine on those.
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
I just pulled the rocker covers on my 2002 Craftsman Riding Mower/tractor (made by American yard Products AYP). Engine is a B&S 21.5 HP vertical shaft. Engine has 1200 plus hours on it. Never saw Synthetic OCI, except for one Mobil 1 top off. This old girl has had B&S oil factory fill, AAP 20w-50, GTX, Warren convenience store oil, etc. All has met API SL minimum. Last change was Rotella 15W-40. Current fill is Delvac 1300. Filters were either B&S or MotorCraft 400S.
Here is a link of the engine.

Remember, this is an air cooled Briggs Intek V-twin full pressure lube. It sees 25+ hours a month in very dusty conditions.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...=1861000#Post1861000

Dave


Capt. Kirk, Prove to me about Sludge again......

This thing has only had dino (mineral oil) on the average of every 100 hours.

Dave


Just thought I should add that small engines don't have high tech sophisticated emission systems like cars do... further stressing the oil. Car engines are also plagued with short trips,incomplete warm ups,condensation and so forth that all contribute to oil oxidation. Small engines will run hot and burn off VOC'S ,condenstation,and fuel intrusion. There exists no possible coolant intrusion into the oil in those small air cooled engines to boot.

The small air cooled engines do run the oil to higher temperatures compared to water cooled engines which can pose another set of possible issues in some cases!!


However,this is daves real story,


I have an 8 year old Craftsman (AYP) heavy duty lawn tractor that is developing some sludge/varnish. Last season, it was filled with Rotella-T 15W-40 HDEO. Well, it don't like thick oil. It burned it at about 8 oz. per week (10-12 hours). Now that I am a BITOG'er, I want to clean her up and thought about this method:


So,the engine DID AT ON TIME.......HAVE SLUDGE....MAKING THE STORY A LIE

THE PROOF WITH A LINK

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...wflat&Number=1829761


KIRK
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Dave



Capt. Kirk, Prove to me about Sludge again......


Dave,I thought you might like these links to help explain what is going on with some engines regarding your question about sludge and how it forms and why.

http://www.schleeter.com/oil-sludge.htm


http://www.examiner.com/x-4824...s-the-best-motor-oil

http://www.ehow.com/how_451611...duce-oil-sludge.html


http://74.125.93.132/search?q=...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
Nice how they list sludge problem engines.
And say: Remember—any car can suffer an oil sludge problem, and some manufacturers more than others due to various design differences

Good engine design, reasonable OCI, quality oil.


All of today's engines are very good/high tech engine design along with high tech emission designs so we can all breath easy.

More of the same can be said of future engine/emission designs which will challenge the crankcase oils even more so,but help keep the air clean,and get better economy!!

The issue is not defective engine design...just the opposite......very high tech state of the art designs meeting or exceeding all of the emission standards/economy for that model year which imposes a good deal of stress to the engine lube..oxidizing it that much faster as supported by the above links.

Engine design is not going to devolve by any stretch.......it will continue to evolve getting more highe tech with each passing year allowing for even lower emissions,more power,and better fuel economy.

The engine lubes will have to evolve just to keep pace or OCI's will be lower and lower like they have been as of late.

Cadillac/cts has just lowered their oci's on those models,and has been re-flashing the prom on vehicles in for service so the oil change monitor will decrement at a faster rate because of the very issues at hand...sludge. Other car makers are doing the same. By the way.....those cadillacs have very fast sports car engines if you ever drive one......very nice! Better use group IV of your choice though to keep those engines happy!!
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
You have a link for this caddy claim? And what car makers are doing the same?

Sounds more like a faulty engine design to me.

It isn't the oil's fault that engines are either of faulty design, the mfg makes wrong recommendations, or owners neglect routine maintainence, ie: not changing oil.


Yea you're right Trajen.........I forgot that all the engines on the market are now junk, and both foreign and domestic cars are now making faulty defective engines that sludge up........how silly of me not to realize that like you do!!!

You might want to email all those links I pasted above and set them straight with your knowledge of why all those engines have issues. I guess they are all misinformed according to you!!

These are also wrong???

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...wflat&Number=1075810

http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-En...M_Certification.aspx
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
So, in other words, you *don't* have a link to your latest claim.

Kindly post when you do. Would like to know before I buy a CTS.

Neither link shows that Cadillac, or anyone else, is reducing OCIs.


Many of the dealers are just telling customers to change the oil sooner then what the manual states when issues arise,not just Cadillac.

That is why car makers are pushing for increased oil standards....to address the issues. I don't understand why you continue to ignore those facts.

Your going to buy a CTS?? That would be great to see that you "buy American"



http://www.asashop.org/autoinc/nov2009/cover.htm

Took my 2004 Cadillac cts to the dealer today.

To make a long story short..

The Cadillac dealer service department told me today. The oil life monitor is a bad tool to use when deciding oil changing intervals. I had my oil changed 5000 miles ago. Oil life monitor indicated oil life 69%. I figured I could go at lest another 3500 miles before the next oil change. Not according to the dealer service advisor and an technician they advised me 3500miles regardless, the oil life monitor goes by the engines rpm and temperature and is only ruff yes I quote a ruff guide. I asked what the hell the oil life monitor is doing on GM vehicles and why GM is telling me different story. They had no answer, I said Amazing and left!

My question

Any of you on this forum been told this about the olm? I contacted GM, They stand behind the olm and suggested I continue to use the olm to service the vehicle. Yes I used the recommended Mobil 1 5W30 synthetic. And I will not return to this dealership again. Thank you in advanced.

* digg
* delicious
* stumbleupon
* netscape
* addthis
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
I'm not interested in what "dealers" are saying. I want the link to what mfgs are saying.

I also want the proof that car makers are pushing for what you claim.

I certainly haven't received any notice from a dealer to come in sooner than what the OCI already is.


http://www.asashop.org/autoinc/nov2009/cover.htm


GM 6094M is based on the same specifications as ILSAC GF-4 but additionally includes some specific GM requirements. GM 4718M is the GM high performance oil specification that goes well beyond the industry standard ILSAC GF-4 and API SM specifications. The Mobil 1 grades that carry GM 4718M have been fully approved and tested against GM 4718M. The companion Mobil 1 Extended Performance viscosity grades have not been formally approved against GM 4718M but will provide the performance at GM 4718M level. Engine testing required to get formal approval is limited to certain Mobil 1 products only.

This is for European cars including those imported to America:

http://www.techmax.ca/european...l_specifications.htm

This one comes from shell

http://www.motoroilmatters.org...Shell%20-%202009.pdf

This one talks about the politics behind the scenes in Europe and the U.S.
http://www.smartmotorist.com/c...-specifications.html

Pretty straight forward!!
Last edited by captainkirk
Some thoughts on GM's OLM

Icon 1 posted Profile for bbobynski Email bbobynski Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote One thing I can touch on and clear up.....the GM oil life monitor operation and my statement that ZDP (or ZDDP as you tend to call it here...most of the API literature just sticks to ZDP so I tend to use that) depletion is the basis for oil deterioration.

My spelling is poor but ZDP stands for zinc dialkyldithiophosphate which , as it sounds, is an anti-wear compound comprised of zinc and phosphorus.

ZDP is dispersed in the oil so as to be at a potential wear site if a surface asperity happens to break thru the oil film thickness causing the dreaded metal-to-metal contact. A molecule of ZDP must be present at that moment to prevent microwelding at the contact site which will cause material transfer, scuffing, scoring, wear and catostrophic failure. The concentration of ZDP in the oil will determine if there is ZDP present to work it's magic. The greater the concentration...the more likely a molecule of ZDP will be there...and vice versa.

By nature, ZDP is sacrifical. As ZDP is "used up" at a wear site to prevent micorwelding the concentration of ZDP decreases.... So...if you measure the ZDP concentration in engine oil in a running engine it will decrease at linear rate based on engine revolutions. Any given engine has a certain number of high potential wear areas where metal-to-metal contact could occur due to reduced film thickness and/or surface asperities....areas such as rubbing element cam followers, distributor gears, rocker arm pivots, push rod tips, etc...... The more of these areas the more ZDP depletion. The more often these features come in contact the greater the ZDP depletion. That is why, generally speaking, ZDP concentration in the oil, for any given engine, will decrease at a fairly linear rate when plotted versus cummulative engine revolutions. The more times it turns the more contact the more chance for wear the greater the depletion. This is as much of a fact as I could quote ever and is really not speculation or anything. It is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in many studies. That is why it is ONE of the basis for determining oil life remaining and why it is THE basic premis of the GM oil life algorithm. It is only ONE of the things that determines oil life...but it is the one thing that can be tied to engine operation in a linear fashion and estimated very accurately by accumulating engine revolutions via a counter.

The GM engine oil life monitor counts engine revolutions and accumulates the number for the basis of the oil life calculation. It then adds deterioration factors for operating temperature, start up temperature, soak times, ambient, coolant temperature, etc... There are a LOT of factors that "adjust" or affect the slope of the deterioration but the fundamental deterioration is traced back to the ZDP depletion that is inescapable with engine revolutions. The specific rate of ZDP depletion is readily measurable for any given engine so that is the fundamental item that is first calibrated for the oil life algorithm to tailor it specifically to that engine.

You would obviously like to get the oil out of the engine before the ZDP concentration gets so low that it is ineffective at being at the right place at the right time and preventing engine wear so that becomes the long term limit on oil life for that application.

The other things that determine oil life such a acid build up, oxidation, petane insuluables such as silicon from dust/dirt, carbon or soot build up from the EGR in blowby, water contamination, fuel contamination, etc.... are all modeled by the multipliers or deterioration factors that "adjust" the immediate slope of the line defined by the engine revolution counter as those items can be modeled in other ways and accounted for in the immediate slope of the ZDP depletion line.

The algorithm was developed over the course of many years by several lubrication experts at GM Fuels and Lubes, spearheaded by Doctor Shirley Schwartz who holds the patents (with GM) for the algorithm and the oil life montitor. I had the luck of working directly with Dr. Schwartz when the idea of the oil life monitor first progressed from the theoretical/lab stage to real world testing/development/validation. There were fleets of cars operated under all conditions that deteriorate the oil life for any and every reason and , thru oil sampling and detailed analysis of the oil condition, the algorithm was developed, fine tuned and validated to be the most accurate way invented yet to recommend an oil change interval by. As just one example, I have seen cars driven side-by-side on trips, one towing a trailer and one not, for instance, to prove the effectiveness of the oil life monitor in deteriorating the oil at a faster rate just because of the higher load, higher average RPM, higher temps, etc...and it works flawlessly.

The oil life monitor is so effective because: it is customized for that specific vehicle/engine, it takes everything into account that deteriorates the oil, it is ALWAYS working so as to take into account THAT INDIVIDUALS driving schedule, and it tailors the oil change to that schedule and predicts, on an ongoing basis, the oil life remaining so that that specific individual can plan an oil change accordingly. No other system can do this that effectively.

One thing is that I know personally from years of testing and thousands of oil analysis that the oil life algorithm works. There is simply no argument to the contrary. If you don't believe me, fine, but, trust me, it works. It is accurate because it has been calibrated for each specific engine it is installed on and there is considerable testing and validation of the oil life monitor on that specific application. NOt something that oil companies or Amsoil do. They generalize....the oil life monitor is very specific for that application.

Oil condition sensors in some BMW and Mercedes products are useful, also. They have their limitations, though, as they can be blind to some contaminates and can, themselves, be contaminated by certain markers or constituents of certain engine oils. Oil condition sensors can only react to the specific oil at that moment and they add complexity, cost and another potential item to fail. One other beauty of the GM oil life monitor is that it is all software and does not add any mechanical complexity, mass, wiring or potential failure mechanism.

There is considerable safety factor in the GM oil life monitor. Typically, I would say, there is a 2:1 safety factor in the slope of the ZDP depletion curve....in other words, zero percent oil life per the ZDP depletion is not zero ZDP but twice the concentration of ZDP considered critical for THAT engine to operate under all conditions reliably with no wear. This is always a subject of discussion as to just how low do you want the ZDP to get before the oil is "worn out" if this is the deciding factor for oil life. We would tend to be on the conservative side. If the oil life is counting down on a slope that would recommend a 10K change interval then there is probably 20K oil life before the ZDP is catostrophically depleted....not that you would want to go there...but reason why many people are successful in running those change intervals.

Please...NOT ALL ENGINES ARE THE SAME. The example above is an excellent practical justification of why you would want to add EOS and change the 15W40 Delvac in the muscle car at 3000 miles max and yet can run the Northstar to 12500 easily on conventional oil. You must treat each engine and situation differently and what applies to one does not retroactively apply to others. This is where Amsoil falls short in my book by proposing long change intervals in most everything if you use their oil. It just doesn't work that way. You can run the Amsoil to 12500 with no concerns whatsoever in the late model Northstar because even the oil life monitor tells you that for conventional oil off the shelf. Would I do that to the 502 in my 66 Chevelle...NO WAY. Amsoil says I can though. Wrong.


There are entire SAE papers written on the GM oil life monitor and one could write a book on it so it is hard to touch on all aspects of it in a single post. Hopefully we hit the high spots. Realize that a GREAT deal of time, work and energy went into developing the oil life monitor and it has received acclaim from engineering organizations, petroleum organizations, environmental groups all across the board. It is not some widget invented in a week and tacked onto the car.

The oil life monitor is not under the control of a summer intern at GM Powertrain per an earlier post....LOL Not that a summer intern wasn't compiling calibrations or doing a project on it but is under control of the lube group with a variety of engineers directly responsible that have immediate responsibility for the different engine families and engine groups. The idea that a summer intern was responsible for or handling the oil life monitor is ludicrous.....LOL LOL LOL
More...

The OLM does NOT just monitor engine revolutions. Each specific engine has a stored maximum "bank" of set engine duty cycles (revolutions) between OCIs, reset by the user at time of service. Each time the PCM fires, it subtracts the number of revolutions from the bank. When the bank = 0, the "Change Engine Oil" or oil light illuminates. Outside air temp, coolant temp, cold soak time, throttle load, vehicle speed, etc. are all accounted for in an effort to predict oil temperature, which in turn assess an exponential penalty factor. If the oil temp is above or below the standard algorithm allowance, the amount of degradation increases and is subtracted from the bank value at a higher rate. Hence, if you drive short trips in cold temps, the OLM ticks away faster. If you track your Vette with high rpm/loads, the OLM ticks away faster. If you tow, well you get the idea...

The ONLY thing the OLM cannot account for is a mechanical engine fault. If you have a leaky air filter or a coolant leak, the OLM will never know or change it's signaled OCI. This is where and oil condition monitor would be superior. GM chose this route for simplicity/cost. They are willing to stake a 5yr/100K powertrain warranty on it, so it can't be too terrible.

IMHO, the intervals are a bit on the high side, usually signaling for a change right at the time the oil is spent. I prefer a buffer of 10-20%, but have no qualms about going to 0%. I have yet to see a bad UOA by following the OLM
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
I'm not interested in what "dealers" are saying. I want the link to what mfgs are saying.

I also want the proof that car makers are pushing for what you claim.

I certainly haven't received any notice from a dealer to come in sooner than what the OCI already is.


http://www.asashop.org/autoinc/nov2009/cover.htm


GM 6094M is based on the same specifications as ILSAC GF-4 but additionally includes some specific GM requirements. GM 4718M is the GM high performance oil specification that goes well beyond the industry standard ILSAC GF-4 and API SM specifications. The Mobil 1 grades that carry GM 4718M have been fully approved and tested against GM 4718M. The companion Mobil 1 Extended Performance viscosity grades have not been formally approved against GM 4718M but will provide the performance at GM 4718M level. Engine testing required to get formal approval is limited to certain Mobil 1 products only.

This is for European cars including those imported to America:

http://www.techmax.ca/european...l_specifications.htm

This one comes from shell

http://www.motoroilmatters.org...Shell%20-%202009.pdf

This one talks about the politics behind the scenes in Europe and the U.S.
http://www.smartmotorist.com/c...-specifications.html

Pretty straight forward!!





Ummm, neither addresses what you claimed. Remember, Cadillac reducing the OCI?

The first in the series of non answers concerns the difference between API cert and ACEA.

You really should read it, as it does not support your "arguement" about bad oil.

I use ACEA cert oil. I don't care if it is API cert. If it isn't ACEA A3/B3, it doesn't go into my engine. I've made that clear on many occasions. ACEA isn't new you know.

The second concerns the use of low quality oil AKA non API/ACEA/Whatever certed. Like a certain oil we all know.

Still waiting for the proof for the CTS claim.

The overriding thing is that this thread is about a mower engine that uses mineral oil, and doesn't sludge.

The owner attributes that to a good engine design and use of certified oil and regular changes. The owner is also quite aware of what causes sludge.
In a motor vehicle having a direct or an indirect injection engine containing lubricating oil which has a useful life that varies in accordance with engine operating conditions, a method for advising the operator of the vehicle of the need to change oil, such method comprising the steps of:

Periodically calculating an effective engine revolutions value over predetermined intervals during a present engine operation in accordance with a product of measured engine revolutions and engine oil temperature and engine oil contaminant penalty factors which operate to increase the effective engine revolutions value to compensate for engine operating conditions that tend to cause increased degradation of the engine oil, the oil temperature and oil contaminant penalty factors being determined as a function of engine oil temperature and engine oil contaminant values, respectively;

Decreasing a stored remaining allowed revolutions value indicative of the remaining number of engine revolutions allowed for the useful life of the engine oil by subtracting the calculated effective engine revolutions value; and

Actuating an indicator advising the operator that the engine oil needs to be changed when the stored remaining allowed revolutions value falls below a predetermined threshold value indicative of the end of the useful life of the engine oil.

2. A method as in claim 1 further comprising the step of calculating the engine oil temperature value in accordance with engine parameters prior to calculating the effective engine revolutions value.

3. A method as in claim 1 further comprising the step of determining the engine oil temperature value by measuring an engine oil temperature from an engine oil temperature sensor prior to calculating the effective engine revolutions value.

4. A method as in claim 1 further comprising the step of calculating the engine oil contaminant value in accordance with an oil temperature value, fuel injection timing, fuel quantity and engine rotational speed prior to calculating the effective engine revolutions value.

5. A method as in claim 2 wherein the step of calculating the engine oil temperature value includes the steps of:



When the engine oil temperature value is in a warm up range, calculating the oil temperature in accordance with a measured initial coolant temperature at the beginning of a current engine operation and a sum of engine revolutions since the beginning of the current engine operation; and

When the engine oil temperature value is in an equilibrium range, calculating the oil temperature in accordance with a measured coolant temperature, engine rotational speed, fuel quantity, intake air temperature and vehicle speed.

6. A method as in claim 2 wherein the step of calculating the engine oil temperature value includes the steps of:

When the engine oil temperature value is in a warm up range, calculating the oil temperature in accordance with a warm up equation T.sub.o =T.sub.ic +k.sub.1 R.sub.e wherein T.sub.ic is an initial coolant temperature at the beginning of a current engine operation, R.sub.e is sum of the engine revolutions since the beginning of the current engine operation and k.sub.1 is a constant; and

When the engine oil temperature value is within an equilibrium range, calculating the oil temperature in accordance with an equilibrium equation T.sub.o =k.sub.2 +k.sub.3 S.sub.e +k.sub.4 T.sub.c +k.sub.5 F.sub.q -k.sub.6 T.sub.a.+-.k.sub.7 V.sub.s wherein S.sub.e is engine rotational speed, T.sub.c is a coolant temperature, F.sub.q is fuel quantity, T.sub.a is an air intake temperature, V.sub.s is vehicle speed, and k.sub.2, k.sub.3, k.sub.4, k.sub.5, k.sub.6 and k.sub.7 are constants.

7. A method as in claim 4 wherein the step of calculating the engine oil contaminant value includes the steps of:

calculating the engine oil contaminant value, C, from an equation
C=k.sub.8 +k.sub.9 I.sub.t +k.sub.10 F.sub.q +k.sub.11 T.sub.o +T.sub.o +k.sub.12 S.sub.e,
wherein I.sub.t is fuel injection timing, F.sub.q is fuel quantity, T.sub.o is the calculated oil temperature value, S.sub.e is engine rotational speed, and k.sub.8, k.sub.9, k.sub.10, k.sub.11 and k.sub.12 are constants.
quote:
Originally posted by snakedoctor:
If the was a problem with Cadiliac engines, there would be a techanical service bulletin on it. I have not seen one. Is there one. you tell us???


TSB.....give it time........

I did not had any engine trouble on the 2005 I had, but my friend did. His engine went out at 30,000 miles. He bought it used and it had the certified 100,000 mile warranty. I am wondering, too, if Cadillac has a problem with their engines. I rolled into the dealership with my 2009 CTS with 8,000 miles for the first oil change. I talked to the service advisor and he said that they were now recommending 6,000 mile oil changes; they were having problems with some of the engines at 50,000 miles. He said not to go by the monitor. My monitor would have let me go at least 10,000 miles.

I am certainly not saying that I let my maintenance go. I, too, check the oil on a regular basis. That is just common sense if you want to make an engine last. When I had my 2005 CTS, I went to the Cadillac dealership to get the oil changed at 5,000 miles. He told me that was not necessary because it was synthetic, and that I needed to go by the monitor. I asked the dealership on the last oil change if they were still going by that recommendation. At 8,000 miles, mine was at 40% and I just did not want to go any further. He told me that they, the Cadillac dealership, were now recommending 6,000 miles because what they had found was that, if you went by the monitor and the number of miles it allows, they were beginning to have engine problems at around 50,000 miles on some of the 08's and 09's. They attributed this to people changing their oil in the 8,000 to 10,000 miles range.
quote:
Originally posted by snakedoctor:
Golly, they sound so smart


They are smart.......and so are these guys

The Japanese Automotive Standards Organization (JASO) has created their own set of performance and quality standards for petrol engines of Japanese origin.

By the early 1990s, many of the European original equipment manufacturer (OEM) car manufacturers felt that the direction of the American API oil standards was not compatible with the needs of a motor oil to be used in their motors. As a result many leading European motor manufacturers created and developed their own "OEM" oil standards.

ACEA YOU SAY!

Because of the real or perceived need for motor oils with unique qualities, many modern European cars will demand a specific OEM-only oil standard. As a result, they may make no reference at all to API standards, nor SAE viscosity grades. They may also make no primary reference to the ACEA standards, with the exception of being able to use a "lesser" ACEA grade oil for "emergency top-up", though this usually has strict limits, often up to a maximum of ½ a litre of non-OEM oil.
How in the heck did this topic go from me showing a half-way decently maintained lawn mower engine to crap about Garbage Caddy's? Cadillacs have gone downhill since the 1980's. All they are now are re-badged Chevy's and GMC's, with a power ashtray and phony walnut trim and made in Canada (not the United States).

My post was about proving Engine Design has a lot to do with sludge. The Geeks at B&S design these little engines for abuse. The tolerances are loose, the oil galleries are as big as the Lincoln Tunnel, and they are simple. These little engines are designed to see severe service, that no vehicle engine will ever see, unless you convert you caddy to a lawnmower.

I do buy American, Yes, my Titan has a Nissan badge on it, but it was built in Canton, MS. The engine was built in TN. I don't care for anything built by UAW, and their 10 minutes work, 20 minutes break, 45 an hour to bolt wheels on the lugs, then have 3 Union meetings to get more $$$ for doing a crummy job.

Dave
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:

I don't care for anything built by UAW, and their 10 minutes work, 20 minutes break, 45 an hour to bolt wheels on the lugs, then have 3 Union meetings to get more $$$ for doing a crummy job.

Dave


Big Grin Wasn't that bad when I was in the UAW. But our plant had nothing to do with autos. Scott Paper was out biggest customer.
quote:
My post was about proving Engine Design has a lot to do with sludge. The Geeks at B&S design these little engines for abuse. The tolerances are loose, the oil galleries are as big as the Lincoln Tunnel, and they are simple. These little engines are designed to see severe service, that no vehicle engine will ever see, unless you convert you caddy to a lawnmower.


This should clear up the small engine question

Just thought I should add that small engines don't have high tech sophisticated emission systems like cars do... further stressing the oil. Car engines are also plagued with short trips,incomplete warm ups,condensation and so forth that all contribute to oil oxidation. Small engines will run hot and burn off VOC'S ,condenstation,and fuel intrusion. There exists no possible coolant intrusion into the oil in those small air cooled engines to boot.

The small air cooled engines do run the oil to higher temperatures compared to water cooled engines which can pose another set of possible issues in some cases!!
quote:
Cadillacs have gone downhill since the 1980's. All they are now are re-badged Chevy's and GMC's, with a power ashtray and phony walnut trim and made in Canada (not the United



You might want to re-consider you Cadillac assertions and read this Dave. Most foreign car buyers like yourself trash American cars......yet have not owned American ever......or maybe over 30 years ago.

So how could you even know about American cars....let alone trash them??

A high tech Cadillac engine should be running the same kind of oil that Vettes run...........preferably group IV/V oil would be my choice. High tech engine gets high tech oil...Period!! Many will be rolling off the line with the good stuff already in the crankcase if not already!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_CTS
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Cadillacs have gone downhill since the 1980's. All they are now are re-badged Chevy's and GMC's, with a power ashtray and phony walnut trim and made in Canada (not the United



You might want to re-consider you Cadillac assertions and read this Dave. Most foreign car buyers like yourself trash American cars......yet have not owned American ever......or maybe over 30 years ago.

So how could you even know about American cars....let alone trash them??

A high tech Cadillac engine should be running the same kind of oil that Vettes run...........preferably group IV/V oil would be my choice. High tech engine gets high tech oil...Period!! Many will be rolling off the line with the good stuff already in the crankcase if not already!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_CTS


you claim that they reduced the OCI.

Still waiting for you to back that claim.
Kirk, somewhere up there you said "You could buy the CTS and use AMSOIL for example to exceed even the European spec.....here is why"

Is the Amsoil certified to meet the spec?

also, about the GM monitor, a couple of years ago I was at dinner during a conference, the owner of a well known lab was there too.

He knows the lady that headed the algorithm team and spoke highly of her and her efforts.

Good enough for me.

I would discount anything a dealer told me that increased their profit.

My Dodge 2500 came with a 7,500 OCI in the manual, they gave 4 coupons for oil changes at 6,000, and then pput a 3,000 sticker in the window.

Same people told my daughter they couldn't install the filter I sent her with, (Jeep) because it voids the warranty?


Yeah, I trust them. NOT!
quote:
Originally posted by RobertC:
Kirk, somewhere up there you said "You could buy the CTS and use AMSOIL for example to exceed even the European spec.....here is why"

Is the Amsoil certified to meet the spec?

also, about the GM monitor, a couple of years ago I was at dinner during a conference, the owner of a well known lab was there too.

He knows the lady that headed the algorithm team and spoke highly of her and her efforts.

Good enough for me.

I would discount anything a dealer told me that increased their profit.

My Dodge 2500 came with a 7,500 OCI in the manual, they gave 4 coupons for oil changes at 6,000, and then pput a 3,000 sticker in the window.

Same people told my daughter they couldn't install the filter I sent her with, (Jeep) because it voids the warranty?


Yeah, I trust them. NOT!


This is not about trusting a dealership Per se. It's more about the fact of them dealing with some sludge issues that have occurred in this high tech engine,as well as all the other sludge issues in other cars.

Should the dealers have done nothing to address the issue of sludge???

So now when the dealer attempts to address an issue it's either bogus or an attempt to make more money........now everything is always about an ulterior motive?

Looks like Amsoil works on the CTS........http://www.25000milemotoroil.com/Best-Oil-for-Cadillac-CTS.html

http://www.25000milemotoroil.c...or-Cadillac-CTS.html

This link will discuss way down on the list regarding oil type and the algorithms for oci's....

http://www.cadillacfaq.com/faq/answers/caddyresp.html
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
This is one example, if you read this link of OCI's being shortened.

http://74.125.93.132/search?q=...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

http://legacy.signonsandiego.c...s_lz1d14sludge1.html


This letter written to shell implies quite a lot of info regarding low quality motor oil and proof!!!

http://www.motoroilmatters.org...Shell%20-%202009.pdf


None of those said the mfgs are calling for reduced ocis.

What at least one said was that some engines are prone to sludge. Which goes back to engine design.
The Automakers are fighting hard to get better oils to satisfy lubrication needs of today's engines.

Notice how sludge is listed among other things. Motor oil technology always lags engine technology!!

http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e...fm?x=b4bMGRl,bhb871W

http://narbreview.blogspot.com...n-sludge-claims.html

http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e...346479.cfm?x=b11,0,w
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Cadillacs have gone downhill since the 1980's. All they are now are re-badged Chevy's and GMC's, with a power ashtray and phony walnut trim and made in Canada (not the United



You might want to re-consider you Cadillac assertions and read this Dave. Most foreign car buyers like yourself trash American cars......yet have not owned American ever......or maybe over 30 years ago.

So how could you even know about American cars....let alone trash them??

A high tech Cadillac engine should be running the same kind of oil that Vettes run...........preferably group IV/V oil would be my choice. High tech engine gets high tech oil...Period!! Many will be rolling off the line with the good stuff already in the crankcase if not already!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_CTS


Hmm, Let's see. I had a 1971 Olds Cutlass Convertible, Then I had 1991 F-150 Pickup 4.9L six that had 130K. 1994 Dodge Ram pickup (trannys were junk), 1998 Ram with 5.9 cummins diesel, 1997 Camaro Z-28 LT1 engine. 2000 Chevy Impala, 2002 F-150 pickup. I would say I have had my fair share of "american" vehicles. The Impala was made in CANADA, The 2002 F-150 had a CANANDIAN built engine, and a MEXICAN rear axle and a MAZDA (Japanese) Tranmission. not really "American".

Yes, you have showed links that engines will sludge. I bet that over 75% were due to owner negligence (too long OCI, Improper oil, etc). I will not have a sludge problem, because I maintain my vehicles.

It is my choice to own a Foreign vehicle that is actually made in the U.S.A. By buying it, I have supported Americans in the the Southeast.
Not many Auto plants in the midwest, mostly farm land there. If the government would support our farmers, instead of bailing out automakers that can't build and market a decent car, the midwest might not look like a ghost town.
Dave
quote:
Originally posted by RobertC:
Kirk, somewhere up there you said "You could buy the CTS and use AMSOIL for example to exceed even the European spec.....here is why"

Is the Amsoil certified to meet the spec?

also, about the GM monitor, a couple of years ago I was at dinner during a conference, the owner of a well known lab was there too.

He knows the lady that headed the algorithm team and spoke highly of her and her efforts.

Good enough for me.

I would discount anything a dealer told me that increased their profit.

My Dodge 2500 came with a 7,500 OCI in the manual, they gave 4 coupons for oil changes at 6,000, and then pput a 3,000 sticker in the window.

Same people told my daughter they couldn't install the filter I sent her with, (Jeep) because it voids the warranty?


Yeah, I trust them. NOT!


My OLM routinely says 14.5K or better for an oil change. (I put a lot of highway miles.)

They never pushed me to change the oil early. They'd do it if I asked them, but it would of been on my dime.

I think they're full of it re: the oil filter you sent with your daughter. AFAIK, you don't have to have the dealer do it, just show that it was done on time.
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Yes, you have showed links that engines will sludge. I bet that over 75% were due to owner negligence (too long OCI, Improper oil, etc). I will not have a sludge problem, because I maintain my vehicles.

Dave



By the way Dave..........how is the phone tag thing going with Oak.Ca. regarding your task at hand........what did you find out??.....just wondering!!!

A very generalized answer will suffice!!
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Yes, you have showed links that engines will sludge. I bet that over 75% were due to owner negligence (too long OCI, Improper oil, etc). I will not have a sludge problem, because I maintain my vehicles.

Dave



By the way Dave..........how is the phone tag thing going with Oak.Ca. regarding your task at hand........what did you find out??.....just wondering!!!

A very generalized answer will suffice!!


I have left several voice mail messages and 2 emails to the Fleet Division. So far this week, no call back.
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Yes, you have showed links that engines will sludge. I bet that over 75% were due to owner negligence (too long OCI, Improper oil, etc). I will not have a sludge problem, because I maintain my vehicles.

Dave



By the way Dave..........how is the phone tag thing going with Oak.Ca. regarding your task at hand........what did you find out??.....just wondering!!!

A very generalized answer will suffice!!


I have left several voice mail messages and 2 emails to the Fleet Division. So far this week, no call back.


Thanks......I must say I am a little surprised at how efficient they are answering a simple question to one of their brethren!!

Although....no news is good news!! kirk
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
None of those said the mfgs are calling for reduced ocis.


Look again Trajen!!

To help prevent sludge, Toyota in 2003 shortened the recommended oil-change interval from 7,500 miles to 5,000

This is copied from one of the links!!


BFD. Shows a bad engine design. BTW, that was 7 years ago. How about 2009/10.
Still waiting for that proof on the caddy.
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
None of those said the mfgs are calling for reduced ocis.


Look again Trajen!!

To help prevent sludge, Toyota in 2003 shortened the recommended oil-change interval from 7,500 miles to 5,000

This is copied from one of the links!!


BFD. Shows a bad engine design. BTW, that was 7 years ago. How about 2009/10.
Still waiting for that proof on the caddy.



Even group III is not immune. Just Look at this


http://74.125.93.132/search?q=...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
quote:
Still waiting for that proof on the caddy.



Here it is again...............


With the newer DI engines being harder and harder on oil due to fuel dilution, doesn't it make more sense to go back to the old 3,000 mile interval? Aren't we now seeing a lot of UOAs that show significant oil breakdown after only 3,000 miles?

Also, many of the newer GM 3.6 engines are showing chain stretch issues. I read on GMInsideNews that technicians believe that extended oil change intervals were partially to blame. The dirty oil has been causing issues with the chain tensioner and the camshafts. Some dealers, such as the one who employs MrCritical, have began recommending 5k intervals (no higher) on the GM 3.6 engines.

Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that with engines becoming more and more complex, some engines are starting to develop oil-related issues. Would reducing our service intervals back down to 3,000 miles help reduce some of these problems?
_________________________


HOWEVER........I will say it again.........use a quality group IV/V oil and a microglass filter,or the new Bosch distance and you'll be fine.

Although...I think the Micro glass filter can tolerate higher heat in certain applications like hot running Vettes out west for example. The synthetic media I would guess is high tech...high temp, spun plastic fiber. Plastic might distort in some high performance hot running applications.


http://www.boschautoparts.com/...ail.aspx?article=156
Last edited by captainkirk
Did use for year Castrol gtx in a vw jetta 1990 the original engine had over 300k running strong, no sludge at all. My current work place have a complete fleet of f150 running on dyno and long oci no sludge. All the reputable oil have to maintain a certain level of quality, some product might be a little better then other or more suitable for certain application. Still the more you read ,the more you realize the quality of the product we have on the shelf these day.
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
Your "point" is irrelevant. The claim that cadillac was reducing OCIs was made by you.

You haven't backed it up yet.

And you will also explain the millions upon millions of engines running strong using what you claim is inferior oil.

Another claim you fail to prove.



This quote is not from me 'Nuke'....here it is again...

Here it is again...............


With the newer DI engines being harder and harder on oil due to fuel dilution, doesn't it make more sense to go back to the old 3,000 mile interval? Aren't we now seeing a lot of UOAs that show significant oil breakdown after only 3,000 miles?

Also, many of the newer GM 3.6 engines are showing chain stretch issues. I read on GMInsideNews that technicians believe that extended oil change intervals were partially to blame. The dirty oil has been causing issues with the chain tensioner and the camshafts. Some dealers, such as the one who employs MrCritical, have began recommending 5k intervals (no higher) on the GM 3.6 engines.

Anyway, the point I am trying to make is that with engines becoming more and more complex, some engines are starting to develop oil-related issues. Would reducing our service intervals back down to 3,000 miles help reduce some of these problems?
_________________________


HOWEVER........I will say it again.........use a quality group IV/V oil and a microglass filter,or the new Bosch distance and you'll be fine.

Although...I think the Micro glass filter can tolerate higher heat in certain applications like hot running Vettes out west for example. The synthetic media I would guess is high tech...high temp, spun plastic fiber. Plastic might distort in some high performance hot running applications.
quote:
And you will also explain the millions upon millions of engines running strong using what you claim is inferior oil.

Another claim you fail to prove.

quote:
And you will also explain the millions upon millions of engines running strong using what you claim is inferior oil.

Another claim you fail to prove.



Anyone reading this thread or the others that are now read only will realize I have more than proved the sludge issues with all the links I have dropped.

The links showing all the sludge issues and that motor oil only meets minimum specs,proves my case and then some!!!

Here is more of them again since you are playing the ignore what I prove game!!!

http://www.schleeter.com/oil-sludge.htm


http://www.techmax.ca/european...l_specifications.htm
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:


Cadillac/cts has just lowered their oci's on those models,and has been re-flashing the prom on vehicles in for service


And the proof is where................

You haven't shown anything that proves oil is the culprit.

Car mfgs have been sued over sludge issues. Not because of oil, but for faulty designs or wrong recommendations. (Mercedes equipment telling people they could go up to 20K on mineral oil for example.)

This thread itself gives the nod to good engine design, along with quality oil, meaning API certified, and reasonable oil changes, for the lack of sludge.

I know that you're attempting a synlube push through the back door, but no one is buying it.

Group III oil, such as Castrol, works just fine. So does a quality filter.
Last edited by trajan
quote:
(Mercedes telling people they could go up to 20K on mineral oil for example.)



Now it's your turn to prove something.

Prove that Benz gave the ok to go 20k on mineral oil as you claim above.......and not synthetic with a certain spec!!!!!

You are the one trying to back door by always attempting to discredit me on every topic and then ignoring all the prove I demonstrate without fail!!!

20 grand on mineral oil will be a Tough one for you to conjure up regarding a Benz oci recommendation. Can't wait to see that!!!
Here is proof of a 100k mile oil change using Synthetic done by a known oil expert named Ray Potter from ford written up by Popular science. So much for all you skeptics over very extended oil change intervals. Try disproving this one guys. You can't!!! The science is real!!!

Sorry to blow the wind out of your sails!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDvY4hmIuZg


More proof why synthetic oil is just better.

In the same Popular Science article on synthetic oils, veteran race car
driver Smokey Yunick was quoted: "When you disassemble an engine that's
been run on petroleum oil, if you examine the rings and cylinder bores
with a glass you'll see ridges and scratches--that's the wear going on.
With polyol (a variety of synthetic), when you take the engine apart
everything has the appearance of being chrome-plated. In the engine we
ran at Indianapolis this year we used a polyol synthetic. When we tore
the engine down, you could still see the original honing marks on the
bearings...no wear at all. We put the same bearings back in because the
crankshaft never touched the bearings. I've never seen that before."
Last edited by captainkirk
This proof comes from an Automotive Lubrication Engineer....

Finally, we asked a respected petroleum engineer why auto manufacturers
don't specify synthetic oils for used in their products. His response
was both candid and revealing: "Auto manufacturers must, by necessity,
stick to the 'generic' SAE standards in recommending oil grades and
viscosities...and synthetics are way ahead of SAE standards. The top
SAE motor oil classifications (SD, SE, SF, etc.), rather than being
benchmarks of excellence, are merely 'highest common denominators'. The
highest SAE rating (currently 'SF'), for example, is determined not for
the state-of-the-art performance of the better synthetics, but rather
for the best possible performance of petroleum oils *currently
achievable by a majority of petroleum oil producers* (emphasis ours).
It is not surprising then that synthetics pass these qualifications
effortlessly. What is needed is an entirely additional set of SAE
standards for synthetics. Such a grading system would, in effect, start
where current SAE (petroleum-oriented) specs leave off. If such a
premium grading system were adopted by the Society (SAE), then you'd see
the automakers universally recommending lighter oils in grades and with
recommended drain intervals completely beyond the reach of petroleum
products..."



This is the whole long article for the Ultimate of Proof of synthetic being best that lays all your questions to rest forever!!!! This is the Nail in the Petroleum Coffin!!!!

http://www.mr2.com/TEXT/synth_oil.txt
SD Motor oils were spec'd for cars 1971 and older

SF Motor oils were spec'd for cars 1988 and older.

@Captain Kirk; Why are you digging this ancient data up, and quoting it like it is current?

This data has no bearing at all on the latest dino oils on the market....You Failed Again.

No new car much less a new Cadillac is using SD/SE/SF motor oils. Get your 'FACTS' up to date.
OOooh...Somebodies mad because they are being destroyed on every oil forum.

I use a Synthetic oil 'Redline & Mobil 1EP' in my vehicles. For most people that would be overkill.

However the oil data YOU are using mentions SD/SE/SF oils, these oils were replaced 20-40 years ago.

The dino oils being produced by 'REPUTABLE' firms however are much advanced from the oils of decades past...PERIOD.

Please post relevant up to date data...better yet don't post at all.
quote:
The dino oils being produced by 'REPUTABLE' firms however are much advanced from the oils of decades past...PERIOD.


If they are so advanced.......why all the sludge issues and commercials that continue when 'those' oils are used.

Destroyed..........I have proven every point very well. You have not!!!!

SO.... I am still waiting for your proof that you never show with meaning you are the one getting 'destroyed' as you like to call it.

Still waiting 'trajen'
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
For gas engines, anything below SJ is obsolete.

Diesels, below CF.

http://www.aa1car.com/library/API_ratings.pdf

Can't find fault with any of Deltona Dave's thoughts on the subject either.


The information you post is supposed to show proof of what if any. It's just a chart compiled by big oil.......that's all.........


Trajen........still waiting for the info with the Benz 20k oil on dino oil specified by Benz.

You know......this one.......

(Mercedes telling people they could go up to 20K on mineral oil for example.)
To use your oft spoke line...."Google it'"

Hint: Mercedes class action suit. One of those you yourself mentioned in an ill fated attempt to blame oil for all those class action suits over sludged engines.

You remember, all those suits against the suto makers for sludged engines due to bad design.

And still, you don't prove the Caddy claim.
Last edited by trajan
If you're going to do 3-5k changes, I'd stick with the mineral.

It doesn't hurt to use that OCI with synthetic. Well, it does lighten the ole bank account. But if you get peace of mind.....

BMW went all synth @1998 or so. I'm not aware of any ACEA A3/B3 mineral, so it's a moot point for me anyway.

But mineral or synth, I've never, ever, had a sludge problem in any car, mower, or snow blower.

As for getting back to the subject..... API Mineral/Dino is not bad...... It isn't.
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Glad to see that you posted something relevant.

Those 20 year old posts, referencing SF oil, and then claiming it's relevant, made you look not to smart though.


The point was.............the popular science article at that time(1976).... proved synthetic oil can last a 100,000 miles done by a ford lubrication expert/guru.........that is the whole point..........you didn't get that!!!!!!!!

That article still stands as the most significant and largest to date!!!!

Now who is not looking too smart!!!!!!

The synthetic oil technology has only gotten better since then!!!!!


Here it is again........this is a bombshell by definition.

You have all been speechless over this blockbuster bombshell of information I noticed!!!!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDvY4hmIuZg
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
@ Kirk: DUH..Yes synthetic oils have only gotten better...Tell us something we don't know...But guess what...So have mineral oils...Your still not to smart.


Nuke/Trajen.....You are now on my ignore list for being unprofessional......you have been notified!!!!!!!! I will now only have sensible dialogue and intelligent exchanges!!
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
(Mercedes telling people they could go up to 20K on mineral oil for example.)



You have failed to give any proof ever..........like the 20k Benz remark above for starters............still waiting trajen. That was a bold remark/lie.....you can't back!!!!!

kirk


My dear fellow, I've done that in one of the locked threads. It was one of many suits launched by consumers against car makers concerning sludge due to faulty engine design/recommendations.

For someone who has yet to prove claims such as the CTS reduced OCI, or how all those sludge suits were due to oil, you have chutzpah.

https://forums.noria.com/eve/fo...=614104214#614104214

I guess you fogot that one? We'll ignore the fact that you falsely claimed to use your real identity.

Now, about that Cadillac reducing OCIs on the CTS...........

All in all, there has been nothing that refutes the OP's points.
Last edited by trajan
This is what I am talking about.

NEW STANDARDS ......the old didn't work well

Real world data is the best as described below using Dynos!! The old way of collecting data was not reliable!!!

GF-5 Issues
Most of the issues surrounding the coming GF-5 oil standard have to do with engineering test procedures that are obsolete or need to be changed. The current Sequence IV-B fuel economy test, which is done in a laboratory on a test bench, will have to be replaced with some type of engine dynamometer test that more accurately simulated real-world driving conditions. The new test procedure should be ready by early next year.

GF-5 may also require reducing phosphorous and sulfur even more to extend the life of the catalytic converter to 150,000 miles and beyond. Phosphorous and sulfur can contaminate the catalyst and reduce the life of the converter if the engine uses oil. But both of these ingredients are also important anti-wear agents, so the fear is that reducing phosphorous and sulfur too much may end up reducing the life of the engine itself.

There are already concerns that today’s levels of phosphorous may be too low for older pushrod engines with flat tappet camshafts. Camshafts with flat-bottom lifters generate a lot more friction between the cam lobes and lifters than roller cams with roller lifters. Consequently, cam lobe wear in older engines may be a problem if the oil does not contain adequate levels of anti-wear agents, or if the oil is not changed regularly.


IN SUM ............Motor oil may be developing more issues in the very near future(next year) then less issues. It's all about the EPA and environmental issues which is what led to all the motor oil sludge issues due to the emission systems on the cars choking down the engines ability to breathe and less than ideal oil formulations to deal with it!!

Now car engines will be dealing with wear and tear issues on this new standard.....besides the sludge issues. The sludge issues might be less...........but more wear on your engine is no better,and even worse!! Can you say, "look at my clean..worn out..almost new engine" !!!!

Let me guess.....when that happens you'll say....."bad engine"......."good oil"...."sue the automakers again for something the oil did" Well........you've been warned!!!

I won't have any issues because I will be using...............

High tech synthetic oils group IV/V with all the 'right stuff'......
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:


Cadillac/cts has just lowered their oci's on those models,and has been re-flashing the prom on vehicles in for service


And the proof is where................




Well?


How typical of you, Trajan­. When backed into a corner, you completely ignore what is presented, then you throw out a smokescreen of nonsense to take off the heat.

Well? Well? Well? Well?
My own opinion Kirk is that using a quality dino with moderate oil change intervals no sludge issue would be present.

A irresponsible owner of a vehicle can be another reason for sludge.

Personally I have never owned a vehicle with a sludged engine. Marketing likes to play us, drumming into our heads, if were not using brand x, then watch out here come 'Da Sludge'
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:


I won't have any issues because I will be using...............

High tech synthetic oils group IV/V with all the 'right stuff'......


At least you're dumping that synlube.

Now, about that Cadillac reducing ocis??????

All the obsolete information and dodging does not alter the facts.

The OP's mower engine is fine.

The use of API mineral/dino is fine.

A good engine design along with reasonable oil changes and the use of approved oil goes a long way in combating sludge.
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
This BITOG thread talks about 'BLACK DEATH' engine sludge/deposits and why some are using European 100% PAO in their European rides.

Those oil change monitors are calibrated for it!!!

http://webcache.googleusercont...&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us


just as bad about bringing up issue that happened a long, long time ago...... your link.

Explain why it isn't mentioned in the present. You know, 2010.

The 15k miles done with Gr III oil, spec 5w-30, and the lack of sludge I've dealt with.

got a cheap product bulk oil from their local home improvement centers
they also did extended drains without considering the consequences. Negligence is an ubiquitous problem.

your link.

Don't know why you bring up the 1980s or 90s when the year is 2010.We don't use oil from the 1980s, or even the 1940s for that matter.

Doesn't change the facts stated by the OP.
Last edited by trajan
@ Trajan: Thanks for the last post, informative

You will not get any answer concerning the Cadillac...But you know that.

Modern dino oils are vastly superior to the oils of yester year...Anyone who would deny that, well is just plain ignorant...

As you mentioned if you have a known vehicle that uses a engine that is prone to sludge, your going to have to reduce the oil change interval, faulty or poorly designed PCV systems can be attributed to this issue.
Again, from one of his links: Used-car shoppers should also realize that even the most complained-about engines represented less than 1 percent of those made, so the odds of avoiding such a car are in your favor.

Consumers who own cars with sludge-prone engines should change the oil according to the “extreme use” schedule in the owner’s manual.

This is at the top of his list: http://www.consumerreports.org...e/overview/index.htm

So, here's a question. Why all those V6 3.0ls on the list?

I have a 3.0L I6, and it isn't on the list.

Don't see any Fords on the list. Or GMs either. If it's an oil problem, why not?
I just noticed 9 ignored posts by Trajen/nuke..........all not worth reading or opening/showing.........because that one poster(trajen/nuke are the same)......always divert away from the actual facts and now flood this thread with whatever "trash talk" he is spewing again to serve is crazy agenda!!

He Must be a big oil straw boss/shill/troll!!!!

So why listen ever again to this 'character' due to the obvious political agenda he is trying to serve or push!


To spew distorted information!!!!


All I ever post/ed are the real scientific facts!

What/who do you want to believe??

The Facts without spin(what I have shown already)....or a straw man argument(Trajen/Nuke),with all kinds of spin!!

You be the Judge!

Kirk
Ahh, I'd let it go. His own links don't back up his claims.

Not much more we can do. Deltona's info hasn't been refuted. The auto makers don't blame the oil for the sludge problems. The customers haven't blamed the oil companies.

His own links show he's been on the wrong track.

Have a sludge prone engine? Change the oil/filter more often. The "severe service" schedule. (Not everyone does the filter. I just figure, what's another $10-$15 on top of 7qts?).

Use mfg approved oil. If not, at least API certed oil.

There is no miracle oil. No magic fix.
Last edited by trajan
This is off the net....shows oil is a fault for causing sludge.


Most common cause of sludge problem

As complex as the issue of sludge formation is, the most common cause of the sludge problem is the oil itself.
More exactly it is the use of either substandard oil like API SA or just using even the top quality oil for just too long.
As "obvious" as this may be, it is not surprising that general motoring public is not aware of either of these two problems.
Even if your "Owner's Manual" recommends top API or ILSAC quality motor oil, there is not any assurance that the local cut rate "quick oil change" outlet actually will use it in your vehicle, more often than not they will use deeply discounted "surplus" bulk oil whose quality is either substandard or as bad as API SA !
The second most common reason is just running way too long on the motor oil for the given type of service.
Another not too often disclosed fact is that during the ILSAC or API engine tests on motor oils, the oil life is measured in HOURS, and yet only very few vehicles sold anywhere in the world have ENGINE HOUR RUN meters.
The normal motor oil recommended service frequency is specified in miles or kilometers, but the motor oil life is in hours of service.
I remember way back........someone wanted to know why big oil was not sued......think again......this tells a different story.

The oil in question is a group III.......not the true synthetic group IV/V.

The oil filter was also blamed. That's why I use only depth filters with the backing support screen,or the new Bosch Distance depth filter. In either case, a group three oil can sludge and then block the filter putting the blame on the filter when the oil was at fault all along.

This would not have happened with a 100% PAO/GROUP IV/V OIL. No sludge,and no blocked filters....period! Just a super clean engine.

This engine below wasn't so lucky with the group III oil. The opposite of super clean!!


http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...wflat&Number=1653077


This is the very famous BG product addressing sludge issues and mentions oil quality as an issue.

http://www.bgprod.com/blendr/sludgeKills.html
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:
I used to be in the habit of using quick lube outlets and using a synthetic oil from the hose. Since reading some of these threads, I take my own oil or purchase a quality synthetic from a bottle, not a barrel.


inHaliburton,

That's the smartest thing I've heard in a while!! I am glad you've been reading,and you won't be sorry. Playing it safe/smart is always a good bet!

Happy motoring!

Kirk
This is a Jay Leno interview with a Torco Rep.

It discusses what is wrong with modern day motor oil products, and how you can address the wear and tear issues occurring in both older car engines.....and newer car engines to stop or reduce wear due to the lack of anti-wear additives due to modern day car emission control systems that don't allow the use certain anti-wear additives of yesteryear that once protected our engines.

This interview implies that colloids shown in the second product are needed to replace those lost additives. Modern day colloids are better than zinc ever was, by reducing more friction....zinc just cost more! Zinc is what's discussed in the first product.

Colloids also stop those dry damaging cold starts that zinc couldn't even stop back in the day... as would be in the second product.

http://www.enginebuildermag.co...ay_lenos_garage.aspx
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:


Cadillac/cts has just lowered their oci's on those models,and has been re-flashing the prom on vehicles in for service


And the proof is where................




Well?


You haven't backed up this "claim" yet.

I know, you can't.
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:


Cadillac/cts has just lowered their oci's on those models,and has been re-flashing the prom on vehicles in for service


And the proof is where................




Well?


You haven't backed up this "claim" yet.

I know, you can't.


Trajan, where's that vehicle you claim a neighbour of yours has that blew up from using Synlube?

Well?

You haven't backed up that claim Yet.

Ya, I know, you can't. Wink Wink
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
I remember way back........someone wanted to know why big oil was not sued......think again......this tells a different story.

The oil in question is a group III.......not the true synthetic group IV/V.

The oil filter was also blamed. That's why I use only depth filters with the backing support screen,or the new Bosch Distance depth filter. In either case, a group three oil can sludge and then block the filter putting the blame on the filter when the oil was at fault all along.

This would not have happened with a 100% PAO/GROUP IV/V OIL. No sludge,and no blocked filters....period! Just a super clean engine.

This engine below wasn't so lucky with the group III oil. The opposite of super clean!!


http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...wflat&Number=1653077




Another fail for you. (BTW, I remember someone, not too long ago, saying "big oil" doesn't get sued. Some tripe about them being too big.

That same person should look up the word potential as well. I also wonder if that same person could explain the part colored in red. Guess that potential suit had no merit.)

"Mobil(e) 1's fault?!? Hardly, he's got ZERO case there. You don't have to be a Mobil fan to recognize that if it WERE a common contributor to sludge, we'd know about it here on BITOG. Its a perfectly adequate oil, and less likely to cause sludge than many, many other other oils out there." (It would be known here too.)

"He got the check cut from Nissan, not Mobil."


"The fact that Nissan is paying for the repair says to me that the cause was something within the engine or emissions control system"



You really should *read* these links first lad.

And, I know I'm asking the impossible, but you can prove M1 is a grp III? EM does not publicly discuss formulations.

Got that bulliten from GM that says the OCIs were reduced for the CTS?
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Trajan, where's that vehicle you claim a neighbour of yours has that blew up from using Synlube?

Well?

You haven't backed up that claim Yet.

Ya, I know, you can't. Wink Wink



inHaliburton.....Very good point. But remember....Trajen only makes demands for proof,and never provides any of his own.

We are also still waiting for trajen to back his claim that Mercedes Benz was recommending oil change intervals of 20,000 miles on petroleum oil. He failed on that one as well

It's for reasons like mentioned above and all of trajens other lies and slander is why I have placed him on my IGNORE list along with his alter ego...Nuke..where he will stay until/IF he mans up and quits with his DRIVEL!!!

Snakedoctor.... being trajens other screen name is next to be ignored if he resurfaces with drivel as well.
inHaliburton......This is trajens remark saying Mercedes Benz said to go 20k on dino oil.



quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:

And the proof is where................

You haven't shown anything that proves oil is the culprit.

Car mfgs have been sued over sludge issues. Not because of oil, but for faulty designs or wrong recommendations. (Mercedes equipment telling people they could go up to 20K on mineral oil for example.)

This thread itself gives the nod to good engine design, along with quality oil, meaning API certified, and reasonable oil changes, for the lack of sludge.

I know that you're attempting a synlube push through the back door, but no one is buying it.

Group III oil, such as Castrol, works just fine. So does a quality filter.
Trajan: Kirk and the alter ego Inhaliburton, will never answer any questions, as these boobs don't have the answers.

I believe they post here, as they have been banned from all the other sites. They have been on better behaviour as of late, as they're probably down to their last chance here as well.

They will never post anything of relevance, but I give them credit for copying and pasting...Though they should read through, what they link, as it usually refutes any point, they were trying to make.
I know.

I don't see why this inhal person harps on the Z4. Strange that he demands what he and his alter ego fail to provide over and over.

Just for kicks, I asked the owner if he would give all the info wanted.

He said if they posted a nice letter apologizing for their attitude, and explain why, in detail, they need all this information, he'll consider it.

But, given the fact that one knows very little about oil, and the other isn't even savy enough to stay on topic, plus the overwhelming fact that neither have as yet proven a need to know, he is doubtful.
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Originally posted by Taterandnoodles:
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
Check this out regarding wear tests.


http://www.animegame.com/cars/Oil%20Tests.pdf


Well check this video out about using a timken (1 arm bandit) for product demonstation.

http://www.amsoil.com/video/AM...n_Series_Videos.aspx



Ok.......But Amsoil does show on their website what the 4172 four ball wear shows for most of their lubes. The original link I pasted seemed to indicated RP had the most EP protection.

Can you show otherwise.......what is the truth?

Check this out.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...wflat&Number=1589827
Yeh Kerk is totally lost as far as anything that requires up to date data. He cannot accept that sludge is not an issue.

He's kinda of like a Chatty Kathy Doll, you pull a string on it's chest and it blabs about sludge.

My vehicles are not infected with this sludge virus, nor any of my friends.

This sludge issue must be big among Yugo users thus the tendancy to use goop in the motors.

I believe the thread was started mentioning the complete lack of sludge in an engine. Perhaps the boob should start his own sludge thread where he and his alter ego (himself) can comment back and forth telling each other (himself) what a great post that was
It's almost a 'No-Brainer'....that synthetic oil is this much better.......why even take a chance putting cheap oil in your engine that cost several thousand dollars alone?

I work hard for my money and want the best for engines. Synthetic oil is cheap insurance. Why risk it?

Check this out....

http://advancedlubetech.com/le...versus-petroleum-oil

This is another link that shows not only protection from sludge,but also 'dry starts'...

Dry damaging starts causes a good portion of the engine wear that occurs. This fact is another very important reason to use premium synthetics........to help lube the engine at start up. This might be just as important as sludge prevention..

http://www.carsdirect.com/car-...and-conventional-oil


This one is straight from Noria showing the benefits of synthetics. It shows sludge is an issue at the start of the article.

http://www.machinerylubricatio...nal-vs-synthetic-oil
Last edited by captainkirk
So my take Trajan is, if you follow oil change intervals, that are not outrageously long, then you should have no issues. This also requires the owner to keep up on maintenance.

This is a disposeable society today and cars along with just about everything else is marketed for a quick turnover. So people don't necessarily take care of what they own.

Todays modern dino oils are more than up to the task. If the car is spec'd for synthetic then use it. If the area in which you live in see's extreme's then it is of benefit.

My advice to someone reading these posts is don't listen to the hype, or the shill's who are close to being banned from this site. We know who those people (person) are/is.
Deltona Dave: Your pictures show what I would expect from an engine using quality dino's. Just another example that synthetic oils are not necessary for all.

Sludge is an overhyped issue plain and simple. The vast majority of cars on the road will never have an issue. I guess that is why the majority of cars do not use synthetic oils. Use dino oils with confidence if not required by vehicle make/model.
quote:
This is a disposeable society today and cars along with just about everything else is marketed for a quick turnover.



Disposable being the word when your engines blows up with sludge using a sludge prone mineral based oil.

SLUDGE = QUICK TURNOVER...........with mineral based oil. Good marketing strategy if you want to sell more cars.........use cheap mineral oil,and get a new car very soon. Very true indeed!

Synthetic oil = very slow turnover of cars. Bad marketing strategy if you want to sell more cars.

If you want to keep your car and save money........use 100% premium synthetic oil,not to mention the better fuel economy.
Yes Trajan the tendancy now is to lease vehicles to people who care not about upkeep. Like I have mentioned only a boob would recommend one type of oil for all.


If the vehicle requires synthetic, it is one thing, but only the ignorant would make a blanket statement.

Sludge is an issue for those lonely middle age men, desperately looking for attention on internet forums.

Haven't seen sludge nor has anybody I know.
The simple fact is: the overwhelming majority of new cars manufactured, have the factory fill with dino oil. Those are the only facts pertinent to a debate...The rest is just background noise.

Are synthetics useful? of course...Are they necessary? only in certain vehicles...Are synthetics better then dino oils? of course...Those are the facts....The rest is just background noise.
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Trajan: Kirk and the alter ego Inhaliburton, will never answer any questions, as these boobs don't have the answers.

I believe they post here, as they have been banned from all the other sites. They have been on better behaviour as of late, as they're probably down to their last chance here as well.

They will never post anything of relevance, but I give them credit for copying and pasting...Though they should read through, what they link, as it usually refutes any point, they were trying to make.



Hey nuke.................YOU ARE BUSTED SIR AND YOU SHOULD BE BANNED!!!!!!!!!


http://www.ripoffreport.com/Li...iar-and-co-682eq.htm
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Yeh Kerk is totally lost as far as anything that requires up to date data. He cannot accept that sludge is not an issue.

He's kinda of like a Chatty Kathy Doll, you pull a string on it's chest and it blabs about sludge.

My vehicles are not infected with this sludge virus, nor any of my friends.

This sludge issue must be big among Yugo users thus the tendancy to use goop in the motors.

I believe the thread was started mentioning the complete lack of sludge in an engine. Perhaps the boob should start his own sludge thread where he and his alter ego (himself) can comment back and forth telling each other (himself) what a great post that was


Talk about being a boob. This post is typical from you. Insult the person who presents information. You likely don't read the links. What grade are you in?
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
I know.

I don't see why this inhal person harps on the Z4. Strange that he demands what he and his alter ego fail to provide over and over.

Just for kicks, I asked the owner if he would give all the info wanted.

He said if they posted a nice letter apologizing for their attitude, and explain why, in detail, they need all this information, he'll consider it.

But, given the fact that one knows very little about oil, and the other isn't even savy enough to stay on topic, plus the overwhelming fact that neither have as yet proven a need to know, he is doubtful.


Apologize for what?

Well?
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
The simple fact is: the overwhelming majority of new cars manufactured, have the factory fill with dino oil. Those are the only facts pertinent to a debate...The rest is just background noise.

Are synthetics useful? of course...Are they necessary? only in certain vehicles...Are synthetics better then dino oils? of course...Those are the facts....The rest is just background noise.


Pennzoil Yellow Bottle has a strong following over at bitog. A good SM rated dino.

Mobil Clean 5000 is another good dino.

Could skim through this as well.
https://forums.noria.com/eve/fo...16604995/m/976102648
Last edited by trajan
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:

My vehicles are not infected with this sludge virus, nor any of my friends.


Hallelujah! Nucleardawg and all of his friends (both of them) have never had a sludge issue. Therefore, there has never been a sludge issue.


Nuke tells everyone to use mineral oil........yet he(nuke) uses synthetic oil on all his vehicles,such as Redline oil. What's up with that?

What do you make of this....

http://www.ripoffreport.com/Li...iar-and-co-682eq.htm
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
So my take Trajan is, if you follow oil change intervals, that are not outrageously long, then you should have no issues. This also requires the owner to keep up on maintenance.

This is a disposeable society today and cars along with just about everything else is marketed for a quick turnover. So people don't necessarily take care of what they own.

Todays modern dino oils are more than up to the task. If the car is spec'd for synthetic then use it. If the area in which you live in see's extreme's then it is of benefit.

My advice to someone reading these posts is don't listen to the hype, or the shill's who are close to being banned from this site. We know who those people (person) are/is.


If 'dino oils' are so good Nuke.............why do you have only synthetic in your 'STASH' ???????

NUKE...You make no sense telling everyone basic mineral oil is ssssooooo good............then admit to loading up with synthetic oil REDLINE OIL.

Your busted again!!!!!!!!

Here is the proof that proves it.......


Originally Posted by NuclearDog View Post
I currently have 1 case of Redline 5w-30, and 1 case of Redline 10-w30, in my oil stash at home. Would either of these oils be good for the 75 I just purchased, or should I look into a heavier 5 or 10w-40.

I know how to use the search function, but as a new member I want to get my posts up, so I can post pics of my new ride.

Any recommendations or explanations, of why you use your particular oil, is appreciated..Thanks Guys.
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
Looks like the 'other site' is giving quite a bit of information proving sludge is a real issue.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...wflat&Number=1498040


And yet, not a single mention of the word sludge.



Wrong again Trajen........here is sludge talk just for you.....YOU ASKED FOR IT!!!


http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...wflat&Number=1860004

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...umber=1504155&page=1


This is just a small sample of all the sludge talk on that site. It's epidemic over there as well.....SLUDGE!!!!

This makes it a littler easier to prove my point regarding sludge with this one google link/Bombshell.....

http://www.google.com/cse?cx=0...3D1504155%26page%3D1
Last edited by captainkirk
It's my understanding that going up a grade won't hurt, eg: 5w-30 to 10w-30, or say 10w-30 to a 10w-40. I've used GC 0w-30, Castrol 5w-40 and M1 0w-40 in the Z4.

I don't think it will hurt to use the MMO with either grade.

Supposedly Rislone helps with the tick. Like any kind of additive though, YMMV.

Pay a visit to the Pennzoil and Mobil websites. Mobil in paticular has lots of info.

Deltona Dave's point stands.
Last edited by trajan
Kirk/Inhaliburton/Miro latest obsession is sludge.

I believe it goes back to some posts where they mentioned, that they believed that sludge had something to do with the dire case of, erectal disfunction that they suffer from.

For some reason they believe sludge is clogging the main vein. They are tired of the giggles it gets them when it's money time.
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Kirk/Inhaliburton/Miro latest obsession is sludge.


Links get posted. They're shown to have nothing to do with the position taken.

Then in a show of misplaced retailiation, more get posted that weaken said position even further.

Then. the cycle continues. Obsession indeed.

And none, not a single one, come even close to refute the OP.

And Big Bear has some good advice.
Last edited by trajan
Define synthetic? According to the data, from Ashland and other oil companies, there are no issues with wear and GF-4 oils.

With GF-5/SN soon due out, these oils will approach synthetic quality. Many of the GF-4 products contain some Grp III base oils. Additives are also very important.

With GF-5, most oils will be considered synthetic by the Grp III definition. Shell recently came out with their new Synthetic called Pennzoil Ultra. It's primarily group III base, in which they claim Grp III's have been solvency than PAO's.

Conventional oils are all one needs unless your owners manual calls for a synthetic. If you are following OEM recommendations, you should have nothing to worry about.

In a high performance application, where high heat from a turbo or racing conditions are experienced, you maybe be better off using a synthetic oil like Mobil1/Synpower etc..

The new Mustangs will be going 10k miles or 1 year on Motorcraft oil. Toyota will be doing the same with their 0w20. Both of these oils are synthetic blends.

Amsoil is currently testing their GF-5 oils that will be out later this fall, along with the rest of them.

Oils have come a long way, and you can't go wrong with any of the major brands.

http://www.pqiamerica.com/

http://www.gf-5.com/

Using a qualified, officially approved, licensed product is your safest bet.
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Kirk/Inhaliburton/Miro latest obsession is sludge.


Links get posted. They're shown to have nothing to do with the position taken.

Then in a show of misplaced retailiation, more get posted that weaken said position even further.

Then. the cycle continues. Obsession indeed.

And none, not a single one, come even close to refute the OP.

And Big Bear has some good advice.



What???????? Get back on your MEDS!!!!!!!!
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
So my take Trajan is, if you follow oil change intervals, that are not outrageously long, then you should have no issues. This also requires the owner to keep up on maintenance.

This is a disposeable society today and cars along with just about everything else is marketed for a quick turnover. So people don't necessarily take care of what they own.

Todays modern dino oils are more than up to the task. If the car is spec'd for synthetic then use it. If the area in which you live in see's extreme's then it is of benefit.

My advice to someone reading these posts is don't listen to the hype, or the shill's who are close to being banned from this site. We know who those people (person) are/is.


If that's your advice Nuke........then why don't you put cheap dino oil in your 75 vette,and all your mustangs.

Why do you use the group IV synthetic that I have been touting as being superior,but go on to say mineral is fine.

Why do you tell everyone that mineral oil is fine..........but I don't see you using it in your precious cars. The ratty little beater truck you claim to drive doesn't count.

I want to see you put that cheapo Dino oil in your cars,then tell us its good enough. Put your money where your mouth is like I do.

Until then.....you are a hypocrite,just playing games,or lying. Which is it??


Here is the group IV stuff you seem to have plenty of and only use in your cars...but then go on and tell everyone group II/III is good enough to use,even though you won't use it.

Originally Posted by NuclearDog View Post
I currently have 1 case of Redline 5w-30, and 1 case of Redline 10-w30, in my oil stash at home. Would either of these oils be good for the 75 I just purchased, or should I look into a heavier 5 or 10w-40.

I know how to use the search function, but as a new member I want to get my posts up, so I can post pics of my new ride.

Any recommendations or explanations, of why you use your particular oil, is appreciated..Thanks Guys.
AT least the new G5 standard will be attempting to address the issues I have stated above.

he Sequence VG is a fired engine test designed to evaluate the candidate oil's ability to prevent sludge and varnish deposits in short trip low temperature operation.

The test cycles between low and high temperature operation, simulating the short trip driving conditions which promote the generation of acids and fuel dilution in the crankcase. A special fuel is used which is prone to sludge and varnish generation.

The rated performance parameters for the Sequence VG are:

* Average Engine Sludge (AES)
* Rocker Arm Cover Sludge (RACS)
* Average Engine Varnish (AEV)
* Average Piston Skirt Varnish (APV)
* Oil Screen Clogging (Screen Clogging, %)
* Ring Sticking (RS)


Proposed Performance Limits for AES, RACS and Oil Screen Clogging will be more demanding for GF-5 compared to the limits for GF-4.
Sequence VG Test Conditions


This test alone acknowledges that sludge/varnish/deposits are an issue.


However...the point missed is that refining petro oil into something similar to group IV is going to make it cost just as much as group IV and more if oil prices continue rising.

I still don't see a severely Hydro-cracked Group III that equals or rivals a quality group IV true synthetic,especially with doing extended OCI's. Even when that day may come.......you will pay a premium price if you buy into it.
quote:
Fine. Use your favorite petroleum oil if you think it's that good. I will continue using group IV/V synthetic because it's cheap insurance..


Captain_kirk.....Damn and you where saying oil company are making *** product and the only good oil was ******* .Now you using synthetic oil what append? I thought you didn’t need to change your oil ever again.
I'm still waiting for the 'copy and paste' response.

This guy never has had an original thought. Thats why he continually gets 'owned' on every forum.

I'm sure whatever his comeback it will bring a chuckle from me as he seems a big crybaby.

I truly enjoy when the split personality surfaces and the alter ego's appear defending him...talk about a joke, but it always makes me laugh at him
quote:
Originally posted by vitual_mage:
quote:
Fine. Use your favorite petroleum oil if you think it's that good. I will continue using group IV/V synthetic because it's cheap insurance..


Captain_kirk.....Damn and you where saying oil company are making *** product and the only good oil was ******* .Now you using synthetic oil what append? I thought you didn’t need to change your oil ever again.



I don't change it. I might change at 50k and send it back for credit like before.
It isn't of question of 'thinking' the oil we use is good,

The fact is that we *know* it's good.

The fact is that no one has proved otherwise.

The fact is that link after link has shown what happens when one fails to use a quality oil in favor of some unrated slop like synlube.

Link after link has shown the results of poor engine design. Or the results of owners who fail the ID Ten Test.

Link after link, provided by a die hard synlube user, has shown over and over again that the OP is right.
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Do you have an original thought in your brain? All I see from you is 'copy and paste'

How's that little blue pill working on that sludge of your?


I have never seen you EVER post anything original or intelligent. That's my doing!!

You have never bought any information to this thread other than your drivel. Oh wait....you do at least admit to using synthetic oil you claim no one else needs,just you. Go figure!

All you are capable of is sarcasm. You're not very good at that either!

I see you are familiar with that little blue pill you refer. How many a day do you take for your condition? No wonder you are so frustrated!!

Once you go fat you don't go back is your motto I see...........I agree......but in my case that would be my wallet!!! What do you mean?????
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Originally posted by vitual_mage:
quote:
Fine. Use your favorite petroleum oil if you think it's that good. I will continue using group IV/V synthetic because it's cheap insurance..


Captain_kirk.....Damn and you where saying oil company are making *** product and the only good oil was ******* .Now you using synthetic oil what append? I thought you didn’t need to change your oil ever again.



I don't change it. I might change at 50k and send it back for credit like before.


Then why claim that using a Group IV/V oil is the way to go since you don't use it?
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
quote:
Originally posted by Captain Kirk:
quote:
Originally posted by vitual_mage:
quote:
Fine. Use your favorite petroleum oil if you think it's that good. I will continue using group IV/V synthetic because it's cheap insurance..


Captain_kirk.....Damn and you where saying oil company are making *** product and the only good oil was ******* .Now you using synthetic oil what append? I thought you didn’t need to change your oil ever again.



I don't change it. I might change at 50k and send it back for credit like before.


Then why claim that using a Group IV/V oil is the way to go since you don't use it?



You know full well what product I use...you constantly bring up that product over and over knowing full well I have moved on.

What else would you like to know regarding my chosen brand of oil you keep referencing, and why?

Your favorite topic seems to be my chosen oil...why do you mention it so often?
we are very good at what we do...What we have done is get you and the rest of the minions banned from BITOG, where your, snd synlubes name was destroyed for all time...We have got all synlube topics locked and your next on the way out...Yes we have heard about sludge from you and the other boob...Soon you both will be gone and we can discuss other subjects besides sludge...Bye Kerk and Inhaliburton
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
we are very good at what we do...What we have done is get you and the rest of the minions banned from BITOG, where your, snd synlubes name was destroyed for all time...We have got all synlube topics locked and your next on the way out...Yes we have heard about sludge from you and the other boob...Soon you both will be gone and we can discuss other subjects besides sludge...Bye Kerk and Inhaliburton


What do you mean by 'WE' and 'do'. Are you a shill? Getting topics locked is your only purpose?

I have never seen you discuss anything other than what I bring to the table. Nothing intelligent......EXAMPLES OF YOUR DRIVEL AND ATTACKS FOR ALL TO SEE........

https://forums.noria.com/eve/fo...rtType=1&u=815109593

The above proof only shows your goal is to attack........and one thing in particular!!!

Go ahead nuke,let me see you start another topic......something original.....something with substance........you're free to do so....you never do.....always promise or complain you want/would like to do so........but you seem to like only this one,or whatever one I am on. Take your own advice and start whatever topic...bet you won't...you can't......you can't think for yourself like I can.......can you??? What's the matter, Bob's place to boring now!

By the way........who said anything about synlube recently except you...YA BOOB!!!
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
tell you what I will be happy to start a thread of substance but yer such a tool that you will start talking about sludge...We have heard all we want about sludge...Yah BOOB


This topic started off with......'show me sludge kirk'....on the second post.........Yah BIG BOOB,Nuke!!!

(((Capt. Kirk, Prove to me about Sludge again)))... So I answered Dave with the proof of sludge! Happy now!!


Go ahead.......make my day.......start another topic if you dare! Yah BIG BOOB, AGAIN!!
Last edited by captainkirk
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Trajan: Kirk and the alter ego Inhaliburton, will never answer any questions, as these boobs don't have the answers.

I believe they post here, as they have been banned from all the other sites. They have been on better behaviour as of late, as they're probably down to their last chance here as well.

They will never post anything of relevance, but I give them credit for copying and pasting...Though they should read through, what they link, as it usually refutes any point, they were trying to make.


I'm pointing out to the masses Nucleardawg's inaccuracies and untruths.

He calls us "boobs."

What sites have we been banned?

I have contributed very little info as I am not an oil expert--just a user.

Capt. Kirk has supplied much typed info as well as many interesting to me links.

What have you posted besides insults?
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Kirk/Inhaliburton/Miro latest obsession is sludge.

I believe it goes back to some posts where they mentioned, that they believed that sludge had something to do with the dire case of, erectal disfunction that they suffer from.

For some reason they believe sludge is clogging the main vein. They are tired of the giggles it gets them when it's money time.


Nucleardawg, show us where I am obsessed with sludge.

Your reference to erectal disfunction is uncalled for, and disgusting.
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
I'm still waiting for the 'copy and paste' response.

This guy never has had an original thought. Thats why he continually gets 'owned' on every forum.

I'm sure whatever his comeback it will bring a chuckle from me as he seems a big crybaby.

I truly enjoy when the split personality surfaces and the alter ego's appear defending him...talk about a joke, but it always makes me laugh at him


And another belittling post pointed at Captain Kirk.
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
we are very good at what we do...What we have done is get you and the rest of the minions banned from BITOG, where your, snd synlubes name was destroyed for all time...


That`s a lie. I have not been banned from BITOG.

quote:
We have got all synlube topics locked and your next on the way out...Yes we have heard about sludge from you and the other boob...


Calling Captain Kirk and myself a boob once again.

quote:
Soon you both will be gone and we can discuss other subjects besides sludge...Bye Kerk and Inhaliburton


You must know something that I don`t.
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Sounds like Kirk is all butt hurt again...Be a man and come get your whipping


Yet another typical post by Nucleardawg.


ihHaliburton.....Thanks for showing everyone what Nuke/dog is all about. It's actually worse/uglier than even I thought. That guy has issues man!! Must be off his Meds for sure!!
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
yes I hope my warmth shines through to inhaliburton/Miro/Kirk now hopefully we don't have to see any more 'copy and pasted' sludge info that we all grew tired of weeks ago....now i think i shall pluck the strings of this incarnation of Miro as I can alrady read what he will type out before he even type's it....somebody 'inhaliburton' is looking for sympathy...do you need a hug? man up and quit being a big baby...And post something other than sludge...yah boob.



Hey Nuke....this is your quote......


For the violations of 'Terms of Service' I feel the need to contact the operators. I and others wish to discuss oil and oil related topics, we do not wish to discuss Yugos. We wish to discuss these topics on a website, free from company minions/spokesmen who attack non-believers.



I am still waiting to see you discuss oil and related topics,so far nothing but sarcasm on all levels.

I have talked about filtration,ATF,G-oil,minimum TBN,etc,etc.

You on the other hand only chose to mock intelligent posts. You have never introduced intelligent information to any of the threads. Your posts never move to other threads or topics proving your only agenda is to mock and harass.....that's all you have done,period!!!

You have no desire to talk about oil or related topics because you would have done so already.

You are a sham!! Here is the proof again for the Mods to see. I submit you are harassing me and others on these boards with no agenda but to harass and nothing else!!!!!!

https://forums.noria.com/eve/fo...rtType=1&u=815109593
Miro/kirk/the other:

As you notice from the other site I am more than cordial when dealing with 'normal' people...Your a old troll with whom I have no patience for. I do not suffer fools like you...You are more than welcome to go back to your cave where apparently you matter. If your on a public forum, be a man and take your lumps...Or at least give up the multiple identities and stay to the subject of the original thread..You like to promote your own agenda, on a public forum your not going to get away with that,,,so quit whining, grow a pair and start fitting in, or your going to ship out of here
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
I just pulled the rocker covers on my 2002 Craftsman Riding Mower/tractor (made by American yard Products AYP). Engine is a B&S 21.5 HP vertical shaft. Engine has 1200 plus hours on it. Never saw Synthetic OCI, except for one Mobil 1 top off. This old girl has had B&S oil factory fill, AAP 20w-50, GTX, Warren convenience store oil, etc. All has met API SL minimum. Last change was Rotella 15W-40. Current fill is Delvac 1300. Filters were either B&S or MotorCraft 400S.
Here is a link of the engine.

Remember, this is an air cooled Briggs Intek V-twin full pressure lube. It sees 25+ hours a month in very dusty conditions.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...=1861000#Post1861000

Dave


Capt. Kirk, Prove to me about Sludge again......

This thing has only had dino (mineral oil) on the average of every 100 hours.

Dave


Interesting read. But does not mean that by using dino oils you won`t have sludge issues.
quote:
Originally posted by inHaliburton:
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
I just pulled the rocker covers on my 2002 Craftsman Riding Mower/tractor (made by American yard Products AYP). Engine is a B&S 21.5 HP vertical shaft. Engine has 1200 plus hours on it. Never saw Synthetic OCI, except for one Mobil 1 top off. This old girl has had B&S oil factory fill, AAP 20w-50, GTX, Warren convenience store oil, etc. All has met API SL minimum. Last change was Rotella 15W-40. Current fill is Delvac 1300. Filters were either B&S or MotorCraft 400S.
Here is a link of the engine.

Remember, this is an air cooled Briggs Intek V-twin full pressure lube. It sees 25+ hours a month in very dusty conditions.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/...=1861000#Post1861000

Dave


Capt. Kirk, Prove to me about Sludge again......

This thing has only had dino (mineral oil) on the average of every 100 hours.

Dave


Interesting read. But does not mean that by using dino oils you won`t have sludge issues.


If you use a good dino oil and change when the engine manufacturer says to, there should not be a sludge issue. A properly designed engine, will not allow oil to pool in places and allow it or the contaminates to cook/coke. My B&S mower engine has huge oil galleries. These guys have been building small engines for over 80 years, they know what they are doing. They also know that most homeowners/commercial lawn services are not going to follow their suggested OCI and oil grade recommendations. In air cooled engines, the oil is used as a cooland also. Since I follow the Manufacturers OCI, I don't have a "sludge" problem. Nowdays, most "dino" oils can meet or exceed the GL-5 and API SN certifications, even though they are not going to be required until 10-2010.

Fancy synthetic oils are fine for vehicles, but in OPE, a dino oil is just fine. I have confidence in dino oils, and am going back to using Pennzoil Yellow bottle in my Titan and the wife's Altima. The new PYB will probably go 7500 miles without a problem.

Dave
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
Won't have any problem with that plan. If the 3.6L Camaro can use dino, why not the Altima and Titan.



Go ahead trajen,let me see you put that stuff in your beamer. Bet you won't. You have only used synthetic to date......gee I wonder why!!

Because even you know that synthetic is far better,and that's why you only use synthetic oil. Your actions speaks for itself!! Synthetic is best!!
I have heard that about varnish too. Most of it is due to suspended contaminants that stick to surfaces.

Mower still starts, runs, cuts grass and doesn't smoke (unlike me, bad habit, I know).

Still haven't figured out why it uses oil every 8 hours or so. No fouling on plugs, muffler/exhaust has normal carbon, no external leaks.

Maybe I should try some Slime/Fix a Flat in it Big Grin Darn B&S engines will probably run with roofing tar in the crankcase.

Dave
Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×