Skip to main content

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

Closed1,525 replies

Synlube

I inhaliburtonMember
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
You didn't copy/paste? I guess it's just coincidence, that you quoted me word for word in the post, but conveniently left off my name.


Sorry, still don't understand. What I normally do is "reply with quote," then delete anything I'm not going to respond to in order to keep the reply as short as possible. In other words, so as not to be "repetitive." It's possible I delete your name or something like that...

quote:
You claim to be late for a mensa meeting in earlier posts.


Not late, but had to go to a Mensa meeting in one post. I'm not a member but a prospect. Frankly, I'm less than impressed with this bunch. They kept interrupting one another, trying to outdo each other. A boring bunch.

quote:
Have never heard of Techron but frequent oil forums?


Yes, I frequent oil forum, and no, I've never heard of Techron. Should I know? What is it, gasoline, lighter fluid?

quote:
Like I say because of your stupidty in getting caught in lies, and hiding the truth, and then denying it when caught. I find you very comical...A grown man who is a joke, myself that's not way I choose to live, but perhaps you have a low self opinion/esteem of yourself


Well, back to calling names again. Stupidty(sic), I'm a joke, etc. I have to go now.
I inhaliburtonMember
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
Funny how the Synluber's no longer wish to talk about it anymore...Just droning posts about the biggest POS car 'Yugo' ever sold in the USA.

Synluber's are sensitive people.


What's to talk about? Anyone who does gets profanity thrown at them. Read what you wrote.

quote:
Perhaps it's time that this thread is closed, or maybe we should wait for the VOA, that is coming...I'm sure they'll be squealing loud then.


Yes, yes. Close the thread. Again! If this thread is closed, you would have to go elsewhere to swear at posters who do not agree with you. Is that what you want?

Does BOB tolerate your vulgarity and profanity? Just curious...

And the VOA. What's the status? We are all interested in the results. Does the sample have to be sent offshore for accurate results?
Last edited by inhaliburton
N nucleardawgMember
You poor baby, I feel for you...After the trash you have hurled at people, on this thread for asking questions, or wanting proof of absurd claims. You want others to feel sorry for you?

Inhaliburton, I can come here daily, and read your attacks on others...So don't cry when another hurls it right back.


Why don't we talk about Synlube having a 'permanently revoked' business license in Nevada. Or why the BBB gives Synlube a 'F' rating.

Or how they claim to have the mixing done in 'Mercury, NV...top secret....
V vitualmageMember
Their point of view about the Yugo is important for a simple reason, it prove what kind of business it is, a scam back them and still one today. He went from a car seller, to an electric car seller then became tribiologist .He claim any vehicle over 100k are junk but then turn around and praise 30 year old vehicle. Claim is oil is good for 150 000 miles but then write in fine character otherwise, saying the vehicle are so badly built they will be good for the scrap yard after 5 year…..

Let me ask why should we use an unknown product with no data, no proof, only the word of the owner…..is multiple personality and some so call user ,most of them driving old car from 30 year ago.
I inhaliburtonMember
quote:
Originally posted by Nucleardawg:
You poor baby, I feel for you...After the trash you have hurled at people, on this thread for asking questions, or wanting proof of absurd claims. You want others to feel sorry for you?

Inhaliburton, I can come here daily, and read your attacks on others...So don't cry when another hurls it right back.


Why don't we talk about Synlube having a 'permanently revoked' business license in Nevada. Or why the BBB gives Synlube a 'F' rating.

Or how they claim to have the mixing done in 'Mercury, NV...top secret....


Nucleardawg, perhaps I have been too tough on you. Noting your moniker, reading between the lines in your posts and having thought about it ever so briefly, and assuming that you are employed, could it be that you work in a nuclear facility?

Just a thought...
T trajanMember
quote:
Originally posted by Deltona_Dave:
quote:
Originally posted by Trajan:
Earlier today out for the Sunday drive I saw something I haven't seem in years. A 1970 Superbird going the opposite direction.



One of MOPAR's finest probably running Mobil 1 or Redline in that beast too! Too bad they don't make them like that anymore today's Hemi is nothing compared to the original 426.


Dave


Yeah. They might have the name, but not quite the same magic.

Got another treat too. A 63 Stingray with the split windows. Don't see many of them. At least I haven't.

There's a Dairy Queen near me that has impromtu car shows. Not many cars, but nice ones.
C captainkirkMember
Synthetic Performance Solutions Group
A wholly owned subsidiary of Paribagon Corporation

A Murrieta, California Company - Serving the United States, Latin America, and Canada
Home PageSynpsgCustomer ServiceDiesel Power Info
Why Amsoil SyntheticsOur ServicesSynpsg EspanolOnline Application Guide
Amsoil Online OrderingOur Research - Q&A'sServicio a ClientesMessage from Synpsg EVP
Oil Change Cost AnalysisThe Oil Sludge ProblemDocument LibraryCommerical Account
Request Free CatalogBecome a DealerPreferred CustomerRetail On-the-Shelf Info



Oil Sludge Problem


Oil Sludge Problems can be a huge issue, inconvenience, and expense. In order to avoid sludge related catastrophic problems, alway use the best synthetic. When you change your oil, please recycle. If you don't know where to
recycle, ask us, we'll let you know the nearest
location.

Oil Sludge Problem: Oil sludge is a real problem today. A vehicle cannot be adequately protected with a $19.99 oil change. Let's be realistic. Maybe better stated, you get what you pay for...and quality oil changes are the most important maintenance you can do for your vehicle. If an oil sludge problem develops in your vehicle, it will be an extremely expensive repair. More and more people experience issues with poor oil flow due to sludge (where the oil turns to gel). What is the cause of this problem and is it avoidable? The cause is the properties and characteristics of conventional oil becomes stressed. Once a conventional oil reaches the engineering specifications for which it was designed, it will then breakdown into a gel that sticks to your engine and all moving parts in lieu of circulating and keeping your engine cool. As the gel settles in the engine, it actually stores heat instead of providing the cooling necessary for your engine. Sludge is the thickening and breakdown of the oil as it deteriorates, and as moisture and contaminants build up. This is what causes the oil to gel, resulting in excess wear as friction increases or, in extreme cases, a catastrophic failure of the engine due to lack of lubrication between moving parts. There are currently many legal issues and manufacturer litigation around sludge build up. Many companies, such as Volkswagen, have sent out technical service advisories to immediately switch to a fully synthetic oil.

Oil sludge usually starts in the top end of an engine (valve cover area) and the oil pan. The immediate damage begins to occur when the sludge or gel begins to block the oil screen siphon. Once this blockage occurs, catastrophic failure of the engine is eminent. The oil level of the engine may actually look fine...but your engine is truly being damaged by every stroke of your crank and camshaft as your engine loses oil pressure and no longer lubricates correctly. This is a huge issue for cars built in 1996 and newer.



Why did this start occurring in 1996 and newer vehicles? There are several issues...

· Quick Lube shops that are competing for market share are trying to differentiate themselves as being the low cost leader and thus competing for consumers that think they are getting a bargain. How do they give oil changes for $9.99 or $14.99? Very low performing single grade oil that is purchased in bulk along with very cheap oil filters. Combine the very cheapest products along with very low skilled or inexperienced technicians and you have a $9.99 oil change that will only add to sludge and other damage, as well as low performance to your engine and shorten the life of your vehicle.



· Federal Emissions Specifications have really got tough from the mid 1990’s. In 1996 the tighter federal emissions standards were enacted. Combined with leaner fuel mixtures and higher combustion temperatures, sludge starts to appear as a real industry problem.



· Fuel economy pressures have led the manufacturers to engineer their vehicles for lower viscosity engine oils. When conventional oil is used, these oils break down very fast in day-to-day driving.

Great additional resource information:

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

Amsoil Technical Bulletin on Sludge

The following engines were reported by the Center for Auto Safety and/or their manufacturers to have a problem with sludge accumulation:

* 1998-2002 Chrysler2.7 L LHV6
o 2001-2002 Dodge Stratus/Chrysler Sebring
o 1998-2002 Dodge Intrepid/Chrysler Concorde
* 1998-2003 SaabH engine B205/B235I4
o 1998-2003 Saab 9-5B235 2.3 L
o 1999 Saab ViggenB235 2.3 L
o 2000-2002 Saab 9-3B205 2.0 L
o 2000-2003 Saab 9-3 convertibleB205 2.0 L
* 1996-2001 Toyota3.0 L 1MZV6
o August 1996-July 2001 Toyota Camry
o June 1998-May 2001 Toyota Camry Solara
o July 1997-May 2001 Toyota Sienna
o July 1996-May 2001 Toyota Avalon
o November 2000-July 2001 Toyota Highlander
o August 1998-July 2001 Lexus ES300
o January 1998-July 2001 Lexus RX300
* 1996-2001 Toyota5SFEI4
o August 1996-July 2001 Toyota Camry
o June 1998-May 2001 Toyota Camry Solara
o August 1996-April 1999 Toyota Celica
* 1997-2004 VolkswagenVW 1.8tI4
o 1997-2004 Audi A4 1.8t
o 1998-2004 Volkswagen Passat 1.8t

This problem can be avoided or mitigated if the sludge formation has begun to occur (something you may not be aware of until it is too late). The only action that can be taken is to change your engine oil to a top quality synthetic oil. Amsoil is recommended to replace the conventional oil being used that causes the damage in the first place. Anyone that chooses to use conventional oil is simply asking for severe engine problems. That is not an opinion; it is a proven fact. That is exactly why conventional oil must be changed at 3,000 miles to maintain the minimum protection properties, and Amsoil at 25,000 miles - pretty significant difference.

When changing from a conventional oil to a synthetic, such as Amsoil, it is best to first flush the engine and try to clean out the sludge build up.

Don't put clean synthetic oil in a dirty engine!

When an engine gets dirty, even regular oil changes can't help restore its operating efficiency. The detergen/dispersant's in most conventional engine oils can't handle the abnormal amounts of contamination found in a "dirty" engine. The new oil becomes dirty long before it should, losing much of its ability to lubricate and protect your engine and actually accelerating the formation of more sludge and varnish.

In this age of longer recommended drain intervals, it is especially important to have a clean engine before changing oil. Using AMSOIL Fast Acting Engine Flush when you change oil is an excellent way to guarantee your engine stays clean. It has special solvents and cleaning agents that act fast but gently to remove harmful deposits that can cost you money in excessive fuel consumption and mechanical repairs.

AMSOIL Engine Flush is especially recommended for use before changing to AMSOIL Synthetic Motor Oils, assuring that these super premium long life oils provide the maximum protection and service life they are designed to deliver.

The AMSOIL Formula
for Better Engine Performance

1) FLUSH: To quickly clean residual sludge and engine deposits, AMSOIL Engine Flush is recommended: Change the oil filter and add the flush (about 10% of the oil capacity). Do not overfill the crankcase. Idle the engine 15 to 20 minutes, then immediately drain the old oil and flush.

*Note: Engine Flush is not recommended for use in transmissions, differentials, air-cooled engines, engines that share a common oil sump with the transmission (motorcycles & ATV's) or engine not equipped with an oil filter.

2) INSTALL: Remove the old oil filter and replace it with an AMSOIL Ea Oil Filter. Ea Oil Filters feature advanced full synthetic nanofiber technology, making them the highest efficiency filters that are available for the auto/light truck market.

3) POUR: Fill the engine's crankcase with the AMSOIL Synthetic Motor Oil of the viscosity grade recommended by your vehicle's manufacturer. AMSOIL Synthetic Motor Oils are highly resistant to oxidation and provide exceptional detergent/dispersant properties, helping keep your engine free of further sludge and varnish build-up.
C captainkirkMember
Automotive Q&A
Oil to fight sludge? You be the judge

Q: A lot of manufacturers are promoting "high-mileage" oil. Is it just marketing, or is there something to this? A: As an engine ages and...

By Brad Bergholdt

San Jose Mercury News

Related

* Motoring RSS feed

Q: A lot of manufacturers are promoting "high-mileage" oil. Is it just marketing, or is there something to this?

A: As an engine ages and its rubber seals harden, oil can leak and sludge can form, reducing engine life.

High-mileage oils feature reduced volatility and/or slightly increased viscosity, which decreases oil consumption; a seal-softening additive to keep seals plump; extra anti-oxidation additives to reduce sludge buildup; and friction-reducing and detergent additives.

If you're one of the few folks with a motor-oil-friendly daily commute — a half-hour or more each way without excessive stop-and-go traffic — then frequent oil changes and high-mileage oil may not be necessary. But if you have short commutes, lots of stop-and-go, temperature extremes, tow a trailer, or drive one of several vehicles with particular sludge issues, then high-mileage oil every 3,000 to 4,000 miles makes good sense.

For a list of cars that are particularly sludge-sensitive, and lots more about sludge, take a look at www.synlube.com/sludge.htm.

E-mail Brad Bergholdt at under-the-hood@earthlink.net.

Sorry, no personal replies.

Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company
C captainkirkMember
Choosing engine oil: bad habits can hurt.
Visiting many Porsche specialists in the past few weeks, I have been able to witness the devastating consequences that a wrong choice of oil could have on the cams of Porsche engines. I have also been made once again aware of the quasi-spiritual nature of “oil choice”. As the representative of a large oil and lubricant company, I found myself justifying the reasonable choices of the lubricant industry and realizing that most oil companies have given up on explaining their products, including to their distributors. The result is much mis-information, that I will try and address in this article.
Table comparing what I heard versus what I know:
Statements I heard or read:
Fact:
The “government” is taking away the ZDTP from our engine oils, and the new oils do not protect old engines enough against cam wear.
The government is demanding longer warranties on catalytic converters of new cars. ILSAC, the oil standardization board for Domestic and Japanese cars, has set limits on the content in catalyst-polluting Sulfur and Phosphorus in their GF-3 and GF-4 standards. No European manufacturer recommend ILSAC GF-4 for any vehicle. European carmakers have their own oil standards (more below). In the field, many oil wholesalers ignore that information and focus their offering on the “high volume” market of Japanese and Domestic cars, still assuming that the needs of European cars will be “close enough”. That can be a problem not only for Porsche, but for any European car.
Since “they” took away the ZDTP, let us put it back in the form of after-market additives, or call Brand X who has sworn to not follow any third-party spec and make “the best lubricants possible”.
Protecting the cams against premature wear is only one of many more functions of a good engine lubricant. The oil must also cool the engine, prevent sludge, clean it, fight corrosion to mention only the main functions. Sludge has been a big problem in recent years.
Organizations like API, ILSAC, ACEA, as well as car manufacturers test as many of these properties that they can to serve a specific category of cars, while following a budget for testing and a maximum cost of finished product. For Porsche and European cars, this testing is longer and more expensive. Look for the “Porsche”, VW 502.00 or ACEA A3/B4 approvals, proof that the oil passed not only an appropriate cam wear test, but also a sludge and corrosion test, among others.
Aftermarket additives are an extra load to carry for the detergent chemistry of engine oils. Saturating those detergents is what creates sludge.
Diesel oils “are not API formulated”, have plenty of ZDTP and can safely be used in older Porsche.
Diesel oils are formulated for diesel heavy-duty trucks. These engines are designed for low RPM (1000 to 1500) and contain 5 to 10 gallons of oil that stays much cooler than most gasoline engine oils. Diesel oils usually follow one of the latest API
specifications: API CH-4, API CI-4 or now API CJ-4. This latest category CJ-4 is “backward compatible” but has, like the ILSAC spec, some limits on Sulfur and Phosphorus. These limits are higher than for the ILSAC spec, but expect newer diesel oils to have diminished amounts of ZDTP as well.
I am not trying to knock down the crutches that the Porsche community has been using to solve the very real problem of cam wear. Rather, I would want to make the case that if the way oil was chosen has failed, now may be a good time to re-examine the way we choose oil. In short, brands are just brands. Trying to second guess the chemists is more and more futile. Only improving our knowledge of the engine oil testing procedures, and checking what oil passed what test is the professional and safe way to choose engine oil.
Oil technology is complex and every sales guy has a good story, so let us sidestep technology for now.
Let us rather concentrate on the universe in which we, sales guys, operate: realities of the business world.
To make and distribute oil at a competitive price, a company must be able to manufacture or buy the components at a competitive price, and have enough of a market to pay for the development and manufacturing cost. That company has to be able to “be a player”. Once that company decides to “be a player”, say, in the Porsche market, then the sound and professional way to operate is to present the finished product to Porsche so they put it through the Porsche 996FL Engine test. This test will last 203 hours. The engine, and the oil, will go through:
- 4 times the simulation of 35 hours of summer driving,
- 4 times the simulation of 13.5 hours of winter driving,
- 40 cold starts,
- 5 times the simulation of 1-hour sessions on the “Nürburgring” racetrack,
- 3.5 hours of “running-in” program
Measurements on the engine and on the oil will be done at regular intervals, and the following parameter will be taken into account to grant the approval or not:
- torque curve (internal friction),
- oxidation of the oil,
- Piston cleanliness and ring sticking,
- Valve train wear protection. Cam & tappet wear must be less than 10 μm.
- Engine cleanliness and sludge: after 203 hours, no deposits must be visible.
- Bearing wear protection: visual rating according to Porsche in-house method.
Several mechanics told me that they were relying on “their own testing” to choose an oil. None of these mechanics showed me that their method came close to matching what Porsche does: running dozens of oils through the same 203-hour test, and comparing the results.
This test has been designed by Porsche to guarantee the availability of test-proven oils for all Porsche since model year 1973: the letter (attached) given to oil manufacturers specifies that date.
This oil testing procedure exists specifically to avoid the wear cam problems created by the fiasco of ILSAC GF-4 being recommended in Porsche by some distributors. Why not use the Porsche testing to choose your oil?
All the large oil companies, including Mobil 1 of course, and many smaller companies, have one or several formulas that successfully passed this test. The “Porsche recommends Mobil 1” advertising is confusing: the most available Mobil 1 products found at Wal-mart or Jiffy Lube meet the ILSAC GF-4 spec and are NOT approved by Porsche. A clearer advertising statement would say “Mobil 1 0W40 passed the Porsche engine test”.
The problem for oil companies is to make their Porsche-approved formulas easily available and affordable to the Porsche community when many of their wholesalers care about volume (gallons) more than about oil technology. We have chosen to distribute our ELF Excellium NF 5W40 through German auto specialists who make that oil available to consumers at a price competitive with any fully synthetic oil.
Now, some oil companies claim they need no approval from Porsche because they found a better solution, at a cheaper cost, and they ask you to take their word for it. They are “opportunity players”: they claim that they saw a problem and decided to fix it. You may have tried their product, and found that they have a point. Now, if their story was true without any “side effect” to be expected later, if they found a real and durable solution, then they would do what the “players” do: they would get their products tested by the factory and gain access to the larger market. If, say, an industrial oil company can make the right product and venture into the Porsche market, good for them. They should let Porsche know! Why do they not do it? You may want a clear answer to that question.
If they say they’re “too small”, then they probably do not have a cheap access to the raw material in the first place, so how can they be competitive? If the company is large enough and still does not get the approval, you are probably listening to a particularly gifted regional salesman.
Porsche-approved oils are usually fully synthetic, not to claim “synthetic” on the label, but because the raw material that can withstand the Porsche testing happens to be synthetic. These oils may cost a few dollars more that the usual “shop oil”. I hope I explained why.
What’s next? I have been through similar explanations of factory oil specs in the past, like with Volkswagen in 2003-2004, and what followed was a flurry of claims saying “meets or exceeds the VW spec” on engine oil labels. The next step was for Volkswagen to release complete lists of the oils that actually met the spec, which of course did not please the oil company having a marketing deal with Volkswagen… This may happen with Porsche too, but here are the facts. Porsche of America has a list of approved oils, and each approved company should be able to display to you a letter similar to the one in attachment. This may not be a perfect solution, but to me, it sure beats thinking of Porsche engines like “Diesel engines” or believing the sales rep who tells me that his “proprietary” XXTZP999 additive prevents wear cam like no other…
Hervé Blanquart is a sales engineer for Total Lubricants USA, Inc. and supports the distribution of ELF engine oils in the Western United States. He can be reached at herve.blanquart@total-us.com .
C captainkirkMember
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
My VW Lemon Bulletin Board
Passat
the 1.8L Turbo Engine, and it's sludge

Post New Topic Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic: the 1.8L Turbo Engine, and it's sludge
treinz031
Junior Member posted 01-26-2007 06:24 PM Click Here to See the Profile for treinz031 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote So I'm in the midst of a dispute with the local dealership in regards to oil sludge destroying my engine. I've read through several of the other threads in this regard, and Up-the-river, you have alot of good advice.

My point & subsequent question to the forum is this: VW wants you to believe that the cause of the oil sludge problem in your 1.8t engine is a result of improper maintenance/neglect. My car is a 2003 VW Passat 1.8 turbo, delivered to me in November 2002. That car was delivered with petroleum based 5w40 oil. In August of 2004, in addition to VW extending their warranties in regards to oil sludge damage, they also changed their engine oil specifications to 502.00. Without saying it in black & white, they changed the oil specs to require ONLY synthetic oil, no petroleum based oil is to be used in the 1.8t passat. Well, that means that my car was filled once upon arrival to me, plus 3 more times prior to August 2004 for a total of 4 times with petroleum based oil. Yet at 50,000 miles, VW would have me believe that the reason for my problems wasn't because of improper oil courtesy of the manufacturer, but instead was due to my obvious neglect of the car for not changing the oil every 5,000 miles on the dot.

But there's a flaw in that argument. The obvious one is this: If the cause of the engine oil sludge problem is a result of negligence and improper maintenance, then anyone that CAN produce documentation of an oil change every 5,000 miles should NOT even have an oil sludge problem. The fact that there are hundreds of people that can, and did have documented oil changes every 5,000 miles and STILL needed their engines replaced as a result of oil sludge proves that the flaw was in design/oil type being originally used and not in maintenance. Right?

The other flaw in their argument is that I have photographs of my valve cover, engine, etc. covered in black burnt oil, and according to every single mechanic I've shown those to, the only cause of that type of damage is petroleum based oil. From what I've learned, a synthetic based oil, even if run 10, 15, 20k miles beyond it's scheduled maintenance will never, ever, result in the type of extensively damaging oil sludge that you see as a result of the petroleum based oil that VW shipped your car with, and that the VW dealership was using to replace your oil every oil change up to August of 2004.

Has anyone that has already had a run in with VW brought this to their attention? I mean, the proof is in the pudding. If the problem is improper maintenance, why have they changed out ANY engines? I mean, lack of documentation voids all us losers, and the others that do have documentation... well... your engine should be good as gold and in no need to be replaced!

IP: Logged
Up-The-River
Member posted 01-26-2007 07:04 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Up-The-River Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Do you have proof of all required oil changes as stated in the 2003 Owner's manual? If you do, DON'T BACK DOWN! You have done all that is required by law to up-hold your responsibilites. You may need to hire a lawyer...or at least threaten to. A $150 legal letter might get you some results?

BTW, all motor oil is petroleum, even synthetic! The difference is how it it made and/or refined. The 'synthetic' Castrol (a "Group III" oil) the dealer uses is just hydro-cracked conventional motor oil. Group IV oils like Red Line & Mobil 1 (which I hear is switching to the cheaper Group III product) are just processed and/or re-processed hydrocarbons, usually natural gas!

Sidebar-
"Synthetic" motor oils are not some mysterious fluid of unknown origin. They were developed by Germany in the early 1900's as a way to supply their army with chemicals needed to fight a war (e.g. fuels & lubricants), by processing and/or chemically altering the limited natural resourses avialable (natural gas via the Fischer-Tropsch process). Just think...Mobil 1 can come from coal, too!

------------------
This information does not constitute legal, medical, engineering, or other professional advice. If such expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. Neither the author of this post nor page host guarantees the accuracy, completeness, usefulness, or effectiveness of the material provided, and neither shall be liable for any damages, or in any event for incidental or consequential damages caused or alleged to be caused, directly or indirectly, by the use of any information disclosed.

IP: Logged
YupOldBull
Member posted 01-26-2007 08:46 PM Click Here to See the Profile for YupOldBull Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Lots of comments out there on this topic.


Here is just one.

http://www.grumblemutterspit.o...read.php?i=4682#5024


Here is another way to say what your saying.......


Sounds normal to me.


Normal people, with normal oil change intervals, going to normal oil change shops, getting normal oil put in by normal technicians, filling to normal levels, driving under normal conditions, are getting catastrophic engine failure.


This recall wasn’t for those that abused the system. The recall was for all those that had absolute documentation and still have engine failure. What right do they have to duck all of those in the gray area?


We should all try to be more positive.


Learn to think more positive.....


I would rather think of it this way.....


If you schedule your maintenance properly, keep your reciepts, then your engine will be fine, and VW won't have to pay for anything.


If you don't schedule your maintenance properly, don't keep your reciepts, then your engine won't be fine, and VW won't have to pay for anything.


Let's not discuss which oil was in the vehicle when it was delivered new.


Let's not discuss larger oil pans in the newer models.


Let's not discuss a running change to a higher grade oil.


Let's not discuss larger oil filters.

http://forums.audiworld.com/a4gen2/msgs/622904.phtml


Try to be more positive.

IP: Logged
Joe///M
Junior Member posted 01-26-2007 08:55 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joe///M Click Here to Email Joe///M Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote I had this oil pressure problem some time ago. After I was told I needed to get the car to the dealer (at my expense even though it was under warranty) submit the receipts (which i really didn't have since I do my own changes), and then maybe after they diagnose it was a good chance it may not be covered...yada yada we have all heard the deal by now. After I did a motor flush and new oil & filter I haven’t had a problem knock on wood. I did observe what looked like small chunks of carbon coming out of the oil pan (I used a screen to catch what was coming out) and even used a piece of wire to scrape the bottom of the pan but it seemed like just particles not consistent with sludge. Several months later there was a burning oil smell coming from under the hood. It turned out to be the hose on the back of the valve cover, part of the evap/pcv system. Ok no big deal to change but still unacceptable for a car in this day and age with about 50,000 miles on it. incidentally it is the 4th hose I had to replace. Upon changing the hose it just collapsed when grabbed. The hose was disintegrating from the inside out and guess where the particles were going...yup down the return line into the engine! At that point I realized these particles look familiar. I believe this is the “sludge” problem and to further strengthen my argument I received a letter from VW concerning the replacement of this hose. Check out the photos of the hose. On another note at 45,000 miles the outer cv boot on the passenger side had split which was covered under warranty but shouldn’t have happened that early. While down there I saw the other side going but VW couldn’t do anything until it actually broke. I thought I had time as the power train warranty was extended to 60,000. Little did I know it only covers the oiling systems and major internal engine & transmission components axle shafts but not the boots (how insane is that?) as it was later explained to me. So now guess what, the other boot is split before 60,000 and tonight it looks like a coil went on me, the coldest night of the year here in NY. My wife is fed up since she is the primary driver and I had to go “save” her on her way home from work dragging out our 10 month old. She suggested we burn it.
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/...oo.com/ph//my_photos

IP: Logged
treinz031
Junior Member posted 01-26-2007 09:01 PM Click Here to See the Profile for treinz031 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote

quote:

BTW, all motor oil is petroleum, even synthetic! The difference is how it it made and/or refined. The 'synthetic' Castrol (a "Group III" oil) the dealer uses is just hydro-cracked conventional motor oil. Group IV oils like Red Line & Mobil 1 (which I hear is switching to the cheaper Group III product) are just processed and/or re-processed hydrocarbons, usually natural gas!

Sidebar-
"Synthetic" motor oils are not some mysterious fluid of unknown origin. They were developed by Germany in the early 1900's as a way to supply their army with chemicals needed to fight a war (e.g. fuels & lubricants), by processing and/or chemically altering the limited natural resourses avialable (natural gas via the Fischer-Tropsch process). Just think...Mobil 1 can come from coal, too!

[/B]

Hmm, all I know is that the two garages I've shown the photos to both say that the burnt carbon deposits seen on the valve cover and all over the engine are created by "petroleum based oil."

Is that true? Does synthetic oil and what is referred to as petroleum-based oils in the Volkswagen engine oil specification section of the manual differ in how it reacts under the 1.8L turbo's heat? I mean, it obviously must or else they wouldn't have mailed me this spiffy new engine oil spec supplement insert for my manual =D

IP: Logged
treinz031
Junior Member posted 01-26-2007 09:13 PM Click Here to See the Profile for treinz031 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote nice pictures of the hoses. here's my valve cover. Is it caused by "petroleum-based oils" that is referenced in my VW manual?

IP: Logged
treinz031
Junior Member posted 01-26-2007 09:15 PM Click Here to See the Profile for treinz031 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote btw, i've also had both boots replaced. as well as the rack and pinion, whatever the hell that is. oh, and the fuel pump... that was fun when it went out on the freeway.

IP: Logged
YupOldBull
Member posted 01-26-2007 09:28 PM Click Here to See the Profile for YupOldBull Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Terrible.


In contrast.......


My 2002 Toyota Camry has 68k.


It has been perfect. (Zero problems)

IP: Logged
Joe///M
Junior Member posted 01-28-2007 12:29 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Joe///M Click Here to Email Joe///M Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote I have been running synthetics since after the break in period so that pretty much shoots down thier theory. It looks like the oil change intervals may need to be done between 3-4,000 instead of the fctory recommended 5,000 if all that contamination is floating around in there.

IP: Logged
John_E
Member posted 01-30-2007 11:34 PM Click Here to See the Profile for John_E Click Here to Email John_E Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote 1) Some manufacturers ship their cars with dinosaur break-in oil, which should be replaced at the first oil change with synthetic.
2) "Synthetic" oil, whether super-refined Group III or true synthetic Group IV, has fewer impurities than dino and IS less prone to cook into coke in your turbo.
3) VW specifies an oil change interval of 5k mi / 8k km, but also stipulates that cars driven under severe conditions, such as typical urban short trips or stop-and-go driving, require "more frequent" service. One size does not fit all where oil change intervals are concerned.
4) The (transverse) 2.0T's oil sump is only 10% bigger than the longitudinal 1.8T's, and the oil change interval has been stretched to 10k mi / 16k km after the first two changes.

IP: Logged
John_E
Member posted 01-30-2007 11:38 PM Click Here to See the Profile for John_E Click Here to Email John_E Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote

quote:Originally posted by Joe///M:
I have been running synthetics since after the break in period so that pretty much shoots down thier theory. It looks like the oil change intervals may need to be done between 3-4,000 instead of the fctory recommended 5,000 if all that contamination is floating around in there.

I think your PCV problem caused, or at least exacerbated, your coking problem.

IP: Logged
Up-The-River
Member posted 01-31-2007 08:21 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Up-The-River Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote

quote:Originally posted by John_E:
I think your PCV problem caused, or at least exacerbated, your coking problem.

…In addition to the ridiculously SMALL sump capacity of the Passat 1.8t & high operating temperatures and factory-recommended extended oil change interval. Even in 2004 m.y., Audi had the 1.8T on 10k oil changes!

BTW, even Group IV oils come from dinosaurs. They just start life as natural gas.

This still doesn’t explain why some people can do 3k changes on M1 and STILL get sludging. I think it is due to visitors from another planet.

Does the 1.8T have a PCV valve?

IP: Logged
pm26
Member posted 01-31-2007 08:23 PM Click Here to See the Profile for pm26 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote

quote:Originally posted by Up-The-River:
…

Does the 1.8T have a PCV valve?

I believe that every passenger car and pickup truck made since the mid sixties has a PCV valve.

IP: Logged
Up-The-River
Member posted 01-31-2007 09:44 PM Click Here to See the Profile for Up-The-River Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote

quote:Originally posted by pm26:
I believe that every passenger car and pickup truck made since the mid sixties has a PCV valve.

CIS, CIS-E engines do not have PCV valves!

Never a worry of sludging-up the Scirocco!!!

I guess todays more complex engines are supposed to be less complicated.

IP: Logged
toms480
Member posted 02-01-2007 07:07 PM Click Here to See the Profile for toms480 Click Here to Email toms480 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Yes they have pcv valves and they also fill up with sludge. Another point, even after all this talk of 5,000 mile oil change intervals, the "free" 4yr 50,000 mile services done by audi, are done at 10,000 mile intervals, including the 1.8t engines. They use the same oil, filters, and breater system parts.

IP: Logged

All times are ET (US)
next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | MyVwLemon.com

Powered by: Ultimate Bulletin Board, Version 5.44b
© Infopop Corporation (formerly Madrona Park, Inc.), 1998 - 2000.
M mirokefurtMember
quote:
It’s a jeep thing you wouldn’t understand.


Jeep Wrangler
Segment: SUV
CR Predicted Reliability Score: Poor
CR Value Score: Rated among the worst in overall value (Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sahara)
CR Safety Score: Not rated among the worst in overall safety performance
CR Overall Score: 17 out of 100
J.D. Power Dependability Score: 2 out of 5 Power Circles
MSRP: $21,915


I certainly don't !!!!
C captainkirkMember
Page 1 of 8
SynLube Lube-4-Life INITIAL FILL SAE 5W-50
1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION
APPROVAL DATE: 3/19/10
PRODUCT NAME: SynLube Lube-4-Life® INITIAL FILL
SUPPLIER: SynLube, Inc. MARKETER: MIROX Corporation
2961 Industrial Road #300 PO Box 19294
Las Vegas, NV 89109 JEAN, NV 89019-9294
24 - Hour Emergency (toll free): 1-800-SYN-LUBE
Product and MSDS Information: www.synlunbe.com
2. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
CHEMICAL NAMES AND SYNONYMS: SYNTHETIC HYDROCARBONS AND ADDITIVES
INGREDIENTS CONSIDERED HAZARDOUS TO HEALTH:
This product is not formulated to contain ingredients, which have exposure limits established by U.S. agencies. It is not hazardous to health as defined by the European Union Dangerous Substances/Preparations Directives.
See Section 15 for a regulatory analysis of the ingredients.
See Section 15 for European Label Information.
See Section 8 for exposure limits (if applicable).
3. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
US OSHA HAZARD COMMUNICATION STANDARD:
Product assessed in accordance with OSHA 29 CFR 1910.1200 and determined not to be hazardous.
EFFECTS OF OVEREXPOSURE: No significant effects expected.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE DATA: Black Opaque Liquid. DOT ERG No. – N/A & N/R
4. FIRST AID MEASURES
EYE CONTACT:
Flush thoroughly with water. If irritation occurs, call a physician.
SKIN CONTACT: Wash contact areas with soap and water.
INHALATION: Not expected to be a problem.
INGESTION: Not expected to be a problem.
However, if greater than ½ liter (pint) ingested, immediately give 1 to 2 glasses of water and call a physician, hospital emergency room or poison control center for assistance.
Do not induce vomiting or give anything by mouth to an unconscious person.
Page 2 of 8
5. FIRE-FIGHTING MEASURES
EXTINGUISHING MEDIA: Carbon dioxide, foam, dry chemical and water fog.
SPECIAL FIRE FIGHTING PROCEDURES: Water or foam may cause frothing.
Use water to keep fire-exposed containers cool. Water spray may be used to flush spills away from exposure. Prevent runoff from fire control or dilution from entering streams, sewers, or drinking water supply.
SPECIAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT: For fires in enclosed areas, fire fighters must use self-contained breathing apparatus.
UNUSUAL FIRE AND EXPLOSION HAZARDS: None. Flash Point C(F):
216(420) (ASTM D-92). Flammable limits - LEL: NA, UEL: NA.
NFPA HAZARD ID:
Health: 0
Flammability: 1
Reactivity: 0
HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS:
1. Metal oxides.
2. Carbon monoxide.
3. Elemental oxides.
6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES
NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES:
Report spills as required to appropriate authorities.
U. S. Coast Guard regulations require immediate reporting of spills that could reach any waterway including intermittent dry creeks. Report spill to Coast Guard toll free number (800) 424-8802.
In case of accident or road spill notify
CHEMTREC (800) 424-9300.
PROCEDURES IF MATERIAL IS RELEASED OR SPILLED:
Adsorb on fire retardant treated sawdust, diatomaceous earth, etc. Shovel up and dispose of at an appropriate waste disposal facility in accordance with current applicable laws and regulations, and product characteristics at time of disposal.
ENVIRONMENTAL PRECAUTIONS:
Prevent spills from entering storm sewers or drains and contact with soil.
PERSONAL PRECAUTIONS: See Section 8
Page 3 of 8
7. HANDLING AND STORAGE
HANDLING:
No special precautions are necessary beyond normal good hygiene practices. See Section 8 for additional personal protection advice when handling this product.
STORAGE:
Do not store in open or unlabelled containers.
Store away from strong oxidizing agents or combustible material.
8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION
VENTILATION:
No special requirements under ordinary conditions of use and with adequate ventilation.
RESPIRATORY PROTECTION:
No special requirements under ordinary conditions of use and with adequate ventilation.
EYE PROTECTION:
Normal industrial eye protection practices should be employed.
SKIN PROTECTION:
No special equipment required. However, good personal hygiene practices should always be followed.
EXPOSURE LIMITS:
This product does not contain any components, which have recognized exposure limits. However, a threshold limit value of 5.00 mg/m3 is suggested for oil mist.
Page 4 of 8
9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
Typical physical properties are given below.
Consult Product Data Sheet for specific details.
APPEARANCE: Liquid
COLOR: Opaque Black
ODOR: Mild, Characteristic
ODOR THRESHOLD-ppm: NE
pH: NA
BOILING POINT °C(°F): 316(600)
MELTING POINT °C(°F): NA
FLASH POINT °C(°F): > 276(529) (ASTM D-92)
FLAMMABILITY: NE
AUTO FLAMMABILITY: NE
EXPLOSIVE PROPERTIES: NE
OXIDIZING PROPERTIES: NE
VAPOR PRESSURE-mmHg 20 °C: < 0.1
VAPOR DENSITY: > 2.0
EVAPORATION RATE: NE
RELATIVE DENSITY, 15/4 °C: 0.926
SOLUBILITY IN WATER: Negligible
PARTITION COEFFICIENT: > 3.5
VISCOSITY AT 40 °C, cSt: > 100.0
VISCOSITY AT 100 °C, cSt: > 17.5
POUR POINT °C(°F): -45(-50)
FREEZING POINT °C(°F): NE
VOC: < 5.00 (Wt. %); 0.358 lbs/gal
Code Key: NA=NOT APPLICABLE NE=NOT ESTABLISHED D=DECOMPOSES
FOR FURTHER TECHNICAL INFORMATION, CONTACT YOUR MARKETING REPRESENTATIVE.
10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY
STABILITY (THERMAL, LIGHT, ETC.): Stable.
CONDITIONS TO AVOID: Extreme heat. Contact with Ignition or Flame Source.
INCOMPATIBILITY (MATERIALS TO AVOID): Strong oxidizers.
HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS:
1. Metal oxides.
2. Carbon monoxide.
3. Elemental oxides.
HAZARDOUS POLYMERIZATION: Will not occur.
Page 5 of 8
11. TOXICOLOGICAL DATA
---ACUTE TOXICOLOGY---
ORAL TOXICITY (RATS):
Practically non-toxic (LD50: greater than 2000 mg/kg).
---Based on testing of similar products and/or the components.
DERMAL TOXICITY (RABBITS):
Practically non-toxic (LD50: greater than 2000 mg/kg).
---Based on testing of similar products and/or the components.
INHALATION TOXICITY (RATS):
Not applicable ---Harmful concentrations of mists and/or vapors are unlikely to be encountered through any customary or reasonably foreseeable handling, use, or misuse of this product.
EYE IRRITATION (RABBITS):
Practically non-irritating.
(Draize score: greater than 6 but 15 or less).
---Based on testing of similar products and/or the components.
SKIN IRRITATION (RABBITS):
Practically non-irritating.
(Primary Irritation Index: greater than 0.5 but less than 3).
---Based on testing of similar products and/or the components.
OTHER ACUTE TOXICITY DATA:
The acute toxicological results summarized above are based on testing of representative SynLube products.
Representative SynLube formulations have shown no acute effects, administered via the inhalation route, when tested at maximum attainable oil mist or vapor concentrations.
---SUBCHRONIC TOXICOLOGY (SUMMARY)---
Representative SynLube formulations have been tested by dermal applications to rats 5 days/week for 90 days at doses significantly higher than those expected during normal industrial exposure. Extensive evaluations, including microscopic examination of internal organs and clinical chemistry of body fluids, showed no adverse effects.
---REPRODUCTIVE TOXICOLOGY (SUMMARY)---
Dermal exposure of pregnant rats to representative formulations did not cause adverse effects in either the mothers or their offspring.
---SENSITIZATION (SUMMARY)---
Representative formulations have not caused skin sensitization in guinea pigs.
Page 6 of 8
---OTHER TOXICOLOGY DATA---
This product is formulated with a synthetic hydrocarbon as the base stock. The Mobil Environmental and Health Sciences Laboratory has tested representative synthetic base stocks to assess their potential adverse effects on human health. Assessment of human health effects was based on acute oral, dermal, and inhalation toxicity; eye and skin irritation; subchronic dermal toxicity and reproductive studies; guinea pig sensitization; and mutagenicity and chromosomal damage assays. None of these base stocks appears to pose a health hazard to humans under conditions of expected use.
Used gasoline engine oils have shown evidence of skin carcinogenic activity in laboratory tests when no effort was made to wash the oil off between applications.
Used oil from diesel engines did not produce this effect.
12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION
ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECTS:
Acute LC/EC50 Fish: Juvenile Rainbow Trout:
Practically non-toxic
---Based on testing of similar products.
13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS
WASTE DISPOSAL:
Product is suitable for burning in an enclosed, controlled burner for fuel value or disposal by supervised incineration. Such burning may be limited pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. In addition, the product is suitable for processing by an approved recycling facility or can be disposed of at an appropriate government waste disposal facility. Use of these methods is subject to user compliance with applicable laws and regulations and consideration of product characteristics at time of disposal.
RCRA INFORMATION:
The unused product, in our opinion, is not specifically listed by the EPA as a hazardous waste (40 CFR, Part 261D), nor is it formulated to contain materials which are listed hazardous wastes. It does not exhibit the hazardous characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, or reactivity and is not formulated with contaminants as determined by the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP).
However, used product may be regulated.
14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION
USA DOT: NOT REGULATED BY USA DOT.
RID/ADR: NOT REGULATED BY RID/ADR.
IMO: NOT REGULATED BY IMO.
IATA: NOT REGULATED BY IATA.
Page 7 of 8
15. REGULATORY INFORMATION
Governmental Inventory Status:
All components comply with TSCA, AICS and DSL.
EU Labeling: EU labeling not required.
U.S. Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) Title III:
This product contains no "EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES".
SARA (311/312) REPORTABLE HAZARD CATEGORIES: None.
This product contains the following SARA (313) Toxic Release
Chemicals:
CHEMICAL NAME CAS NUMBER CONC.
--------------------------- -------------- -------
PHOSPHORODITHOIC ACID, O,O-DI 68649-42-3 0.81%
C1-14-ALKYL ESTERS, ZINC SALTS
(2:1) (ZDDP)
THIS PRODUCT HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED BY USDA FOR USE UNDER THE FOLLOWING CATEGORY: H2 - Lubricants with No Food Contact
The following product ingredients are cited on the lists below:
CHEMICAL NAME CAS NUMBER LIST CITATIONS
------------- ---------- --------------
BUTYL BENZYL PHTHALATE (0.48%) 85-68-7 22, 24
ZINC (ELEMENTAL ANALYSIS) (0.12%) 7440-66-6 22
PHOSPHORODITHOIC ACID, O,O-DI 68649-42-3 18, 20, 21, 22, 24,
C1-14-ALKYL ESTERS, ZINC SALTS 25
(2:1) (ZDDP) (0.81%)
--- REGULATORY LISTS ---
1 = ACGIH ALL 6 = IARC 1 11 = TSCA 4 17 = CA P65 22 = MI 293
2 = ACGIH A1 7 = IARC 2A 12 = TSCA 5a2 18 = CA RTK 23 = MN RTK
3 = ACGIH A2 8 = IARC 2B 13 = TSCA 5e 19 = FL RTK 24 = NJ RTK
4 = NTP CARC 9 = OSHA CARC 14 = TSCA 6 20 = IL RTK 25 = PA RTK
5 = NTP SUS 10 = OSHA Z 15 = TSCA 12b 21 = LA RTK 26 = RI RTK
Code key: CARC = Carcinogen; SUS = Suspected Carcinogen
16. OTHER INFORMATION
INTENDED USE: ENGINE OIL
NOTE: SynLube PRODUCTS ARE NOT FORMULATED TO CONTAIN PCBS.
Page 8 of 8
Information given herein is offered in good faith as accurate, but without guarantee. Conditions of use and suitability of the product for particular uses are beyond our control; the user therefore assumes all risks of use of the product and WE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ALL
WARRANTIES OF EVERY KIND AND NATURE, INCLUDING WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE IN RESPECT TO THE USE OR SUITABILITY OF THE PRODUCT.
Nothing is intended as a recommendation for uses, which infringe valid patents, or as extending license under valid patents. Appropriate warnings and safe-handling procedures should be provided to handlers and users. Alteration of this document is strictly prohibited.
Except to the extent required by law, republication or retransmission of this document, in whole or in part, is not permitted.
SynLube assumes no responsibility for accuracy of information unless the document is the most current available from an official Synthashield distribution system.
SynLube, Inc. neither represents nor warrants that the format, content or product formulas contained in this document comply with the laws of any other country except the United States of America.
Copyright © 1997-2010 SynLube, Inc., All rights reserved



This would be the MSDS of the lubricant in question.
V vitualmageMember
quote:
Originally posted by Miro Kefurt:
quote:
It’s a jeep thing you wouldn’t understand.


Jeep Wrangler
Segment: SUV
CR Predicted Reliability Score: Poor
CR Value Score: Rated among the worst in overall value (Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Sahara)
CR Safety Score: Not rated among the worst in overall safety performance
CR Overall Score: 17 out of 100
J.D. Power Dependability Score: 2 out of 5 Power Circles
MSRP: $21,915


I certainly don't !!!!



I wont play your little retarded data game, I can post tons of data saying otherwise to ,even if I was to drive over a yugo in front of you, your crazy mind would not acknowledge it. Live in your post soviet era; ill live in my post American one. I would still like to see a tatra run over a yugo .

People complaining about the jeep are soccer moms thinking buying a suv. The jk is an open body vehicle body on frame with solid axle; made for off road and quite good at it.

Do a little research, you might realize the jeep and off road community is fantastic, unlike most of people they use the full potential of their rig, posses probably the best fab worker around.

http://www.riverraider.com/[/url]
C captainkirkMember
quote:
I wont play your little retarded data game,


The last time I checked the real world.........DATA is what it's all about.

The last time I was in College......same thing.... DATA=INFO

DATA=FACTS PERIOD

You guys keep asking for info/data,the facts.etc., and then when you get the info you have been asking for in all forms....it's as you say ......"retarded" ??????
S snakedoctorMember
Now all that posting was a complete waste of bandwidth. Nothing of any importance in there. Just the same old tired gobbledygook. Kirk you are wasting your time. There will be no victims of this scam found here. Go peddle syncrap some where else. At first this was intertaining. Its not even that anymore. its insulting to anyone who has a functioninng brain.
Last edited by snakedoctor
A adfd1Member
I enjoyed his rant about ODB II and how the engines and vehicles won't last, especially late model cars. It was painful to read so I might not be spot on with details, a quick glance was all his writing got.

I would love to hear Miro and his alter egos explain the Ford Crown Vics used by Taxi companies with all the miles on them, or the Police Cars still in service. Everything this guy says is meaningless, and a waste. But like a bad accident you have to look.

AD
S snakedoctorMember
These are reasons not to use syncrap as posted on another forum.

1.No office or offices and avoiding anyone who wants to see their office even going so far as to say it is located on a secret government base
2.Selling oil to customers out of the trunk in a parking lot
3.Selling oil in used bottles
4.Selling Delvac 1 with original seals removed and new seals added
5.Belligerant to potential customers on forums
6.Unwilling to provide any data, such as VOA
7.MSDS sheet with different companies names on it
8.Pictures of models with exotic cars on their website with false names and long stories about how they use it in their car
9.Buys back used oil for reuse
10.Permanently revoked business license in Nevada
11.Wildly variable data from VOAs not supplied by the company
12.Posting the real names on forums of customers who are critical of the company
13.Saying that oil pressure is not important and that it is the solids that do the lubricating
Last edited by snakedoctor
B bigbearMember
Code:

Tater-n Budman
-Noodles

19k miles
VOA UOA UOA-VOA
FE 5 166 161
CR <1 3 >2
NI <1 2 >1
AL 2 39 37
PB <1 2 >1
ZN 588 588 0
CU <1 44 >44
SN <1 1 >0
AG <1 <1 >0
TI <1 <1 >0
SI 10 44 34
B 37 15 -22
NA 9 62 53


Miro, can you explain how your oil has an IRON reading of 5 from the VOA on Synlube, and then at 19,000 miles from a sample taken by Budman who got a UOA done it had an IRON reading of 166

If Budman runs this oil out to 50,000 miles or more then is it safe to say that he could have an iron reading of well over 200

Are you going to tell us that all of this iron floating around in his oil will not damage anything inside of the engine.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt in saying that the iron reading of 166 would mean more if Budman got a Particle Count Test because we really do not know the micron size of all of the iron particles from Budman's UOA.

Maybe the particles of iron are in the 5 micron range or less, how efficient is your oil filter that you sell, is it like 50% at 5 microns.

Miro, I am trying to be open minded with this UOA since I do not see a Particle Count Test, what is your take on this Iron Reading.
A adfd1Member
Give him time to come up with a good one. Remember Synlube is such an advanced high tech oil that no company can run a proper analysis on it. Oh the engine must have had that iron, from prior oil used, Synlube removed it. Wait, wait, those iron particles are sub-atomic and are meaningless. That isn't iron its FEee2.

Lets see what he comes up with.

AD
R robertcMember
Ealier, 69 ppm iron was sacrificial.

So Budmans "lube" had none of the critical sacrificial component?


---===---
Particle count may surprice, an ICP is good, reliably, for 7-8 microns max. After that, partial combustion and thus false low readings.

RDE is better, and more expensive tha ICP at finding all particle sizes.

Aslso, most ICPs have an absolute limit around 10 PPM. Any bigger and it won't even go into the machine. I have sent samples with visible debris and gotten sat ICPs

Gott to do other work to see it all.
B bigbearMember
quote:
Originally posted by ADFD1:
Give him time to come up with a good one. Remember Synlube is such an advanced high tech oil that no company can run a proper analysis on it. Oh the engine must have had that iron, from prior oil used, Synlube removed it. Wait, wait, those iron particles are sub-atomic and are meaningless. That isn't iron its FEee2.

Lets see what he comes up with.

AD


AD, I believe Budman dumped the Factory Fill Oil on this engine when it had less than 1000 miles on it, at that time he started using Synlube, I believe his vehicle is only about 2 years old, so this is not a case where someone used some other brand of oil for thousands of miles.

I am sure Miro will be able to explain the so called high Iron readings for us here, I hope he is not going to blame it on a bad engine design.
M mirokefurtMember
quote:
Miro, can you explain how your oil has an IRON reading of 5 from the VOA on Synlube, and then at 19,000 miles from a sample taken by Budman who got a UOA done it had an IRON reading of 166


You would have to tell me who Budman is and what vehicle it is from - If I think who it is then he has 3 cars, 2 new and one used when converted.

No one sent me a direct e-mail with any oil analysis - so I have not seen who, where and when did this.

And ADD OIL if it has been used has lot more Fe in it than INITIAL FILL.
M mirokefurtMember
quote:
Maybe the particles of iron are in the 5 micron range or less, how efficient is your oil filter that you sell, is it like 50% at 5 microns.


We have 57 different oil filters made for us by 5 different manufacturers as we do NOT make any filters. They have microglass or stratapore media and normally they are filtering down to 5 microns - it is in 95% to 98% range and 99% for over 10 micron particles.

However without knowing who it is and what vehicle, I have no idea which filter is used and also if the FILTERMAG has been installed.

even 200 PPM Fe is nothing to worry about if you do not see any particles in the sample for that 400X microscope has to be useed and in variable magnetic field to see if there are any.

Normal "lab" does not even look at the Oil Sample.

Only 3 more future samples will determine trend as also from the data there has not been any Oil Sample takes at about few hours after the Installation to see what the FRESH OIL mixed with, nor the Sample of the USED OIL Drained prior conversion.

It is totally silly to assume that "all the old oil was "perfect"" and that everything drains out !

Some OEM have both DRY and WET oil change specs, for both Engines and ATF and in some cases like few TOYOTA 1.5 quart of the "old" oil stays behind.

Again people do NOT do all the proper steps for Analysis to be of a statistically significiant.

VOA
Drained OIL
Fresh oil after short time of installation
Sample 1
Sample 2

This is the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM before you can analyze any data with any confidence that is more than a coin toss (50%) accurate.
M mirokefurtMember
This may be of interest too:

http://www.machinerylubricatio...1384/ferrous-density

And finally DO NOT forget to send the SAME SAMPLE to the SAME LAB about week or two latter, that will indicate repeatability and accuracy, without that, no matter what the numbers are they are noise.

And I do not care if they are "bad" or "good" it is still scientifically insignificiant.

I think I have posted here more than once what needs to be done so you can "trust" VOA/UOA Data.

SO no need to repeat it, just go back in the thread to it.

But both the Repeatability and Accuracy are big issues - and unless you know what they are, you can not conclude much be it "good" or "bad", but if done properly you will spend even when SynLube is used MORE than the value of the lubricant.

NO OEM be it Light Duty or Heavy Duty engine will do anything under Warranty based on UOA results, that is because they are that "unreliable". People tried that with VW, SATURN, now HONDA (mostly due to high oil consumption) and all were told to get lost, and just pour in more oil !!!

PS: The Fe in INITIAL FILL should be about 50 PPM and not 7
M mirokefurtMember
quote:
vitual_mage


The point was that no matter how much you think about your ride or how many other fanatics are there, there always are "experts" and "authorities" that will with confidence in magazine like FORBES declare it as "junk" and have data from RL Polk, JD Power and IIHS to prove it.

Not any different than opinions people have about YUGO, SMART, MINI, SATURN, and so on.

There always are people who never owned the vehicle they comment on since it is such a dog that they would not be caught dead driving it !!!

But of course they are full of comments and second or third hand knowledge about how unsafe, poor quality, poor value, unreliable they are.

Not trying to prove anything about JEEP just copy and paste "opinion" from a reliable and trusted source - that's ALL....

But then it is a JEEP thing, and I would think you'd understand, but apparently not........

Opinions about YUGO, JEEP and SynLube are just that, and ALL of them are propagated by those who have NO EXPERIENCE - that was the purpose of the "example" (JEEP WRANGLER)
M mirokefurtMember
quote:
People complaining about the jeep are soccer moms thinking buying a suv.


The lagrest NEW VEHICLE Consumer Group - they influence 72% of vehicle purchases !!!

Is USA not a country where the majority WINS ?

And the majority does not or never bought JEEPS, the closest they get is a PICK-UP Truck !!!

Check the sales numbers...

But again it does not mean that there are fanatics that like rain, wind noise, danger, on and on - so JEEP is perfect for them and if that is not insane enough to drive in city then a Harley for sure will fill the ticket !!!

So you admit you are member of a "fringe" do not think the "majority" is right ?

Why then do you not display tollerance and understanding toward other members of other "fringe" groups or clans ?

PS: A garbage collection truck can run over your Jeep any day, does that make it a superior choice for city transport ?
PreviousNext
Post

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×