From: Steve Barker on 1 Apr 2007 23:16 And that's a very good point, Jim. And like I've said many times, I have maintained a fleet of 33 trucks for 10 years, changing the oil every 3k, on cheap straight 30 weight oil. No engine failures, no coking, no excessive wear on cold starts, no low oil pressures, none use oil, none rattle, none leak, nothing wrong with any of them. Several of them over 300,000 miles. $ynthetics are a rip off. Extended change intervals are just plain stupidity. -- Steve Barker YOU should be the one controlling YOUR car. Check out: www.lightsout.org "JimV" <jv9999(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:D6mdnRm0VI_Y7o3bnZ2dnUVZ_hGdnZ2d(a)comcast.com... > This whole oil thing is pretty funny. When is the last time anyone here > saw an oil related failure? Not in the last 10-20 years I'll bet. It's all > about MARKETING.
From: John Henderson on 1 Apr 2007 23:47 Steve Barker wrote: > And that's a very good point, Jim. And like I've said many > times, I have maintained a fleet of 33 trucks for 10 years, > changing the oil every 3k, on cheap straight 30 weight oil. > No engine failures, no coking, no excessive wear on cold > starts, no low oil pressures, none use oil, none rattle, none > leak, nothing wrong with any of them. Several of them over > 300,000 miles. > $ynthetics are a rip off. Extended change intervals are just > plain stupidity. You get full marks for tenacity from me Steve :) I don't agree with you though. John
From: nm5k on 1 Apr 2007 23:47 On Apr 1, 9:06 pm, JimV <jv9...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > This whole oil thing is pretty funny. When is the last time anyone here > saw an oil related failure? Not in the last 10-20 years I'll bet. It's > all about MARKETING. Oh, I've seen oil related wear, no doubt about it... Heck, the old 68 ford truck I got about 7-8 years ago was one such victim.. Was run on dirty oil all the time, and they just topped it off when it got low.. Naturally, by the time I got it, the rockers are clacking, the bearings about half shot, etc. The whole engine was half shot. In fact, that engine eventually spun a bearing, and I had to replace it with a fresh long block. I guess you could call that an oil related failure. Oil change neglect can ruin an engine over time. Sure, some may still run, but not well enough to be any engine I'd want in a car. I've seen plenty of 80's GM cars that had so much crud built up in the rockers, you would need a chisel to get it all out. That was from letting the oil go too long between changes. Lots of those were V6's.. Then you have all the recent ford and toyota, and probably other brand, oil coking and gelling problems in some hot running engines. You won't see much of that if you change the oil at least every 5k. The ford truck that had the problem had 177k miles with a toasted engine. Yea, thats not bad for a 60's vehicle, but no big deal considering it had a 300 six which can go for much longer than that, if maintained correctly. Some 300's go 200-300k +.. I've got a 89 accord with 160k or so, and it still runs very well. No smoke, runs or errors. Purrs like a new car. But it has had the oil changed fairly regular all it's life. As far as I'm concerned, marketing has nothing to do with it. I've been a regular oil changer for years.. Heck, I just changed my corolla's oil at 5k about a two weeks ago.. It was quite dirty. It looks a lot dirtier pouring out of the pan, than just looking at the dipstick. The engine ran a bit quieter with the new oil, which to my mind means it was absolutely worth changing it. Extra noise means extra wear. MK
From: Mark A on 2 Apr 2007 00:37 "Steve Barker" <ichasetrains(a)some.yahoo.com> wrote in message news:4pqdncpq4rLl6I3bnZ2dnUVZ_t2tnZ2d(a)giganews.com... > And that's a very good point, Jim. And like I've said many times, I have > maintained a fleet of 33 trucks for 10 years, changing the oil every 3k, > on cheap straight 30 weight oil. No engine failures, no coking, no > excessive wear on cold starts, no low oil pressures, none use oil, none > rattle, none leak, nothing wrong with any of them. Several of them over > 300,000 miles. $ynthetics are a rip off. Extended change intervals are > just plain stupidity. > -- > Steve Barker If you use conventional oil and do 3000 mile changes, your car would be better off with a full synthetic and 6000 mile changes (not exactly what I would call "extended"). In that case, synthetics would not cost more than conventional oil.
From: Andy on 2 Apr 2007 10:34
On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 19:20:39 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote: >Andy wrote: > >> And where on the Mobil 1 site does it say that? I looked and didn't >> see it. They say its a blend of synthetic basestocks. > >Right, it's the base stocks that are synthetic, but the additives are >petroleum based. > > From the Mobil 1 web site: > >"Each Mobil 1 and Mobil 1 Extended Performance viscosity grade uses a >unique combination of synthetic fluids _and selected additives_ in order >to tailor the viscosity grade to its specific application" (underlining >mine). Does it say it uses non synthetic addatives? > >Of course it's really immaterial that Mobil 1 is combination of >synthetic base stock and non-synthetic additives, just as it's >immaterial that base stocks of regular motor oil are non-synthetic. It's >not like they take oil out of the ground and mix in the additives, and >stick in bottles; the petroleum base stock is highly refined. You need to learn how oil fractioning works, then you'd see a clear difference. |