Will switching from Synthetic to Dyno oil harm my engine?

So are more frequent oil changes, and so is an extra $100 over the life of
the vehicle.

I actually think the issue is more one of frequent inspections than of
anything
else. I always do my own oil changes and when I do them I get under the
vehicle
and look at everything. Even if you were changing your oil and filter at
10,000
miles I think you should still be inspecting the vehicle at 3K miles.

Unfortunately now that most people pay an oil change place to do the oil
changes, the economic incentive is to not change the oil as frequently, and
thus decrease the frequency of inspection.

Ted

 

You are simply wasting your money changing it that often.

Trust me, when the underbonnet stickers say, on a standard car under hard
use, 2750miles change periods, and this is running twice the stock boost and
a number of supporting mods, im more than happy to change it at 3K intervals
if it keeps it running right.
The previous owner replaced the oil every 6K when running lower boost and
less modification, and his reconned turbo lasted...15K miles. Hence I aint
taking the risk. Might be fine with a non-turbocharged engine but the heat
these things generate will boil off various protective parts of the oil
before 6K is reached, and knowing how Mr Toyota likes to charge for parts
I'd rather spend £50 a year more on oil than £700 on a new turbo every 3
years.

Its called prevention Its my favourite method of maintenance.

J

J

 

That primary reason being ... injection timing initiating closer to TDC(?).
This is similar to gasoline NOx emission reductions efforts ... that is, to
have maximum cylinder pressure occur further after TDC. Apparently, one
trade off is a little more soot for a lot of NOx reduction. Mobil made a
point to mention higher ExhaustGasRecirculation activity as a major source
of oil fouling.

Quite remarkable. I might not be surprised if these were stationary engines.
But for OverTheRoad vehicles ... tough to imagine such frugal oil
consumption. The OTR trucks I used to drive would maintain their oil level
(suggesting that some oil was lost/replaced by contaminations) until about
8-10k miles. Then consumption would progress to about 1 gallon every 5k
miles. By the time a B Service was scheduled (25k miles), oil consumption
would about double. What does that suggest to you? BTW, the oil capacity
was 7 or 8 gallons.

In retrospect, I fail to see how 'retarded injection timing' increases
"engine temperatures" when a reduction in NOx emissions is the result of
retarded timing. The best I can come up with is that "engine temperatures"
means COOLANT temperatures ... not combustion chamber temperatures. This
would come about due to more cylinder wall exposure during combustion ...
more combustion heat reaching the coolant.

Yes, I know what you mean. All I have to do is fire up the SD22 (fresh
oil/filter), let it run for 30 seconds ... the oil is already blackened.
Ironically, there is no 'sludge' around the rocker arms whatsoever.

I know -exactly- what part you are referencing. The same kind of crooked
oil jet is usually present on factory turbocharged gasoline engines. Still
sounds suspicious. You do know that a diesel engine that smokes heavily
under load has higher combustion chamber temperatures than one that does not
smoke (perceptibly) under load?

The fuel and timing setting were what I was alluding to earlier in this post
and previous. As I understand diesel, the more air you pressurize the intake
manifold with, the more fuel you can put to the engine with less risk of
excessive combustion chamber temperatures. However, if this air/fuel
delivery calibration is altered (ie, restricted air intake, turbocharger
damage, or somebody monkeying around with the injection pump), to where less
air is available, the combustion chamber heat rises. I've also read that
direct injection chambers requires less fuel timing advance than indirect
injection chambers, the former being less forgiving about too much timing
advance.

"Everything is spot on..." Yes, NOW it is. LOL

 

Yeah, that's the one. Thanks.

What is really needed now is another go-around with Mobil 1, because
they're using the same engine for all the tests and the engine was
obviously more "broken in" by the time they did the Amsoil test. The
ideal would be to take two new cars and drive them side-by-side for the
whole test... but that's not exactly practical for the casual oil tester!

 

IMO, a combination of factors causes that in the US. Advertising of
oils, and the relatively low cost of even the very best oils on the
market that allow 3000 mile changes to be "not ridiculously expensive in
the grand scheme of life" being the main drivers. Also, I think Europe
has suffered a lot more in the past 10 years with things that place high
demands on oil- changing gasoline and diesel formulations, more small
diesel engines in use, the far more short-trip driving, a generally
colder climate across a greater percentage of Europe than of North
America, etc.

What am I, chopped liver? ;-) And there are a ton of Americans that use
the bobistheoilguy forums, too.

Not Americans who've worked in in fleet or (especially) the heavy
trucking industry, or even read about it. North American class-8 trucks
have been running oil change schedules based solely on oil analysis for
20+ years, but that sort of thinking has never drifted down into
car-driving world until recently. Locomotives, stationary generators,
ship powerplants, etc. also generally follow analysis-based change
intervals.

This touches on my biggest gripe with automotive groups on the 'net.
Yes, I'm making a huge generalization, so its going to annoy some folks.
And it applies better to the alt.autos.<brand> groups than it does to
say, rec.autos.tech, and of course it hardly applies at all to the
vintage or high-performance car groups. The vast majority of people
that come here and think of themselves as "car aficiandos" are just car
users. They want transportation for the warranty period, then they're
going to sell the thing. Sure, they want as much value back when they
sell as they can get, but they're already throwing money away by
replacing the car so often and they don't REALLY care about making the
car last as long as possible. They just want to preserve the warranty,
and think that using lots of Armor All, a bunch of expensive oils,
expensive additives, gimmicky spark plugs and washing the car all the
time constitutes being a "car nut." But dare to suggest that they do
things like blow off the dealer service department and establish a
relationship with a competent private mechanic, do as many of their OWN
repairs as possible, etc. and they think you're nuts. My goal is to make
the car actually LAST, not just keep the warranty intact- my NEWEST
vehicle has been OUT of warranty over 10 years and 180,000 miles.


..

No carmakers do that anymore. The education of the masses has begun in
earnest.... 20 years ago, probably. Another symptom of the usenet
culture of people that think that following rules in maintaining a car
is what defines being an "aficianado." They'll waste money on
excessively over-spec'd oils and absurd oil change intervals because
they think its "what car aficianados do," but they'll turn right around
and insist on buying only "dealer" parts, without realiziing that 90% of
"dealer parts" after a car has been in production a year or two are
actually built by a lowest-bidder for the car maker, and just stuffed in
appropriate branded boxes. Or insist on buying a rebuilt transmission
with a "lifetime warranty" from a mass-rebuilder, rather than an
extra-careful custom rebuild in a local shop with a 90-day warranty,
even though the odds are that it will actually last 10x as long as the
mass-rebuilt mess.

 

Cut the condescension and piss up a rope. I understand the difference
perfectly.

No it doesn't. Neglect, mechanical failure, or inappropriate choice of
the oil and drain interval CAN (but doesn't always). Extended drain
interval alone DOES NOT.

All I can say is "duh." And that's my whole point... running an adequate
oil BEYOND 3000 miles, beyond 5000 miles, or even beyond the
manufacturers recommendation (given that you may use an oil that is up
to the task, which might not have even been on the market when the
manufacturer WROTE that recommendation) DOES NOT automatically lead to a
ruined engine, as the post with the link to the destroyed BMW engine
IMPLIED.

And you are merely woeful.

If your reading skills were up to your skills of pretension, you might
have realized by now that Huw and I are in total AGREEMENT.

 

Written (or edited) by someone other than an engineer, no doubt. The
only thing that is not strictly true, however is the generalization that
"...low emission diesel engines generate higher levels of soot..."
Obviously they "generate" less soot overall, hence their lower
emissions. However, raising the combustion pressure and temperature can
EASILY result in more soot (and other undesirable combustion byproducts)
being pushed past the rings into the LUBRICANT, even though the total
soot produced and sent out the tailpipe is much lower. Thus, poor
wording aside, the statement is correct in the context of soot loading
of the oil.

 

what you intent is good, but your method is not.

http://theoildrop.server101.com/whatisoilanalysis.htm has good basic
info on how to adopt a better approach to what you're trying to achieve.
you're better off spending your money on oil analysis rather than
excessive oil changes.

 

I can only agree.

Not as far as I can tell. But your knowledge is on a different level to most
I have read on Usenet from your part of the World, or most other parts come
to think of it.



And there are a ton of Americans that use

Indeed they do. However the 15000 to 30,000 intervals for cars do not depend
on drivers being proactive and analysing their oil. The service interval is
flexible and conditions are moitored automattically by the vehicle systems.
This applies to both petrol and diesel systems.
I believe Cummins have a similar system fitted called Sentinel or similar.
No doubt it is somewhat more sophisticated than passenger car systems thus
far. We both know that quite ordinary long haul trucks now run for up to
100,000 miles between oil changes useing analysis based service schedules.

I share the same philosophy and run older vehicles to high milage. My Land
Rover has exceeded 10,000 hours of hard, short journey and towing use.
However I am partial to new technolgy and also run a number of newer
vehicles, the latest being a diesel Range Rover using the BMW 3.0 unit which
I have mildly chipped for more power and economy.

Again I can only agree.

Huw

 

It suggests viscosity breakdown and indicates either reduced service
intervals or superior oils should have been used.

It does not. The retarded engine timing results in cooler combustion
although this is counteracted by the increased specific power and fuel burnt
per cycle with these engines. Of course with the advent of full authority
control of many parameters and four valve high pressure piezo injectors then
the combustion process can be controlled today with a precision unimagined
even five years ago. Nearly all diesels are now intercooled as well. Even
stage three off road engines over 100hp are now fitted with large
intercoolers as a rule.


The best I can come up with is that "engine temperatures"

That is because you use an oil that is able to hold contaminants in
suspension and you change at appropriate intevals.

Although it smokes when accelerated rapidly from low revs, this engine has
inperceptible smoke at full load. I should say that it does output a bit
more than its advertised power but not to the extent that it has ever
sheared its injector holding bolts and blown them out of the head as is this
engines habit if over powered significantly.
It has been totally reliable up to and since the incident although spending
a high proportion of its time at full revs and full or overload.

It is now standard for injection timing to be software controlled and
altered dynamically in real time for each combustion cycle and individually
for each cylinder.

Again.

Huw

 

Yes indeed we are.
It's not often I agree with so many people in a string. It must be
Christmas.

Huw

 

Huw wrote:

"Centinel," I believe <eyeroll.> Advertising types....


Also, nearly every General Motors product that comes down the pike these
days has *some* form of oil monitoring system even the Civic-competitor
dispose-a-cars with the Ecotec 4-cylinder engine. But rather than using
something optical to look at the oils actual turbidity and factor that
(or conductivity, or pH, etc.) into the equation, I think it just
monitors driving parameters (temperature cycles, speeds, throttle
settings, etc.) and concocts a time when it "thinks" the oil should be
changed based on assumed oil characteristics. As the guys that did the
long-term tests on the Pontiac LS-1 reported in the link posted earlier,
the monitoring system "thought" the oil needed changing well before
actual oil analysis indicated that it ws necessary.

 

I await the evidence.

Does too. The primary cause of sludge IS... leaving the oil in service too
long for conditions which ... comes under your heading of "neglect." That
you have some rigid definintion of what constitutes "extended" is your
sticking point.

Yes it does ... as stated a few lines up.

 

A recurring fact in evidence is that Steve discounts everything not
mirroring his own opinion (facts not withstanding). I'll accept Mobil over
you.

See ... here's an example of your rigidness ("strickly").

Do reveal how higher combstion pressure and temperature result in more soot.

The primary byproduct here is your vague reference to NOx?

Are you aware that NOx contaminates the lubricating oil? I am not. If
less soot is being produced, then how is -more- soot being "pushed past the
rings into the LUBRICANT" when anecdotal evidence is current tech diesels
take longer to soot foul their oil than older design diesels. Soot has
intelligence to go past the rings instead of out the tail pipe? Ingenious.

 

This is 100% true. In fact, it's a leading cause of warranty and
extended warranty rejections. Can't prove you changed your oil at
regular intervals? Claim Rejected.

 

I suspect, but do not know, that European Vectra and Astra vehicles have
their oil moitoring systems sourced from the same company as Mercedes and
BMW. Certainly the Mercedes has a real time oil condition monitor which I
found when I did an early first oil change [at around 7000 miles] and
observed the service countdown indicator actually counting the 'wrong' way
for a while and adding a couple of thousand miles to the next service over a
period of no more than 200 miles driving.

I would be surprised if GM did not fit such a physical condition monitor to
its vehicles considering that it, along with VW, now have the longest
intervals in the industry, about 20,000 for certain petrol engines and up to
30,000 for its diesels.





As the guys that did the

They do build in a safety factor even with these systems but it is probably
far less than they build in for fixed service intervals generally.

Having said that, there were some teething troubles, as is the case with
most technology which stretches the envelope. The only one I can think of
though is where Mercedes found that 229.1 oil used in their petrol engines
in the US and serviced according to the monitor, did indeed suffer the very
occasional sludge incident. They were quick to revise the recommendation,
not shorten the service interval mind you, so that all 229.1 oils HAD to be
synthetic whereas previously some service centres used mineral oil that did
meet but not exceed 229.1.
My preference is always to use just one performance grade higher than
recommended when appropriate, and this is one appropriate use, in this case
I always used oil meeting the more demanding 229.3 specification.

I now use synthetic oil meeting 229.5 in a Vito 220 service van with fixed
14000 mile service intervals. In more demanding applications, including my
Toyota Land Cruiser diesel run to more than twice the manufacturers
recommended interval I use Ultra HPD oil meeting 228.5 which is the ultimate
specification for ultra long use. No doubt that with more efficient
filtration and oil analysis allowing, this oil would be good for almost
'sealed for life' engines.

Huw

 

It is not as simple as that and Steve is the only one that appreciates this.
Although the use of the word 'extended' here can be confused and confusing.
One thing is sure, it is not normal to have any lubrication or lubrication
related issues if the oil is changed as per recommended by the engine or
vehicle manufacturer. For the more sophisticated operator then the
manufacturers recommendation can be elastic to a greater or lesser extent.

In fact, it's a leading cause of warranty and

Yes even if it was just an electric mirror mechanism that broke. Sharp
practice by any standards. This is not common practice in other branches of
the vehicle industry where common sense and fair play prevail. That is not
to say that a failure due to obvious neglect or misuse would be approved,
only that where a vehicle was reasonably maintained and operated then the
warranty would not be voided and reasonable steps would be taken to make
good manufacturing faults or premature failures with no hassle and the
minimum downtime.

Huw

 

Here in the UK there's no such thing as oil analysis - certainly I cant
find anyone local (i.e. in the north of the country) that does it, and the
only place i found in the whole country quoted £10 and 3 days wait. Whats
the point? It really is cheaper and less time consuming to change
over-regularly than to run tests and waste time that way - takes me 10 mins
to change oil at the most, i spend £50 a year more than most people, but i
know im running golden honey all year round, no matter how hard i've
thrashed the engine, and most particulates from an older engine are cleared
out with each oil/filter change.

 

Huw wrote:
snip

The legalistic understanding of "extended" seems to suggest longer than
historic yet sanctified by some authority ... so long as ... the operator
also operates his vehicle in a manner that would allow the higher mileage.
Then we have the more "sophisticated operator" who readily prefers the
shorter service intervals because he has past experience.

USE ADJUSTED per Normal or Severe (in the simplest of terms) as mentioned in
most Owners Manuals.

 

wiley, you can do whatever makes you feel good, but here's some perspective:

1. it takes about 3 days this side of the pond too
2. you go ahead & change your oil anyway - you just send a sample of the
old oil at change time. the resulting report tells you whether you're
about to encounter a problem. or, and this is the whole point of this
conversation, whether you're changing oil ahead of it being necessary &
thus wasting money.

the analysis folks are not trying to rip you or sell you stuff you don't
need. they primarily help big fleets manage their maintenance costs -
and they can do that for you too. if you're environmentaly minded, you
can look at it as not wasting resources too or causing unnecessary
contamination. especially if you're using synthetic.

again, if analysis shows you can safely extend your maintenance
interval, it makes sense to do that. they will tell you if you need to
shorten your maintenance schedule too.