Motor oil opnions
 

Mys Terry wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 15:07:15 GMT, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On 6 Jun 2006 07:21:41 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:



One thing about multi viscosity numbers is that in a 10W-30 for
instance, the 10 doesn't correspond to any temperature! It only means
that the oil will flow when cold like a straight 10W will. The 30 on
the other hand, means that the oil will act like a straight 30W at a
given temperature, which is 212F.

The above is the oral tradition carried on, but is totally incorrect.

For starters see:
http://www.texacoxpresslube.com/carc...viscosity.html


From the link you gave:

The reason we have both single grade and multigrade oils is largely
historical. The earliest engine oils were all non-W single grades, but
as the requirement for oils to work well under both low and high
temperatures evolved, W grades and multigrades emerged. In terms of
viscosity, the biggest difference between a multigrade and a single
grade is that the multigrade must not become too viscous at low
temperatures, while still meeting the requirements of its high
temperature grade - in other words, multigrades exhibit less viscosity
change with temperature than most single grades.

Thus, a typical 5W-30 motor oil has the same approximate kinematic
viscosity as a SAE 30 grade oil at 100 ° C, but it's viscosity at very
low temperatures, while thicker than when hot, is much less than the
30 grade. This is achieved by formulating multigrades with a higher
Viscosity Index than typical for single grades. So, while a 5W-30 oil
will allow a modern car to start at temperatures as low as -30 ° C,
the typical SAE 30 oil would be too thick to either crank or pump at
that temperature.


Sounds like the oral tradition is also the facts!

That's why I'm confused! Gene's sharp on this subject, I'm sure he'll
clarify.

Motor oil opinions
 

I have used synthetic oils exclusively in everything from my outboard
(synth 2-stroke) to my Volvo (300,000+miles) to my Dodge Cummins Diesel
(290,000+mi) and finally my Honda mini van (187,000+mi) all with
original engines - none of them burn oil and all have near-original
compression.

The ONLY problem with using a synthetic in an older engine is that
between the oil's detergent/cleaning capabilities and slightly lower
viscosity, if the engine is prone to leak oil, it will. I figure if my
engine leaks oil, I need to fix the leak and I don't mind if the
crankcase gets cleaner.

With synthetic oil, ALL my engines and transmissions (I use synthetic
transmission fluid or gear lube as the case may be) run measurably
cooler. Cooler means less friction and better oil flow (better flow
spreads the heat around where it can cool more efficiently.)

I have only had good results with synthetic oil and from what I have
both read and experienced, it is far superior to Dino oil. Tests have
shown that synthetic oil does not break down nearly as fast and if kept
clean will far outlast other lubricants.

My dad always taught me that keeping the oil clean is equally as
important as which oil you choose you use to lubricate the engine with.
I use remote dual oil filters on all my engines, all with outstanding
results. Dad always said it's cheaper to replace a filter than to
replace a set of bearings. I think he was right, although now I don't
change the oil as often as I do filters, since I have seen convincing
evidence that synthetic engine oil can/will last 12,000 miles or more.
I change mine every 6,000 miles which lets me sleep at night. I change
filters every 3,000.

I have friends and relatives that have adopted the same procedure all
with the same excellent results.

That's my experience, your mileage may vary.

Jeff



jamesgangnc wrote:
I think a few people with high performance boat engines, like
supercharged tall deck big blocks, have similar high clearances and run
50 or 60 wt racing oil. Then people think if it's good for a racing
engine then it should be good for me. Not considering that they have a
completely different engine.

Gene Kearns wrote:
On 5 Jun 2006 20:03:26 -0700, wrote:

. Straight weight oils (even as thick as SAE 50) do not have the
?film strength? of multi-viscosity oils such as 5W-20, 5W-30, and
10W-30

This is opposite of what research I have done says and what I have
personally seen in aviation engines. Film strength of multi-viscosity
oils fails when the viscosity improver's fail under extreme pressure.
The oil molecules will re-link in the sump as they cool off, but the
damage to the metallic parts is done.

I would NEVER recommend multi-viscosity oils in extreme pressure
situations (barring really cold starts) and the valve train is a great
place to find such situations. I suspect the article's advice is
driven by people using way to thick an oil.... SAE 50 in an aircraft
engine is the standard... but then it has HUGE clearances compared to
a water cooled boat engine.

Motor oil opinions
 

Back in my younger days I rode dirt bikes competitively (and now I am
paying for that physically!) running "Enduros" and other long-distance
(500 + mi.) rugged races. I rode in the open class (500cc or larger.)
Anyway, I started using synthetic oil (I mixed my own, disabled the oil
injection system) and had nothing but excellent results. One thing all
of us had problems with was fouled plugs -for a number of reasons
related to the kind of running we did. Synthetic oil simply stopped
that problem. I also noticed that the engine ran cooler overall (not a
giant difference, I was using high-quality Dino-oil to begin with) but
more importantly I didn't have ANY scoring on the cylinder walls after
making the switch. Previously it was fairly common after a long, hard
race to observe some scoring on the cyl. walls and pitting on the
piston top. We did a tear-down after every race so it was easy to see
the difference.

As for the quality of synthetics under heat/pressure in high stress
points like tappets or cams, I have been told that's not true. I don't
know... I can only go by what I personally observe and my engines are
as tight as they were when I bought them. If synthetic failed under
high pressure as you suggested, then it seems to me that many people
who use synthetic oils exclusively (like me) would have failures (or
unusual wear) particular to those parts, however that doesn't seem to
be the case.

Jeff



Gene Kearns wrote:
On 6 Jun 2006 11:31:59 -0700, "Chehalis Jeff"
wrote:

I have used synthetic oils exclusively in everything from my outboard
(synth 2-stroke) to my Volvo (300,000+miles) to my Dodge Cummins Diesel
(290,000+mi) and finally my Honda mini van (187,000+mi) all with
original engines - none of them burn oil and all have near-original
compression.

The ONLY problem with using a synthetic in an older engine is that
between the oil's detergent/cleaning capabilities and slightly lower
viscosity, if the engine is prone to leak oil, it will. I figure if my
engine leaks oil, I need to fix the leak and I don't mind if the
crankcase gets cleaner.

With synthetic oil, ALL my engines and transmissions

I have had excellent service out of synthetic oils, too. The only
disaster I have seen directly attributable to synthetics is their use
in high performance air cooled engines. Under high temperatures, the
oil loses it's EP properties and fails at high pressure points like
cam and tappets. Recip. aircraft oils are now either straight dino oil
or a synthetic/dino mix.

Interestingly, I wanted to use synthetics in my Suzuki outboards and
was advised by the manufacturer not to do so. When I questioned this
surprising position I was told that they couldn't recommend synthetics
merely because they were untested by the manufacturer.

Motor oil opnions
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 19:07:23 GMT, Mys Terry penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 18:43:28 GMT, Gene Kearns
wrote:

On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 15:30:26 GMT, Mys Terry
wrote:


From the link you gave:

The reason we have both single grade and multigrade oils is largely
historical. The earliest engine oils were all non-W single grades, but
as the requirement for oils to work well under both low and high
temperatures evolved, W grades and multigrades emerged. In terms of
viscosity, the biggest difference between a multigrade and a single
grade is that the multigrade must not become too viscous at low
temperatures, while still meeting the requirements of its high
temperature grade - in other words, multigrades exhibit less viscosity
change with temperature than most single grades.

Thus, a typical 5W-30 motor oil has the same approximate kinematic
viscosity as a SAE 30 grade oil at 100 ° C, but it's viscosity at very
low temperatures, while thicker than when hot, is much less than the
30 grade. This is achieved by formulating multigrades with a higher
Viscosity Index than typical for single grades. So, while a 5W-30 oil
will allow a modern car to start at temperatures as low as -30 ° C,
the typical SAE 30 oil would be too thick to either crank or pump at
that temperature.


Sounds like the oral tradition is also the facts!


Really? Show me where it says 0W-40 oil acts like 0 weight (no
viscosity?) oil when cold and 40 weight oil when hot......

Answer: 10W-30 does NOT become 10 weight oil when cold and 30 weight
oil when hot......

Turn your binoculars around the other way, Gene. 10W-30 performs like
10 weight when it is cold, and as it gets hotter, it doesn't thin out
as much as straight 10 would. When it's at 100C it is about the same
viscosity that straight 30 would be at that temp.


"multigrades exhibit less viscosity change with temperature than most
single grades."


Ok, I can see that you wish to believe that "10W-30 performs like 10
weight when it is cold, and as it gets hotter, it doesn't thin out as
much as straight 10 would. When it's at 100C it is about the same
viscosity that straight 30 would be at that temp."

That certainly is your right... but if you spend as much time reading
on the subject as I have.... you'll see things differently.

10W-30 behaves exactly like extra virgin olive oil. Mah daddy done said so.

Motor oil opinions
 

As a pilot and previous aircraft owner (1969 Beechcraft A36) I am well
aware of the Mobile AV-1 debacle. The problem with AV-1 was apparently
a chemical compatibility problem that only applied to AV-1 that caused
sludge buildup, thereby drastically reducing the oil's ability to
lubricate. In cases where AV-1 caused damage, it had little to do with
tappets or cam bearing surfaces in particular, it was spun crank
bearings, cylinder wall damage - big problems. If you recall, Mobile-1
(and Mobile AV-1) wasn't a fully synthetic oil in their first
formulations. Mobile-1 is a different animal now and is fully
synthetic.

I would think if the same problem(s) existed in Mobile-1 or any other
synthetic oil, they would be pulled off the market or the manufacturers
would be sued (like the AV-1 issue) or both. I haven't seen that
happen, in fact more and more major oil companies are formulating
better and better synthetics, all of which outperform mineral/petroleum
oils.

I don't have anything against Mobile-1 or any other fully synthetic
major brand, however I choose to use only AMSOil or RedLine Synthetics.
The API tests speak for themselves.

That's my 2 cents worth anyway.

Jeff


Gene Kearns wrote:
On 6 Jun 2006 12:22:27 -0700, Chehalis Jeff penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:


As for the quality of synthetics under heat/pressure in high stress
points like tappets or cams, I have been told that's not true. I don't
know...

If interested, check out the story of Mobil AV-1. The FAA rescinded
the approval for use (STC) of that lubricant due to engine failures.
There was also a huge class action lawsuit and settlement.

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats

Motor oil opnions
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 06:19:08 -0400, Big gus
wrote:

Hi guys thanks for all the advice
posted in the past.

well me and the guys at the maria were discussing oil.

Some use "marine" grade while others do not

Some use Valvoline strait 50 weigh "racing" oil

was wonder what every ones thoughts were?

Thanks
m


Marine grade oils are formulated for a damp environment. Not a bad
idea.

How does a marine grade better protect in on the water than a standard
grade?



Using a straight weight oil in warm climates is probably preferable to
a multi viscosity oil.

Volvo Penta recommends a SAE 15W-50 API SG multigrade (natural or
synthetic). I had always thought a straight 30W was preferable.

What are your thoughts Gene?

Motor oil opnions
 

" JimH" jimhUNDERSCOREosudad@yahooDOTcom wrote in message
. ..

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 06:19:08 -0400, Big gus
wrote:

Hi guys thanks for all the advice
posted in the past.

well me and the guys at the maria were discussing oil.

Some use "marine" grade while others do not

Some use Valvoline strait 50 weigh "racing" oil

was wonder what every ones thoughts were?

Thanks
m


Marine grade oils are formulated for a damp environment. Not a bad
idea.

How does a marine grade better protect in on the water than a standard
grade?



Using a straight weight oil in warm climates is probably preferable to
a multi viscosity oil.

Volvo Penta recommends a SAE 15W-50 API SG multigrade (natural or
synthetic). I had always thought a straight 30W was preferable.

What are your thoughts Gene?


What is your "I had always thought" based on?

Motor oil opnions
 

On Mon, 05 Jun 2006 20:39:54 -0400, Big gus
wrote:

WOW what a discussion.

after reading all the posts I guess I should clarify my question

The engines a 502 Merc inboards, not V-drives

I was wondering if anyone had been uses something like Valvoline 50
weight racing oil.

When I switched my Crusader 454's from the 25W-40 marine oil to
Valvoline 60 weight, per advice of a 30 year marine mechanic, the boat
ran 100% better.

Now I have newer boat with engines that were rebuilt in 94, I am
trying Valvoline strait weight 50 racing oil.

I boat in Cleveland ohio on lake erie.

I WILL not "winterize" the boat with that oil, but its full blown
summer here and I just changed the "winterized" oil with the strait
weight Valvoline.

Thanks for all the advice



I'd be leary of using oil that thick.
Great for racers who pre-heat the oil to operating temp before
starting the engine. Not so great for cold-start conditions.

At one time I used 50w oil in my 4-cyl Isuzu PUP but I was crawling at
5 MPH through the Mojave desert for weeks at a time with no wind
through the radiator.

You might look at rebuilding your engine if it takes 50w or 60w oil to
make it run well.

Mark E. Williams

Motor oil opnions
 

Mercury's oil is 25-40 and doesn't have viscosity improving additives... so
I'm told. $25 of oil is a lot cheaper than a $4000+ engine replacement.
That's my 3 cents!


"Big gus" wrote in message
...
Hi guys thanks for all the advice
posted in the past.

well me and the guys at the maria were discussing oil.

Some use "marine" grade while others do not

Some use Valvoline strait 50 weigh "racing" oil

was wonder what every ones thoughts were?

Thanks
m

Motor oil opinions
 

Hi Gene... well thought out replies, indeed. Just for some final
clarification, here are some things I can say to back up my statements.

I didn't say AV-1 didn't damage cam lobes or tappets... what I did say
was that wasn't the only problem _in particular_, but that AV-1
apparently caused even bigger damage in areas not under direct constant
pressure. There are still different opinions as to what actually was
the problem with AV-1 (Mobile Oil won't say...but I think they know.)

As for Mobile AV-1 being "100% synthetic"... yes, that's what Mobile
Oil advertised. However, while Mobile AV-1 and Mobile-1 (pre-1992) said
they were "100% synthetic", that was with an asterisk: "*exclusive of
carrier oil." They indeed had, by Mobile oil's own admission up to 19%
petroleum-based a"carrier oil." 81% synthetic ain't 100%, even 95%
isn't (not in my book anyway.) 100% is 100%, right?

Now if I remember right, AMSOil was challenged by Mobile oil when
AMSOil claimed Mobile-1 wasn't "really 100% synthetic" ... well the
upshot of that conflict was that Mobile Oil withdrew the legal
challenge and changed their formula to eliminate petroleum-based
additives, thus making it truly a "100% synthetic lubricant" (as of
1992 sometime.) I also remember the FTC being involved.

Notably, neither SAE or API have a clear definition for what
"synthetic" oil is. Some say it is simply a marketing term. I go by my
own experience, results, some of what I hear from people I know and
trust and my gut.

I would suggest you try ONE oil change with AMSOil Formula 4 or Red
Line Racing Oil. Pay attention to temperature readings, top speed and
overall smoothness of idle. Maybe it's all in my head, but I sure think
it makes a difference that I could tell right away. I would not
recommend Mobile-1 anywhere except in your personal automobile engine.
If you had 2-stroker smokers as I do, I would recommend either the
AMSOil Saber Outboard or Red Line's Watercraft Oil.

Finally, I agree with you about AMSOil's advertised API tests... they
show what they want you to see. I wouldn't put my faith in what any
website says, rather see what works for you.

Give it a try... just not in your aircraft engine. Yet.

Jeff



Gene Kearns wrote:
On 6 Jun 2006 15:29:34 -0700, Chehalis Jeff penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

As a pilot and previous aircraft owner (1969 Beechcraft A36) I am well
aware of the Mobile AV-1 debacle. The problem with AV-1 was apparently
a chemical compatibility problem that only applied to AV-1 that caused
sludge buildup, thereby drastically reducing the oil's ability to
lubricate. In cases where AV-1 caused damage, it had little to do with
tappets or cam bearing surfaces in particular, it was spun crank
bearings, cylinder wall damage - big problems.
It had plenty to do with tappets and cams...
http://www.eaa49.av.org/techart/mobil01.htm

If you recall, Mobile-1
(and Mobile AV-1) wasn't a fully synthetic oil in their first
formulations.
Mobil AV-1 WAS a fully synthetic oil. "Mobil introduced its 100%
synthetic AV-1 piston aircraft engine oil with great ballyhoo in
connection with the 1986 round-the-world Voyager flight. It went on
the market in 1987, after five years of R&D and 25,000 hours of flight
testing in 23 different aircraft.. " See:
http://www.avweb.com/news/news/182891-1.html


Mobile-1 is a different animal now and is fully
synthetic.

And isn't approved for use in aircraft... though I do admit it is a
different animal and is my oil of choice in land based vehicles. I'm
seriously considering using it in my outboards after the warranty
period.


I would think if the same problem(s) existed in Mobile-1 or any other
synthetic oil, they would be pulled off the market or the manufacturers
would be sued (like the AV-1 issue) or both. I haven't seen that
happen, in fact more and more major oil companies are formulating
better and better synthetics, all of which outperform mineral/petroleum
oils.
Well, the proof of this is that there are no fully synthetic oils on
the aviation market.... only semi-synthetic.


I don't have anything against Mobile-1 or any other fully synthetic
major brand, however I choose to use only AMSOil or RedLine Synthetics.
The API tests speak for themselves.


I remain skeptic with respect to the selectivity of the AMSOil API
tests.

--

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/

Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide
http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats