| Slant Six Forum https://slantsix.org/forum/ |
|
| Straight 30 weight for winter? https://slantsix.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=60586 |
Page 3 of 3 |
| Author: | Killer6 [ Sat Dec 31, 2016 9:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Synthetic oil I feel is a good choice if the engine in question doesn't contaminate the oil too quickly. The fuel and ignition systems need to be spot on and the engine in good mechanical condition. Otherwise you will need to change the oil based on contamination long before a synthetic has paid for itself in most daily driver scenarios. Conventional oils are better than ever and you can get great results with nothing more exotic than Chevron Supreme.
Who is making non-detergent automotive oil? Fuel? Anybody here knowIf sludge and varnish are keeping the oil in the motor then you're risking oil leaks by running detergent oils. Synthetic will seep more than conventional, but it rarely causes leaks. what Spectrum Gold is? It was just about the only 2stroke oil guys'd run in the eighties/early nineties because it was synthetic and superior for 2 reasons. 1) It is burned intentionally and produced less deposits in the cyl/piston/chamber & plugs lasted longer B4 fouling. 2)It provided much superior protection to the piston skirts. I worked for a former "H" factory MX racer, guess what got used ? As far as multi-weight oil goes, my old Gravely 408 lawn tractor('72) w/the 8Hp Kohler spec'd 5W-20 for winter operation, SAE30 for the summer. The question and topic was straight 30 for the winter.....the answer is NO. |
|
| Author: | jcc [ Wed Feb 01, 2017 12:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Seems like most of this thread is based on one widely held concept: "Again, most engine wear occurs at startup before sufficient oil reaches the critical points. The shorter that grind-time, the less the engine wears" As logical as that seems, it would be nice to see some science to back it up, it would be nice if there was some published/research based ratio of wear of a cold start to miles driven equivalency, and the actual time difference achieving adequate/equivalent lubrication in milliseconds(?) between different weighted oils. This also somewhat implies and to assume EVERY start up is a cold one, and overlooks the reverse idea, that thinner oil by the same applied logic, must also drain out of critical points faster, especially when hot then thicker oil, thereby increasing wear on start up, and when in elapsed time do the two oil thicknesses have equal non running oil lubrication points, on start up. |
|
| Author: | Killer6 [ Fri Feb 03, 2017 7:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
If you would like to see documentation, look for it, it can't be hard to find w/the web at your disposal. As far as "thinner oil drainback" goes, 0W-40 doesn't drainback any faster than 10W-40 and may actually drainback less. But it sure as hell pumps more quickly cold......... |
|
| Author: | jcc [ Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
You mean like this one: and http://papers.sae.org/600190/: "Studies in laboratory engines equipped with radioactive piston rings show that wear is highest during a cold startup. Corrosion by condensed combustion products is responsible"  Interesting your comment that both mentioned oils drain the same rate but pump differently. Guess I have to look same place to find that explanation. |
|
| Author: | bob fisher [ Sat Feb 04, 2017 7:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | the right oil .obviously a slippery subject. sorry. sorry |
hello uncle dan and other top sages - appreciate your incisive, intelligent and colorful analysis. i know my above attempt at humor may get me expelled from this forum. actually agree with most of what you say. if i get a new car one day will probably follow the current tech innovations for oil instead of what we thought in 1960 and use full synthetic 5-30. have mostly used a conventional name brand 1030 oil in fla and nj changing it every 4-5k. have heard that synthetic in older high mileage engines leads to leaks because it cleans too well. is this correct in your opinion or another canard like the many oil myths you point out. like your example of the 1980 volare owners manual. now fords and mercs in the last 10 years call for 5-20 oil all the time. still using quaker 10 30 in my volvo 240 (which actually is a slant 4). my other question is , most new cars require the highest sae rating, sn . is this a reliable indicator of quality? sometimes i use conventional wal mart brand oil 10-30 or 5 -20 which has a sn rating. what think you? thanks tons bob f |
|
| Author: | Killer6 [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: You mean like this one:
Yes, You will, and Your opinion is tantamount to stating that water willand http://papers.sae.org/600190/: "Studies in laboratory engines equipped with radioactive piston rings show that wear is highest during a cold startup. Corrosion by condensed combustion products is responsible" Interesting your comment that both mentioned oils drain the same rate but pump differently. Guess I have to look same place to find that explanation. always freeze at 0degC with or w/o ethylene glycol.............. additives change the rate the oil viscocity changes, hence you have 0W-40 vs 15W-40....................... Ummmm...ring wear isn't the only concern or consideration on a cold start, esp -10deg, but given that.........there is nothing other than an engine heater that can minimize cold start combustion issues. If You think that somehow making the pistons/rings & cyl. walls wait for their lubrication longer whilst that is occurring is benign, well 
|
|
| Author: | jcc [ Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: Quote: You mean like this one:
Yes, You will, and Your opinion is tantamount to stating that water willand http://papers.sae.org/600190/: "Studies in laboratory engines equipped with radioactive piston rings show that wear is highest during a cold startup. Corrosion by condensed combustion products is responsible" Interesting your comment that both mentioned oils drain the same rate but pump differently. Guess I have to look same place to find that explanation. always freeze at 0degC with or w/o ethylene glycol.............. additives change the rate the oil viscocity changes, hence you have 0W-40 vs 15W-40....................... Ummmm...ring wear isn't the only concern or consideration on a cold start, esp -10deg, but given that.........there is nothing other than an engine heater that can minimize cold start combustion issues. If You think that somehow making the pistons/rings & cyl. walls wait for their lubrication longer whilst that is occurring is benign, well 
|
|
| Author: | SlantSixDan [ Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Two links worth reading: this one (the last section, "Starburst myth") and this one. |
|
| Author: | Reed [ Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The 351W in my 89 Ford is a 1984 vintage hydraulic flat tappet motor. I have never run anything more exotic than Valvoline 5W-30 synthetic oil in it. I regularly drive the van fully loaded on the highway at 65-80 MPH running at 3500-4500 RPM for 2-4 hour stretches. The flat tappet motor is still running strong and I have not had cam lobe failure. My 2¢ is that all the Zinc additive bru-ha-ha is just more snake-oil marketing hype. I have never run a ZDDP additive in any engine I own, or that my family owns, including slant six engines and other flat tappet cam engines. Zinc additive is like Lucas products- all they are good for is emptying your wallet. |
|
| Author: | Killer6 [ Sat Mar 04, 2017 6:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
So all the wear we are concerned about on "oil starved" start up is actually as per my link, really mostly a result of cyl wall corrosion from combustion by products, so we now move the "goalposts" to more minor wear areas? Looks to me like changing one's age old conclusions is not easy, IMO. [/quote]No sir, first You displayed the inability to understand how different rated multi-weight rated oils flow differently at different temps, it has been explained yet You still state You don't get it. Maybe SAE & API shouldn't rate oils at all, I mean oilzoil rite? It all came from the ground so it has to behave the same way, no need to fuss with stoopid numbers & such. Second YOU plopped a set of goal posts on the lawn declaring that ring/ cylinder wear was the only thing we need concern ourselves with, nobody else did, and it is NOT. These "minor wear areas" are responsible for 90% of the engine failures that didn't have roots in poor engineering today. Modern engines have cam phaser/actuators,chain tensioners,spray bars directing oil to the pistons/skirts, almost everything is DOHC now & most failures aren't ring wear related. The only time we have a smoker is when a skirt has failed, or the pan is full of trash from a failed component with the predictable consequences. Cam to cam chains have jumped & trashed 2 engines in the last week and a half, noisey start-ups have been an issue for multiple makers all specifying 0 or 5W-20 trying to maximize low hot viscosity for MPG & minimize friction loss. Of course they aren't slantys, so why worry then right? |
|
| Author: | Mr.6 [ Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Much engine wear occurs during a cold start the film oil has come off parts The time for oil pressure to build and re-coat moving parts will be speeder with synthetic . Still I have used straight 30 during dog days of summer . It's a classic oil for use in hot weather |
|
| Author: | coconuteater64 [ Thu Jun 15, 2017 11:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
After reading this site and bobistheoilguy extensively, I arrive at the conclusion: use what you feel comfortable with. I've used synthetic since 1980 in all my vehicles except those that were on their last legs when I got them. Some people swear by ZDDP levels and others argue against, and still others say use straight weight in old engines. The conclusion I come up with is that modern oils are far superior to what was available when our slants were new. To me, frequent oil changes with a quality filter are far superior to snake oils (like Slock 50 and others). |
|
| Author: | Mr.6 [ Fri Jun 16, 2017 3:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mobil One web sight says it has sufficient ZDDP has cold start superiority over any conventional oil . Recommendations on 30 weight container is use when temperature is above 60 . Even summer time (at night) in the north east 55 to 60 typical hot summer day is 80 to 100 . I figure even in the summer a 30 weight will have a smidgen more start up wear . Northern winter not even a consideration |
|
| Author: | jcc [ Fri Jun 16, 2017 6:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: So all the wear we are concerned about on "oil starved" start up is actually as per my link, really mostly a result of cyl wall corrosion from combustion by products, so we now move the "goalposts" to more minor wear areas? Looks to me like changing one's age old conclusions is not easy, IMO.
No sir, first You displayed the inability to understand how different rated multi-weight rated oils flow differently at different temps, it has been explained yet You still state You don't get it. Maybe SAE & API shouldn't rate oils at all, I mean oilzoil rite? It all came from the ground so it has to behave the same way, no need to fuss with stoopid numbers & such. Second YOU plopped a set of goal posts on the lawn declaring that ring/ cylinder wear was the only thing we need concern ourselves with, nobody else did, and it is NOT. These "minor wear areas" are responsible for 90% of the engine failures that didn't have roots in poor engineering today. Modern engines have cam phaser/actuators,chain tensioners,spray bars directing oil to the pistons/skirts, almost everything is DOHC now & most failures aren't ring wear related. The only time we have a smoker is when a skirt has failed, or the pan is full of trash from a failed component with the predictable consequences. Cam to cam chains have jumped & trashed 2 engines in the last week and a half, noisey start-ups have been an issue for multiple makers all specifying 0 or 5W-20 trying to maximize low hot viscosity for MPG & minimize friction loss. Of course they aren't slantys, so why worry then right?[/quote] Your implied understanding of my wording "minor wear areas" should be more related to areas having less wear relative to the greatest wear area, which I believe my link fairly indicates. Addressing the importance of the area wearing any amount, is likely much more subjective , ie each to their own, Your comment above in bold is incorrect, and I see little else you have referred to that changes or inspires me to rethink my position of what I have already commented on this thread. |
|
| Page 3 of 3 | All times are UTC-08:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|