Avi's Good Note

["Al Powell" <APOWELL@agcom.tamu.edu>]

Avi said:

> My point has been, is, and will be that like everything else synthetic oil
> is not without it's short comings, this "blanket" endorsement of synthetic
> by you and the list is not justified, with the exception of Corvette and
> Porsche, engine manufacturers have not jumped on the synthetic wagon. I
> have told you that I personally ran two tests of synthetic oil for an OEM
> engine manufacturer one test on a large diesel for 1000 HRS at rated load
> (160 BMEP, 1000BHP) and another test on a large natural gas engine for 1000
> HRS at rated load (160 BMEP, 1100BHP) the oil used were Tenneco 30W and
> Delvac 1 Mobil both synthetics, the results were:
> INCREASED wear on engine components, especially valve train
> double the oil consumption
> premature failures of seals
> We did not endorse the synthetic oil use in our engines.... the cost for
> the above tests was in excess of $100,000 in 80 dollars..

This is very interesting, and more specific than your previous post 
on the matter.  PLEASE speculate on the reason for the premature seal 
failure and the difference in wear.  This directly contradicts 
anything I have read elsewhere.  The WHY of this is important.  

Also, from the rest of your post, I don't get the idea that you feel 
that synthetics are INFERIOR to standard oils.  But based on your 
comment above, that should logically be the conclusion.  If I 
performed such tests with such a result, I certainly would not run 
the lesser lubricant in any long-term vehicle.

Can you please discuss the reasons for this apparent inconsistency?  
I'm asking for better information here....

> Now, I also have a lot of data I documented on my own VW, Chev,  Audi and
> Buick which confirm the above tests, I used Delvac 1 Mobil on my Jetta
> diesel for a period of 365,000 miles, in that period I replaced two engines
> and rebuilt those engine twice more, the car was driven at 95% highway
> miles and generally was treated very well,

Please add detail.  Tht totals 4 rebuilds in 365K miles, which seems 
VERY excessive for highway usage.  I would expect an engine to run a 
minimum 150K miles in such an application.  Are you suggesting that 
the poor engine durability was due to the synthetic?  Otherwise, I'm 
not sure of the reason for this comment.

> Why do you and the rest of the list refuse to accept Consumer magazine
> tests? nobody on the list (including me) can match the ability of consumer
> magazine testing ability and data crunching powers. Why do you believe and
> except the information from Mobil or Amsoil they are after all trying to
> sell you a product.....

In my case, I simply don't think taxi driving is ANYTHING like the 
driving I do.  I am aware that oil consumption, wear on parts, and 
longevity of accessories can vary depending on the RPM range used, 
the driving pattern in terms of hours driven vs. hours idling, 
consistent engine speeds, and other factors.  

Without a control group comparison, I simply will NOT buy Consumer 
Reports' oil tests.  They had no control group, so I don't buy it.  I 
also, like many people, don't readily accept information which runs 
contrary to my belief set and past experience (in learning theory, 
this is called the theory of Constructionism..PhD warning here..).  
CR's results do not fit my construct of reality, so they have to do a 
better, more thorough job of documentation in order to convince me.  
So do you.  That's fair, isn't it?

> Take with a VERY large grain of salt the information supplied by chemical
> engineers, they are the ones developing the synthetic oils after
> all....listen to the OEM ....

I think this is realistic advice.  But what I know, based on my 
experience and that of other synthetic users, reinforces the 
information provided by the manufacturers.  Chevrolet, Porsche and 
BMW must also have sound reasons for REQUIRING synthetics over 
petroleum oils.  That ALSO reinforces my construct of reality, which 
says that synthetics to have some advantages which apply to my style 
of driving.  I have ONE dissenting vote - yours.  And while you speak 
as if you have a good background, I find that some details are 
lacking in your posts.  If that is due to proprietary information 
which you are not in a position to disclose, I can understand that - 
but I don't know the story yet.
 
> There is nothing I can do to change your mind about using synthetics and I
> agree "they have there place" but, in most cases they are not needed, the
> quality of oil today is extremely high, use a good oil, change your oil
> regularly and that's all you need to do... synthetic oil IS NOT going to
> supply you with any extra margin of security or prolong your engine life. 

Let's be specific here.  You cay that "In most cases they are not 
needed."  Please, in what cases ARE they needed?  What is your 
recommendation FOR their use??

> This is what synthetic will do for you:
> start easier in the winter,
> increased performance (although you won't notice much),good
> increased RPM (although you might not notice),good
> longer change intervals (10K is usually OK),good
> lifters might sound less noisy, good

All of these agree with what I understand to be the truth. The BUT is 
what is missing here.  As in, "BUT - since synthetics make engines 
prone to early seal failure and increased engine wear, my 
recommendation is...........".  I am attempting to quote your first 
paragraph.  Is my understanding accurate or not??  If accurate, what 
is your recommendation for their use?

> The std. oils performance is extremely close to synthetics (read some of 
> the literature's, if you don't have it I have some)...
> Conclusion (mine), no need for synthetics, regular oils are very good.
> synthetics should be used in extreme cases read gear box (Audi), -30F
> start-ups, long intervals of oil change desired and a few others...

Avi, I absolutely agree that standard oil IS very good.  I know of 
many users who have driven hundreds of thousands of miles using it 
without major engine trouble.  I have been driving since the days 
when jut having DETERGENT qualities in oil was a big advance!! My 
1958 Fiat Spyder comes from an era in which the oils were NON 
detergent.  Does that mean I would run a non-detergent oil in it?  
Not on your life!!  I run a high betergent oil and appreciate the 
fact that the engine does not get sludged up.  

But with engine rebuilds running $1500 and up, I consider buying just 
a LITTLE edge in engine longevity worth the investment in synthetics. 
And from what I know and understand, I expect to gain the following 
advantages from using synthetics:

1)  More protection when starting the engine and oil pressure is low. 
I believe that synthetics provide better residual lubrication 
qualities during start-up, before oil pressure rises.

2)  More protection against oil caking in the turbo bushings on my 
cars.  I believe that synthetics are less prone to burning.coking on 
the bushings in the turbos after the engines are shut down.

3)  More protection against oil jelling if I or another driver ever 
overheat the engine and cannot shut it off immediately.

4)  Extended oil change intervals, because it tends to maintain 
accurate viscosity longer than standard oil, and because I use 
Amsoil's filters, which I believe to be superior in filtration to 
conventional filters, including the Audi models.

I do not believe that I am gaining a world-beating advantage.  I do 
believe that I am getting an edge, and I'm willing to pay more per 
quart to get it.

I welcome comments to the contrary, when they are phrased in logical 
and well-reasoned fashion, and complete in content.  You seem like a 
sharp guy.  Lets have more detail!

*.......................................................*
Al Powell, Ph.D.                 Voice:  409/845-2807
107 Reed McDonald Bldg.          Fax:    409/862-1202
College Station, TX 77843      
Http://agcomwww.tamu.edu/agcom/satellit/alpage.htm
*.......................................................*