When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I have a friend with a supercharged 3.8 pontiac grand prix that has run Mobil 1 since new with 400,000 miles on the engine and still going strong!
Ah, the old "buddy" claim, huh? 400,000 miles and still going strong, yeah right! Nothing's been overhauled, nothing's been replaced? If it had, then your count goes back to zero. I'm guessing you are just trying to make a joke. But if you are serious, then sorry but I gotta call on that one. Your buddy is obviously yanking your chain and having a good laugh at your expense. Just stop and think about what you are saying. Insurance companies have said that putting 12,000 miles a year on a car is the national average, but of course "your results may vary". If your "buddy" put that many miles on the car each year, it would take him 33 years to put on 400,000 miles. How many people ever keep a car that long? And that 6 banger Pontiac is certainly no collector car. Not to mention the fact that actual collector cars don't usually see all that many miles. So, it all sounds incredibly bogus, like finding a brand new '57 BelAir in some long lost warehouse. Yeah, that'll happen.......
Well the horse is dead so I won't kick it, but I have a question no one seems to have addressed.
I was told (or heard) that synthetic oil was sooo slipery that when used on a vehicle that sat for a month or longer without being started, the oil would literally slid off the cam as well as other parts). This creates an ugly environment for starting the engine...dry for a few seconds.
Any thuth to this?
BTW I do use synthetic in my daily driver and Diesil in my Vett (for the lifters)
I know for a fact that this is NOT true. I personally witnessed the dismantling of a series of aircraft engines (which use very similar synthetic oil to cars) after three years of dead storage and there was as much residual oil on the surfaces as an engine that had been stopped for 24 hours. Amazing the myths that are out there.
By the way- the amount of residual oil was comparable to that left by conventional lubricants under similar circumstances.
I honestly feel, though, that the 200,000 mile engine MAY have gone 250,000 if it had a a synthetic rather than a conventional oil based on the science and data available. Conclusive, no but an extrapolation based on real world experience, racing history, and data available.
You feel, but have no proof and are making an extrapolation nonethless. OK, you've convinced me.
St. Jude Donor '05-'06,'11,'13-'14,'16,'18,'19,'24, '25
Mike you ever took an old chvey SB apart that had so much parafins left in the head from the oil that the rear return holes were plugged? Down here in the south this was a major issue on engines with a few miles on them. You ever try and clean the ring groves on an engine that had a few miles on it during a rebuild?
No ill intent here, just a good debate
Mike works in the aircraft industry and they seem to have some very reliable equipment in that industry, they have deffinantly done there home work. I remember reading that this is the industry synthetics were developed for, in the aircraft industry.
Mike you ever took an old chvey SB apart that had so much parafins left in the head from the oil that the rear return holes were plugged? Down here in the south this was a major issue on engines with a few miles on them. You ever try and clean the ring groves on an engine that had a few miles on it during a rebuild?
No ill intent here, just a good debate
Mike works in the aircraft industry and they seem to have some very reliable equipment in that industry, they have deffinantly done there home work. I remember reading that this is the industry synthetics were developed for, in the aircraft industry.
Neal
Yes, I've seen engines come apart that were in horrendous shape both in the automotive and aviation field. All were subject to neglect from the quality and quantity of maintenance point of view. Not much difference between dino and synthetic oils though.
St. Jude Donor '05-'06,'11,'13-'14,'16,'18,'19,'24, '25
Mike, I will agree that maybe a group I, II or III synthetic oil may leave impurities but they just are not there with the group IV and V base oils. And the cleaning properties of the group IV and V oils are much better than the lower groups.
Are you saying that you have seen no benefit at all to using synthetics or are you saying that with good maintenance regular oils will do the job?
Maybe we need to define synthetic when we have these discussions, there may be some benefits using group I,II and III base oils but I don't consider them true synthetics. The benefits of true synthetics are there in being able to withstand higher temps before breaking down, the volatility rate of true synthetics is half of what standard oil is, and there cleaning properties are better, these are just a few of the benefits.
Everyone has to ask them selves if the added benefits are worth the extra cost.
Are you saying that you have seen no benefit at all to using synthetics or are you saying that with good maintenance regular oils will do the job?
With regular mtce, dino oil will the job- and more.
Synthetics oils were developed for gas turbine engines to address a particular technical issue (nothing to do with lubrication BTW). This issue does not exist on most conventional piston engines, certainly not SBC or BBC engines, so synthetics are the perfect solution for something that's not broken.
The audio equivalent is developing speakers that can faithfully reproduce a 50kHz signal, whereas humans can't hear anything above 20kHz.
We know that smaller molecules will fill in holes better and have fewer ridges (making it slippery). There should also be fewer body forces on them to prevent them from doing their job.
What about extreme conditions? What does oil turn to in cold weather -- jello! And it breaks down in extreme heat. Synthetic is better in both cases due to the additives. There is hard data out there that 40% of engine wear is caused by cold starts.
Can you provide any explanaion as to why synthetic wouldn't decrease wear?
Also, Brian at SKSpeed (who's been testing everything for 40 years, said Royal Purple is better for engines, but no better for gear boxes). He built my transmission, so I trust his tests and don't mind $7/quart.
My engine actually got quieter the first time I put it in. I didn't like that part.
My engine actually got quieter the first time I put it in. I didn't like that part.
Thats funny
Other than certain early development stage one synthetics penetrating seals and gaskets therefore creating leaks, IMO the argument is mute.......... kinda like comparing leather to kevlar for MC riding protection........... they both work but one would have to have never ridden on two wheels not to know and appreciate the difference.
Can you provide any explanaion as to why synthetic wouldn't decrease wear?
GM built 90 million SBCs. How come there aren't hundreds of thousands of examples of engines that lasted longer (extended overhaul period) by using synthetic oils?
People can argue theory all they want. Show me proof.