I don't think there is "bad" dino as long as it meets current specs. Regular change intervals are the most important. There are other good filters out there too. I have used NAPA gold/Wix filters on lots of vehicles. They are good high quality filters.

None of this is to say that there are not advantages to running a good synthetic. What it takes though genrally is more work than most people want to go through or too large a leap of faith. With a quality synthetic and good filter you can more than double your oil change interval and actually save money. To get there though you need to do oil analysis to determine when you oil has actually used up its additive package or is contaminated. Most people dont want to go through the trouble of oil analysis, others can't stomach a 10-15k mile change interval. Truth be known, many over the road trucks go 250k miles on the same oil, I have even heard of 500k intervals. They change filters and that is about it. Heck, I used to do 10k intervals on a Dodge Cummins with dino. That was well documented as safe.

Oil talk always gets heated. There is no one right way, or one right product. I still don't think just "feeling good" about what you use is a good measure, but to each his own.

 

No big meany I don't have a problem with things being explained, just not shoved down our throats. There are ways to say things then there are ways that just get people angry as you have seen here on other posts. Most of the information you say is usually correct its just your delivery. We have gotten along for quite a few years just explaining not bashing,,,try it you may like it.

 

Nahh, to old to change. Besides a little extra blood pressure every now and then is good for ya.

I really think the root of the problem for most people is ego. Nobody likes being told they may be wrong, or have been doing things wrong for a long time. Instead of being willing to listen and learn, they just bail out. Less ego damage that way.

Most of it should also be taken MUCH more lightly. If I offend you that badly, you might want to consider the source and laugh it off.

This is all beside the fact that the post I think we are talking about was in response to one that really offered nothing to the conversation. "Because I have been using these products for years they must be good." Wasn't that the premis? With nothing else to back it up? I really had to read it and say, who cares? It had already been pretty well supported that the oil in question was probably not what it claimed to be. Then someone comes in with a post like that? I couldn't help myself, and I am clearly not nearly as compassionate as you, oh well.

 

We still have to remember that the slam on Mobil1 is from an AMSOIL source and the original article was written in 2000 by C&D magazine.

I've been using Mobil1 Extended performance for many years. I change the oil every 12000 miles or annually which is more often than Mobil recommends. The guarrantee protection for 15K miles.

I can get a 5 qt container at wally world for $26. I spend under $40 per year on engine oil and filters per vehicle. Someone, anyone, please tell me how that's a rip off? I have followed this regimine for over 15 years and have never experienced a failure of any kind.

BTW, what is the price per quart of Amsoil and the special filtration required?

I will continue to confidently waste $40 per year to ensure that my vehicles have the best protection for the price.

To the OP, I would recommend using Mobil1. As previously mentioned, your engine is perhaps at half life with proper care.

Tim

 

Almost as good as a religous debate eh? Just keep it respectful folks.

 

I vote Castrol GTX

In the early 90's I was working for a Company called UMA Engerinering as a shop forman when a salesman comes in to sell me this additive an Amsoil product saying it was the best thing since sliced bread

He had a Timkin (spelling) bearing tester with him which is a leaver and a fulcrum that on one end hanges weights the other end is placed against a roller bearing spinning on an electric motor.
You place one drop of oil on the spinning bearing and add weights on the other end until the bearing fails we tryed all kinds of oils and his product was very impressive i believe we got it to 12 lbs before the bearing failed with his oil ( most brands failed under 10 lbs) I then asked if we could test the oil in my '80 bronco he said sure so i pulled the dipstick and place a drop off it onto the bearing and it took 16 lbs to smoke it the poor guy did not know what to say he wanted to try again and same out come. Needless to say I have used Castrol GTX in every vehicle I have owned since.

1977 F-250 460 250000 miles pures like a kitten
1975 Brickin 351w 65000 miles Fast
1980 Bronco 351 C/Mod 280000 miles just like the day i got her at 100000
2004 F-350 6.0l Diesel 100000 miles always overloaded still my work truck
2006 expedition 5.4 L 60000 miles just got this one we'll see


Great site Cheers
-R-

 

Wonderful story ... but Ams has never sold an additive for oil & they have never used the 1 armed bandit to demonstrate anything.

 

Still waiting for an answer from those who claim Amsoil is the best. I've never seen it on a store shelf so it must be sold by an idependant distributor.

Tim

 

Tim,

You are trying to take the discussion in a direction that was never intended. NOBODY here is trying to compare M1 and Amsoil.

There are tests out there, not Amsoils, that show M1 performs worse than DINO oil. I believe, and will check, Castrol dino based oil outperforms M1.

It isn't that you are getting a full synthetic for a dino price and getting full synthetic performance. You are getting a semi synthetic for a semi synthetic price and getting dino performance that you can get for less.

BTW, you can buy buy Amsoils Ea filters, just a regular spin on filter, and extend your intervals. You are not required to use the full blown filtration systems, but you can because it is offered as a higher yet level of performance.

Do you use oil analysis to check your oils performance or just change based on the advertising?

 

I'm gonna throw a monkey wrench in all of this oil analysis business. What does an oil analysis cost you (including shipping the sample to the lab)?
JL

 

Here's an article from Car Craft comparing regular and synthetic oils.
Synthetic Versus Conventional Oil- Car Craft Magazine

Over the years, Car Craft has tested many different types of engine components. A common theme underlying many of these tests is that bigger is not necessarily better, especially on the street. But just as many continue to believe in rad cams and giant carbs, traditional, thick, single-viscosity oils still have a strong following among car-crafting traditionalists.

Of course, high-viscosity oils don't flow well at low temperatures. In the old days, guys living in cold climates put in a thinner oil for the winter with a "W" or cold temperature-viscosity rating. Although they poured better at low temperatures, straight-viscosity "W" oils, in turn, didn't do a good job of protecting high-performance engines once they reached normal operating temperatures, so they weren't recommended for sustained high-speed driving. The oil industry developed "all-season" multiviscosity oils to solve the problem, but some of the early products didn't hold up under heavy-duty operating conditions, tainting the reputation of multiviscosity lubricants among many Car Crafters to this day.

Yet today's modern oils are vastly improved over those of 20 years ago. For oils that meet the current "SJ" service designation, viscosity breakdown is no longer a significant problem, thanks to modern formulation technologies and viscosity enhancers. Auto manufacturers have also redesigned their engines for tighter clearances and instituted precision machining techniques that take advantage of thinner oil to deliver improved fuel economy through reduced friction.

Like the OEMs, racers have discovered that friction reductions plus precision tight clearances yield greater efficiency and more power. Racers also know that most engine wear occurs at start-up, so it's critical that engine parts receive proper lubrication as soon as possible--hence the need for an initially thinner, so-called "winter" viscosity. Today, few racers run a single-viscosity motor oil except nitro-burners. According to 76 Lubricants, most NASCAR teams use the really thin stuff during qualifying, moving up to 20W-50 during the long race (although it's rumored some teams may use the extreme cold-weather thin oils all the time, but don't want to admit to their latest performance "trick").



Synthetic oils, pioneered in the '70s by Mobil and now available from most major oil companies, take the all-season, multiviscosity approach to the outer limits. Unlike traditional mineral oils that are produced by distillation and further refining of existing crude oil stock, synthetic lubricants are made through chemical reactions. These new oils aren't synthetic or artificial in the sense that they're manufactured out of whole cloth--they still have the same natural ingredients found in "real" oil. But in a synthetic lubricant, these ingredients are recombined like a Lego set to yield synthesized-hydrocarbon molecular chains with desirable characteristics and uniformity not found in even the highest-quality traditional motor oils. Typically, the best synthetic oils use a combination of up to three different synthetic base fluids--polyalphaolefin (PAO), synthetic esters, and alkylated aromatics.

Because a synthetic oil's molecules are much more consistent in size and shape, they are better able to withstand extreme engine temperatures. By contrast, the unstable molecules in conventional oil can easily vaporize or oxidize in extreme heat. Mobil 1 synthetic is said to be capable of protecting engines "at well over 400 degrees F"; in the real world, most racers have no problem running synthetics up to 290 degrees F under prolonged use, but they get really jumpy when a conventional exceeds 270 degrees F.

Because a synthetic oil is chemically produced, there are no contaminants in the oil. By contrast, conventional oils contain small amounts of sulfur, wax, and asphaltic material that can promote detonation as well as varnish and sludge buildup. With no wax, synthetics will flow at much lower temperatures than conventional oils. In fact, synthetic oils are now available with viscosity ratings as low as 0W-30, as in Mobil 1's new Tri-Synthetic blend or Castrol Formula SLX. These oils flow more than seven times faster than a conventional 5W-30 motor oil during initial start-up, yet at normal operating temperatures act like a regular Grade 30 oil.

An 0W-30 synthetic oil is capable of pumping easily at -62 degrees F and flowing at even lower temperatures. Conventional oils are essentially frozen solid at that temperature, so there's simply no conventional equivalent to this new grade. There are 5W-30 conventional and synthetic oils, but even here, the synthetic has a real-world advantage: Mobil 1's 5W-30 will pump at -58-degrees F, compared to about -35-degrees F for a conventional oil.



But claims and talk are cheap, so Car Craft had Westech Performance run some of the new Mobil 1 0W-30 in Ford's prototype 392 small-block stroker crate engine. The Mobil 1 was compared to the generic (and recommended for this engine) 20W-50 factory-fill conventional oil, as well as 10W-30 conventional oil. All tests began with the oil temperature stabilized at 210 degrees F. The engine ran from 3,300-6,200 rpm, and several runs were made for each oil to ensure repeatability.

In terms of peak numbers, we found that the engine gained nearly 7 hp with the thinner conventional oil, and was up nearly 10 hp with the synthetic. No peak torque gains were observed by changing from 20W-50 to 10W-30 conventional; however, the synthetic was up 15 lb-ft of torque at the peak. Looking at average numbers helps explain where the gains occurred--both the thinner conventional and synthetic oils broadened the torque and power bands overall, but the thin Mobil 1 showed the greatest improvement under 4,700 rpm, indicating that the thinner oil provides less initial drag for the engine to overcome.

However, thinner oil also translates to lower oil pressure: The 0W-30 oil developed 10 psi less than the baseline 20W-50. Only 46 psi was on tap at 6,200 rpm--kind of shaky as most gearheads like to see at least 10 psi per 1,000 rpm. Still, the engine ran OK, and the bearings looked fine on teardown, seemingly verifying synthetic manufacturers' claims that their products' greater shear strength more than makes up for lower viscosity. Is 10 hp and 15 lb-ft worth paying two to four times more for a quart of oil? Or the potential for extended engine life? You be the judge.

 

7-12 dollars depending on the vendor.

 

That's including shipping the sample?
JL

 

Yes.

Typically you just call them up, pay, they send you a sample kit, you put a few ounces in it and send it back pre-paid, you just pay the one charge.

 

Blackstone's website is showing $22.50.
Either way, you're sending in $7-22 for them to tell you how long you can run your oil.
MC 5w20 or 5w30 is only $2.50/qt here,and an FL-820S is $5.00
So, for approx $20, I can change the oil and have a fresh crankcase fill and KNOW for 100% certain that the oil is good.
Even if I'm able to stretch it out to 10K miles by checking the oil with the analysis,I'm still breaking even (at Blackstone's listed cost) if I were to just change it at 5K miles and not do an analysis.
JL