I am thinking of adding Amsoil synthetic oil to my 1991 Ford Ranger 3 L, 2 wheel drive engine and transmission. Has anyone done this? Have you noticed any benefit?

 

Hello, welcome to FTE!

You don't say how many miles you have on your truck, but it doesn't matter....switching to Amsoil will do nothing to improve the performance and/or add to the longevity of your 1991 Ranger.

 

I put Mobil1 in both my Ranger, and my Miata. I put Redline synthetic in the tranny on my Miata.

I've only noticed two differences. The Miata shifts a little better with the Redline in the tranny, and the Ranger starts much easier in the extreme cold with the synthetic. (the Miata is stored in the winter).

Synthetic won't really give you more power. It probably won't give you better gas mileage. It may, or may not, increase the life of your engine. It probably is a little more forgiving if you go over on your mileage between changes.

Unless you live in an area prone to extreme cold, or you tend to forget to do oil changes, there's no "gotta have it" reason to go synthetic. It won't hurt, but it may not be a big help either. Sticking to a regular maintenance schedule is more important than the oil you choose.

I like Mobil1, and I'll keep using it. But be skeptical of anyone who tells you that a product will work miracles for your truck... they're probably more concerned about selling you something than anything else.

 

I'd have to agree with jase71's view of the "dino oil verses syntetic oil" issue.

I've been using Mobil1 oil in my Ranger the past few oil changes and I have no complaints with it, but I'll be going back to dino oil soon (Castrol GTX) because I don't do extended oil drains and I see NO other reason to go with a synthetic motor oil. (M1 you can find on the shelf anywhere, as opposed to the more expensive Amsoil, and M1 comes with no marketing baloney).

I do think that synthetic fluids are better suited to transmission applications. I run Mobil1 ATF in my '97 Taurus GL tranny (AX4S) and I even use Redline ATF in my '94 Taurus SHO, which actually has the manual MTX 5-Sp. tranny. Even my Ranger has a semi-synthetic ATF (Castrol Mercon-V) in the tranny.

The reason I feel synthetics are a better bet in transmissions is because trannies generate more heat (especially the automatics) and the fluid gets changed much less often than motor oil does.

 

I have to say that Rockledge and I have discussed the advantages of synthetics and I can see where he's coming from but I do have a different take on synthetics.

First extended oil drains are something I really like. I have better things to do than to change my oil and then there's the disposal of that oil and filter. The fewer times I have to do this the better so long as I don't compromise the protection of the engine. I am using SynLube lubricants which reduce oil-related maintenance to almost nothing during the life of the vehicle while providing excellent protection. Lubrication technology has advanced to the point where "extended drains" are well within the capacity of synthetics. Doubling the traditional replacement interval of 3K miles is not taking any kind of a chance.

Second, I have converted my Focus SVT (I'm still waiting for a suitable Ranger to become available.) to synthetics as soon as I got it. This included the gear box and power steering as well as the motor oil. Currently, I have about 9K miles and I have consistantly gotten better mileage than projected by the OEM. Specifically, this car is rated at 21/25. Around town, I get right at 26 MPG (with RFG gas) and out on the road, about 30-31 with RFG fuel and 31-32 with standard premium. This, I believe is significantly better mileage. In fairness, I also run a higher tire pressure than recommended because I get better handling in addition to better mileage.

 

True, what jase says. I consider my Ranger to be my dog. Plain old food won't do for my dog. I use Mobil 1. But there's no reason except for my feelings.

 

I have run synthetic oil (Mobil 1) in ALL my cars for 20 years.
My 2001 Ranger got it at the first oil change. Several Honda Accords, the Ford Motorhome and an old VW got synthetic.
All got better mileage after switching over. Not a lot...., but at least 1 mpg consistently.
Those vehicles that I kept long enough have given faithful service and run as they did new, despite the occassional 10K oil change interval.
Typically I change oil at 7500 miles or so...but sometimes I forget....or don't notice (like the wife's car that I don't drive much).
Sure ... I could be more organized and diligent with 7500 mile intervals, but the truth is I'm just not. And I truly believe that FULL synthetic oils should be able to go at least 10K miles if not farther between changes.
I have not tried any synthetic tranny or differential fluids though have always wanted to.
My '93 Accord has 176,000 miles and runs like a top. No leaks, no drips and burns about a quart of olil in 4000 miles driving 70-75 mph on the freeway routinely.
Changing oil every 3K miles is a waste of my time and money and a waste of oil...IMHO.

-Cajun

 

i had a 88 mercury topaz w/50k miles on it and made the switch to synthetic. after about 3000 miles i needed to add a quart, which was never necessary before the switch. i'm sticken to the all natural stuff for my 92 ranger. if i had a newer high performance vehicle i may use synthetic, but for an olf 4 banger its a waste of money(20 bucks a change vs 8 doen it myself)

 

I've been led to believe that the best way to get the most out of synthetic motor oil use is to change the filter only at 3K to 5K intervals and add one quart (or however much is required to top off) and repeat until the lubricant is visibly dirty/contaminated or 12K to 15K whichever comes first and change the lube at that time. I would be very interested to hear others' opinions on this.
Gene

 

I recently posted my opinion on the very same subject in another thread from the Oil & Lube Forum: This is the thread: Do we really need to change oil?

 

my 94 ranger 2.3 always had synthetic oil and it runs decent with 387,000 miles! could be the oil could just be its a ford!

 

I've been driving for nearly 40 years and haven't got that kind of mileage for all my vehicles put together.

I think you can keep an engine in good shape for that long by either taking the dino oil (especially Group III petroleum) route or the synthetic path. The big factor is replacement intervals and usage severity. I wouldn't use standard dino oil more than 3K miles but a real synthetic is good for at least double that! Also, it seems a like some folks here like to scrimp on the oil filter or at least don't pay much attention to it. Using a good filter is extremely important so that the engine gets a steady flow of clean oil. Not every filter can do that. A restricted flow will take years off an engine's life.

Unfortunately picking a good synthetic oil is tricky because "synthetic" is a marketing term and can be defined as the manufacturer decides. Brands like Castrol Syntec take advantage of this to sell petroleum lubricants at real synthetic lube prices. It's not bad stuff but most people don't get what they think they're paying for and that's not right. Amsoil, from what I've heard is pretty good stuff (Amsoil 2000 0W30, specifically). Their XL-7500 line is Group III petroleum.

Getting back to the basic question of whether synthetics yield a definite benefit, I think the answer is YES!!! For those who want the best, go with SynLube. I don't rep for them, I just think their stuff is the best. Although most people think SynLube is too good to be true and is therefore "snake oil", it isn't. I've got about 27K miles of experiences with this true synthetic (9K on my current car) and I'm projecting about 90-95K miles before it will need to be replaced. On a per mile basis, it is definitely cheaper and no waste oil is generated (except during filter replacements every 2-3 years). What I've come to believe is that lube technology has progressed beyond the 3K replacement interval or even the 10K interval and SynLube takes advantage of this. How good is it? As I pointed out in my previous post, during my trip, I was getting 30-31 on RFG fuel when the EPA mileage rating is for 25 MPG. Another indication is oil consumption: about 3 oz. over 9K miles.

 

I can't say that I've noticed any increased performance or mileage using Synthetic, but its kinda like Ford Tradesman said, I only feed it the best. Kind of a makes me feel good having it in there thing and if for some reason I would happen to over heat I know that the synthetic will still help protect when the dino will start breaking down. I've also noticed that it uses almost no oil with synthetic where with dino I was adding a quart about halfway between oil changes.

 

Lots of good observations & comments made. I'm surprised this topic kept going as far as it did, since it probably belongs in the lubrication forum. The ONE VERY IMPORTANT THING TO KNOW AND REMEMBER IS ... EXTREME TEMPERATURES! Synthetics flow easier in bitter cold, and resist breakdown very well in extreme heat. Thus, turbos benefit greatly from synthetics, and, vehicles driven in extremely bitter cold climates benefit. The rest is the icing on the cake.

 

Hi all,
My father-in-law had very positive results religiously changing the oil in his older vehicles every 3k mi . The only time that he ever went to synthetic lube was when he was told that it was suppose to stop an engine from smoking (Were talking about vehicles w/ over 300k mi here!) All view-points Welcome! There are pros +cons to everything!
_____________________________________________
My Beastie:
90 Ranger 2.3L EFI 2wd Mazda < with many new parts!