A 6637 and one of them covers from ....hum.....what's that guy's name?

Would be a good improvement over that K&N.

 

This I read in a trucker magazine at a truck stop. The trcuk was a semi-tractor and he had a cummins engine in it. Article stated 1,000,000 miles and still no change required per oil analysis. He did change filters at regular intervals based on the odometer and added oil to makeup what he lost from the filter changes.

 

I got to thinking about oci's last nite at 3:00 am.

Consider this:

According to the National Transit Census there were 251 million vehicles in the US in 2006 ( that's passenger cars, light trucks, suv's) probably more now.

Each one travels about 12K-15K per year according to a source I found. Let's say 10,000 for ease of calculation.

251,000,000
X10,000=
_________________
2,510,000,000,000 Thats 2.51 TRILLION miles
Say everyone changes their oil every 5000 miles

Thats 500,000,000 oil changes... twice a year... that's 1,000,000,000 One BILLION oil changes....per year.
Say each oil change is 8 quarts (2 gallons) for the sake of this argument. Thats 2,000,000,000 gallons 2 BILLION!!! a year ...of dino oil...out the ground

Now say we were able to get 25,000 miles on syn.. that's a savings of 80%
80% of 2 billion is 1.6 million, if there's 50 (about) gallons in a barrel, about 32,000 barrels. not out of the ground.

1.6 million gallons is 6.4 million quarts at say $3.00 qt. is about 20 million dollars not spent.

And that doesn't count Long-hauls, busses trains, boats, planes... just cars and light trucks.

Sorry...idle hands

Still don't know for sure if it's true or safe but it sure is something to think about.

I might have missed a few comma's in those calc's, but still something to think about.

 

Have you met Gene

 

No not yet

 

The actual impact on crude is much, much larger than you've estimated. According to traditional Amoco training materials, below is the typical breakdown for lubricant production rates from barrels of crude.

A typical barrel of crude is only 42 gallons.

Each barrel of crude typically produces the following product quantities:
18.5 gallons of gasoline
10.5 gallons of diesel fuel and distillates
4.25 gallons of jet fuel
3.5 gallons of miscellaneous materials
2 gallons of heavy residues
1.5 gallons of asphalt
1 gallon of petrochemicals
0.5 gallons of lubricants (some of which are greases, hydraulic oils, gear oils, etc.)
0.25 gallons of kerosene


So... first off... correct your 50 gallons barrels to 42 gallon barrels to get an actual barrel count for lubricants:

32,000 x 50 / 42 = 38,095 barrels of lubricants

38,095 barrels of lubricants x (42 gallons crude) / (0.5 gallons lubricants) = 3,200,000 barrels of crude

Given that the 0.5 gallon of lubricants actually includes greases, hydraulic oils, gear oils, etc, the actual number of barrels required to produce the quantity of motor oil you quoted may be even HIGHER than 3.2 million barrels. However, since of synthetic oils come from vegetable and aniumal fat sources, the use of 3.2 million barrels is probably good enough for our "back of the napkin" calculations in this thread.

 

[Given that the 0.5 gallon of lubricants actually includes greases, hydraulic oils, gear oils, etc, the actual number of barrels required to produce the quantity of motor oil you quoted may be even HIGHER than 3.2 million barrels. However, since of synthetic oils come from vegetable and aniumal fat sources, the use of 3.2 million barrels is probably good enough for our "back of the napkin" calculations in this thread.[/quote]

WOW!!! Thats mind blowing!! Pretty good arguement for syn, assuming it works as advertised.

Especially since VERY little Pennz or Quaker State comes from PA. (or Texas) any more, or Valvoline, Chevron or Shell for that matter.

 

I looked back at my first assumption and if close and you get less than .5 gallons from a barrel you would need over 4 BILLION barrels of oil a year to produce enough lube oil to service the 251 million autos in the US (in 2006) in a year. at 500 mi oci.

I need to find a J O B !!!

 

oops!! read 5000 mi. oci

 

[quote=bc2sv;7992700...

WOW!!! Thats mind blowing!! Pretty good arguement for syn, assuming it works as advertised.

...[/quote]

The synthetics can work as well as advertised, but not all do. Like I mentioned before, it all depends on the types, quantities, and qualities of the additive packages being used.

Whether or not it's a good idea for your particular vehicle also depends on the condition of the engine. If it's an old leaker, you don't want the more expensive synthetics leaking on the ground, and you're better off sticking with the cheaper dino oils and changing more often.

 

Pete,
I just found a thread called Amsoil Anomoly started 12/20/06 (57 pages, 860 some posts) Sorry, didn't mean to bring up a sore subject!!!lol Great read tho!

 

I started to recommend that thread earlier, but like you, didn;t want to over-elevate the issue beyond your questions. There is a lot of info to wade through in that thread, and perhaps a little "weeding out" along the way, too.

I don't think you need to apologize for anything. Honest questions. It can sometimes get a little heated, though. Generally speaking, most of us have learned how to just sort of answer the questions simply and straight forwardly and we can often avoid any impropriety, offense, or any other kind of inflammatory actions.

 

Point well taken. I'm just trying to learn. Off the subject, but I'm reading mixed reviews about the 203*therm and see you have it. I bought one but haven't installed it yet. Does it seem to be worthwhile? In your opinion? I get from your posts you are or have an engineering background. Seems to make sense to me, but I'm just a carpenter. Gets real cold here in SE. Idaho.

 

Kudos to you for searching thigns out proactively and trying to learn as much as possible. In my opinion, it's the best approach to making informed decisions. Accordingly, it's hard to keep my 23 years as a chemical engineer (all in large manufacturing plants) from affecting how I think and talk about things.

To your question, though... I personally have conlcuded that the benefit of the 203° stat is overstated, though it does stand on a valid foundation in real physics and engeering design. Regardless, we're really only talking about 8°F.

One thing I did not foresee or even see addressed by the "advertisers" and supporters of the 203° stat is that it will NOT help your transmission fluid temps because it will reduce the amount of cooling the fluid can see in the bottom of the radiator prior to going to the tranny cooler. Although I believe that the impact of a slightly higher radiator coolant temp won't have much impact on your engine's performance, the domino affect on the tranny fluids is worth considering. Every 10° increase in tranny fluid temp will cut that fluid's life in half and also decrease the tranny life. Granted, an 8° increase in radiator fluid will not necessarily translate into the same amount of increase in tranny fluid temps, but it won't HELP, for sure.

Since I don't have a tranny temp gauge in place right now, I cannot speak to the actual differences in my own truck. That might be worthy of starting a new thread, though, just to survey others in FTE who do have the gauges and can speak to what they've seen.

Eventually, I'll probably replace my 203° stat with a standard 195° stat, but I'm so far away from pushing the limits on my engine and I simply don't have the extra cash to toss at it right now.

 

Can we still get 195* stats? They put a 192* in mine back when I first bought the truck. It was stuck open and took FOREVER to warm up. Oddly enough, the dealer replaced the sending unit, too. Gotta love the dealer techs...