Do you realize how many company vehicles run 200,000 to 300,000 miles on quick lube oil changes. They never see synthetics. I am just saying SN is a good certification. I just don't think conventional oil should be looked at as to cheap for synthetic. I am not a long run on oil changes. 5000 miles would be the max for me. Therefore people like me would be fine with just about any oil. I seen so many posts on here saying go synthetic. That cold flow thing is getting wore out, honestly unless you live in Alaska that is never going to a issue. I lived in PA for 30 years, seen my share of way below 0. Never was oil a issue, fuel yes. Oil- never.
Got the oil picked for the new rig...Valvoline WB
- Thread starter Doublehaul
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Jimmy9190
Originally Posted By: spasm3
If you like valvoline, watch for napa conventional and napa synthetic. Goes on sale a few times a year.
+1 VWB is a great oil. Napa has it on sale now thru Feb. 29th for $3.59 a quart. That is even cheaper than the quart price at Walmart. The Napa store brand is also an excellent oil.
+1 Ashland makes NAPA's motor oil. It is essentially the same thing. I would stock up on NAPA synthetic and run it on the OLM.
Originally Posted By: spasm3
If you like valvoline, watch for napa conventional and napa synthetic. Goes on sale a few times a year.
+1 VWB is a great oil. Napa has it on sale now thru Feb. 29th for $3.59 a quart. That is even cheaper than the quart price at Walmart. The Napa store brand is also an excellent oil.
+1 Ashland makes NAPA's motor oil. It is essentially the same thing. I would stock up on NAPA synthetic and run it on the OLM.
Napa has Synpower on sale this month too. $5.39 per quart. Sale ends on Feb. 29th.
Originally Posted By: Doublehaul
They are standard equipment on all Super Dutys in select states...Michigan being one of them. I'll never use it though honestly...never had a need on a gasser
Thanks yeah I'd forgotten when you order new you get the plug in automatically...thanks...
They are standard equipment on all Super Dutys in select states...Michigan being one of them. I'll never use it though honestly...never had a need on a gasser
Thanks yeah I'd forgotten when you order new you get the plug in automatically...thanks...
Originally Posted By: lubricatosaurus
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
I don't understand the big push for everyone to go synthetic. The conventional oil meets SN, the synthetic oil meets SN. I think people just bought into the 70s hype over synthetic. I could see if conventional oil was SL rated and Synthetic SN. They both have excellent ratings to serve well in 3000 to 5000 mile oil changes. It's kinda crazy to pay more for synthetic to get the same rating. I am surprised no one ranted about Valvolines weak additive PAC
You're kidding, right? Valv Synpower not only exceeds SN GF-5, like its cheaper cousin VWB, Valv Synpower also exceeds GM 4718M and dexos1.
That means a lot of extra performance tests the conventional oil doesn't pass.
In addition, a full synthetic flows better cold and leaves less piston deposits, all things we want. Lasts longer too because its basestocks don't oxidize as much with heat.
Performance tests that his engine does not require, might I add. I too fail to understand why the immediate push for synthetic and a lambasting of this guy for picking a conventional that will MORE than adequately do the job. Given that he had a block heater, cold flow startup wear is a moot point. Yes, a synthetic may leave less piston deposits, but a SN conventional leaves equal or less piston deposits that an SJ or SL synthetic ever used to. And we touted their praises over and over 10 years ago when somebody went 200-300k on them. So other than a feel-good statement, you've listed absolutely NO credible evidence as to why a SN conventional won't work perfectly in his situation.
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
I don't understand the big push for everyone to go synthetic. The conventional oil meets SN, the synthetic oil meets SN. I think people just bought into the 70s hype over synthetic. I could see if conventional oil was SL rated and Synthetic SN. They both have excellent ratings to serve well in 3000 to 5000 mile oil changes. It's kinda crazy to pay more for synthetic to get the same rating. I am surprised no one ranted about Valvolines weak additive PAC
You're kidding, right? Valv Synpower not only exceeds SN GF-5, like its cheaper cousin VWB, Valv Synpower also exceeds GM 4718M and dexos1.
That means a lot of extra performance tests the conventional oil doesn't pass.
In addition, a full synthetic flows better cold and leaves less piston deposits, all things we want. Lasts longer too because its basestocks don't oxidize as much with heat.
Performance tests that his engine does not require, might I add. I too fail to understand why the immediate push for synthetic and a lambasting of this guy for picking a conventional that will MORE than adequately do the job. Given that he had a block heater, cold flow startup wear is a moot point. Yes, a synthetic may leave less piston deposits, but a SN conventional leaves equal or less piston deposits that an SJ or SL synthetic ever used to. And we touted their praises over and over 10 years ago when somebody went 200-300k on them. So other than a feel-good statement, you've listed absolutely NO credible evidence as to why a SN conventional won't work perfectly in his situation.
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
you've listed absolutely NO credible evidence as to why a SN conventional won't work perfectly in his situation.
Because the OCI is too long for a conventional oil. If we were talking about 5000 mile OCIs, fine. However, the OLM will most likely go out to at least 7500 miles and could push 10,000 miles. That's way too long for a conventional oil, at least in my opinion. (and probably the opinion of many others here)
you've listed absolutely NO credible evidence as to why a SN conventional won't work perfectly in his situation.
Because the OCI is too long for a conventional oil. If we were talking about 5000 mile OCIs, fine. However, the OLM will most likely go out to at least 7500 miles and could push 10,000 miles. That's way too long for a conventional oil, at least in my opinion. (and probably the opinion of many others here)
I'll be running a UOA at 5000 and every 2500 there after until the olm is at 5% twice to establish baselines. I'm not looking to shell an engine no pun intended
If the oci is in fact too long why doesn't FoMoCo specify a syn or a stricter standard like GM? With a 7qt sump and ideal conditions a quality conventional is more than adequate...at least that's what I HOPE to find. If not I'll change based on mileage
If the oci is in fact too long why doesn't FoMoCo specify a syn or a stricter standard like GM? With a 7qt sump and ideal conditions a quality conventional is more than adequate...at least that's what I HOPE to find. If not I'll change based on mileage
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: KD0AXS
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
you've listed absolutely NO credible evidence as to why a SN conventional won't work perfectly in his situation.
Because the OCI is too long for a conventional oil. If we were talking about 5000 mile OCIs, fine. However, the OLM will most likely go out to at least 7500 miles and could push 10,000 miles. That's way too long for a conventional oil, at least in my opinion. (and probably the opinion of many others here)
Unsubstantiated. You think it's good business for Ford to set an OCI that will make an engine grenade in 100K? Just because people have opinions on something doesn't mean they have any root in facts. A conventional SN that meets Ford's specs for the engine in question at an OCI specified by Ford is more than adequate. They have millions of operational hours and test data to back this up.
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
you've listed absolutely NO credible evidence as to why a SN conventional won't work perfectly in his situation.
Because the OCI is too long for a conventional oil. If we were talking about 5000 mile OCIs, fine. However, the OLM will most likely go out to at least 7500 miles and could push 10,000 miles. That's way too long for a conventional oil, at least in my opinion. (and probably the opinion of many others here)
Unsubstantiated. You think it's good business for Ford to set an OCI that will make an engine grenade in 100K? Just because people have opinions on something doesn't mean they have any root in facts. A conventional SN that meets Ford's specs for the engine in question at an OCI specified by Ford is more than adequate. They have millions of operational hours and test data to back this up.
Originally Posted By: Doublehaul
I'll be running a UOA at 5000 and every 2500 there after until the olm is at 5% twice to establish baselines. I'm not looking to shell an engine no pun intended
If the oci is in fact too long why doesn't FoMoCo specify a syn or a stricter standard like GM? With a 7qt sump and ideal conditions a quality conventional is more than adequate...at least that's what I HOPE to find. If not I'll change based on mileage
So we're talking probably at least 6 UOAs. At what...$25 each? That's $150. The difference between an oil change with QSGB and a synthetic like QSUD would be about $10. That same $150 would pay for 15 synthetic oil changes. I would spend the money on synthetic oil and skip the UOAs. That's just me though I guess.
I'll be running a UOA at 5000 and every 2500 there after until the olm is at 5% twice to establish baselines. I'm not looking to shell an engine no pun intended
If the oci is in fact too long why doesn't FoMoCo specify a syn or a stricter standard like GM? With a 7qt sump and ideal conditions a quality conventional is more than adequate...at least that's what I HOPE to find. If not I'll change based on mileage
So we're talking probably at least 6 UOAs. At what...$25 each? That's $150. The difference between an oil change with QSGB and a synthetic like QSUD would be about $10. That same $150 would pay for 15 synthetic oil changes. I would spend the money on synthetic oil and skip the UOAs. That's just me though I guess.
Originally Posted By: KD0AXS
Originally Posted By: Doublehaul
I'll be running a UOA at 5000 and every 2500 there after until the olm is at 5% twice to establish baselines. I'm not looking to shell an engine no pun intended
If the oci is in fact too long why doesn't FoMoCo specify a syn or a stricter standard like GM? With a 7qt sump and ideal conditions a quality conventional is more than adequate...at least that's what I HOPE to find. If not I'll change based on mileage
So we're talking probably at least 6 UOAs. At what...$25 each? That's $150. The difference between an oil change with QSGB and a synthetic like QSUD would be about $10. That same $150 would pay for 15 synthetic oil changes. I would spend the money on synthetic oil and skip the UOAs. That's just me though I guess.
To correct the math, $150 is the difference, not the cost of 15 changes with synthetic. At 7 quarts / $5 and a $5 filter, that would be 4 changes. Contrast with under utilization of the oil and that's a worthwhile investment. Contrast with OVERutilization of the oil and subsequent early engine wear and it shows its value even more.
All I'm saying is that setting your OCI with a few UOAs pays off in the long run.
Originally Posted By: Doublehaul
I'll be running a UOA at 5000 and every 2500 there after until the olm is at 5% twice to establish baselines. I'm not looking to shell an engine no pun intended
If the oci is in fact too long why doesn't FoMoCo specify a syn or a stricter standard like GM? With a 7qt sump and ideal conditions a quality conventional is more than adequate...at least that's what I HOPE to find. If not I'll change based on mileage
So we're talking probably at least 6 UOAs. At what...$25 each? That's $150. The difference between an oil change with QSGB and a synthetic like QSUD would be about $10. That same $150 would pay for 15 synthetic oil changes. I would spend the money on synthetic oil and skip the UOAs. That's just me though I guess.
To correct the math, $150 is the difference, not the cost of 15 changes with synthetic. At 7 quarts / $5 and a $5 filter, that would be 4 changes. Contrast with under utilization of the oil and that's a worthwhile investment. Contrast with OVERutilization of the oil and subsequent early engine wear and it shows its value even more.
All I'm saying is that setting your OCI with a few UOAs pays off in the long run.
YES its true he could "get by" with conventional SN oil without breaking the engine. No explosions will happen due to the oil.
YES its ALSO true his piston rings will be cleaner with synthetic, and less wear at start-up on a cold day.
If you're a stickler, use a full-synthetic. If not, you're boring.
YES its ALSO true his piston rings will be cleaner with synthetic, and less wear at start-up on a cold day.
If you're a stickler, use a full-synthetic. If not, you're boring.
Originally Posted By: Kuato
Originally Posted By: KD0AXS
Originally Posted By: Doublehaul
I'll be running a UOA at 5000 and every 2500 there after until the olm is at 5% twice to establish baselines. I'm not looking to shell an engine no pun intended
If the oci is in fact too long why doesn't FoMoCo specify a syn or a stricter standard like GM? With a 7qt sump and ideal conditions a quality conventional is more than adequate...at least that's what I HOPE to find. If not I'll change based on mileage
So we're talking probably at least 6 UOAs. At what...$25 each? That's $150. The difference between an oil change with QSGB and a synthetic like QSUD would be about $10. That same $150 would pay for 15 synthetic oil changes. I would spend the money on synthetic oil and skip the UOAs. That's just me though I guess.
To correct the math, $150 is the difference, not the cost of 15 changes with synthetic. At 7 quarts / $5 and a $5 filter, that would be 4 changes. Contrast with under utilization of the oil and that's a worthwhile investment. Contrast with OVERutilization of the oil and subsequent early engine wear and it shows its value even more.
All I'm saying is that setting your OCI with a few UOAs pays off in the long run.
I was talking about the price difference, $150 would pay for the $10 price difference 15 times.
Originally Posted By: KD0AXS
Originally Posted By: Doublehaul
I'll be running a UOA at 5000 and every 2500 there after until the olm is at 5% twice to establish baselines. I'm not looking to shell an engine no pun intended
If the oci is in fact too long why doesn't FoMoCo specify a syn or a stricter standard like GM? With a 7qt sump and ideal conditions a quality conventional is more than adequate...at least that's what I HOPE to find. If not I'll change based on mileage
So we're talking probably at least 6 UOAs. At what...$25 each? That's $150. The difference between an oil change with QSGB and a synthetic like QSUD would be about $10. That same $150 would pay for 15 synthetic oil changes. I would spend the money on synthetic oil and skip the UOAs. That's just me though I guess.
To correct the math, $150 is the difference, not the cost of 15 changes with synthetic. At 7 quarts / $5 and a $5 filter, that would be 4 changes. Contrast with under utilization of the oil and that's a worthwhile investment. Contrast with OVERutilization of the oil and subsequent early engine wear and it shows its value even more.
All I'm saying is that setting your OCI with a few UOAs pays off in the long run.
I was talking about the price difference, $150 would pay for the $10 price difference 15 times.
I would never follow the OLM. Ever. Our new Ford company trucks have them. Our company fleet requires oil changes ever 5000 miles. I idle for hours, I am constantly in dusty conditions. I run bursts or full hard acceleration merging with traffic in construction. Basically, I have worse case scenarios than a police car. My OLM usually says 50% when I go in for a oil change at 5,000 miles. That thing is the worst idea ever. No way I follow that thing. Its your car, its your money. You really want to trust that thing?
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
I would never follow the OLM. Ever. Our new Ford company trucks have them. Our company fleet requires oil changes ever 5000 miles. I idle for hours, I am constantly in dusty conditions. I run bursts or full hard acceleration merging with traffic in construction. Basically, I have worse case scenarios than a police car. My OLM usually says 50% when I go in for a oil change at 5,000 miles. That thing is the worst idea ever. No way I follow that thing. Its your car, its your money. You really want to trust that thing?
The IOLM algorithm takes into account how the vehicle is used and includes idling and heavy use. Here's some information for you: http://owner.ford.com/how-tos/vehicle-fe...ite-MFPR0515OIL
I would never follow the OLM. Ever. Our new Ford company trucks have them. Our company fleet requires oil changes ever 5000 miles. I idle for hours, I am constantly in dusty conditions. I run bursts or full hard acceleration merging with traffic in construction. Basically, I have worse case scenarios than a police car. My OLM usually says 50% when I go in for a oil change at 5,000 miles. That thing is the worst idea ever. No way I follow that thing. Its your car, its your money. You really want to trust that thing?
The IOLM algorithm takes into account how the vehicle is used and includes idling and heavy use. Here's some information for you: http://owner.ford.com/how-tos/vehicle-fe...ite-MFPR0515OIL
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
I would never follow the OLM. Ever. Our new Ford company trucks have them. Our company fleet requires oil changes ever 5000 miles. I idle for hours, I am constantly in dusty conditions. I run bursts or full hard acceleration merging with traffic in construction. Basically, I have worse case scenarios than a police car. My OLM usually says 50% when I go in for a oil change at 5,000 miles. That thing is the worst idea ever. No way I follow that thing. Its your car, its your money. You really want to trust that thing?
That's why I recommended going synthetic. The OLM on our Jeep goes out to around 9000 miles. I'm fine with that length of OCI on a good synthetic oil, but there's just no way I'm doing it with conventional oil. If I were using conventional oil, I'd ignore the OLM and do 5000 mile OCIs.
I would never follow the OLM. Ever. Our new Ford company trucks have them. Our company fleet requires oil changes ever 5000 miles. I idle for hours, I am constantly in dusty conditions. I run bursts or full hard acceleration merging with traffic in construction. Basically, I have worse case scenarios than a police car. My OLM usually says 50% when I go in for a oil change at 5,000 miles. That thing is the worst idea ever. No way I follow that thing. Its your car, its your money. You really want to trust that thing?
That's why I recommended going synthetic. The OLM on our Jeep goes out to around 9000 miles. I'm fine with that length of OCI on a good synthetic oil, but there's just no way I'm doing it with conventional oil. If I were using conventional oil, I'd ignore the OLM and do 5000 mile OCIs.
Originally Posted By: KD0AXS
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
I would never follow the OLM. Ever. Our new Ford company trucks have them. Our company fleet requires oil changes ever 5000 miles. I idle for hours, I am constantly in dusty conditions. I run bursts or full hard acceleration merging with traffic in construction. Basically, I have worse case scenarios than a police car. My OLM usually says 50% when I go in for a oil change at 5,000 miles. That thing is the worst idea ever. No way I follow that thing. Its your car, its your money. You really want to trust that thing?
That's why I recommended going synthetic. The OLM on our Jeep goes out to around 9000 miles. I'm fine with that length of OCI on a good synthetic oil, but there's just no way I'm doing it with conventional oil. If I were using conventional oil, I'd ignore the OLM and do 5000 mile OCIs.
There is so much wrong on bitog! What is wrong with these uoas the oils are holding up just fine. We are living in the 1970 ? uoa.
Originally Posted By: Panzerman
I would never follow the OLM. Ever. Our new Ford company trucks have them. Our company fleet requires oil changes ever 5000 miles. I idle for hours, I am constantly in dusty conditions. I run bursts or full hard acceleration merging with traffic in construction. Basically, I have worse case scenarios than a police car. My OLM usually says 50% when I go in for a oil change at 5,000 miles. That thing is the worst idea ever. No way I follow that thing. Its your car, its your money. You really want to trust that thing?
That's why I recommended going synthetic. The OLM on our Jeep goes out to around 9000 miles. I'm fine with that length of OCI on a good synthetic oil, but there's just no way I'm doing it with conventional oil. If I were using conventional oil, I'd ignore the OLM and do 5000 mile OCIs.
There is so much wrong on bitog! What is wrong with these uoas the oils are holding up just fine. We are living in the 1970 ? uoa.
- Status
Similar threads
