Which oil? 89 Mazda B2600i

Status
Not open for further replies.
lmao, I wanted to try it to slow the smoke. I had ran 5w30 in this last change and it smoked less before I went from 10w30 to 5w30.

BTW: did a compression check today. Looks like 125 or 130 lbs on all 4?
 
quote:
Looks like 125 or 130 lbs on all 4
Click to expand...
Looks a little low. The entry in my PalmPilot Kare Kare2 auto log has the compression range of Max 182 and Min 142.

I've got the factory shop manual at home. I'll check it tonight and verify and post the specs.

BTW: at 188K my B2600i compression was

Cyl # / psi

1 / 180
2 / 175
3 / 177
4 / 185
 
quote:
15 quart sooper-flush or it's gonna blowed up!!
Click to expand...
lol.gif
 
quote:
SpunBearing
posted January 01, 2006 02:52 AM

The Rebadged ford ranger mazda's can't even compair to the dependability to the true mazda's, but that's fords fault lol.

Oh i'll get it fixed one way or the other. Shouldn't cost over $300 to get the head redone. Valves, valve guides, seals, spings, leveled and cleaned. Just can't decide to rebuild the engine or do a compression check and if all is well just do the head?
Click to expand...
I had a 86 B2000 (same basic truck as 86-94 B2xxx mazdas) and that thing was a true terd. It had regular maint. too. At 186K it ran hot from one of the silly coolant bypass lines on the bottom of the intake (noted for it approx. 1 million vacuum hoses) busting and taking the head gasket with it. I bought a new head and put it on and the thing never ran right again. It cost me a fortune between ball joints and tie rod ends that could not be mechanically separated except with nuclear fission, and the rest of the under-engineered crap-asian interior. I own/have owned many mazda's but there's a reason their trucks were killed off by the ranger...

Granted, it had more power than my 94 Mazda-Ranger and handled better, but parts were way more expensive for the same technology (SOHC 2.x liter 4-banger) My Ford produced truck not only looks better, has a better idle (due to EFI) and a much much bigger aftermarket.

Working on both, I choose the Ford for simplicity and value
 
Well I have a 1987 Mazda B2000 with 153,000+ miles and I run chevron 10w-30 pretty much year round. I've seen a lot of these trucks (pre-ford) running around with a lot of miles on them, mine is all original (engine,tranny,carb, etc.) I really think these trucks are a solid buy if you can find one.
 
SpunBearing,

Checked my factory shop manual. The factory spec compression figures for the B2600i G6 engine are

(cranking with wide open throttle and all plugs removed)

182 psi @ 270 rpm

Min: 142 psi @ 280 rpm

I can post the possible cause for low compression chart if you want. Send me a private message and I email it to you.
 
I wouldn't own one of these trucks if it wasn't the B2600i, The Carbed trucks had lots of problems. Later on they get better and hard to beat.
The reason ford and mazda trucks became one was in 94 Ford bought Mazda, probly the best thing ford could have done. They strted changeing the suspensions from the old twin I bean to something like the mazda. The older fords may be more practicle but to me as mazda is to you, turds. Twin I-beam is junk.
Not to mention those stupid hubs that slip off when you remove the wheel.

Really it doesn't matter it is just what we each like, just don't put all mazda down cause of some old turd you had, there is junk in everything you buy. Not wanting to argue.

Can't say the ford 4.0 helped the mazda more than the 2600.
 
ikarus,

You are very, very mis-informed.

The 89-93 Mazda B2600i's were some of the very best small 4-cylinder trucks ever made.

I put 80,000 miles on one from scratch and it was in showroom condition when I got rid of it. I kick myself daily for getting rid of it.

Sure, it had some minor ticky problems-

Under warranty, the Thermostat was replaced.

I took another one to 100k miles and only put brakes and tires on it.

The interior was much better looking to me than a Ford will ever be.
 
Ok after reading i'm deciding to drain the 10w40 and go back with 10w30. Considering 10w30 Rotella T heavy duty I looked at at WM. Cheep enuff to do a drain and fill and run the rest of the OCI.
Will this oil be any harm? It's like $1 than havoline per gallon.

Considering checking out the Trop Artic, at WM it's like $1.19 a quart or so and says it's syn blend. Buy up some and put it back. I'm really just considering running cheeper oils till I get the oil burning stoped or rebuild the engine.

Sometimes when it's cold the truck ticks with the 10w40, never had that happen with the other oils. It only does it till the oil makes it to the top of the engine.
 
Also looked at Supertech Full Synthetic 10W-30 while I was at WM. Looks like a good oil by reading the back but haven't searched on here for results but also considering it. It is suppose to have high mileage additives in it too.

A full synthetic, highmileage formula, and not too pricey.
Just wonder about this stuff.............
 
quote:
till I get the oil burning stoped or rebuild the engine.
Click to expand...
Before the rebuild, I'd redo the compression test with all spark plugs out, with wide open throttle, and warm engine. If the compression comes up to minimum spec or more without doing the oil in the cylinders thing in my private msg to you, I'd do a double Auto-RX treatment. It might clean up and recondition the value seals if that's what's causing the oil burning rather than worn valve guides. If the compression only goes up with the oil in the cylinder, then a rebuild maybe in order. Still the Auto-RX might not be a bad try even then. Maybe if you're lucky the piston rings are gunked up and a cleaning will free them up so they can do their job. Just a guess and much cheaper than engine rebuild.
 
Audi, I finally got to test it today. around 150 on all 4. (cranking with wide open throttle and all plugs removed)

Seems a bit better now.
 
So I still wander, mine isn't as high as yours was but could rings be a problem. I wanna check it with another gauge and see if it's the same.

This one might have had a hard life.
 
That's better. Looks like the head is true and headgasket is good. I'd run the auto-rx cycles and see what happens then.

One caveat about my compressions figures is they were taken about 10K miles after a new head. The valve seating on your original head could partially account for the lower values. Agree that it just could be the hard life. Still I'd auto-rx it and see what the oil burning and compression does.

Yeah as you said using a different gauge as a check isn't a bad idea either.
 
Good day to everyone,
I have a Ford Ranger model of 2011 with the G6 engine 5 speed manual.
Some people do not recommend to run synthetic oil into the engine.
I found mineral oil ENEOS SJ 5w-30 in our local store. Should I use this mineral oil or better look for the semi (part) synthetic oil 5w-30?
Thank you for your replies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
What oil should I use 2016 Mazda 6 Skyactiv 2.5L non turbo?
2
Replies
39
Views
1K
wareze
W
Mazda 2.5T Oil Selection
Replies
2
Views
567
drtyler
F
Mazda 5w30 from Canada
Replies
12
Views
1K
VolkswagenFox21
52 Ford
Alternative to Shell Rotella Gas Truck
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
ATex7239
0
Valvoline advanced vs Mobil 1 ESP
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
Glenda W.
Back
Top