This research presents a strong argument for using synthetic oil with long OCI.
old oil better than new oil
- Thread starter GMorg
- Start date
- Status
Does anyone know enough about "stressed" or "aged" oils to know if one could spike a fresh oil change with a quart of old oil to get the age effect? - if it is real..
I have had to use several pieces of equipment of the years that use oil at rate that was high enough to never just an oil change. Or, at least that is what we told ourselves. I think that we may have done more good than we thought. That 1953 Ford tractor still runs today. It's last complete oil change was probably in 1981.
I have had to use several pieces of equipment of the years that use oil at rate that was high enough to never just an oil change. Or, at least that is what we told ourselves. I think that we may have done more good than we thought. That 1953 Ford tractor still runs today. It's last complete oil change was probably in 1981.
Look at this thread - I am going to stay on the safe side and stick with new oil, thank you very much!
You gotta see this
In all seriousness, this quote has me confused:
"In the example shown here, the wear rate of the cast iron in engine-conditioned test oil was four times higher than in the fresh oil."
Does that mean it's four x better than new oil or wear 4 times more?
Scott
You gotta see this
In all seriousness, this quote has me confused:
"In the example shown here, the wear rate of the cast iron in engine-conditioned test oil was four times higher than in the fresh oil."
Does that mean it's four x better than new oil or wear 4 times more?
Scott
Like I've said over and over again, if you really think used oil is better than new oil, I'm more than happy to give you my old oil for F-R-E-E.
In fact, I'll give ten bucks to the first person who shows up at my house in a newer model Mercedes, BMW, Corvette, etc., and dumps my old, used oil in his/her car.
Heck, it's obviously better for your car! Move on this deal now while you still have the chance! I'm about to start selling my used oil in the stores for $7.50 a quart!
In fact, I'll give ten bucks to the first person who shows up at my house in a newer model Mercedes, BMW, Corvette, etc., and dumps my old, used oil in his/her car.
Heck, it's obviously better for your car! Move on this deal now while you still have the chance! I'm about to start selling my used oil in the stores for $7.50 a quart!
"""
Molakule and bruce381:
Do you have access to SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-3119? I do not so I cannot quote from it directly, I can only remark that it is supposedly a technical paper from Ford Motor Company and Conoco-Phillips showing that wear is lower with older oil than with brand-new oil. Can anyone with access to that paper elaborate for the rest of us?
If your hypothesis was the actuality, shouldn't we be able to test it by looking at UOAs of ARX clean and/or rinse cycles and comparing them with the previous UOA in that vehicle?
"""
I think I have a copy of that SAE article in the lab and as I remember I have some problems with the test method and I mentioned this to ?? too slick ?? on this forum also the data was/has not been peer reviewed and is a few years old.
Even tho if true the advantages of a new oil far out weigh old oil IMHO.
bruce
Molakule and bruce381:
Do you have access to SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-3119? I do not so I cannot quote from it directly, I can only remark that it is supposedly a technical paper from Ford Motor Company and Conoco-Phillips showing that wear is lower with older oil than with brand-new oil. Can anyone with access to that paper elaborate for the rest of us?
If your hypothesis was the actuality, shouldn't we be able to test it by looking at UOAs of ARX clean and/or rinse cycles and comparing them with the previous UOA in that vehicle?
"""
I think I have a copy of that SAE article in the lab and as I remember I have some problems with the test method and I mentioned this to ?? too slick ?? on this forum also the data was/has not been peer reviewed and is a few years old.
Even tho if true the advantages of a new oil far out weigh old oil IMHO.
bruce
Also remeber that changeing oil at a regular interval will reduce wear and corrosion by products and gunk.
Oil is suposed to hold gunk and wear metal till you drian it but it must be drianed offten even if it is a supper stable oil then to get full advantage a 1-5 micron full flow filter should be used otherwise to get out crud even if the oil is in GOOD shape it must be changed out.
bruce
Oil is suposed to hold gunk and wear metal till you drian it but it must be drianed offten even if it is a supper stable oil then to get full advantage a 1-5 micron full flow filter should be used otherwise to get out crud even if the oil is in GOOD shape it must be changed out.
bruce
If Ford was so convinced..besides dealer profits...why not extend their reccomended OCI's?
MolaKule
Staff member
This study
1. it didn't report the kinematic viscosity of the fluids either before or after the test,
2. what happens to used oil when subjected to long-term testing under those conditions?
3. Duh, why Jet A, for grins or for use as a contrasting fluid?
4. What WAS the composition of the used oil; oxidation, viscosity, soot loading (insolubles, solubles), elemental analysis?
was interesting but didn't go far enough for anyone to reach a definitie conclusion and here is why:
1. it didn't report the kinematic viscosity of the fluids either before or after the test,
2. what happens to used oil when subjected to long-term testing under those conditions?
3. Duh, why Jet A, for grins or for use as a contrasting fluid?
4. What WAS the composition of the used oil; oxidation, viscosity, soot loading (insolubles, solubles), elemental analysis?
The authors of at least one of the papers did suggest that shearing of VI polymers and even dilution by fuel were potential reasons why "engine aged" oil produced less wear and a lower coefficient of friction. Sounds like "used" and "thinner" is confounded. Maybe instead of adding back a little used oil, I should just use thinner oil.
Similar article, seems to help define the impact of some of the variables.
http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cppr/y2001/pres/120365.pdf
The Effect of Lubricating Oil Condition on the Friction and Wear of Piston Ring and Cylinder Liner Materials in a Reciprocating Bench Test*
A test method has been developed to evaluate the friction and wear behavior of candidate piston ring and cylinder liner materials for heavy duty diesel engine applications. The test uses actual piston ring segments sliding on flat specimens of liner material to simplify alignment and to multiply the stress to the level normally seen in engine operation. Reciprocating tests were conducted at 10 Hz and 10 mm stroke at 100o C. Test oils consisted of fully formulated lubricating oils that were conditioned in ASTM standard engine tests. The point contact between the ring segment and flat counter-face, the applied load and elevated temperature all result in boundary lubrication, which simulates the environment near top-ring-reversal. The oil condition was defined by such variables as spectroscopic elemental concentrations, soot level, oxidation and nitration, and contaminant particle concentration. Compared with engine-measured wear rates, ring wear was increased by at least an order of magnitude and the liner by about 1.5 to 2 orders of magnitude as needed for an accelerated test. The iron content of the engine conditioned oil was a good predictor of the relative wear rates of the liner specimens in the bench test. The soot concentration also had a strong effect on liner wear but no effect on ring wear. This corresponds to engine experience in which it has been observed that soot can interfere with the formation of antiwear films on the liner surface. The oil viscosity has a mild effect on the friction at high load in boundary lubrication conditions.
The viscosity of the conditioned oils was related to the soot content rather than the oxidation levels.
Key words: Piston ring, cylinder liner, oil condition
*Research sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of Office of FreedomCAR and Heavy Vehicle Technologies, under contract DEAC05-
00OR22725 with UT-Battelle LLC.
http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cppr/y2001/pres/120365.pdf
The Effect of Lubricating Oil Condition on the Friction and Wear of Piston Ring and Cylinder Liner Materials in a Reciprocating Bench Test*
A test method has been developed to evaluate the friction and wear behavior of candidate piston ring and cylinder liner materials for heavy duty diesel engine applications. The test uses actual piston ring segments sliding on flat specimens of liner material to simplify alignment and to multiply the stress to the level normally seen in engine operation. Reciprocating tests were conducted at 10 Hz and 10 mm stroke at 100o C. Test oils consisted of fully formulated lubricating oils that were conditioned in ASTM standard engine tests. The point contact between the ring segment and flat counter-face, the applied load and elevated temperature all result in boundary lubrication, which simulates the environment near top-ring-reversal. The oil condition was defined by such variables as spectroscopic elemental concentrations, soot level, oxidation and nitration, and contaminant particle concentration. Compared with engine-measured wear rates, ring wear was increased by at least an order of magnitude and the liner by about 1.5 to 2 orders of magnitude as needed for an accelerated test. The iron content of the engine conditioned oil was a good predictor of the relative wear rates of the liner specimens in the bench test. The soot concentration also had a strong effect on liner wear but no effect on ring wear. This corresponds to engine experience in which it has been observed that soot can interfere with the formation of antiwear films on the liner surface. The oil viscosity has a mild effect on the friction at high load in boundary lubrication conditions.
The viscosity of the conditioned oils was related to the soot content rather than the oxidation levels.
Key words: Piston ring, cylinder liner, oil condition
*Research sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Office of Office of FreedomCAR and Heavy Vehicle Technologies, under contract DEAC05-
00OR22725 with UT-Battelle LLC.
Ugly3, thanks for the link.
It has been over a year since that thread. Are you now doing partial oil changes?
It has been over a year since that thread. Are you now doing partial oil changes?
It would be interesting to see them both repeat their tests with various ages of oil. And as MolaKule stated, what's the properties of the variously aged oils? It may be the case that only 5 hrs. of aging achieves essentially the same result.
427Z06,
I agree that we don't know how much aging is required. However, if the non-linear wear issue is due to aging, then I would expect 1000-2000 miles to be required since it seem that wear levels out after that point. I am, of course, assuming that there is only one phenomenon at work and that the phenomenon is related to oil aging. That assumption is clearly imperfect.
A correlate to this discussion is that if viscosity is the issue, then as oil is thinned, the aging phenomenon should be reduced. For example their should be diffences in degree of effect between aged 15W40, 10W30, and straight 20 weight.
How expensive are some of the simpler wear tests? Is there a place that I could send samples?
I agree that we don't know how much aging is required. However, if the non-linear wear issue is due to aging, then I would expect 1000-2000 miles to be required since it seem that wear levels out after that point. I am, of course, assuming that there is only one phenomenon at work and that the phenomenon is related to oil aging. That assumption is clearly imperfect.
A correlate to this discussion is that if viscosity is the issue, then as oil is thinned, the aging phenomenon should be reduced. For example their should be diffences in degree of effect between aged 15W40, 10W30, and straight 20 weight.
How expensive are some of the simpler wear tests? Is there a place that I could send samples?
I really appreciate this discussion and the information and ideas here.
My own position here is not that oil should never be changed. There are factors that do/should condemn an oil fill in my view. I am interested in the effects of each incremental increases in miles on any given crankcase fill. To give a randomly-chosen example: Is wear any different, and how and how much, over the course of 60,000 miles if I change my Chevron Supreme every 500 miles versus changing it every 5,000 miles?
My own position here is not that oil should never be changed. There are factors that do/should condemn an oil fill in my view. I am interested in the effects of each incremental increases in miles on any given crankcase fill. To give a randomly-chosen example: Is wear any different, and how and how much, over the course of 60,000 miles if I change my Chevron Supreme every 500 miles versus changing it every 5,000 miles?
but what about the filth! wont somebody think about the filth!?!
When someone sticks two identical internal combustion engines on a bench and runs them for 200k miles - one with oil being only topped-off, and the other with regular "normal" OCIs, and the first engine outlasts the second, and performs better, I might consider a change in my habits.
Until then, it's 3k miles on M1/Toyota filter.
Any buyers for my "better than new oil" please email me
Scott
Until then, it's 3k miles on M1/Toyota filter.
Any buyers for my "better than new oil" please email me
Scott
Another look at incremental UOAs at http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html
I've posted this before and had a hard time describing how rates for increments were calculated, so I'll try again with more raw numbers. This data is nice as we have UOAs at 1k increments, which allows us to do more than determine average average iron rates per miles. Averages are useful but sometimes they can hide changes.
First, we need to compensate for top off oil, so I've done so assuming a 6 qt sump, and calculating a multiplier for the iron in the 'adj' column.
k miles top off adj
1 0.0 1.0
2 0.0 1.0
3 0.5 1.1
4 0.5 1.2
5 0.5 1.3
6 0.5 1.3
7 0 1.3
8 0.5 1.4
9 0.5 1.5
10 0 1.5
Here we have the raw iron numbers, and the adjusted iron.
k miles raw adj
1 10 10.0
2 12 12.0
3 14 15.2
4 19 22.2
5 23 28.8
6 26 34.7
7 27 36.0
8 35 49.6
9 38 57.0
10 36 54.0
Here we have iron per thousand mile rates, and in the second column merely the difference between the current and preceeding adj iron numbers. Notice that there is a lot of iron in the firs t1k sample, and pretty low numbers in the 2k and 3k samples. The iron doubles at 4k, stays steady until 7k where it drops, increases dramatically, etc., until we have 'negative iron.' Evidently iron is being deposited or collected somewhere as it's unreasonable to assume that the used oil is repairing the engine. The rate appears to be steady after 1k, but the increment suggests that wear increases past 3k.
k miles fe/kmi incrmental Fe
1 10.0 10.0
2 6.0 2.0
3 5.1 3.2
4 5.5 7.0
5 5.8 6.6
6 5.8 5.9
7 5.1 1.3
8 6.2 13.6
9 6.3 7.4
10 5.4 -3.0
I've posted this before and had a hard time describing how rates for increments were calculated, so I'll try again with more raw numbers. This data is nice as we have UOAs at 1k increments, which allows us to do more than determine average average iron rates per miles. Averages are useful but sometimes they can hide changes.
First, we need to compensate for top off oil, so I've done so assuming a 6 qt sump, and calculating a multiplier for the iron in the 'adj' column.
k miles top off adj
1 0.0 1.0
2 0.0 1.0
3 0.5 1.1
4 0.5 1.2
5 0.5 1.3
6 0.5 1.3
7 0 1.3
8 0.5 1.4
9 0.5 1.5
10 0 1.5
Here we have the raw iron numbers, and the adjusted iron.
k miles raw adj
1 10 10.0
2 12 12.0
3 14 15.2
4 19 22.2
5 23 28.8
6 26 34.7
7 27 36.0
8 35 49.6
9 38 57.0
10 36 54.0
Here we have iron per thousand mile rates, and in the second column merely the difference between the current and preceeding adj iron numbers. Notice that there is a lot of iron in the firs t1k sample, and pretty low numbers in the 2k and 3k samples. The iron doubles at 4k, stays steady until 7k where it drops, increases dramatically, etc., until we have 'negative iron.' Evidently iron is being deposited or collected somewhere as it's unreasonable to assume that the used oil is repairing the engine. The rate appears to be steady after 1k, but the increment suggests that wear increases past 3k.
k miles fe/kmi incrmental Fe
1 10.0 10.0
2 6.0 2.0
3 5.1 3.2
4 5.5 7.0
5 5.8 6.6
6 5.8 5.9
7 5.1 1.3
8 6.2 13.6
9 6.3 7.4
10 5.4 -3.0
- Status
Similar threads
