Recent Topics
Humor: Walmart Product Review
by Apollo14
10/25/14 10:04 PM
Mobil Delvac 5w-40 OK for 2009 Audi Q7 TDI?
by teedoff00
10/25/14 10:02 PM
Honda S2000 Pennzoil Ultra 5,000 miles
by Bror Jace
10/25/14 09:52 PM
Time for hot vs cold old to drain into pan
by Apollo14
10/25/14 09:19 PM
Noco Genius Boost - my video test - battery @ 9.9v
by 901Memphis
10/25/14 09:13 PM
Bought my first firearm today
by Nick R
10/25/14 09:01 PM
Built a few AR-15 A3's this weekend...
by 2010_FX4
10/25/14 08:57 PM
New Briggs oiling schedule
by Tom_T
10/25/14 08:52 PM
Thinking about a new 1.0L Ecoboost Fiesta
by Burt
10/25/14 08:44 PM
Viscosity Calculators don't work well below zero..
by Shannow
10/25/14 08:12 PM
Good Dealership Experience this time!
by Miller88
10/25/14 08:03 PM
Toyota 6000 truck - didn't know they existed.
by Shannow
10/25/14 07:48 PM
Newest Members
PhxAZ, Miramonte, Rotario, ignat, aahull
51695 Registered Users
Who's Online
83 registered (2010_FX4, 55Test, 123Saab, 13Tacoma, 14 invisible), 1191 Guests and 204 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
51695 Members
64 Forums
221212 Topics
3497521 Posts

Max Online: 2862 @ 07/07/14 03:10 PM
Donate to BITOG

Page 2 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >
Topic Options
#3261197 - 01/27/14 02:51 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: dnewton3]
Chris B. Offline


Registered: 03/16/03
Posts: 2898
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Oil is cheap so "better" in terms of wear protection. Normally I agree that 5,000 on full Syn is a waste of money but not on the VCM V6. It is well documented that this engine is very hard on oil and it degrades fast.



Ah, yes, the old "cheap insurance" defense. Well known in the BITOG Court of Lubes ...


Please show me the "well documented" evidence that proves you need syn. So the engine may be "hard" on oil; so what? How does that translate into actual wear and ROI? Show me data that undeniably details how, in 5k miles, there is a statistical difference in wear outside "normal" sigma deviation between your choice of lube and a decent conventional oil.


Spend any time on Honda Forums and the Folks following the MM using conventional oil are having problems. It is all over the place with pictures and UOA's showing trashed oil and engines. The VCM feature is what is being blamed for this. I barley had time to post my UOA so since you're from Missouri you can go search for it yourself. I'll spend a whopping $22 two or three times a year on full syn and keep my $30,000 car well protected.

Top
#3261203 - 01/27/14 03:28 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: Chris B.]
TrevorS Offline


Registered: 07/14/13
Posts: 1281
Loc: California
On the f150online forums, labnerd has been reporting some ecoboost engines are "destroying" oil at 3000 miles. Some are not and some are. Apparently the OLM is not being helpful. Based on the data he is seeing, he recommended 5000 mile oci's and UOAs for everyone to see what their individual engine is doing.

It also appears that Ford requests back some engines that were replaced in warranty claims so that they can dismantle and investigate themselves.

If the Honda design is flawed, some of the owners who follow manufacturer ocis will soon have major warranty work and Honda should sit up and take notice.

Top
#3261222 - 01/27/14 05:10 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: Chris B.]
dnewton3 Offline



Registered: 05/14/07
Posts: 5628
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Oil is cheap so "better" in terms of wear protection. Normally I agree that 5,000 on full Syn is a waste of money but not on the VCM V6. It is well documented that this engine is very hard on oil and it degrades fast.



Ah, yes, the old "cheap insurance" defense. Well known in the BITOG Court of Lubes ...


Please show me the "well documented" evidence that proves you need syn. So the engine may be "hard" on oil; so what? How does that translate into actual wear and ROI? Show me data that undeniably details how, in 5k miles, there is a statistical difference in wear outside "normal" sigma deviation between your choice of lube and a decent conventional oil.


Spend any time on Honda Forums and the Folks following the MM using conventional oil are having problems. It is all over the place with pictures and UOA's showing trashed oil and engines. The VCM feature is what is being blamed for this. I barley had time to post my UOA so since you're from Missouri you can go search for it yourself. I'll spend a whopping $22 two or three times a year on full syn and keep my $30,000 car well protected.



Directing me to other websites, also full of mythology and rhetoric, isnt' exactly the "proof" I was seeking. I still wait for true documented evidence and not scare tatics resounded by other uninformed folks. Maybe it's good enough for you, but I set a higher standard for my level of "proof". I would agree there are things that are "well documented" on those sites. Unfortunately it's not hard data with objective review, but rather subjective conjecture and regurgitation of opinion.

I see nothing in UOA data to indicate your selection of lube did anything outstanding. Macro analysis leads to the conclusion, even for your specific engine family, that syns at 5k miles don't pay for themselves. Read my "normalcy" article. Then show me, with real tangible data including your own UOAs, where your point of ROI is at, please. Can you please tell me the five top markers of wear, what the averages are for those criteria, what sigma deviation is exhibited by those criteria, and what condemation levels you have set for those markers, relative to your specific engine family, and how your specific engine compares/contrasts to those parameters?

Maybe you're right; maybe you "need" syns at 5k miles. But I have yet to see real world proof of such claim. You have done ZERO to prove it, other than make wide-ranging claims and point to other hysterical folks who substantiate your own personal viewpoint.


BTW - What makes you think I'm in MO? I live near Indy ... not that it matters ...
_________________________
Conventionals vs. Synthetics isn't about which is "better"; it's about which lasts longer, while assuring safe operation, in relation to cost. Any product can be over or under utilized. The same applies to filters.
Make an informed decision; first consider your operating conditions, next determine your maintenance plan, and then pick your lube and filter. Don't do it the other way around ...

Top
#3261224 - 01/27/14 05:14 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: Chris B.]
demarpaint Offline


Registered: 07/03/05
Posts: 21341
Loc: NY
Originally Posted By: Chris B.

Spend any time on Honda Forums and the Folks following the MM using conventional oil are having problems. It is all over the place with pictures and UOA's showing trashed oil and engines. The VCM feature is what is being blamed for this. I barley had time to post my UOA so since you're from Missouri you can go search for it yourself. I'll spend a whopping $22 two or three times a year on full syn and keep my $30,000 car well protected.


A Ford tech friend of mine was telling me that some of the F-Series trucks are having issues, and he's advising people to ignore the MM and follow a severe service interval. I never had much faith in MM's, and took a lot of flack for saying it here. Now we have Honda having problems with it, Ford having problems with it, and GM had some problems too and had to re-calibrate it. Vehicles are an expensive investment. Imagine the poor guy that puts faith in his F-150 Ecoboost pick up's MM. He does a lot of stop and go driving and finds out just after warranty that his OCI's were too long, no thanks for me. hide

While some of them are OK, blanket statements like MM's are great across the board is just wrong. A few UOA's to confirm its accuracy would be a sound investment, and a visual inspection of the valve train at 25K miles would be a good idea too, if possible and economically feasible. Opinions vary.
_________________________
GOD Bless our Troops


Top
#3261261 - 01/27/14 07:02 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: demarpaint]
DuckRyder Offline


Registered: 10/20/05
Posts: 1444
Loc: Atlanta
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2675186/1

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2858992/1

What is the usage? Longterm steady state driving is where the VCM comes into play and starts creating problems.

I don't know what if any changes in the MM or VCM programming have been made.

Just out of curiosity what percentage was the MM at 5000 miles.
_________________________
Robert
  • 1996 Acura 3.5RL
  • 2005 Honda Civic Sedan
  • 1972 Ford F100
  • 2012 Volkswagen Jetta TDi

Top
#3261421 - 01/27/14 11:02 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: DuckRyder]
TrevorS Offline


Registered: 07/14/13
Posts: 1281
Loc: California
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder

What is the usage? Longterm steady state driving is where the VCM comes into play and starts creating problems.


That's exactly what I was wondering.

I wonder if the OLM algorithm has been updated for VCM.

Top
#3261463 - 01/27/14 11:37 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: dnewton3]
Chris B. Offline


Registered: 03/16/03
Posts: 2898
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Oil is cheap so "better" in terms of wear protection. Normally I agree that 5,000 on full Syn is a waste of money but not on the VCM V6. It is well documented that this engine is very hard on oil and it degrades fast.



Ah, yes, the old "cheap insurance" defense. Well known in the BITOG Court of Lubes ...


Please show me the "well documented" evidence that proves you need syn. So the engine may be "hard" on oil; so what? How does that translate into actual wear and ROI? Show me data that undeniably details how, in 5k miles, there is a statistical difference in wear outside "normal" sigma deviation between your choice of lube and a decent conventional oil.


Spend any time on Honda Forums and the Folks following the MM using conventional oil are having problems. It is all over the place with pictures and UOA's showing trashed oil and engines. The VCM feature is what is being blamed for this. I barley had time to post my UOA so since you're from Missouri you can go search for it yourself. I'll spend a whopping $22 two or three times a year on full syn and keep my $30,000 car well protected.



Directing me to other websites, also full of mythology and rhetoric, isnt' exactly the "proof" I was seeking. I still wait for true documented evidence and not scare tatics resounded by other uninformed folks. Maybe it's good enough for you, but I set a higher standard for my level of "proof". I would agree there are things that are "well documented" on those sites. Unfortunately it's not hard data with objective review, but rather subjective conjecture and regurgitation of opinion.

I see nothing in UOA data to indicate your selection of lube did anything outstanding. Macro analysis leads to the conclusion, even for your specific engine family, that syns at 5k miles don't pay for themselves. Read my "normalcy" article. Then show me, with real tangible data including your own UOAs, where your point of ROI is at, please. Can you please tell me the five top markers of wear, what the averages are for those criteria, what sigma deviation is exhibited by those criteria, and what condemation levels you have set for those markers, relative to your specific engine family, and how your specific engine compares/contrasts to those parameters?

Maybe you're right; maybe you "need" syns at 5k miles. But I have yet to see real world proof of such claim. You have done ZERO to prove it, other than make wide-ranging claims and point to other hysterical folks who substantiate your own personal viewpoint.


BTW - What makes you think I'm in MO? I live near Indy ... not that it matters ...


See 2 posts below yours quoted above. These folks having VCM problems are all over the forums. They are not making up this stuff for fun. It is a real problem with this engine and dino oil going by the MM.

Top
#3261607 - 01/27/14 02:13 PM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: Chris B.]
dnewton3 Offline



Registered: 05/14/07
Posts: 5628
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
Anecdotal blathering is not evidence nor data that can be understood statistically.

Show me how you (or any other Honda VCM owner) have determined safely and statistically that 5k miles is the correct mileage limit, and how you attribute that limit directly to the use of synthetic, please. How do you know 5k miles isn't "too far" as well? Or not far enough? Why 5k miles? Are you 100% sure that 5k miles isn't too much? Perhaps you should consider every 3k miles or 3 months; you know, like the good ol' days. You can double-down on the "extra cheap insurance".

Your data suggests nothing substantial came for your effort except gross waste, despite what anyone tells you to comfort your predisposed lube bigotry. I think it's clear what your want, and there's nothing wrong with that, for you. But some of us actually use data and facts to make reasoned, rational decisions. For us, there's more to an OCI then just guessing.

If you're going to dump M1 every 5k miles, then why even bother with the UOAs? If you started to have a problem, would you even know how to distinguish it in the UOA, versus standard deviation shifts? Right now, this is telling you that M1 did nothing special, and yet you continue to ignore the very data you paid for. So why is it you would have any faith in the UOA should it indicate something were wrong? You don't seem to trust it to be right; why trust it if something were askew? The UOA is telling you that you wasted money, but your emotion is telling you otherwise.

Again - what five markers are you looking for, what averages do you believe to be sound, what deviation is typical, and how are you setting condemnation limits? If you are not addressing these, you're just guessing your way through the entire thing. And of these "problems" you're trying to avoid, can you definitively describe the issues, and how they are cause by oil use and selection? Is there a limit where a conventional lube would be OK? What is the upper end to the use of syns? What symptoms manifest that indicate a problem is present?

You run M1 for 5k miles; I presume you have no issues to date so far. But that's just correlation and nothing more. You have not convinced me that your plan is attributable to safe operation. Let's expound on your logic here:
1) you use syn for 5k miles
2) you have no issues so far
3) you presume your engine is safe because of your actions

I can do that too ...
1) we have three outdoor cats at home
2) we have no wild bears roaming in central Indiana
3) I presume the cats are keeping the bears away

Maybe I should get a few more cats, just for cheap insurance ...

Don't confuse correlation with causation, sir. You have not shown me any proof that you have any data to use for rational decisions about your OCI or lube selection.

Whether you like it or not, you're not only wasting money on the lube, but also on the information you paid to ignore. Maybe that is your idea of "cheap insurance", but where I come from, it's called massive waste.

It's clear to me you have no interest in using the products you purchase as anything other than toys. Fine by me. I wish you the best.


Edited by dnewton3 (01/27/14 02:28 PM)
_________________________
Conventionals vs. Synthetics isn't about which is "better"; it's about which lasts longer, while assuring safe operation, in relation to cost. Any product can be over or under utilized. The same applies to filters.
Make an informed decision; first consider your operating conditions, next determine your maintenance plan, and then pick your lube and filter. Don't do it the other way around ...

Top
#3261663 - 01/27/14 03:06 PM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: dnewton3]
DragRace Offline


Registered: 11/27/06
Posts: 2327
Loc: 1/4 Mile Track
This*

Classic case of uncalled for bashing.

Top
#3261711 - 01/27/14 03:59 PM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: Chris B.]
Schmoe Offline


Registered: 05/12/03
Posts: 6410
Loc: Oklahoma
Wow.
_________________________
01 Supercrew Lariat 4X4
06 Accord EX V6
10 CRV EX-L
(traded 02 Accord EX V6 @ 208K miles for)
14 CRV EX-L
(traded 10 CRV for)


Top
#3261767 - 01/27/14 05:15 PM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: Chris B.]
Trav Offline


Registered: 11/20/06
Posts: 9987
Loc: MA, Mittelfranken.de
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: Chris B.
Oil is cheap so "better" in terms of wear protection. Normally I agree that 5,000 on full Syn is a waste of money but not on the VCM V6. It is well documented that this engine is very hard on oil and it degrades fast.



Ah, yes, the old "cheap insurance" defense. Well known in the BITOG Court of Lubes ...


Please show me the "well documented" evidence that proves you need syn. So the engine may be "hard" on oil; so what? How does that translate into actual wear and ROI? Show me data that undeniably details how, in 5k miles, there is a statistical difference in wear outside "normal" sigma deviation between your choice of lube and a decent conventional oil.


Spend any time on Honda Forums and the Folks following the MM using conventional oil are having problems. It is all over the place with pictures and UOA's showing trashed oil and engines. The VCM feature is what is being blamed for this. I barley had time to post my UOA so since you're from Missouri you can go search for it yourself. I'll spend a whopping $22 two or three times a year on full syn and keep my $30,000 car well protected.


I know the 3.5 iVTEC engines pretty well, i may have been one of the first ones to actually have one of these engines apart because of this issue and posted pictures, lots of them right here on BITOG and took some serious flack from the Honda fan club for it too.

I know this particular engine from new and it had verifiable OCI with gp III synthetic and deposited up so badly it stopped running on 3 cylinders.
This engine will not survive on 5K dino oil changes thats not an opinion. I have proven it on a real live engine.

UOA's are just snap shots in time and of little value when it comes to something like this, it will not show up on a UOA. When this issue arises it does it today and with no warning.

I have done more than a dozen of these and 5k on synthetic keeps them alive and clean for the rest of their lives, one i did has gone over 80K since tear down on it which is more than it had originally.
Could it go more or less? I know 7500 isnt doing so well and 5K does keep them clean long term so thats as close to it as i can come to putting a number one it.

2cents
_________________________
ASE L1, Master. Deutsch Meisterbrief.

Top
#3262241 - 01/28/14 04:58 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: dnewton3]
Chris B. Offline


Registered: 03/16/03
Posts: 2898
Loc: Colorado
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Anecdotal blathering is not evidence nor data that can be understood statistically.

Show me how you (or any other Honda VCM owner) have determined safely and statistically that 5k miles is the correct mileage limit, and how you attribute that limit directly to the use of synthetic, please. How do you know 5k miles isn't "too far" as well? Or not far enough? Why 5k miles? Are you 100% sure that 5k miles isn't too much? Perhaps you should consider every 3k miles or 3 months; you know, like the good ol' days. You can double-down on the "extra cheap insurance".

Your data suggests nothing substantial came for your effort except gross waste, despite what anyone tells you to comfort your predisposed lube bigotry. I think it's clear what your want, and there's nothing wrong with that, for you. But some of us actually use data and facts to make reasoned, rational decisions. For us, there's more to an OCI then just guessing.

If you're going to dump M1 every 5k miles, then why even bother with the UOAs? If you started to have a problem, would you even know how to distinguish it in the UOA, versus standard deviation shifts? Right now, this is telling you that M1 did nothing special, and yet you continue to ignore the very data you paid for. So why is it you would have any faith in the UOA should it indicate something were wrong? You don't seem to trust it to be right; why trust it if something were askew? The UOA is telling you that you wasted money, but your emotion is telling you otherwise.

Again - what five markers are you looking for, what averages do you believe to be sound, what deviation is typical, and how are you setting condemnation limits? If you are not addressing these, you're just guessing your way through the entire thing. And of these "problems" you're trying to avoid, can you definitively describe the issues, and how they are cause by oil use and selection? Is there a limit where a conventional lube would be OK? What is the upper end to the use of syns? What symptoms manifest that indicate a problem is present?

You run M1 for 5k miles; I presume you have no issues to date so far. But that's just correlation and nothing more. You have not convinced me that your plan is attributable to safe operation. Let's expound on your logic here:
1) you use syn for 5k miles
2) you have no issues so far
3) you presume your engine is safe because of your actions

I can do that too ...
1) we have three outdoor cats at home
2) we have no wild bears roaming in central Indiana
3) I presume the cats are keeping the bears away

Maybe I should get a few more cats, just for cheap insurance ...

Don't confuse correlation with causation, sir. You have not shown me any proof that you have any data to use for rational decisions about your OCI or lube selection.

Whether you like it or not, you're not only wasting money on the lube, but also on the information you paid to ignore. Maybe that is your idea of "cheap insurance", but where I come from, it's called massive waste.

It's clear to me you have no interest in using the products you purchase as anything other than toys. Fine by me. I wish you the best.


5,000 miles on conventional has proven to be a bad match for this engine. As I have said before and have posted, this engine sludges and had early failures using the MM on dino oil. In many cases at 7,500 miles on syn, this engine has problems. At 5,000 miles on syn there has been no reports of problems.
Now none of this was done in a "lab setting" backed by controlled tests that take years and costs millions of dollars to conduct. It was determined by people like me and other forum members real world findings on what is really working in these engines better then what the factory MM recommends.

Tracking wear trends with UOA's can help when you do end up with a problem. I have on a couple different accounts, identified engine problems and fixed them before they became a bigger problem. The UOA's more then paid for themselves in these cases so not really wasting money here. Not many on here are scientists or tribologists and this is just a hobby for most on here so are we all wasting money? There is a lot to be learned from everyone posting their findings and the VCM engines needing short Syn OCI's is one of them. Why don't you PROOVE I'm wrong??? You can't just as I can't answer all you questions so don't even try.

Your cat scenario is your logic not mine and it quite silly. I know for a fact my engine is well protected because the UOA shows low wear and a clean report based on all reports on this engine. All the "proof and data" you want and keep asking for is spread out on the internet. It is not in the form you want. It is in the real world findings of people like Trav and the countless Honda V6 owners who talk and share "data" about what they are finding in every day use.
You are the one who is getting "emotional" Sir. Worrying about "massive waste" and getting all bent out of shape over changing M1 early LOL! I just posted a UOA to share with the forum, I'm done talking to you. You remind me of the type of person who is super book smart but doesn't have enough common sense to figure out how to hold the door open for a pretty girl or how to properly tie their shoes. The rest of us can keep swapping UOA's and figuring out how to keep our engines protected and running better.....

I just got done working a 16 hour day to help pay for all the free loaders in this country so forgive my grammar and punctuation. LOL! Good nite all.

Top
#3262242 - 01/28/14 05:00 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: Trav]
fpracha Offline


Registered: 12/07/10
Posts: 479
Loc: MA
Originally Posted By: Trav
I know this particular engine from new and it had verifiable OCI with gp III synthetic and deposited up so badly it stopped running on 3 cylinders.
This engine will not survive on 5K dino oil changes thats not an opinion. I have proven it on a real live engine.

UOA's are just snap shots in time and of little value when it comes to something like this, it will not show up on a UOA. When this issue arises it does it today and with no warning.

I have done more than a dozen of these and 5k on synthetic keeps them alive and clean for the rest of their lives, one i did has gone over 80K since tear down on it which is more than it had originally. 2cents

First, thank you for sharing input from your real experiences smile
Now are you saying the Grp III oils have failed these engines on the 5K oci routine given by the MM?
If yes then what are the Synthetic Oils you will recommend for these Honda engines at the 5K OCI routine ?

Top
#3262245 - 01/28/14 05:35 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: fpracha]
901Memphis Offline


Registered: 08/14/10
Posts: 6074
Loc: Northern Kentucky
Originally Posted By: fpracha
Originally Posted By: Trav
I know this particular engine from new and it had verifiable OCI with gp III synthetic and deposited up so badly it stopped running on 3 cylinders.
This engine will not survive on 5K dino oil changes thats not an opinion. I have proven it on a real live engine.

UOA's are just snap shots in time and of little value when it comes to something like this, it will not show up on a UOA. When this issue arises it does it today and with no warning.

I have done more than a dozen of these and 5k on synthetic keeps them alive and clean for the rest of their lives, one i did has gone over 80K since tear down on it which is more than it had originally. 2cents

First, thank you for sharing input from your real experiences smile
Now are you saying the Grp III oils have failed these engines on the 5K oci routine given by the MM?
If yes then what are the Synthetic Oils you will recommend for these Honda engines at the 5K OCI routine ?


If it were me i would go with a low deposit oil like Castrol Edge, or a GTL base oil like Pennzoil Ultra, which scores well in the deposit test too.

On page 7 if you havent seen it.

http://www.amsoil.com/lit/g3115.pdf
_________________________
1999 Ford Taurus 145k (Vulcan v6) - M1 High Mileage 5w30 | Fram Ultra XG 3600
2002 Buick Century 102k - PU 5w30 / Fram Ultra XG 3980 / Filter mag

Top
#3262370 - 01/28/14 08:20 AM Re: 2012 Honda Accord V6 M1 0w20 5,000 miles [Re: Chris B.]
dnewton3 Offline



Registered: 05/14/07
Posts: 5628
Loc: Indianapolis, IN
You guys still don't get it ... Let me simplify it in this manner with these questions:
What does a UOA show you that you can use as a marker to see when the issue in that engine family arises? Do you see a marked increase in wear metals? A huge shift in viscosity? What is it that the UOA gives you as a clue to know the probelm is afoot?

- If your answer is wear metals, then what shift in which elements are you looking for, past the standard deviation? At what point do you see a delineation in performance between conventional and synthetic lubes? Or, are wear metals not an indicator at all? It is not unheard of that wear metals may not indicate the onset of the problem (example to follow later ...)
- If your answer is vis, then what value is the tell-tale sign? Again, what value is the tipping-point? How does that contrast between the two choices (dino and syn) in macro data?
- Your individual UOA may or may not shot the onset of the sludge problem. Even if it does, it's too late by then. You're already into the problem if you count on your unique UOA to alert you. Visual checks (peeking under the valve cover) may do so, but I cannot assure you of that.



This is topically no different than the discussion I had a year ago about the coked-piston issue in Saturn SL2 engines. And believe it or not, there was a marker that could indicate the onset of the problem; it was oil consumption. Not wear, not vis, not insolubles, not FP. It was top-off fluid! And that information came from macro UOA data. While individual UOAs would not show immediate onset, the mass population data allowed clear delineation of the duration of the OCI where the problem began, and grew. DATA has value, even if it's not yours! And the data seemed indiscriminatory as well; age, brand, grade did not matter. And it was the same story there, too; the OP chose to use PU for 5k miles, but had ZERO idea of why he was doing it, other than his presumption of "cleaning" ability of the lube. He had zero data and no basis for any conclusion, until the marker was discovered in the macro data. And, because the data is predicated heavily on dino, he still has nothing but presumptive thought as to how the syn will react in regard to duration of exposure. So little syn data was there that the marker was not present. In short, he guessed that it would be OK, but had no proof that is was safe. If he was wrong, he too would fall victim.


If you all can get past your sensitive emotional reactions and read my INTENT here, you'll understand. There is good value in macro data; you can learn from OTHERS rather than having to experience the issue first-hand.

What I am pointing out is that here in this thread the OP has no idea what the markers are, or what condemnation points would be prudent based upon macro data. This is why I said he's wasting money; he is swaggin' a guess based upon correlation and not causation. He's being influenced by rhetoric rather than adjusting actions based upon facts. He is using the UOA as a toy rather than a tool. My cat analogy has merit; it illustrates the flawed assumption of presence of an attribute, relative to the exclusion of another. He uses syns; he sees no sludge at 5k miles (yet). That is coincidence and nothing more, as far as proof goes. One or two UOAs with syn in his application is meaningless. If he had 30 successive in a row, and evidence that sludge was not present, then I'd agree that micro data proved his point at that duration. But he does not have that; he has ZERO basis for mirco data conclusions. 5k miles is anecdotal at this point; he has no marker to point to (other than coincidence) that his lube and OCI are "right". He has stumbled upon correlation, not discovered causation.

If you said to me ...
"Dave - the marker is wear; there is a 63% elevation of Fe and Pb at 6.2k miles, with a confidence of .94, when using conventional lubes, but the marker can be shifted to 28% using syns" then I'd have to say you have an identifier. Or, if you said "Mr. Newton - the onset of sludge is predicated by a significant shift of oxidation and nitration outside the 3rd sigma, 47% of the time using conventional fluids at 4.9k miles, but syns delay this onset by one whole magnitude of exposure resultant of the same effect", then I'd have to agree you've found it. But nope - you show me nothing so far to convince me you understand what the markers may be, or how to quantify them. Rather, you rely on anecdotal gibberish and hype. You see some folks have success at some exposure, and you presume it to be gospel. Did it ever occur to you that some folks use syns in your application, and still get sludge? And some use dino, and don't get sludge?

If UOA micro data can show the onset of the problem, and you can indentify it, then don't hold back, because you can be the savior for the Honda faithful. If UOA micro data cannot define the onset, then why are you paying for the UOAs? You seem to infer that the UOA data in this thread is evidence of your choice being a good one, but then what is it you point to in assurance of the claim, because statistically the wear is well within normal response? You cannot have it both ways ChrisB. You cannot say the data shows this is a good choice, but then ignore the fact that the data shows no distinction between your syn and a typical dino oil. So, it the UOA data the basis of your markers, or not? Which is it?

It is my assessment that you have nothing to go on but your own supposition, backed up by other folks patting you on the back who also blindly follow the cattle trail.

You all would do well to read the "normalcy" article and internalize it.


Just because you all don't like my frank, stark assessment, does not mean I'm wrong here. Rude? Perhaps. Incorrect? Nope. Perhaps you find me offensive, brash and arrogant; maybe I am those things. But I find it irritating when folks mistakenly and carelessly apply incorrect conclusions. That's not the basis of the website's purpose. BITOG is a great place to share data and experiments, and to challenge others to prove their position. We can learn from each other. It was not created to be a sounding board for hap-hazard opinions and whimsical conclusions, backed up by other self-congratulatory lube bigots.

Contrary to popular opinion, I don't hate synthetics. I actually use them in some of my applications. But I don't profess them to be a one-size-fits-all answer. Nor do I use them blindly, because marketing and buddies tell me to. I do abhor waste and misinformation.

I conclude by offering a sincere public apology for those I hurt emotinally; that is not my purpose or intent. But some of you need some tough love, whether you recognize it or not. No one promised you an easy time of it when you post a UOA; that's not in the site rules. We are expected to treat and respect each other as adults, but that does not infer we have to coddle or agree with each other. If you set out public info, then be prepared to back it up. I am sorry if I offended ChrisB or others, but I am not sorry for speaking the truth about the use and misuse of UOA data, nor the wreckless conclusions thereof made.







Edited by dnewton3 (01/28/14 08:38 AM)
_________________________
Conventionals vs. Synthetics isn't about which is "better"; it's about which lasts longer, while assuring safe operation, in relation to cost. Any product can be over or under utilized. The same applies to filters.
Make an informed decision; first consider your operating conditions, next determine your maintenance plan, and then pick your lube and filter. Don't do it the other way around ...

Top
Page 2 of 8 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >