257,000 mi of Valvoline conventional 5k OCI (pics)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Someone asked to see the compression numbers. I got a change to do this today. These were checked dry with the engine warmed as per Toyota FSM. I didn't do a wet test since the numbers were within specs.

1. 187
2. 186
3. 182
4. 190

Toyota Specifications for this vehicle...
Compression Pressure 184 psi
Minimum Pressure 145 psi
Difference Between Cylinders <15 psi
 
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Yea, so much for the bull [censored] about the rings being gummed up with conventional oil.

Nice job; keep on keepin on.


Drew,
I have seen coked rings in a 4 cyl Ford engine that was abused on dino. It's not that the rings are gummed, they get carboned up where the rings cannot fully seat againt the cyl walls. The carbon was so hard that it was like there was no ring expansion at all. Serious blow by resulted and high oil consumption was a result. Coked rings are a major reason for engines using oil. Oil oxidation leads to varnish and at times ring coking. Quality synthetic oils almost never experiance this.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Yea, so much for the bull [censored] about the rings being gummed up with conventional oil.

Nice job; keep on keepin on.


Drew,
I have seen coked rings in a 4 cyl Ford engine that was abused on dino. It's not that the rings are gummed, they get carboned up where the rings cannot fully seat againt the cyl walls. The carbon was so hard that it was like there was no ring expansion at all. Serious blow by resulted and high oil consumption was a result. Coked rings are a major reason for engines using oil. Oil oxidation leads to varnish and at times ring coking. Quality synthetic oils almost never experiance this.


Why not? Synthetics are not impervious to break down, only take longer to do so. You said yourself that the engine was abused on dino. Once you start talking abuse, even a quality synthetic would not have prevented severe ring coking. Perhaps the process would take longer, but it would inevitably happen regardless.
 
Originally Posted By: KrisZ
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Yea, so much for the bull [censored] about the rings being gummed up with conventional oil.

Nice job; keep on keepin on.


Drew,
I have seen coked rings in a 4 cyl Ford engine that was abused on dino. It's not that the rings are gummed, they get carboned up where the rings cannot fully seat againt the cyl walls. The carbon was so hard that it was like there was no ring expansion at all. Serious blow by resulted and high oil consumption was a result. Coked rings are a major reason for engines using oil. Oil oxidation leads to varnish and at times ring coking. Quality synthetic oils almost never experiance this.


Why not? Synthetics are not impervious to break down, only take longer to do so. You said yourself that the engine was abused on dino. Once you start talking abuse, even a quality synthetic would not have prevented severe ring coking. Perhaps the process would take longer, but it would inevitably happen regardless.


Nice try, but no cigar. To get ring coking with a quality synthetic would require very long OCIs. 20-30K OCIs and beyond. Who knows? I personally know folks that do 15-25K OCIs on M1 oils with 200-400K on their engines and there is no evidence of ring coking. I'm sure that Amsoil dealers can verify that they have customers doing long OCIs like that without a problem.

The good news is, you can have that same confidence that your engine will never have this problem.
 
Ok tig, do you think the Honda in the link below had gummed up rings? Or are we still gonna play the silly game that synthetics don't sludge, varnish or gum up rings?
Below example is all using synthetic at 7500 mile intervals according to Trav, and I have no reason to doubt his testimony.
It's extreme, I admit and there is no doubt that a conventional oil would fare much worse, but that is not my point. My point is to debunk the silly notion that synthetics don't sludge, leave deposits or gum up rings.

SAM_0102.jpg


SAM_0077.jpg



http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rd_V6_M1_0w20_5
 
Originally Posted By: apwillard1986
I literally laughed through the few pages where posters expressed concern over the possible state of the piston rings in this engine. No one who regularly works on cars would look under that valve cover and see anything other than an indication of a well maintained engine who's owner has obviously changed the oil at a reasonable interval with a quality product.


Agreed... I think a lot of people are very brand loyal (nothing wrong with that) and assume that their preferred choice in oil would have done better.

We can look at pictures under the valve cover of cars with similar mileages and different oil all day long, but those are meaningless unless they are of the same engine running under the same operating conditions.

All that we do know is that conventional Valvoline was more than adequate to protect this engine at a high mileage and reasonable oil change intervals.
 
Originally Posted By: KrisZ

Ok tig, do you think the Honda in the link below had gummed up rings? Or are we still gonna play the silly game that synthetics don't sludge, varnish or gum up rings?
Below example is all using synthetic at 7500 mile intervals according to Trav, and I have no reason to doubt his testimony.
It's extreme, I admit and there is no doubt that a conventional oil would fare much worse, but that is not my point. My point is to debunk the silly notion that synthetics don't sludge, leave deposits or gum up rings.

SAM_0102.jpg


SAM_0077.jpg



http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rd_V6_M1_0w20_5


Honda engines are normally realiable. There has to be something else going on that's not obvious. Family members with Hondas never saw anything like this. Trav, tell us more.
 
I'd be willing to bet that's one of the Honda v6's with the cylinder deactivation that is so hard on oil. I personally think the design of an engine and its pcv system has more to do with varnish build up than anything.
 
Not to take away from Trav but IIRC those pics were from a mid 2000's Honda Odyssey with the 3.5 V6 VCM engine. That engine specifically was the 6/3 design which when activated, the front 3 cylinders kept going while the back shut off. It was highly exasperated by prolonged highway driving at light throttle. That engine had no "defects" other than a poor design that even synthetic couldn't handle at a resonable 7500 OCI. Honda has sinced revised the ECM's for 6/4/3 operation for shoter durations. Regardless, even new Honda 3.5s WILL varnish and sludge synthetics at longer OCIs. They are brutally hard on oil.

To the original poster, the under cover pics on the first page serve to prove that plain conventional oil is really all that is necessary for long engine life in most cases. Here we have an engine that has over 1/4 MILLION miles, very little deposits, and seemably has more life left.
 
Originally Posted By: zuluplus30
Here we have an engine that has over 1/4 MILLION miles, very little deposits, and seemably has more life left.


I did a compression test and the numbers are posted on page 10 of this thread. The compression is still within Toyota specs for a new engine.
 
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: KrisZ

Ok tig, do you think the Honda in the link below had gummed up rings? Or are we still gonna play the silly game that synthetics don't sludge, varnish or gum up rings?
Below example is all using synthetic at 7500 mile intervals according to Trav, and I have no reason to doubt his testimony.
It's extreme, I admit and there is no doubt that a conventional oil would fare much worse, but that is not my point. My point is to debunk the silly notion that synthetics don't sludge, leave deposits or gum up rings.

SAM_0102.jpg


SAM_0077.jpg



http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rd_V6_M1_0w20_5


Honda engines are normally realiable. There has to be something else going on that's not obvious. Family members with Hondas never saw anything like this. Trav, tell us more.


This is a iVTEC. You cannot compare this to the OP's engine or any other "normal" non VCM engine or even VCM engines from other manufacturers.
This is a specific issue with these particular engines. The 3.5 is a very good reliable engine its just the VCM caused a lot of issues under certain conditions in these cars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top