GMC Acadia - Havoline Dino - 8000 Miles - OLM 15%
- Thread starter JDR15467
- Start date
- Status
Does this remind you of the Consumer Report on the NY taxi and how the basic same results were found when the tore down the motors???? Hardly any difference in wear between dino and syn. Tons of reasons why, but down deep I really do not think there is a big difference. But if that is true for many that would be terrible news. We all must dream on.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Not comparable. You used 2 different filters,time of year,different mileages on the unit,etc. 2 very nice runs. Cheers for your motor!
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Not comparable. You used 2 different filters,time of year,different mileages on the unit,etc. 2 very nice runs. Cheers for your motor!
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
Does this remind you of the Consumer Report on the NY taxi and how the basic same results were found when the tore down the motors???? Hardly any difference in wear between dino and syn. Tons of reasons why, but down deep I really do not think there is a big difference. But if that is true for many that would be terrible news. We all must dream on.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Not comparable. You used 2 different filters,time of year,different mileages on the unit,etc. 2 very nice runs. Cheers for your motor!
Not to pick a argument, but I read that article many, many years ago. I don't recall any synthetics being in that test (although I am older now and suffering from CRS
). However, the fair point to make was that they tested high end expensive oils and bargin brand oils, and all the wear was essentially the same over 60k miles for 100 vehicles. That's a very credible statement. Teardown analysis is the absolute end-all-be-all of any assessment.
What most people simply cannot wrap their head around is that synthetics ARE great products, but ONLY when they are used in a manner that allows their strengths to shine. Synthetics can typically outlast dino oils in OCI duration. If you don't run out the oil far enough to experience the difference, then synthetics are a waste of money. If you can/will extend you OCI, then synthethics can show enhanced performance.
What this UOA tells us is that this engine, with a credible mass-market oil, is capable of doing 8k miles easily, with little wear. In this engine, a syn might be able to go 12k miles or more, but if you compare/contrast a dino to a syn at 8k miles, the synthetic "advantage" has not been established yet.
This is not the first example of a GM gasser going 8k+ miles on the OLM. I recall one where the OLM went nearly 10k miles, and the UOA came back fine. My Dmax has an OLM, and they seem to be fairly accurate as well. They are predicated on the use of "normal" oil and filters.
Kudos on this UOA; great running engine that will last (quite likley) for much longer that you'd ever care to own it.
Does this remind you of the Consumer Report on the NY taxi and how the basic same results were found when the tore down the motors???? Hardly any difference in wear between dino and syn. Tons of reasons why, but down deep I really do not think there is a big difference. But if that is true for many that would be terrible news. We all must dream on.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Not comparable. You used 2 different filters,time of year,different mileages on the unit,etc. 2 very nice runs. Cheers for your motor!
Not to pick a argument, but I read that article many, many years ago. I don't recall any synthetics being in that test (although I am older now and suffering from CRS
What most people simply cannot wrap their head around is that synthetics ARE great products, but ONLY when they are used in a manner that allows their strengths to shine. Synthetics can typically outlast dino oils in OCI duration. If you don't run out the oil far enough to experience the difference, then synthetics are a waste of money. If you can/will extend you OCI, then synthethics can show enhanced performance.
What this UOA tells us is that this engine, with a credible mass-market oil, is capable of doing 8k miles easily, with little wear. In this engine, a syn might be able to go 12k miles or more, but if you compare/contrast a dino to a syn at 8k miles, the synthetic "advantage" has not been established yet.
This is not the first example of a GM gasser going 8k+ miles on the OLM. I recall one where the OLM went nearly 10k miles, and the UOA came back fine. My Dmax has an OLM, and they seem to be fairly accurate as well. They are predicated on the use of "normal" oil and filters.
Kudos on this UOA; great running engine that will last (quite likley) for much longer that you'd ever care to own it.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
Does this remind you of the Consumer Report on the NY taxi and how the basic same results were found when the tore down the motors???? Hardly any difference in wear between dino and syn. Tons of reasons why, but down deep I really do not think there is a big difference. But if that is true for many that would be terrible news. We all must dream on.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Not comparable. You used 2 different filters,time of year,different mileages on the unit,etc. 2 very nice runs. Cheers for your motor!
I don't think wear is going to be an issue with either oil, but deposits may be a bigger issue with the conventional. Better deposit control in "fancy" oils is what you are paying for.
Does this remind you of the Consumer Report on the NY taxi and how the basic same results were found when the tore down the motors???? Hardly any difference in wear between dino and syn. Tons of reasons why, but down deep I really do not think there is a big difference. But if that is true for many that would be terrible news. We all must dream on.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Not comparable. You used 2 different filters,time of year,different mileages on the unit,etc. 2 very nice runs. Cheers for your motor!
I don't think wear is going to be an issue with either oil, but deposits may be a bigger issue with the conventional. Better deposit control in "fancy" oils is what you are paying for.
Originally Posted By: Old Mustang Guy
My wife has an 09 Acadia. It appears that the direct injection engine may not be as hard on oil as we thought. Low fuel contamination also.
Is this the direct injected variant?
The 3.6L in my wife's 2009 Torrent GXP is not direct injected.
Regardless, glad to see this UOA - I've got the Havoline synthetic in hers, and I'm going to try really hard to let it go the full OLM interval.
My wife has an 09 Acadia. It appears that the direct injection engine may not be as hard on oil as we thought. Low fuel contamination also.
Is this the direct injected variant?
The 3.6L in my wife's 2009 Torrent GXP is not direct injected.
Regardless, glad to see this UOA - I've got the Havoline synthetic in hers, and I'm going to try really hard to let it go the full OLM interval.
The test did include a syn because of the time of the test late 90 the guess was Mobil 1. But I agree with your thread and say thanks for putting it in another slant.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
Does this remind you of the Consumer Report on the NY taxi and how the basic same results were found when the tore down the motors???? Hardly any difference in wear between dino and syn. Tons of reasons why, but down deep I really do not think there is a big difference. But if that is true for many that would be terrible news. We all must dream on.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Not comparable. You used 2 different filters,time of year,different mileages on the unit,etc. 2 very nice runs. Cheers for your motor!
Not to pick a argument, but I read that article many, many years ago. I don't recall any synthetics being in that test (although I am older now and suffering from CRS
). However, the fair point to make was that they tested high end expensive oils and bargin brand oils, and all the wear was essentially the same over 60k miles for 100 vehicles. That's a very credible statement. Teardown analysis is the absolute end-all-be-all of any assessment.
What most people simply cannot wrap their head around is that synthetics ARE great products, but ONLY when they are used in a manner that allows their strengths to shine. Synthetics can typically outlast dino oils in OCI duration. If you don't run out the oil far enough to experience the difference, then synthetics are a waste of money. If you can/will extend you OCI, then synthethics can show enhanced performance.
What this UOA tells us is that this engine, with a credible mass-market oil, is capable of doing 8k miles easily, with little wear. In this engine, a syn might be able to go 12k miles or more, but if you compare/contrast a dino to a syn at 8k miles, the synthetic "advantage" has not been established yet.
This is not the first example of a GM gasser going 8k+ miles on the OLM. I recall one where the OLM went nearly 10k miles, and the UOA came back fine. My Dmax has an OLM, and they seem to be fairly accurate as well. They are predicated on the use of "normal" oil and filters.
Kudos on this UOA; great running engine that will last (quite likley) for much longer that you'd ever care to own it.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Originally Posted By: ottotheclown
Does this remind you of the Consumer Report on the NY taxi and how the basic same results were found when the tore down the motors???? Hardly any difference in wear between dino and syn. Tons of reasons why, but down deep I really do not think there is a big difference. But if that is true for many that would be terrible news. We all must dream on.
Originally Posted By: FZ1
Not comparable. You used 2 different filters,time of year,different mileages on the unit,etc. 2 very nice runs. Cheers for your motor!
Not to pick a argument, but I read that article many, many years ago. I don't recall any synthetics being in that test (although I am older now and suffering from CRS
What most people simply cannot wrap their head around is that synthetics ARE great products, but ONLY when they are used in a manner that allows their strengths to shine. Synthetics can typically outlast dino oils in OCI duration. If you don't run out the oil far enough to experience the difference, then synthetics are a waste of money. If you can/will extend you OCI, then synthethics can show enhanced performance.
What this UOA tells us is that this engine, with a credible mass-market oil, is capable of doing 8k miles easily, with little wear. In this engine, a syn might be able to go 12k miles or more, but if you compare/contrast a dino to a syn at 8k miles, the synthetic "advantage" has not been established yet.
This is not the first example of a GM gasser going 8k+ miles on the OLM. I recall one where the OLM went nearly 10k miles, and the UOA came back fine. My Dmax has an OLM, and they seem to be fairly accurate as well. They are predicated on the use of "normal" oil and filters.
Kudos on this UOA; great running engine that will last (quite likley) for much longer that you'd ever care to own it.
The 09 Acadia is DI. The 08 is not.
It appears that both oils performed well. The one on the right hand column seemed to stand up to the shearing better than the one in the left column. the TBN was better also. For an 8,000 mile OCI, both are very good.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked