Conventional oils and varnish

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by wemay
According to Quora...(2016)

https://www.quora.com/Mechanically-what-car-has-the-most-reliable-engine

Outdated list and likely biased study by a warranty-claim company.

According to Consumer Reports, Audi is now the most reliable European make. It used to be one of the least reliable makes in the past. Lexus and Toyota are the most reliable makes and Volvo is by far the least reliable make.

Code
Rank Change Least Average Most

From Brand Reliable Reliability ReliableÂ

2018 (No. of Models) Model Score Model



1 ↑1 LEXUS (6) IS 78 GX

2 ↓1 TOYOTA (14) Tacoma 76 Prius C

3 ↑9 MAZDA (6) CX-3 69 MX-5 Miata

4 ↑2 SUBARU (6) WRX 65 Crosstrek

5 ↓2 KIA (8) Cadenza 61 Sedona

6 ↑1 INFINITI (4) Q50 61 Q60

7 ↓3 AUDI (6) A3 60 Q5

8 ↓3 BMW (7) X1 58 i3

9 N/A MINIÂ (2) Cooper 57 Countryman

10 — HYUNDAI (5) Ioniq 57 Santa Fe XL

11 ↑2 PORSCHE (3) Cayenne 54 911

12 N/A GENESISÂ (2) G90 52 G80

13 ↑6 ACURA (3) MDX 51 ILX

14 ↓3 NISSAN (11) Versa Note 51 Maxima

15 ↓6 HONDA (9) Clarity 50 Fit

16 — VOLKSWAGEN (8) Atlas 47 Passat

17 ↓3 MERCEDES-BENZ (7) E-Class 47 GLS

18 ↓3 FORD (11) Mustang 45 Taurus

19 ↓11 BUICK (5) Enclave 44 Encore

20 ↑2 LINCOLN (4) MKZ 43 Continental

21 ↑3 DODGE (5) Journey 40 Charger

22 ↓2 JEEP (4) Compass 40 Renegade

23 ↓5 CHEVROLET (16) Traverse 39 Impala

24 ↓7 CHRYSLER (2) Pacifica 38 300

25 ↑1 GMC (8) Sierra 2500 HD 37 Yukon

26 ↓1 RAM (3) 3500 34 2500

27 ↓6 TESLA (3) Model X 32 Model 3

28 ↓1 CADILLAC (6) ATS 32 XTS

29 ↓6 VOLVO (3) S90 22 XC60



Note: NA indicates the brand was not ranked last year. — indicates the ranking is unchanged from last year.
https://www.consumerreports.org/car-reliability-owner-satisfaction/who-makes-the-most-reliable-cars/

I love how consumer reports is considered "Trash" here until someone wants to prove something.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted by StevieC
PM's explaining varnish they have encountered with no issues and boat loads of German car experiences showing them to be less reliable as it pertains to this thread. But it's ok you'll never believe it Mr. Almighty.
There are lots of other conversations on other threads with views and experiences not shared in the public threads for the same reason though so you aren't alone in your "Almighty" title.

And what makes it a fact? Just because it comes out of your mouth instead of others with first hand experiences that know something else to be true? ... And your posts above proves my point about those fearing the public beatings on the forum as I mentioned.

I on the other hand don't give a #### what you or anyone else thinks (Mods/Admins excluded) and will call it as I see it and have experienced it. Probably why I ended up with so many PM's and added to so many group PM's. It's like a second forum at times.

Enjoy your afternoon it's freezing cold here today with the windchill.

So the thread doesn't go the way you like it and you and some others get into a circle jerk because you don't have a clue about you are doing or talking about and you need a support group of like minded to prop you up, that's pretty sad. You have said in other thread you are not and never have been a mechanic yet in this thread you claim we have had hundreds apart, don't you mean your dad had apart? I seriously doubt you have ever had an engine apart.
Originally Posted by StevieC
The Euro engines we have taken apart for repair have ALL been varnished to some degree. This number would be in the hundreds and would span about 25 years

I guess you chose to ignore the perfectly clean BMW engine Overkill posted.
You made the blanket statement that varnish is harmless, others have said it may or may not be depending on how the engine is equipped which is correct. So now we have to listen to your stupid childish rantings, walking it back, temper tantrums and all sorts of nonsense.

I couldn't care less what car is less reliable than another, in fact the less reliable it is the better it is for me, unfortunately most major failures are on US and some Japanese cars and many are corrosion related.

 

[JAG]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by JAG
The claim was made that "varnish won't harm anything". That implies that varnish will never harm anything. It only requires one legitimate case of varnish harming an engine to disprove the claim. I provided one such case earlier in the thread. Therefore the claim is disproven. The disproveness is not undone by cases that support the claim. Stevie, do you agree with this train of reasoning? If not, what about it do you think is incorrect?

And I explained that those that have issue are poor engine designs because the vast majority do not. Folks in your camp called it "Walking back" on what I said and I defined what that wasn't the case.

So keep posting and I'll keep digging my heels in, no problem.

The heel digging is precisely why I'm posting. You lately say that your statement that varnish won't harm anything is true except when there is a poor engine design. At first you made no such exception. Therefore, you initially misspoke. Do you agree? Does an oil pickup screen that partially clogs from varnish constitute a poor engine design?

 

[aquariuscsm]

I want my engine so clean that I can use the camshaft as a mirror to style my hair

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted by ekpolk
Great to be back -- it was was waaaaay too long.



Yes it was, I thought you were one of the many who decided to move on. Welcome back.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by Trav
Originally Posted by StevieC
PM's explaining varnish they have encountered with no issues and boat loads of German car experiences showing them to be less reliable as it pertains to this thread. But it's ok you'll never believe it Mr. Almighty.
There are lots of other conversations on other threads with views and experiences not shared in the public threads for the same reason though so you aren't alone in your "Almighty" title.

And what makes it a fact? Just because it comes out of your mouth instead of others with first hand experiences that know something else to be true? ... And your posts above proves my point about those fearing the public beatings on the forum as I mentioned.

I on the other hand don't give a #### what you or anyone else thinks (Mods/Admins excluded) and will call it as I see it and have experienced it. Probably why I ended up with so many PM's and added to so many group PM's. It's like a second forum at times.

Enjoy your afternoon it's freezing cold here today with the windchill.

So the thread doesn't go the way you like it and you and some others get into a circle jerk because you don't have a clue about you are doing or talking about and you need a support group of like minded to prop you up, that's pretty sad. You have said in other thread you are not and never have been a mechanic yet in this thread you claim we have had hundreds apart, don't you mean your dad had apart? I seriously doubt you have ever had an engine apart.
Originally Posted by StevieC
The Euro engines we have taken apart for repair have ALL been varnished to some degree. This number would be in the hundreds and would span about 25 years

I guess you chose to ignore the perfectly clean BMW engine Overkill posted.
You made the blanket statement that varnish is harmless, others have said it may or may not be depending on how the engine is equipped which is correct. So now we have to listen to your stupid childish rantings, walking it back, temper tantrums and all sorts of nonsense.

I couldn't care less what car is less reliable than another, in fact the less reliable it is the better it is for me, unfortunately most major failures are on US and some Japanese cars and many are corrosion related.

I explained you both choose to pick what you want to hear. You can think what you want but myself and others here have first hand experience otherwise that contradicts your statements that VARNISH is a problem. Keep playing the "Listen to me" almighty card. Fine by me.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by JAG
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by JAG
The claim was made that "varnish won't harm anything". That implies that varnish will never harm anything. It only requires one legitimate case of varnish harming an engine to disprove the claim. I provided one such case earlier in the thread. Therefore the claim is disproven. The disproveness is not undone by cases that support the claim. Stevie, do you agree with this train of reasoning? If not, what about it do you think is incorrect?

And I explained that those that have issue are poor engine designs because the vast majority do not. Folks in your camp called it "Walking back" on what I said and I defined what that wasn't the case.

So keep posting and I'll keep digging my heels in, no problem.

The heel digging is precisely why I'm posting. You lately say that your statement that varnish won't harm anything is true except when there is a poor engine design. At first you made no such exception. Therefore, you initially misspoke. Do you agree? Does an oil pickup screen that partially clogs from varnish constitute a poor engine design?



The design is poor if it can't handle a little bit of Varnish which is perfectly normal occurrence in a lot of engines. It's the poor design that is the problem and not the varnish itself causing the issue otherwise every engine that has even the slightest varnish would be having issues and that isn't the case. The variable is the engine not the varnish.

I explained this, I explained why I blanketed it in reference to this, and I even defined "blanket statements" and that wasn't good enough so then I decided to agree to disagree. Folks want to dig their heals in so I continue to do so. I will not be beaten into submission because they feel superior and need to have it their way when I have seen evidence that contradicts what they are saying with my own two eyes.

Funny how it's always the same camp of a few people that feel the need to gang together and try to pulverize anyone in their path on anything they don't happen to agree with. Yeah, no, not going to happen with this guy. You want to pick a fight and jump all over me because you don't agree and because you may have a personal beef with me, I'm here to keep posting right back at you. No problems.

Now if that camp of "these" folks is done so am I. If not I'll brew some coffee and continue. The choice is yours.

 

[JAG]

Well, Stevie, do you agree that you initially misspoke?

I know what a blanket statement is and your initial statement falls in that category. Even if what you said does not fall in the category, it still was an incorrect statement. Trying to throw doubt on the definition of what a blanket statement is is exactly the kind of thing you do to throw out a distraction to cover up something incorrect that you said and were called out on. That tactic is a red herring.

The relationship between engine design and tolerance of varnish is interesting thing to think about. A 50% clogged pickup screen or PCV hose is harmful even though the engine will keep running for a long time in that condition. Although this is interesting to think about, it is not the reason for my postings in this thread. My reason for posting is related to my hope to see integrity of character during discourse.

 

[StevieC]

I didn't mis-speak. I spoke based on the majority which is where the blanket statement comes in. Varnish is harmless, it's the engine design that has issues in some cases. Again I explained this.

Varnish is not going to clog up a pick-up screen 50% unless it's a poor design as was the case with some Caravan engines in the late 1990's as an example when all the other engines Chrysler used that have similar or more amounts of varnish were perfectly fine. Chrysler revised the screen some time later. This is a design flaw, not the varnish's fault. Good now?

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by JAG
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by JAG
The claim was made that "varnish won't harm anything". That implies that varnish will never harm anything. It only requires one legitimate case of varnish harming an engine to disprove the claim. I provided one such case earlier in the thread. Therefore the claim is disproven. The disproveness is not undone by cases that support the claim. Stevie, do you agree with this train of reasoning? If not, what about it do you think is incorrect?

And I explained that those that have issue are poor engine designs because the vast majority do not. Folks in your camp called it "Walking back" on what I said and I defined what that wasn't the case.

So keep posting and I'll keep digging my heels in, no problem.

The heel digging is precisely why I'm posting. You lately say that your statement that varnish won't harm anything is true except when there is a poor engine design. At first you made no such exception. Therefore, you initially misspoke. Do you agree? Does an oil pickup screen that partially clogs from varnish constitute a poor engine design?



The design is poor if it can't handle a little bit of Varnish which is perfectly normal occurrence in a lot of engines. It's the poor design that is the problem and not the varnish itself causing the issue otherwise every engine that has even the slightest varnish would be having issues and that isn't the case. The variable is the engine not the varnish.

I explained this, I explained why I blanketed it in reference to this, and I even defined "blanket statements" and that wasn't good enough so then I decided to agree to disagree. Folks want to dig their heals in so I continue to do so. I will not be beaten into submission because they feel superior and need to have it their way when I have seen evidence that contradicts what they are saying with my own two eyes.

Funny how it's always the same camp of a few people that feel the need to gang together and try to pulverize anyone in their path on anything they don't happen to agree with. Yeah, no, not going to happen with this guy. You want to pick a fight and jump all over me because you don't agree and because you may have a personal beef with me, I'm here to keep posting right back at you. No problems.

Now if that camp of "these" folks is done so am I. If not I'll brew some coffee and continue. The choice is yours.

It does not have to be a poor or bad design for varnish to be a problem, Sticking rings resulting in lower than built specs is a problem, granted it will not prevent the engine from running but it will not perform as it should, it may use oil also.
Hydraulic lifters/lash adjusters, timing chain tensioners, VVT solenoids etc are not bad design they are common components in most engines today and are susceptible to sticking due to varnish.

That is not opinion but well known and proven fact. Why should anyone quit the thread because you threaten to keep going if they don't?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by StevieC
The design is poor if it can't handle a little bit of Varnish which is perfectly normal occurrence in a lot of engines. It's the poor design that is the problem and not the varnish itself causing the issue otherwise every engine that has even the slightest varnish would be having issues and that isn't the case.


So would you say that varnish is desirable then? I mean, it sounds like we are defending substance abuse at this juncture. We've gone from varnish being stated as universally harmless to it's not the varnish's fault that the engine can't handle it, which seems to cede the point that varnish can be a problem, but even though it can be a problem, it's not its fault, it's the engine's fault because it can't hold its varnish... It sounds like we are discussing a Newfie Screeching.

Originally Posted by StevieC
The variable is the engine not the varnish.


Varnish is certainly a variable, as is engine design. They are both variables and certain designs are going to be more resilient than others when faced with varnish accumulation. This goes for the presentation of symptoms as I discussed earlier, which are often imperceptible to Average Joe unless something royally buggers up.

See exhibit A, variations in varnish on the same engine family:

Obviously the engine in picture #1 is going to be more inclined toward varnish-related issues due to the level of accumulation, but going by the metric being expressed here, unless we had a CEL or customer complaint, this varnish, which could be affecting phaser function, compression...etc is harmless because this engine can "handle it's varnish" thanks to its German heritage

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by Trav


It does not have to be a poor or bad design for varnish to be a problem, Sticking rings resulting in lower than built specs is a problem, granted it will not prevent the engine from running but it will not perform as it should, it may use oil also.
Hydraulic lifters/lash adjusters, timing chain tensioners, VVT solenoids etc are not bad design they are common components in most engines today and are susceptible to sticking due to varnish.

That is not opinion but well known and proven fact. Why should anyone quit the thread because you threaten to keep going if they don't?


Apparently the metric in play here Trav is that if Joe Blow Consumer isn't making a complaint about function, despite there being a measurable impact if one were to go looking, that this fits the definition of harmless. Thankfully the aviation industry doesn't follow this school of thought or you'd have no engine hour limits on components. The metric would be the pilot complaining about power loss and if it fell from the sky it would be GE/Pratt & Whitney/Rolls Royce...etc fault that their designs were crap.

 

[StevieC]

Then all engines with all those components would be exhibiting the same problems if it was the oil's fault. They don't so it's the engine design. Plain and simple.

Amazing back in the day before oils were the quality they are of today and varnish and some mild sludging was common that these engines weren't sensitive snow flakes to it but today some are and that means that varnish is a bad thing? Funny... I guess we should take the GM approach. Have the oil change and sweep the mechanical design flaws and inferior components under the carpet because Dexos was "needed" when others didn't "need" it.

I never said Varnish was desirable that is you twisting it as per usual trying to turn it into something that it is not. All I said was varnish is harmless (IF IT OCCURS), and that if it is a problem it's something else in the engine that seems to take issue with it OR ELSE EVERY ENGINE WITH VARNISH WOULD HAVE ISSUES and the vast majority that have varnish live their whole lives perfectly fine. But yeah we should probably tear those engines apart and see for ourselves because lack of drive ability issues and no CEL's and long engine life isn't enough proof for the merry bandwagon here.

I'm not threatening anyone Trav. I made a statement that if anyone wants to continue as you are doing I will do the same is all. You along with others seem to want to take issue with what I said and you have others here echoing the same thing about varnish being harmless. But like i said it's ok, I know you have personal beefs with me and I know you feel the superiority complex and needing to beat one into submission. It's ok I can take it.

Coffee is just about ready.

 

[Uregina09]

Give it up. You are embarrassing yourself. I get that some of these guys act like they know everything and get off dazzling us with their brilliance and command of the English language. And they often talk down to and gang up on people. But in this case they're right.

Originally Posted by StevieC
Then all engines with all those components would be exhibiting the same problems if it was the oil's fault. They don't so it's the engine design. Plain and simple.

Amazing back in the day before oils were the quality they are of today and varnish and some mild sludging was common that these engines weren't sensitive snow flakes to it but today some are and that means that varnish is a bad thing? Funny... I guess we should take the GM approach. Have the oil change and sweep the mechanical design flaws and inferior components under the carpet because Dexos was "needed" when others didn't "need" it.

I never said Varnish was desirable that is you twisting it as per usual trying to turn it into something that it is not. All I said was varnish is harmless (IF IT OCCURS), and that if it is a problem it's something else in the engine that seems to take issue with it OR ELSE EVERY ENGINE WITH VARNISH WOULD HAVE ISSUES and the vast majority that have varnish live their whole lives perfectly fine. But yeah we should probably tear those engines apart and see for ourselves because lack of drive ability issues and no CEL's and long engine life isn't enough proof for the merry bandwagon here.

I'm not threatening anyone Trav. I made a statement that if anyone wants to continue as you are doing I will do the same is all. You along with others seem to want to take issue with what I said and you have others here echoing the same thing about varnish being harmless. But like i said it's ok, I know you have personal beefs with me and I know you feel the superiority complex and needing to beat one into submission. It's ok I can take it.

Coffee is just about ready.

 

[StevieC]

Read my post where I said I couldn't give a #### what folks think. You can think what you want. I've seen enough to call B.S. on this. Sorry you think "they" are right but it isn't the case.

 

[Trav]

You have gone far beyond embarrassing yourself.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by Trav
You have gone far beyond embarrassing yourself.

See post: https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/foru...onventional-oils-and-varnish#Post4981796

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Amazing back in the day before oils were the quality they are of today and varnish and some mild sludging was common that these engines weren't sensitive snow flakes to it


They weren't? Engines now last longer than they ever have thanks to improved lubricants and more stringent manufacturing tolerances. I've torn down oval-bored SBC's with the oil control rings stuck to the piston so hard you needed to chisel them out with a screwdriver. Varnish everywhere. Things swilled oil like Popeye ate spinach, as has been the case with the several heavily varnished SBF's I've had apart. Low compression, poor oil control, No, they didn't have some of the actuators and phasers on them that might be more sensitive to the condition, but the condition was certainly there and had an impact.

Originally Posted by StevieC
but today some are and that means that varnish is a bad thing?


If too much varnish, in ANY engine, is problematic, what exactly exempts it from being a bad thing?

Originally Posted by StevieC
I never said Varnish was desirable that is you twisting it as per usual trying to turn it into something that it is not. All I said was varnish is harmless (IF IT OCCURS), and that if it is a problem it's something else in the engine that seems to take issue with it OR ELSE EVERY ENGINE WITH VARNISH WOULD HAVE ISSUES and the vast majority that have varnish live their whole lives perfectly fine.


So, looking at the two pictures I posted, both of varnish, you would weigh the impact of the accumulation in both of those engines equally because they were presumably asymptomatic? You are building a strawman. Every engine that accrues varnish doesn't accumulate the same amount or in the same locations. If it's harmless then a light tinting is the same as 4mm thick laquer on everything. So if some Honda rig can't handle 1/8th of an inch of accumulation thanks to horrific owner abuse, the owner is absolved because the engine design is junk. That's essentially your argument at this point.

It's pretty easy acknowledge the nuance here, and I've extended that olive branch several times now. A little surface varnish is likely to be inconsequential in terms of function, despite not being desirable. Thick layers of it are far more likely to trigger issues perceptible by the owner of the vehicle, even if they are a complete dolt.

Originally Posted by StevieC
But yeah we should probably tear those engines apart and see for ourselves because lack of drive ability issues and no CEL's and long engine life isn't enough proof for the merry bandwagon here.


And if the tear-down showed plugged up oil control rings, would that still fit this definition of harmless? If a compression test was done and the results were a bit low? If VCT actuation was tracked and found to be slow, but not slow enough to trigger a CEL? There are all kinds of measurable (using an instrument) impacts that can take place that will be imperceptible to the average end user. If they are measurable, then there is an affect.

I would assume it is avoiding these affects that is part of your drive to use a premium lubricant vs the conventional oil that, per your own statement "works just fine for 300,000km" in your dad's van with the same engine, no? Because despite your defence of this position, it is not something you desire in your own engine.

Originally Posted by StevieC
I'm not threatening anyone Trav. I made a statement that if anyone wants to continue as you are doing I will do the same is all. You along with others seem to want to take issue with what I said and you have others here echoing the same thing about varnish being harmless. But like i said it's ok, I know you have personal beefs with me and I know you feel the superiority complex and needing to beat one into submission. It's ok I can take it.

Coffee is just about ready.


Several people took issue with a broad-brush statement that you refuse to back down from, despite its ambiguity and lack of qualifiers, which you've been presented with numerous opportunities to cede but have instead willfully; joyfully, dug in your heels as some sort of stand. This has been stated to be against those, which I assume includes presently company, you feel are out to diminish your contributions by taking issue with statements they don't feel are accurate. Does that about sum it up?

I'm not trying to beat you down, but we've all got time and this is already quite silly. I don't know where you expect this to go beyond more of the same if your intention is to hold your line

 

[StevieC]

Overkill and that's all engines right? Not just your cases? Sheesh you would have thought they would have done something about engine varnish a long time ago then if it was killing engines all over the place. I'm sure GM would have come out with Dexos Varnish 1 Gen 2 oils for pete's sake.

- Notice where I talked about the vehicle performing fine and living a long life with regards to not having CEL's again seeing what you want in what I wrote and fixating on one part to twist it into a response.

- Yeah the same band of merry folks that take issue with everything everyone says in every thread that they don't happen to agree on because you guys are always right and words should be taken as gospel. All praise you almighty folks with the superiority complex. God forbid someone have experiences that differ from yours and cite examples. Couldn't possibly believe anyone else.

Can't be bothered to quote you in-between my responses but its in the same order as yours.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Overkill and that's all engines right? Not just your cases? Sheesh you would have thought they would have done something about engine varnish a long time ago then if it was killing engines all over the place. I'm sure GM would have come out with Dexos Varnish 1 Gen 2 oils for pete's sake.

Ummm, they did, they developed, and continue to improve, the oil standards, that's why we have the API and ACEA, that's why manufacturers have their own specs and approvals, because oil performance, including deposit control, was not sufficient.

Engine life, in general, has improved and this is due to better manufacturing processes and superior lubricants.

Originally Posted by StevieC
- Notice where I talked about the vehicle performing fine and living a long life with regards to not having CEL's again seeing what you want in what I wrote.


Notice where I addressed that? No? because you skimmed my post and didn't read it, which you always do. I'm quite aware as to how you operate.

Originally Posted by StevieC
- Yeah the same band of merry folks that take issue with everything everyone says in every thread that they don't happen to agree on because you guys are always right and words should be taken as gospel. All praise you almighty folks with the superiority complex.


Guess it's better than having an offended complex

God forbid somebody takes responsibility for what they wrote because it happened to be a bit short on qualifiers and details. But naw, let's turn this into a 30 page [censored] match instead.