Originally Posted By: crazy_raccoon
... I'm just wondering if I really am wasting money on these OCIs especially when I usually change them out at 5,000 miles.
Short answer? Yes - it's a waste.
Long answer ...
There is a fantastic way to know for sure, rather than have to decipher all the opinions you're getting. Run some UOAs. Collect some data. Find out for yourself. Do it this way ...
Run two more 5k mile OCIs with conventional lube. Take UOAs and compare/contrast those to macro data.
Then run a couple 5k mile OCIs with a syn. Again - take UOAs and view against the macro data.
Then, review the ROI potential. If the syn costs 3x more money, then it should return 3x more "something" (3x less wear or 3x longer OCI); if it does, use it. If not, don't. You cannot call one "better" using macro data and only a few samples, but you can find out if they both perform equally (within normal performance bounds). If they are equal in performance, pick the cheaper one.
Yes- I hear you. I hear you and a wagon load of nay-sayers already constructing your objections. You think it's severe to do stop/go driving. And I'm telling you it does not matter. I ran an experiment in my wife's old Villager van; a total soccer-mom abused vehicle. Typical stop/go runs, short trips, multiple on/off cycles all day long. So I wanted to know how this type of use affected wear. I first ran a 5k mile baseline. Then I ran 10k miles on one OFCI, on W/M ST lube and a Puro filter. That is 3.3x longer than the 3k mile "severe" schedule in the maintenance manual. And yet the UOA was totally normal in wear rates. And, to double down, I then did the same, extending out to 15k miles on the OFCI; 5x longer than the "severe" rated OCI. Again - totally normal wear rates DESPITE the "severe" use. And so my conclusion was two-fold ... "Severe" really isn't after all, and I was wasting lubes changing oil too often. Even though I used dino oil at FIVE TIMES THE SEVERE SERVICE FACTOR, the wear rates were totally within "normal" statistical bounds! And yes- I did pull the valve cover to check for sludge build up; never happened. Sludge in an engine is more of a engine-family trait issue; not unlike those who suffer from arterial plaque. Some engines sludge, some don't. Using a syn versus a dino isn't likely to greatly alter this trait in 5k miles.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3169384/1
OK - so maybe you think that Villager experiment was a fluke? Well I'm now running the same type experiments between dino/syn with my two MGMs.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4398177/1
Guess what? The syns are not out-performing the conventional oils. Both are returning totally "normal" wear rates, even though I'm running lubes out to 2x the 5k mile OCI. Yet more proof that there's tons of available performance in a lowly house-brand dino lube.
Now, I'm not saying you have to run out longer OCIs. You can, but you don't have to. But what you should learn, is that dino oil is way more capable than most folks think; there is a huge amount of reserve capacity in conventional lubes and filters. It is statistically improbable, if not impossible, for any syn to outperform a dino oil in 5k miles of use. 5k miles of "severe" driving does not bring out any disparity in contrast of the two lubes. So many folks cry out that syns are "cheap insurance". Bovine Manure! They are neither cheap, nor insurance. They are a waste under the type conditions you operate. If a dino oil can go 5x further than a "severe" rated OCI, and yet return totally normal wear rates, then there is already a HUGE amount of cheap insurance in a dino oil. Using a syn only increases the wasted cash, because you end up not utilizing potential.
I beg of you; don't be the typical BITOGer here. So many folks ask for opinions, and the VAST majority of the answers they get are based on supposition and guesses. Occasionally, someone breaks out of the mold, and actually DOES SOMETHING to prove or disprove the theory. And we then learn something. Sadly, experiments like mine are too few and far between; the hype, mythology and rhetoric are deeply entrenched here.
You have three choices:
- You'll blow off my suggestion and use emotions rather than intellect, and let a bunch of hysterical folks talk you into syns
- You'll run the experiment for yourself, and actually learn something, in real time
- You'll learn from my experiment and save yourself the trouble (data here for all to see
It's up to you. Make an informed, rational choice, or let your emotions take over. What you "want" and what your engine "needs" are likely two entirely different things. My point? Quit listening to a bunch of bench racers who love to regurgitate marketing hype. Put your money where your mouth is; go out and learn something first-hand. Or, trust someone like me who actually did it more than once, and has real, tangible, credible proof that what I say is true.
