My only suggestion to Pajero would be to not use the more expensive oils like Ultra. Regular PP, Quaker State, Havoline, Castrol Magnatec , or VSP would be the ones I would look at. PUP is a long service oil for 10-15000 mile intervals. At less than 5k it just a waste of money. Something to consider.
Montero Gen2 UOA advise needed pls!
- Thread starter Pajero
- Start date
- Status
My mechanic suggested Delo, Rotella, or Valvoline. Several guys on expedition portal use Shell Rotella in their Monteros. I actually emailed Bill Burke and he stated that he changes his oil frequently, due to environmental conditions and runs conventional oil. I always did 3,000 mile oil changes for Severe Service until I started reading BITOG. I don't think synthetic OCI are good for my application. I still have an open mind......and welcome input!
Respectfully,
Pajero!
Respectfully,
Pajero!
Originally Posted By: danielLD
I'd replace the air filters every 10K at a minimum too.
Why ?
They let more dirt through when they are new...filter better as they load.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
This is not true, not one bit. TBN shows the oils ability to fight off acid, it is an indicator of the base stocks, not additives.
What's the TBN of pure, virgin basestock ?
Why is the TBN of a formulated oil higher than that of base stock alone ?
I'd replace the air filters every 10K at a minimum too.
Why ?
They let more dirt through when they are new...filter better as they load.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
This is not true, not one bit. TBN shows the oils ability to fight off acid, it is an indicator of the base stocks, not additives.
What's the TBN of pure, virgin basestock ?
Why is the TBN of a formulated oil higher than that of base stock alone ?
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: danielLD
I'd replace the air filters every 10K at a minimum too.
Why ?
They let more dirt through when they are new...filter better as they load.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
This is not true, not one bit. TBN shows the oils ability to fight off acid, it is an indicator of the base stocks, not additives.
What's the TBN of pure, virgin basestock ?
Why is the TBN of a formulated oil higher than that of base stock alone ?
Rather than say blah blah blah, I'll just resort to results. In all my UOAs, new air filters every 10K lead to an improvement in most values across the board. The air intake is one of the most important conditions in a car's engine. Restrictive air flow results in retarded timing, which the computer compensates in many areas. With fresh filters, fuel % always goes down, wear values are reduced and a lot of other good values appear. Rather than end up in an argument, if you want a full blown answer, Terry Dyson, will gladly explain more, you might tip him at the end of the phone call too.
Your TBN question is valid and there are additives such as TBN boosters added to oils that the TBN test is measuring, however, the notion that TBN is reflective of additives really isn't true. It doesn't read ZDDP, ZDTP, etc. FTIR gives you a big indication into how they're performing, something TBN does not do. So reading TBN and seeing a number does not tell you how the add packs are doing.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
I'd replace the air filters every 10K at a minimum too.
Why ?
They let more dirt through when they are new...filter better as they load.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
This is not true, not one bit. TBN shows the oils ability to fight off acid, it is an indicator of the base stocks, not additives.
What's the TBN of pure, virgin basestock ?
Why is the TBN of a formulated oil higher than that of base stock alone ?
Rather than say blah blah blah, I'll just resort to results. In all my UOAs, new air filters every 10K lead to an improvement in most values across the board. The air intake is one of the most important conditions in a car's engine. Restrictive air flow results in retarded timing, which the computer compensates in many areas. With fresh filters, fuel % always goes down, wear values are reduced and a lot of other good values appear. Rather than end up in an argument, if you want a full blown answer, Terry Dyson, will gladly explain more, you might tip him at the end of the phone call too.
Your TBN question is valid and there are additives such as TBN boosters added to oils that the TBN test is measuring, however, the notion that TBN is reflective of additives really isn't true. It doesn't read ZDDP, ZDTP, etc. FTIR gives you a big indication into how they're performing, something TBN does not do. So reading TBN and seeing a number does not tell you how the add packs are doing.
I have seen studies where altitude increases oil consumption.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
In all my UOAs, new air filters every 10K lead to an improvement in most values across the board.
You may wish to look at some of the papers presented in the air filter section, too, particularly with respect to the issue of too frequent replacement. Also, what's the value of a Wix XP with its notoriously poor filtration? I'll even leave it's insane price aside.
In all my UOAs, new air filters every 10K lead to an improvement in most values across the board.
You may wish to look at some of the papers presented in the air filter section, too, particularly with respect to the issue of too frequent replacement. Also, what's the value of a Wix XP with its notoriously poor filtration? I'll even leave it's insane price aside.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: danielLD
In all my UOAs, new air filters every 10K lead to an improvement in most values across the board.
You may wish to look at some of the papers presented in the air filter section, too, particularly with respect to the issue of too frequent replacement. Also, what's the value of a Wix XP with its notoriously poor filtration? I'll even leave it's insane price aside.
I speak from experience and results. As I mentioned, rather than argue with others, they can contact Terry Dyson, who actually operates a consumer UOA business, I don't. Here on this board, I'm a stranger, but surely Terry Dyson is not.
Terry Dyson and I have had the opposite results with XP, let alone he did work for WIX on the XP, he was able to share with me. It's truly a filter of it's own.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
In all my UOAs, new air filters every 10K lead to an improvement in most values across the board.
You may wish to look at some of the papers presented in the air filter section, too, particularly with respect to the issue of too frequent replacement. Also, what's the value of a Wix XP with its notoriously poor filtration? I'll even leave it's insane price aside.
I speak from experience and results. As I mentioned, rather than argue with others, they can contact Terry Dyson, who actually operates a consumer UOA business, I don't. Here on this board, I'm a stranger, but surely Terry Dyson is not.
Terry Dyson and I have had the opposite results with XP, let alone he did work for WIX on the XP, he was able to share with me. It's truly a filter of it's own.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: danielLD
It's truly a filter of it's own.
It's a synthetic glass media filter, a technology pioneered by Donaldson. I'm curious as to what distinguishing features make it unique from other filters using the same style of media such as the AMSOIL EaO, Fleetguard Stratopore, Royal Purple....etc.
WIX is a sub-brand of MANN-HUMMEL, who also owns Purolator, and conveniently, there is also a Purolator Synthetic filter.
It's truly a filter of it's own.
It's a synthetic glass media filter, a technology pioneered by Donaldson. I'm curious as to what distinguishing features make it unique from other filters using the same style of media such as the AMSOIL EaO, Fleetguard Stratopore, Royal Purple....etc.
WIX is a sub-brand of MANN-HUMMEL, who also owns Purolator, and conveniently, there is also a Purolator Synthetic filter.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: danielLD
In all my UOAs, new air filters every 10K lead to an improvement in most values across the board.
You may wish to look at some of the papers presented in the air filter section, too, particularly with respect to the issue of too frequent replacement. Also, what's the value of a Wix XP with its notoriously poor filtration? I'll even leave it's insane price aside.
I speak from experience and results. As I mentioned, rather than argue with others, they can contact Terry Dyson, who actually operates a consumer UOA business, I don't. Here on this board, I'm a stranger, but surely Terry Dyson is not.
Terry Dyson and I have had the opposite results with XP, let alone he did work for WIX on the XP, he was able to share with me. It's truly a filter of it's own.
I still have a napa platinum. I was told they are made by Wix on these forums and at Napa.
Respectfully,
Pajero!
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: danielLD
In all my UOAs, new air filters every 10K lead to an improvement in most values across the board.
You may wish to look at some of the papers presented in the air filter section, too, particularly with respect to the issue of too frequent replacement. Also, what's the value of a Wix XP with its notoriously poor filtration? I'll even leave it's insane price aside.
I speak from experience and results. As I mentioned, rather than argue with others, they can contact Terry Dyson, who actually operates a consumer UOA business, I don't. Here on this board, I'm a stranger, but surely Terry Dyson is not.
Terry Dyson and I have had the opposite results with XP, let alone he did work for WIX on the XP, he was able to share with me. It's truly a filter of it's own.
I still have a napa platinum. I was told they are made by Wix on these forums and at Napa.
Respectfully,
Pajero!
Originally Posted By: danielLD
I speak from experience and results. As I mentioned, rather than argue with others, they can contact Terry Dyson, who actually operates a consumer UOA business, I don't. Here on this board, I'm a stranger, but surely Terry Dyson is not.
Even if Terry says so, I'm not about to take his word on it. There is some very, very significant counter evidence to this, far beyond the point where appeal to authority will get anywhere.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
Terry Dyson and I have had the opposite results with XP, let alone he did work for WIX on the XP, he was able to share with me. It's truly a filter of it's own.
I've always wondered myself. Here, we've heard claims on both sides, not to mention claims of improvements. Pricing is out of whack up here, with some places charging $30 per example. On the other hand, NAPA Canada will sell me the Platinum/XP for my application cheaper than the Gold (at least when at regular price; NAPA Canada doesn't advertise their filter special, unlike NAPA USA), which is very peculiar.
I speak from experience and results. As I mentioned, rather than argue with others, they can contact Terry Dyson, who actually operates a consumer UOA business, I don't. Here on this board, I'm a stranger, but surely Terry Dyson is not.
Even if Terry says so, I'm not about to take his word on it. There is some very, very significant counter evidence to this, far beyond the point where appeal to authority will get anywhere.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
Terry Dyson and I have had the opposite results with XP, let alone he did work for WIX on the XP, he was able to share with me. It's truly a filter of it's own.
I've always wondered myself. Here, we've heard claims on both sides, not to mention claims of improvements. Pricing is out of whack up here, with some places charging $30 per example. On the other hand, NAPA Canada will sell me the Platinum/XP for my application cheaper than the Gold (at least when at regular price; NAPA Canada doesn't advertise their filter special, unlike NAPA USA), which is very peculiar.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
The Japanese earlier this year announced they would start evaluating viscosities for the first time on the operating film thickness vs. just HTHS.
Have asked a few times for you to link us up to the statement...
As a degree qualified mechanical engineer with 25 years in power generation, 10 years specifically in turbines, including bearing design (these things seem important to you), you can't have one (film thickness) without the other (viscosity)...
MOFT is related to bearing design (diameter, length, clearance), and operational parameters (load and speed), and lubricant (viscosity).
Sommerfeld Number = (r/c)^2 x uN/P
r=shaft radius
c= radial clearance
u= viscosity
N= RPS
P= average film pressure (load/(2rl)), l being the bearing length.
For all else being constant (dimensions, load and speed), you get the following relationship.
Simple...it's laws of physics.
Now where I think that you are getting confused in the Japanese papers is that (most I've read is Honda), they are chasing lower viscosity oils...clearly, they are the main diver for the sub 20 grades.
However, they state that they are changing the bearing parameters to maintain MOFT in this low viscosity world.
They are:
* lengthening bearings (depreses the "P" component)
* reducing clearances (makes r/c bigger)
* stiffening bottom ends (allows for reduced clerances)
* coating (for when contact occurs becuase MOFT is too low).
My engineering assessment is that the are chasing the friction in the piston/skirt area, and have reached the limit of the bottom end, so to go lower in HTHS, they need to change the bottom end.
I think THAT's what you are picking up. and not understanding the engineering are giving it a spin that's not there.
But the statement that increasing HTHS increases part separation in any given design (like the OP's V-6) is an engineering fact.
The Japanese earlier this year announced they would start evaluating viscosities for the first time on the operating film thickness vs. just HTHS.
Have asked a few times for you to link us up to the statement...
As a degree qualified mechanical engineer with 25 years in power generation, 10 years specifically in turbines, including bearing design (these things seem important to you), you can't have one (film thickness) without the other (viscosity)...
MOFT is related to bearing design (diameter, length, clearance), and operational parameters (load and speed), and lubricant (viscosity).
Sommerfeld Number = (r/c)^2 x uN/P
r=shaft radius
c= radial clearance
u= viscosity
N= RPS
P= average film pressure (load/(2rl)), l being the bearing length.
For all else being constant (dimensions, load and speed), you get the following relationship.
Simple...it's laws of physics.
Now where I think that you are getting confused in the Japanese papers is that (most I've read is Honda), they are chasing lower viscosity oils...clearly, they are the main diver for the sub 20 grades.
However, they state that they are changing the bearing parameters to maintain MOFT in this low viscosity world.
They are:
* lengthening bearings (depreses the "P" component)
* reducing clearances (makes r/c bigger)
* stiffening bottom ends (allows for reduced clerances)
* coating (for when contact occurs becuase MOFT is too low).
My engineering assessment is that the are chasing the friction in the piston/skirt area, and have reached the limit of the bottom end, so to go lower in HTHS, they need to change the bottom end.
I think THAT's what you are picking up. and not understanding the engineering are giving it a spin that's not there.
But the statement that increasing HTHS increases part separation in any given design (like the OP's V-6) is an engineering fact.
"But the statement that increasing HTHS increases part separation in any given design (like the OP's V-6) is an engineering fact." Given everything else is equal.
Shannow, why do you think they are chasing friction in the piston/skirt area, other than the obvious. Are there any gains to be made there anymore?
Shannow, why do you think they are chasing friction in the piston/skirt area, other than the obvious. Are there any gains to be made there anymore?
Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Shannow, why do you think they are chasing friction in the piston/skirt area, other than the obvious. Are there any gains to be made there anymore?
It's the last place that any "big" gains can be found, as it's all diminishing returns now.
They've dropped ring tension as far as they can, cut back on the size of the skirts as far as is mechanically possible (steel pistons will let that progress a little), applied coatings.
Now they are researching thermal barrier coatings on the water jacket mid stroke to reduce heat transfer, and locally thinning the mid stroke oil film even further.
Now that they are making bearings bigger (more drag) to handle the thinner oils (less drag), I think that they are fast approaching the point where a win one way will equal the loss the other way. Steel pistons, and TBC are about the end of the road I think.
Shannow, why do you think they are chasing friction in the piston/skirt area, other than the obvious. Are there any gains to be made there anymore?
It's the last place that any "big" gains can be found, as it's all diminishing returns now.
They've dropped ring tension as far as they can, cut back on the size of the skirts as far as is mechanically possible (steel pistons will let that progress a little), applied coatings.
Now they are researching thermal barrier coatings on the water jacket mid stroke to reduce heat transfer, and locally thinning the mid stroke oil film even further.
Now that they are making bearings bigger (more drag) to handle the thinner oils (less drag), I think that they are fast approaching the point where a win one way will equal the loss the other way. Steel pistons, and TBC are about the end of the road I think.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: danielLD
I speak from experience and results. As I mentioned, rather than argue with others, they can contact Terry Dyson, who actually operates a consumer UOA business, I don't. Here on this board, I'm a stranger, but surely Terry Dyson is not.
Even if Terry says so, I'm not about to take his word on it. There is some very, very significant counter evidence to this, far beyond the point where appeal to authority will get anywhere.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
Terry Dyson and I have had the opposite results with XP, let alone he did work for WIX on the XP, he was able to share with me. It's truly a filter of it's own.
I've always wondered myself. Here, we've heard claims on both sides, not to mention claims of improvements. Pricing is out of whack up here, with some places charging $30 per example. On the other hand, NAPA Canada will sell me the Platinum/XP for my application cheaper than the Gold (at least when at regular price; NAPA Canada doesn't advertise their filter special, unlike NAPA USA), which is very peculiar.
Well, to each his own. We can believe what we wish, I look at data so I've seen different evidence. In all of the UOAs I've done, fresh air filters reduced wear across the board. With regards to Terry Dyson, who taught me about fresh air filters, I'm sure he could explain it far better than I could. He is just an e-mail away.....
That's very high, the most I see XP go for is $10-14USD around here. Yikes.
I have data from UOAs, and the XP has always made a significant difference in the UOAs I've analyzed. In most applications, it has produced great results.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
I speak from experience and results. As I mentioned, rather than argue with others, they can contact Terry Dyson, who actually operates a consumer UOA business, I don't. Here on this board, I'm a stranger, but surely Terry Dyson is not.
Even if Terry says so, I'm not about to take his word on it. There is some very, very significant counter evidence to this, far beyond the point where appeal to authority will get anywhere.
Originally Posted By: danielLD
Terry Dyson and I have had the opposite results with XP, let alone he did work for WIX on the XP, he was able to share with me. It's truly a filter of it's own.
I've always wondered myself. Here, we've heard claims on both sides, not to mention claims of improvements. Pricing is out of whack up here, with some places charging $30 per example. On the other hand, NAPA Canada will sell me the Platinum/XP for my application cheaper than the Gold (at least when at regular price; NAPA Canada doesn't advertise their filter special, unlike NAPA USA), which is very peculiar.
Well, to each his own. We can believe what we wish, I look at data so I've seen different evidence. In all of the UOAs I've done, fresh air filters reduced wear across the board. With regards to Terry Dyson, who taught me about fresh air filters, I'm sure he could explain it far better than I could. He is just an e-mail away.....
That's very high, the most I see XP go for is $10-14USD around here. Yikes.
I have data from UOAs, and the XP has always made a significant difference in the UOAs I've analyzed. In most applications, it has produced great results.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Shannow, why do you think they are chasing friction in the piston/skirt area, other than the obvious. Are there any gains to be made there anymore?
It's the last place that any "big" gains can be found, as it's all diminishing returns now.
They've dropped ring tension as far as they can, cut back on the size of the skirts as far as is mechanically possible (steel pistons will let that progress a little), applied coatings.
Now they are researching thermal barrier coatings on the water jacket mid stroke to reduce heat transfer, and locally thinning the mid stroke oil film even further.
Now that they are making bearings bigger (more drag) to handle the thinner oils (less drag), I think that they are fast approaching the point where a win one way will equal the loss the other way. Steel pistons, and TBC are about the end of the road I think.
Time for air bearings!
Originally Posted By: bigj_16
Shannow, why do you think they are chasing friction in the piston/skirt area, other than the obvious. Are there any gains to be made there anymore?
It's the last place that any "big" gains can be found, as it's all diminishing returns now.
They've dropped ring tension as far as they can, cut back on the size of the skirts as far as is mechanically possible (steel pistons will let that progress a little), applied coatings.
Now they are researching thermal barrier coatings on the water jacket mid stroke to reduce heat transfer, and locally thinning the mid stroke oil film even further.
Now that they are making bearings bigger (more drag) to handle the thinner oils (less drag), I think that they are fast approaching the point where a win one way will equal the loss the other way. Steel pistons, and TBC are about the end of the road I think.
Time for air bearings!
Here is an interesting concept.
http://newatlas.com/namikoshi-4-in-1-piston-engine/34330/
and another
http://www.google.com/patents/US8215270
http://newatlas.com/namikoshi-4-in-1-piston-engine/34330/
and another
http://www.google.com/patents/US8215270
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: danielLD
Well, to each his own. We can believe what we wish, I look at data so I've seen different evidence. In all of the UOAs I've done, fresh air filters reduced wear across the board. With regards to Terry Dyson, who taught me about fresh air filters, I'm sure he could explain it far better than I could. He is just an e-mail away.....
The evidence that is seen in some of the threads here with respect to that data has little to do with belief, and some is evidence that is far stronger than a UOA interpretation. We also can't just sit here and call a UOA interpretation the grand standard of evidence. As I've pointed out before, you get five people interpreting a UOA, you'll get five different opinions, which is hardly scientific.
As for the Wix XP, ironically, I checked NAPA Canada today, and their NAPA Platinum price is $14 for my G37 (Gold is significantly higher for some reason), and even a Fram Ultra on special here would have a hard time beating that. What are you seeing improve by use of a Wix XP, and how are we quantifying that?
Well, to each his own. We can believe what we wish, I look at data so I've seen different evidence. In all of the UOAs I've done, fresh air filters reduced wear across the board. With regards to Terry Dyson, who taught me about fresh air filters, I'm sure he could explain it far better than I could. He is just an e-mail away.....
The evidence that is seen in some of the threads here with respect to that data has little to do with belief, and some is evidence that is far stronger than a UOA interpretation. We also can't just sit here and call a UOA interpretation the grand standard of evidence. As I've pointed out before, you get five people interpreting a UOA, you'll get five different opinions, which is hardly scientific.
As for the Wix XP, ironically, I checked NAPA Canada today, and their NAPA Platinum price is $14 for my G37 (Gold is significantly higher for some reason), and even a Fram Ultra on special here would have a hard time beating that. What are you seeing improve by use of a Wix XP, and how are we quantifying that?
Greetings everyone:
I wanted to follow-up with my interim decision. I purchased Castrol GTX Magnatec 5W30, from Hellmart. Does anyone if this current version has the polarized ester molecules, that was quoted from Kimberly Lancaster (Castrol)? Castrol's website states that it has "Specialized molecular components." However; that is a broad statement. I did put 50ml of Liqui Moly MOS2 (already in my stockpile) in engine. I changed the oil a second time after a 1,000 miles, to get rid of the heavy metals i.e., aforementioned contaminates, based on my mechanic's advise.
I did notice that it now takes four seconds for my oil light to go off. Prior, it was two seconds. This continued after driving it for seventy miles today. I'm a stickler for details. Still haven't decided if I'm going to continue with Magnatec or any of the other oils, I'm contemplating and digesting the data. Good night!
Respectfully,
Pajero!
I wanted to follow-up with my interim decision. I purchased Castrol GTX Magnatec 5W30, from Hellmart. Does anyone if this current version has the polarized ester molecules, that was quoted from Kimberly Lancaster (Castrol)? Castrol's website states that it has "Specialized molecular components." However; that is a broad statement. I did put 50ml of Liqui Moly MOS2 (already in my stockpile) in engine. I changed the oil a second time after a 1,000 miles, to get rid of the heavy metals i.e., aforementioned contaminates, based on my mechanic's advise.
I did notice that it now takes four seconds for my oil light to go off. Prior, it was two seconds. This continued after driving it for seventy miles today. I'm a stickler for details. Still haven't decided if I'm going to continue with Magnatec or any of the other oils, I'm contemplating and digesting the data. Good night!
Respectfully,
Pajero!
- Status