Oil
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
> Chaps,
> Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of oil
> grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller range
> like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was not
> recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> performance.
>
> At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the stuff
> that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a filter, a
> cap and a drain plug.
>
> Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> Thoughts ?
It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
stays stable over a longer service interval.
On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
[or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
describing much of real interest about the oil.
The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
worth considering.
I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
...and I still change it rather aggressively.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
> Chaps,
> Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of oil
> grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller range
> like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was not
> recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> performance.
>
> At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the stuff
> that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a filter, a
> cap and a drain plug.
>
> Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> Thoughts ?
It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
stays stable over a longer service interval.
On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
[or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
describing much of real interest about the oil.
The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
worth considering.
I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
...and I still change it rather aggressively.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
> Chaps,
> Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of oil
> grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller range
> like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was not
> recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> performance.
>
> At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the stuff
> that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a filter, a
> cap and a drain plug.
>
> Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> Thoughts ?
It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
stays stable over a longer service interval.
On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
[or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
describing much of real interest about the oil.
The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
worth considering.
I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
...and I still change it rather aggressively.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
> Chaps,
> Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of oil
> grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller range
> like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was not
> recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> performance.
>
> At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the stuff
> that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a filter, a
> cap and a drain plug.
>
> Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> Thoughts ?
It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
stays stable over a longer service interval.
On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
[or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
describing much of real interest about the oil.
The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
worth considering.
I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
...and I still change it rather aggressively.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
> Chaps,
> Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of oil
> grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller range
> like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was not
> recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> performance.
>
> At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the stuff
> that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a filter, a
> cap and a drain plug.
>
> Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> Thoughts ?
It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
stays stable over a longer service interval.
On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
[or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
describing much of real interest about the oil.
The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
worth considering.
I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
...and I still change it rather aggressively.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
> Chaps,
> Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of oil
> grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller range
> like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was not
> recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> performance.
>
> At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the stuff
> that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a filter, a
> cap and a drain plug.
>
> Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> Thoughts ?
It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
stays stable over a longer service interval.
On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
[or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
describing much of real interest about the oil.
The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
worth considering.
I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
...and I still change it rather aggressively.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
Roughly 4/30/04 14:53, twaldron's monkeys randomly typed:
> Use 5w30.
>
Why? Is there something about a Mobil One 5w40 oil that
makes it less suitable than a 5w30? Note that the original
question was specifically about Mobile One, not dinopee.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
> Use 5w30.
>
Why? Is there something about a Mobil One 5w40 oil that
makes it less suitable than a 5w30? Note that the original
question was specifically about Mobile One, not dinopee.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
Roughly 4/30/04 14:53, twaldron's monkeys randomly typed:
> Use 5w30.
>
Why? Is there something about a Mobil One 5w40 oil that
makes it less suitable than a 5w30? Note that the original
question was specifically about Mobile One, not dinopee.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
> Use 5w30.
>
Why? Is there something about a Mobil One 5w40 oil that
makes it less suitable than a 5w30? Note that the original
question was specifically about Mobile One, not dinopee.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
#16
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
Roughly 4/30/04 14:53, twaldron's monkeys randomly typed:
> Use 5w30.
>
Why? Is there something about a Mobil One 5w40 oil that
makes it less suitable than a 5w30? Note that the original
question was specifically about Mobile One, not dinopee.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
> Use 5w30.
>
Why? Is there something about a Mobil One 5w40 oil that
makes it less suitable than a 5w30? Note that the original
question was specifically about Mobile One, not dinopee.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
Roughly 4/30/04 14:53, twaldron's monkeys randomly typed:
> Use 5w30.
>
Why? Is there something about a Mobil One 5w40 oil that
makes it less suitable than a 5w30? Note that the original
question was specifically about Mobile One, not dinopee.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
> Use 5w30.
>
Why? Is there something about a Mobil One 5w40 oil that
makes it less suitable than a 5w30? Note that the original
question was specifically about Mobile One, not dinopee.
--
Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
I change every 3000-3500 miles, and over that time oil consumption is not
discernable really.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> wrote in message
news:6xDkc.1201$IG1.25773@attbi_s04...
> Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
>
> > Chaps,
> > Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of
oil
> > grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller
range
> > like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was
not
> > recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> > alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> > performance.
> >
> > At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the
stuff
> > that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a
filter, a
> > cap and a drain plug.
> >
> > Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> > Thoughts ?
>
> It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
> to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
> dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
> adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
> And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
> time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
> Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
> may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
> entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
> thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
> components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
> stays stable over a longer service interval.
>
> On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
> temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
> [or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
> may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
> describing much of real interest about the oil.
>
> The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
> at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
> constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
> worth considering.
>
> I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
> over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
> a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
> ...and I still change it rather aggressively.
>
> --
> Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
>
discernable really.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> wrote in message
news:6xDkc.1201$IG1.25773@attbi_s04...
> Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
>
> > Chaps,
> > Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of
oil
> > grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller
range
> > like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was
not
> > recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> > alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> > performance.
> >
> > At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the
stuff
> > that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a
filter, a
> > cap and a drain plug.
> >
> > Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> > Thoughts ?
>
> It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
> to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
> dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
> adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
> And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
> time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
> Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
> may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
> entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
> thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
> components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
> stays stable over a longer service interval.
>
> On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
> temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
> [or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
> may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
> describing much of real interest about the oil.
>
> The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
> at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
> constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
> worth considering.
>
> I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
> over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
> a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
> ...and I still change it rather aggressively.
>
> --
> Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
>
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
I change every 3000-3500 miles, and over that time oil consumption is not
discernable really.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> wrote in message
news:6xDkc.1201$IG1.25773@attbi_s04...
> Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
>
> > Chaps,
> > Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of
oil
> > grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller
range
> > like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was
not
> > recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> > alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> > performance.
> >
> > At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the
stuff
> > that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a
filter, a
> > cap and a drain plug.
> >
> > Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> > Thoughts ?
>
> It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
> to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
> dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
> adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
> And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
> time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
> Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
> may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
> entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
> thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
> components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
> stays stable over a longer service interval.
>
> On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
> temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
> [or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
> may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
> describing much of real interest about the oil.
>
> The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
> at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
> constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
> worth considering.
>
> I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
> over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
> a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
> ...and I still change it rather aggressively.
>
> --
> Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
>
discernable really.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> wrote in message
news:6xDkc.1201$IG1.25773@attbi_s04...
> Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
>
> > Chaps,
> > Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of
oil
> > grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller
range
> > like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was
not
> > recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> > alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> > performance.
> >
> > At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the
stuff
> > that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a
filter, a
> > cap and a drain plug.
> >
> > Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> > Thoughts ?
>
> It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
> to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
> dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
> adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
> And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
> time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
> Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
> may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
> entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
> thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
> components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
> stays stable over a longer service interval.
>
> On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
> temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
> [or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
> may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
> describing much of real interest about the oil.
>
> The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
> at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
> constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
> worth considering.
>
> I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
> over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
> a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
> ...and I still change it rather aggressively.
>
> --
> Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
>
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Oil
I change every 3000-3500 miles, and over that time oil consumption is not
discernable really.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> wrote in message
news:6xDkc.1201$IG1.25773@attbi_s04...
> Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
>
> > Chaps,
> > Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of
oil
> > grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller
range
> > like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was
not
> > recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> > alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> > performance.
> >
> > At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the
stuff
> > that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a
filter, a
> > cap and a drain plug.
> >
> > Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> > Thoughts ?
>
> It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
> to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
> dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
> adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
> And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
> time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
> Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
> may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
> entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
> thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
> components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
> stays stable over a longer service interval.
>
> On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
> temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
> [or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
> may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
> describing much of real interest about the oil.
>
> The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
> at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
> constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
> worth considering.
>
> I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
> over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
> a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
> ...and I still change it rather aggressively.
>
> --
> Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
>
discernable really.
Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
"L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11"@ComcastDot.Net> wrote in message
news:6xDkc.1201$IG1.25773@attbi_s04...
> Roughly 4/30/04 13:20, Dave Milne's monkeys randomly typed:
>
> > Chaps,
> > Forgive me if I tread once again on the well worn territory of
oil
> > grades. I believe the consensus of group was that oils with a smaller
range
> > like 10w30 perform better than those with a larger range (e.g. 10w40 was
not
> > recommended). I think the reason given was that polymers were added to
> > alter the viscosity, and the larger the compromise, the worse the
> > performance.
> >
> > At the same time, Mobil One is highly recommended, and indeed is the
stuff
> > that the dealer would squirt in, were I incapable of unscrewing a
filter, a
> > cap and a drain plug.
> >
> > Except ... over here Mobil One is 5 w 40 ; that is a big ------ !
> > Thoughts ?
>
> It is attemting to apply a rule of thumb to one type of oil chemistry
> to an entirely different chemical formulation... The folklore for
> dinosaur urine is that the extended viscosity range is gained by
> adding a witches brew to a base stock derived from cracking crude oil.
> And that the components of this witches brew break down due to both
> time and load... lowering the effective viscosity range. Whereas the
> Mobil One synthetic is made from a different type of base stock [which
> may also come from dinosaur pee] of a different chemical composition
> entirely that needs less brewing to obtain a wide viscosity range,
> thus being a slightly less complicated witches brew so the different
> components will decay at a fairly uniform rate, so the viscosity
> stays stable over a longer service interval.
>
> On this side of the pond, oil viscosity is only measured at two
> temperature points... so at lower temps it may thicken quickly
> [or may not] and at higher temps it may thin non-linearily [or
> may not]...making viscosity range of limited usefulness in
> describing much of real interest about the oil.
>
> The synths tend to have better lube qualities at low temps and
> at high temps...with lower overall friction that stays a bit more
> constant over the service interval... and that alone may make it
> worth considering.
>
> I haven't noticed any odd results of cutting a 4.0 over to synth
> over 2.5 years... oil consumption is extremely low and I would guess
> a few percentage better oil mileage particularly on longer trips.
> ...and I still change it rather aggressively.
>
> --
> Evolution is merely survival of the minimally adequate
>