Havoline?

[codewize]

First of all anyone who changes the oil every 3000 miles is doing more damage than good AND wasting a lot of money.

Virgin oil has far less protective properties than oil that's been broken in. The person that goes 7 - 10 k and keeps topping off will have far less wear over time than someone who changes the oil every 3k.

Now I have a question for the lubrication geniuses here. What happens if I mix 5W-30 with 10W-30. What's the result and how will it perform?

As far as Filters I think everyone agrees on Wix, AC Delco or MANN. Purolator is also supposed to be very good. I guess that's all you really need. I swear by Wix and always will. It's another one of those, I was shown with physical evidence years ago and that's enough for me.

[Ranger]

Here is what our old Guru had to say about the OLM.

"One thing I can touch on and clear up.....the GM oil life monitor operation and my statement that ZDP (or ZDDP as you tend to call it here...most of the API literature just sticks to ZDP so I tend to use that) depletion is the basis for oil deterioration.

My spelling is poor but ZDP stands for zinc dialkyldithiophosphate which , as it sounds, is an anti-wear compound comprised of zinc and phosphorus.

ZDP is dispersed in the oil so as to be at a potential wear site if a surface asperity happens to break thru the oil film thickness causing the dreaded metal-to-metal contact. A molecule of ZDP must be present at that moment to prevent microwelding at the contact site which will cause material transfer, scuffing, scoring, wear and catostrophic failure. The concentration of ZDP in the oil will determine if there is ZDP present to work it's magic. The greater the concentration...the more likely a molecule of ZDP will be there...and vice versa.

By nature, ZDP is sacrifical. As ZDP is "used up" at a wear site to prevent micorwelding the concentration of ZDP decreases.... So...if you measure the ZDP concentration in engine oil in a running engine it will decrease at linear rate based on engine revolutions. Any given engine has a certain number of high potential wear areas where metal-to-metal contact could occur due to reduced film thickness and/or surface asperities....areas such as rubbing element cam followers, distributor gears, rocker arm pivots, push rod tips, etc...... The more of these areas the more ZDP depletion. The more often these features come in contact the greater the ZDP depletion. That is why, generally speaking, ZDP concentration in the oil, for any given engine, will decrease at a fairly linear rate when plotted versus cummulative engine revolutions. The more times it turns the more contact the more chance for wear the greater the depletion. This is as much of a fact as I could quote ever and is really not speculation or anything. It is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in many studies. That is why it is ONE of the basis for determining oil life remaining and why it is THE basic premis of the GM oil life algorithm. It is only ONE of the things that determines oil life...but it is the one thing that can be tied to engine operation in a linear fashion and estimated very accurately by accumulating engine revolutions via a counter.

The GM engine oil life monitor counts engine revolutions and accumulates the number for the basis of the oil life calculation. It then adds deterioration factors for operating temperature, start up temperature, soak times, ambient, coolant temperature, etc... There are a LOT of factors that "adjust" or affect the slope of the deterioration but the fundamental deterioration is traced back to the ZDP depletion that is inescapable with engine revolutions. The specific rate of ZDP depletion is readily measurable for any given engine so that is the fundamental item that is first calibrated for the oil life algorithm to tailor it specifically to that engine.

You would obviously like to get the oil out of the engine before the ZDP concentration gets so low that it is ineffective at being at the right place at the right time and preventing engine wear so that becomes the long term limit on oil life for that application.

The other things that determine oil life such a acid build up, oxidation, petane insuluables such as silicon from dust/dirt, carbon or soot build up from the EGR in blowby, water contamination, fuel contamination, etc.... are all modeled by the multipliers or deterioration factors that "adjust" the immediate slope of the line defined by the engine revolution counter as those items can be modeled in other ways and accounted for in the immediate slope of the ZDP depletion line.

The algorithm was developed over the course of many years by several lubrication experts at GM Fuels and Lubes, spearheaded by Doctor Shirley Schwartz who holds the patents (with GM) for the algorithm and the oil life montitor. I had the luck of working directly with Dr. Schwartz when the idea of the oil life monitor first progressed from the theoretical/lab stage to real world testing/development/validation. There were fleets of cars operated under all conditions that deteriorate the oil life for any and every reason and , thru oil sampling and detailed analysis of the oil condition, the algorithm was developed, fine tuned and validated to be the most accurate way invented yet to recommend an oil change interval by. As just one example, I have seen cars driven side-by-side on trips, one towing a trailer and one not, for instance, to prove the effectiveness of the oil life monitor in deteriorating the oil at a faster rate just because of the higher load, higher average RPM, higher temps, etc...and it works flawlessly.

The oil life monitor is so effective because: it is customized for that specific vehicle/engine, it takes everything into account that deteriorates the oil, it is ALWAYS working so as to take into account THAT INDIVIDUALS driving schedule, and it tailors the oil change to that schedule and predicts, on an ongoing basis, the oil life remaining so that that specific individual can plan an oil change accordingly. No other system can do this that effectively.

One thing is that I know personally from years of testing and thousands of oil analysis that the oil life algorithm works. There is simply no argument to the contrary. If you don't believe me, fine, but, trust me, it works. It is accurate because it has been calibrated for each specific engine it is installed on and there is considerable testing and validation of the oil life monitor on that specific application. NOt something that oil companies or Amsoil do. They generalize....the oil life monitor is very specific for that application.

Oil condition sensors in some BMW and Mercedes products are useful, also. They have their limitations, though, as they can be blind to some contaminates and can, themselves, be contaminated by certain markers or constituents of certain engine oils. Oil condition sensors can only react to the specific oil at that moment and they add complexity, cost and another potential item to fail. One other beauty of the GM oil life monitor is that it is all software and does not add any mechanical complexity, mass, wiring or potential failure mechanism.

There is considerable safety factor in the GM oil life monitor. Typically, I would say, there is a 2:1 safety factor in the slope of the ZDP depletion curve....in other words, zero percent oil life per the ZDP depletion is not zero ZDP but twice the concentration of ZDP considered critical for THAT engine to operate under all conditions reliably with no wear. This is always a subject of discussion as to just how low do you want the ZDP to get before the oil is "worn out" if this is the deciding factor for oil life. We would tend to be on the conservative side. If the oil life is counting down on a slope that would recommend a 10K change interval then there is probably 20K oil life before the ZDP is catostrophically depleted....not that you would want to go there...but reason why many people are successful in running those change intervals.

Please...NOT ALL ENGINES ARE THE SAME. The example above is an excellent practical justification of why you would want to add EOS and change the 15W40 Delvac in the muscle car at 3000 miles max and yet can run the Northstar to 12500 easily on conventional oil. You must treat each engine and situation differently and what applies to one does not retroactively apply to others. This is where Amsoil falls short in my book by proposing long change intervals in most everything if you use their oil. It just doesn't work that way. You can run the Amsoil to 12500 with no concerns whatsoever in the late model Northstar because even the oil life monitor tells you that for conventional oil off the shelf. Would I do that to the 502 in my 66 Chevelle...NO WAY. Amsoil says I can though. Wrong.


There are entire SAE papers written on the GM oil life monitor and one could write a book on it so it is hard to touch on all aspects of it in a single post. Hopefully we hit the high spots. Realize that a GREAT deal of time, work and energy went into developing the oil life monitor and it has received acclaim from engineering organizations, petroleum organizations, environmental groups all across the board. It is not some widget invented in a week and tacked onto the car."

[C66 Racing]

Originally Posted by Ranger

... By nature, ZDP is sacrifical. As ZDP is "used up" at a wear site to prevent micorwelding the concentration of ZDP decreases.... So...if you measure the ZDP concentration in engine oil in a running engine it will decrease at linear rate based on engine revolutions...

Well... to help the thread generate to 12+ pages, and based on used oil analysis reports of my own customers (not 3rd party info), while conceptually I agree with the "guru", I'm going to have to practically disagree.

First consider these four used oil analysis reports, all on a modified LS1 Corvette motor, and all over 3000 miles:
Used Oil Analysis Comparison: German Castrol 0w30 vs AMSOIL Series 2000 0w30

Though two of these were tests of AMSOIL and two of German Castrol, both high quality Group IV synthetic oils, all four samples showed zinc levels (which is the actual anti-wear particle in ZDP) over 800 ppm, with the AMSOILs zinc levels being about 100-200 ppm higher than the Castrols. These levels are after 3000+ miles of use. The zinc was not "used up". It remained in the oil in sufficient quantities to provide excellent protection to the motor as indicated by the very low wear numbers on this motor, and this is not a car that is babied.

Also note that both these oils contain zinc levels higher than currently allowed by the API SM/ISLAC GF-4 of 0.08% or 800 ppm as this test was run in 2005.

Second consider a very recent test of AMSOIL's current SAE Synthetic 10w30 which does meet API SM/ISLAC GF-4:
Corvette C5 Used Oil Analysis Report – AMSOIL SAE Synthetic 10w30

This motor was run for 5,000 miles and included a full track day - conditions as severe as any of us use our motors for in daily driving. Despite the longer than 3,000 mile interval and the severe duty use, the zinc level was still right at 800 ppm, the limit for API SM/ISLAC GF-4 oils. The zinc was not "used up." Additionally, despite the new more restrictive limitations on ZDP, this oil still performed very well in this motor and wear metals are essentially at or below the labs universal averages for that motor family despite the longer than typical drain interval and track day.

Adding to the filter discussion, AMSOIL carries its own filter line (developed in partnership with Wix and Donaldson) and Wix Filters:
AMSOIL Ea Oil Filter
WIX Filters

Codewize,
As for your question of mixing a 5w30 and a 10w30, I believe you'd end up with an oil that was essentially a 7.5w30, but practically speaking not much would change.

A fluid’s viscosity goes down as it heats up. The first number in a multi-grade oil’s rating is its viscosity grade when "cold" (40C), the second its viscosity grade when "hot" (100C). Despite the 2nd number being higher, the oils viscosity is about 5-6 times lower at 100C than it is at 40C.

To make a 5W-30 oil, one starts with a 5W oil and adds viscosity improvers (VIs). These VIs have the property that in cold temperatures their polymers coil up, contributing little to the base oils viscosity measurements. At higher temperatures they uncoil to reduce the base oils loss of viscosity as it heats up. So when the VIs break down (shear down) one is left with properties of the original base oil (the 5W stuff). Thus over time, a low quality 5w30 could over time shear down to a 5w20, or worse. Good synthetics do not need as much VI as conventional oil so in general don’t shear down as fast. Since a 10w30 will need less VI than a 5w30, again in general it will perform better since there is fewer VI to shear down and there is proportionately more basestock in the 10w30 since it isn’t being displaced by VI. That said, there are other higher costs additives that can offset this effect.

Using AMSOIL's 5w30 and 10w30 viscosity numbers as an example since I have those immediately available, the 5w30's viscosity is 10.6 cSt at 100C and 57.3 at 40C, while the 10w30s viscosity is 10.6 cSt at 100C and 59.2 at 100C. So mixing them will result in an oil with a viscosity about 10.6 at 100C and 58.3 or so at 40C... not all that different from either the 5w30 or 10w30 you started with. Bottom line, I don't think its worth your time to bother. If you plan on using a good synthetic, use a 5w30. It provides the same viscosity as the 10w30 when hot, and has a lower viscosity when cold thus providing slightly better cold performance (less startup wear, better cold fuel mileage, etc).

[peteski]

Guys, this is worse than political rants! Over 100 posts ?!

You guys are all wasting time deciding on the best oil and filter to use. Most of you change both of them often enough that even the crappiest oil and filter wouldstill work just fine and give you trouble-free 500k miles!

Look throughout this (or any engine related) forum. How many posts you see about some engine problem caused by oil related failure? Probably none. All posts are about some non-oil related issues. And I'm sure lack of oil related failure posts are *NOT* due to everybody using wonderful Amsoil in their engine.

So lets all get a life and forget the oil wars....
Peteski

[GreenMachine]

we're discussing other stuff two, like where to buy the stuff cheap. SHould mention the Advance Auto Parts filters are the same as Purolator only with a red coating, right now they are buy one get one free all month!

[JohnnyO]

Originally Posted by MUGSANDLUKE

You guys are headed for a 12 page thread. Keep going guys! You can do it!

Don't use Fram filters.

[codewize]

I agree 100%. I have a Fram story if you'd like to hear it..

Originally Posted by JohnnyO

Don't use Fram filters.

[Ranger]

Yeay, 12 pages. I knew we could do it.

[STS127]

Hey code what is your Fram story.

[Cadillacboy]

OMG !
I bet even an oil filter forum wouldn't make it lol

[codewize]

Well since you asked. Back in the day when I had my 67 rag Camaro I used Fram for a bit mostly because of the marketing hype.

One day I was doing an oil change and I noticed the sun gleaming off the oil in the pan, or so I thought. What it was actually gleaming off of was metal in the oil in the pan.

Yes, metal large enough to see that the Fram filter let through. I went to the parts store and asked my man at the time what he recommended, and that's how I got turned onto WIX. He showed me a Fram filter then showed me a WIX and a MANN and asked me which I wanted on my car. The choice was clear, and so what my oil after that.

I wouldn't put a Fram filter on my lawn mower.

[Dadillac]

Oil filter talk is about as boring and "getnowherefast" as oil talk. Over the years I have heard / read my share of Fram bashing. I have been driving and servicing my cars for 23 years now, and have been using Fram filters almost exclusively. I also have only used a non-dino oil in an engine only a few times (read that as I always use the "cheap" stuff) and I have yet to have an oil related issue with any vehicle I have owned. Aside from the time I was running Mobil1 with a Motorcraft filter in my '93 Bronce back in '94. Stupid me overtightened the filter, squashing the gasket, and allowing that "liquid gold" to run all over the highway. But Fram filters have done me well over the years. I will continue to use them also.

Don

[Eldobroken]

Another oil thread make it 13

[dkozloski]

Originally Posted by Eldobroken

Another oil thread make it 13

Everything inside a Fram filter is made out of cardboard. They're so bad it's laughable. Anybody that would use Fram would sleep in their underwear. The can they come in is more useful than the filter.

[STS127]

Are Bosch filters good? Picked one up to do an oil change in the near future.