Best no BS motor oil/filter comparison?
in [Toyota]
|
From: HLS on 1 Dec 2008 12:46 "Steve" <no(a)spam.thanks> wrote in message > > If you believe that particular engines are "not suitable for synthetic > oil," then there's no use trying to have an intelligent, engineering-based > discussion. No, there isnt.. I went back to the distributor on this and they told me that B&S did not recommend synthetics in this engine, and I shouldnt have assumed that the Mobil 1 would be a good choice after break-in. I went into the B&S, honed it, installed new rings, etc, and it lasted a few hours, but quickly went to hell again. Got rid of it, dont want to hear that technically the synthetic should have been great.. Either the B&S was BS, or the lubricant was unacceptable. Next mower, I used what B&S recommended, and it worked fine (until it was stolen a couple of months ago). I can talk engineering with you all day long, but this is not a case where I am very open to "shoulda, coulda, and woulda".
From: HLS on 1 Dec 2008 12:48 "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message news:92VYk.8434 After a couple of oil changes the gunk on the engine > would have been gone, and the synthetic would look just as clean as > whatever was used before. This was not a case of gunk, although the oil became black very quickly. The engine started using oil very badly soon after the Mobil I was used. That was the reason for the problem, not oil color.
From: HLS on 1 Dec 2008 12:49 "Steve" <no(a)spam.thanks> wrote in message news:dPidnU_ufuiRiKnUnZ2dnUVZ_j-dnZ2d(a)texas.net... > HLS wrote: >> >> "Mark A" <someone(a)someone.com> wrote in message news:0clYk.1725 >>> I also had an edger with a Briggs and Stratton engine and the oil turned >>> black after one use. I knew immediately that the Briggs and Stratton >>> engine I had then (don't know about newer ones) was not suitably built >>> for synthetic oil (in the same way those Chevy Caprice and Crown Vic >>> engines used in NYC taxis are not suitable for synthetic oil). >> >> Mine was a B&S too, Mark.. The engine was ruined in short order. > > And I've been using synthetic oil in 2 B&S 6-horsepower lawnmowers and a > 5-horsepower tiller for over 10 years now. All 3 are good as new, despite > being air-cooled engines that see most of their operation in near-100 > degree F ambient temperatures. > > Of course the same was true of the 60s B&S engines I had back in the 70s > and 80s that only got single-grade SAE 30 dino oil, too. I just can't kill > a B&S, and I sure don't take it easy on them. I've only ever gotten rid of > a B&S powered mower because the mower deck fell apart around the engine. These were modern B&S engines, not old ones. The old ones were very likely better made.
From: C. E. White on 1 Dec 2008 13:28 "Mark A" <someone(a)someone.com> wrote in message news:TPyXk.844$n_5.421(a)bignews7.bellsouth.net... > "larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly(a)my-deja.com> wrote in message > news:9e83883f-5a7a-46ec-aba1-6a4f585b6b9f(a)a12g2000pro.googlegroups.com... >> I once cut open a used Fram PH2951, and it had metal end caps. I >> did >> this because I had dropped the new filter, denting it on the end, >> and >> wanted to see if anything inside could have gotten hit. > > Fram makes 4 different "grades" of filters, which range in price > from about $3 to $11 (they also make filters for OEM use and for > other companies). Trying to lump them all together as one product, > would be like comparing a Chevy with a Cadillac, just because they > are both made by GM. > > Yes, the $3 Fram filter sucks. So do all other $3 filters. What $3 Fram filer? I checked on-line prices at local auto parts stores (Advance and AutoZone). The $3.99 Fram (PH2) and the $6.99 Fram (TG2) equivalents to the Motorcraft FL820S ($3.68) both include the same glued cardboard end caps and the same mediocre relief valve. The $6.99 Fram filter does buy you a silicone anti-drain back valve. However, the CHEAPER Motorcraft FL820S includes the silicone anti-drain back valve, a very robust pressure relief valve, and potted metal end caps. There is no comparison, the Fram filters are a rip off, at least for this application. Maybe for other applications, the Fram filters are better. I can't say for sure. I've only cut open Fram filters for a few applications (FL820S, FL1, a Honda Filter) and they all had the same basic construction that I don't like. Ed
From: Steve on 1 Dec 2008 13:33
SMS wrote: > Steve wrote: >> jim wrote: >> >>> >>> As far as I know the type of dirt that gets into oil due to >>> combustion >>> byproducts is not going to be any different for synthetic oil. >> >> That's true, and is a key part of this discussion. Too bad its being >> discussed in terms of "synthetic" versus "conventional," because that >> really doesn't matter. What DOES matter is the rest of the oil >> additive package, in particular the compoenents that maintain the >> total base number (TBN) and keep the oil from becoming acidic. You can >> have synthetics with poor TBN control additive, and you can have >> conventionals with good packages. Now *most* synthetics also happen to >> be higher-end oils and have decent additive packages... but its not >> BECAUSE they're synthetic. > > That's why an inexpensive oil analysis is a good idea in order to > determine the optimal interval. Usually what it finds is that users of > conventional oil are changing their oil far too often, and those trying > to extend their oil changes to beyond 10,000 miles, with the use of > synthetics, have used up the oil additive package, especially in terms > of acid neutralizers, even though the oil still is lubricating. Perhaps > that's one of the reasons that Mobil backed down on it's original > marketing promotion of 25K oil changes. From where I sit, spending extra for slightly more frequent oil changes costs about the same as regular UOAs. It would be different if I were managing a fleet. Well, my wife considers 3 vintage muscle cars and 3 daily drivers a "fleet," but I don't... :-) |