From: Mark A on
"Retired VIP" <jackj.extradots.180(a)windstream.net> wrote in message
news:7gu384l7kcvmicpal15hdrkeqbiqed8j4u(a)4ax.com...
> I've never murdered anyone either Mark. Does that mean that I'm not
> qualified to pass judgment on murder?
>
> I've never rob a bank either. Can I state that robbing banks is bad?
>
> You are sold on synthetic oils. That's fine and I have no problems
> with you buying them and using them. Just don't try to tell me that
> my life experiences with cars and conventional oils are invalid
> because they don't back up your prejudices. If it wasn't for you and
> folks like you, the manufactures of synthetic oils would have a very
> limited market, mostly tropical and arctic climates.
>
> Oh, by the way. I do use synthetic oil in my snow blower.
>
> Jack

You are confused about the difference between passing judgment on an ethical
matter versus knowing the practical benefits experienced when using a
particular product (in this case synthetic oil). It is shocking to me that
you don't know the difference between these two things.


From: Mark A on
"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message
news:d4ngk.14770$xZ.10136(a)nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
> That is in fact the problem that the synthetic motor oil manufacturers
> originally faced. Their products were used in cold climates, in
> non-automotive applications (snow-mobiles, snow blowers, ORVs, etc.) and
> in some high performance engines, but not in normal, mass market passenger
> cars. They created marketing campaigns to convince naive car owners that
> oil with a synthetic base stock was better for their vehicles than oil
> with a petroleum base stock. The problem they faced was that there is
> absolutely no data that shows any benefit, either in fuel economy or
> engine protection. Fortunately, lack of data is often not an issue in
> convincing someone to spend more money for no benefit.

Naive? We are talking about spending $10 - $15 more per oil change, twice a
year on average. You make it sound like we are getting fleeced by scam
artists.

If you had been working a legitimate job for the same number of hours you
have posted the nonsense criticizing synthetic oil on this newsgroup (even a
low paying job like mowing lawns), you would have earned enough money to pay
for 10 synthetic oil changes per year.


From: larry moe 'n curly on


Retired VIP wrote:

> Synthetic oil won't stop engine wear. Under normal conditions,
> synthetic oil won't even reduce wear by very much.

In a 1996 issue, Consumer Reports said it found no significant
differences in engine wear between NYC taxicabs that used conventional
API SH oil and Mobil 1 synthetic.

OTOH I quit using synthetic in my Nissan because a front seal leaked
annoyingly with it. The only reason I used synthetic in the first
place was because it was 6-38 cents a quart.
From: larry moe 'n curly on


Scott in Florida wrote:

> My 92 Rolla Wagon states 3750 miles between changes under severe
> driving conditions.
>
> Florida is a severe driving environment...

Because of all those senior citizens with Alzheimer's? ;)

From: Mark A on
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymoencurly(a)my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:cf435bbe-cb69-4ac5-9fff-bb9e53d2edc3(a)y22g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> In a 1996 issue, Consumer Reports said it found no significant
> differences in engine wear between NYC taxicabs that used conventional
> API SH oil and Mobil 1 synthetic.

Those cabs were mostly Ford Crown Vics, a 20 year old engine design with
very sloppy engine tolerances.

Anyway, what does "significant" mean in this context. I would not trust
Consumers Reports on that one.