synthetic oil for 06 Sonata V-6

Page 2 of 5  
Bob Adkins wrote:


I certainly hope so.

Yeah, tell me about it. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A father used to say to his teenage son: Take good care of her son, and use nothing but Esso Extra and Uniflow motor oil, and she'll last you 90,000 miles!
Now the single dad says: Dude! Take good care of your whip, m'k? Make sure to use the right octane gas, and use oil with the right SAE service rating, m'k? Dude! If you don't get T-boned and shit, that car will last you 300,000 miles!
It boils down to this Matt: We used to rely on our favorite trusted brands to promise us that the product in the bottle was good. Now, we are more sophisticated, and can judge for ourselves. The governing and testing bodies stamp the rating on the bottle, and all we have to do is educate ourselves a little and read the label.
Truth be told? I rather it the old way. But that's life, dude.
--
Bob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Matt - you've been making some pretty big assumptions about QA throughout this thread. Where is the breakdown in QA in your mind? It's refined in the same plants. The distinction comes more at the packaging end of things. Sure - there is potential for problems at every step but those problems exist for everyone. Do you really believe that Mobil or any other supplier has a QA process that is so unique and so different from what Wal Mart or any other private label similar to Wal Mart has? I really doubt it. There just isn't that much room in the supply chain as it exists, for huge disparities in QA like you're suggesting. Besides - you've not documented any reason to believe that there even is a QA difference, so why do you keep mentioning the QA point? At some point, this kind of thing becomes what we call FUD - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. Most times, totally unfounded and only intended to smear a competitor or a product when no valid evidence exists.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Mike Marlow wrote:

Yes, I do believe that. I've worked for 23 years in a Fortune 500 corporation and I know a lot of things I can't say in public that would very much surprise you about a lot of products you use every day.

Sure there is. Many people will sacrifice a lot of quality to get a cheap price. Many people won't. There is room for all, but to claim that all products are created equal is simply absurd. Do you really believe that Bose stereo products are no better than the no-name brands from China?

And you've not documented that there isn't a difference.

and Doubt. Most times, > Totally unfounded and only intended to smear a competitor or a product when no valid evidence exists.
The key word is most times, and it isn't even most, more like some.
Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Absolutely!!! If they sound the same, they are just as good!
--
Bob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Adkins wrote:

And Consumer Reports sure wastes a lot of money testing products. Now that Mr. Supertech has educated us that all products that meet a standard are equal in "the real world" and don't have differences that matter, I can drop my subscription and just buy the cheapest product I can find at Wal-Mart and know that I'm getting good stuff. :-)
Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Matt Whiting wrote:

Consumer Reports, eh? I guess you must have conveniently forgotten this article that refutes everything you've suggested:
http://www.xs11.com/stories/croil96.htm
Granted, it's ten years old, but at least it's an actual controlled test. Read it and weep, Matt.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Indeed. If anyone expected to find serious differences among oils, believe me, Consumer Reports would be running these tests every year.
Sinan
--
A. Sinan Unur < snipped-for-privacy@llenroc.ude.invalid>
(remove .invalid and reverse each component for email address)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That gets us back to the "what's the label say" issue.
I've been running Supertech Synthetic for a long time in a Dodge Caravan, Chevy Malibu, and Chrysler T&C with no problems - no leaks, no sludge, no nothing! If you look down under the valve cover on these vehicles, it looks really clean.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob wrote:

The specs aren't even close though. I was talking brands, not origin. What part of "no-name brands" above wasn't clear?

Great! I'd now try running re-refined oil or maybe even reusing someone else's oil. You'd save a few more bucks.
Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Matt Whiting wrote:

What have we here? Could it be yet another feeble attempt to divert the discussion and confuse the issue we've been debating? Imagine that!
BANG! You just shot yourself in the foot again, Matt. ;-)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ok - I'll be the one to steer this thread in a different direction...
I've never used synthetic oils. Pure dino all the way. I've typically driven my cars for 200,000 - 250,000 miles. I've had the valve covers off more than one of my cars and with well over 100,000 miles, I've never found any sludge or buildup. The most recent experience of this nature was when I replaced the intake gaskets on my daughter's '98 Malibu with a 3.4L. The car had 118,000 miles on it and when I pulled the valve covers the thing was spotless. On nothing but dino oil and those crummy Fram filters that have such a bad reputation here. The dino oil came from Wally World - you guessed it - SuperTech.
Someone has been bringing up the word "degree". I think that is the most appropriate word to this whole thread. Any differences are really not that significant. I change my oil faithfully at 4,000 miles and always have. I'm switching to synthetic just to get the added mileage between changes. I've got 5 cars in this household to tend to and reducing oil changes appeals to me. But, do I expect something more or something better from synthetics? Nope. How do you improve upon the experiences I've had in 35 years of driving and maintaining my vehicles?
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Those longer intervals appeal to me too!
I think I would use synthetic oil if I didn't worry about the filter. I trust syn oil up to 10,000 miles, but I only trust oil filters up to 6000. Filters are so small these days I'm afraid they could become restricted by normal combustion products.
--
Bob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]

I often feel using synthetic would be a total waste is some vehicles.
The best oil in the world won't stop contaminants from getting in, filters aging... Quality conventional oils also have improved dramatically over the years.
Consider someone who should change oil by time, not mileage. Say they only drive 10-12K miles a year and have few long trips to really dry things out. That is "severe service" of a different kind and there may be a cost benefit ration that favors more frequent changes with conventional oils.
gerry
--

Personal home page - http://gogood.com

gerry misspelled in my email address to confuse robots
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh come on Matt. I've worked in Corporate America for over 25 years myself. That fact has nothing at all to do with the discussion at hand. Do you think that most of America would really be surprised by things you've seen? The truth is that most of these "hidden corporate secrets" are quite common knowledge.

That's not what was stated Matt. Red Herring.

to smear a competitor or a

No, FUD is almost always unfounded and intended to smear. Factual issues are one thing, but speculative fears based on no evidence are not factual.
--

-Mike-
snipped-for-privacy@alltel.net
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Again, that's a relic of the 1950's. Ain't gonna happen!
Even if it did happen, no oil bottler is immune to accidents.
--
Bob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Adkins wrote:

Absolutely. And a good QA/QC program is your last line of defense against such refinery or bottling accidents.
Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Matt Whiting wrote:

True, so what's your point? Do you have EVEN ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE that Warren Oil doesn't have outstanding QC? In case you can't bring yourself to let the word past your lips, I'll help you. The answer is "no".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Being a retired QA/QC manager that fought the good fight for 35 years, yes, I know about the last line of defense. In today's plants, there are redundant checks, balances, and super-reliable instrumentation to prevent those little accidents from getting out of the shop. I believe bottlers are just too sophisticated for that to happen except on rare, freakish occurrences.
--
Bob

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Bob Adkins wrote:

Bob, who'd you work for? Did you work for multiple companies or just one? I work for a large company that has a reputation for high quality products. I've friends who have come from a range of other companies and it is amazing at the disparity among companies with respect to their quality orientation.
Certainly this isn't true across the board, but for the most part the "name brand" companies that have THEIR name on the product take quality manufacturing and QA/QC more seriously. Since adopting TQM and Six Sigma practices a couple of decades ago, we actually try to avoid having to do QC! No offense. :-)
It is almost always better to design (and manufacture) quality in than to try to inspect it out, as I'm sure you well know. However, you need some inspection as a process feedback mechanism if not a strict QC mechanism.
Matt
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.