Will switching from Synthetic to Dyno oil harm my engine?

Understood. :-)

My gut reaction is to agree that indirect injection results in more soot, also much less diesel cackle. This soot gets into the oil, obviously. Please explain why direct injection design would promote "slightly more" soot fouling of the oil. What am I missing?

Are limiting oil consumption to the context of diesels here?

YIKES! The SD22 by the 3,000 mile post (on Delo 400)(estimated time: 100 hrs/30 mph average) is soot fouled enough that when you rub a little between your fingers, that getting the black crap off your skin requires serious pumice soap. Solvent doesn't touch it. I use hospital latex gloves on oil/filter changes! Wised up quick. Can't speak difinitively about the viscosity at this mileage. Never sent a sample for laboratory.

All that from simply losing an oil cooling jet? Sounds fishy ... sorry. When you say "this engine runs so hot..." ... which "hot" are you referring to? Coolant? Oil temperature? Exhaust temperature? Combustion chamber temperatures? Is the injection timing known to be correct for the fuel quality?? Perhaps a little less timing advance?

Reply to
Philip
Loading thread data ...

Once again ... just because the manufacturer makes such a specific requirment does not make that oil a mainstream oil. What you find on the shelves of Autozone, PepBoys, Napa, TA, Petro, 76 truck stops, and (any name) gas station is mainstream.

Reply to
Philip

Hahahhahha Recall the great Toyota V6 debate.

Reply to
Philip

Our kids passed the plate around the family and all the relatives ... even ones a hundred miles away. LOL

Reply to
Philip

If you are given a maintenance schedule to change your oil every 3k miles, and you don't(even with an oil analysis), do you think you met your end of the warrenty agreement?

Just asking....

Tom @

formatting link

Reply to
newsgroups01REMOVEME

Neil Nelson wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@newsclstr01.news.prodigy.com:

If Pennzoil was free I wouldn`t use it. I have only seen one eng in 30 years run on that stuff that wasn`t a mess inside when tore down. Hardly any detergent there. KB (ps the shit killed many ford 2300 cams as per ford TSBs. in the 1970s)

Reply to
Kevin Bottorff

It would be a 'get out' for the manufacturer here. For industrial machines and prime movers then an oil analysis and proof of reasonable maintenance, such as an in-house service record, would suffice.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

Only the latest direct injection diesels foul their oil slightly more than versions of about pre 2000 due to previously mentioned reasons. Compared to indirect injection diesels they pollute their oil far less with soot.

Most of my diesel engines use virtually no oil between services. My Toyota diesel running at twice the recommended oil change interval on synthetic oil uses no oil at all AFAICS up to 10,000 miles. The Mercedes did use half a quart to reach 15000 miles initially but was using less when I sold it.

The Land Rover achieves this in the first mile, believe me.

Solvent doesn't touch it. I use hospital latex gloves on

Oh yes. The little cranked pipe which sprays oil under the piston crown broke off at the banjo bolt.

All of the above. Coolant being, in this case, the sump oil which bathes the lower part of the cylinders and under the piston crown. The upper cylinder and head are air cooled. When it failed catastrophically, it was not even working that hard, just hauling a ten ton load [17 ton gross] up a two mile hill. It is a 160 hp electronically controlled 6litre turbo intercooled engine with around 580Nm torque at 1400rpm. It does not have much constant power, let alone rising power charachteristic and a rather modest torque rise of some 25% by todays standards.

It has been known to work at maximum power output for hours on end, and it is here that it runs exceedingly hot. All parameters appear to be significantly hotter than any other engine I run. Such engines, very economical though they are, have been phased out recently because their combustion temperature does not lend itself to passing emission regulations, in particular oxides of Nitrogen.

Is the injection timing known to be correct for the fuel

Everything is spot on and no adjustments were made when it was repaired and it has been going as well as ever since the cylinder was repaired.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

So are more frequent oil changes, and so is an extra $100 over the life of the vehicle.

I actually think the issue is more one of frequent inspections than of anything else. I always do my own oil changes and when I do them I get under the vehicle and look at everything. Even if you were changing your oil and filter at

10,000 miles I think you should still be inspecting the vehicle at 3K miles.

Unfortunately now that most people pay an oil change place to do the oil changes, the economic incentive is to not change the oil as frequently, and thus decrease the frequency of inspection.

Ted

Reply to
Ted Mittelstaedt

Trust me, when the underbonnet stickers say, on a standard car under hard use, 2750miles change periods, and this is running twice the stock boost and a number of supporting mods, im more than happy to change it at 3K intervals if it keeps it running right. The previous owner replaced the oil every 6K when running lower boost and less modification, and his reconned turbo lasted...15K miles. Hence I aint taking the risk. Might be fine with a non-turbocharged engine but the heat these things generate will boil off various protective parts of the oil before 6K is reached, and knowing how Mr Toyota likes to charge for parts I'd rather spend £50 a year more on oil than £700 on a new turbo every 3 years.

Its called prevention :) Its my favourite method of maintenance.

J J
Reply to
Coyoteboy

That primary reason being ... injection timing initiating closer to TDC(?). This is similar to gasoline NOx emission reductions efforts ... that is, to have maximum cylinder pressure occur further after TDC. Apparently, one trade off is a little more soot for a lot of NOx reduction. Mobil made a point to mention higher ExhaustGasRecirculation activity as a major source of oil fouling.

Quite remarkable. I might not be surprised if these were stationary engines. But for OverTheRoad vehicles ... tough to imagine such frugal oil consumption. The OTR trucks I used to drive would maintain their oil level (suggesting that some oil was lost/replaced by contaminations) until about

8-10k miles. Then consumption would progress to about 1 gallon every 5k miles. By the time a B Service was scheduled (25k miles), oil consumption would about double. What does that suggest to you? BTW, the oil capacity was 7 or 8 gallons.

In retrospect, I fail to see how 'retarded injection timing' increases "engine temperatures" when a reduction in NOx emissions is the result of retarded timing. The best I can come up with is that "engine temperatures" means COOLANT temperatures ... not combustion chamber temperatures. This would come about due to more cylinder wall exposure during combustion ... more combustion heat reaching the coolant.

Yes, I know what you mean. All I have to do is fire up the SD22 (fresh oil/filter), let it run for 30 seconds ... the oil is already blackened. Ironically, there is no 'sludge' around the rocker arms whatsoever.

I know -exactly- what part you are referencing. The same kind of crooked oil jet is usually present on factory turbocharged gasoline engines. Still sounds suspicious. You do know that a diesel engine that smokes heavily under load has higher combustion chamber temperatures than one that does not smoke (perceptibly) under load?

The fuel and timing setting were what I was alluding to earlier in this post and previous. As I understand diesel, the more air you pressurize the intake manifold with, the more fuel you can put to the engine with less risk of excessive combustion chamber temperatures. However, if this air/fuel delivery calibration is altered (ie, restricted air intake, turbocharger damage, or somebody monkeying around with the injection pump), to where less air is available, the combustion chamber heat rises. I've also read that direct injection chambers requires less fuel timing advance than indirect injection chambers, the former being less forgiving about too much timing advance.

"Everything is spot on..." Yes, NOW it is. LOL

Reply to
Philip

Yeah, that's the one. Thanks.

What is really needed now is another go-around with Mobil 1, because they're using the same engine for all the tests and the engine was obviously more "broken in" by the time they did the Amsoil test. The ideal would be to take two new cars and drive them side-by-side for the whole test... but that's not exactly practical for the casual oil tester!

Reply to
Steve

IMO, a combination of factors causes that in the US. Advertising of oils, and the relatively low cost of even the very best oils on the market that allow 3000 mile changes to be "not ridiculously expensive in the grand scheme of life" being the main drivers. Also, I think Europe has suffered a lot more in the past 10 years with things that place high demands on oil- changing gasoline and diesel formulations, more small diesel engines in use, the far more short-trip driving, a generally colder climate across a greater percentage of Europe than of North America, etc.

What am I, chopped liver? ;-) And there are a ton of Americans that use the bobistheoilguy forums, too.

Not Americans who've worked in in fleet or (especially) the heavy trucking industry, or even read about it. North American class-8 trucks have been running oil change schedules based solely on oil analysis for

20+ years, but that sort of thinking has never drifted down into car-driving world until recently. Locomotives, stationary generators, ship powerplants, etc. also generally follow analysis-based change intervals.

This touches on my biggest gripe with automotive groups on the 'net. Yes, I'm making a huge generalization, so its going to annoy some folks. And it applies better to the alt.autos. groups than it does to say, rec.autos.tech, and of course it hardly applies at all to the vintage or high-performance car groups. The vast majority of people that come here and think of themselves as "car aficiandos" are just car users. They want transportation for the warranty period, then they're going to sell the thing. Sure, they want as much value back when they sell as they can get, but they're already throwing money away by replacing the car so often and they don't REALLY care about making the car last as long as possible. They just want to preserve the warranty, and think that using lots of Armor All, a bunch of expensive oils, expensive additives, gimmicky spark plugs and washing the car all the time constitutes being a "car nut." But dare to suggest that they do things like blow off the dealer service department and establish a relationship with a competent private mechanic, do as many of their OWN repairs as possible, etc. and they think you're nuts. My goal is to make the car actually LAST, not just keep the warranty intact- my NEWEST vehicle has been OUT of warranty over 10 years and 180,000 miles.

.

No carmakers do that anymore. The education of the masses has begun in earnest.... 20 years ago, probably. Another symptom of the usenet culture of people that think that following rules in maintaining a car is what defines being an "aficianado." They'll waste money on excessively over-spec'd oils and absurd oil change intervals because they think its "what car aficianados do," but they'll turn right around and insist on buying only "dealer" parts, without realiziing that 90% of "dealer parts" after a car has been in production a year or two are actually built by a lowest-bidder for the car maker, and just stuffed in appropriate branded boxes. Or insist on buying a rebuilt transmission with a "lifetime warranty" from a mass-rebuilder, rather than an extra-careful custom rebuild in a local shop with a 90-day warranty, even though the odds are that it will actually last 10x as long as the mass-rebuilt mess.

Reply to
Steve

Cut the condescension and piss up a rope. I understand the difference perfectly.

No it doesn't. Neglect, mechanical failure, or inappropriate choice of the oil and drain interval CAN (but doesn't always). Extended drain interval alone DOES NOT.

All I can say is "duh." And that's my whole point... running an adequate oil BEYOND 3000 miles, beyond 5000 miles, or even beyond the manufacturers recommendation (given that you may use an oil that is up to the task, which might not have even been on the market when the manufacturer WROTE that recommendation) DOES NOT automatically lead to a ruined engine, as the post with the link to the destroyed BMW engine IMPLIED.

And you are merely woeful.

If your reading skills were up to your skills of pretension, you might have realized by now that Huw and I are in total AGREEMENT.

Reply to
Steve

Written (or edited) by someone other than an engineer, no doubt. The only thing that is not strictly true, however is the generalization that "...low emission diesel engines generate higher levels of soot..." Obviously they "generate" less soot overall, hence their lower emissions. However, raising the combustion pressure and temperature can EASILY result in more soot (and other undesirable combustion byproducts) being pushed past the rings into the LUBRICANT, even though the total soot produced and sent out the tailpipe is much lower. Thus, poor wording aside, the statement is correct in the context of soot loading of the oil.

Reply to
Steve

what you intent is good, but your method is not.

formatting link
has good basic info on how to adopt a better approach to what you're trying to achieve. you're better off spending your money on oil analysis rather than excessive oil changes.

Reply to
jim beam

I can only agree.

Not as far as I can tell. But your knowledge is on a different level to most I have read on Usenet from your part of the World, or most other parts come to think of it.

And there are a ton of Americans that use

Indeed they do. However the 15000 to 30,000 intervals for cars do not depend on drivers being proactive and analysing their oil. The service interval is flexible and conditions are moitored automattically by the vehicle systems. This applies to both petrol and diesel systems. I believe Cummins have a similar system fitted called Sentinel or similar. No doubt it is somewhat more sophisticated than passenger car systems thus far. We both know that quite ordinary long haul trucks now run for up to

100,000 miles between oil changes useing analysis based service schedules.

I share the same philosophy and run older vehicles to high milage. My Land Rover has exceeded 10,000 hours of hard, short journey and towing use. However I am partial to new technolgy and also run a number of newer vehicles, the latest being a diesel Range Rover using the BMW 3.0 unit which I have mildly chipped for more power and economy.

Again I can only agree.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

It suggests viscosity breakdown and indicates either reduced service intervals or superior oils should have been used.

It does not. The retarded engine timing results in cooler combustion although this is counteracted by the increased specific power and fuel burnt per cycle with these engines. Of course with the advent of full authority control of many parameters and four valve high pressure piezo injectors then the combustion process can be controlled today with a precision unimagined even five years ago. Nearly all diesels are now intercooled as well. Even stage three off road engines over 100hp are now fitted with large intercoolers as a rule.

The best I can come up with is that "engine temperatures"

That is because you use an oil that is able to hold contaminants in suspension and you change at appropriate intevals.

Although it smokes when accelerated rapidly from low revs, this engine has inperceptible smoke at full load. I should say that it does output a bit more than its advertised power but not to the extent that it has ever sheared its injector holding bolts and blown them out of the head as is this engines habit if over powered significantly. It has been totally reliable up to and since the incident although spending a high proportion of its time at full revs and full or overload.

It is now standard for injection timing to be software controlled and altered dynamically in real time for each combustion cycle and individually for each cylinder.

Again.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

Yes indeed we are. It's not often I agree with so many people in a string. It must be Christmas.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

"Centinel," I believe Advertising types.... :)

Also, nearly every General Motors product that comes down the pike these days has *some* form of oil monitoring system even the Civic-competitor dispose-a-cars with the Ecotec 4-cylinder engine. But rather than using something optical to look at the oils actual turbidity and factor that (or conductivity, or pH, etc.) into the equation, I think it just monitors driving parameters (temperature cycles, speeds, throttle settings, etc.) and concocts a time when it "thinks" the oil should be changed based on assumed oil characteristics. As the guys that did the long-term tests on the Pontiac LS-1 reported in the link posted earlier, the monitoring system "thought" the oil needed changing well before actual oil analysis indicated that it ws necessary.

Reply to
Steve

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.