Synthetic Oil Changes

There is no basis to this claim. It is possible that some synthetic oils provide better mileage than some conventional oil, but the opposite claim is also true. I do believe that if you are in an extremely cold climate, synthetics might provide slightly better gas mileage because of better low temperature performance. However, once the engine warms up, the advantage disappears, so unless you are doing a lot of cold starts in a low temperature environment, I doubt you could see the difference.

The API test for qualifying for the energy conserving mark involves comparing the oil being evaluated to a reference synthetic oil. To get the energy conserving mark, an oil must provide better economy in the test engine (a Ford 4.6L I think) than the synthetic reference oil.

I personally have compared Mobil 1 5W30 to Havoline 5W30 in two vehicles. I ran both oils for many thousands of miles and then compared the cumulative fuel mileage (I keep a gas log) for each type. There was no difference (none, zero, zip, they were the same). I am in a relatively mild climate and do a lot of moderate to long trip driving, so someone that does a lot more short trip driving in relatively cold climate might have slightly different results. It is my opinion that you will not reduce fuel economy simply by switching from conventional to synthetic oil if you keep the same viscosity rating. Friction reducing additives are more likely to have an effect on fuel economy than just changing the base stock (assuming the viscosity is the same for the two base stocks).

Regards,

Ed White

Reply to
C. E. White
Loading thread data ...

If there is an effect, it would be very, very small. Probably not enough to offset the added cost of the oil.

I suspect (just my hunch, no hard data to back it up) that any savings actually results from better viscosity stability rather than better lubrication. The fact that synthetic oils are so consistent allows them to flow well at lower temperatures and still protect at high temperatures, so that there's less extra drag when the engine is at less than its maximum temperature.

Reply to
Steve

I have to ask on what he bases this recommendation. It certainly isn't found in the owners manual. Has he tested thousands of cars over hundreds of thousands of miles before publishing this revelation?

If you really follow that schedule you will be adding up to a quart of synthetic every 3,000 miles anyway, so I'm not really seeing a whole lot of cost savings here. It sounds like a lot of trips to the mechanic.

I would follow the recommended schedule in the manual at a minimum and do it more frequently.

Reply to
John S.

I think he has seen data from various sources, but most of his advice rests on 30 years or so of GM experience. I have found, in other cases, that his recommendations haven't always followed GM recomendations, but made sense and worked for me. That's why I, and many others, keep going back to him. I asked the question on this newsgroup not because I didn't trust his judgement, but because I wanted to find out if those of you who maintain cars have other ideas. And it's always nice to instigate a discussion...

No, I buy the oil at discount and do the oil changes myself, and he knows it.

I've never followed a schedule that said to change the oil every 7 or 8 thousand miles (as most did in the '80s and '90s), but changed oil (and the filter) every 3000 miles. I've never had a motor fail from wear (most recently, my Subaru Justy went 210,000 miles and my Lumina went 140,000 miles- both sold running well). So why should I change things for my Impala? I guess I just want to do the best I can, for this car, within cost reasonableness.

Jim Thomas

Reply to
Jim Thomas

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.