[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]
Re: synthetics (consumption)
>> Right. Synth allows that leakage by removing old deposits.
>If it's so wonderful to have dino deposits where the oil might leak,
>what about its deposits elsewhere in the system? Are they desireable?
>Or just invisible? Or does the oil "know" where to deposit to be
>and only do it there? Hmmmm
Well, for instance: You get some hard particulate matter in your
cylinder wall and the wall gets a small scratch in it. The dino oil
would collect in that scratch, forming a varnish that would, over time,
effectively 'fill the gap' between the cylinder wall metal and the
piston ring, at least to the extent that the scratch path was linear and
parallel to the piston path (which it likely would be). Synth would
remove that buildup and allow more more oil to flow past the ring,
leading to higher oil consumption. This is just one example.
As far as collecting elsewhere. That can be a problem, but much moreso
the case with oil that's overdue for changing. The varnish 'filler'
places like the cylinder wall scratches occurs b/c of the extremely high
temps in that location. Synth is not prone to that behavior, from what I
I'm not an engineer. Everything I've brought up is what I've gleaned
from conversations with engineers, mechanics, and listers. So I'm not
here to give a soapbox diatribe that "this is what's happening you
nitwit", rather I'm looking for some data to confirm the behavior of
synth in older motors. Any Chem-E's have more data on this?
What consensus I've seen to date is this: if you have an older engine
that has always had a steady diet of dino, stay with it. In winter,
change to a blend if temp extremes demand it. You can try full synth, it
may result in higher consumption, or not, if you have little wear. In
*fresh* motors, switch to synth after the break-in period, and use synth