By your logic people should continue smoking cigarettes because we have heard of people who lived to be 100 and smoked 2 packs a day.
Conventional oil is like cigarettes?
The problem with that logic is obvious, but i feel compelled to explain it. Engines running synthetic have more protection during and after remaining idle. They have less resistance throughout it's temperature range and are much more stable during overheat situations and therefore are more capable of protecting your engine in the event of an overheat, and remain more fluid in cold conditions.
Yes synthetics have some great properties, no doubt about that and I don't dispute they are excellent lubes.. The real questions is are they actually necessary to the average life of engines today
I for one have worn out numerous cars well before the engines. Perhaps we need synthetic paints to prevent our cars from rotting out before the engines wear out.? Now that I would pay for...
I don't know too many people who take their engines with them when their cars body dies or for that matter people having engines die from oil related issues in the time they keep the engine..
Oil related engines failures are extremely rare today even with the vast majority of cars & fleets running conventional oils. Oil related failures in marine engines are also extremely rare. Most issues come from lack of maintenance not what type of oil was chosen because any oil change is better than none.
The argument with synthetics always seems to revolve around extending change intervals. My question, do any of the engine manufactures support a warranty if exceeding their change intervals? We know Westerbeke/Universal don't support extending intervals.
Because they allow for less friction, they create less heat which in turn creates less material stress and prevents material breakdown. Because the engine turns more easily it actually improves fuel economy, which i recognize is not of great importance to someone who puts 20 hours a year on the engine, but it could become an issue down the road. My car and van all have over 400k on them and although there are many other things which could go wrong, the fact that i have synthetic in them increases my odds of not suffering cylinder and ring wear, valve stem wear, sludge and other material wear. It's better than mineral oil, it's smarter than mineral oil and that is indisputable.
Smarter, stronger & indisputable, but is that level of protection really necessary...? It is a real question.I just don't see engines dying from oil related failures even when using conventional oils.. Most big fleets in this country don't use them either.
Your objection to a vastly better product is confusing to me and your claim that engines with synthetics would die at 50k is weird and smells like bull@#%$.
That was not my claim, though I admit it appeared that way. Sorry for the confusion. What I meant was if those of us using conventional oil believed the marketing from the Synthetics we'd all have dead engines at 50k, not from using synthetics but from using conventional oil. We just don't have the massive oil related engine deaths the marketers of synthetics would have you believe from conventional oils.
I have used synthetics and by far and away those cars had more oil leaks than any others. Was it frustrating and expensive, you bet. Can I blame it on the synthetics? No, I can't. It is odd that the cars we owned with synthetics suffered from oil leaks far worse than those that ran conventional oil.
We actually owned two identical BMW's, one that came from the factory with Dino and was never converted and one was converted to synthentic. Both cars went to approx 150k before we upgraded or sold them. The Dino car had zero oil leaks in 150k (147k actually) and the synthetic one (same identical engine in both cars) had nothing but chronic oil leaks. Some seals were done two times in our ownership. Similar miles, same engines same manufacturer but different oils. Still only an n=2...
Oh wait, that's because it is bull@#%$. You don't want to use it, who cares?
Again sorry for the confusion with that statement. I have used it and if I bought a car that had been using it I would stick with it. Would I ever personally convert a car to it? No because I know I will never own a car or boat long enough for the oil to make a difference in my engines longevity for my use.
But why you would deter other people from electing to use it only fills the void in you.
I am not deterring people from using it only suggesting they actually pay some attention to the manufacturers recommendations for oil change intervals.
Why would you advise folks to ignore the engine manufactures recommendations for oil change intervals? You claim they, Westerbeke, have not done the testing, do you know this for a fact? What was your source for them not doing the testing did it come from someone like Joe J. at Westerbeke?
Can you assure us that if you exceed the change interval under warranty that Westerbeke will cover it because it was a synthetic?
Perhaps that testing was not done by Westerbeke but perhaps by Mitsubishi or Kubota the people who make the blocks for Westerbeke? I do feel Westerbeke does have a hair in the game and that is because they pay for the warranty. They don't suggest exceeding the change intervals even with synthetics. You do seem to advise this so should owners of in-warranty Westerbeke products listen to your advice or Westerbeke?
You are not doing them any favours.
Are you, by advising not listening to your engine makers suggestions for maintenance intervals?
Please, i won't engage you anymore on this topic, no matter how inflammatory you get, but i encourage you to use your time researching research, done by smart people, used by smart people.
Inflammatory??? I don't think I used any inflammatory language such as "bull@#%$" which I find unnecessary... I am sorry if you took my post as inflammatory but it was not meant to be in any way.
My real question remains;
Is a synthetic necessary
for the average engine life most engine owners face? Beyond marketing messages, and the fact that it is technically a better lubricant, "is it necessary?"....
I just did a count with my wife on cars we've owned. It exceeds 50 (in sales I used to get a new car every 9-12 months - fleet stuff) All of our personal cars were run to well over 100k and we even owned some 300k classics in the mix. In all those cars, back to when we were both 16, neither of us have ever had an engine oil related failure. The only oil related issues we can think of were some oil leaks, which I do feel were made easier (not caused) by synthetics.
Honest question, is it necessary?
I also came across this for Yanmar:
"Your Yanmar pleasure boat engine should be broken in before using the sythetic oil. As long as you have at least 50 hours on the engine and it has be used at all RPMs, then synthetic oil is OK to use. Please continue to change it at the recommended interval for your engine as specified in the operator's handbook.
You can expect slightly increased oil consumption and posibly a drip or two under the engine. Synthetic oil tends to find its way past gaskets and seals a little easier than petroleum based
products. Depending on temperature, you can also use a petroleum based 10-30 or even a 5-20 if it is cold enough. Just be sure to use a premium grade oil.
Director, Service Warranty and Engineering"