Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 21:42:11 GMT, Matt Whiting <whiting@epix.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>These were laboratory tests of a half dozen or so oil properties of oils
>>both sold as being for motorcycles specifically and standard auto oils.
>> They weren't tests in engines so the fact that the tests were
>>commissioned at an independent laboratory by a motorcycle magazine isn't
>>relevant.
>
>
> Agreed.
>
> Again, we get back to degrees. How bad were the bad ones, and how were the
> tests quantified?

It has been 5+ years since I read the articles. I don't remember the
specific details and I don't think I even have the mags anymore. Since
nobody here cares enough about the data to obtain it, I've got nothing
more to say on the subject.

Actually, I hope that the folks here don't buy premium oils such as
Mobil 1, Castrol products, and similar. They cost too much now and if
the demand gets any higher the price will only increase and cost me more
money! It is bad enough that makers of cars such as the Corvette, a
model or two of Porsche, etc., ship Mobil 1 from the factory and pretty
much require its use.

Then again, Hyundais are cheap cars so it seems fitting to use cheap
oils, oil filters, tires, etc., on them.

Matt

 

"Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
news:CCYWf.7577$lb.679480@news1.epix.net...

> >
> > 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.
>
> 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.

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.

>
> > There just isn't that much room in the supply chain as it exists, for
huge
> > disparities in QA like you're suggesting.
>
> 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?

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

>
>
> > 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.
>
> The key word is most times, and it isn't even most, more like some.
>

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-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

"Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
news:CCYWf.7577$lb.679480@news1.epix.net...

> >
> > 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.
>
> 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.

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.

>
> > There just isn't that much room in the supply chain as it exists, for
huge
> > disparities in QA like you're suggesting.
>
> 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?

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

>
>
> > 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.
>
> The key word is most times, and it isn't even most, more like some.
>

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-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

"Matt Whiting" <whiting@epix.net> wrote in message
news:CCYWf.7577$lb.679480@news1.epix.net...

> >
> > 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.
>
> 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.

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.

>
> > There just isn't that much room in the supply chain as it exists, for
huge
> > disparities in QA like you're suggesting.
>
> 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?

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

>
>
> > 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.
>
> The key word is most times, and it isn't even most, more like some.
>

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-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

"Bob" <bobsjunkmail@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Jt1Xf.1390$ki.94@bignews1.bellsouth.net...


>
> 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.
>
>

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-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

"Bob" <bobsjunkmail@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Jt1Xf.1390$ki.94@bignews1.bellsouth.net...


>
> 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.
>
>

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-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

"Bob" <bobsjunkmail@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Jt1Xf.1390$ki.94@bignews1.bellsouth.net...


>
> 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.
>
>

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-
mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net

 

Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 01:18:32 GMT, Brian Nystrom <brian.nystrom@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>As a Quality Assurance Engineer
>
>
> Not surprised at all! Your training shows in your clear logic!

I certainly hope so.

> I had a wonderful career in QA, but sometimes it's a lonely job.

Yeah, tell me about it. ;-)

 

Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 01:18:32 GMT, Brian Nystrom <brian.nystrom@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>As a Quality Assurance Engineer
>
>
> Not surprised at all! Your training shows in your clear logic!

I certainly hope so.

> I had a wonderful career in QA, but sometimes it's a lonely job.

Yeah, tell me about it. ;-)

 

Bob Adkins wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 01:18:32 GMT, Brian Nystrom <brian.nystrom@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>>As a Quality Assurance Engineer
>
>
> Not surprised at all! Your training shows in your clear logic!

I certainly hope so.

> I had a wonderful career in QA, but sometimes it's a lonely job.

Yeah, tell me about it. ;-)

 

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:19:47 -0500, "Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net>
wrote:

>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.

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

 

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:19:47 -0500, "Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net>
wrote:

>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.

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

 

On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:19:47 -0500, "Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net>
wrote:

>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.

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

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 08:09:29 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:19:47 -0500, "Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net>
>wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>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.


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

 

[original post is likely clipped to save bandwidth]
On Sat, 01 Apr 2006 08:09:29 -0600, Bob Adkins <bobad@charter.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 20:19:47 -0500, "Mike Marlow" <mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net>
>wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>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.


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