Oil recomendation

[legacyak]

I have a 00 OBW with 150,000. I am the original owner and I religiously change my oil using synthetics or synthetic blends. I recently went from 5W30 to 10W30. Was that a good idea? What watt should I be using?

[porcupine73]

If you ask 10 different people what oil you should be using, you'll get 15 different responses. 10W30 is fine. Earlier Subaru's used to say 5W30 was not recommended for sustained high speed driving or something like that. I've run synthetics in weights from 5w30 to 20w50 with no issues.

 

Many automakers are now suggesting lighter weight oils for increased fuel economy and sometimes cafe, though since many subaru's classify as a light truck or something for cafe it's not as big a deal for them.

[Strakes]

it's okay. The owner's manual for that year is pretty broad in it's recommendations. 5W30-20W50 depending on conditions and temp according to the manual. Your 10W30 won't hurt a thing...unless it's like 40 degrees below 0 where you live then a 5W30 synthetic would be better.

[eryque]

I think it's obvious that as with almost anything like this, each decision is a series of compromises, so you have to decide which traits are most important to you and which compromises you can accept.

 

Obviously, fuel economy is one of the trade-offs, and if that's most important you should go with a lower viscosity oil.

 

Would one of you who is familiar with some of these trade offs mind explaining a little to us new initiates? Obviously there has to be good reason why people would use 10w30 and sacrifice a little fuel economy, better than "it won't hurt anything."

[hankosolder2]

I think it's obvious that as with almost anything like this, each decision is a series of compromises, so you have to decide which traits are most important to you and which compromises you can accept.

 

Obviously, fuel economy is one of the trade-offs, and if that's most important you should go with a lower viscosity oil.

 

Would one of you who is familiar with some of these trade offs mind explaining a little to us new initiates? Obviously there has to be good reason why people would use 10w30 and sacrifice a little fuel economy, better than "it won't hurt anything."

---

I think the "fuel economy tradeoff" is not even measurable in normal driving. Remember that if an automaker can raise their corporate average fuel economy .5 mpg, that can equate to millions of dollars in "discounted fines."

One can make the arguement that a slightly more viscous oil will offer superior engine protection, and it's definitely helpful to a high mileage engine with excessive clearances in the bearings, worn rings/bores. etc. For example, I had an old BMW which (running 10W30) would flicker the oil pressure warning light at idle in warm weather... run 20W50 and you'd never see the light at all.

 

Nathan

[LegAC]

If you are running a synthetic 10w30, I wouldn't have the least of worries. It will be thinner than ANY conventional in colder temperatures and still give you ideal pressure/flow for just about any weather. That includes extreme temps like death valley and maybe a trip to Yellow Knife directly afterwards.

 

If you are using synthetic, you really can't go wrong.

 

Older user manuals don't recommend 5w30 because 5w30 utilized massive quantities of "Viscocity Index Improvers" back in the day. Today, we have better refinement and better base oil. The VII's aren't as necessary and it is way more stable.

 

When you have a 5w30 oil. They essentially start with a SAE 5 weight oil, and use VII's to slow it from thickening at higher temps. This allows it to maintain the viscocity (flow rate) of a SAE 30 weight oil when the engine is hot. If the VII's burn off, you just have a crappy thin SAE 5 weight oil. In addition, a 5 weight oil reguardless of what you add to it is more likely to burn off. Less dependence on them means lesser likelyhood of that happening. Again, today's better base oils are also less prone to burning off or shearing. So conventional 5w30 is fine

 

It's WAY more complicated than that, but I'm making a post on a Soob board and not writing a text book. AND believe me, I COULD.

 

Most of you live up north, I would use 5w30 or 10w30 synthetic year round and be happy. Today's 10w30 synthetics flow better at cold temps than every conventional 5w20 that I know of. A large portion of engine wear comes from cold starts. Use synthetics at 7,500 miles intervals with a quality filter and be happy.

 

Anyone changing synthetic before 1 year or 7,500 miles is really just wasting oil unless you take really short trips or fall in to SEVERE service categories.

 

Another tid bit, many people bag on Fram filters, but the "Toughguard" varient is actually fairly nice.

[idosubaru]

follow your owners manual on oil weight, you won't notice any difference between the two. i personally would stick with the 10w-30.

 

you can read more and verify as my knowledge of oils is very limited. but synthetic blends from what i've gathered are pointless. use synthetic, not the blends, they are mostly conventional oil so the benefits aren't there, but the marketing is.

[LegAC]

use synthetic, not the blends, they are mostly conventional oil so the benefits aren't there, but the marketing is.

 

+1

 

Blends usually only incorporate 10-15 percent synthetic compounds. You could do better with buying one quart synthetic and mixing it with conventional. That would give you a 20-25 percent mix for less money.

[1 Lucky Texan]

you could consider the Synth. Rotella 5w-40 . Or maybe run it in the summer and 5w-30 in winter.

 

yuo might enjoy the forums at http://www.bobistheoilguy.com where folks actually send various oils in for analysis.

 

 

Carl

[eryque]

+1

 

Blends usually only incorporate 10-15 percent synthetic compounds. You could do better with buying one quart synthetic and mixing it with conventional. That would give you a 20-25 percent mix for less money.

 

Wouldn't that give you a 50% mix?

[LegAC]

1 Quart of Synthetic in your normal 4-5 quart conventional oil change.

 

 

1-Synth and 3-Convention = 25% Synthetic

 

 

1-Synth and 4-Convention = 20% Synthetic

[bratman2]

I switched to all 10w-30 in my vehicles right many years ago. Was using 5w-30 in my late model truck, wife's late model Legacy. Putting 10w-30 in my older Brat and my daughter's car. Just too aggravating to be out of one oil are the other so I just go 10w-30 through all now. No real difference that I have seen.

 

Bobistheoilguy sight I have seen but they are a little to extreme for me. They are the only bunch I have every seen that can find bad oil right out the jug. The only really bad oil is no oil at all. My opinion.

[LegAC]

I did some looking at BobistheOilGuy and I am severely disappointed with how much propaganda is on there. Right now there is a general consensus among most of the members that Mobil 1 is no longer TRULY a Group IV synthetic. Unfortunately, they don't have a shred of evidence, it's all speculation, and there is quite a bit of evidence to the contrary.

 

They also rely on Used Oil Analysis too much without knowing anything about them. There is always a certain margin of error in the tests, certain amounts of statistical variation, and no knowledge of what the standard deviation is or what would constitute a significant difference. It's all science and statistics, but very few of those guys know anything other than what they read on there. It is then that they give out advise based on other's opinions instead of cold hard facts.

 

Many people recommend changing conventional oil every 3,000 miles.

Many people recommend changing synthetic oil every 3,000 - 5,000 miles.

 

Both are a waste of money and natural resources (for most people, but there are exceptions).

[porcupine73]

Does the Mobil1 stuff have anything to do with the pre/post Katrina formulations? I recall after hurricane Katrina (granted that was a few years back now) that some blenders were having trouble getting the basestocks they needed and many suppliers were putting their customers on allocation.

[bulwnkl]

I did some looking at BobistheOilGuy and I am severely disappointed with how much propaganda is on there.

Absolutely! There are a bunch of folks there just typing to read their own words (common on internet forums, itsn't it? )

 

Right now there is a general consensus among most of the members that Mobil 1 is no longer TRULY a Group IV synthetic. Unfortunately, they don't have a shred of evidence, it's all speculation, and there is quite a bit of evidence to the contrary.

 

Wrong on all 3 counts, I'm afraid. The evidence that M1 has a very significant amount of "lower" quality stuff is there (or rather, it was. It may have been pulled from the thread). The kind of spectral analysis most of us can't afford, read by someone with the motor oil experience to know what he's reading. He was nearly burned as a heretic by MANY folks there, presumably because they didn't want to hear that their favorite brand wasn't made of what they thought it was made of. I am curious, though, as to the spectral analyses you have that would constitute evidence that it's still mainly a G-IV.

 

In either case, results show that Mobil products (including M1) are simply not getting the job done as well as almost everything else out there these days. I think that's too bad because I used to be a 'Mobil guy.'

[LegAC]

Mobil 1 Extended Performance 5w20:

cSt @ 40ºC: 47.4

cSt @ 100ºC: 8.9

Viscosity Index: 171

Flash Point,ºC: 235

Pour Point,ºC: -51

HTHS Viscosity, mPa·s @ 150ºC: 2.7

 

 

AMSOIL 100% Synthetic 0W-20 Motor Oil (ASM)

Viscosity @ 40°C: 49.1

Viscosity @ 100°C: 9.0

Viscosity Index: 165

Flash Point °C: 228

Pour Point °C:-54

HTHS Viscosity, mPa·s @ 150ºC: 2.8

 

So, lets see here. Amsoil is ALLEGEDLY a PAO Group IV based oil. If we look at the data sheet. We see that the Mobil 1 has the following stats that are superior to Amsoil:

 

Viscosity Index

Flash Point

Pour Point

 

The Amsoil barely beats it in HTHS by .1 which is a difference of roughly 3.5%

 

So we have an oil that pours at lower temps, self combusts at higher temps, has a broader range of acceptable viscosity's and is almost exactly as shear worthy when compared to a product that is supposed to be Group IV PAO. That must be some really good Group III basestock, NOT!!!

 

I've read the spectral analysis post and it's just a guy typing on the internet. I want to see the report. I want a PDF or something that I can take to a professional. Most of the Mobil 1 bashing like I said is unfounded. People on BITOG complain about "high iron" ect without considering the fact that many people are easily driving double or triple the mileage versus a conventional. People also don't consider that all vehicles are different and generate different amounts of wear metals due to the differences in utilized materials during manufacturing. People don't consider that towing, racing, excesive cold starts, and other factors that could turn up the wear. People also don't consider that with more people posting reports for Mobil 1 versus any of the other synthetics out there, you are going to see a few more bad reports. But was that the conditions while driving or was that the oil's fault? I can show you a perfectly good report for every bad report you show me. Likewise, I can show you a bad report for every good report on any other brand.

 

Group think instead of standing back and forming your own opinions after research is exactly how the world goes to crap. Forums like BITOG have a general philosophy that is largely based on very little. Now, don't get me wrong, there is some good information, but it is amongst quite a bit of retarded dribble.

 

All I can say, is that I've seen engines that were run exclusively on synthetic that look new or close to new after 150K-200K on the Odometer. The bearings look great, the cylinder walls perfect, and the cams like new. Some of these cars looked like that after using Mobil 1 exclusively.

 

The fact of the matter is Mobil 1 is the current whipping boy, and Syntec was the previous victim. Another will come along soon enough. I didn't see any chaos when Penz decide to switch their Platinum Synthetic product from EAO to hydrocracked petroleum. It just wasn't their turn.

 

It's not like one oil company is better than another. They ALL suck. Atleast they have lubrication readily available when they decide to bend you over a chair.

[bulwnkl]

I'm not sure what post you saw, but if you saw the actual one, it's what it claims to be. Truthfully and honestly, you seeing a "report" (as though that's not what the original thread was) would not do anything the original thread did not already do. A "professional" is who read the spectral analysis. The PhDs at your local college who work with spectral analyses daily do not have the expertise to read a motor oil spectro properly. The guy who read that one does. The "typical properties" spec sheets don't necessarily indicate a G-IV; there are MANY ways to achieve specs on new oil. Moreover, you're basing your M1 claim on the ASSUMPTION that something else (for which you also apparently have no spectro) is made primarilyof G-IV and also that it is an outstandingly good example of such. That's just foolish.

 

All that to one side (and it really is to one side because it's quite irrelevant what base stock is used in a motor oil; it's the finished product and most importantly its performance in your specific application that matters), the poor performance of M1 is fact and is reflected in UOAs. That is not to say that it never performs adequately or even well, only that GENERALLY its performance at present is sub-par. Whether you have the expertise to understand what is there in a UOA or not is a completely different question. Most people do not, including the "analysts" at Blackstone and many other labs across the country. It is important to learn whom to listen to (and whom to not listen to), especially on the internet. I expect we agree about that(?).

 

The use of Mobil oils will not cause massive failures nor cause widespread starving in the Sudan to the best of my knowledge. Nevertheless, there are far better choices out there, and any choice, if one desires optimization, must be individually tailored to the application and use. M1 is GENERALLY just not a good placec to start any more, though I will agree that it USED TO BE outstanding.

[LegAC]

Moreover, you're basing your M1 claim on the ASSUMPTION that something else (for which you also apparently have no spectro) is made primarilyof G-IV and also that it is an outstandingly good example of such.

Anybody can be anybody on the internet. For all you know I could be a 12 year old kid that spent a few hours on Wiki looking at Organic Chemistry. I am not going to simply assume that an entire family of oils (and 1 single sample at that) is one type or the other. I want to see the guys credentials, the empty bottle from the oil he scanned, the analysis that I could have a third party translate, and reference oil to compare it too. I.E. These two oils are Group III; notice the similarities ect... ect... ect...

 

Believe it or not, I've made several user names on different boards and made false claims that everyone believed. Nobody checks facts anymore. What is to say that the gentleman in question isn't full of it? I'll quote myself.

 

Group think instead of standing back and forming your own opinions after research is exactly how the world goes to crap.

Are you going to be a lemming or will you think for yourself? It's your call

 

All that to one side (and it really is to one side because it's quite irrelevant what base stock is used in a motor oil; it's the finished product and most importantly its performance in your specific application that matters),

You are preaching to the choir. BUT, group IV oils typically have higher HTHS ratings, better pour points, higher VI's, and better flash points. This is due to the uniformity of your typical PAO base stock. Even the best wax isomers and hydrocracked oils are still not even close to the same uniformity. Due to this, they typically do not achieve the same specifications as the PAO's. A thinner basestock can be utilized with VII's to increase the VI and Flash/Pour Points, but the HTHS rating usually goes to hell. It is all trade offs.

 

Amsoil openly advertises that ALL of their motor oils, with the exception of the XL line, are group IV, PAO based oils. Hence my utilization of it as a reference point.

 

PAO oils, in part to the afore mentioned reasons, are better in extreme applications like highly tuned engines and extended drain intervals. It depends on the application

 

That is not to say that it never performs adequately or even well, only that GENERALLY its performance at present is sub-par. Whether you have the expertise to understand what is there in a UOA or not is a completely different question.....M1 is GENERALLY just not a good placec to start any more, though I will agree that it USED TO BE outstanding.

UOA 1

UOA 2

UOA 3

UOA 4

UOA 5

UOA 6

 

For your reading enjoyment, here are the 6 MOST RECENT MOBIL 1 USED OIL ANALYSIS from BITOG. They are all stellar results within margins of error and within universal averages for each vehicle.

 

This is what I'm trying to tell you. The "high iron" Mobil 1 speak on BITOG is all garbage. It's unfounded. I do my own research and I am smarter for it. You've simply swallowed their stinking fecal matter whole and now you are barfing it all over your keyboard and onto this forum.

 

Do us a favor....

 

Stop it...

 

You aren't going to win on this one, because I know the truth. The truth may be hard to swallow sometimes, but it's still the truth.

 

 

In science, you NEVER prove something in a controlled experiment, you simply fail to disprove it. After enough repetition, the scientific community may come to recognize it as a immutable fact, but it still may be broken at some point.

 

NOBODY, has given me enough evidence to prove the ALL Mobil 1 products are Group III as the BITOG rumors go. Even if it was a true spectral analysis, by a true professional, I doubt one or two analysis can set the record straight. That particular oil was probably reformulated 10 times since then.

 

For the record, as soon as I finish up out here in Georgia, I'm going back to College Station, Texas to finish up my degree in Petroleum Engineering. Texas A&M has the best PE program anywhere. Why do you think George Bush Senior put his library there?

 

I'm not trying to sound arrogant, it's just that people on the internet are usually full crap. And you are a victim of that. Hopefully you have been liberated and you will be better for it. I'm just here to set the record straight.

[eryque]

Hey guys, would it be out of line for me to request that as soon as we're done tearing apart the "experts" on that other board and proving who's righter that you get around to actually recommending a couple of products that meet your high standards?

 

The technical discussions are beyond some of us (most of us?) and aren't real helpful in choosing an oil. :-) Numbers only speak for themselves when you understand the language, the rest of the time numbers need a spokesperson to dumb it down a little.

[bulwnkl]

LegAC, higher HTHS is NOT a characteristic of a PAO, compared to G-I, II, and III stocks, which you ought to know if you'd done a trivial amount of research, even without expertise in finished lubricants. You mistake my intentions when you discuss "winning." I think your declaration of what you do on internet forums (deliberately spreading false information under varying usernames) and your description of your age and information source have ended the discussion adequately.

 

Eryque, the best oil to use in this or any application is the thinnest one that gives excellent results in that specific application. Using "universal averages" is most definitely not a good way to do that. In this case no one can know what to recommend in anything more than a broad generality, which I guess I'll do at your request: Moving from a 5W30 to a 10W30 likely did nothing positive and will have taken away from cold start AND warm-up performance/protection, even in a warm climate. However, it is likely that the average car owner (which is just a little different from a USMB Subie nut, right?!) will never notice the difference (which is different from saying there will be no difference).

[eryque]

Eryque, the best oil to use in this or any application is the thinnest one that gives excellent results in that specific application. Using "universal averages" is most definitely not a good way to do that. In this case no one can know what to recommend in anything more than a broad generality, which I guess I'll do at your request: Moving from a 5W30 to a 10W30 likely did nothing positive and will have taken away from cold start AND warm-up performance/protection, even in a warm climate. However, it is likely that the average car owner (which is just a little different from a USMB Subie nut, right?!) will never notice the difference (which is different from saying there will be no difference).

 

So, you're saying stick with 5W30. Any specific brand and type that you think is better than the others?

[bulwnkl]

Not really. Chevron Supreme and Havoline DepositShield are often (but not always) very cost-effective, good performers. Nothing with an API starburst on the front of the bottle is really bad.

[LegAC]

Are you dilusional? Are you on medication? Do you listen to Kelly Clarkston? Or maybe you are nuts.

 

So now you are recommending a conventional oil to a guy that lives in New York and fall is around the corner?

 

You just keep getting better and better. Startup wear is a majority of engine wear, and you recommend a slow pumping when fridged conventional. Good job. You really are brainwashed. You even recommended the two oils that they always throw out there on BITOG.

 

My recommendation:

 

Any 0w30, 5w30, or 10w30 synthetic that you can find on sale. Change to it during the fall and use it through winter. Unless you take LOTS of short trips, change the oil every 7500 miles. If you drive alot, feel free to use conventional when spring rolls around and change it after no more than 5,000 miles unless you have reason to believe that there is some additives left.

 

EJ's don't have timing chains, so they don't shear the oil as some engines and there isn't much in the way of hot spots. They actually aren't that hard on oil. This excludes turbo'd applications that obviously are going to be a little more stressful.

 

I'll put this out there again. A 10w30 SYNTHETIC will flow better when COLD than a 5w20 CONVENTIONAL. So why the heck would you want to put a 30 weight conventional in a vehile up north.

 

Dude, I'm done with you. You haven't a clue. Bill Engvall said it best. "You can't fix stupid."

 

P.S. You keep calling the "arm chair scientists" on BITOG experts, and have yet to provide any proof that they are experts. It's all hearsay.

[subaruplatt]

Most of you live up north, I would use 5w30 or 10w30 synthetic year round and be happy. Today's 10w30 synthetics flow better at cold temps than every conventional 5w20 that I know of. A large portion of engine wear comes from cold starts. Use synthetics at 7,500 miles intervals with a quality filter and be happy.

 

 

 

I used 15/50 mobil synthetic for years in my out going VR6.

Years of winter starts! Thick as hell in the morning but after it had warmed up you could beat the @**@ out it and would never hurt it.

12 years of daily red line flogging +300K Km on the original unopened engine and still going.

The car used to take up to a half an hour to fully warm up with the lowered friction index oils! The engine would however perform normally after 3 or 4 minutes warm up.

Subaru probably can't have that problem because these engines seem to warm up extremely quickly!

I ultimately settled on Amsoil 10/40 as the ultimate high performance/everyday Oil.

[86BRATMAN]

I am not delusional. And I have never in my life used synthetic motor oil. And have seen cars well into the 300K mile range running dino 10w-30 Valvoline. As a matter of fact, that perticular 90 legacy is still being driven by the fellow that bought it from my parents in 1999.