Mobil Delvac 1300 Super...ummm...

[silverbullet_02]

Been running Mobil Delvac 1, 15-40 in the truck for a while now... always idled about 625ish rpm... changed oil today and just put the non-synthetic oil in the subject in it, went driving around, now I notice it's idling closer to 550ish rpm. That's about a 75rpm drop. Something in my mind is telling me this isn't right... now, 75rpm might not seem like a whole lot... but there's a definitive difference between the 2 oils. Don't think I like it... that tells me that there's more friction in there, which we all know is not good. Anybody else had any other experiences with this? Is the synthetic that much better, or is something not right here. Any advice would be appreciated, thanks,



Brian



(one of these days I'll bump the idle up, once I figure out how to get to the nut, but that's another day's project)

 

[amsoilman]

Been running Mobil Delvac 1, 15-40 in the truck for a while now... always idled about 625ish rpm... changed oil today and just put the non-synthetic oil in the subject in it, went driving around, now I notice it's idling closer to 550ish rpm. That's about a 75rpm drop. Something in my mind is telling me this isn't right... now, 75rpm might not seem like a whole lot... but there's a definitive difference between the 2 oils. Don't think I like it... that tells me that there's more friction in there, which we all know is not good. Anybody else had any other experiences with this? Is the synthetic that much better, or is something not right here. Any advice would be appreciated, thanks,



Brian



(one of these days I'll bump the idle up, once I figure out how to get to the nut, but that's another day's project)

THis is NOT uncommon, and I have seen this same thing happen in gasolene powered vehicles as well. However, if the engine is electronically controlled, it doesn't seem to happen, but there is a difference in the friction between a GOOD synthetic and a dino oil.



Wayne

amsoilman

 

[flattracker]

Wayne I beg to differ there is not a difference in the friction between dino oil and synthetics there is a difference in viscosity and hence the idle speed change Delvac 1 has a centistoke viscosity of about 13. 50 at 100 degrees centigrade which is 210 fahrenheit Delvac 1300 super has a viscosity of over 15. 00 at the same temperature. At idle your oil temperature is going to be much lower than 210 and hence the viscosity difference would be even greater. I have run literly thousands of oil anaylisis on diesel engines over the years and yes synthetics do have some advantage in cold weather and did have advantages in extended drains but never did show any advantage in wear rates and with the advent of CI4+ oils don't even have an extended drain advantage. Don't take this wrong I still run Delvac 1 in some equipment in the winter that has to sit out with no heat source for the improved cranking ability but the lower wear rates and the fuel comsumption advantages or a myth . If you blend enough 10w30 oil with a 15w40 oil to give you a viscosity identical to the synthetic the fuel consumption will also be identical.

 

[Donn]

Wayne I beg to differ there is not a difference in the friction between dino oil and synthetics there is a difference in viscosity and hence the idle speed change Delvac 1 has a centistoke viscosity of about 13. 50 at 100 degrees centigrade which is 210 fahrenheit Delvac 1300 super has a viscosity of over 15. 00 at the same temperature. At idle your oil temperature is going to be much lower than 210 and hence the viscosity difference would be even greater. I have run literly thousands of oil anaylisis on diesel engines over the years and yes synthetics do have some advantage in cold weather and did have advantages in extended drains but never did show any advantage in wear rates and with the advent of CI4+ oils don't even have an extended drain advantage. Don't take this wrong I still run Delvac 1 in some equipment in the winter that has to sit out with no heat source for the improved cranking ability but the lower wear rates and the fuel comsumption advantages or a myth . If you blend enough 10w30 oil with a 15w40 oil to give you a viscosity identical to the synthetic the fuel consumption will also be identical.

That is what I like about this site. Opinions are just like a rear end.



EVERYONE HAS ONE

 

[chuckwilson]

I dont know about it in our pickups but in the big trucks I work on 1300 works better than delvac 1 for wear and oil pressure consistancy, I run 1300 in everything. Oo.

 

[amsoilman]

Wayne I beg to differ there is not a difference in the friction between dino oil and synthetics there is a difference in viscosity and hence the idle speed change Delvac 1 has a centistoke viscosity of about 13. 50 at 100 degrees centigrade which is 210 fahrenheit Delvac 1300 super has a viscosity of over 15. 00 at the same temperature. At idle your oil temperature is going to be much lower than 210 and hence the viscosity difference would be even greater. I have run literly thousands of oil anaylisis on diesel engines over the years and yes synthetics do have some advantage in cold weather and did have advantages in extended drains but never did show any advantage in wear rates and with the advent of CI4+ oils don't even have an extended drain advantage. Don't take this wrong I still run Delvac 1 in some equipment in the winter that has to sit out with no heat source for the improved cranking ability but the lower wear rates and the fuel comsumption advantages or a myth . If you blend enough 10w30 oil with a 15w40 oil to give you a viscosity identical to the synthetic the fuel consumption will also be identical.

I respect all your knowledge regarding oil analysis, but as you should know, any oil that is packaged as a 15W-40 oil has to fall in a range, such as 12. 5 cSt @ 100 Deg. F (MIN. ) to 16. 5 cSt @100 Deg F. (MAX) Using Centistokes as the measureing factor, as most oil companies do. It doesn't matter what the oil is made from, but it has to be in the range of the Viscosity printed on the package. So ANY 40 grade oil would have to be in the range I mentioned, or it could not be packaged as such.

As to reduced wear rates, there have been numerous papers written by SAE, and others that have proven beyond ANY doubt, that a true synthetic lube will give much better wear... ... ... ... ... ... ... . in some cases as much as 60 PERCENT better! I have a SAE document in my hand as I type this that states " Critical wear areas (e. g. valve train components, piston rings, and cylinder liners) showed SIGNIFICANTLY lower levels of wear in units operating on synthetic Diesel Engine oil. "



Best regards,



Wayne

amsoilman

 

[flattracker]

Wayne if you will kindly look at said SAE papers none of them used a current CI4+ formulation for comparison they are all old test. All I can comment on is what I have seen in real world conditions using equipment that is worked under less than ideal conditions and dino beats synthetic every time. I'm not a synthetic hater they are great in gearboxes and rear ends but the numbers just don't add up in diesel engines.

 

[amsoilman]

Wayne if you will kindly look at said SAE papers none of them used a current CI4+ formulation for comparison they are all old test. All I can comment on is what I have seen in real world conditions using equipment that is worked under less than ideal conditions and dino beats synthetic every time. I'm not a synthetic hater they are great in gearboxes and rear ends but the numbers just don't add up in diesel engines.

Well, you are right that the paper I read does not cover the CI-4+ rating for diesels, but a true synthetic will reduce wear rates as seen here.

http://www.amsoil.com/performancetests/g1971/index.aspx





Wayne

amsoilman

 

[SConklin]

Another entertaining oil war!

I run amsoil too... but the amsoil side's workin the threads about oil like Comp461 does with the competition threads!

I can see the signature now...

"WORLDS FASTEST OIL!"



(now don't take all the the wrong way... just joking around)

 

[flattracker]

Wayne do you ever question why amsoil never shows test comparisons in true diesel engine oil test that are considered industry standards such as Caterpillare ECF1, Cummins CES 20078 or Mack EO-N premium plus 03 could it be because they don't measure up and they know it . When cummins comes out with a four ball engine I will start using a four ball oil until then I will stick with a CI4+ until they introduce something better.

 

[amsoilman]

Wayne do you ever question why amsoil never shows test comparisons in true diesel engine oil test that are considered industry standards such as Caterpillare ECF1, Cummins CES 20078 or Mack EO-N premium plus 03 could it be because they don't measure up and they know it . When cummins comes out with a four ball engine I will start using a four ball oil until then I will stick with a CI4+ until they introduce something better.

NOT meaning to have an oil war here, I will give you some FACTS.



I have not seen the tests, but the (AME) 15W-40 Heavy Duty Diesel & Marine oil does meet the CI4+ requirements as well as the others you mentioned.



HERE IS THE INFO TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE OIL CONTAINER





SAE 15W-40 Synthetic Heavy Duty Diesel & Marine Motor Oil

Engineered for all types of diesel engines with an emphasis on modern, low emission heavy-duty diesel engines. High 12 TBN controls acids from blow-by and EGR. High levels of detergency and dispersancy additives control soot thickening, oxidation and wear. Prevents bore polishing, deposit formation, and ring sticking. Provides clean engine performance. Extended drain capabilities reduce downtime and motor oil expenses. Global performance specifications include: API CI-4+/SL/CF/CF-2, EO-N+03', DHD-1, ECF-1,

VDS-3.



AMSOIL Synthetic Heavy-Duty Diesel and Marine Motor Oil is Recommended for Applications Requiring the Following Specifications:

• API CI-4+, CH-4, CF, CF-2, SL

• ACEA A3, B3, E3, E5

• Global DHD-1

• Mack EO-M+, EO-N Premium Plus 03

• DDC Power Guard 93K214

• Caterpillar ECF-1

• Cummins CES 20071, 20072, 20076, 20077, 20078

• Volvo VDS2, VDS3

• MB 228. 1, 228. 3, 229. 5

• MAN 271, 3275

• MIL-PRF-2104G



I would also ask if you have seen any OF THESE TESTS you mention from any other oil Company? As far as the (ASTM D-4172B) Four Ball Wear Tests, it is a "standard" oil test developed by Shell Oil Company, and tested using the ASTM standards.

 

[LightmanE300]

Flattracker, I've run d1300 and d1 both for 7500 mile intervals no other variables, and the wear metals were considerably lower with the d1. That's about as real world and tangible as it gets. There is also no disputing the fact that synthetic oils leave the engine much cleaner with far fewer deposits when compared to dino oil. I agree that dino oils have gotten a lot better, but to say they are just as good as synthetics is IMO a bit of a stretch. I consistently see oil analysis reports on Cummins engines with rotella or delo on them - and the iron is always a lot higher than the trucks with synthetic.



Why some trucks are showing up with high levels of potassium in the oil analysis reports is a mystery though. Some have gone thru extensive checks of the coolant system and still can't find anything - while at the same time the oil manufacturers are claiming there is no potassium in their additive package . This is mostly occuring in trucks running valvoline prem blue extreme.

 

[flattracker]

Amsoilman you said you speak of facts and post the label did you even read what you posted ? The label specifically states that they recommend the oil for engines calling for that spec not that it meets that spec. Amsoil is not backwards about tooting their own horn I can assure you that if their oil actually met those specs they would most assuredly put it on the label. Also you will notice that they list both CI4 and CF2 which is a low ash spec for two stroke diesels. No major oil manufacturer in the world sells a oil that meets both of those specs in the same oil but you would have us believe Amsoil has discovered the way to make a oil both high ash and low ash dependent on which engine it is poured into? Please when you come up with some facts fine post them but posting this advertising hyperbole and calling it a fact is insulting to the members of the board to say the least.

 

[flattracker]

Lightman if you think you are getting enough added benifit from the synthetic to justify triple the cost then most certainly but in most of my applications I don't personally. Presently I don't know of any major trucking co,s running synthetic motor oil, yellow, ups, fedex, etc. And you can be assured they have tested it and run the numbers if it made even 1/100th of a cent per mi. improvement they would most certainly be using it. As to the potassium issue haven't personally examined any of these engines you talk of but have had engines that were losing as little as a quart of coolant a year come back with high potassium analysis fixed the leak the potasium dissappeared. A leak that small is very difficult to find pressure testing and such you usually have to either live with it or tear down and replace the usual suspects, intake gaskets and head gaskets on gas motors, head gaskets liner seals and oil coolers on diesels.

 

[amsoilman]

Amsoilman you said you speak of facts and post the label did you even read what you posted ? The label specifically states that they recommend the oil for engines calling for that spec not that it meets that spec. Amsoil is not backwards about tooting their own horn I can assure you that if their oil actually met those specs they would most assuredly put it on the label.

I don't know where you are coming from!



I certainly did read what I posted, and I can assure you if what Amsoil puts on their labels can not be verified, they would be in a lot of trouble with the Federal Trade Commission. I think Amsoil Inc. has been in business long enough to know what they are doing!



So what you are trying to tell me is the (AME) 15W-40 does not meet these specifications? And the oil is not API rated as CI-4+?



Wayne

 

[flattracker]

No where in what you posted did it say they met those specifications and as I posted meeting CI4 and CF2 in the same oil is impossible. All their label does is lead you to beleive they might meet those specs thats how they have skirted the law for years just as they lead you to believe their atf meets atf4 specs when they don't even know what the atf4 specs are.

 

[amsoilman]

No where in what you posted did it say they met those specifications and as I posted meeting CI4 and CF2 in the same oil is impossible. All their label does is lead you to beleive they might meet those specs thats how they have skirted the law for years just as they lead you to believe their atf meets atf4 specs when they don't even know what the atf4 specs are.

Perhaps you had better turn them in to the Federal Trade Commission for miss labeling their products! I do belive if they are putting something out that is not what they say it is, some Oil Company, or vehicle manufacturer out there would have done something about it by know. And if by using these products they would cause a breakdown or equipment failure, who do you think would have to stand behind the product? Have you seen their warranty regarding the use of their products? As I said before, I DO NOT want to get in to an OIL WAR! :-{} A good discussion is always GOOD!



Wayne

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

Oh boy here we go!



Here's what I think about the API Certification: Since it appears on Pennzoil products, it means nothing to me.



Vaughn

 

[flattracker]

Wayne why would I turn them in to the Feds no where do they state that their oil actually meets those specs they just list the specs and then recommend their oil for those uses. You just go right ahead and hoc your snake oil and me and 99% of the proffesionals maintaining equipment will go right ahead not using it and we will all be happy.

 

[flattracker]

Lightman you failed to mention that you fitted the dual bypass when you changed over to D1 or that the previous cycle was only at 12,500. The bypass adds about 20% sump capacity and the wear numbers fall on a very steep curve on the first few oil changes with these engines you would have gotten much better wear numbers on that next change irregardless of what oil you put in it. We have a 2001 in the family that has had D1 and stratapore filters in it from 1000 mi. at 11,000 mi. change iron was 94 at 21000 mi. change iron was 52 and is still falling at 91,000 mi change iron was 23. The fact that you got wear numbers that were better at 20,000 than they were at 12,500 is just the usual trend on these motors attributing it to the change to D1 is erroneous science. If you wonder why this truck has D1 in it after all the above post it's because it has to sit out in some very cold weather with no plug in and has to start every day.