Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Maintenance and Repair / April 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Ford Motorcraft Motor Oil

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Buford T. Justice - 15 Apr 2005 10:05 GMT
Is Ford Motorcraft Motor Oil any good?  I know of no one that uses it.  I
looked at a bottle tonight and my interest was sparked when I read on the
front that it is a "PREMIUM SYNTHETIC BLEND" and saw the price of $2 per
bottle.  On the back it says...

Premium Synthetic Blend Motor Oil
- Specifically developed by Ford Motor Company.
- Designed, engineered and recommended for your gasoline-powered Ford,
Lincoln or Mercury vehicle.  Consult Owner's Guide for applications.
- Formulated with synthetic/hydro-processed base oils and performance
additives to help reduce engine friction and improve gas mileage.
- Provides clean engine protection and reduces oil thickening.
- Provides better wear protection.
- Provides better low-temperature performance over the life of the oil.
- Meets Ford WSS-M2C929-A specification and ILSAC GF-4.

I currently use Valvoline MaxLife 5W-30 in my 1998 Ford Mustang GT with
90,000 miles on it.  I wonder if the Motorcraft Oil might be a better
choice.  I like the Motorcraft filters and have had nothing but good luck
with them.

Thanks,
BTJustice
Al Bundy - 15 Apr 2005 12:43 GMT
I just remember a long time ago when they were going through camshafts
on a certain engine (4cyl?) and refused warranty if the Ford oil was
not used. They had a problem that was addressed partially by an
additive in their "special" oil.  Generally, if your aftermarket oil
meets their specs it must be OK.
C. E. White - 15 Apr 2005 13:27 GMT
> I just remember a long time ago when they were going through camshafts
> on a certain engine (4cyl?) and refused warranty if the Ford oil was
> not used. They had a problem that was addressed partially by an
> additive in their "special" oil.  Generally, if your aftermarket oil
> meets their specs it must be OK.

Ford had two problems with 2.3L 4 cylinders in the late
70's/early 80's (cam wear and piston slap). Use of Ford oil
was not required to get warranty work. However, if you used
oil that did not meet the specifications listed in the
owner's guide, they could (but usually didn't) refuse
warranty work. Ford sent us a letter specifically warning
against the use of certin oils. We didn't use "Ford" oil,
but we did always use oil that had the proper specifications
and never had any problems. A co-worker used 10W40 QS oil
and had to redo both the pistons and camshaft (car was long
out of warranty).

Ed
Bror Jace - 16 Apr 2005 04:00 GMT
Motorcraft uses a lot of boron-based anti-wear agents.  Really good
stuff, especially considering the price.

UOAs of this stuff look great.

However, their 'synthetic' components are Group III (mineral).

--- Bror Jace
Buford T. Justice - 16 Apr 2005 10:18 GMT
UOAs?  What are those?

> Motorcraft uses a lot of boron-based anti-wear agents.  Really good
> stuff, especially considering the price.
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> --- Bror Jace
HLS - 16 Apr 2005 13:29 GMT
> UOAs?  What are those?
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> >
> > --- Bror Jace

He probably means Used Oil Analysis.

I have my doubts about them, because I suspect they can be used to support
things not in direct evidence.
Daniel J. Stern - 16 Apr 2005 15:16 GMT
> He probably means Used Oil Analysis. I have my doubts about them,
> because I suspect they can be used to support things not in direct
> evidence.

Er...such as?
HLS - 16 Apr 2005 20:00 GMT
> > He probably means Used Oil Analysis. I have my doubts about them,
> > because I suspect they can be used to support things not in direct
> > evidence.
>
> Er...such as?

I think they have been used superficially as marketing tools, whether for
laboratory services or lubricating products, more because they appeal to the
minds of many people who are impressed by high technology than that they
offer a good diagnostic technique.

At the prices many of these oil tests cost, thorough and rigid chemical
analysis is
not very likely, and interpretation of the results is questionable.

Errors often crop up at the taking of the sample, the stabilization of the
sample,
the preparation for analysis, and finally the analytical technique used.
Often compounds of interest are lost, changed, or formed in this process,
making the analysis doubtful.

Even if procedures are followed and reproducible numbers are generated, it
does not mean that usable and meaningful data results.  ( This happens in
well perceived commercial laboratories at times.  It is not the unique realm
of garage labs, or cheap-o analytical groups)

As a general example, iron is a particularly interesting element to analyze.
It can exist as micronized iron from friction processes, as either ferrous
or ferric ions, or as oil soluble iron soaps or water soluble complexes.  It
can fall out of dispersion,
stick to the sample bottle wall (partially irreversibly in some cases),
change form,
etc.

Unless you know exactly what you are expecting, separate the entities, and
analyze the component parts, you simply get a total iron figure.....which
may or may not have value.

I am not accusing anyone or any company directly.  Simple chemistry just may
not be the best parameter to used for testing waste oils.
Daniel J. Stern - 16 Apr 2005 15:16 GMT
> UOAs?  What are those?

Used Oil Analysis.
C. E. White - 15 Apr 2005 13:22 GMT
I have used nothing but the 5W20 Motorcraft oil in my 2003
Expedition. I'm up to 72,000 miles now without any oil
related problems.It is good oil, but any oil that has the
proper Ford specification listed on the label is OK to use.

Ed

> Is Ford Motorcraft Motor Oil any good?  I know of no one that uses it.  I
> looked at a bottle tonight and my interest was sparked when I read on the
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> Thanks,
> BTJustice
Buford T. Justice - 16 Apr 2005 10:21 GMT
The thing that really caught my eye was that it is a synthetic blend.  I
like to change my oil every 2500 miles (easy to remember lol) so I see no
benefit in using the more expensive synthetic oil brands.  I just figured
the Motorcraft 5W-30 might be better than Valvoline MaxLife 5W-30.  The
Motorcraft oil costs less than Valvoline MaxLife, Valvoline MaxLife
Synthetic, and Valvoline DuraBlend.

>I have used nothing but the 5W20 Motorcraft oil in my 2003
> Expedition. I'm up to 72,000 miles now without any oil
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>> Thanks,
>> BTJustice
Milt - 17 Apr 2005 11:21 GMT
> The thing that really caught my eye was that it is a synthetic blend.  I
> like to change my oil every 2500 miles (easy to remember lol) so I see no
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
>>>Thanks,
>>>BTJustice

When it comes to the question "Is 'so-and-so' motor oil any good" the
answer is most likely, 'yes it is good.' Most oils are okay for average
performance up to about 150,000 miles. The Motorcraft Premium Blend oils
are good, hydrocracked oils and you can't go wrong if you don't plan on
keeping your car longer than about 150,000 miles and don't require the
maximum performance from it during that time. I found that Motorcraft
doesn't publish enough data to make a very informed selection, outside
of meeting their own specification.

The Maxlife oils are actually pretty good, in fact the 5w30, Maxlife
Synthetic (Group III oils aren't that bad) ranks #3 out 45 in my Engine
Oil Selector 2005 (EOS) software
(http://engineoilselector.com/index.html) and the regular Maxlife ranks
27 out of 45. There is actually a pretty cool technical article on
selecting motor oil, which I got from the same the same site I got the
software, http://engineoilselector.com/freetechpaper.html.

As for the Ford 5w20, word has it that Ford was on verge of not passing
the CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) spec., so they specifed 5w20
oil for most of their vehicles at the cost of engine protection. They
figured that most people don't keep their vehicles much past around
120,000 miles or so, so they will never realize that their engines had
more wear than if they used 5w30. By the way, individuals won't notice
much better fuel economy with the 5w20, but large fleets will see some.

Milt
Buford T. Justice - 18 Apr 2005 18:34 GMT
Would it hurt to go to Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic 5W-30?  My car has 90,500
miles on it right now.  I intend the keep the car forever (seriously).

How long could I leave that oil in anyway?  If I could leave it in for 5000
miles safely then it would be worth the double cost of it since I change my
regular oil every 2500 miles.  Should I also run an engine flush?

Thanks,
BTJustice

> When it comes to the question "Is 'so-and-so' motor oil any good" the
> answer is most likely, 'yes it is good.' Most oils are okay for average
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> Milt
Mario - 19 Apr 2005 22:31 GMT
> Would it hurt to go to Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic 5W-30?  My car has 90,500
> miles on it right now.  I intend the keep the car forever (seriously).
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
>>
>>Milt

Actually, my name is Mario, when I posted earlier, I was using my
buddy's (Milt) newsreader, so I have a bunch of posts here as Milt. :)

Anyway, about the Maxlife Synthetic: that oil is an ACEA A3/B3/B4 oil
which (many don't realize) indicates up to 12,000 mi change intervals in
Europe. So you have a pretty good safety factor with 5k mile changes.
When I've used it in my high mileage car - I went over 7500 mi on a
regular basis with the Maxlife and a Motorcraft filter.

On engine flushes: You don't need to flush to use this oil. Unless you
have been doing engine flushes on a regular basis, I would advise
against them on a high mileage engine, unless you want the drop the oil
pan and check for massive amounts of sludge and worry about oil passage
blockage.

The Maxlife should slowly help to clean anyway. It has higher levels of
detergents.

Mario
Buford T. Justice - 20 Apr 2005 07:39 GMT
Cool.  Thanks.

[SNIP]
> Actually, my name is Mario, when I posted earlier, I was using my buddy's
> (Milt) newsreader, so I have a bunch of posts here as Milt. :)
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Mario
Eric F - 20 Apr 2005 08:22 GMT
I read somwhere that the Motorcraft brand oil is actually Havoline in
disguise..

> > Would it hurt to go to Valvoline MaxLife Synthetic 5W-30?  My car has 90,500
> > miles on it right now.  I intend the keep the car forever (seriously).
[quoted text clipped - 52 lines]
>
> Mario
y_p_w - 20 Apr 2005 17:46 GMT
> I read somwhere that the Motorcraft brand oil is actually Havoline in
> disguise..

That's possible.  It's also possible that Ford can tap into any number
of different suppliers that can meet their requirements (quality,
production, and price).  It wouldn't suprise me at all if the product
on the shelf one month comes from a completely different supplier
the next month.

I remember Target brand motor oil used to have production code
markings that looked identical to the Valvoline bottles in the same
store.  Of course Target has cut back heavily on their automotive
items.
Mario - 20 Apr 2005 18:59 GMT
Yeah, you can't tell who makes the oil but most of the MSDSs (material
safety data sheets) for oil often publish the types and percentages of
the base stocks used plus other chemical markers that may give you an
idea if two different oil products/brand are basically the same.

Mario

--
engineoilselector.com

> I read somwhere that the Motorcraft brand oil is actually Havoline in
> disguise..
[quoted text clipped - 82 lines]
>>
>>Mario
y_p_w - 27 Apr 2005 17:35 GMT
> Actually, my name is Mario, when I posted earlier, I was using my
> buddy's (Milt) newsreader, so I have a bunch of posts here as Milt.
> :)
>
> Anyway, about the Maxlife Synthetic: that oil is an ACEA A3/B3/B4 oil

> which (many don't realize) indicates up to 12,000 mi change intervals
> in  Europe. So you have a pretty good safety factor with 5k mile
> changes.  When I've used it in my high mileage car - I went over 7500
> mi on a regular basis with the Maxlife and a Motorcraft filter.

I don't know if ACEA A3 is necessarily the best way to go.  Apparently
one of the requirements for A3 is that the oil meet a high HTHS (high
temperature high shear) standard that some engine designers prefer.
Any XW-30 oil that meets it is unlikely to meet certain fuel economy
standards, which the ACEA A1 standard is supposed to represent.  Any
A3 5W-30 oil is going to have to be on the heavier range of 30 weight.
A heavier oil isn't necessarily going to protect better, depending on
the engine.

I was curious as to why all of the new Mobil 1 EP grades didn't meet
the ACEA A3 standard.  Apparently they felt that so-called extended
drains could be met with an oil that doesn't necessarily meet ACEA
A3.

Read the following.  Some are suggesting a supplement to the current
SAW J-300 standard for oil viscosity.  The proposed "triangle" would
include fuel efficiency, shear rate, and low temperature performance
values.
y_p_w - 27 Apr 2005 19:30 GMT
> Read the following.  Some are suggesting a supplement to the current
> SAW J-300 standard for oil viscosity.  The proposed "triangle" would
> include fuel efficiency, shear rate, and low temperature performance
> values.

Whoops.

<http://www.imakenews.com/lng/e_article000388090.cfm?x=b2V1dRQ,0,w>
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.